網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版
[ocr errors][ocr errors]

1st Session.

JOHN CONARD.

MARCH 22, 1830.

Mr. BUCHANAN, from the Committee on the Judiciary, made the following

REPORT: The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the message of the President of the United States, submiting to the consideration of the House, the memorials which had been addressed to him by Francis H. Nicoll, and John Conard, report:

That a writ of fieri facias, issued out of the Circuit Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, at the suit of the United States, against Edward Thomson, returnable to its April session, 1826, for the sum of $ 500,000, endorsed thereon as the real debt. This execution was placed in the hands of John Conard, the Marshal, and was by him levied upon the ships Addison and Superior, and their cargoes, as the property of Edward Thomson.

Another writ of fieri facias was issued from the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, at the suit of the United States, against Edward Thomson, returnable to its November session, 1826, for the sum of $50,000, real debt. This execution was also placed in the hands of John Conard, the Marshal, and was by him levied upon the ships Rush and Scattergood, and their cargoes, as the property of Edward Thomson.

The property in these four vessels and their cargoes was claimed by Francis H. Nicoll, and an action of trespass was instituted by him, in the said Circuit Court, against John Conard, for seizing, taking, and detaining, the said ships and their cargoes, under the authority of the executions against Edward Thomson. This action came to trial at the October sessions, 1828, of the said Circuit Court, and after a long and elaborate investigation, judg. ment was entered on the verdict of the jury, on the 24th November, 1828, for the sum of $ 39,249 66 cents. This judgment has been affirmed by the Supreme Court, during their present term, with costs and damages, at the rate of 6 per cent. per annum.

The committee have the authority of the present Secretary of the Treasury for declaring, that, “on information collected from the records of the Department, the proceedings which have resulted so unfavorably for the Marshal, were begyn and carried on by direction of the Department, with the advice of the proper law officers, and under the sanction of the late Pre. sident, in the belief that the property levied upon belonged to Edward Thomson.”

Under these circumstances, the committee entertain no doubt but that relief ought to be granted to John Conard. It would be a manifest outrage on justice for this Government to direct a Marshal to seize property, on an execution issued by the United States, and then suffer him to be ruined for. obeying their order.

They therefore report a bill for his relief.

. 1st Session.

NANCY DAVIS,

MARCH 22, 1830.

Mr. YOUNG, from the Committee on Revolutionary Claims, to which was

referred the case of Nancy Davis, made the following

REPORT:

The Committee on Revolutionary Claims, to whom was referred the pe

tition of Nancy Davis, have had the same under consideration, and report:

That the petitioner states, that she is the widow of Jesse Davis, late a Captain in the Revolutionary army, on the continental establishment; that he served faithfully and honorably, from the year 1775, to 1779, or 80, when he was returned as a supernumerary, and retired from service; and she prays commutation for half pay for life, for his services.

The exact time when Captain Davis retired from service, is not stated or shown, but, in the certificates used in his application in Virginia, for bounty lands, and in the affidavits used in his application for the commutation now sought, it is stated that he retired from service in 1778, or the beginning of the year 1779; and in his own affidavit, heretofore used, he states the time of his retiring to have been soon after the battle of Monmouth, which was in June, 1778; leaving no proof or room to infer that he continued in service after the year 1779 at farthest.

No resolution of Congress, prior to that of October 21, 1780, promised half-pay for life, to any officer who did not serve to the end of the war; and that to those supernumeraries only, who should become so by future arrangements in the army, then in contemplation.

The committee, therefore, though duly appreciating the services of Capt. Davis, and observing the near approach of his time of service to that of those who do receive commutation, do not feel themselves authorized to recommend payment for services as in this case, for which no resolution of Congress has promised it; and therefore report the following resolution:

Resolved, That the prayer of the petitioner ought not to be granted

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]
« 上一頁繼續 »