[Court of Claims. Congressional No. 6814 John Ficken vs. The United States.]

This case, being a claim for supplies or stores alleged to have been taken by or fur nished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, the court, on a preliminary inquiry, finds that upon the evidence it does not appear that John Ficken, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores, or from whom they are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war; and the case is dismissed for want of further jurisdiction.

Filed May 5, 1890.

[Court of Claims. Congressional Nos. 3 709 and 5628. James Hargiss vs. The United States.]

This case, being a claim for supplies or stores alleged to have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, the court, on a preliminary inquiry, finds that upon the evidence it does not appear that James Hargiss, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores, or from whom they are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war; and the case is dismissed for want of further jurisdiction.

Filed May 19, 1890.

[Court of Claims. Congressional No. 3993. Henry C. Hayman vs. The United States.]

This case, being a claim for supplies or stores alleged to have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, the court, on a preliminary inquiry, finds that upon the evidence it does not appear that Henry C. Hayman, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores, or from whom they are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war; and the case is dismissed for want of further jurisdiction.

Filed May 19, 1890.

[Court of Claims. Congressional No. 6838. James A. Carden's estate vs. The United States.]

This case, being a claim for supplies or stores alleged to have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, the court, on a preliminary inquiry, finds that upon the evidence it does not appear that said James A. Carden, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores, or from whom they are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war; and the case is dismissed for want of further jurisdiction.

Filed May 19, 1890.

[Court of Claims. Congressional Nos. 5762 and 3479. Joseph H. Brooks vs. The United States.]

This case, being a claim for supplies or stores alleged to have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, the court, on a preliminary inquiry, finds that upon the evidence it does not appear that Joseph H. Brooks, the person alleged to have farnished such supplies or stores, or from whom they are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war; and the case is dismissed for want of further jurisdiction.

Filed May 26, 1890.

[Court of Claims. Congressional Nos. 5039 and 1165. Heirs of Joseph R. Williams es. The United States.]

This case, being a claim for supplies or stores alleged to have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, the court, on a preliminary inquiry, finds that

upon the evidence it does not appear that Joseph R. Williams, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores, or from whom they are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war; and the case is dismissed for want of further jurisdiction.

Filed May 26, 1890.

[Court of Claims. Congressional No. 6025. Thomas J. Walsh vs. The United States.]

This case, being a claim for supplies or stores alleged to have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, the court, on a preliminary inquiry, finds that upon the evidence it does not appear that Thomas J. Walsh, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores, or from whom they are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war; and the case is dismissed for want of further jurisdiction.

Filed May 26, 1890.

[Court of Claims. Congressional No. 3399. Maj. C. Cheatham vs. The United States.]

This case, being a claim for supplies or stores alleged to have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, the court, on a preliminary inquiry, finds that upon the evidence it does not appear that Maj. C. Cheatham, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores, or from whom they are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war; and the case is dismissed for want of further jurisdiction.

Filed May 26, 1890.

[Court of Claims. Congressional No. 5638. Elizabeth Booker vs. The United States.]

This case, being a claim for supplies or stores alleged to have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, the court, on a preliminary inquiry, finds that upon the evidence it does not appear that Elizabeth Booker, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores, or from whom they are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war; and the case is dismissed for want of further jurisdiction.

Filed June 2, 1890.

Court of Claims. Congressional No. 5693. Christopher C. Morris's executor vs. The United States.]

This case, being a claim for supplies or stores alleged to have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, the court, on a preliminary inquiry, finds that apon the evidence it does not appear that Christopher C. Morris, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores or from whom they are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war; and the case is dismissed for want of further jurisdiction.

Filed June 2, 1890.

[Court of Claims. Congressional No. 4808. Jacob Sorrell vs. The United States.]

This case, being a claim for supplies or stores alleged to have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, the court, on a preliminary inquiry, finds that upon the evidence it does not appear that Jacob Sorrel, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores, or from whom they are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war; and the case is dismissed for want of further jurisdiction,

Filed June 2, 1899,

[Court of Claims. Congressional No. 4609. Jacob F. Fisher vs. The United States.]

