tained in that letter conflict with a system adopted by his predecessor and, as he states, sanctioned by this office. The register, in this statement, either strangely misunderstands or wilfully misrepresents, for the sinister purpose of sustaining a bad cause, the previous instructions from this office in relation to the proper mode of conducting the business of his office when a crowd of applicants are pressing upon him for the entry or location of lands. The previous instructions alluded to as sanctioning the system adopted by his predecessor are to be found in a letter addressed to him August 19, 1856, enclosing copies of one addressed to the register and receiver at Council Bluffs July 12, 1856, and one to the register at Fort Dodge, June 17, 1856, copies of which are herewith enclosed, marked C 1, C 2, and C 3. From these copies, so marked, you will perceive that, instead of sanctioning the system alluded to, this office expressly states that the letter of the 4th of June, which the register alleged contained an account of the manner in which, for a length of time, the business of his office had been conducted, had not been received at this office, and that this office could not, therefore, have a clear understanding as to the manner in which the sales and locations have been generally conducted. It then justly inferred that a certain course had been pursued, and at once repudiated such a course, cautioned him against a recurrence to such a system, decided the case there in hand, and referred him to previous instructions to the land officers at Council Bluffs and Fort Dodge, copies of which were enclosed to him. I also inclose, in this connexion, au extract, marked D, from a letter to the register, dated October 12, 1856, in which his duty and that of the receiver of public money in such cases is clearly pointed out, and which will be found to be in entire accordance with the instructions of the 1st of April, 1857, (complained of,) a copy of which is also enclosed, marked E. From an examination of the letter above referred to, it will be seen that the register and receiver at Plattsburg were instructed by this office: 1st. That the registry of the names of persons, who desired to enter or locate lands with the view to the consummation of such entries or locations at a future day, would not be sanctioned by this office. 2d. That the case of Horace Everett, then under consideration, was decided against him, for the reason that it was not shown that he filed a regular application and tender of the consideration in time to be reached in its order, during the regular transaction of business in the official day. 3d. That it was their duty to receive applications for the purchase or location of any lands in the district subject to entry, at private sale, in the exact order of the filing of applications and tenders of the consideration, without restriction as to ranges. 4th. That they were not to allow a monopoly of purchase in favor of any one person, and not to permit one person at any one time to purchase or locate more than the extent of an ordinary entry. 5th. That in a case where an applicant had made his application and lawful tender, at a period when, in the regular discharge of the current duties of the day, the register could have received and allowed the consummation of the location, but neglected through error of judgment or otherwise to do so, this office would unhesitatingly afford the proper relief. 6th. That in a certain cited case, where an application was preferred at a time when it could not be reached in the regular order of business, and the office was closed by instructions from the General Land Office before the case could be reached, no relief could be afforded by this office. These instructions, I think, are in harmony with the principles laid down in the letter of the 1st of April, which forms one of a series of letters addressed to the land officers at Plattsburg, on the subject of an application made by Messrs. McLaughlin and Felix, of Reading, Pennsylvania, to locate 152 land warrants on certain contiguous tracts in that district, with a view of establishing a business community or colony thereon, the history of which transaction, it appears to me, required a thorough and strict examination into the acts of the late register, and called forth the letter of the 1st of April, the tone of which appears to have much disturbed the equanimity of temper of that late official; as that letter has already been referred to, and marked E, in another connexion, I shall now give it the additional letter F, No. 2; the other letters in this series being marked F, No. 1, and F, No. 3, F, 4, and F, 5. The history of that case exhibits the following points: 1st. That two of the associates of McLaughlin and Felix applied in person to the register on 26th of November, 1856, to locate the 152 land warrants which where then in their possession, and tendered the necessary amount of fees in gold, and were illegally refused permission to make the locations, the lands being then vacant and subject to such locations. 2d. That early in February, 1857, they applied in person at the General Land Office for aid in effecting the location of these warrants on the tracts they had already applied for to the register on the 26th of November previous. · 3d. That on the 6th of February, 1857, instructions were issued by this office to the register, requesting him to locate the 152 warrants which were then enclosed to him, with notice that the necessary amount in gold for the payment of fees had been transmitted through Adams & Co.'s express. 4th. That this letter of instructions was not received by the register until the evening of the 7th of March, 1857, more than a month after it was written, and that the lands had been disposed of to speculators on the 2d of March, 1857.-(See letter marked F, No. 4.) 5th. That Messrs. McLaughlin and Felix, through the Hon. J. Glancy Jones, applied to this office to investigate the case, and forwarded their statement under oath.