1st Session. No. 86. IN SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. MARCH 8, 1850. Submitted, and ordered to be printed. Mr. DODGE, of Iowa, made the following REPORT: [To accompany bill S. No. 146.] The Committee on Revolutionary Claims, to whom were referred the petition and papers in the case of the representative of Henry King, have adopted the report in favor of said claim which was made in 1845, as follows: "That said claim is in the form of an account, showing that said King served as a sergeant in the third Maryland regiment, from the 30th May to the 20th October, 1778, at $10 per month; as commissary's clerk, from 21st October to 31st December, 1778, at $35 per month; as same, from 1st January, 1779, to 19th April, 1780, at $50 per month; as assistant commissary of issues, from 10th May, 1780, to the 10th September, 1781, at $75 per month, and for a retained ration during a small part of the above period, which latter item is £8 15s. The total is £862 10s. The United States are credited with various payments during that time, amounting to 180 18s. 8d., the principal of which was made by the State of Maryland of £162 18s. 6d., leaving a balance due King of £681 10s 3d. "This claim was presented to Congress for settlement on the 5th March, 1794, and referred to a committee, whose report is as follows: ""The committee to whom was referred the petition of Henry King, late commissary of provisions in the southern department, report, that they find, on examination, that the petitioner has an authentic and wellattested claim on the United States; but, not having made a timely presentation of it, the act of Congress of the 23d July, 1787, is a bar to its admission. The committee lament that any obstacle should arise to prevent the immediate adjustment of a claim which appears to be sanctioned by every equitable and just principle; but as the payment of the one referred to their examination would be an act of partial justice, they hesitate to recommend it, unless a provision for all demands similarly situ ated should be deemed an act of propriety.' "The Hon. Thomas Sprigg, chairman of that committee, in a letter to Mr. King, dated April 23, 1794, uses the following language, accompanied by a copy of the report: "After several meetings of the committee to whom your petition was referred, and a full examination of the vouchers, we were unanimously of opinion that your claim was just. They requested me to write the report, and to express in strong terms the sense of the committee. The erclosed copy will show you what their opinions were. It is handed in, and has been read, but not taken up, nor do I expect it will be this session. There are such numbers under similar circumstances, that it will take up much time to decide on them.' "King, living in Kentucky, at a distance from the seat of government, made no further movement in the claim until 1817, when he again peti tioned Congress for payment. His petition shows that his original papers had been destroyed when this capital was taken in 1814; and such copies of them as he preserved were filed. A statement from Mr. Hagner, dated 8th Jauwary, 1842, states that all the papers connected with the settlement of such accounts as King's were no doubt destroyed in the burning of the Treasury buildings.' "As additional evidence, King's representative has filed a certificate from the register of the land office in Maryland, dated 25th January, 1841, in which he says: "The office of auditor general was a few years ago abolished, and the records and papers of the Revolution placed under my charge. I have carefully examined them, and send you, herewith enclosed, a certificate from the muster rolls and army leger, which is all the evidence they afford of the service of Henry King. The records of the Revolution are imperfect; most of the accounts of the commissaries, and other papers, were sent on to the general government many years ago, for the purpose of adjusting and settling the accounts between this State and the general government, and they were never returned; I have understood they were destroyed in the late war.' "Enclosed was the following certificate: "I certify that it appears from the musters of Maryland troops that Henry King enlisted on the 25th May, 1778, as a sergeant in the third regiment, and was transferred to the commissary's department in October, 1778.' "Several depositions of soldiers who served with King are also filed in the case. "Jeremiah King, a brother of the petitioner, states that they both entered the 3d Maryland regiment in 1778, then belonging to General Small wood's brigade; that some time in the fall of the same year Henry King was sent to join John Else at Fishkill landing as assistant commissary, which he continued in until the year 1780, when he, as commissary, was sent with General Smallwood's command to join the southern army; that he received letters from his brother while in the southern army; and that from his letters, and afterwards in conversation with his brother, he learned that his official papers had been all destroyed while in the south; that he knew Adam Jamison, who was a deputy commissary general in the army, under General Smallwood. The deponent's character is shown to be such as entitles his statement to full credit. "John Jacobs proves that King served as assistant commissary in the southern army, under General Greene, until September, 1781-he himself belonging to the same corps. Peter Brumback, another soldier in the same army, proves the same fact. "An order from General Smallwood to King, addressed to him as com ́ssary, dated 7th October, 1780, and three letters from Adam Jamison, who signs his name 'D. C. G. of issues,' dated in February, 1781, all addressed to King as 'A. C. of issues,' on official business connected with that office, and which are proved to be genuine, are filed. "The resolution of Congress of the 11th May, 1779, allows pay as follows: "That the assistant commissaries of issues, at every magazine, post, or brigade of the army, be allowed $90 per month; and the clerks of the commissary general, and deputy commissary general of issues, the sum of $80 per month.' "The House of Representatives, in April, 1818, when acting on this subject, reversed a report of its committee unfavorable to this claim, and passed a bill directing its payment; but, from the lateness of the session, it was left among the unfinished business. King died in Kentucky, in 1820; and no execution of his will was had until 1835, when this claim was again presented. It has been pressed at various periods from that time to the present, without any final action upon it by Congress. "Upon mature consideration of this claim, your committee are compelled to sustain it, and recommend its immediate payment. For more than fifty years it has been pressed. It was presented in an authentic and well-attested form' in 1794, and payment was evaded only because of the existence of the statute of 1787, barring all claims in the commissary department if not presented within eight months from its passage— a notice altogether too short for justice, even if the claimant had not resided in the western country, where communication was at that time limited and slow. But Congress since that time has repeatedly disregarded those bars of its own creation, when justice required it. In this case, the original papers having been burned, they have been substituted as far as possible by others, which are in themselves satisfactory, but more so when taken in connexion with the fact of the claim having been made as early as 1794, and then accompanied with sufficient vouchers, which have been since destroyed while in the archives of the nation. "Should the amount due the petitioner bear interest; and if so, from what period? This committee believe that it should bear interest from the time of its presentation in 1794. It was due for thirteen years previous; and, according to strict justice, perhaps, interest should commence at the time it became due. But no good reason or principle can be urged against its allowance from the time it was presented for payment, if that payment was withheld by the government. In the case of Russwurm's heir, the Senate at its last session allowed interest on a claim of no greater merit, and permitted it to commence long anterior to the time of its presentation, because the demand was not made, in consequence of the heir being ignorant of his right, until informed of it in 1837. "The committee therefore report a bill for the relief of the representative of Henry King." 1st Session. No. 87. IN SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. MARCH 15, 1850. Mr. HAMLIN made the following REPORT: The Committee on Commerce, to whom was referred the order of February 18, 1850, directing them to inquire into the expediency of providing by law for a salary for the collector of customs for the port and district of Middletown, Connecticut, have had the subject under consideration, and report: That, considering the whole system of collection of the revenue, and the situation of all the collectors, it is not expedient, or just even to others, that any change should be made as asked for in said order, but that it should remain as it is until some general provision shall be made to regulate and equalize all existing cases; therefore, Resolved, That it is inexpedient at this time to legislate on the subject. |