[To accompany joint resolution S. R. No. 290.] The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred a "Joint resolution to prevent obstruction to navigation of the Ohio River," which resolution refers to the bridge being built by the Newport and Cincinnati Bridge Company, and to whom were also referred divers memorials on the same subject, having considered the same, now report : That your committee suppose that said references were made in order to obtain the opinion of the committee upon a mooted legal question, to wit: Had said bridge company a right, under its charters, granted by Kentucky and Ohio, and the legislation of Congress, to build a bridge of continuous spans or a draw-bridge, at its option, and what must be the elevation of either? The charters of the company permit it to build a bridge in accordance with the laws passed, or to be passed, by Congress. By a resolution, approved March 3, 1869, Congress gave its assent to the erection of the bridge, as follows: A RESOLUTION giving the assent of the United States to the construction of the Newport and Cincinnati bridge. Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the consent of Congress be, and the same is hereby, given to the erection of a bridge over the Ohio River, from the city of Cincinnati, Ohio, to the city of Newport, Kentucky, by the Newport and Cincinnati Bridge Company, a corporation chartered and organized under the laws of each of the States of Kentucky and Ohio: Provided, That said bridge is built with an unbroken or continuous span, of not less than four hundred feet in the clear, from pier to pier, over the main channel of the river, and is built, in all other respects, in accordance with the conditions and limitations of an act entitled "An act to establish certain post roads,” approved July 14, 162; that said bridge, when completed in the manner specified in this resolution, shall be deemed and taken to be a legal structure, aud shall be a post road for the transmission of the mails of the United States; but Congress reserves the right to withdraw the assent hereby given in case the free navigation of said river shall at any time be substantially and materially obstructed by any bridge to be erected under the authority of this resolution, or to direct the necessary modifications and alterations of said bridge. Approved March 3, 1869. So much of the act of 1862 as bears upon the question is section 4, as follows: SECTION 4. And be it further enacted, That any bridge erected under the privi leges of this act may, at the option of the company or companies building the same, be built either as a draw-bridge, with a pivot or other form of draw, or with unbroken or continuous spans: Provided, That if the said bridge shall be made with unbroken or continuous spans, it shall not be of less elevation than ninety feet above low-water mark over the channel of the said river, nor in any case less than forty feet above extreme high water, as understood at the point of location, measuring for such ele vation to the bottom chord of the bridge; nor shall the span of such bridge, covering the main channel of the river, be less than three hundred feet in length, with also one of the next adjoining spans of not less than two hundred and twenty feet in length, and the piers of said bridge shall be parallel to the current of the river as near as practicable: And provided also, That if any bridge built under this act shall be constructed as a draw-bridge, the same shall be constructed with a span over the main channel of the river, as understood at the time of the erection of the bridge, of not less than three hundred feet in length; and said span shall not be less than seventy feet above low-water mark, measuring to the bottom chord of the bridge, and one of the next adjoining spans shall not be less than two hundred and twenty feet in length; and also, that there shall be a pivot-draw constructed in every such bridge, at an accessible and navigable point, with spans of not less than one hundred feet in length on each side of the central or pivot-pier of the draw: And provided also, That said draw shall always be opened promptly, upon reasonable signal, for the passage of boats whose construction may not, at the time, admit of their passing under the permanent spans of said bridge, except that said draw shall not be required to be opened when engines or trains are passing over said bridge, or when passenger trains are due; but in no case shall unnecessary delay occur in the opening of said draw after the passage of such engines or trains." It is the opinion of your committee that, under its charters and this legislation of Congress, the bridge company has the option to build a bridge of continuous spans or a draw-bridge, but subject to the right of Congress to withdraw its assent or to require modifications or alterations of the bridge. If it build a bridge of continuous spans, it must "not be of less elevation than ninety feet above low-water mark over the channel of said (the Ohio) river, nor in any case less than forty feet above extreme high water as understood at the point of location, measuring for such eleva tion to the bottom chord of the bridge." If it build a draw-bridge, the altitude above low-water mark as aforesaid must not be less than seventy feet, and need not be more. Such is the present state of the law. Whether Congress should not exercise its right to alter or modify the plan of said company for its bridge, and especially whether it should not require the bridge, (whether a continuous or a draw bridge,) to have the elevation of one hundred feet above low water, as proposed by said joint resolution referred to the committee, are questions that properly belong to the Committee on Commerce, and upon which that committee has heard arguments both oral and written. Your committee have not considered them, and express no opinion upon them. Your committee therefore ask to be discharged from the further consideration of said joint resolutions and memorials, and that they be referred to the Committee on Commerce. [To accompany joint resolution S. R. No. 208.] The Committee on Claims, to whom was referred Senate joint resolution, relative to claims of certain northern creditors, submit the following report: On the 6th of June, 1862, General Butler issued the following order from his headquarters at New Orleans: [General Orders No. 40.] Any person who has in his possession, or subject to his control, any property of any kind or description whatever of the so-called Confederate States, or who has secreted or concealed, or aided in the concealment of such property, who shall not, within three days from the publication of this order, give full information of the same in writing, at the headquarters of the military commandant, in the custom-house, to the assistant military commandant, Godfred Weitzel, shall be liable to imprisonment and to have his property confiscated. On the 17th day of June, 1862, General Butler forwarded to the Secretary of the Treasury the sums set forth in the following schedule, amounting to $245,760 10. In his letter to the Secretary, he says: The principal amounts are from deposits in the several banks to the credit of the receivers of the Confederate States, and will make a fund upon which those whose property has been confiscated may have claim. Another class he describes as that of the credits due to the Confederate States. The schedule accompanying the letter of General Butler, and showing the amounts received from the several New Orleans banks and the accounts to which they were credited, is as follows, to wit: HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE GULF, Schedule of amounts received from several banks in New Orleans, due Confederate States, and forwarded to the Secretary of the Treasury June 19, 1862, by B. F. Butler, major general commanding: From Citizens' Bank. Made up as follows, to wit: Special account due Confederate States treasurer . Confederate States receivers' accounts........... Confederate States quartermaster and commissary account .. $215, 820 89 $12, 465 00 178,897 50 24,458 39 215,820 89 24, 076 11 6,200 00 17,851 88 24 23 24,076 11 Bank of America-made up as follows, to wit: Due Confederate States treasurer. $2,850 00 New Orleans Canal and Banking Co.