2. The fourth section of the bill authorises the payment of the half pay for life to the widow or lineal descendants of all officers entitled thereto, but who have never been paid upon satisfactory proof of their claim to the proper accounting officer.

The fifth clause provides for the payment in like manner to the widow or children of any officer who died in the service, under the resolution of August 24, 1780.

Among the petitions is one which does not come within the resolution. The father of the petitioner was not in the continental line, but commanded a volunteer company under the authority of a State at the time he was killed. Considering this a meritorious case, and that after the lapse of seventy years there can be few, if any, cases of a like description, the committee have added to the bill a clause which embraces her

case.

3. The amounts found to be due are to be paid in every case without interest. In paying claims of this description there does not seem to have been any inflexible rule in the special acts which have passed to provide for particular cases; anterior to the year 1832, no interest was allowed by the express words of the acts, but in the case of Mrs. Hamilton the attorney general was of opinion that interest should be paid, although not provided for in the act. In 1832 and 1833 there are about sixteen cases of special acts where interest was allowed, but since that time the general rule, as far as ascertained, has been not to allow interest on these antiquated claims, if they have not been paid it has not been because the government had not the ability to pay, and it is fair to presume, has not been wanting in the inclination to render justice to all who had just claims, either on its justice or its liberality.

4. The bill provides that payments are to be made only to the surviving widow and lineal descendants of the officers, collateral are excluded. If these were legal debts, then it would be proper they should be paid to the executor or administrator, and be assets for the payment of debts, and the surplus be paid to those who are entitled under the statutes of distribution in the several States. But in most of the cases the legal obligation has been discharged by the payment of the commutation. The allowance of these claims is more of the nature of a benevolence, given in discharge of a great moral obligation. Gratitude for the services of these officers may impose on Congress the extension of its rewards to the several heirs of the deceased officer, but not to his remote collateral kindred. Besides this, considering the migratory character of our people, it will be no easy task to ascertain who are the lineal descendants of one who died forty or fifty years ago, and this difficulty will be greatly increased in tracing collateral descent for two or three generations. The committee have added to the bill such provisions as they hope will protect the claimants against the rapacity of speculators, and secure to those who are the objects of its bounty the personal benefit of its provisions. They think it is time there should be an end to those claims growing out of the war of the revolution, which terminated seventy years ago, and therefore have limited the bill to a short period, after which all the claims provided for by it shall be forever barred.

years' half-pay, if they should so long live. This provision, by the re lution of August 24, 1780, was extended to the widow of any off who had or should die in the service, and if there be no widow, t to the orphan children of such officer.

These resolutions present all the action of Congress necessary to understanding of the several petitions referred to the committee. The petitions may be divided into three classes.

1. The officers who received the commutation under the resolution March 22, 1783, and now ask that Congress will pay them the h pay for life, deducting what they have received, or pay them the dif ence between the par value of the certificates and the market value which their necessities compelled them to sell. This class inclu nearly all the petitions.

2. Those who have never received, either the half-pay or commu tion, and now ask that they may be paid one or the other. There only ten or twelve of this class.

3. The children of officers who were killed in the service during war of the revolution, asking to be paid the seven years' half-p under the resolution of August 24, 1780. There are two of this cla

The committee deem it impossible to legislate understandingly every case separately. In some cases there is evidence that cert officers have received the commutation, but whether the petitioners the persons entitled to the relief if granted, the committee have means of ascertaining. All the special acts passed on this subj direct an inquiry to be made by the proper accounting officers of treasury before making the payment. The committee having come the conclusion that these petitioners are entitled to some relief, have deavored to frame a bill which shall embrace all these cases and lea the proof to be made before the accounting officers, who, in the ju ment of the committee, can better ascertain the facts than any co mittee of Congress can do.

