Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

Act of Sept. 4, 1841, ch. 16

(5 Stat. 455,

753

Act of July 2, 1864 (13 Stat. 365) ..222, 629, 645 | Act of July 2, 1864, ch. 225 (13 Stat. 375) 333 Act of March 3, 1865, ch. 86 (13 Stat. 501)

......

297
384
146

456)
Act of March 3, 1849, ch. 108 (9 Stat. 395) 222
Act of Sept. 9, 1850 (9 Stat. 446).
Act of Sept. 9, 1850 (9 Stat. 453)
Act of Feb. 26, 1853 (10 Stat. 170)
Act of July 22, 1854, ch. 103 (10 Stat. 308)
Act of Aug. 4, 1854, ch. 249 (10 Stat. 576)
Act of Aug. 5, 1854, ch. 268 (10 Stat. 586)
Act of Feb. 10, 1855, ch. 71 (10 Stat. 604)
Act of Feb. 12, 1855..
Act of Feb. 24, 1855, ch. 122 (10 Stat. 612)

512, 540 Proclamation of May 29, 1865 (13 Stat. 758) 742 643 Act of March 17, 1866, ch. 20 (14 Stat. 9) 773 222 | Act of Apr. 7, 1866, ch. 28 (14 Stat. 21).. 737 445 Act of April 9, 1866, ch. 31 (14 Stat. 27) 442 628 Act of June 15, 1866, ch. 124 (14 Stat. 66) 176 814 Act of July 13, 1866, ch. 184 (14 Stat. 98, 172) 691, 772 Act of July 16, Act of May 15, 1856, ch. 28 (11 Stat. 9).. 582 Act of July 23, Act of June 3, 1856 813 Act of June 3, 1856, ch. 43 (11 Stat. 20) 553, 554 (11 Stat. 21) 232 (11 Stat. 186)

Act of June 3, 1856, ch. 44
Act of Feb. 14, 1857..
Act of March 3, 1857, ch. 93
Act of Feb. 14, 1859..
Act of 1860 (12 Stat. 85).
Act of Jan. 29, 1861, ch. 20
Act of July 13, 1861, ch. 3

814

644

814

202 (12 Stat. 126) 645 (12 Stat. 257) 531, 534 Act of Aug. 6, 1861, ch. 60 (12 Stat. 319, 374) ..401, 402 Pres. Proc. of Aug. 16, 1861 (12 Stat. 1262) 531 Resolution of Apr. 25, 1862 (12 Stat. 618) 147 Act of May 20, 1862, ch. 75 (12 Stat. 392) 629 Act of June 2, 1862, ch. 93 (12 Stat. 411) 47 Act of July 1, 1862, ch. 199 (12 Stat. 465, 473)

.352, 532 Act of July 1, 1862 (12 Stat. 489) 750 Pres. Proc. of July 1, 1862 (12 Stat. 1226) 533 Act of July 16, 1862, ch. 183 (12 Stat. 587) 341 Act of July 17, 1862, ch. 195 (12 Stat. 589, 592) .321, 323, 374, 742 Act of March 3, 1863, ch. 76 (12 Stat. 740) 177 Act of March 3, 1863, ch. 81 (12 Stat. 755) 442 Act of March 3, 1863, ch. 92 (12 Stat. 765, 768) .691, 772, 773 Act of March 12, 1863, ch. 120 (12 Stat. 820) .374, 533, 740, 773 Pres. Proc. of April 2, 1863 (13 Stat. 731) 531 Proclamation of Dec. 8, 1863 (13 Stat. 737) 742 Act of March 7, 1864, ch. 20 (13 Stat. 15, 16) Proclamation of March 26, 1864 (13 Stat. 741)

.81, 354, 442, 479, 652, 845 1866, ch. 200 (14 Stat. 173) 403 1866, ch. 208 (14 Stat. 193206) Act of July 25, 1866, ch. 246 Act of July 26, 1866, ch. 262 Act of July 27, 1866, ch. 180 Act of July 27, 1866, ch. 288

Act

..341, 737, 738 (14 Stat. 244) 176 (14 Stat. 253) 416 (14 Stat. 300) 876 (14 Stat. 306)

738

(14 Stat.

