setting forth, at large, the act of 1812, respecting pursers, proceeds to state, that, before the execution of the bond, the Navy Department did cause the same to be prepared, and transmitted to Debiois, and did require and demand of him, that the same, with the condition, should be executed by him with sufficient sureties, before he should be permitted to remain in the office of purser, or to receive the pay and emoluments attached to the office of purser; that the condition of the bond is variant and wholly different from the condition required by the said act of Congress, and varies and enlarges the duties and responsibilities of Deblois and his sureties; and that the same was under color and pretence of the said act of Congress, and under color of office, required and extorted from the said Deblois, and from the defendant, as one of his sureties, against the form, force, and effect of the said statute, by the then Secretary of the Navy." The substance of this plea is, that the bond, with the above condition variant from that prescribed by law, was, under color of office, extorted from Deblois and his sureties, contrary to the statute, by the then Secretary of the Navy, as the condition of his remaining in the office of purser, and receiying its emoluments. There is no pretence, then, to say, that it was a bond voluntarily given, or that, though different from the form prescribed by the statute, it was received and executed without objection. It was demanded of the party upon the peril of losing his office; it was extorted under color of office against the requisitions of the statute. It was plainly, then, an illegal bond; for no officer of the Government has a right, by color of his office, to require from any subordinate officer, as a condition of holding office, that he should execute a bond with the condition different from that prescribed by law. That would be, not to execute, but to supersede the requisitions of law. It would be very different where such a bond was, by mistake or otherwise, voluntarily substituted by the parties for the statute bond, without any coercion or extortion by color of office.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

WASHINGTON, February 8, 1831.

I, Richard Peters, reporter of the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States, do hereby certify that the foregoing pages contain a true copy of the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States, in the case of the United States against Thomas Tingey, as delivered by said Supreme Court, at January term, eighteen hundred and thirty-one.

RICHARD PETERS.

2d Session.

MARTHA BAILEY.

Mr. McINTIRE, from the Committee of Claims, to which was re-committed the report in the case of Martha Bailey, made the following supplemental and correctional

REPORT:

The Committee of Claims, to which was referred by resolution the petition of Martha Bailey and others, with the report of this committee thereon, for the purpose of correcting certain errors therein, report:

That, in the description of the petitioners, the report made February 2, 1831, James Thorn is described as surviving partner, in joint interest of himself and Elias Mather, when in fact he petitioned for himself and said Mather, his former partner, who is alive, but not now a partner. The error, immaterial in relation to the validity of the claims arose from a careless enumeration of the petitioners and their several interests, taken from the preamble to their petition, the only evidence submitted of their interest in the contract of Elbert Anderson.

The committee committed another error, in supposing that James Thorn was not known to the War Department as interested in the contract as a partner. It appears from a book published by Mr. Anderson in 1824, on the subject of his claim, that the Secretary of War and Gen. Wilkinson did know that Mr. Thorn was interested in the contract of Mr. Anderson. At page 48 the Secretary of War addresses him as such, and at page 51 Gen. Wilkinson does the same. The committee was led into this error by the fact, that Mr. Thorn was, on all other occasions, addressed as an agent merely, and expressly called and treated as such by Mr. Anderson; and no document filed previous to the present, to the knowledge of the committee, disclosed the names of Mr. Anderson's associates. The remarks, therefore, of the committee, near the bottom of the second page of their report, which were predicated on a supposed concealment, on the part of Mr. Anderson, of the interest of Mr. Thorn in the contract, are inapplicable and erroneous, and would not have been made if the committee had noticed the fact that Mr. Thorn had been known to the War Department as one of Mr. Anderson's associates. Mr. Thorn explains the circumstances why he was called the contractor's agent, by asserting the fact, that he, though one of the partners, was the agent of the whole, and acted under their instruction as such with limited powers.

THOMAS BELDEN.

FEBRUARY 18, 1831.

Read, and laid upon the table.

Mr. WHITTLESEY, from the Committee of Claims, to whom was referred the claim of Thomas Belden, made the following

REPORT:

The Committee of Claims, to whom was referred, by resolution, the claim of Thomas Belden, report:

On the 9th of June, O.