-(See letter marked F, No. 5.) Under these circumstances, the two letters of the 1st and 11th of April were written, calling upon the land officers to notify all the parties interested, that on a certain day and hour, to be named in said notice, testimony under oath would be taken in the case, which testimony was to be forwarded to this office, with the joint report of the land officers thereon for final action. I now purpose to apply to the statement made in this case the test of the regular monthly abstracts of warrants issued under the act of 1855, and located at Plattsburg. Messrs. McLaughlin and Felix state in their deposition that two of their associates applied, in person, on the 26th of November, 1856, to enter lands and were denied the right, (the register, J. H. Birch, being present,) and were informed that the office had closed on the 15th of November, and that they could not state when it would be opened again. The abstract of locations for the month of November shows that locations were made by other persons on the 18th, 19th, 21st, 24th, 25th, and 29th of that month. The register, in his letter of the 7th of March, 1857, advising this office of the reception, on the evening of that day, of the instructions of the 6th of February, 1857, containing the 152 warrants, regrets the delay in their reception, "inasmuch as the greater portion of the lands thereby to be located were covered and carried by the locations of mere speculators on the 2d instant." The abstract for the month of March, 1857; shows that the first location made in that month was on the 10th, three days subsequent to the day on which he acknowledges that he had received the instructions; the lands alluded to were therefore not located by speculators on the 2d of that month. I will close this somewhat prolix report by referring to the enclosed tabular statement, showing the effect produced on the register by the instructions relating to his duty in preventing a monopoly of purchase or locations by one person. The first instructions to him on that subject are contained in the copy of the letter to the register and receiver at Council Bluffs, enclosed in the letter of the 19th of August, 1856, to the register at Plattsburg. The second instructions on the same point is in the letter to Plattsburg of the 12th of October, 1856. The tabular statement shows that James H. Birch, James H. Birch, jr., and C. C. Birch, located between the 5th of October, 1855, and the 2d of September, 1856, about the time of the reception of the first instructions, 53 warrants, amounting to about 6,360 acres, and that James H. Birch, jr., and C. C. Birch located between the 24th of October, 1856, after the reception of the second instructions, and the 30th of March, 1857, 343 warrants, amounting to about forty-one thousand three hundred acres. Is any further comment necessary upon the late register's declaration that he is conscious that he has discharged all his duties with an eye single to justice, the laws, and instructions? The purpose of the late register, (Birch) in addressing to you the communications to which this is a reply, cannot be mistaken in its bearing in regard to his act of allowing more than 40,000 acres to be located in the names of J. H. Birch, jr., and C. C. Birch. The course which this office proposes to pursue in reference to these locations will, however, form the subject of a separate communication. I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant, Hon. JACOB THOMPSON, Rep. No. 289-6 THOMAS A. HENDRICKS, Commissioner. No. 15. Statement showing the amounts received by James H. Birch and his son Charles C. Birch, respectively, during their incumbency as register at the land office at Plattsburg, Missouri. James H. Birch received for salary and commissions, Amount received by James H. Birch ..... $10,355 64 2,615 49 2,666 21 15,637 34 Charles C. Birch received from 1st July to 7th October, 1856 2,634 51 Total aggregate amount received........ 18,271 85 Amounts received for the year from 1st April, 1856, to 1st April, 1857. James H. Birch received from 1st April to 30th June, 1856 $2,625 00 James H. Birch received from 8th October to 31st De cember, 1856. ...... 2,615 49 James H. Birch received from 18th February to 30th 2,666 21 Amount received by James H. Birch....... He having received his maximum during the 4th quarter ending the 31st December, 1856, for his official year ending February 17, 1857, under temporary appointment, he received no commissions for 1st January to 18th February, 1857. 7,906 70 C. C. Birch received from 1st July to 7th October, 1856... 2,634 51 Total amount received by them...... 10,541 21 If James H. Birch had continued in office, instead of resigning on 30th June, 1856, in favor of his son, and afterwards being himself again appointed and reappointed, as above stated, the government would have saved $7,500, which amount has passed into the pockets of those individuals by the operation. Statement of the amounts received as commission, exclusive of salaries and pre-emption fees. James H. Birch, late register at Plattsburg, Missouri, from April 1, 1856, to the date of his resignation, June 30, 1856, 3 months, being the 2d quarter, 1856, received his maximum of commissions of...... $2,500 00 Charles C. Birch, son of said James H. Birch, was ap- James H. Birch confirmed appointment as register, to take $2,500 00 2,500 00 2,500 00 He continued to act as register up to the 7th April, 1857, and sales have been made up to that date. No. 16. REGISTER'S OFFICE, PLATTSBURG, Mo. March 7, 1857. SIR: Not having had a regular Washington mail for about a month, your letter of the 6th ultimo, covering the warrants therein alluded to, was not received until this evening. This delay is the more vexatious, inasmuch as the greater portion of the land thereby to be located was covered and carried by the locations of mere speculators on the 2d instant. Mr. Thompson, the agent of the Pennsylvania parties, was here at the opening on the 2d, but being without either warrants or final directions from his principals, was enabled only (by his own means) to put himself in competition with others for a portion of the land. Being here again to-day, with a letter from his principals of the 13th, covering a copy of yours of the 6th ultimo, he is understood to be compromising and doing otherwise all he can for the benefit of his employers. It need not, of course, be added, that, within the limits of personal and official propriety, his exertions, in the direction alluded to, will be cordially seconded by this office. The notice of the parties to the receiver of having made the arrangement and transmitted the fees, reached that office on the evening of the 3d instant. The money has not yet come to hand, but that would have been immaterial, had we received your letter in time to locate the warrants as therein directed. Very respectfully your obedient servant, JAMES H. BIRCH, (Yet out of commission.) H. WHITTINGTON, Receiver. THOMAS A. HENDRICKS, ESQ., |