EMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) 1.0 I.I 1.25 If itt IIIIIM •^ IM !||||2.2 :^ i£ ill 2.0 1.4 1.8 !.6 Photpgraphic LAjlt/liLitib Corporation i^ «% ^^ ^n! c\ \ <^ a^ ». 33 WI-ST MAIN STREET wEbsTcS, rj.y. i45S0 (716) 872-4303 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Cc adian Institute for Historical MIcroreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exempiaire qu'il lui a 6x6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cat exempiaire qui sont peut-u illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relii avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re liure serrie peut causer de I'ombra ou de la diftorsion le long de la marge intirieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possiljle, these have bsen omitted from fi!ming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout^es lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela ^tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas ite filmies. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppldmentaires; □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur □ Pages damaged/ Pagas endommagdes □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaur^es et/ou pelliculdes B^l Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages ddcolor^es, tachetdes ou piqudes □ Pages detached/ Pages ditachies I KiShowthrough/ L^ Transparence r~1 Quality of print varies/ D Quality in^gale de I'impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplementaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Las pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, uns pelure. etc.. ont 6X6 filmies 6 nouveau de facon i obtanir (a meilleure image possible. This item is rilmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film^ au taux de reduction indiqui ci-de9sous. 10X 14X 18X 22X y 12X 16X 20X 26X 30X 24X 2&X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thankn to the generosity of: ; Metropolitan Toronto Library Canadian History Department L'exemplaire film6 f ut reproduit grAce h la g6nirosit6 de: Metropolitan Toronto Library Canadian History Department The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers ere fF!med beginning with the front cover and ending on the last pnge with a printed or illustrcted impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriatts All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated Impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each micrcfiche shall contain the symbol — *► (meaning "COM- TINUED"!, or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Maps, plates, charts, etc.. may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the methods Lor images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec ie plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at de la nettet6 de l'exemplaire fllm6, et en conformity avec las conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires origlnaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimie sont film6s en commenyant par Ie premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernlAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustratlon, soit par Ie second plat, selon Ie cas. Tcus les autres exemplaires origlnaux sont film6s en commenyant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustratlon et en terminant par la derniAie page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles sulvants apparattra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon Ie cas: Ie symbols — »• signifie "A SUiVRE", Ie symbols V signifie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc.. peuvent 6tre film6s k des taux de reduction diffdrents. Lorsque ie document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clichi, 11 est filmi A partir de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de gauche d droito, et de haut en bas, en prenant Ie nombre d'images ndcesseire. Les diagrammes suivants illu ent la m6thoiie. 1 2 3 I ■ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Ii' . i" 'm *^^« Ii^ BRIEF EXPOSITION OF THE CASE OF ELBERT ANDERSON, liATi; AHJO. COJCTTiACTOB., 8w. &c. • WASHINGTON CITY: tvansj) BT ymhiAX coopbb, tvs. 1826. ^ IHSS ^ij l^J^ v< o, VI -^.o w \ ^-^\ »-TOV*^ To the Honourable ^ The undersigned, Elbert Anderson, of the Stat^^f g^^^^^^ late aB-iM»<:ontractor for the army of the United States, very respeSTsoUcits your attention toihe facts and p"^^^^^^^^^^^ claims on tW justice of his country, arising from two contracts mm ft, one dated T^ovember 7th, 1811, and the ^^her dated Febr^^^^^^^^ 25th, 1813, copies of both which are hereto annexed. By the hrst of them the Petitioner contracted to mpply, from June 1, 1812, t My 31, 1813 the rations which should be required ^ him fo^ the usi of the United States, within the l^"^'*^^/ * ^^/^f * ^Jf New York, Niagara and its dependencies excepted, and the State ot mw Jersey; and by the second, to supply, froni June 1, 1813, to May ''^l 1814 such rations within the State of New York, and its wes- tern and northern vicinities. Under these contracts the Petitioner conceTvesMmself fully entitled to an allowance by Congress of sun- drrchTms^of ^^^^^^^ y««^ consideration, the follow- ing exposition. CLAIM FOR CASKS, PACKAGES, &C. &C. This claim amounts to g 29,700 06, of which sum, » 24,894 20, are ehe value of such of the casks, barrels and Packaps, furnished in consequence of his aforesaid contracts, as were, after their expi- ration retained by the government ;-8 1,901 11, are the value of such as had been captured or destroyed by the enemy pand 8 2,904 75 cents, are the value of such as had been lost or destroyed by the trooDS of the United States. i ^ ^f rThe first item of this claim is g 13,972 30 cents, the value of the casks, barrels and packages, furnished i" *^?"^.^^"Xr%u pv contract of November 7, 1811, which were ^^ta^ned, after its ex- piration, by the United States. On reference to this contract, it will appear that the Petitioner was bound, bv the 1st article ot it, to furiiish « rations" only j and the 2d article declares, that a ra- tion shall consist of « one pound and a quarter of beef, or three « quarters of a pound of pork, eighteen ounces of bread or flour, one « iill ot rum, whisky or brandy, and at the rate of two quarts ol « salt, four quarts of vinegar, four pounds of soap, and one pound « and a half of candles, to every hundred rations." In the absence, then, of an express stipulation by the Petitioner, to furnish some- thino- beside the rations, no sound rule of construction will imply such a stipulation, unless on principles derivable from general usage, or from some special usage obligatory on the parties, it is not the general usage for the vendor to furnish, free from a senarate char-e, the enclosure of the article sold : Though sometimes he m- crease-^' the nominal price of the article, so as to include the vulnn \-^' '• I fli :^. •* i of the enclosure ;-And then the article is ««W ^y jte ow^^^^^^^ in.l that of the enclosure, joini^y; as for example, a barrel ot beet, a i ofwhi kyXc But-'in no other instances is the. bu;rer exempt from a separate c^.arge for the enclosure. And so it is ,n the case of an iSter. iS regard to any special usage applicable to ?L iterl^^he most cogen't argument in its support exists m the Dractice of the government itself; which, so far as the Feti- Sone' S informed, has, in all contracts made in reference to the Atlantic States, allowed a sepa.afe charge for casks, barrels and packages. The report on the Petitioner's claim, made on the lathlf August, 1824, by Mr. Calhoun, then Secretary of War, Idmitsthatluch charges Ld been allowed to the Pf tio"er! "nder previous contracts, in cases where he had 'jsued provisions to troops on march, or on board of transports; And there is surely io difference between the P"nciple which allows a diarge made under these circumstances, and that of which the benetit is claimed for enclosures of provisions deposited by the contractor in the storehouses of the United States. In both cases, these enclo- sures were retained by the Government; in both cases had they been 3 for by Jhe Petitioner, and lost to him by its act m so retaining tCi That the construction for which tlie Petitioner contends has been heretofore adopted by the 9"yf^""^«"*V M?Jars"mers bv many examples. Of these, one is the case of Mr. Janies Byers, /ho as/ed and'obtained g 14,502 49 in payment «[ casks, ^^^^^^^^^^^ used by him in depositing rations, and retained by the Unit_ed States. In this case, Mr. Monroe, acting Secretary of War, on the 13th ot OctlerTlsX directed, in a letter of that date, the Accountant of the War Department that " it did not appear by Byers' contract « tha? he was bSund to furnish casks and boxes; or ^n other ^r^^ * J. '"*''*'■ dent Madison's opinion, which was a written one, as the Petitioner is informed, his earnest endeavours have hitherto been unable to ob- tain a copy; and he has equally failed in procuring a copy ot an opinion m favour of this, and the next, item of the claim now under consideration, which was given by the late Mr. Dexter, a lor- mer Secretary of W^ar, and who was the author '>f the blank tonus ol the very contracts under which the Petitioner's claim arises. From the fore.roing facts, it appears that the original decision ot one Se- cretary of War, on Mr. Byers' case, has been adhered to by another Secretary of War, as the nile for determining a claim arising be- fore a new principle was infused into this decision ; that the Second Comptroller has declined to interfere with a construction soacrord- I? ■ f ant to equity and reason ; and tlmt it had been sustained by the en - rhtenei mL of Mr. Madison, while acting, >vith charactenst.c temlerness of conscience, under the highest respons.b.htT known to the Constitution. Tlie Petitioner invokes, therefore, these ^0"^' derations in aid of his claim, with a hope of success, which is am- mated by tho reflection that one of the profoundest lawyers who ever presided over tiie Department of ^V^^v P^«f ^^'^^^V^n^f tho the very contract under which this claim arises, am sanct oned the construction of it, which is now contended for. .. U" wdl; g to vex Congress with an application wiiich might possibly be unfounded, the Petitioner submitted this and the subsequent item to the scru- tiny ot individuals, whose moral and professional reputation enti- tled them to his confidence, and whose authority on a quest on arising under the law of contracts he could not avoid regarding as being at least equal to that of the Third Auditor. If, c«?ntrarily to the Petitioner's deliberate expectations, the sup- plement to Mr. Monroe's original letter be deemed applicable to this item, he would respectfully urge the propriety of its being al- lowed on the very principle of that supplement. The Petitioner and Mr. Byers were in January, 1812, called to Washington, by the Secretary of War, in consequence ot « new ar- 'i rangements being required in the provision department of the ar- « mv?' and directed to provide rations for a nominal torce, at pla- ces not fortified, and to deposit rations at places where was no actual force, and therefore no immediate consumption; they were required to supply salted beef and pork « wholly" and Aon « wholly," for periods during portions of which their contracts did not restrict them to these articles : And it was understood that for complying with these, and other requisitions, not authoriz- ed by contract, the Contractors should be compensated. The Peti- tioner complied with them, nor did Mr. B. do any thing more to entitle him to a compensation not stipulated m his contract. It would be superfluous for the Petitioner to say how difficult obedi- ence to these requisitions was rendered by existing circumstances, or with what zealous alacrity he endeavoured to meet the wishes ot Government, and the exigencies of the service. It must be observ- ed moreover, that the Government, while admitting the usage enti- tling the Contractors to a return or payment of the casKS &c., ex- pected them to issue in detail, when necessary, the component parts of the rations already deposited, and that the deposites should be charged to the Contractor at the prices fixed in the contract of November 7, 1811, subject to a commissariat allowance for issuing. From the contemporaneous correspondence it will appear, that at the date of the deposites the Government had received from Mr. B., as well as from the Petitioner, a promise to make the issues in de- tail, on the principles just stated. This promise was performed by the Petitioner, but Mr. B. receded from it, thereby obliging the Government to transport, at its own hazard ^"" f ^PJl'^.^' [o^^^^.yj' al hundred miles, the provisions he had deposited, which, from their nature, were subject t6 gi-eat loss and decay. Such consequences HI the en- :teristic nown to e consi- li is ani- ers "who 1 eftect, ned the to vex 'ounded, he scru- on enti- question egarding the sup- cable to ►eing al- :alled to new ar- f the ar- , at pla- was no ley were ind flour racts did tood that authoriz- rhe Peti- more to tract. It lit obedi- mstanccs, wishes ot" e observ- lage enti- &,c., ex- omponent :es should >ntract of »r issuing, r, that at im Mr. B., les in de- 'ormed by (liging the for sever- from their isequences to the Government, in the instance of the Petitioner, were averted by the promptitude of his issues ; But he sustained a heavy loss by taking, at tlie increased price of his subsequent contract, such of the provisions as had been deposited by Mr. B.,and transported to Lake Champlain. It should too be observed that the casks, barrels, pack- ages, &c. returned to the Petitioner were, through the hard and rough service which they had undergone, materially impaired in value; — a loss for which he has not claimed, and does not claim, remuneration, however equitably deserving it. Additionally to these farts, the Petitioner must remark that his purchases and requisitions were the same as those of Mr. Byeis ; that in most instances Mr. B. was enabled to procure railons at places, where the remoteness of them from all markets rendered provisions cheap, and whence a long transportation, at the risk and expense of the U. States, became necessary ij — and that, on the other hand, the Petitioner's purchases were made in the State of New York, on navigable waters, where provisions were high, and contiguous to pla- ces afterward the seat oi War. On every ground then, it would seem, that any compensation for extra services to which Mr. B. was entitled, on the principle of the supplement to Mr. Monroe's origi- nal letter, may, with at least equal justice, be claimed by the Peti- tioner. That « all claims arising from loss sustained by requisitions not authorized by the contract," must be allowed by the Government, is a piinciple undisputed hitherto, and in terms recognised by Mr. Crawford, then Secretary of War, in his directions, received by the Accountant, January 27, 1816, concerning contracts for the years 1814—15. 2. The second item of this claim is g 10,921 90, the value of casks &c. furnished in consequence of the contract of February 25, 1813, and retained after its expiration, by the United States. To this item, most of the previous remarks are applicable, as the con- tract under which it arises, like that of November 7 1811, obliged the Contractor to provide " rations " only. If for the payment of this and preceding item, no st'^ulations were made in the contracts, it was because tfie general usage of bu- siness, and the previous practice of the Government rendered such stipulations unnecessary. The Petitioner ha^ held contracts with the U. States, since the year 1809, and invariably obtained compensation for casks &c. which had been required of him for the use or the army. So complete was the understanding at the War Department on this subject, that whenever it appeared that he had omitted to make a charge for them, the officers voluntarily corrected the omission by introducing the charge into the Pnal settlement, to the debit of the United States. These charges were, it is true, from the extent of the supply, less in amount than the present charge ; — but a diiference in the amount makes no dift'erence in the principle. The expectation of the Go- vernment to pay this and the former item, should they arise, is plainly inferiblo, too, from the facts, that on November 7, 1812, the Petition- 1^ r 01- exhibited to the Secretary of War a written schedule of the ra ber7 1811, in which schedile the casks, barrels &c. containin| ?i^,I'ra?i^^, s we^e eparatelv and distinctly charged to the Umte, S a es a the prices Sow cfai.ned; that tt.e Secretary offered no oWPct on to tne char-e; and that on February 25, 1813, another con- ?rtf wSs made be we^ the Government-'and the Petitioner, m which were covenants exactly similar to those under which he had -tXp^^r^^^ at t;.