-made up as follows, to wit: Due Confederate States treasurer. . . . 2,500 00 Southern Bank-made up as follows, to wit: Due Confederate States treasurer. 513 10 245,760 10 Total Schedule of drafts sent to meet this account: Citizens' Bank draft, five days' sight, on Bank of North America, New York, Jacob Barker's check on Park Bank, New York, dated June 19, 1862. Draft of the assistant quartermaster on Assistant Treasurer of the United Total. All payable in treasury notes. B. F. BUTLER, Major General Commanding. It will be noticed in this schedule that the amount deposited in the Citizens' Bank by the Confederate States receivers was $178,897 50. The president of the Citizens' Bank of Louisiana, on the 11th day of June, 1862, in obedience to the order above set out, proceeded to give the information demanded to General Butler. He says, among other things, that the following named parties had to their credit on deposit these sums: J. M. Huger, confederate receiver G. W. Ward, confederate receiver J. C. Manning, confederate receiver Major M. L. Smith, confederate receiver Total. $116, 12 60 72,084 90 1.120 00 16,026 52 6,814 57 497 30 213,355 89 All these deposits were made, says the president of the bank, in the currency of the confederate government, by its appointed officers, and in accordance with an order of the confederate court and an act of congress, which made it a matter of compulsion upon the receivers and the bank. The moneys received by General Butler from the banks of New Orleans, June 19, 1862, amounting as above to $245,760 10, were covered into the Treasury June 30, 1868. So says the Secretary, in a letter to the committee, dated January 17, 1871. Among the assets of the Citizens' Bank at the time the order of General Butler was given was the sum of $219,090 94. This was sold by Jacob Barker for the sum of $73,030 30, which was paid over to Captain J. W. McClure, and disbursed by him as quartermaster's funds. In his account for August, 1863, he acknowledges having received this sum from the Citizens' Bank as confederate funds, under General Orders No. 202. He so received it under order of General Banks. From the letter of E. Rousseau, cashier of the Citizens' Bank, dated August 21, 1863, to Captain McClure, assistant quartermaster, the facts in relation to this confederate money are stated as follows: The $219,090 94 was reported by the president of the bank to General Butler, in his letter of June 11, 1862, as standing at that date to the credit of the treasurer of the Confederate States, in confederate money. The amount was seized by General Butler in behalf of the United States. Subsequently, by his direction, the confederate notes were handed over to Jacob Barker to be sold, and proceeds to be held by the bank subject to the order of the United States. General Butler's reasons for ordering the sale, as communicated to Mr. Barker, were, that when the United States called for the amount, they would greatly prefer to find $70,000 in their own Treasury notes than $220,000 in worthless paper. Mr. Barker accordingly effected the sale at 333 cents on the dollar, and paid to the bank the net proceeds, $73,030 31, which the cashier reported as then held subject to the order of the United States. The order of General Banks to the cashier to pay this money to Captain McClure bears date August 22, 1863. Beyond the sums so realized from the seizure, there remains to be mentioned another. There was received by General Butler from the Bank of Louisiana a bill on London for £3,000, which realized $16,773 90. This was on account of moneys deposited in that bank by the clerk of the circuit court of the United States. The Comptroller, in a letter to the Secretary of the Treasury, dated June 12, 1868, in speaking of the moneys thus sent forward by General Butler-the $245,760 10, and $16,773 90, items above, amounting to $262,534-expresses his opinion that they should be covered into the Treasury as "miscellaneous receipts;" and so far as relates to the $245,760 10, it should be covered in as "Confederate States money seized to the use of the United States." He goes on to add, that whether that money was obtained by the confederates through confiscation of debts due northern creditors or not, did not very clearly appear, nor, in his judgment, was it material. He argues that the money belonged to the rebel authorities, and as such was lawfully seized for the use of the United States, and no other party had any claim upon it until such claim should be recognized by act of Congress. He goes on to say that the courts hold that the attempted confiscation of debts by the rebel government did not relieve the debtor of his liability to the loyal creditor; so that though, in fact, the money may have been obtained through an attempted confiscation, which was in itself illegal, it became the property of the Confederate States and was liable to seizure by our Government; that it was neither the money of northern creditors nor the representative of northern credits. Hence he concludes that in no view of the case was the Secretary authorized to dispose of it otherwise than as the public money. As to the $16,773 90 item, he argues that was money belonging to the United States and had been deposited by a United States officer. It seems that claimants to the money thus paid into the Treasury by General Butler appeared from various parts of the country, and the Secretary requested of the Solicitor of his Department his opinion whether the money could be paid out without further legislation by Congress; and if it could be, with what Department did the decision in regard to the claims presented rest. The opinion of the Solicitor was that the attention of Congress should be called to the subject, by whom it might be referred to the Court of Claims, or some other proper tribunal or office, for the determination of all the questions involved. The Solicitor's opinion was again asked by the Secretary of the Treasury on the 18th of July, 1866, upon a statement of the United States Treasurer that the money's had not been covered into the Treasury, but were subject to the order of the Secretary, and he was asked whether this state of facts modified his opinions. In his reply, dated 13th August, 1863, the Solicitor admits that the |