The Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 2332) for relief of S. D. Hicks, administrator of R. M. Harvey, have considered the same, and report: The committee cannot concur in the report made in the House of Representatives, or in recommending the passage of the bill, for the following reasons: First. The decree of the court directing the sum of $355.25 to be paid by the register of the court was made June 19, 1868. Second. After that, viz, on the 25th June, 1868, R. D. Hicks, one of the firm of Hicks & Crosby, made affidavit that Harvey had not paid for the tobacco, and that it had not been delivered to him. It was therefore legally the property of Hicks & Crosby. Third. The unsworn statement of R. D. Hicks that he had misapprehended the facts, made on the 25th June, was on file and before the court when the decree of distribution was made on the 26th May, 1869, omitting any reference to the claim of Harvey, and the committee cannot discern that any mistake was made by the register in not paying Harvey or his administrator for the decree of 26th May, 1869, was virtually an abrogation of the decree of 19th June, 1868, in view of Hicks's statements made after that date. Fourth. The alleged decree of 18th February, 1874, is an unauthorized quasi judgment against the United States, in misapprehension of the statute referred to, when the Comptroller properly declined to authorize the payment of the claim. Fifth. That decree, when examined at length, recites an alleged order of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue for the restoration of the property to Harvey, of which no evidence is found. The only letter of the Commissioner is one directed to L. H. Chandler, district attorney, dated 18th March, 1868, directing him to release the property, if after examination he found the allegations of Harvey to be correct. If he did so examine and determine, the evidence of his having done so is not furnished, and as he is now marked as one of the attorneys for claimant, we infer no such evidence exists. We recommend the indefinite postponement of the bill. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. APRIL 22, 1874.-Ordered to be printed. Mr. MITCHELL submitted the following REPORT: [To accompany bill S. 271.] The Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the petition of Frances A. Robinson, administratrix of John M. Robinson, late of Independence, State of Missouri, deceased, together with Senate bill No. 271, having had the same under consideration, beg to submit the following report: The petitioner avers in her petition that she is the widow and administratrix of John M. Robinson, deceased; that, for some time previous to the war of the rebellion, and at the commencement thereof, said John M. Robinson resided in the city of Independence, in the State of Missouri; that he was the owner of a foundery situated in that city; that such foundery was at the beginning of the late war completely furnished with all the machinery, fixtures, and appurtenances necessary for its operation, and was operated by said Robinson until he was compelled to close it or cast cannon-shot for the rebels; that he refused to submit to this latter alternative, and, being loyal to the Government of the United States, he closed his foundery, and became a soldier in the Fifth Regiment of Missouri State Militia, commanded by Col. William R. Pennick, which regiment was mustered into the service of the United States; that while he was serving as a soldier in this regiment said Col. William R. Pennick took possession of his said foundery, and used it as a cavalry-yard for the horses of his regiment, and used the tools and iron for shoeing the said horses; that all the machinery, fixtures, patterns, &c., in said foundery were removed or destroyed by the soldiers under command of said officer, and were wholly lost to their owner; that he, John M. Robinson, used every possible effort to prevent this destruction of his property, but without avail; and that the property thus destroyed or carried away was worth from $17,000 to $20,000. These are substantially the statements contained in the petition. There are numerous affidavits on file, from which it appears that said John M. Robinson was the owner of a foundery located in Independence, and was operating the same at the commencement of the war; that he was loyal to the Government, and closed his foundery, and became a soldier, as alleged in the petition, in the Fifth Regiment of the Missouri State Militia, commanded by Col. William R. Pennick; that said Colonel Pennick, as commander of said regiment, serving under the United States Government, on or about the 18th of October, 1862, took possession of said foundery, and from that date until April, 1863, used it as a cavalry-yard for the horses of said regiment, and used the tools and iron for shoeing the said horses. It nowhere appears, either from the peti tion or affidavits, what the size of said foundery building was, nor of what materials it was constructed, whether of wood, brick, or stone. There is no complaint of damage to the building in the petition. It ap pears from several affidavits in the case that there were in the building at the time it was seized by Colonel Pennick, the following items of personal property, with the following estimates of value of each article: 1 engine and boiler 1 large iron lathe.... 1 medium iron lathe.. 2 small iron lathes, $500 and $350 1 iron planer.... 1 screw-cutter 1 power-drill ....... .... 1 full set machinists' tools 1 full set foundery patterns 5 tons wrought iron, new Making a total of....... $2,500 1,200 920 850 700 150 175 350 4,250 950 3,050 500 350 750 650 450 425 18,220 In addition to this, a claim is made in these sworn estimates of damage of $2,500,"for rent of building and damage thereto by United States troops," although it in no way appears in what this damage consisted, nor is there any evidence to show what the rent of the prem ises should be during the time they were so occupied. The affidavits state that all this list of personal property was used or destroyed by the troops. It is difficult to comprehend how in the short space of six months all this property, consisting as it did principally of iron, could be destroyed, and even if it were, it is clear that such destruction must have been the result of wantonness upon the part of the soldiery, except in so far as such property, or any part of it, was taken for the use of the regiment. Your committee find, however, that in the schedule of articles in said foundery at the time of its occupation, such articles as wrought iron, seasoned lumber, smiths' tools, &c., were used by the Government in lieu of articles it otherwise would have been compelled to buy; and that for these, together with a reasonable compensation for the use of and occupation of the building, petitioner should be compensated. In view of all the circumstances, your committee are of the opinion that petitioner is entitled to relief in the sum of two thousand dollars. And they report back Senate bill No. 271, with the following amendment, to wit: strike out two thousand five hundred dollars and insert two thousand dollars, and recommend its passage. |