alleged to have been taken was loyal to the Government of the United States through out said war. The case was brought to a hearing on its merits on the 20th day of February, 1890. The claimant in his petition makes the following allegations: That he is a citizen of the United States residing in Lauderdale County, State of Alabama, where he resided during the late war of the rebellion; that at different times during said period the United States forces by proper authority took from petitioner quartermaster stores and commissary supplies of the value of $1,214.10, and appropriated the same to the use of the U. S. Army, as follows: 1,000 bushels corn. 3,200 pounds fodder 150 bushels sweet potatoes.. $1,000 64 150 The court upon the evidence, and after considering the briefs and arguments of counsel on both sides, makes the following FINDINGS OF FACT. That the claimant has failed to prove to the satisfaction of the court that he was the owner of the property described in the petition. BY THE COURT. JOHN RANDOLPH, Assistant Clerk Court of Claims. 51ST CONGRESS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 2d Session. ANDERSON A. CLEM. Letter from the assistant clerk of the Court of Claims, transmitting a copy of the findings filed by the court in the case of Anderson A. Clem against the United States. DECEMBER 18, 1890.--Referred to the Committee on War Claims. COURT OF CLAIMS, CLERK'S OFFICE, Washington, December 17, 1890. SIR: Pursuant to the order of the court I transmit herewith a certified copy of the findings filed by the court in the aforesaid cause, which case was referred to this court by the Committee on War Claims, House of Representatives, under the act of March 3, 1883. I am, very respectfully, yours, etc., Hon. THOS. B. REED, JOHN RANDOLPH, Assistant Clerk Court of Claims. Speaker of the House of Representatives. [Court of Claims. Congressional No. 1499. Anderson A. Clem vs. The United States.] This case being a claim for supplies or storesalleged 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 Anderson A. Clem, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores, or from whom the same are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war. Filed January 7, 1889. [Court of Claims. Congressional case No. 1499. Anderson A. Clem vs. The United States.] At a Court of Claims held in the city of Washington on the 19th day of May, 1890, the court filed the following STATEMENT OF CASE: The claim in the above-entitled case 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 was transmitted to the court by the Committee on War Claims of the House of Representatives on the 12th day of February, 1887. G. W. Z. Black, esq., appeared for claimant and the Attorney-General by John C. Chaney, esq., his assistant and under his direction, appeared for the defense and protection of the interests of the United States. On a preliminary inquiry the court on the 7th day of January, 1889, found that the person alleged to have furnished the supplies or stores or from whom they were alleged to have been taken was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war. The case was brought to a hearing on its merits on the 5th day of May, 1890. The claimant in his petition makes the following allegations: That he has a claim against the United States for stores and supplies furnished to the army of the United States for army use at or near Athens, Limestone County, Ala., at the time hereinafter stated and by the officers named, said property being reasonably worth at the time and place the value here given, that is to say: Item I. One horse, $150, taken February 4, 1864, by General Geo. H. Thomas. The court upon the evidence and after considering the briefs and arguments of counsel on both sides, makes the following FINDINGS OF FACT: It is not proved satisfactorily that the claimant's horse was taken by and for the use of the army of the United States. BY THE COURT. JOHN RANDOLPH, Assistant Clerk Court of Claims. . Doc No. WILLIAM ROULETTE. Letter from the Assistant Clerk of the Court of Claims, transmitting a copy of the findings filed by the court in the case of William Roulette against the Unnited States. DECEMBER 18, 1890.-Referred to the Committee on War Claims. COURT OF CLAIMS, CLERK'S OFFICE, Washington, December 17, 1890. SIR: Pursuant to the order of the court I transmit herewith a certified copy of the findings filed by the court in the aforesaid cause, which case was referred to this court by the Committee on War Claims, House of Representatives, under the act of March 3, 1883. I am, very respectfully, yours, etc., Hon. THOS. B. REED, JOHN RANDOLPH, Assistant Clerk Court of Claims. Speaker of the House of Representatives. [Court of Claims. Congressional No. 4299. William Roulette 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 William Roulette, the person alleged to have furnished such supplies or stores, or from whom the same are alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war. Filed April 1, 1889. [Court of Claims. Congressional case No. 4299. William Roulette vs. The United States.] At a Court of Claims held in the city of Washington on the 26th day of May, 1890, the court filed the following STATEMENT OF CASE. The claim in the above entitled case 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, was transmitted to the court by the Committee on War Claims of the House of Representatives on the 20th day of April, 1888. G. W. Z. Black, esq., appeared for claimant, and the Attorney-General, by James H. Nixon, esq., his assistant and under his direction, appeared for the defense and protection of the interests of the United States. On a preliminary inquiry, the court on the 1st day of April, 1839, found that the person alleged to have furnished the supplies or stores, or from whom they were alleged to have been taken, was loyal to the Government of the United States throughout said war. Item 8. 220 bushels apples, at 60 cents.. The case was brought to a hearing on its merits on the 13th day of May, 1890. The claimant in his petition makes the following allegations: That he has a claim against the United States for stores and supplies taken by or furnished to the Army of the United States for army use at or near Sharpsburg, Washington County, Md., at the times hereinafter stated and by the officers named, said property being reasonably worth at the time and place the value here given, that is to say: Item 1. 8 hogs, at $10 each... Item 2. 6 hogs, at $7 Item 3. 13 shoats, at $3.. Item 4 12 sheep, at $5... Item 5. 3 calves, at $4. Item 6. 3 barrels flour, at $6.25. Item 7. 155 bushels potatoes, at $1 $80.00 42.00 39.00 60.00 12.00 18.75 155.00 Item 9. 5 bushels sweet potatoes, at $1.25.. 132.00 Item 10. 4 dozen cabbages, $3; 2 bushels onions, $3. Item 12. 250 pounds bacon, $56; 300 pounds bacon, $30 14.00 86.00 25.00 4.50 10.00 Item 17. 15 pounds butter, $3; 8 gallons vinegar, $6 77.00 Item 19. 350 chickens, at 15 cents Item 18. 6 crocks apple butter, $6; 12 crocks preserves, $15 9.00 21.00 Item 20. 25 ducks, at 25 cents 52.50 Item 21. 1 barrel cucumber pickles, $8; 8 turkeys, $4 6.25 Item 23. 12 pounds candles, $2.40; 24 dozen eggs, at 15 cents.. Item 22. 1 bushel dried apples, $1.50; 1 bushel dried cherries, $2; 6 gallons 12.00 15.50 Item 24. 6 jars fruit, $3; 2 dozen enps jelly, at $3 per dozen, $7 6.00 10.00 3.00 3.50 All taken September 18, 1862, by General G. B. McClellan's command. The court, upon the evidence and after considering the briefs and arguments of counsel on both sides, makes the following FINDINGS OF FACT. This claim was presented to the Commissary-General under the act of July 4, 1864, and was disallowed by that officer because he was not convinced that the supplies and stores were actually taken for the use of and used by the United States Army. Since the case came to this court the depositions of the claimant and Jacob Myers have been filed, but it does not satisfactorily appear from this additional testimony that any of the property which may have been lost by the claimant was taken by the United States forces for the use of the Army. Filed May 26, 1890. A true copy Test, this 17th day of December, A. D. 1890. [SEAL.] BY THE COURT. JOHN RANDOLPH, Assistant Clerk Court of Claims. |