1st Session. No. 52. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. JANUARY 18, 1854.-Ordered to be printed. Mr. BUTLER made the following REPORT. [To accompany bill S. 146.] The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the memorial of Samuel H. Hampstead, late attorney for the United States for the district of Arkansas, praying extra compensation for services rendered by him in defending the title of the United States to certain lands in Arkansas, have had the same under consideration and report: That the petitioner, while acting as attorney for the United States, for the district of Arkansas, defended the United States against certain parties claiming land, situated in the State of Arkansas, by virtue of grants made to them by Baron Carondelet and others; that in the discharge of the extra duties aforesaid, no provision by law was made compensating him for these extra services, as was made for the judges trying the same. The committee, after a careful examination of the case, have concluded that the petitioner is entitled to a reasonable and just compensation for his services. There appears to be but three leading and important cases in which the principle at issue is involved, and similar cases coming under each head respectively, would not require the same amount of labor as the first or original cases; the amount therefore claimed by petitioner is, in the opinion of the committee, greater than the services rendered justify. The committee report the accompanying bill for his relief. 1st Session. No. 53. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. JANUARY 18, 1854.-Ordered to be printed. Mr. BUTLER made the following REPORT. [To accompany Bill S. 147.] The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the petition of James Chapman, administrator of Thomas Chapman, have had the same under consideration and report: This claim has been heretofore submitted to Congress, and various reports have been made upon it. From these the Committee select the following report, made at the first session of the twenty-second Congress, which they adopt, and accordingly report a bill. IN SENATE, MAY 19, 1852. The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the petition of James Chapman, administrator of Thomas Chapman, submit the following report: The committee have had this case under consideration, have examined the various reports heretofore made upon it, have concurred in the opinions expressed in the report made to the Senate by its Judiciary Committee on the 24th of April, 1832, and, adopting the same, accordingly report a bill. IN SENATE, FEBRUARY 27, 1850. The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the petition of James Chapman, administrator of Thomas Chapman, submit the following report: This claim has been heretofore submitted to Congress, and various reports have been made upon it. From these the committee select the following report, made at the first session of the twenty-second Congress, which they adopt, and accordingly report a bill. IN SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, APRIL 24, 1832. The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the petition of James Chapman, report: That the petitioner represents that he is the executor of Thomas Chapman, late of Georgetown, South Carolina, deceased. "That the said Thomas Chapman was in his life time collector of the customs for Georgetown district, in the State of South Carolina, and continued faithfully to discharge the duties of said office to the period of his death, which took place on the 28th day of November, A. D. 1820. That some time in February, 1814, while the said Thomas Chapman was in the discharge of all the duties of his office, a certain Swedish brig, called the Diana, alleged to be in distress, and attempting to enter the port of Georgetown, was seized by Lieutenant Mark, of the United States cutter Boxer, and brought to anchor in said harbor, where the said Thomas Chapman visited her as collector, and put a revenue officer on board to take charge of the cargo; that the said brig was accordingly libelled on the charge preferred against her by Lieutenant Mark, of a violation of the non-intercourse act, and her cargo condemned to be forfeited, which sentence of condemnation was, in February, 1818, finally confirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States. The said vessel's cargo having been condemned as aforesaid, the said Thomas Chapman was by the laws of the United States entitled, as collector, to one-fourth part of the net proceeds. "That while the said libel was pending before the court, the captain of the Diana, acting for the owners, thought proper to have the said Thomas Chapman examined as a witness in the case; that his counsel accordingly prepared interrogatories, to which the district attorney put in cross-interrogatories, and transmitted the same in the commission, directed to certain gentlemen in Georgetown, requiring them to take the answers of the said Thomas Chapman thereto. Being thus called upon to testify by a commission under the seal of the court, sanctioned as it seemed to be by the district attorney-the official adviser of all United States officers-the said Thomas Chapman did not suppose that any loss or damage could be incurred by him in consequence of his giving the evidence thus required of him. The said Thomas Chapman was not aware in doing this act he was giving up any legal right whatever; he knew the district attorney too well to suspect that he would lead him into error, or that he would even suffer him unadvisedly to commit himself, and abandon his rights. The district attorney, indeed, subsequently declared that he had no idea at the time that the examination of said Thomas Chapman, as a witness on the part of the owners, could jeopard his claim, and even to the end maintained the opinion that such was not the law. On hearing that the cargo had been finally condemned, the said Thomas Chapman caused a petition to be sent on to the court at Charleston, praying that his fourth part of the said cargo should be paid over to him according to law. On this petition being presented to the court by a legal friend of the said Thomas Chapman, the district attorney expressed his surprise, and stated that it was unnecessary to present such a petition, when the act directs expressly that one-half should be paid over to the collector for the use of himself and the United States. The legal co-partner of the district. attorney, acting for him in his absence, had also declared that the district attorney was aware of the examination of the said Thomas Chapman, but that he had nothing to apprehend from it; and his right to a fourth of the condemned cargo was certain. Fortified by these opinions, and conscious that he had done nothing to merit a forfeiture, it was with great astonishment and mortification that the said Thomas Chapman was finally informed that his honor Judge Johnson had, on the second day of July, decided that he, the said Thomas Chapman, had forfeited his fourth part of the proceeds, and that he had ordered the same to be paid into the branch bank of the United States, to the credit of the government, which was accordingly done. The ground of this decision was, that the said Thomas Chapman had forfeited his proportion on account of his having been examined as a witness in the case. By this decision the United States has received into its treasury the sum of $13,457 55, which had justly belonged to the said Thomas Chapman, on the alleged ground that he had by his own act forfeited his right to it. "That this decision operated with peculiar hardship on the said Thomas Chapman. He had been induced, between six and seven years before, to accept the appointment of collector of the port of Georgetown under the belief that the emoluments would afford compensation for the strict attention to his duties. In this expectation he was greatly dissapointed; and though he continued most assiduously and faithfully to perform his duties as collector to the day of his death, the pecuniary compensation he received was very inconsiderable. That he nevertheless continued to hold his commission, in the hope that the time might arrive when he would be rewarded for his devotion to the interests of the government. That his proportion of the forfeited cargo. of the Diana afforded for the first time the prospect of some remuneration for years of faithful service; when, unexpectedly, this was torn from him by the government, for an offence which he had unconsciously committed, which consisted in his stating the truth, upon oath, when required by a writ under the seal of the court, and when his conduct was sanctioned by the district attorney, and when no idea of forfeiture existed in the minds of any of the parties." The petitioner, therefore, prays that the sum of $13,457 55, being Thomas Chapman's proportion of the cargo of the Diana, which has been paid into the treasury of the United States, may be restored to the family of the deceased. The committee have examined the documents submitted in support of the claim thus set up by the petitioner, and have looked into the proceedings of the court, and find all the material allegations of the petitioner fully sustained by the testimony advanced. It appears from the record now on file in the office of the clerk of the Supreme Court, and from the documents now in the hands of the committee, that the ship Diana, when about to put into the harbor of Georgetown, in a state of distress, was seized, in crossing the bar, by Lieutenant Mark, of the United States cutter Boxer, on a charge of a violation of the non-intercourse act, on which charge she was libelled and condemned. That so soon as Thomas |