state in which he lived and was served with process. 81 This court cannot establish a jurisdictional requirement, as Congress alone has the power to do this.82 There is an implied contract on the part of the United States to pay for land appropriated to a public use, which is admitted to be private property.83 But there is no implied contract to make compensation for the use and occupation of the land of a private citizen where it is taken by the United States under a claim that it is the property of the government.84 Claims are barred within six years after they accrue.85 Aliens may prosecute claims where their governments grant reciprocity, the state declaring that aliens "who are citizens or subjects of any government which accords to citizens of the United States the right to prosecute claims against such government in its courts shall have the privilege of prosecuting claims against the United States in the court of claims, whereof such S1 United States v. Borcherling, 185. U. S. 223, 22 Sup. Ct. Rep. 607, 46 L. ed. 884. 82 Clyde v. United States, 13 Wall. 38, 20 L. ed. 479. United States v. Great Falls Mfg. Co., 112 U. S. 645, 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 306, 28 L. ed. 846; Great Falls Mfg. Co. v. Attorney General, 124 U. S. 581, 8 Sup. Ct. Rep. 631, 31 L. ed. 527; Merriam v. United States, 29 Ct. of Cl. 250; Morris v. United States, 30 Ct. of Cl. 162; Dunnington v. United States, 24 Ct. of Cl. 404. "Langford v. United States, 101 U. S. 341, 25 L. ed. 1010; Hill v. United States, 149 U. S. 593, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1011, 37 L. ed. 862. 5 Rev. Stats., sec. 1069. An action will lie to the court where an officer, clothed with authority to investigate and allow, determines the facts of the case and refers it to the court for a determination of the question presented, or where the officer has allowed the claim and transmitted it to the accounting of ficers for payment, and they or the Secretary of the Treasury refuse to give effect to the award. Kaufman's Case, 11 Ct. of Cl. 659; affirmed 96 U. S. 567, 24 L. ed. 792; Horton v. United States, 31 Ct. of Cl. 48; Brigg's Case, 15 Ct. of Cl. 48; Stotesburg v. United States, 23 Ct. of Cl. 285; Greencastle's Bank Case, 15 Ct. of Cl. 225; Nixon v. United States, 18 Ct. of Cl. 448; Sybrandt v. United States, 19 Ct. of Cl. 461; Real Estate Sav. Bank's Case, 16 Ct. of Cl. 335; affirmed 104 U. S. 728, 26 L. ed. 908; Dupasseur v. United States, 19 Ct. of Cl. 1; Ramsay v. United States, 21 Ct. of Cl. 443. This court has no jurisdiction where the claim presented is for a wrongful diversion of a watercourse. Mills v. United States, 46 Fed. 738, 12 L. R. A. 673. The court has no jurisdiction of a claim for the infringement of a patent. Pitcher's Case, 1 Ct. of Cl. 7; Schillinger v. United States, 155 U. S. 163, 15 Sup. Ct. Rep. 85, 39 L. ed. 108. court, by reason of their subject matter and character, might take jurisdiction." 86 $585. The Bowman Act. In 1883 Congress passed an act commonly known as "The Bowman Act," which provides "that whenever a claim or matter is pending before any committee of the Senate or House of Representatives, or before either House of Congress, which involves the investigation and determination of facts, the committee or House may cause the same, with the vouchers, papers, proofs, and documents pertaining thereto, to be transmitted to the court of claims of the United States, and the same shall there be proceeded in under such rules as the court may adopt. When the facts shall have been found, the court shall not enter judgment thereon, but shall report the same to the committee or to the House by which the case was transmitted for its consideration." Another section provides: "That when a claim or matter is pending in any of the executive departments which may involve controverted questions of fact or law, the head of such department may transmit the same, with the vouchers, papers, proofs, and documents pertaining thereto, to said court, and the same shall be proceeded in under such rules as the court may adopt. When the facts and conclusions of law shall have been found, the court shall not enter judgment thereon, but shall report its findings and opinions to the department by which it was transmitted for its guidance and action." 87 § 586. Liberal construction of act.-This act is liberally construed, because it is a remedial act by which it is intended to relieve Congress and afford redress to the claimant.88 Letters and ex parte statements are excluded.89 There is, however, no jurisdiction in the court to determine a diplomatic claim presented by a foreign government to the Secretary of State, although it has been transmitted by him to the court." The court does not enforce the strict rules of pleading, but pays attention to the substance; and the case will not be dismissed, if by reason able intendment the purpose of Congress can be subserved by the finding of the court. On the contrary, the court will examine and report according to the requirements of the statute.91 act does not provide for an appeal to the supreme court, as no judgment is entered under its provisions.92 The petition of claimant must set up substantially the same cause of action as that transmitted to the court, as the jurisdiction of a claim stated in a bill is confined to the claim which the bill describes.9 93 § 587. The Tucker Act.