This case, being a claim for supplies or stores alleged to have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, the court, on a preliminary inquiry, finds that upon the evidence it does not appear that Jacob F. Fisher, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores, or from whom they are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war; and the case is dismissed for want of further jurisdiction.

Filed June 2, 1890.

[Court of Claims. Congresional No. 2723. Maria C. Buie vs. The United States.]

This case, being a claim for supplies or stores alleged to have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, the court, ou a preliminary inquiry, finds that upon the evidence it does not appear that Maria McLean, mother of claimant, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores, or from whom they are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war; and the case is dismissed for want of further jurisdiction. Filed June 2, 1890.

[Court of Claims. Congressional No. 1553.

Rebecca E. Jackson vs. The United States.]

This case, being a claim for supplies or stores alleged to have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, the court, on a preliminary inquiry, finds that upon the evidence it does not appear that Bebecca E. Jackson, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores, or from whom they are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war; and the case is dismissed for want of further jurisdiction.

Filed July 9, 1890.

[Court of Claims. Congressional case No. 5717. Isaac I. Boring's estate vs. The United States.]. This case, being a claim for supplies or stores alleged to have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, the court, on a preliminary inquiry, finds that upon the evidence it does not appear that said Isaac I. Boring, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores, or from whom they are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war; and the case is dismissed for want of further jurisdiction.

Filed July 9, 1890.

[Court of Claims. Congressional No. 2741. Mary L. Underwood, heir of Theresa Grimene, widow of Frank Grimene, vs. The United States.]

This case, being a claim for supplies or stores alleged to have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, the court, on a preliminary inquiry, finds that upon the evidence it does not appear that Frauk Grimene, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores, or from whom they are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war; and the case is dismissed for want of further jurisdiction.

Filed June 9, 1890.

[Court of Claims. Congressional No. 3447. Andrew Anderson vs. The United States.] This case, being a claim for supplies or stores alleged to have been taken by or furnished to the military forces of the United States for their use during the late war for the suppression of the rebellion, the court, on a preliminary inquiry, finds that upon the evidence it does not appear that said Andrew Anderson, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores, or from whom they are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war; and the case is dismissed for want of further jurisdiction,

Filed June 11, 1899,

2d Session.

BRIG VULTURE.

No. 41.

A communication from the assistant clerk of the Court of Claims transmitting the conclusions of fact and of law filed by the court in the matter of certain spoliation claims, brig Vulture, master, John Berry.

DECEMBER 12, 1890.-Referred to the Committee on Appropriations.

COURT OF Claims, Clerk's Office,

Washington, December 11, 1890.

SIR: Farsuant to the order of this court I transmit herewith the conclusions of fact and of law filed in the following spoliation claims under the act approved January 20, 1885, to wit:

In the matter of the brig Vulture; master, John Berry.

No. 395. Elizabeth R. Gardner, administratrix of Jesse Richardson. Nathaniel P. Richardson, executor of Joshua Richardson.

96. William Gray, administrator of William Gray.

213. Charles Francis Adams, administrator of Peter C. Brooks. William Sohier, administrator of Nathaniel Fellowes. Horatio H. Hunnewell, executor of John Welles.

2068. Henry W. Blagge and Susan B. Samuels, administrators of Crowell Hatch. By order of the court.

In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said court this 11th day of December, 1890.

[SEAL.]

Hon. THOS. B. REED,

JOHN RANDOLPH, Assistant Clerk Court of Claims.

Speaker House of Representatives.

[Court of Claims. French spoliations (act of January 20, 1885, 23 Stat. L., 283.) Vessel, brig Vulture;

Case.

master, John Berry.]

Claimant.

No. 395. Elizabeth R. Gardner, administratrix of Jesse Richardson. Nathaniel P. Richardson, executor of Joshua Richardson.

96. William Gray, administrator of William Gray.

213. Charles Francis Adams, administrator of Peter C. Brooks. William Sohier, administrator of Nathaniel Fellowes. Horatio H. Hunnewell, executor of John Welles. 2068. Henry W. Blagge and Susan B. Samuels, administrators of Crowell Hatch.

CONCLUSIONS OF FACT.