.799, 803

354

69, 477, 527 Act of July 28, 1866, ch. 310 (14 Stat. 344) 159 Act of Feb. 5, 1867, ch. 28 (14 Stat. 365) 436, 446, 447, 448, 590, 654 Resolution Feb. 28, 1867, No. 30 (14 Stat. 569) Act of March 2, 1867, ch. 167 535) of March 2, 1867, ch. 169 (14 Stat. 471) .. Bankrupt March 2, 1867, ch. 176 (14 Stat. 517-536).. .152, 154, 274, 276, 449, 517, 521, 536, 544, 573, 577, 637, 638, 686, 690, 757 Act of March 2, 1867, ch. 184 (14 Stat. 544) 202 Act of March 2, 1867, ch. 196 (14 Stat. 558) 68, 163, 331 Proclamation of Sept. 7, 1867 (15 Stat. 700) 742 Act of Feb. 10, 1868, ch. 7 (15 Stat. 34) 193 Act of June 25, 1868, ch. 71 (15 Stat. 75)

Act,

Act of June 25, 1868, ch. 72
Act of July 20, 1868, ch. 186

691, 773 (15 Stat. 77) 341 (15 Stat. 125,

129)..

533

.209, 343, 474, 475 Act of March 3, 1869 (15 Stat. 406) Act of May 31, 1870, ch. 114 (16 Stat. 141) Act of July 7, 1870, ch. 210 (16 Stat. 189) Act of July 8, 1870, ch. 203 (16 Stat. 206215) Act of July 8, 1870, ch. 230 (16 Stat. 206)

882

442

395

442

[blocks in formation]

58 Act of May 5, 1864, ch. 80 (13 Stat. 66) 553, 555 Act of June 2, 1864 (13 Stat. 95).. 583 Act of June 3, 1864, ch. 106 (13 Stat. 99116) 193, 194, 442, 688 Act of June 25, 1864, ch. 147 (13 Stat. 155) 738 Act of June 30, 1864, ch. 173 (13 Stat. 239, 284) Act of June 30, 1864, ch. 186 Act of July 1, 1864, ch. 196 Act of July 2, 1864, ch. 210

Preamble (1 Stat. 10)
Art. 1, secs. 2, 3, 4.

..352, 353, 479 (13 Stat. 581) 214 (13 Stat. 335) 754 (13 Stat. 349,

257, 737

[blocks in formation]

707, 710 Act of July 12, 1870, ch. 251 (16 Stat. 250) 341 Act of July 14, 1870, ch. 255 (16 Stat. 256, 261) .81, 351 Act of March 3, 1871, ch. 111 (16 Stat. 474)

257, 813 Act of March 24, 1871, ch. 2 (17 Stat. 1) 264 Act of April 20, 1871, ch. 22 (17 Stat. 13) 442 Act of March 2, 1872. 462

Act of June 1, 1872, ch. 255 (17 Stat. 196)
44, 45, 180, 227, 346, 879
Act of June 6, 1872, ch. 315 (17 Stat. 256)
Act of June 8, 1872..
Act of April 19, 1873.
Act of May 1, 1873..
Act of March 3, 1876..

653

691

814

814

813

Art. 1, sec. 8.

Art. 1, sec. 10..

628

629

630

630

ARGUED AND DECIDED

IN THE

SUPREME COURT

OF THE

UNITED STATES

AT

OCTOBER TERM, 1873.

Vol. 86

[graphic]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors]
[subsumed][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed]

ury, thereby becomes evidence. Those matters, of which the treasury officers have official knowledge, and which upon such knowledge they have recorded in the books of the Treasury, thereby become evidence. But when they ascertain facts by evidence, that evidence becomes part of their proceedings, and their conclusions, apart from the evidence upon which they are founded, are not evidence at all. This is clearly stated in U. S. v. Jones, 8 Pet., 375, 381.

The quarterly returns were not admissible in evidence, without the auditor's report.

The defendant is entitled to the benefit of all credits allowed by the accounting. officers. But as credits claimed, if not admitted by the accounting officers, must be proven, then it follows that to admit the quarterly returns without the auditor's reports, would be to deny the defendant the benefit of all credits given him at the Treasury, and put him to proof of all the credits anew. This would have been a great hardship and one which no court would impose, especially if, as stated in the bill of exceptions, the reports thus omitted contained credits which do not appear in the quarterly returns, but do appear first in the settlements made after the collector's death, and which, with other settlements, the United States declined to offer with the quarterly returns.

absence from the United States. It results from the provisions that the officer is entitled to the decision by the accounting officers on every item, and this court so rules in the case of U. S. v. Jones, 8 Pet., 375, 382.