-In 1887 an act was passed by Congress, commonly known as the Tucker Act, which was intended as an enlargement of the jurisdiction of the court of claims. It provided that this court should have jurisdiction to hear and determine "all claims founded upon the constitution of the United States, or any law of Congress, except for pensions, or upon any regulation of an executive department, or upon any contract, express or implied, with the government of the United States, or for damages, liquidated or unliquidated, in cases not sounding in tort, in respect of which claims the party would be entitled to redress against the United States either in a court of law, equity, or admiralty, if the United States were suable." 94 Under the provisions of this act the court of claims has power to reform a contract so as to carry into effect the intention of the parties." The act, being remedial in its character, should receive a liberal construction.96 A claimant cannot overcome the provision of the act, denying jurisdiction in cases sounding in tort, by waiving the tort, and suing as if on a contract, even where the common law would permit him to do so.97 The words "claims founded upon the Constitution of the United States," confer jurisdiction of as comprehensive and untrammeled character, as the legislative power could well make.98 It is not necessary, under this act, to make a demand on an executive department before commencing suit.99 If a petition is filed 1or equitable relief, it should be reasonably definite and certain in its statements of facts.100 A claim does not sound in tort, where an agent who has authority to contract for the government interferes in an improper manner with the completion of a contract made with such agent. The contractor in such a case is, under this act, entitled to recover. 101 § 588. Concurrent jurisdiction of district and circuit courts.— The "Tucker Act" provides that "the district courts of the United States shall have concurrent jurisdiction with the court of claims, as to all matters named in the preceding section, where the amount of the claim does not exceed one thousand dollars, and the circuit courts of the United States shall have such concurrent jurisdiction in all cases where the amount of such claim exceeds one thousand dollars and does not exceed ten thousand dollars. All cases brought and tried under the provisions of this act shall be tried without a jury. "102 By an amendment made on June 27, 1898, it is provided that the jurisdiction conferred upon the district and circuit courts "shall not extend to cases brought to recover fees, salary or compensation for official services of officers. of the United States, or brought for such purpose by persons as Stovall v. United States, 26 Ct. of Ci. 240. "Kendall's Case, 14 Ct. of Cl. 122; affirmed 107 U. S. 123, 2 Sup. Ct. Rep. 277, 27 L. ed. 437; Carlisle v. United States, 29 Ct. of Cl. 414; Battelle's Case, 7 Ct. of Cl. 297; Cotton v. United States, 29 Ct. of Cl. 207; Spann v. United States, 21 Ct. of Cl. 267; Bulkley's Case, 8 Ct. of Cl. 519; Leonard v. United States, 18 Ct. of Cl. 382; United States v. Knox, 128 U. S. 230, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 63, 32 L. ed. 465; Ravesies v. United States, 21 Ct. of claiming as such officers or as assignees or legal representatives thereof.' 103 Letter carriers in the postal service are within the meaning of this amendment. "Letter carriers are appointed by the postmaster-general under authority of the acts of Congress, practically during good behavior. They are sworn and give bond for the faithful performance of their duties. They are paid from moneys appropriated for the purpose by Congress, and their salaries are fixed by law. They have regularly prescribed services to perform, and their duties are continuing and permanent, not occasional or temporary. 104 The constitution of the United States is not violated by the provision for trial by the court without a jury.105 589. Procedure under this act.-In proceeding under this act the plaintiff is required to file a petition, "duly verified, with the clerk of the respective court having jurisdiction of the case, and in the district where the plaintiff resides. Such petition shall set forth the full name and residence of the plaintiff, the nature of his claim, and a succinct statement of the facts upon which the claim is based, the money or any other thing claimed, or the damages sought to be recovered, and praying the court for a judgment or decree upon the facts and law." 106 The plaintiff is required to serve a copy of his petition upon the district attorney of the United States, in the district in which suit is brought, and to mail a copy by registered letter to the attorney general of the United States, and to cause to be filed with the clerk of the court in which the suit is instituted an affidavit of such service and of the mailing of such letter. It is made the duty of the district attorney upon whom service is made to appear and defend the interests of the government, and within sixty. days after the service, unless the time should be extended by order of the court, to file a plea, answer, or demurrer, on the part of the government, and to file a notice of any counterclaim, setoff, claim for damages, or other demand, or defense of the government. If the district attorney should fail so to act, the plaintiff may pro 103 30 U. S. Stats. at Large, 495. 104 United States v. McCrory, 91 Fed. 295, 33 C. C. A. 515. 15 McElrath v. United States, 102 U. S. 426, 26 L. ed. 189; United 106 24 U. S. Stats. at Large, 506. |