^ W. De,^-- of .. a.. cS'^;a"ckL^r&ccm« c? tJ^^ Tppef on reference to^hose accounts : And trom the absence oPany Stion to that demand, an acquiescence in it by the Depart- «u.n7,.,ust be inferred. The Petitioner must therefore seek the o"^ X?" s^J^-ion," on the exhibition of hj^^ a-^^^^^ -- in March, 1815, of the items now claimed, to afterthought suggest ed bv the r amount. Hence too, he must suppose, they were, V an ex.post.fa to decision, forced out of the operation of a pnnciple in whS., in si" ilar cases, compensation had been granted to contem- poraneous Contractors, and to one of his successors. 'i The third item is 84,805 86. Of this sum, g 1901 11 arc the valurof casks &c. captured and destroyed by the enemy, and 82 nOA^Xve the value of casks &c. lost and destroyed by the troopa of tCurdted States, in descending the St. Lawrence The item Arises un er the con ract of February 25, 181 3, of which the 6th ar- ?ic e P?iy des, « that all losses sustained by the depredations of the « enemT or b; means of the troops of the fjnited States, in articles "intenaed to compose rations, to be issued r^''•*^'^?^ '' ne tv" « n . the nronerty of the Contractor, as well as in other prope ty ne'cessaSy^useHn transp.,rting the same, shall be paid for at the ^ rontra? mice of the rations, or the component parts, and at the SnSecfvak^ ^^P^^I^'T "^ Tfh^ u Sore cred^l^e characters, » & c. If the reasoning in favo^rof tjie "vtrTf f rom ^^^^^ Fel-^^'J «'' '8>3, contemplate, 8ome. WnTbeS Z rations, a, the subje'ct of los. and pajment. and . is diflicult to be imagined what it could have contemplated, except the enclosures used in transporting them. CLAIM FOR INTEREST ON DECLAHED BALANCES. This claim h for 810,000, the interest at six per cent per an- num, arising from the delay of the Government in paying certain warrant-i issued, and certificates given, in favour of the Petitioner. Of these, the Third Auditor reports one for 8181,243 57, to be dated March 14, 1815, and paid January 5, 1816; one for 8 5(),75G 43, to he dated June 27, 1015, and paid August 28, 1815, and one for 87,389 34, to be dated July 10, 1815, and paid January 5, 1816. Bui from the Report of the Register of the Treasury, it appears that the amounts of the warrant for 8181,3 T 57, and that for S 7,389 34, were not remitted till January 1 IfA, 1816, and thfit the amount of the warrant for 8 56,756 42, was not remitted till September ist 1815. The interest accruing from the date of the certificates, to September 5, 1815, when the Petitioner received in New York the remittance for the warrant for $ 56,756 43 cents, and to January 16, 1816, when he there received the re- mittances on the other two warrants, is !^ 10,019 51, and was stated by the Petitioner, on presenting his accounts at the War Depart- ment, in round numbers at 8 10,000. The tenth article of the contract of February 25, 1813, under which this claim originates, provides that any balance which shall be found, on •' any settlement of his accounts," to be due to the Peti- tioner, shall be immediately paid. The issuing of the warrants afore- said, admits debts to their amount to be due from the Government to the Petitioner ; and for the delay occurring in the payment of those debts, there seems no re.ison why the Petitioner should not receive the same compensation which the law would have compelled an indi- vidual debtor to make to him. It is true that the Tenth article of the contract requires the Petitioner, in case of a failure on his part to comply with the contract, to pay interest at the rate of six per cent, per annum, on the surplus of advances which might have been made to him, and that it does not express any contingency on which the Government is to pay interest. But interest universally commen- ces whenever the principal becomes due, and the object of the stip- ulation obtained from the contractor was merely to define, what would otherwise have been uncertain, the period when the interest, which under given circumstances might be due from him, should commence. That the obligations of every contract are reciprocal, is undeniable : and the Petitioner needs not advert to the numerous instances in which a rule, so radicated in reason and conscience. has been sanctioned bv the Legislature ol the Union. t «' CLAIM FOR DAMAGES ON PROTESTED BILLS. This claim is for » 20,000, that sum being t^%^^lJ^S"' ** *i\^ rate of 10 per cent, on two bills ot exchange, one for »150,000, and the other fbr 850,000, drawn October 27, 1814, by the Petitionee on the Secretary of War, and protested ^^JJ'^''-^%"'^f\r,.. .r^^ Bvthe 10th article of the contract of February 25, 1813, the officers of the United States are prohibited from opposin- aiiy -'un- reasonable or unnecessary dela/.to setting the P^ti ^ojier s ac^ counts. This contract expired by its own limitation on the ^Ist ot May, 1814, previously to which time the Petitioner had become m Xnce to /e governLnt in the sum of 8263,004 53^, of whidi ,245,000, on the vouchers then produced, were since admit- sum '? ^^ ted. In July and August of this year, ^is accounts, leaving a bal- ance in his favour exceeding 8 200,000, had been presented at the War Department for settlement, and on the next ensuing 15th ot October ^he transmitted to tliat Department his account rurren, stating a balance in his favour of the aforesaid sum ofl^G-'OO^ o^j- The interval between October 15th and October 27th, the date ot the bills, was sufficient for a view of this account ^^'''^^^^'J^^\'^- terval between August and October 27th, was far " ->'-e than suffi- cient for the exami'iation of his former accounts, resulting in the Sernent oned balance exceeding $200-000 There occurred, there- fore, an "unreasonable or unnecessary" delay in the settlement, which places the Government in the same attitude that it would have ta^ken by making the settlement, and refiis.ng payment ot clie sum which would then have appeared due to the Petitioner. Estab- lished usage would, as will, in the exposition of another c aim, be more particularly mentioned, have entitled him to dravv on the Gov- ernment, for advances necessar." for the execution of the contract: But he did not draw till, by stienuous exertions of his private cred- it, he had himself become in advance to an amount considerably ex- ceeding that of his bills; a forbearance, which the exigencies of the countiT induced him, to his heavy injury, to contu.ue for nearly five months after the value for his bills had been received by the Goveniment; and eight months after his right to draw them had The Petitioner being, then, entitled to draw these Ulls, and they not being paid is not the responsibility of the Goveriiment, which by its ov;n act came within the operation of commercial lavy, identical with that of any other defaulting drawee.^ And has not this Law tix- ed a rule for measuring the damage in credit and estate, occasioned to the drawer of a dishonoured bill ? In tact, the Government so iar from asserting an invidious exemption from a responsibility at once equitable and unive.sul, has repeatedly acknowledged it. One case is that of Ward and Tavlor, who, under their contract ot. March ^1, 1814, commencing June 1, 1814. and eiidini: May 31 . I81a, were al- l.,wed by the Government for Discounts, Interest, I>«mrr^r.&c. on bills drawn by them on the Secretary ot Wav, and protested, S^O, 958 88. Another case is tiiat of John H. Piatt who, under his con- was ford' fr-tp»-*^«*. 11 at the 00, and titioner H3, the ly ''un- er's ac 31st of :ome in f which ! admit- 5 a bal- [ at the 15th of current, )04 5S|. B date of The in- an suffi- r in the id,there- itlement, it would t of the Estab- laim, be the Gov- :ontract : ate cred- rably ex- !S of the [)v nearly ■A by the them had tract dated January 26, 1814, commencing; June 1, 1814 and ending May 31, 1815, received g21,000, or 10 per cent., as damai;es for the protest of his drafts on the Government. In stating the case of Ward and Taylor, tiie Third Auditor does not specify what part of the sum allowed to them was for damages, and describes that sura to be for money which they had paid to the Pennsylvania and Schuyl- kill Banks. But these Banks must be considered not only as the creditors, but as the collectors, of Ward and Taylor, and the charge for damages was incidental to the Protest. The obligation of the Government to pay damages on protested bills is confessed by Mr. Crawford, the Secretary of War, in liis directions of January 27, 1816, before cited, to the Accountant of the War Department in settling the accounts of the contractors for 1814 ')5, and has been emphatically^ recognised by Congress. The Petitioner's contract was, it is true, for 1813—14; but he was therefore a contractor for 1814: And moreover, Mr. Craw- ford's decision is surely applicable on principles of equitable con- !5truction to a contract of another date, which substantially resem- bles the contracts of 1814 — 15 for supplyinj; the army. But if a distinction be taken between the contracts of 1813—14. and those of 1814— 15. it must be favourable to the former: For, from the high credit of the Government at the date of the Petitioner's contract, he had no reason to apprehend a dishonour of its paper ; — whereas when this state of things became reversed, such a contingency would more probably enter into the calculations of a subsequent Contractor. The same rule which entitles the Petitioner to damages for the protest of his bills, entitles him to interest also on them ; but his de- mand for it is merged in the next claim to which your attention is invited. and they which by identical 5 Law fix- ccasioned ent so far at once One case ^larch 21, i, were al- es &C. 0!l ted, S20, I- his con- :,f.8^fts«*^.fe'^1 i!^ 11 ' CLAIM FOR INTEREST ON ADVANCES WITHHELD. This claim arises under the contract of February 25, 1813, and is tor 815,625, the i.iterest at the rate of 6 per cent, annually, on 8250,000, from March 1, 1814, to March 14, 1815. Until the year 1 20, the constant usaj:;e of the ^overnmont had been to make advances, for tlie use of a contract to which it was a party, to a contractor who had furnished satisfactory security for the performance of that contract. Kvery contractor was presumed to have furnished such security ; and in the Petitioner's instance, it was ample, unquestioned, and unquestionable: Every contractor was presumed, too, to have j^iven in such secuiity, and in the low- ness of his bid, a consideration for the capital to be advanced to him. From the aforesaid usage, the amount which it would entitle him to receive in advance from the gove nment became his own property : This amount was the money necessary for the execution of the contract during the interval between any two settlements of his accounts, and its criterion was the amount which had been ex- pended in executing the contract during the equal and next preced- ing period. Moreover, when any order for deposite was received by the contractor, he was authorized to draw on the government to the amount of that order ; it being a principle inherent in all such agreements that the contractor was never expected to be in advance to the government. The contract of February 25th, 1813, expired by its own limi- tation on May 31, 1814. The period for a settlement of his ac- counts prescribed by it to the Petitioner was « at least once in eve- ry three months." Had these accounts been settled in due time, it would have appeared on March 1, 1814, that taking the expenses, even exclusively of the orders for deposites, of the three months next preceding, as a criterion, the minimum estimate for the next three months would be 8250,000, and that the contractor had th(Me- fore, n March 1, 1814, a right to an advance of this sum at least, beside what the execution of the orders for deposite might require. This right is not impaired by an infraction of the tenth article of the contract, caused by the delay of the officers of Government. Being then entitled on March 1, 1814. to receive from the govern- ment, for the use of the contract, at least 8250,000, exclusively of orders for deposite ; that sum being withheld, and he being never- theless obliged to execute the contract, he must do so either by em- ployint' his own money, in which case he would be entitled to inter- est, orljy borrowing money, in which case he must pay interest, and would be entitled to receive it in return. In point of fact, the Petitioner was compelled, by the withholding of this advance, thus to borrow, and to pay bank interest for the loan : And the orders for deposite, from November, 1813, to May 17, 1814, exceeded the sum required for current issue; and this will be seen by a reference to the orders for deposite during this period :— -In truth, the depos- ites mzde within the two quarters next preceding the 1st of June, amounted to nearly half a million of dollars. *r 13 The intciestdue on g'250,000 from March 1, 1814, to June 1. 1814, depends, the Petitioner admits, on merely equitable gr-unds. 15ut at the last mentioned date, all the services having been per- formed, and all the provisions having been delivered, which his contract required, and the United States being then indebted to him in ;^'i()3,000, he is strictly and legally entitled to interest from June 1, 1814, to March 14, 181o, when hi3 accounts, to the amount of 8245,000, were passed at the War Department, after a long delay on its part in performing the covenant contained in the Tenth ar- ticle of the contract, and an inattention to his solicitous importuni- ties for a settlement. It must be remarked, that of the g 250,000 on which interest is now claimed, g 20f>,000 constitutes the amount of the Petitioner's aforesaid Bills of Exchange: So that his right to interest on 8 200, 000 is sustainable not only on general grounds, but on the rule of commercial law which makes interest as well as damages inciden- tal to Protested Hills, and on the practice of the Government under that rule. The usage of the Government on the subject of interest, is direct- ly in support of this claim. Mr. Secretary Crawford's decision of January 27, 1816, directs the Accountant, in settling the accountn of Coritractors for 1814-15, to " allow all claims supported by evi- "dence of loss sustained by payment of interest or damages in con- " sequence of the Department beinff unable to make the necessary ad- "vflnce>s." The Petitioner has before mentioned the allowance to Ward and Tavlor of 820,958 88 for discount, interest &c., and that to John H. Piatt of 821,000, or 10 per cent, on ^210,000, in consideration of the damages sustained by him through the Protest of his drafts on the Government. Mr. P. was also allowed $3,750, and $4,320, for charges made on him by the Companies who had negotiated his drafts on the Government; which charges will, when analysed, be found, as the Petitioner is informed, to be substantially charges for interest. It is moreover, expressly stated in a Report made, December 17, 1817. under the authority of the War Depart- ment, to the President of the United States, that " after the var was " ended, the Secretary of W\ir paid the legal interests on all Mr. « Piatt's drafts, to the different Banks which held them." Undei the A-ct of Congress passed in 1824 for his relief, Mr. P. was also allowed by the Comptroller the farther sum of $4,707 21 for interest expressly, on money which the failure of Governmf^nt to pay his drafts, had obliged him to borrow. These, and similar allowances which might be instanced, involve an admission on the part of the Government that, having once assum- ed the character of a party to a contract, it becomes liable to the re- sulting losses of that cfai net, in like manner as an individual or a company would be liable. Indeed so far from arrogating privileges contrariant to the rights of individuals, a just and generous Govern- ment must ever feel in its dignity, its power, and its exemption from the force of law, the strongest incentives to a