See, U. S. v. Gilmore, 7 Wall., 494, 19 L. ed., 283; U. S. v. Edwards, 1 McLean, 467.

There are debits in the transcript, manifestly not within the scope of the liability sought to

be enforced.

Mr. Justice Hunt delivered the opinion of the court:

This is an action brought upon a bond of Thomas Barrett, as Collector of Customs for the Port of New Orleans. The testator, John Kingsbury Elgee, was one of the sureties upon the bond."

[ocr errors]

Upon the trial, the bond of Barrett, the collector, was produced and the signature of the defendant's testator, as one of the sureties therein, was duly proved. Further to maintain the action, plaintiffs' counsel offered in evidence "copies of the reports of the First Auditor of the Treasury of the United States, numbered respectively 5,688, 5,700, 5,856, 5,870, 6,391, 6,423, 9,241 and 15,817, as admitted and certified by the Comptroller and Commissioner of Customs, all of said papers being It may be said that the defendant could have fastened together as a whole, and embraced in referred to or even put in evidence the quarone certificate. The defendant, "making no obterly returns and the auditor's reports as an- jection to the form or substance of the certifinexed to the petition, and could thus have ob-cate, objected to this evidence, on the ground tained the advantage of which the course of the that the Act of Congress making evidence tranplaintiff in the trial is supposed to deprive him. scripts from the books of the Treasury DepartBut this is no sufficient answer to the objection. ment, applies only to public defaulters, and that The examples above given are mere illustrations the same are not evidence against sureties; and of the evil of an incomplete transcript and al- also on the further ground that said returns though in this particular case the remedy may were fragmentary, incomplete, and partial; and be easy, that does not justify the plaintiff in also on the ground that said reports charged mutilating the transcript, or presenting an in- Barrett with gross sums and balances, without complete one, and throwing on the defendant giving details. The evidence was excluded, and the onus of completing it. plaintiff's counsel excepted to the ruling.

But if the plaintiff's had offered in evidence the complete transcript of which they offered parts, it would not have been admissible.

It is on its face fragmentary and imperfect, and it moreover contains items not within the scope of the liability of the surety on whose bond the suit is brought. We assume that, under the Act of 1797, which alone makes such a transcript evidence: 1. The transcript must contain all the proceedings. 2. It must contain

The plaintiff also offered in evidence a statement of the account of said Barrett with the United States, made by said Barrett to the United States while Collector of Customs, and certified as true and correct copies of said original statements. This evidence was objected to

on the ground that said statement was not le

gal proof of the existence of a debt by said Barrett, did not tend to prove the same and was not competent evidence thereof; and that the a decision either of allowance or disallowance same was fragmentary and incomplete. This of all claims to credit, which have been sub-evidence was excluded, and plaintiff excepted mitted to the accounting officers. 3. It must not contain debts manifestly and clearly not within the scope of the account settled and adjusted.

If the transcript be liable to any of these objections, the proper course is to exclude it. And this course imposes no hardship on the United States. As this suit cannot be barred by limitation, and it is not liable for costs, it has only to submit to a nonsuit and correct the transcript in the particular objected to. The transcript was incomplete.

U. S. v. Patterson, Gilp., 44. The Act of 1797 declares that no credit, not allowed by the accounting officers, shall be allowed on the trial, unless it has been presented to the accounting officer "and disallowed," or has not been presented by reason of accident or

to the ruling of the court.

revenue officer

.

[ocr errors]

By the Act of March 3, 1797, 1 Stat. at L., 512, 513, it is enacted: "Sec. 1. That when any shall neglect or refuse to pay into the Treasury the sum or balance reported to be due to the United States upon the adjustment of his accounts, *it shall [*199 be the duty of the Comptroller to institute suit for the recovery of the same. Sec. 2. That in every case of delinquency, where a suit has been or shall be instituted, a transcript from the books and proceedings of the Treasury, certified by the register and authenticated under the seal of the department, shall be admitted as evidence, and the court trying the cause shall be thereupon authorized to grant judgment and award execution accordingly."

86 U. S.

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »