October 31.-The Commissioners attended according to appointment with the agents to go through the evidence in several of the cases. November 1.-The case of Platt and Duncan was, on leave, reopened, and General Thomas proposed to present certain affidavits, but objection being made to the introduction of further testimony, and it being suggested that the case would probably turn on the question of jurisdiction, the affidavits were withdrawn. Some remarks were made by Messrs. Spinks and Thomas on the question of jurisdiction, and the effect of the Treaty of Commerce as bearing on that question, when the case was submitted. In the case of Charles Kenworthy, Mr. Willis, special agent and counsel of the claimant, was heard, and the claim was submitted for decision, and, in case of disagreement, to that of the umpire, who was present. November 4.-In the claim of James Shaw, the umpire being present, Mr. Willis, special agent and counsel for the claimant, was heard, and the case was submitted. The case of the "Lawrence," the "John," and of Messrs. Rogers, were referred to the umpire as to the amount of damages to be awarded. November 11.-Hearing was had before the Commissioners and umpire by Honourable Reverdy Johnson and General Thomas in the case of Philip Dawson and others, holders of bonds issued by the Republic of Texas, and the case was submitted. November 13.-In the claim of the "Lady Shaw Stewart," the umpire being present, Mr. Hillyard made a statement relative to the amount of damages claimed, and the case was submitted for decision. In the case of the "Only Son," hearing was had in pre sence of the umpire, when the Commissioners disagreed the allowance of the same. upon The claim of Messrs. Platt and Duncan was disallowed. The claim of James Shaw was disallowed. The Commissioners being unable to agree in the case of the Florida Bondholders, that claim was referred to the umpire for decision; as was also that of Messrs. Kerford and Jenkin. November 15.-In the case of Messrs. Kerford and Jenkin, Mr. Hannen and General Thomas were respectively heard, the umpire being present, and the claim was submitted for his decision. November 16.-Hearing was had before the umpire in the claim of the brig "Lawrence," which was submitted. Appointments were made for hearing in the case of the "James Mitchell," on Monday, and for the claim of Messrs. Cotesworth, Powell, and Pryor, and the brig "Confidence" on the same day. November 18.-The umpire being present, Mr. Hannen was heard upon the case of the steamer" Beaver," and General Thomas in reply. General Thomas placed on file a letter in the claim of the "Only Son." In the Florida Bond case, an appointment was made for hearing on Tuesday week at twelve o'clock. November 20.-Hearing was had before the umpire in the case of the brigantine "Confidence," by Dr. Adams, Queen's Counsel, and by General Thomas. In the case of the assignees of the "James Mitchell," hearing was had before the Commissioners and umpire, by Messrs. Hannen and Thomas, and both cases were submitted for decision. Hearing was also had before them in the case of Messrs. Cotesworth, Powell, and Pryor, as to the recovery of certain lands granted in Texas, which was also submitted for decision. November 22.-The Commissioners conferred on the case of the "James Mitchell," and agreed to dismiss the claim of Messrs. Cotesworth and Powell. November 25.-The Commissioners disallowed the claims of the brig "Cyrus," the "Hero," the schooner "Leven Lank,” and the claim of Messrs. Cotesworth, Powell, and Pryor. They also agreed on an award in the case of the brig "Douglas." The claims of the "Lord Nelson," the "Volusia," and the brig "Lawrence," were severally disagreed upon, and appointments were then made for hearing the same before the umpire. November 27.—In the claim of the brigantine "Volusia," John Graham, owner, hearing was had by the Agents of the two Governments, and the same was submitted for the decision of the umpire. November 29.-The umpire reported to the Commissioners his opinion upon a portion of the claims referred to him for decision. The claim of the executors of James Holford for the payment of bonds issued by the Republic of Texas, the umpire decided to be without the jurisdiction of the Commissioners. The claim of Philip Dawson for the payment of bonds similarly issued was also decided to be without their jurisdiction. In the claim of the barque "Jones," and for sundry ventures thereon, the umpire awarded the sum of one hundred thousand, six hundred and twenty-five dollars, due the 15th of January, 1855. In the claim of the schooner "John," the umpire awarded to the owners, or their legal representatives, the sum of thirteen thousand, six hundred and eight dollars, due the 15th of January, 1855. G In the claim of the ship "Lady Shaw Stewart," the umpire awarded the sum of six thousand dollars, due the 15th of January, 1855. In the claim of the "Frances and Eliza," the umpire awarded the sum of thirty-four thousand, two hundred and twenty-seven dollars, due the 15th of January, 1855. In the claim of the Hudson Bay Company's steamer "Beaver," the umpire awarded the sum of one thousand dollars, all of which awards are in full of said claims, and due to the claimants from the respective Governments on the 15th of January, 1855. November 30.-The Commissioners met pursuant to appointment with the umpire and agents, and had long conferences on the claims submitted to the latter for his judgment. December 1.-In the claim of the Hudson Bay Company for drawback, the sum of fifteen hundred and twenty-three dollars and sixty-eight cents was awarded by the Commis sioners. In the claim of the Hudson Bay Company for supplies furnished Volunteers of the Settlers against the Indians, the Commissioners awarded the sum of three thousand one hundred and eighty-two dollars, and twenty-two cents in full of said claim, to the 15th of January, 1855. In the claim of the "Albion," the umpire awarded the sum of twenty thousand dollars, due the 15th of January, 1855. The claim of the "Volusia" was disallowed by the umpire. In the claim of the ship "James Mitchell," the umpire awarded the sum of twenty thousand dollars, due the 15th of January, 1855. The Commissioners disagreed in the case of McCalmont and Greaves, on that of Calmont and Co., and on the amount to be awarded in the claim of the Great Western Steamship Company. Appointments for hearing were made for those of McCalmont and Greaves, and Calmont and Co., on Thursday at 12 M. December 7.-In the claim of Messrs. McCalmont and Greaves for return of duties levied on goods imported into Vera Cruz during the Mexican war, hearing was had before the umpire. Also in the claim of Messrs. Calmont and Co. for return of duties levied on goods taken possession of by Mexicans while under a convoy of United States' forces, and both cases were submitted to the umpire for his decision. In the claim of Messrs. Rogers and Brothers, the umpire awarded the sum of seven thousand six hundred and seventysix dollars, ninety-six cents, due the 15th of January, 1855. December 9.-In the claim of Miller and Mackintosh hearing was had before the Commissioners and umpire. Hearing was also had before the umpire in the claim of the "Lord Nelson," and both cases were submitted for decision. The case of the Great Western Steamship Company was argued by the agents and submitted for the decision of the umpire. The claim of the "Sir Robert Peel" was submitted to the Commissioners on the papers. December 11.—In the claim of Alexander McLeod for his arrest and imprisonment in New York on charge of being engaged in the destruction of the steamer "Caroline," hearing was had in the presence of the umpire. Mr. McLeod was also personally heard relative to his claim, when the same was submitted to the Commissioners for decision, and, in case of their disagreement, to the umpire. In the claim of Charles Barry, on behalf of American importers of woollens, discussion was had as to the evidence requisite to establish proof of such ownership. December 13.-In the claim of Mr. Barry for return of duties improperly levied, farther discussion was had as to the evidence necessary to prove the ownership of the parties for whom duties were paid, and a form of evidence to be obtained was drawn up for this purpose. |