punctilious, if not to a liberal discharge of its engagements. These considerations are -: f'l'^s^ 14 made applicable to the Petitioner's case, not only by the injury and loss inflicted on him through the delays which have been represen- ted, but by the advantage derived to the country, and the inconve- nience averted fiom it, through his zealous execution of the con- tract, after the proceedings of the other party had paralysed its ob- ligations on him, whether legal or moral. At no period of the late Avar were supplies more important, within the State of New York, than during the interval between the close of the year 1813, and the middle of the vear 1814, when the success of the next campaign must require large deposites, exclusive of the current issue, to be provid- ed beforehand, and with promptitude. For his strenuous and unre- laxed exertions to prepare for this exigence, the Petitioner asks in- demnification only; disclaiming that he ever expected, or has ever realized, from the contract, any profits which entitle the United States to the unrecompensed use of his money and credit, or of the money and credit of his friends. And even had the profits as fore- seen by the parties, promised to be great, would they not be dimin- ished by a denial of interest on the use of this money and credit? Confiding in tlie justice and strength of this claim, the Petitioner would respectfully invite such a reference by Congress to any im- partial Accountant of the Government, as will elicit a full exhibi- tion of his interest account with the United States : And should such an account, if stated on fair principles, consistent with the terms of the contract, and with the ysage entitling him to advances for the current issue and orders for deposite, disclose any balance, at the termination of the contract, against the Petitioner, he will be- com«^ responsible for its payment on any terms which the wisdom of Congress may indicate. Should, however, the balance be in his fa- vour, he doubts not the willingness of the Legislature to extend to him the same justice which, under aa opposite result, it would exact. *i a ^ *■ 15 CLAIMS ARISING FROM DEPRECIATION OF TREASURY NOTES. This claim is for $6,^57, the discount at 11 per cent., on $56,700, received in Treasury notes, September 5, 1815, and for )i,l5,977 20 the discount at 8^^^^^ per . nt., on ^188,632 91, received in Treasu- ry notes, January 16, 1816. It is a principle of the Constitution of the United States, that pe- cuniary payments are to be made in specie. The Government was bound to pay to the Petitioner, under the contract of February 25. 1813, specie, or something equivalent thereto; but after a lonj;, and to him deeply embarrassing delay, he finally received from it Treas- ury notes, which he was obliged to sell at a discount. The Govein- ment, then, being bound to do one thing, was reduced by the public exigency to do another thing, thereby subjecting the Petitisiiier to a loss for which he asks compensation. The principle of the claim now advanced rests on obvious grounds of justice. It was, moreover, applied by the Government to the case of James Hyers, and sanctioned by Congress in that of his bro- ther John Byers. The former had contracted with the War Depart- ment to supply rations from June 1, 1814, to May 31, 1815, for the States of Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts and New Hamp- shire ; and when the contract was made, the supply for Connecticut and Rhode Island was transferred to John Byers. At the date of the contracts, Treasury notes were at par, but afterward became un- current in the places where the supplies were to be furnished. Fore- seeing the consequent impossibility of executing the tontractSj with- out a great sacrifice, these Contractors resolved to surrender them to the Government, and for this purpose James Byers repaired to Washington. There, however, an understanding took place between the Secretary of War and himself, that he should go on to execute the contract^ and be remunerated on the final settlement of account:* for loss arising from the depreciation of Treasury notes. Doubts being entertained by the Accounting officers whether this under- standing extended to Connecticut and Rhode Island, Congress de- cided that it did, and granted relief to the Contractors. Mr. Monroe, Secretary of War, in his letter of July 11, 1815, to Mr. James Byers, says, " I recollect receiving the letter addressed " to me by you while 1 was in the Department of War, bearing date " on the 4th January las. ad am satisfied that I assured you that « you should sustain no lose; which I could prevent — The troops in " the Kastern States were in great distress. I was aware of the de- " preciation of Treasury notes; it was indispensable to supply the troops, and it seemed to be just that, as the Government could not furnish you witii a paper which circulated at par in that quarter, <• you ougiit to be indemnified against the loss arising from the dc- " preciation. I considered your case, at the time, as rendered pe- " culiar by the situation of tlie troops, and the exigency of the pnb- '• lie service in the ([uarter to which your contract applied.'" The necessities of the service alluded to' by the Secretary were even less severe than tliose which the Petitioner met ; for his State ami a S^' feJ^.': District were the actual seat of War; both Southern and West- ern frontiers were menaced and invaded by a vindictive enemy, and immediate supplies were required by frc(iuent and sudden calls for tlje Militia. The actof Congress of February 24, 1815 (4 L. U. S. 810. Bioren's edit.) authorizes the issuinji of Treasury notes- and provides, it is (rue, that they siiall be paid •' to such person and persons as shall be •• willing to accept the same in payment." An opposite provision would have derogated from the honour of the Government; for in compelling public creditors to receive in payment a depreciated -urrency, Congress would, while violating the spirit of the Constitu- tion, have made the hunuliating admission that the Government, be- ing unable to pay its creditor, must force on him a dividend in ex- linguishmentof adebt. But nothing in the law of February 24, 1 815, bars the Petitioner's present claim. The clause just cited left Ai\ option with every individual to receive or to refuse Treasury notes, but did not devest him of the right to receive them condition- ally. The correspondence between the Petitioner and the War Department will show that he was understood to take the Treasury notes as all which it was then possible for the Government to give, and that so far from waiving his right to indemnification for the loss they might occasion to him, he expressly protested against any ad- justment of his claims " on terms different from the most favoured." True it is, that he did not during an almost vital crisis of the war, hasten to Washington, menace the Government with the abandon- ment of his contract, and thus endeavour to extort from its appre- hensions, assurances made superfluous by his faith in its justice. That he used no such means to fortify his contract nmst ever be a- mong the proudest of his recollections, and would console him under even heavier disappointments than the possible defeat of this claim. The views of its paper taken by the Government, appeal in Mr. Crawford's decision, before cited, of January 27, 1816, which de- clares " that the Contractors will be required to account for all pre- « miums received on the sale of bills negotiated by them on the "Government." This decision was made when the credit of the Government had revived Its principle is, that a Contractor shall receive no more than his promised reward. Is it not then incontes- table that he ought to receive no less? If he must not speculate on the Government, ought the Government to speculate on him ? On reference to tlTe records of the Treasury Department, it will appear that the government has often admitted and discharged i.s responsibility for the depreciation of its paper. In the years 1815 and 1816, about the dates when the Treasury Notes on which this claim arises, were remitted to the Petitioner, it funded paper ol' that description and other of its debts at the rate of $ 100 in stock, for ^ 80 of Treasury Notes, or other Government debts, thus con- fessing and compensating a depreciation of 20 per cent, on its paper. The records of the Treasury Department disclose, among other cases, that a debt of the United States to the Corporation of Charleston, amounting to $ 163,911 39, principal and interest, was, foi - 17 on January 11, 1816, paid in funded 6 per cent, stock of 1814, at the rate of ^100 in stock for ^80 of debt, amountinji to g 204,889 23; an.l that on February 13, 1815 a similar arrangement for nearly five times tliat amount was made with the Corporation of New York. Had tlie Petitioner's claim been thus liquidated, (and he had stren- uously urged an adjustment of t on the most favoured terms) the re- sult would have prevented, because it would have more than cover- ed, his present claim ; that for Damages on the Protested bdls: that for Interest on Declared balances; and that for Interest on Withheld advances. So far, however, from receiving the justice extended to other public creditors, the Petitioner, after having re- luctantly acceded to a proposal in April 1815, of Mr. Dallas, Secre- tary of the Treasury, and acting Secretary of War, to tund his claim at ^95 for pOO in stock, he was informed that a deficien- cy of appVopriations for the War Department rendered it imprac- ticable for the Secretary to carry that proposal into effect. A com- pliance by the Government with even these severe terms, would have given the Petitioner all that he now asks in recompense for the Depreciation of Treasury notes, and all that he has before asked as Interest on Balances declared. The hardship of his case is still more peculiarized by the facts that Mr. Dallas, after retreating Irom his aforesaid proposal, made, on September 21,1815, to Messrs. Prime, Ward and Sands, of New York, and on March 26, 1816, to the Merchants' Bank at Salem, the very same proposal, in letteri=i of those dates; which facts and letters have but recently come to the knowledge of the Petitioner.* It is a mournful fact incident to national wars, that public credit often sinks under their pressure. Had not the credit of the Pe- titioner been based on foundations independent on his contract, he could never have discharged that contract, and would now be re- duced to ask Congress not merely to compensate him for losses, but to lift him up from ruin. * Additional illustrations are derivable from the following facts, viz •' In April 1815, U. States 6 per cent, stock was sold at $80 to $82, payable in specie, -,. bills on Boston. The local bank paper of N. York was then from 6 to 7^ per cent, belowspecie, and Treasurj' notes were of less value than such paper. Hence it the debt of $245,389 32, ascertiuned to be due to the Petitioner, had been funded at the par value of specie, or on tlie same terms which were granted to other public credi- tors, the an-angement would have covered his claims for Damages on Protested Bills, Interest on Declared Balances, Interest on Witliheld Advances, and Depreciation ot Treasuiy Notes. Mr. Dallas in the letter to the Petitioner, referred to in the text, says, I am ready " to receive proposals for subscribing to the 12 million loan, at the rate of 100 dollars " in stock for 95 in the payment which you propose." The Petitioner in a letter to Mr. Dallas, dated « New York, May 15, 1815" expresses "a well grounded hope" thattheSecretary will extinguish his, the Petitioner's, claim, "by giving 6 per cent. « stock" according to the " oft'er of 95 of debt for 100 of stock." Mr. Dallas, ma memorandum, dated 6th June, 1815, says, " My letters and overtures, respecting the " payment of Mr. Anderson's claim, are all correct ;" " Mr. Anderson's debt is ascer- " tained; and it could be paid in Treasm-y notes, or it mii,ht be received in subscrip- " tion to the loan ;" but, in a letter, to the Petitioner dated " Treasuiy Department, "August 23, 1815," he says, "the appropriations fyr the War Pi-pnrtmrnt are not '' fluffiicient to cover all the demands upon it."' 3 or I >' 18 CLAIM ARISING FROM THE WHISKY TAX. This claim is for ^ 45,709 51 ; and arises under the contract of February 25, 1813, in consequence of an act of Congress passed, at an extra session, on July 24, 1813, to taice eft'ect January 1, 1814, and laying a duty on stills and boilers employed in distilling spirits from {fomestic materials during the year 1814. 1. The first item of this claim is ^32,776 52, the charge, at the price, enhance«l by the operation of this law, of 14 i cents per gallon for the Whisky part of the ration required by the contract ; the Peti- tioner having furnished during its term 226,045 gallons of whisky. He believes this item to stand on preeminent grounds. Had the price of whisky been augmented by the agency of ordinary causes, or of causes within his control, or of causes not proceeding from the volition of the United States, any risk thence to arise must have been presumed to be within his contemplation when he signed the contract: — But when the price was raised by the act of the o- ther party, and that party a supreme and irresistible power, the as- sumption of a risk so stupendous cannot have been ascribed to the Petitioner, without supposing in him not merely gross imprudence, but infatuation. Any principle which would deny to him relief in this item, must imply in the Governnent a power to break up any contract, at any time, by taxing, without limit, the articles whicli this contract had bargained to supply, and by throwing the loss on the Contractor to leave him a ruined victim to his confidence in the public faith. Against such consequences the Petitioner never thought of guarding himself by a covenant; — for this cove- nant must have had for its basis suspicions incompetible with the reliance which he has ever felt, and ever must feel, on the justice of his country. This contract was founded on his previous proposals of December 28, 1812 to the Secretary of War, in which he vindi- cates his estimate of the component parts of the rations by statinji; the grounds on which it was formed, and refers especially to leak- age and wastage, to the diminished importations of foreign spirits, to the high price of grain, the consequently probable increase in the price of home distilled spirits, and to the difficulty in obtaining them, as reasons for the price of rations, (liquor being one of their components,) which was fixed in that estimate. On an inviolate principle of construction, this enumeration is exclusive of any- particular not contained in it, and must be deemed the rule foi ascertaining the motives, inducements and circumstances of the parties to the contract. It affords no colour for inferring that any exercise, to his detriment, of the sovereign power of tlie nation, ever entered into the calculations of the Petitioner, or into those of the Secretary of War. That the Government never meant to devest itself of the power to impose taxes, is clear; that the Government exerts it for wise and beneficent objects, is also clear: But it is equally clear, that the Governtnent cannot mean to apply this power, through the ex- post-facto instrumentality of any enactment, to the invalidation of its 19 engaffcments. Such a consequence is repuenant, not only to the practice of every nation niindful of its good Faith, but to the spirit of the Constitution, and to the dictates of universal justice. The law of July 24, 1813, was passed five months after the date, and took effect five months before the expiration, of the contract of February 25, 1813. Its object was to sustain public faith, an ob- ject very doubtfully aciueved, it it lead to an indirect and unre- dressed violation of a contract between tlie Government and a ci- tizen. Its eftect was to take from the Petitioner by means of the contract, without compensation, the excess of the price of whisKy, produced by the law, above the price which would have obtaiiit^d it, had no such law been enacted. It is observable that the Fifth article of the contract of February 25, 1813, empowers »' the Com- " manding General, or person appointed by him, at each place or "post, in case of absolute failure or deficiency in the quantity of " provision contracted to be delivered and issued, to supply the '\e- " ticiency by purchase, at the risk and on account of the" Contract- or: And that the Tenth article makes any sums of money which the commanding officer may disburse in order to procure supplies in consequence of such failure, a charge against the Contractor on the settlement of his accounts. Now it is a settled principle of law, recently and solemnly recog- nised by the Supreme Court of the United States, that "' in an action " by the buyer against the seller for breach of a contract, in not deli- *' vering the thin* sold, the proper measure of damages is not the " price stipulated in the contract, but the value at the time of the '' breach." — By obvious analogy to this doctrine, if the Petitioner had failed to supply rations, after the passage of the law aforesaid, and the Commanding General had procured them at the enhanced prices produced by that law, as he must have done, the Contractor would nave been charged with them at these prices. Of the principle of this doctrine, the Petitioner claims an application to the present item. 2. The second item of this claim is ^ 12,932 99, the value, at 14i cents a gallon, of 89,193 gallons of Whisky, furnished by tfic Peti- tioner under the contract of February 25, 1813. between July 24, 1813, when the law passed, and January 1, 1814, when it took ef- fect. This item is susceptible of the same reasoning as that advanced in support of the former, because tlie rise in the price of whisky was im- mediate on the passage of the law ; — a law, which aftected the Peti- tioner not with any remote or consequential influence, but by acting directly and in rem on the sub* * n^atter of his contract, •^ ■^ 20 CLAIM ARISING FROM THE TRAVSPOUTATION BT LAND, OF FLOUR AND WHISKY, FROM PHILADELPHIA, BALTIMORE, AND ALEX- ANDRIA, TO NEW YORK. The transportation was made {lurin.2; the blockade of the coast in 1813, and cost 87,9,VJ. The frei-ht by water would have been S1.990, and for 85,949, the dilference between these sums, this claim is ma«le. . , , By the contract of Februarv 25, 1813, the contractor was bound to furnish supplies at places within its scope: But it made the Urn- ted States lialde for all losses in articles intended to compose the rations, which mi^ht be " sustained by the denveu;'.i ...ns ot a" ene- my." The Petitioner, in a letter to the Secretary of War. dated New York, February 4, 1813, says. » When I was last at the seat ot « Government, I staled the necessity of, and my intention to pur- « chase Flour and Whiskey at a Southern Port, for the supply o the « U. S. Troops, accordingly I have purchased and paid tor one thou- "sand barrels of flour, in Alexandria, and one hundred and htty « hhds. Whiskey at Philadelphia, to be brought to this port.— 1 he « Sea risk of the whole is at my hazard, the risk of the Government « is the hazard of capture. I deem it prudent for me to procure in- « surance in this place to the full amount of my invoices, and 1 beg « leave to request your instructions whether I shall procure at the « s?me time insurance against capture, to the amount, that these ar- « tides are charged to government, unJer my contract. I am ever « desirous of receiving, and obeying the instructions of the Govern- « ment."* The Secretary's answer is in these words, viz: « War « Department, February 13th, 1813. Sir—Your letter of the 4th " inst. has been received. You will please to state m what quanti- " ties the flour and whiskey have been shipped m the same vessel. « If shipped in small parcels by difterent vessels, it would not seem « advisable to procure any insurance. Respecttully, sir, your ob t. « servant, John Armstrong." In conformity with this answer, tlie Petitioner declined making Insurance, and endeavoured to ship « in small parcels by different vessels" the flour and whisky, men- tioned in the letter of February 4, 1813, and subsequent purcha- ses, at Philadelphia and Baltmore, of those articles. After re- peated and fruitless efforts to procure vessels to take these partiai freights, the Petitioner resolved to make a single shipment ol them, but early in the ensuing March the enemy's blockade became com- plete. Instead of subjecting the U. States, as the contract would have permitted him to do, to the imminent risk of a capture of the vesseland cargo, he preferred the safety of a land transportation; thereby incurring a certain and heavy additional expense, and saving to them a sum, equal to a premium of insurance against capture. This sum, under the existing circumstances, must have immeasu- rably exceeded the amount now claimed. . * . + The Petitioner was certainly bound under his contract to trans- port, in some way, the flour and whisky, to New York, where they were required, and therelorc only asks a reimbursement of the extra f FLOUR I ALEX- coast in ve been IS bound the Uni- )ose the an ene- r, dated e seat ot to pur- \\y or the me thou- md fifty rt.— The ernment (cure in- id I beg B at the these ar- am ever Govern- ;: «War the 4th ; quanti- j vessel, lot seem Dur ob't. vver, the to ship :y, men- purcha- V.tter re- e partial of them, me corn- it would •e of the ortation ; id saving capture, mmeasu- to trans- ere they the extra 21 expense nt that im)de of conveyance, which a regard for the public interest, and not anv obli}i;ation of his contract, prompted him to a- dopt;— a claim obvious! vvvithin the spirit and equity oi the pro- visi^ ♦ *r ill 2i jfliinfr proposals for any future contract. In tlie November follow- 'iujs,<, and after Gun. llaiupton'H extraordinary coinniissarisliip had darkened the campaign with many disasters, he required the Pe- titioner to resume the functions of a contractor. In obeying, the Petitioner was compelled to meet existing deficiencies, anci to pro- vide (or prospective necessities, at a season when the manufacture of flour had ceased, when the procurement of the other articles con- stituting the rations wr.s extremely diilicult, and when the roads were almost impassable. The Petitioner oftered to the War Department evidence of his having sustained, through General Hampton's violation of the con- tract, damages 'jxceeding jj;2(),0()0. The Department admitted the infraction, but, instead of examining this evidence, determined to consider as the measure of dainajjesi the VJ^ per cent, for leakage and wastage, covenanted to the Petitioner in the Third article of the supplementary agreement, and the allowance of one cent per ration tor issue, to which the Fifth article of that agreement enti- tled him Though aware that an estimate of damages under this test, would reduce them considerably below the amount which he had actually sustained, the Petitioner assented to it, and was di- rected to obtain from the Adjutant General's Oftice a statement of the number of men under General Hampton's command when the breach of the contract took place. Finding this number to be 5000 men, for 90 days, the term of the suspension, by Gen. Hampton, of the Contract, the Department would allow to the Petitioner, the 12i per cent, only, arising under the Third article, as aforesaid, and amounting, to $9,843 75, but refused the compensation it had promised, arising under the Fifth article, and amounting; to ^4,300. The Petitioner now asks from Congress this su!>i, is incident to a contract of which the execution was interrupted by ore of their military officers, and to the full benefit of which v^ V en^ tied ; as having been deliberately promised to him by the Department of War ; and as being far less than the merits oi the case would ju8ti« fy him in claiming. ?W^!mm .apfer^O^r-*^.* 23 CLAIM ARISING FROM THE CAPTURE AND DESTRVCTION OF DRKI.' HIDES. The Sixth article of the contract of February 25, 181. ">, reqxnres the U. Htates to pay for, at the contract price of the rations, or the component parts, and at an appraised value of the other articles, all losses sustained by the depredations of an enemy, or by troops of the U. States, in articles intended to compose rations to be is- sued under that contract, as well as fur other properti/ iifcessarily used in transportins^ the same. In order to supply the troops with beef, a component part of the rations required by this contract, the Petitioner caused to be trans|)orted a certain number of beeves, five hundred and five hides of which were, in November and De- cember, 1813, captured and destroyed on the Nii>o;ara frontier. The value ol these hides was $1,750, and constitutes the present claim. There being nothing in the contract to prevent the Contractor from driving the cattle alive; that bein^ the most eligible mode of transporting them ; an'nluntary, no loss to the Petitioner ought to result from it, because it '^ riWKw?«jri?»r^i.'^ ■ TT 24 was not an act within the competence of Mr. Thorne's agency, vvhich was-^pecial, and witiiout power to bind the Petitioner beyond the obligations imposed on him by the contract 'I'lje/.^^t'^'^^l^^^/;^ ^\' T.eV'-S'^lv say "The provisions shou d be delivere to >ou, in .^due propoVtions of all articles comprising the rations." The inca- nacity of an asent to "bind his principal beyond he extent of h> K authority," fs a settled principle vvhich, if it needed any sanction, would finil it in the Ads of Congress. , But whatever character be ascribed to Mr. Thorne s ac , the Pe- titioner is entitled to indemnification for the loss vyluch it "lA'cted on him, because " it was a loss sustained by requisitions not authoi- " i/,ed by the contract." „ , _ ,i . i i i „. The Government allowed Mr. Porter for the flour tha had been deposited by him, 5 cents per ration, vvhich together with the cap- tured flour they afterward charged to the Contractor at .J cents per ration, if the damaged state of the captured flour, and the inju- ry resulting from a want of the storehouses vvhich the contract re- quired the U. States to provide, be taken into the estimate, an aver- age allowance of 3 cents per ration, on the extra quantity ot tiour, must be deemed moderate. r xi iv n««ovf A reviving hope of attracting the attention of the AVar Depait- ment to this claiin, deters the Petitioner from now urging m its sup- port any additional considerations. CLAIM FOR LEAKAGE, WASTAGE, &C. &C. This claim is for g5,749 06, the amount of 12i per cent, allow- ance for Leakage and Wastage on the issue of the rations to tlie U. S. troops in descending the St. Lawrence, and of one cent per ra- tion for the issue. It arises under the Third and Fifth articles of the aforementioned supplementary agreement, of even ^'ate with the contract of February 25, 1813, between the Secretary of War and Th* pSoner feels entire confidence in the justice and strength of this claim. But as he cannot avoid still expecting that the \V ar Department will consider an admission of it as coming withm tlie autWrity of that Department, he desires to avoid the impropriety of invitint' Congress to investigate what may possibly be a question ol evidence merely. He now mentions it in order that Ins country may perceive every claim arising to him under his contracts during the War, and it is only when all hope of obtaining redress from the Evecative Department becomes extinct, that he can willingly resort, in any case, to Legislative relief. ... , c These remarks are applicable to the Petitioner's claim, also, for « 1 14, the value of provisions belonging to him, which were so d by John Bliss A. D. Q. M. and credited by said Bliss to the U. States; -.to his claim for i 832 87 the cost of transporting 327 barrels of Flour from Handford's storehouse, on Genesee river, to Willams- y, which ond the 19 to Mr. you, in 'he in ca- ll of h:> iauction, the Pe- inflicted t author- lad beeji the cap- r^ cents the inju- tract re- an aver- of Hour, Depart- i its sup- t. allovv- othe U. per ra- ticles of with the rVar and strens;th the War ithin the (priety of estion of ntry ntay I ring the from the ly resort, also, for ; sold by I. States ; larrels of Willams- 25 ville ; and to his claim for ^12. '^03 37 the cost of transportin-^, by or- der of Gen. Hall, provisions rrorn the Genesee river to Williams- ville, &c. Of the strength of every and all of these claims, the Pe- tioner entertains no doubt, and trusts that a similar opinion at the War Department will preclude any necessity of their being sub- mitted to the consideration of Congress. One item of the Petitioner's accounts has been brought beiore the notice, without requiring the interposition, of Congress. After the termination, in June 1813. of a contract between the Secretary of War and Augustus Porter, certain Deposites which Mr. P. had made, were transferred to the Petitioner's special agent, on the Niagara frontier, in the vicinity of which the Petitioner^ had also made Deposites. By a mistake on the part of the U. S. Command- ant at Fort Niagara, and of the Accounting o.Ticers, 287 barrels of liard bread, and 394 gallons of Whisky, amonntiug in value to 4 2,593 78, were charged to the Petitioner, as a part of Mr. P*s transferred Deposites, when in fact they were a part of the Peti- tioner's Deposites, and never had been the property of Mr. P., nor claimed by him. Such testimony on this subject was adduced be- fore the I'reasury Department, that the Comptroller reversed the charge, which had been thus erroneously made to the Petitioner. It, therefore, though still unpaid, makes no part of his application to Congress ; because he believes the Executive Department will di- rect the amount to be paid to him, the proper Accounting officer having decided that it should be so paid. The foregoing claims. Sir, are founded on principles which, in a controversy between the Petitioner and any adversary but the Gov- ernment, would oblige the courts of law and equity to award to him all that he now asks. But in cases like his, the dispensation of jus- tice becomes at once the privilege and the duty of Congress, and in requesting your examination of his appeal to that august Assembly, he is unconscious of attempting an improper trespass on your time. The minutest scrutiny of the grounds and statements of that appeal will show that every claim which he has advanced, is meritorious, authorized by usage, responsive to the most exacting rules of evi- dence, and requiring compensation from the most penurious justice. When the Petitioner recollects that during the term of the con- tracts under which he claims, his disbursements were nearly three millions of dollars ; That neither under these, nor any other of his eno-agements with the Government, was he, for one moment, a de- faulter : That his contracts were discharged, not with a cold obedi- ence to their stipulations, but with a zeal for the service, which the difficult responsibilities so often, during the last war, arising to him, sei-ved only to increase : That influenced by this high motive, instead of exercising the right secured to him by the contracts of re- ceiving thirty days notice tor furnishing supplies, he provided them on immediate requisition : That this promptitude, however unu- sual, was, at some periods of the war, important, and at others al- most vital, to military operation : That among duties not imposed on iiriiiti iiK' (f r Iv! 26 lum by his contracts, he performed without reward, and with the most exact frugality, those of Quarter Master and Storekeeper: That during the inability of the Government to make the usua and necessary advances, the Petitioner instead of retiring from his con- tract, exerted, with unsparing eftorts, his own credit and the credit of his friends, on behalf of the public service : That so far from hav- ing expected, or obtained any extravagant gains from the contracts, these gains are not commensurate with those of an ordinary mercan- tile adventure, and were preceded by various and complicated risks, and a compliance, at every sacrifice o.