No. 21. 1848. The Honorable, the Legislature of the State of Michigan: The memorial of Henry B. Lathrop to your honorable body made this 27th day of March, 1848, showeth, That on or about the 13th day of March, 1845, your memorialist, at the solicitation of the agent and inspectors of the state prison and Albert Walcott, then of Jackson, became the possessor of a certain contract then existing between said agent and said Walcott, for the labor and services of from 20 to 50 convicts then or thereafter to be confined in said prison. That on or about that time your memorialist entered upon and was in receipt of the labor and services of from 25 to 30 of said convicts, and certain other privileges and immunities guarantied to said Walcott, and by him assigned to your memorialist. That such labor and service, and such privileges were in his enjoyment under and by virtue of said contract and assignment. That your memorialist, in consequence of the solicitation as aforesaid, paid to said Walcott, to the knowledge, at the time, of the agent of said prison, a sum equal to from $1400 to $2000-and guarantied among other things, to pay to said agent any and all sums of money then due to said agent from said Walcott, for the services of said convicts, and privileges as aforesaid, which said sum amounted at that time to from $1000 to $1500. That he made such payment to said Walcott and guarantied such payment to said agent, solely for said contract and privileges thereby guarantied, That at the time of such purchase and payment aforesaid the state prison agent had no security from said Walcott, on which to rely for payment, and that at that time said Walcott's pecuniary circumstances were such as to preclude all hope of ever collecting said amount by course of law, nor was it believed by said agent that the said sum would ever be realized from the best efforts of said Walcott unaided by a sale of his said contract. That in consequence of your memo. rialist becoming the possessor of said contract as assignee of said son. Walcott, it became necessary for your memorialist to advance large sums of money, not only to pay the debts of said Walcott, but for machinery and stock for carrying on the business of manufacturing as guarantied to said Walcott, and your memorialist by virtue of said contract and assignment. That your inemorialist did pay to said agent the full amount due from said Walcott to said agent for lobor and services of said convicts. That said agent did allow and encourage your memorialist to possess, enjoy and pay for the service of said convicts for a long time, to wit: to the 19th day of May, 1846, when the said convicts were taken from the employ of your memorialist and forcibly detained from entering into the employ of your memorialist, under the provision of said contract by the then agent of said state priThat previously, to wit: on the 10th day of March, 1845 the agent of said prison did cause to be drawn up a new contract, substantially the same as the one held by said Walcott and your memorialist, as his assignee, varying only in substituting the name of your memo rialist for that of said Walcott, and some other alterations dictated by the board of inspectors and the agent aforesaid. That the said contract was made for the convenience of the state prison authorities, and for the better securing payment for any sum that might become due to said agent for the labor and services of said convicts under said contract. That your memorialist did, for a long time, refuse signing said last mentioned contract, believing the one assigned him by said Walcott, was sufficient, with such additions as your memorialist had been assured by said agent and inspectors, should be made, but did, after a delay of months execute the same. That, in consequence of the agent of said prison refusing to allow your memorialist the services of said convicts as guarantied to said Walcott and your memorialist, as his assignee, your memorialist was put to great loss, and for the recovery of which divers suits were commenced against said agent in manner as empowered by statute. That at the time the board of inspectors of said prison did make their annual report to the secretary of state in November last, they recommended to the legislature to take such action in the matter as would produce a settlement of such controversy. That in consequence of said recommendation and the solicitation of the present agent of said prison, your memorialist did apply to your honorable body to pass a joint resolution referring the matters. in controversy to the board of state auditors for settlement. That in pursuance of said resolution, the matters in controversy were submitted to said board, and an award agreed upon by them that your memorialist feels under the necessity of declining to receive, for the following reasons: 1st. Because said board did as he is informed by them, determine that both of the said contracts with said Walcott and your memori alist as his assignee, and with your memorialist as principal, were void and not binding on either party, but for no action or omission on the part of either Mr. Walcott or your memorialist; and that under their view of the case, they could not allow any relief for damages your memorialist may have sustained since said convicts were refused him. That as your memorialist is informed by said board, they did, in making their said award, take into consideration to some extent, the loss of your memorialist in the completion of his work already begun. And further, that at the subsequent letting of the services of said convicts, the said agent did agree to receive a greater price per day for their services than was stipulated to be paid by the several contracts of said Walcott, and your memorialist gives as a further reason that in making the allowance as above stated, the said board have not allowed your memorialist one-fifth part of the difference between the price stipulated in the contracts of said Walcott and your memorialist, and the highest price offered for the same convicts; and your memorialist asserts that if, as the board assume, he was entitled to receive the difference in such pricesthat his measure of damages should be the highest offer made by responsible persons at the time of re-letting said convicts. Again, in not allowing your memorialist for his loss by reason of the forced sale he was compelled to make of his machinery, tools and fixtures, as is in proof in the testimony submitted to said board and in stipulation between the respective counsel of the parties. Again, in charging your memorialist interest on a demand held against him, and not allowing him interest on his damages awarded which your memorialist is informed by one of said board, was not contemplated by him. And your memorialist further shows that in making said award said board acted without a full knowledge of the facts or proper understanding of the testimony in the case which is attributable to a difference of opinion between said board, and the counsel of your memorialist as to the force of testimony on some points which your memorialist avers can be substantiated in his favor by further testimony which would have been produced at that time but for the be lief that it was already sufficient and that said board did not so consider it to the great loss of your memorialist. And your memorialist further shows that since said award was made, he has applied to said board to open their award and grant a further hearing of testimony and argument in support of his claim which application was declined by said board on the ground as stated by them that they had not authority so to do. And your memorialist now comes before your honorable body asking such relief in the matter as may be according to justice and good faith, either by directing the board of State Auditors to return to your memorialist all the papers and documents by him submitted to them, or such other relief as may best subserve the cause of justice and good conscience. And your memorialist as in duty bound, will ever pray, &c. H. B. LATHROP. No. 22. 1848. OFFICE OF SECRETARY OF STATE, HON. WM. M. FENTON, President of the Senate: SIR-I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt, by the board of state auditors, of a copy of a resolution of the Senate, requesting the board to inform the Senate whether, in their opinion H. B. Lathrop has any legal or equitable claim against the state, which will render any further legislative action necessary; and am instructed by the board to return for answer thereto, That all legal and equitable claims of Henry B. Lathrop referred to this board by joint resolution approved January 14, 1848, have been adjudicated upon by the board, so far as the same have been presented by the claimant, and the determination of the board thereupon, declared to said Lathrop that the board were unanimous in the award made by them, and that they know of no facts or circumstances which render further legislative action on these claims necessary. Respectfully, your ob't serv't, GEO. W. PECK, Ch'n Board of State Auditors. |