1st Session. No. 3. IN SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. JANUARY 14, 1850. Submitted, and ordered to be printed. Mr. STEWART made the following REPORT: [To accompany bill S. No. 36.] The Committee of Claims, to whom was referred the "memorial of John M. McIntosh, praying the settlement of the accounts of John Clutes and Jacob Hart on duplicate certificates, the originals being lost, and that the amounts found due may be paid to him as their assignee," have had the same under consideration, and respectfully recommend the adoption of the report of the Committee of Claims of the Senate made at the 1st session of the 30th Congress. The report states that the memorialist is the assignee of two accounts— one in favor of John Clutes, as a teamster, for services at Fort Macomb, Florida, amounting to $82, and the other in favor of Jacob Hart, for similar services and a similar amount, which accounts were regularly certified by Lieutenant and Acting Assistant Quartermaster Alexander Waugh, of the United States army; that said accounts were stolen from the memorialist on the 7th of April, 1840, and that, notwithstanding every effort on his part to recover them, nothing has been heard of them at the departments or elsewhere. The memorialist now prays that the accounting officers be authorized to pay the above named accounts upon duplicate certificates, and that the original accounts be cancelled. Your committee, after due examination, are of opinion that the prayer of the memorialist is just and should be granted; because, in the first place, the certificate of Lieutenant and Acting Assistant Quartermaster Waugh, who gave the original certificates, proves that the accounts now presented are true copies, and for the amounts respectively due. In the second place, because there is reasonable evidence that the original accounts were lost, and that from the length of time that has elapsed, eight years, there arises a fair presumption that they have been destroyed. The committee, therefore, recommend the passage of the accompanying bill. 1st Session. No. 4. IN SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. JANUARY 14, 1850. Mr. FELCH made the following REPORT: [To accompany bill S. No. 45.] The Committee on Public Lands, to whom was referred the petition of Jonathan Kearsley, receiver of public moneys at Detroit, in the State of Michigan, and the petition of John Biddle, late register of the land office at the same place, respectfully report: That for several years, including the years 1831, 1835 and 1836, the petitioners were register and receiver at the land office at Detroit, Michigan, and assiduously devoted themselves to the duties of their respective offices. The quantity of land sold, and the amount of business transacted, will be best indicated by a statement of the amount received on such sales during the three years above mentioned, which was as follows: In 1831 1835 1836 $283,585 80 600,646 54 1,861,597 71 The extraordinary sales of the three years above mentioned, being many fold more than were ever, before or since, made at that office in the same space of time, necessarily demanded much extra aid of clerks, in order to accommodate the applicants for purchases. The ordinary business of the office, when unaffected by any unusual pressure, required the constant services of the register and receiver, with a clerk always employed by each. The unprecedented amount of sales during the three years above specified compelled those officers either to refuse many of the applications for purchases, or to employ an additional number of clerks to transact the business. The public interest demanded that the latter course should be taken; and the petitioners seek to have restored to them the amount which they paid for that purpose. In "The receiver's compensation consists, under provisions of law, of a salary of $500 per annum, and a commission of one per cent. on money received and accounted for by him, with the limitation that the aggregate sum of these allowances shall not exceed $3,000 for any one year. order to obtain the maximum of compensation, including the salary of $500, sales of land to the amount of $250,000 must be made in each year. This law was approved April 18, 1818, and at that time the amount therein specified was so large, compared with previous sales of public lands, that no one could have anticipated that a larger sum would ever be received at any office for the sales of a single year. The limitation upon his receipts was evidently founded upon the presumption that his expenses and labor would not be required beyond that which was necessary in disposing of lands to the amount of $250,000 in any one year. If sales were made to a greater amount, it is evident that additional clerks would be needed to perform the duty; and if the receiver was compelled to pay the extra clerk hire, his salary would be diminished by the amount so paid. This would present the anomaly of a salary increased in proportion to the labor and expense of the office to a given maximum, but diminished in proportion to the labor and expense above it. Thus, if the sales amounted in a given year to $250,000, the receiver's salary would be $3,000; if the sales were doubled, and extra clerk hire to the amount of $1,500 were required to do the additional business, the receiver's compensation would be reduced by one-half. "It was early determined at the Treasury Department that the maximum compensation could not be justly imposed, when and because the money received, and accounted for on sales of public lands, had exceeded the sum of $250,000, and it was long the practice to allow, at the accounting office, a credit of the amount actually paid by the receiver and register for clerk hire, in making sales above that amount. The claim of the petitioner was presented for like allowance, but being the first of its class that had been brought before the present Secretary of the Treasury, he referred the matter to the Attorney General for his opinion. That officer, in a written opinion, dated March 13, 1846, declared that the allowance, within reasonable limits, of actual expenses incurred in procuring the services of necessary clerks, may be just and proper, but it is for the legislative department to determine whether the discretion shall be given to the Executive. In my opinion, such discretion has not been conferred by existing laws.' "Under the construction given to the law at the department, before the opinion of the Attorney General was submitted, the following credits, of a character similar to the claim of petitioner, had been allowed: "After the opinion of the Attorney General was submitted, the claim of John Spencer, late receiver of public moneys at Fort Wayne, Indiana, being rejected by the accounting officers, was presented to Congress, and under an act authorizing the settlement of his accounts, upon equitable terms, the credit was subsequently given to him." The same compensation to which the receiver is entitled, is by law given to the register. At the last session of Congress, two acts were passed and approved, extending the principle of reimbursement, for such expenditures, to Thomas C. Sheldon, late receiver, and Abraham Edwards, late register of the land office at Kalamazoo, Michigan. It will be seen, by the above statement of the sales at the Detroit office, that the receipts exceeded $250,000 during the year 1831, by 1835, by 1836, by $33,585 80 Over $250,000 per annum; for the expenses attending which, no remuneration has been received. The bill herewith reported authorizes the auditing and settling of these amounts, and the payment of such balance as may be found justly due. |