\ his part, with every requisi- tion, however sudden and severe : — When the Petitioner recollects these facts, lie comes before the Legislature ot his country not only without embarrassment, but with all the confidence which a just cause, and the candour of his judges ran inspire. Each of these claims, so soon as it was ascertained, he made known to the War Departmeiit ; and surely it is not the greatest of his offences that he forbore, so far as forbearance was possible, to urge them on an exhausted Treasury. Thev are now submitted to the consideration of Congress, with undoubting reliance, that should its enlightened wisdom sanction the views of them that the Petitioner has exhibited, he will obtain the relief which a tender re- gard for the purity of public faith may suggest to its Constitutional guardians, and which a citizen, who serves his country well and de- votedly in the hour of her peril, has a right to expect in the hour of her peace and prosperity, I am. Sir, very respectfully, Your Fellow citizen, ELBERT ANDERSON. Washington, April 12, 1826. Claiii i-miy m' fi I n • ' with the ekeeper: sua and his con- \e credit rom hav- lontracts, r mercan- ted risks, requisi- recollects not only :h a just he made reatest of ssible, to initted to [ice, that I that the ;ender re- ititutional ill and dc' e hour of JERSON. REFERENCES. Claim for Casks, Packages, kc. &c. - . - Interest on Declared Balances - Damages on Protested Bills Interest on advances withheld Arising from depreciation of Treasury Notes Arising from the Whisky Tax — Arising from the Transportation by land, of Flour and Whisky, from Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Al- exandria, to New York .- For the Balance of Damages arising from General Hampton's interference - - - - - — Arising from the capture and destruction of Beef Hides „.------ — For Damage arising from receiving A. Porter's Deposite, and captured Provisions — For Leakage, Wastage, &c. &c. ... 3 9 10 12 15 18 20 21 23 ih. 9A -^ >M- C( APPENDIX: coRTAisiira CONTRACTS, &C, WITH THE WAR DEPARTMENT, VORTBX SUPPLY AND ISSUE OF PROVISIONS rORTBB Armi/ within the State ofJSTeiv York, fife. FOR THE YEAR 1812....13....14, "WITH ELBERT ANDERSON, LATE AN ARMY CONRACTOR. WASHINGTON CITT: »BIKTED BT WltllAM COOPER, 3VJt. 1826. tjj^- ^iiikiiiHinil .1 1' REFEREJ^CE^* Contract dated 7th Mroemher,lsn, . - • M. Anderson^s Proposal to supply Rations^ Letter from Secretary of War, accepting Proposal, - Contract dated 25th Feb. 1813, to take effect 1st day of June, 1813, and terminate 3lst May, 1814, Supplementary Agreement for the issue of Rations from deposites, - - - * * Circular — Instructions, Mr. Monroe^s Decision on Cask claim, Jnterpolatim, or Supplementary Instriiction, - Compensation for Depreciatim of Treasury JSTotes, - Secretary Crawford's Decision on aUowance to Contrac- tors for Damages ard Interest, - - Practical operation of the foregoing Decisions by the Ac- countant Department, per letter of Phird Au- ditor, ----"* Letter from D. D. Tompkins, from John Armstrong, - - - from James Madison, - - from General Hall, - from General M^Comb, - - - OFlNioif an the Cask and Package Claim, - on Packages captured and destroyed, - on receiving Ji. Porter's Provision, and cap- tured Flour, - - - - on claim for Whisky Tax, on Interest on declared Balances, on Interest for Advances withheld, - on Protested Bills and depreciation of Treas- ury J^otes, S^c. * mthe claims ofE. Anderson, page, 5 • 10 11 .. 12 15 - 18 20 - 21 ib. - 22 ib. 25 26 ib. 27 28 29 30 31 ib. 33 34 ^f the corn- id to be is- : quality, a ans, one to y the said Elbert Anderson, or his agent, and in case of disagreement, a third person to be chosen by mutual consent, who shall have power to condemn such part of the provisions as to them may appear unfit tor use. But if the said Elbert Anderson, Juii. or his agent, shall fad, or neglect to appoint a person to inspect the said provisions, after reasonable notice in writing, it shall be permitted to the said com- manding officer to appoint such persons as he may think proper, to inspect the provisions, under oath, with power to condemn, as afore- said. And all provisions condemned by such survey may be de- stroyed by the commanding officer. Fifth. That the commanding general, or person appointed by him, at each post or place, in case of absolute failure, or deficiency, in the quantity of provisions contracted to be delivered and issued, shall have power to supply the deficiency by purchase, at the risque and onaccountofthesaidElbert Anderson, Jun. his heirs, execu- tors or administrators. Sixth. That all losses sustained by the depredations of an ene- my, or by means of the troops of the United States, in articles in- tended to compose rations, to be issued under this contract, being the property of the contractor, as well as in other property necessa- rily used in transporting the same, shall be paid for at the contract price of the rations, or the component parts, and at an appraised va- lue of the other articles, on the deposition of one or more creditable characters, and the certificate of a commissioned oflicar, when the same can be obtained, ascertaining the circumstances of the loss, and the amount of the articles for which compensation is claimed. Seventh. That escorts and guards for the safety of the provi- sions, and for the protecting of the cattle against an enen^jr shall be furnished, whenever in the opinion of the commanding officer ol the army, or of any post, to whom application may be made, the same can be done without prejudice to the service, and that the said Elbert Anderson, Jun. his heirs, executors or administrators shall not be answerable for any deficiency of supplies, at any of the said posts or places, if it shall appear, upon satisfactory proof, that such deficiency was occasioned by the want of proper escorts and '^^Eisiith. That at all stationary posts, proper store-houses shall be provided on behalf of the public, for the reception and safe-keep- in"- of the provisions deposited from time to time, at such posts res- pectively ; and the contractor shall sufter no loss for want ot sucfi stores JViiith. That the said Elbert Anderson, Jun. his heirs, execu- tors or administrators, shall render his or their accounts to the Ac- countant of the Department of W^i, for settlement, at least once in every three months, agreeably to such form as Dy the said Account- ant may be established and made known to i ^ +> Tenth. That all such advances of money as may be made to the said Elbert Anderson, his heirs, executors or administrators, tor and on account of the supplies to be furnished, pursuant to this contract, and all such sums of money as the commanding oflicer ot the troops li: m -.^^fy^mi^.^^ v'^i^ T ' ,-?^ or recruits that are or may be within the States above mentioned, may cause to be disbursed, in order to procure supplies, in conse- quence of any failure on the part of the said Elbert Anderson. Jun. his heirs, executors or administrators in complvinjj; with the requisi- tions herein contained, shall be duly accounted for by him or them by way of set-off against the amount of such supplies, and the sur- plus if any, repaid to the United States, immediately after the ex- piration of the term of this contract, together with an interest at the Tate of six per centum, per annum, from the time of such expiration, until the same shall be actually repaid. And that il any balance shall, on any settlement of the accounts of the said Elbert Ander- son, Jun. his heirs, executors or admiiiigtrators, be found to be due to him or them on account of the rations which shall be supplied, pursuant to this agreement, the same shall immediately be paid. And that no unreasonable or unnecessary delay, on the part of the officers of the United States, shall be given to the settlement of the accounts of the said Elbert Anderson, Jun. his heirs, ex«'rutors or administrators. Provided however, that no member of Congress, shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract or agreement, or to any benefits to arise therefrom. LY WITNESS whereof, the said Secretary of War, for and on behalf of the United States hath hereunto sniiscrihed hisname^ and affived the Seal of the JVar Office of the United States ; and the said Elbert Mderson, Junior, hath hereto set his hand and seal the day and year first above written. W. EUSTIS. (Seal U. S.) ^ ^ ELBERT ANDERSON, JUN. (L. S. E. A.) Signed sealed, and delivered > in the presence «/ 5 DANIEL PARKER, JOHN J. ABERT. A true copy from ihe original. WHEREAS, by a certain agreement made on the seventh day ot Nov., 1811, between W. Eustis, Secretary of War, and Elbert Anderson, Jun. of the State of New-York, it was stipulated, that the deposits of three &c. months supplies of rations may be required. Now therefore it is acireed by the order of the said W. Eustis to Major-General H. Dearborn, that when issues are required from the public deposits, that he might call on the said Elbert for tliat pur- pose. , ,,, First. That an inventory shall be taken as soon as possible, which shall comprise all such supplies as shall have been actually 9 entioncd, in conse- soii. Jun. e ref|uisi- or them the 8ur- r the ex- est at the xpiration, y balance t Ander- be due supplied, r be paid, irt ot the nt of the Tutors 01 Conr mid on his niime^ 'totes ; and his hand f, JUN. . S. E. A.) jnth day ot [ind Kl6ert lated, that c required. ^ Eustis to id from the that pur- ls possible, ni actually delivered on or before the last day of May, 1 813, next, by ^ ' tue of le 'aid a-M-eement, a.ul shall .m that day remain unoxpen.led. Se^-md? That the inventory shall be taken in the presence o fho c Z nnclin- officer of the post, and the party of the second ^t St^r^t,or his aSent, and duplicate receipt. y.ven fhi e or by tl?e said party of the second part, or ns a-^eut, expn-.>- ' the (luantitv and' ciuality of each article, or delivery to be ma e lly the public store-kcipers-or other agents Nvhu have charge ot the ''''En/ That the party of the second part shall account to the rnittstatrfo al^la' supplies which shall be recemted or, a. n t lenreS he being allowed however a deduction ol t V IveCl a h^^^ per c^nt. as a full allowance for wastage, leakage a d dan ge of wl/atever nature, excepting only such osses as mav be occasimied by fire, water, an enemy, or by the troops of th« ^' t^o-^T^t the party of the second part shall if "« -»l ['-^^"i^; plies as aforesaid, to the troops at the several posts, m lations to consist as follows, viz. : Eiifliteen ounces of bread or tlour. 5ne pound and a quarter of beef, or three quarters of a pou.id ol pork. , ... One iiill of rum, brandy or whiskey. . r • . t\.,„- A at the rate of two qU'-^-'t^ »*' ««»*' ^««'- V^'K''^ T"'-'"' /' ' p,,unds of ; . .p, and one pUnd and an half of candles to every hun- "* 'i'lmf That the said partv of the first part shall pay or cause to hP n/id to the said party oV the second part, one cent lor every ratiln which he shalFissue as before recited, as a full compensation fur his trouble and expense in issuing the same. . IJ\r tVITYESS ivhprenf, the said IL Dearborn, in behalf of the sZetL, of War, on lehalf of the United States ha -, J.r.jm ;• lib'^cribed Ids name, and ajjixed his sea ; and the sad Elbeit }Zh hereto sH his hand and seal the day and year last above "■''^"'"' H. DEARBORN. (L. S. M. D.) ELBERT ANDERSON. (L. y. E. A.) Signed, sealed and delivered, in the presence of A true copy from the oris^iir.J. SIR, War Department, JVovemher '27, 1813. In mv letter of October 29th, you were adA-i-ed that ar- rangements would be made with the contractors for js^nng the e- posTts of provisions which had been required of them. xMess.^ Anderson and Byers expressed a wilUngness to make Jie issues, I . , ^f«av*»*|^;^;,«?!:;isi^^ -w .- t 10 lmp and in case you should find it for the public interest to employ them in preference to other agents, you are authorized to till the blank attached to their contracts accordingly. I have the honour to be, very respectfully, Sir, your ob't servant, Major-General Henry Dearborn, Plattsburg. A true copy from the original. W. EUSTIS. highe -«& i*;i Washington, Dec. 28, 1813. The Honble Sec. at War. SIR, In behalf of myself and associates, I will supply all rations that may be required for the troops of the United States, marched, stationed or recruited within the City and Harbor of New York, at rireenbush, from the first day of June, 1813, to 31st May, 1814, at 14 cents 8 mills, to viz : Meat 5 5 Liquor S 5 Small parts 1 Bread or Flour 4 8 14 8 In all other parts State of New -York, including its northern vi- cinity as far as St. John s, on Lake Champlain, at 17 cents 5 mills, to wit. Meat 5 5 Liquor . 3 5 Small parts 1 Bread or Flour 7 5 17 5 For the State New-Jersey, lo cents 2 and an half mills per ration- If the troops U. States should enter the Crnudas at any time previous to the 31st May, 1814, this proposal will embrace all supplies that may be required in the enemy's country, from Fort George along tlie shores of Lake Ontario and the river St. Law- rence, until it intersects the out-let of Lake Champlain. The price of the rations to be augmented in proportion to the dif- ficulty and expense of transporting in the enemy's country, with u reserve on the part of the United States to reduce the component price of the bread ration, to bear a proportionate value to the other parts of the ration, when the price of bread-stuft" shall, in the opinion of the Honorable Sec'y at War, justify such alteration or reduction. The Honorable Sec'y at War will perceive that the price of the component parts of the rations are the same as the present con- tract, the l-ead or flour excepted : And that the price of this article is not in proportion to its increased value and alarming scarcity of bread on the nortliern frontier. 11 )loy them the blank servant, ISTIS. , 1812. ,11 rations marched, York, at 1814, at 5 5 S 5 1 4 8 14 8 them vi- ,s 5 mills, 5 5 3 5 1 7 5 17 5 er ration, any time brace all ;ry, from St. Law- u the (lif- try, with )mponent the other I, in the ration or When the price of the bread ration is 4 cents 8 mills, the value of flour is at the ratio of S8 35 per barrel, when the flour ration is estimated at 6 cents 2i mills, note, the value of Flour is only 10 dollars 87i cents per barrel. It is believed that all the other component parts of the rations are estimated as low as possible : The article of liquor bearing the highest proportion, being subject to great leakage and wastage ; and in consequence of the partial importations of foreign spirits, and the very high price of grain in our own country, there must be an inev- itable rise take place in the value of home distilled spirits. The aforesaid proposal is made without reference or regard to a- nv opposition bid, but from a perfect knowledge of the intrinsic va- lue of the articles contracted to be delivered and issued, and the difficulty of obtaining bread-stuff and liquor, without transporting from southern Atlantic ports, early in the spring, to places contigu- ous to the Northern Frontier. All of which is humbly submitted by Your ob't servant, (signed) ELBERT ANDERSON, Jr. Note. — The transportation of flour from the Hudson to Lake Champlain is equal to 1 cent 2i mills per ration on Flour. Department of War, dug. 16 1823. A true copy. E. A. JUN. C, VANDE VENTER. War DepartmeM, February 8, 1813. On examining the different proposals made for subsisting the army for one year, after the 1st of June next, within the state of New-York and its Northern vicinity, 1 have given the preference to yours. It would be well therefore you should repair to this place as promptly as possible, that the contract may be closed. I am, &c. E. Anderson, Jun. Esq. N. York. JOHN ARMSTRONG. ce of the ?ent con- lis article arcity of 12 iiti, CONTRACT, Dcitp(l23th Fehrnan/. lS\C^,totake efect on the Ut day of June, ]S]5,audtermin(iie oniheCAst daij of May, 1814: and supple- mentary Agreement for the isnm of Mat ions from deposites made under this Contract. ARTICLES OF AGREEMENT made on the twenty-fifth day of February, Anno Domini, one thousand eii^ht hundred and thirteen, between John Armstrong, Secretary for the Department ol War of the United States of America, of the one part, and Elbert Anderson, Junior, of tlie City of New-York, of the other part. This Jir WITJyESS whereof, the said Secretary of War, on be- half of the United States, hath hereunto subscribed his name, and affixed the seal of the War Office of the United States; and the said Elbert Ander- son hath hereunto set his hand and seal the dty and year last above written. (Seal of the War Office.) JOHN ARMSTRONG. ELBERT ANDERSON, Jun. Sig ned, sealed and delivered, in the presence of DANIEL PARKER, GEORGE BOYD. KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That we, Elbert Ander- son, junior, of the City of New York; Theodorus Bailey of the same city; Thomas Ward of Now Ark, New Jersey; Thomas Jen- kins of Hudson (N. Y.) Elisha Jenkins of Albany (N. Y.) James Thorne of Albany (N. Y.) and Isaiah Townsend o'f Albany (N. Y.) are held and firmly bound unto the United States of America, in the sum of one hundred thousand dollars, lawful money of the said )' of each nt to the id for. as luction of !, leakage, ?s as may ps of the II supplies to consist pound of legar, four to every r cause to for every ipensatioii isportation leconie ne- ny's coun- ter, on be- aubscribed Far Office zrt Jinder- al the d'ly iN, Jun. 17 i:iutcd states, to be paid to the said United States, for uhicli pay- ment well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves and each ot us, our and each of our heirs, executors, and administrators, for and iu the whole, jointly and severally, firmly, by these presents. Sealed with our seals : dated the twentieth day of March in the year ol oui' liord one thousand eight hundred and tiiuteen, and in the thirty- seventh year of the independence of the saiil states. THK CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, That if the abovc bounden Elbert Anderson, Jun. his heirs, executors, or administra- tors, or any of them, shall and do in all things well and truly ob- serve, perform, fulfil, accomplish, and keep, all and singular the covenants, conditions, and agreements whatsoever, which, on the part and behalf of the said Elbert Anderson Jun. his heirs, execu- tors, or administrators, are or ought to be observed, performed, iul- fiUed, accomplished, and kept, comprised or mentioned in certain articles of agreement or contract bearing date twenty-fifth day ol February eighteen hundred and thirteen, for supplying rations within the limits of the state of New York and the western and northern vicinity within the Canadas, from the first day of June ei"-hteen hundre'd and thirteen, to the thirty-first day of May eigh- teen hundred and fourteen, both days inclusive, according to the true intent, meaning, and purport, of the said articles ot agreement or contract, then the above obligation to be void, otherwise to re- main in full force and virtue. Elbert Anderson, Jun. (Seal.) Theodorus Bailey (Seal.) Sealed and delivered in the> Thomas Ward (Seal.| presence of 5 Thomas Jenkins (Seal.| } Witnesses to the signatures Elisha Jenkins (Seal.) ofElbert Anderson, Jr. Tainpts Thorne (Seal.1 Isaac Ward ? Witnesses to the signature Eliza Ward 5 of Thos. Ward. John Townsend } Witnesses to the sigratnros of Elisha Jenkins. Peter Townsend \ James Thoino md Isaiali Townsend. ert Ander- ley of the homas Jen- Y.) James ny (N. Y.) Linerica, in of the said TREASURY DEPARTMENT, Register's Office, 9,Sd March, 1826. PURSUANT to « An Act providing for the prompt settlement of public accounts," approved Sd March, 1817, I, Joseph »\ ourse. Register of the Treasury of the United States, do hereby certdy, that the aforegoing is a true copy of the bond and contract ot Kl- bert Anderson; the original of which is on file in this J)epartment. JOSEPH NOURSE, Register, .^■.vV#- 18 UK IT nEMKMBiciiEu, That Joseph •^'owrsp, Esq. who certified the foregoing transcript, is now, and was at the time of doing so, Register of the Treasury of the United States, and that faith and credit are due to his official attestations. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I, Richard Rush, Secretary of the Treasury of the United States, have hereunto sub- CSeal of the scribed my name, and caused to be affixed the seal Treasury De- of this Department, at the city of Washington, this partment.J twenty -third day of March, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and twentv-six. RICHARD RUSH, Secretary of the Treasury, War Department, May 17, 1813. SIR, Your letter of the 12th inst. has been received ; orders have been given regulating provision returns, a copy of which will be transmitted to you. The ^'iperintendant General of military sup- plies has been instructed relative to the kind and form of vouchers necessary to entitle you to a credit for deposites. I am, Sir, Yours, &c. JOHN ARMSTRONG. Klbert Anderson, Jun. Army Contractor. CIRCULAR^INSTRUCTIONS. In addition to my Circular of the 20th May, (a duplicate of which you will find inserted below) I now enclose you the Presi- dent's Proclamation, announcin|E; a Declaration of War against Great Britain and her Dependencies. At this important epoch in the history of our country, it becomes me in my official capacity to (all your attention to the duties assigned to you respectively, as Agents or Sub-Contractors for the supply and issue of rations to the troops of the United States. Your principal has contracted with tlie government to supply all rations that may be required in the states of New-York and New- Jersey, containing a maritime frontier extending from the Eastern extremity of Long-Island to the capes of the Delaware, and of a Northern inland frontier from Niagara to the outlet of Lake Cham- plain. 1 ou must, at one view, perceive the seat of war your coun- try is justly and necessarily engaged in, and your united exertions are of the utmost importance in the contest for our rights as an in- dependent nation. You are associated with your principal in the ^hare of censure, if censure is due, and you are to partake with him in the applause that vour countrymen may be disposed to give your honest exertions. For the want of activity and industry in the ge- neral and gubordinate concerns of this department, disasters mar 3 certified doing so, faith and tary of the iunto sub- 1 the seal gton, this our Lord c. Treasury. ', 1813. ders have h will be itary sup- vouchers RONG. iplicate of he Presi- ir against epoch in apacity to tively, as ons to the lupply all nd Nevv- ! Eastern and of a ke Cham- our coun- exertions as an in- al in the with him i^ive your in the ge- iters may 19 occur that might otherwise have been avoided, if the proper steps re* quired of you had been taken in tivie. You have previously been instructed to look to the resources of your distiict, and to infoni\ nie, at proper intervals, what reliance can be placed on your dis- trict, county or town, for supplies that may be required. This ne- cessary information will enable me to communicate with the Com- manding General, and state to him where and how supplies may be had with the least inconvenience to the public service. By pos- sessing this information, it will give me time to meet any scarcity in your district, by transporting supplies from other places, or either of the deposites. You have likewise been instructed not to offer or issue any pro- visitm that should appear unsound, or of an unmerchantable quality. For this purpose, it will be necessary for you to be extremely vigi- lant, frequently examining the state of your issues, and take es- pecial care that your salt provision at this season of the year has its proper quantity ot salt, and each barrel full ( good pickle. Our country is blessed with plenty of ivholesome food ; and as the health and vigor of the Army depend, in a great measure, on a strict and faithful fulfilment of your duties, you are seriously to reflect if, at this crisis, your talents and resources are fitted for the station you now hold ; and should you conclude to decline this Agency, you will immediately inform me, so that other arrangements may be made in season. In addition to the just and proper scrutiny of tlie officers of tlic army, the eyes of the public will be contMUially upon you ; and without the greatest prudence and discretion oh your part, your station at this time will excite the envy of some, aiid the jealousy of others. You are not now to learn, that men are as ditVerent in ■ their sentiments and opinions as in their countenances ani num- bers; consequently you may expect that your best exertions \yiir not always be revvartled, and that universal satisfaction is not be expected — but this will not deter you from doing your duty. You will listen to objections against your provisions with patience, and investigate any complaints with temper and moderation ; at the same time you will maintain your own rights, and the just rights of your principal, with dignity and firmness. Go straight forward in the path of your duty, and you will sooner or later obtain the good opinion of the Officers, the love and respect of the Soldiers, and what is more, the approbation of your own conscience. You will have the enclosed instructions made known totliose who supply Recruiting Rende7,vous in your district: and it will be pro- per at this time to give publicity to that article of the contract which regulates the condemnation of unmerchantable ])rovisions. 'i'he Contractor requires all Aj-ents and »Sub-Contractors to iss !sue. on the 4th of July next, one gill of whisky to each man in his dis- trict, and one bushel of peas or beans to every sixty men, or an equivalent in other vcgetal)les, being extra from their allowance by law, whidi issue will'be charged to me when you transmit jour next account, separately from the abstract. 20 ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS. IT is nocesaary for every issue to be accompanied by a regular Provision Return, signed by the coniinan3!»5i»w, :.■■'«.■#_:■. Cx J 24 Cs ply," ^14,502 49.--See copy of the letter of the Secretary of War, marked A, herewith. Matthew L. Davis, under his contract, dated 26tli April, 1814, commencing 1st June, 1814, and ending 31st May, lsl5, received a credit for casks and boxes, amounting to ^2,814 57, under the following circumstances : He placed in deposite at New York and its vicinity, in December, 1814, provisions in bulk, for which he obtained the officers' receipts, including the casks and boxes. On settlement of his account, by the then Accountant, on the 17th Jan. 1815, he received a credit, and the officers were charged with the provisions received on deposite, as well as for the casks, &c. in which they were contained. Subsequently, say on settlement of 28th March, 1815, by the same accounting officer, the credit was reversed for the casks and boxes, on the ground « that they had been admitted in the previous statement, prior to the ultimate decision of the Ir'ecretary of War that no allowance shall be made to contractors for barrels, casks, &c. except in special cases of contract with the War Department." The account thus remained until the 2d March, 1817, when Mr. George Graham, then acting Secretary of War, made the follow- ing decision : « The amount of the charge for casks, barrels, boxes, &c. which had been admitted to the credit of the contractor, previ- ous to the decision of the Secretary of War, and for which a war- rant had issued, will be allowed." (Signed) GEORGE GRAHAM. 2i March, 1817. Mr. Davis having received back most of the provisions in the same casks and boxes in which they were deposited for issue, I sub- mitted the following remark : " The same casks and boxes having been again turned ovei- to Mr. Davis, when he received the depo- site, (in which the provisions were contained) does the above de- cision go to exonerate him from any charge for them .•^" (Signed) PETER HAGNER. 26th March, 1817. The Hon. Secretary of War. On which the Second Comptroller decided as follows : " The Se- cond Comptroller cannot interfere with the decision of Mr. Gra- ham, acting Secretary of War, sanctioned by the late President of the United States. The amount allowed to the credit of Mr. Davis for casks, barrels, boxes, &c. will remain so, without being recharg- ed to him." (Signed) RICHARD CUTTS. wVov. 24, 1818. The amount was accordingly admitted to the credit of Mr. Da- vis, by the Second Comptroller on settlement, 26th November, 1818, 4 mm. ^ mm m. 25 •etaiy of il, 1814, received ntler the York and ivhich he xes. On the 17th ged with isks, &c. ), by the asks and previous of War asks, &c. jnt." A'hen Mr. e foil ow- ls, boxes, :)r, previ- h a war- .HAM. ns in the ue, I sub- js having the depo- ibove de- BNER. 1817. » The Se- Mr. Gra- jsident of Mr. Davis 5 recharg- UTTS. 1818. Mr. Da- sovomber, There is not to be found among the papers any written decision of President Madison, nor is it recollected to have been seen m this office. I have the honor to be, with great respect, bir, lour obedient servant, (Signed) PETER HAGNER, Auditor. To the Hon. James Barbour , Secretary of War. I certify that the above is a true copy of the original received from |';« jy^i^ D<^- partmeiit. IHU.MAb J. HUUSUix. March 24, 1826. From the Secretary of War, enclosing the above. SIR, Department of War, March 2Srf, 182G. Agreeably to the request made by Mr. Cambrehng to cause vou to be furnished with a statement of what seems to have been paid for interest ^n.; damages on protested bills of exchange under the decision of the Secretary of War of 27th January 1816, and what allowances have been made by the Department for casks, box- es, &c. I transmit herewith a report of the Thud Auditor, which furnishes the information required. TinniTR ^Signed) JAMES BARBOUR. Elbert Anderson, Esq. I certify that the above is a true copy of the original received from the War De- partment. March 24, 1826. THOMAS J. IIODSON. LETTERS SHOAVING HOAV THE CON TRACTS WERE EXECUTED. Mbany, Dec. l9//i, 1812. SIR ' Mr. Elbert Anderson, Junr. the contractor for this state, in- forms me that he contemplates making a proposition for the contract for the ensuing year. Mr. Anderson has for a number of years sup- plied the rations in this State. The very prompt and capable man- ner in which he has heretofore discharged the du ,es of Contracto. . and the acquaintance which the performance ol those duties has giv- en him, with the resources of this part of the country, qualify inn. in an eminent degree for the fulfilment of that station hcreattcr, as satib- ■.-..Wftiwl^w ■Ml m 26 lactorily as it can be lilled by any person ; and should his bid entitle him to the contract for the next year, I have no doubt of his capaci- ty and responsibility to perform the contract satisfactorily. I am Sir, respectfully. Your ob'dt servt. (Signed) DANIEL D. TOMPKINS. Hon. William Eustis. The foregoing is a correct copy of the original on file in the War office. C. VANDE VEiNTER, C. C. W. D- Red Hook, August 12, 1823. DEAR SIR, I received your letter of the 4th instant a day or two ago : I am, as you well know, no great panegyrist of either dead or living public functionaries ; but this fact notwithstanding, it bv no means follows, that I should have any hesitation in speaking favorably of them, or of their conduct, when the latter shall have been such as, in my opinion, entitled them to praise. On this general principle, and under the best recollections I h.ave of the manner in which you ilischarged your duty as an army contractor, I have no scruple in saying, tliat it was both able and honest, fulfilling as far as was per- haps possible under the circumstances of the times, the injunctions of the law, and the objects and expectations of the Government, and, on some occasions, showing a disposition to promote the suc- cess of pending military operations by doing rather more, than less, tlian was prescribed by the letter of your contract. It was tlie joint eftect of this disinterestedness and of the opinion entertained of your general capacity for business, that induced me, with the approbation of the President, to sound you on the subject of supplying the Army by a Commissariat, instead of contracts, and virtually to offer to you the direction of a department of that descrip- tion. This fiict is perhaps the best illustration I could ^ive of the consideration in which you were held by the Executive of that day, and which takes a new force from the circumstance, that when the offer was declined by you, it was not made to any other person. I am, dear sir, respectfulh' your obedient, humble servant, JOHN ARiMSTRONG. F.lbert Anderson, Esq. SIR, Montpelkr, Oct. 22, 1823. The attention of the Executive of the U. States being divi- ded among the several Departments, he cannot be supposed as par- ticularly ac(|uainted with the transactions under each, as the respec- tive heads of them. What I can say with truth and pleasure in 27 id entitle i capaci- IPKINS. your case is, that every thing I recollect to have known of your a- gency in supplying the army during the late war was favorable to tlie ability and zeal with which the trust %vas executed. With friendly respects, JAMES MADISON. Elbert Anderson, Esq. ;. c. w. D. 1, 1823. ago: I or living no means orably of such as, principle, which you icruple in was per- ijunctions vernment, i the suc- lore, than e opinion luced me, le subject racts, and at descrip- ive of the that day, when the crson. nt, RONG. 12, 1823. )eing divi- id as par- the respec- (leasure in liloomjield, Ontario Co. JV. I'. Oct. 27, 1823. Elbert Anderson, Esq. SIR, By your request I have examined and compared the vouch- ers, orders, &c. Avhich took place and occurred on the Niagai-a frontier, in the winter of 1813 and 1814, between you as Army Contractor, by your agent Nathaniel Allen, Esq. and myself as Commanding Officer on that station. At the time I assumed the command, the frontier had in part been laid waste by the enemy, viz : from Fort Niagara to the Falls— and all the public provisions, stores, &c. in that quarter, had been destroyed. And on the SOth of December, 1813, the remaining part of the frontier, to wit : Buffalo and Black Rock, together with all the supplies for the army, were likewise destroyed. Thus situated, I called on vour agent. Major Allen, for imme- diate supplies, which he furnished with promptitude, without avail- ing himself of the thirty days notice, as 1 understand was allowed by the contract— and no doubt those supplies were furnished, in most instances, at a much gi-eater expense than they would have been, had the usual time been taken to have completed the several requisitions, viz: the 1st bearing date the 24th December, 1813, and directing ten thousand rations to be delivered in deposite near Lewistown.