No.

. Doc

CLEMENT CALHOON vs. THE UNITED STATES.

Letter from the Assistant Clerk of the Court of Claims, transmitting a copy of the findings and opinion of the court dismissing the case in the case of Clement Calhoon against The United States.

DECEMBER 9, 1890.-Referred to the Committee on War Claims.

COURT OF CLAIMS, CLERK'S OFFICE,

Washington, December 8, 1890.

SIR: Pursuant to the order of the court I transmit herewith a certified copy of the finding and opinion of court dismissing case 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 repectfully, yours, etc.,

Hon. THOS. B. REED,

JOHN RANDOLPH, Assistant Clerk Court of Claims.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

[Court of Claims. Clement Calhoon vs. The United States. Congressional, No. 1923.]

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 Clement Calhoon, 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 May 28, 1888.

[In the Court of Claims. December Term, 1886-'87. No. 1923. Congressional case. Clement Calhoon vs. The United States.]

PETITION.-FILED MAY 4, 1887.-J. R.

To the honorable the Court of Claims of the United States:

Your petitioner, Clement Calhoon, respectfully represents that he is a citizen of the United States, residing in La Rue, on the border of Nelson County, State of Kentucky; that he resided during the late war of 1861 at the same place, in the county of La Rue, and State of Kentucky, and that his post office address was New Haven, county of Nelson, State of Kentucky; that he has a claim against the United States

for supplies and stores taken by or furnished to the Army of the United States for Army use, at or near New Haven, in said county, stated at $870, viz:

Your petitioner further states that his claim for compensation for said property was presented to the Quartermaster-General under the act of 4th July, 1864, with such vouchers, proofs, and papers as he had showing the taking and use of the prop erty, and was by said Quartermaster-General, U. S. Army, rejected and disallowed about 1880 on the ground that the proofs were not made by a United States officer showing the taking and use of the property, etc.

Your petitioner, knowing said decision to be unjust, subsequently petitioned the Congress of the United States for relief, and said petition was, by the Committee on War Claims of the House of Representatives, referred to the honorable Court of Claims, under an act of Congress approved March 3, 1883, entitled "An act to afford assistance and relief to Congress and the Executive Departments in the investigation of claims and demands against the Government."

That no assignment or transfer of said claim, or of any part thereof or interest therein, has been made, except as stated herein; that he is justly entitled to the amount herein claimed from the United States after allowing all just credits or offsets; that he never gave any aid or comfort to the rebellion, but was throughout that war loyal to the Government of the United States, and that he believes the facts herein stated to be true.

Wherefore your petitioner prays that when the facts shall have been found by this honorable court the same may be reported back to the Committee of the House of Representatives from which the case was transmitted.

CLEMENT CALHOON.

Personally appeared before me the undersigned, Clement Calhoon, who, being duly sworn, says that the statements contained in the foregoing petition by him subscribed are true to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief. Subscribed and sworn to before me this second day of May, 1887. [SEAL.]

SYLVESTER RAPIER, Notary Public, Nelson Co., Ky.

[Court of Claims. Congressional case, No. 1923. Decided May 6, 1889. Clement Calhoon v. The United

States.]

OPINION.

Nott, J., delivered the opinion of the court:

The claim presented by this case was investigated by the Quartermaster's Department under the act 4th July, 1864, and received an unfavorable report from the Quartermaster-General upon the merits. Some of the evidence upon which he acted consisted of ex parte affidavits, but the testimony of the claimant and one witness was taken in the presence of an agent of the Quartermaster's Department, who crossexamined, or had the opportunity of cross-examining, the witnesses. The claim ultimately went to Congress, and was transmitted to this court by the Committee on War Claims of the House of Representatives. Since its transmission here no evidence has been taken by either party. It is now submitted on the two depositions taken in the presence of the agent above referred to.

The first section of the Bowman act authorizes a committee of either House to transmit to this court a claim pending before it "which involves the investigation and determination of facts." This is the purpose and the only purpose for which the law authorizes the transmission of a claim, "the investigation and ascertainment of facts." A committee is not authorized to transmit a claim under the Bowman act for any other purpose whatsoever; nor is the court authorized to take any other action in regard to a claim than such as is involved in the ascertainment and investigation of the facts.

It is manifest here that the claimant has not sought to have the claim investigated since it was transmitted, nor the facts ascertained by means of such an investigation. The effort now is practically to turn the court into an appellate tribunal to which appeals will lie from the adverse decisions of the Quartermaster-General or Southern Claims Commission. To this it must be answered that the court has been invested

with no such appellate authority, and that the proper appellate tribunal for such appeals, and the only tribunal to which they will lie, is Congress. If, upon the evidence before them, either the Southern Claims Commission or the QuartermasterGeneral erred, Congress can award a new trial or otherwise rectify the wrong.

It must be now understood that this court is without authority to sit in review of the decisions referred to, and that where a claimant does not pursue his remedy of au investigation of the facts by judicial means in this court his claim must be dismissed.

Accordingly the order of the court is that the claim in the present case be dismissed and the fact of its dismissal be reported to Congress.

BY THE COURT.

JOHN RANDOLPH,

Assistant Clerk Court of Claims.

. DOC

REPORT OF SECOND COMPTROLLER IN RELATION TO CER. TAIN CLAIMS INCLUDED IN HOUSE EX. DOC. NO. 314, FIFTY-FIRST CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION.

DECEMBER 9, 1890.-Referred to the Committee on Appropriations.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

December 3, 1890.

SIR: Referring to your communication of July 23, 1890, inclosing copy of House Report No. 2750, in relation to certain claims included in House Executive Document No. 314, Fifty-first Congress, first session, and to the reply of the Department thereto of August 4, 1890, I have the honor to transmit herewith the final report upon the claims by the Second Comptroller, dated the 2d instant, for your information.

Respectfully, yours,

W. WINDOM,

Secretary.

House of Representatives.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

SECOND COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE,

Washington, D. C., December 2, 1890.

SIR: I have to acknowledge, by reference to me from you, the receipt of a letter from the Hon. J. G. Cannon, chairman of Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives, dated July 23, 1890, reading as follows:

I have the honor to hand you herewith a copy of House Report No. 2750, this session, with reference to certain claims included in House Executive Document No. 314, which has been referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and to request that you will, after having had the same examined by the accounting officers of the Treasury, report to the committee whether you recommend that appropriation be made for the payment of the claims embraced in said Executive Document No. 314.

Your indorsement upon that letter of date July 24, 1890, is as follows:

Respectfully referred to the Second Comptroller for examination, as contemplated by the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives, and for report as to whether any facts are disclosed that would in his judgment affect the validity of the claims referred to, or preclude the Secretary from recommending an appropriation for their payment.

I have the honor to report that I have caused the said claims, so far as they relate to this office, to be examined, and in my opinion the claims embraced in the accompanying report marked Exhibit A and Exhibit B should be appropriated for and paid. There are no facts dis