That, on the 10th of January, 1815, the United States, by Oliver H. Perry, contracted with Thomas Belden and C. & W. Churchill to construct, at Middletown, in the State of Connecticut, two brigs, to be delivered by the 1st day of May following, of three hundred and fifty tons each, for which the United States were to pay the sum of twenty six thousand dollars for each of said vessels. If either vessel exceeded the tonnage mentioned, thirty-five dollars per ton was to be paid for such excess. The money was to be such as was current in New York. H. Perry drew on the Department for $36,404, being the balance due for the construction of said brigs. He mentioned that the money was to be current in New York. On the 15th of July, 1815, the Treasurer drew on G. Beach, cashier, payable in New York bank notes, for $404, and on W. Few, commissioner, for Treasury notes, $36,000. Mr. Belden acknowledged the reception and payment of these drafts on the 1st of August, 1815, but stated he could not account for the Treasury notes at par, as they were from three to three and a half per cent, below it. The Treasurer stated on the 7th of August, 1815, in answer to Mr. Belden's letter, that the drafts were drawn as ordered by the Secretary of the Treasury, and that he could not grant him relief. Mr. Belden now claims the sum of $2,516 97, consisting of the following items, to wit:

Interest on $36,404, from June, 1815, to July 27 or 28, when I received that sum in Treasury_notes and cash. Interest 38 days Discount on $36,000, Treasury notes, at 3 per cent.

$227 52

1,080 00

1,307 52

Interest on this sum, from July 27, 1815, to Dec. 27, 1830, 15 years, 5 months,

1,209 45

$2.516 97

The Secretary of the Navy wrote to Mr. Belden on the 22d of June, 1815, that he had directed the draft drawn by O. H. Perry to be paid. The committee do not find any proof that the drafts were not issued by the treasurer without any unnecessary delay, and this delay is not complained of by Mr. Belden in his letter of the 1st of August, 1815. Mr. Belden has

presented some certificates of brokers that Treasury notes were, at the time these were received, three per cent. under par. A part of the committee think, that, inasmuch as Mr. Belden received the Treasury notes, he waived any claim for remuneration, and a part of the committee entertain the opinion that his letter of the 1st of August, 1815, includes the idea of a waiver. But there is no difference of opinion in this, that Mr. Belden must show, before he entitles himself to relief in this item, that he sustained a loss on the Treasury notes. The price of Treasury notes in the market at the time is not establishing this fact. It is well known that Treasury notes soon rose; and if Mr. Belden retained his, he was greatly benefitted instead of being prejudiced by being paid with them. Interest, on no principles, could be allowed. The committee move the following resolution: Resolved, The claimant is not entitled to relief.

NAVY DEPARTMENT,

January 20, 1831.

SIR: I have the honor, in reply to your letter of the 29th ultimo, requesting to be furnished with copies of all letters in the Department written by Thomas Belden, or by the Secretary of the Navy, in the years 1814 or 1815, relating to the construction of two hermaphrodite brigs by said Belden, by virtue of a contract made with Captain Oliver H. Perry, acting for the United States, to inform you that the records of this Department have been examined from 1813 to 1821, and it cannot be found that any letters upon the abovementioned subject passed between the Navy Department and Thomas Belden; but one letter during that period can be found to have been received from him, dated the 10th of June, 1815, enclosing a bill for $36,404, drawn by Commodore Perry in favor of C. & D. Churchill and said Belden, and the reply, dated 22d of the same month, informing him that the bill had been paid. Reference has been made to the offices of the Navy Commissioners and Fourth Auditor, without finding any letters upon the subject. The delay in answering this call has arisen from the voluminous correspondence of the period referred to, and the want of an index or reference to the miscellaneous letters received by the Department, which were not arranged and bound until the year 1828; the indexes to which are now preparing as rapidly as practicable.

I am respectfully, Sir,

Your obedient servant,

The Hon. ELISHA WHITTLESEY,

JOHN BRANCH.

Chairman of the Committee of Claims, H. R.

The Treasurer of the United States presents his compliments to Mr. Whittlesey, and begs leave to inform him, that he is not aware of, nor can he find any correspondence with Belden, from the description of the case given in his letter But if Mr. Whittlesey will have the goodness to send the petition, or to state more particularly the nature of the correspondence, the period when it took place, &c., he will endeavor to have the object of the committee effected.

TREASURY OF THE UNITED STATES, Dec. 31, 1830.