— 2d, the Sd of January, 1814, directing thirty thou- sand meat rations to be furnished at Williamsville.— 3d, the 9th ot Tinuary, 1814, on the Public Storekeeper at Handford's Landing. 4t,h, the lOtli of January, 1814, for one hundred thousand complete rations, to be deposited at Williamsville.— 5th, dated 20th of Janu- ary, 1814, for, viz: 175,000 complete rations at Williamsville. 22^,000 do. do. " Batavia. 100,000 do. do. « Warren's, on Ridge Road. And I am well satisfied that the greater part of the supplies, lur- nished to fulfil the above requisitions, were taken from the place or places where the purchases weie severally made, and transported directly to tlie several deposites pointed out by my orders. And I may further add, that the places of deposite were, in some in- stance's, entirely out of the direction of the posts to which my or- ders directed the supplies to be carried, and consequently the trans- portation of Ihein to the original places of deposite at the tune. • i^ «M>^'^ ■-■*( 28 would have been attended with serious inconvenience to the United States. I am, Sir. most respectfully, Your obedient humble servant, AMOS HALL, Late Major-Gen. Washington, JSTovemher SO, 1823. DEAR SIR, ,. . , . u- u It is but justice to give you credit for the part which you bore in the late war with Great Britian, when you not only exerted yourself to sustain the administration by all the means in your power, but likewise efficiently combatted opinions which were hostile to the interests and liberties of the people. To your exertions in the Com- missariat, the army, serving on the northern and southern frontiers of the State of New -York, was peculiarly indebted, and has acknow- ledged with gratitude your prompt and sufficient supply of those ar- ticles of subsistence essential to their well being, at a time it was difficult to supply the troops with necessaries of any description. That the administration was satisfied with your conduct in the im- portant and arduous duties which you had undertaken, is well known, and as far as your operations have come under my observa- tion, I have had every reason to be perfectly satisfied not only with your zeal, activity and system, but with the liberality and perfect fairness of your dealings, to say nothing of the gratuitous supplies of vegetables to the Hospitals for the use of *he sick and wounded. With sentiments of respect and esteem, I remain, dear sir. Your most ob't. servant, ALEX. M'COMB, J\Iaj. Gen. Elbert Anderson, Esq. ;iai*» -^(Wwwwfcte.- 'f' *# .'»i«i«*«»v. ;;.«!i»K. le United 29 ]i I or -Gen. 3, 1823. which you y exerted )ur power, tile to the I the Corn- frontiers IS acknow- f those ar- ne it was escription. n the im- 1, is well f observa- only with id perfect s supplies mounded. t, J\I(tj. Gen. OPINIONS. ON THE CASK AND PACKAGE CLAIM. We have examined the contracts submitted to us for consideration, and are of opinion that Mr. Anderson is fairly entitled to a reason- able allowance for the barrels, boxes, packages, &c. containing the rations, delivered by him pursuant to his contracts. Rations are the thino- contracted for, which certainly mean no more than the quan- tity of the article, without reference to what it may be contained in.— In that way it is always furnished to the soldier, he bringing the machine to contain it. What is a ration to him, when he re- ceives it, from Government, is also a ration to Government, when it is received from the contractor. We know that in the purchase of many of the articles of provision, &c. the things they are con- tained in are either to be returned or paid for— as to other articles, there may be a diversity according to the usage of business; which usa<'e will there always decide, because the parties must be sup- posed to have dealt with a knowledge of that usage, and to have incUuled the value of the box or package, &c. in the nominal price of the article. In the contracts with Government, it seems to us that usage is clearlv the other way. Those made in time of neace have always been exptmnded, by receiving the rations merely, at the places'^of issue; and when on a march, great inconvenience or necessity required that the contractor's barrels, &c. should be used, they weie always returned or allowed for to him. This was a prac- tice which seems to have settled the construction of the contract; and when in time of war, those which related to the same thing used the ^ame language. We think the terms used can only re- ceive the same interpretation. If Government intended differently, their change ot intention should have been expressly stated ; for the contractor r.ust be presumed to have made his bargain with a view to the established usa^e. No satisfactory reason seems as- signable why he should be called upon to do more in time of war, under the same bargain, than would be required of him in the event "' 1"^'" WM. PINKNEY. THOS. ADDIS EMMET. JOS. OGDEN HOFFMAN. frashington City, March lOtli, 1815. X(»TE— At the same time the above opinions weve pfiven, the written opinion wan fnllv given in favor of tliis claim bv tlic laic- Smnuel Dexter: this opinion was left in the'Thinl Auditor's offii-e, but is not to be found. It is worthy ot remark, that tlie late S. Dexter was acting Seer. lai'V of War, and was tiie autlior of the blank form» i>( the very contracts that the claim of casks were made uiiiler. 5 * '<* *■ 30 Mr. Anderson having submitted to mc for my consideration, his contracts with the Government of the United 'States for supplying rations, (one of which contracts bears date the 25th February, 1813, and was made with the Secretary for the Department of War) and his claim under the same for a reasonable allowance for the boxes, packages, barrels, inclosures, &c. containing the meat, flour, liquor, and other component parts of rations furnished in pursuance of his contracts, I am of opinion that in all those cases in which the boxes, &c. were delivered together with the rations, and retained on the part of Government, he is justly entitled to a fair and reasonable allowance for the value of the inclosure. This would appear to be according to the ordinary course of dealing, and there is nothing in the contracts from which we are to infer that the beef, pork, li- quor, &c. of which the rations consisted, were to include the ves- sel or cask or box in which they were contained. He was simply to furnish rations, which does not necessarily, or according to usage, include the material for carrying or containing the same. JAMES KENT. Mbany, October 21, 1823. I have considered the question answered in the within opinion of Chancellor Kent's, as well in reference to the contract of the 25th ot February 1813, as to the contract of the 7th of November 1811, and fully concur in the same. ^ A. SPENCER. Albany, October 24, 1823. ON PACKAGES CAPTURED AND DESTROYED. The claim of Mr. Anderson for the loss of the packages, boxes, barrels, &c. containing provisions, &c. as within claimed, falls un- der tbe sixth article of his conti act, and there can be no reasonable doubt that if he is entitled to the packages, he is entitled to the loss of them sustained by the depredations of the enemy, or by means of the troops of the U. States. The article says that all losses so sustained were to be allowed, and surely the packages, materials, &c. cover- ing the provisions were property subject to loss, and being actually lost to the contractor, the demand falls within the terms and the palpable equity of tl,e 6tl. article. ^^^^^ ^^^^ Many, Oct. 22d, 1823. If the packages, &c. be the property of the contractor, as contra- distinguished from the rations, of wiiich I have no doubt, then_ the loss in question comes wit'iiti the tprms of the contract, in either rase it is not imputable to the laches of the contractor, the loss pro- 31 •ation, his supplying ary, 1813, War) and the boxes, lur, liquor, ice of his the boxes, ed on the reasonable )ear to be is nothing , pork, li- e the ves- icas simply g to usage, KENT. opinion of 'the 25th of • 1811, and ENCER. ges, boxes, i, falls un- reasonable o the loss of neans of the io sustained &c. cover- ng actually ms and the ) KENT. , as contra- ct, then the t, in either ;he loss pro- ceeding from a casualty of war, or the act of the troops ot the Uni- ted States ; the Government having assumed both these risks, in my opinion the contractor is entitled, upon the strictest principles, to be paid a fair equivalent for the loss sustained. ^ A. SPENCER. many, Oct. 24, 1823. ON RECEIVING A. PORTER's PROVISION AND CAPTURED FLOUR. I am of opinion upon the within case that Mr. Anderson is en- titled to some equitable allowance for the loss or damage he niav have sustained by being obliged to receive an extra proportion ot flour as within mentioned, inasmuch as the value of his contract de- pended materially upon preserving a rateable proportion betweeii the several articles to be furnished within the contemplation of his con- *'^''*' JAMES KENT. dlbani/f October Q9d, 1823. I have considered claim number seven, and fully concur in the view taken of the subject by Mr. Secretary Crawford, indeed the principle he advances seems so just and obvious, as not to admit of further iUusfatiou.. A.SPENCER. Oct. 24, 1823. • « The Accountant in the settling Uic accounts of Contractors for 18l4--'15, wUl allow all claims, &c. . . , , . .u . * " Also, all losses sustained upon the issue of raUons, not requirable by the contract. " All claims ai-isiiig from loss sustained by requisitions, uot autliorized by the coiv- tracU' ON CLAIM FOR TAX ON WHISKY. The claim founded upon the within statement of facts, does not appear to be admissable at the Treasury Department; and the equi- ty upon which the claim rests must be addressed to the justice ot Con«'ress. I should presume the appeal to that justice would not be male in vain, and Mr. Anderson has very equitable and per- suasive grounds to ask for a reasonable indemnity for the depreci- ation of the valu3 of his contract, by the direct interference of Go- vernment with the very article on which his contract with them was to operate. He contracts with the Government of the United States to deliver whisky rations at such a price, and government then, while the contract is in operation, lay a tax on whisky, and raise and increase the price. It strikes me that Mr; A. has very strong. 32 fair and full claims for a compensation by way of indemnity for the injurious operation of the duty upon his contract. ,^„^^^ ^ ^ *' ' JAMES KENT. JHhany^ 22d October, 1823. 'fr- I have considered the within claim to an allowance on the article of whisky, in consequence of the act of Congress, of the 24th of July, 1813. It is presumed to be an undeniable proposition, that the samt' principles which govern and control the contracts ot indi- viduals, ought in a moral and equitable view, to be applied between the government and an individual. If an individual had by his own act prevented a party with whom he had contracted, from the performance of his contract ; or had artificially and contrary to the fust expectations of the other party, enhanced the price of an ar- ticle contracted to be delivered, it is beyond all doubt, that a court of equity would afford relief to the injured party. The Govern- ment undoubtedly for wise purposes, passed the act relerred to,- but in doing so they unintentionally injured Mr, Anderson, by vir- tually changing the nature of his contract, and imposing upon him a burden which he never could have contemplated when he ent^ed into his contract, on the 25th of February, 1813. The direct effect of this act of the 24th of July, 1813, was to enhance the price ot whisky, and thereby Mr. Anderson was prevented from obtaining it upon the terms contemplated by both the parties to the contract. It is true that Mr. Anderson took upon himself all the risks ot the fluctuation in the market; but he did not take upon him the risk of the rise in the price of whisky, produced by the act ot the other con- traotiti"- party. It must have been impliedly understood by him, that the other party should do nothing to enhance artificially, the the price of whisky. I cannot hesitate in saving that after the Government have con- tracted for the delivery of an article at a stipulated price, tiien to pass an act having a material influence on the price, and yet to in- iist on its delivery at the former price, would be an extremely rigo- rous and apparently an unjust proccdui e. There woulu be no sate- ty in contracting with the Government, if it was not bound by the same rules of good faith, which would be exacted of an indiyulual. Can it be doubted that had the contractor foreseen this event, /the passing of the act, of the 24th of July, 1813) that he would iiot have guarded against it by his contract } And can it be believed that the Secretary of War would have resisted the insertion ot an article, that if the price of whisky should be enhanced by an act ot the Government, that the enhanced price should be allowed to the contractor ? Considering then this contract as one with the Govern- ment through its functionary, and that the Government have by an act of power subsequently to the contract, produced a material bur- deu on one of the articles contracted to be delivered} it seems to 88 y for the CENT. me a plain and obvious principle of equity, that they should com« pensate Mr. Anderson by making, good his losses occasioned by their ""'Zct^, 1S23. A. SPENCER. the article e 24th of ition, that ts of indi- d between ad by his from the rary to the o(*^an ar- lat a court le Govern- jferred to, m, by vir- upon him he entered lirect effect le price of 1 obtaining le contract, isks of the the risk of ; other con- od by him, ficially, the ; have con- ce, then to [ yet to in- emely rigo- 1 be no safe- und by the ndividual. this event, t he would ; be believed ertion of an by an act of )wed to the the Govern- have by an material bur- it seems to It appears to me that it would be very unjust not to make this allowance to Mr. Anderson. He estimated his prices and made his contract under a state of things which he had no right to pre- sume would be changed during its continuance. Government, to supply its own convenience or wants, voluntarily made a change, which essentially injured him, as the other contracting party, and probably deprived him of all his profits, the change might as well have been carried to an extent that would make the execution of the contract ruinous or impossible. If the change had been produced by the act of a stranger or foreign power, perhaps he would have no other resource but to throw himself on the generosity of the other party of the contract. But where that party to the contract has voluntarily done an act so essentially varying the situation and destroying the profits of the other party, I think he is bound to make good the consequences of such act. „,.,„,.