The principles of the bill are:

1. That the widow and lineal descendants of any officer who v entitled to receive, under the resolutions of Congress, half-pay for 1 shall still be entitled, notwithstanding such officer may have received commutation. The receipt of the commutation in lieu of the life annu presents a case of election, and in strict law might be a bar to th claims. But the petitioners allege, and there is no doubt of the fa that there was no fund for the payment of the certificates; that in c sequence of this and the large amount which was thrown upon market, and the necessity the officers were under to sell, the mar price of the certificates fell to 12 per cent. Besides this, the mode accepting or refusing the offer did not leave them individually the ri of choosing. Considering all the facts of the case, and that the amou which the officers actually received has fallen so far below their dese and the amount of the rewards which were promised, the commit are of opinion they should be admitted to their original rights, and ha accordingly provided in the bill that they shall be paid the half-p for life, deducting the amount of their commutation certificates; no terest to be allowed

A list of cases referred to the Committee on Revolutionary Claims, and which are embraced in the report made July 6, 1853.

1st class. Those who have received the commutation, and are to receive the half-pay for life, deducting the commutation on proof: Benjamin Mooers, Simon Summers, Wells Clift, William Beaumont, Joshua Danforth, William Riley, Philip G. Vanwyck, James Sawyer, Clement Gosline, Garrat Tuniece, Thomas Reed, Samuel Gibbs, Derrick Schuyler, Samuel Lewis, Nicholas Schuyler, Thomas Mounts, James Clinton, Peter Gansvort, Andrew Finck, Peter J. Vosburgh, Lewis Booker, Thomas Buckner, Samuel Cliff, Jedediah Huntington, Henry Hughes, Beverly Roy, 26; Pierre Ayot, 27.

2d class. Those who claim half-pay or commutation, and are to be allowed half pay for life: J. DeTreville, Antoine Paulent, Francis Chaudonet, George Gibson, Louis Gosline, Gerard Wood, Uriah Forrest, Francis Marten, Amable Borliace, Lewis Marnay, Joseph Bendon, Felix Vinter, Maria Stephenson.

3d class.-The children of officers who died in the service: Nathan Weeks, Mary Perry, Jacob Cooper.

1st Session.

No. 83.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.

FEBRUARY 6, 1854.-Ordered to be printed.

Mr. BENJAMIN made the following

REPORT.

[To accompany bill S. 187.]

The Committee on Private Land Claims, to whom was referred the following resolution: "Resolved, That the subject-matter of relief to the innocent purchasers and settlers on the Maison Rouge and De Bastrop grants, which lie in the States of Louisiana and Arkansas be, and the same is hereby, referred to the Committee on Private Land Claims; with power to report,' have had the same under consideration, and

The committee find that the subject matter of said grants has been so frequently reported upon that they deem it unnecessary to review their history at this time, neither do they believe it important to refer to the many legal adjudications that have grown out of them; but the committee are compelled to allude to the hardships and seeming injustice that has been from time to time visited upon those persons who purchased in good faith and for a valuable consideration from the said grantees, or other persons holding titles derived under them.

By a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, in which four of the judges dissented, a number of such purchasers were evicted of their title to the said lands.

By an act of Congress, approved January 27, 1851, provision was made, in the event of a final adjudication of the title of the Maison Rouge to said lands in favor of the United States, for those of the said purchasers who had improved and cultivated their said lands to enter the same by paying to the United States the minimum price for public lands; another act of Congress was passed on the 3d of March, 1851, providing for the settlement of certain classes of private land claims within the limits of the De Bastrop grant; neither of said acts made any provision whatever for those purchasers who had not improved or cultivated the lands so purchased.

Your committee are of the opinion that justice would demand relief alike to those persons who had purchased in good faith and for a valuable consideration, and who did not cultivate, as to those who did cultivate their said lands, provided the relief did not interfere with the rights of third persons, who may have acquired the right of pre-emption by actual settlement and cultivation of the said lands, under the general pre-emption laws of the United States.

The committee therefore report the accompanying bill and recommend its passage.