These cases were tried before the Court of Claims on the 18th day of June, 1888. The claimants were represented by William E. Earle, John H. P. Dodge, and George S, Boutwell, and the United States, defendants, by the Attorney-General, through his

assistant in the Department of Justice, Benjamin Wilson, esq., with whom was Assistant Attorney-General Robert A. Howard.

The court, upon the evidence and after hearing the arguments and considering same with the briefs of counsel on each side, determine the facts to be as follows:

I.

The brig Vulture, of which John Berry was master, a duly registered vessel of the United States, of 83 tons burthen, sailed on a commercial voyage from Salem, Mass., on the 29th of November, 1798, bound for the Island of Trinidad with a cargo of tish, flour, beef, sole leather, butter, tobacco, and lumber, all, vessel and cargo, owned by said Jesse Richardson and Joshua Richardson, now deceased.

II.

While in the peaceful prosecution of said voyage on the 18th of December, 1798, on the high seas, said vessel was captured by the French armed privateer Le Furet and taken to the harbor of Cape François, in the north department of St. Domingo, where, January 13, 1799, said vessel aud all her cargo were condemned by the French prize tribunal there sitting as good prizes, and were wholly lost to the owners and insurers.

III.

The decree of condemnation recites that said vessel had on board

A register bearing title of property in favor of Joshua Richardson and Jesse Richardson, merchants of Salem, in the county of Essex, State of Massachusetts, baving the customary signatures and seals.

A sea letter written in four languages stating that the vessel was bound to Trinidad with a cargo of beef, codfish, flour, tobacco, coffee bags, leather, and butter, and having the customary seals and signatures.

Articles of agreement between John Berry, captain, and the crew, being six men, stating that the vessel was bound for Trinidad or any other West Indian ports, dated at Salem in November, 1798, without any seal or signature of the naval officer.

A commission granted by John Adams, President of the United States of America, in virtue of an act passed in the Congress of the United States the 9th of July, 1798, for the brigantine called the Vulture, of about 82 tous burthen, belonging to Joshua Richardson and Jesse Richardson, merchants of Salem, armed with two guns and manned with eight men, which authorizes John Berry, captain, and Joseph Felt, lieutenant, of the said brigantine, and other officers, to seize and take the armed French vessels they may meet with near the coast of the United States or elsewhere at sea, and to conduct them with the Frenchmen and the merchandises found on board in any port of the United States, the said commission delivered at Philadelphia the 19th of November, 1798. Signed, John Adams. By the President: Signed, Timothy Pickering, Secretary of State.

A clearance dated at Salem November 19, 1798, signed by the collector and naval officer with their seals.

An invoice of said brig's cargo, consisting of codfish, beef, flour, tobacco, coffee bags, butter, staves, and planks, amounting to the sum of $7, 912.70, loaded on board the said vessel by Joshua and Jesse Richardson for Trinidad, consigned to Jesse Richardson, supercargo, dated at Salem the 22d of November, 1798. Signed, Joshua Richardson, Jesse Richardson.

A bill of lading of the merchandises expressed in said invoice loaded on board of said brigantine Vulture, John Berry, master, stating also that she was bound to Trinidad, by Joshua and Jesse Richardson, dated at Salem the 22d of November, 1798; signed, John Berry.

A letter of instruction written by the owners of the brigantine Vulture to John Berry, captain of the same, dated at Salem the 22d of November, 1798, by which they order him to sail as soon as possible for Trinidad or elsewhere, and to deliver the cargo on his arrival unto Jesse Richardson, supercargo, and to load the vessel again in return to Salem.

Printed instructions given to John Berry, captain of the brigantine Vulture, by the Secretary of State, Timothy Pickering, pursuant to the law passed in Congress of the United States the 29th of July, 1798.

The reasons for the condemnation are stated in said decree as follows: "The letter of mark found on board of said armed vessel, being no inducément to the tribunal, which authorizes the said captain to chase all armed French vessels, not only on the coast of the United States but at sea, and to take all Frenchmen found on board of said vessels; which demonstrates the hostile intentions of the American Government against the French Government upon which the tribunal shall not make