„ ^ THOxMAS ADDIS EMMET. JWw Fork, JVou. 5th, 1823. OS INEUKST ON DECLARED BALANCES. I am of opinion upon the within case that Mr. Anderson is justly and equitably entitled to interest v.i the rate of six per cent, per annum, during the period of the delay of payment of the balances declared in his favor. The balance due him was by the contract with him to be immediatelv paid, and he was made chargeable with the like rate of interest for any default of repayment on his part. JAMES KENl. Mbany, October 21, 1823. If this were a transaction between two individuals amenable to the law, there would not I think be a moment's hesitavion as to the re- sult, and I am not aware of any rule or reason ^vhy the United States should be exempted from the general law. The contractor was bound in case of his default to pay 6 per cent interest, (thus fix- inn- the rate between the parties) and the U. States not anticipating any inability on their part, promised immediate payment— they be- came unable to keep their promise; but they should now compensate the sufterers by their default. Independent of the Secretary of the 34 Tieasui y's 2;eneral (irder, I think Mr. Anderson is entitled to 6 per cent interest until paid ; and besides (at least under that orders aa well as by law) to any as ly have had question on well as eve- ecie, and if lich they do EMMET. the offcers it of the ac- J in his con- its were not ot to suffer found due, indered and I have them n of opinion, ) the within 3 KENT. the Govern- e and report upported by liar periods. of the par- icipation, to se advances te of his ac- ract that no fficers of the accounts of e contractor IS to the ex- as not only ! might have ist claim on heir part: I , as the one it would be, 85 to compensate the injured party by payinej him interest on tlie ba- lance, from tlie time the amount (uight to have been settled, to the period when it was actually settled. *^ A. SPENCER. Oct. 27, 1823. It seems to me, that the contractor is entitled to interest from the time he had a right to draw, till paid, and also to damages on ell vrotested bills he had a right to draw, and did draw. Mw Forkf JVov. 5, 1823. THUS. ADDIS EMMET. ON PROTESTED BILLS AND DEPRECIATION OF TUEASURY NOTES, &C. moHi The following questions have been submitted to vie for my opi by Elbert Mderson, Esq. late Jirmy Contractor. 1. Whether he is justly entitled to the customary damages on two bills drawn by him on the Secretary of War, in Oct. 1814, amounting to 200,000 dollars, and protested for non-payment, in- asmuch as his vouchers and account current had been previously lurnished to the War Department, and he was entitled to draw ? 2. Whether he be entitled to indemnity from Government for \os% on depreciated Treasury notes, which, when paid to him, were tf 22,1 14 below par value ? In answer to the first question, I am of opinion that Mr. Ander- son is clearly e'ltitled to the customary allowance of damages ac- cording to the law merchant, and which are part of the law of the land, upon these bills protested. " The universal practice and laws of nearly the whole civilized world has settled it as a just and equitable principle, that the interest and damages should follow a protested bill." This was the observation contained in the report of the select committee on Mr. Piatt's claims, and it was well fouixl- ed in justice and in law, and I cannot hesitate to believe that the Government of the United States will at once perceive, acknow- ledge, and admit the obligation of these rules and usages which are prescribed to individuals in their dealings with each other. In answer to the second question, I am of opinion that Mr. Ari- derson is entitled to a fair and just indemnity against the depreci- ation of the notes in which he was paid. The Government were bound to pay in specie. It is the principle of the Constitution that debts are to be paid in gold and silver, and if paper be substituted, it ought to be of equivalent value— nothing can be clearer or more persuasively just than this principle. It then, Mr. Anderson was paid in depreciated paper, because the government had not, at the time, any tlung better to otter, they are bound, in conscience, to make good tlie\lifterence between the current value of the TrcuHury 36 not^s, when paid, and the par value. Tf would not be in my power fo avail my»elf of better authority on this point than the letter of Mr. Monroe, of the date of hi\y H, 1815, in which the principle I have stated is clearly and forcibly admitted. « It seemed to be just (he observed) that as the (iovernment could not furnish paper which circulated at par, the party ou};ht to be indemnified against the loss arisiiiw from the depreciation." ^ JAMES KENT. JS^ew Vork, 2d June, 1824. If » .:! J .rUDGE PI.ATt's opinion on the claims of ELBERT ANDEnSON. Mr. Anderson having submitted for my examination his contracts with the Ignited States, bearing date the 7th day of November, 1811, and the '25th day of February, 1813, with the accomj>anyinj«; dciru- ments and correspondence — I have considered the questions which have arisen between him and the accounting officers of the (Toveni- ment; and applying the rules by which justice is administered, in the Courts of Law and Equity, my mind has been led to the following conclusions, viz. First. The claim of Mr. Anderson, for extra expense of trans- porting flour and whisky, over land, from Philadelphia, Haltimore, and Alexandria, to New-York, during the blockade of the coast in 1813. The contractor had an undoubted right to procure his supplies from those places; and he had an election to send them by land, or by sea, at the risque of the United States, as to capture by the ene- my. Two facts, are certain : 1st. That transportation by land was more expensive than by sea ; and 2d. that the hazard of capture was imminent at sea, while' that risque was merely nominal by land. It is therefore apparent, that the contractor voluntarily submitted to a certain and heavy additional expense ; whereby he saved to the Unitetl States a sum equal to a premium of insurance against capture by sea, which probably cannot be estiuiated at less than five times the amount now claimed by the contractor. That he acted prudent- ly, and conferred a certain benefit on the Government, in executing that part of his contract, cannot be doubted : and his claim for in- demnity, that is for the difference between the expense of transpor- tation by land, and by sea, appears to me to be within tlie equity of ^he stipulation, that the United States should bear the loss by cap- ture. Second. The claim for a reasonable allowance for casks and boxes, containing the component parts of the rations. The contract is explicitly for rations^ by weight and measure ; to be " furnished" and " issued" by the Contractor : the casks and boxes were used for the convenience of the Contractor merely : they were not indispensable to the fulfilment of his contract ; and the ra- tions being issued-, the casks and boxes were the property of the 't^-m* -Ww. 8t III my power the letter of the principle eemed to be urnish paper pitied against IS KENT. T ANDEnSON. I his contracts vember, 1811, |>anyinji; (htru- lestions which f the Govern - ministered, in 3 the following ense of trans- ia, Baltimore, J of the coast re his supplies m by land, or ire by the ene- n by land was of capture was it by land. It jjubmitted to a saved to the igainst capture han five times acted prudent- it, in executing s claim for in- ise of transpor- II tlie equity of le loss by cap- for casks and id measure ; to the casks and r merely : they ct ; and the ra- property of the Contractor. They were mere vehicles of transportation, and be- longed to the Contractor as much as the carts and oxen, or bouts^ used in carrying them. If the contract had been for barrels of Hour, beef, or pork, and hogsheads of whisky, and boxes of soap and can- dles, the usage of trade would require a different construction. 1 am therefore of opinion, that, tor all such casks, vessels, or boxes, detained or converted by the Government, or its agents, Mr. Ander- son has a just and legal claim. Third The claim for casks and boxes, containing rations, and which were captured or destroyed, &c. That this claim is well founded, under the 6th article of the Con- tract of 25th February, 1813. seems to mr so plain as to defy the in- genuity of a casuist to raise a doubt against it. Were those casks and boxes " necessarily used in transporting the Jirticles intended to «• compose rations, to be issued under this contract ?" If so, the stipulation is express, that they shall be paid for by the Government, at their appraised value. Fourth. The claim for damages in being compelled to receive provisions of Augustus Porter, itc. It is very evident, that the terms of the Contract did not require Mr. Anderson to accept those provisions : and that they were im- posed on the Contractor against his will, and contrary to his interest. The United States gained by it, at i'is expense ; and I am unable to perceive any valid objection to this claim. Fifth. The claim for extra compensation for removing provi- sions, by orders of General Hall and General Dearborn, respec- tively. That the expense was greatly enhanced by those special orders, is certain : and, it appears to me, that this claim is well founded, on the equity and spirit of the stipulation contained in the 3d article of the Contract of 25th February, 1813. But, supposing there had been no express convention for such a case ; I can perceive no rea- son to doubt the justice of the claim, on general and acknowledged principles of equity. Having purchased,^ and being in progress of transportation, under xn order to deliver at a certain post, that order was countermanded : and the Contractor was required to deliver at another post. Who could doubt as to the rule of justice, if such a case had occurred bet .veen private individuals ? Sixth. The claim for tax imposed on whisky, after date of the Contract. If this were a continj.ency depending on accident, or the act of a foreign GovernmeAt, it vould have been among the hazards incident to the Contract. So, if the Contract for whisky had been between two private individual?, both alike subject to the sovereign power of laying taxes- Hut, where the contract is with the Government, on whose volition it depends, whether such tax shall be imposed or not; good faith requires, either that the Govemment should abstain from laying such tax, or thac it should indemnify the Contractor for all damages sustained by reason of such ex post facto imposition. Sup- pose the contract price, and fair value of whisky to be 25 cents per 6 v-^> S8 gallon ti i\ and then suppose the Government, which contracted at that price, should impose a duty of 25 cents per gallon ; and should still insist on the fulfilment of the contract, on the original terms : is it possible to doubt, that such conduct would be an outrageous breach of faith ? The present case (lifters only in degree, and not in jirin- ciple. In this case, a tax of 14 cents per gallon was imposed ; which necessarily enhanced the price of that article to an equal amount. And not only so, but, in effect, that amount was taken from the pocket of Mr. Anderson, and placed in the Treasury of the United States. What he pays extra, the other contracting party receives. To refuse compensation for the operation of this tax upon the con- tract, would be 'IS unjust, and as arbitrary, as to pass a law that Mr. Anderson should be bound to receive 14 cents per gallon less than the contract price. My respect for the Government of mj country will not permit me to doubt of the success of this appeal to its justice. Seventh. The claim for interest on balances due the Contractor, and where payments were deferred, &c. and for damages on protest- ed drafts. The 9th article of the Contract provides that Mr. Anderson « shall render his accounts for settlement, at least once in every three months. ^^ He had a right to do so, as much oftener as he pleased. The 10th article expressly stipulates, « that if any balance shall, « on any settlement of the accounts, be found to be due to him, the « same shall immediately be paid. And that no unreasonable or un- « necessary delay, on the part of the officers of the United States, « shall be given to the settlement of the accounts," &c. There is no express stipulation that tlie Government should make advances of money, before the settlement of accounts ; but the terms and scope of the 10th article plainly imply, that such prospective advances were contemplated by the parties j and the usage of the Government justified such an expectation. The question on which the justice of this claim depends, is, whether the Government '.as in default ? If the balance in favor of the Contractor was struck and admitted, and payment still re- refused, it would seem to be an unquestionable dictate of justice, that interest should be allowed from the date of such refusal. So, if there was any '• unreasonible or unnecessary delay," in settling his accounts, the Government would thenceforth be in default, and ought to pay interest. The only use of an express stipulation to pay inte- rest, in governmental contracts, is to settle the rate of compensation for the use of money, and to designate the time and place of pay- ment. Aiid where the Government acknowled5;;e a debt, and refuse to pay interest, for money withheld from its creditor, it is as absolute a breach of faith, as it would be to refuse interest on the National Funded debt. In rc;j:ard to the protested bills, where there was an acknowledjicd ria;ht to draw, I can see no reason why the Govern- ment should not repair the injury by the same rule, as is prescribed for a like injury between private' individuals } which allows not only J I \.J^JWKS«K^^«»«^'" %^.f *'. 39 icted at that I should still terms : is it ^eous breach not in jjrin- osed ; which |ual amount. :en from the f the United rty receives. pon the con- law that Mr. Ion less than ot permit me 5 Contractor, ;s on protest- er. Anderson once in every oftener as he 3alance shall, le to him, the onable or un- Jnited States, : should make but the terms h prospective usage of the depends, is, ance in favor ^ment still re* te of justice, efusal. So, if n settling his ult, and ought m to pay inte- compensation place ofpay- ibt, and refuse is as absolute I the National e there was an y the Govern- > is prescribed Hows not only I I a legal rate of interest, but such sum as will cover all ordinary dama* ges, occasioned by disappointment, loss of credit, and consequent embarrassment. Eighth. The claim for loss on depreciated Treasury notes. That the true construction of the Contract is, that Government should pay in specie, or in something equivalent, is too plain +o be questioned. Has it done so ? No ! Public exigencies compelled a departure from the terms of the Contract ; and the contractor was under a necessity of receiving Treasury notes, at par ; when, in truth, they were available to him at no more than 86 per cent of par value. Ihe public necessity is now removed, by an overflowmg Treasury ; and the question of morality, justice, and honor, now is, whether the Contractor shall in fact receive his stipulated reward, where he has been in no default, and has faith! lly performed his contract ? or, shall he lose 14 per cent, of his promised reward, be- cause the Government was unable, at the time, to give him any thing better than Treasury notes ? It seems to me, that, to doubt of the success of this claim, would be an atfront to the Government of the United States. JViuth. The claim for hides captured and destroyed on the Ni- agara frontier, in November, 1813. These were hides of cattle driven by the Contractor to that fron- tier, to supply fresh beef rations. The 6th article of the contract stipulates that " all losses sustained by the depredations of an ene- «» my, in articles intended to compose rations, &c. as well as iti « other property necessarily used for transporting the same" shall be paid for by the United States. Assuming that it was a reasonable and proper execution of the Contract, to drive the cattle alive to the station required ; the ques- ti^)n presented is, whether the skins were " necessarily used in trans- porting the same ?" I see no ground to contend, that the hides were not the property of the Contractor ; and, in every view, I am of opinion that this claim is well founded. JONAS PLATT. Utica, 24fA J^ovemberf 1824,