Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

that she was finally given up by the officer of the United States, after this ruinous delay, and proceeded on her voyage to San Francisco.

The memorialist shows that he was compelled to mortgage his steamer to raise funds in consequence of this illegal seizure, and that he has sustained thereby losses and damages amounting to almost entire loss of his property.

Upon the facts disclosed by the memorial, and documents accompanying, the committee' are of opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be indemnified in this case; and as in a similar case (not so strong) indemnity was granted to the owners of the brig Kate Boyd, for a seizure and detention, not so injurious as in this case.

From the documents filed in this case, it is manifest that the seizure and detention of this vessel was not justified by the facts; and that under no circumstances was she liable to be thus taken; as, in the opinion of the Secretary of the Treasury, she did not belong to that class of passenger vessels embraced in the provisions of the act of Congress, for the violation of which she was seized, and thus illegally detained.

The affidavit of the memorialist sets forth the amount expended by him in the purchase and equipment of his vessel, and the loss and damage he has sustained in consequence of the seizure, and thus presents a claim for indemnity, the justice of which cannot be doubted, while the illegality of the seizure is distinctly admitted by the Treasury Department in the order for her release. But the committee deem it just to limit the compensation to demurrage, and submit the following joint resolution.

[blocks in formation]

The Committee on Private Land Clains, to whom was referred the petition of D. J. Campau, in behalf of his father Joseph Campau, praying for a patent for a certain tract of land, have had the same under consideration, and directed me to submit the following report:

The committee find that commissioners were appointed, under an act of Congress, to investigate and confirm the claims of persons in possession and occupancy of lands lying in that part of the territory of Michigan, to which the Indian title had been extinguished, and that said commissioners did confirm to Pierre Bonhomme a certain tract of land, in the following words: "The commissioners decide that this tract be confirmed to the extent claimed, viz: sixteen arpens by forty, French measure, commencing at a point on the south border of the river Au Delude, about two miles from its confluence with the river St. Clair; and thence up stream, upon said river Delude, sixteen arpens; thence at right angles with said river Delude, to the distance of forty arpens; thence in the rear, sixteen arpens; thence, to the place of beginning, by a line, forty arpens in length. The commissioners would here advert to the fact, that this tract appears to be covered by a reservation made to the Chippewa nation of Indians. It is therefore submitted to the revising powers, if a change of the location of this tract be not necessary or advisable."

On the 17th April, 1828, by an act of Congress, the confirmations of the commissioners were confirmed, and patents ordered to be issued for the said lands. But in view of the qualifications and recommendations of the said commissioners attached to their confirmation, and from the fact that a portion of said lands were covered by a reservation to the Chippewa nation of Indians, the Commissioner of the General Land Office refused to issue a patent to said Bonhomme for said lands.

The title of the Chippewa nation of Indians in said lands has been extinguished, and is now vested in the United States, so that no barrier exists against the conveyance of said lands, by patent, to the said Pierre Bonhomme, or the person claiming under him.

On the 23d day of December, 1833, the said Pierre Bonhomme, conveyed by deed, properly executed and recorded, (as appears by a

duly certified copy accompanying said petition,) all his right, title, and interest in and to the said tract of land, to Joseph Campau.

Under the decision of the Commissioner of the General Land Office a patent cannot be issued under the act of the 17th April, 1828, "without further legislation and express authority of law."

The committee, in view of the foregoing facts, have directed me to report the accompanying bill for the relief of Joseph Campau, and respectfully recommend its passage.

[blocks in formation]

The Committee on Military Affairs to whom was referred the memorial of Mrs. Helen Mackay, widow and administratix of Colonel Eneas Mackay, deceased, praying that the proper accounting officers may be directed to receive certain vouchers as evidence in the settlement of her late husband's accounts, report.

Colonel Æneas Mackay was deputy quartermaster general in the United States army, stationed at St. Louis, Missouri, in 1847, where he disbursed large sums of money on account of the Mexican war. In he settlement of his accounts at the Treasury Department, in 1847, he was credited in his second quarterly account by $25,000 paid by him to Captain Wm. D. McKissack, as per receipt dated May 1, 1847and in his third quarterly account of the same year he was credited by $25,000, also paid to Captain Wm. D. McKissack, as per receipt dated August 14, 1847, and upon a final statement of his account he is shown to have a balance to his credit, on the books of the Treasury Department, of about $7,000.

Colonel Mackay was in the city of Washington, from February to September, 1848, engaged in the settlement of his accounts, and claiming payment of the balance due him, which however was not paid him up to the time of his death in 1850. Since his death, his widow has repeatedly applied to the department for a final settlement of his accounts; when, much to her surprise, she was informed that, upon a re-examination of Colonel Mackay's accounts, the receipt dated May 1, 1847, had been rejected, and that her husband was a defaulter about $18,000.. The reason advanced by the department for rejecting this voucher is,, that Captain McKissack makes no return of it in his accounts, andi it is alleged that these two receipts, each for $25,000, are for the iden-tical sum of money.

The existence of the receipts in the hands of Colonel Mackay are prima facie evidence that both amounts were paid over by Colonel Mackay, and both received by Captain McKissack, and their possession would entitle Captain McKissack to a verdict in any court of justice. The committee also find the most abundant and satisfactory proof that the $25,000, for which Captain McKissack gave the receipt of May

1, 1847, was paid to him, and do not think that Colonel Mackay should be made to suffer for the neglect of another officer, and therefore recommend that the prayer of the memoralist ought to be granted, and accordingly report the accompanying bill for her relief.

« ZurückWeiter »