1st Session. No. 26. IN SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. JANUARY 29, 1850. Submitted, and ordered to be printed. Mr. King made the following REPORT: The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was referred the memorial of Abigail Shaler Stilwell, legal representative of William Shaler, deceased, have had the same under consideration, and report: That William Shaler, who had for many years discharged the duties of consul of the United States at Algiers, to the entire satisfaction of his government, asked and obtained permission to return to the United States for the improvement of his health, which had been greatly impaired. This permission was given by the Secretary of State, with the express understanding that Mr. Hodgson should be left in Algiers to discharge the consular duties during Mr. Shaler's absence, without expense to the government; and that he (Mr. Shaler) should continue to receive his salary. In 1828, Mr. Shaler returned home; and in 1829, resigned his office as consul at Algiers, and received the appointment of consul at Havana, in the island of Cuba. In the settlement of his accounts, Mr. Shaler claimed a quarter's salary, which had, by the uniform practice of the government, been allowed to meet the expenses of consuls to the Barbary powers in returning to their homes at the expiration of their service. The Secretary of State refused to make the allowance asked for, upon the ground that Mr. Shaler was at home at the time of his resignation, and received his salary from the time he left Algiers until his resignation was accepted. The committee, appreciating as it does the valuable services of Mr. Shaler, is constrained to come to the conclusion that the Secretary of State decided correctly. They report the following resolution : Resolved, That the prayer of the memorialist be rejected. 1st Session. No. 27. IN SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. JANUARY 30, 1850. Mr. UPHAM made the following REPORT: [To accompany bill S. No. 89.] The Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads, to whom was referred the petition of Ira Day, of Vermont, beg leave to report: That they have had the subject under consideration, and find that two bills have heretofore been reported for the relief of the petitioner; one in 1839 and the other in 1840. The facts in the case are fully set forth in Senate report No. 86, 3d session of the 25th Congress, in the words following: James Barker and others were contractors for transporting a daily mail for four years from Boston, in the State of Massachusetts, to Royalton, Montpelier, and Burlington, (the great depot of navigation on Lake Champlain,) being the great mail route from Boston to Montreal, for the sum of $12,250 per annum, commencing on the 1st day of January, 1833, and ending in January, 1837. In the month of October, 1834, the Postmaster General ordered the mail to be discontinued one day in a week on that part of the route from Royalton to Burlington; which part of the route, for the transportation of the mail, was assigned by the contractors to the petitioner. Under the order aforesaid of the Postmaster General, the mail from Boston arrived at Royalton on Saturday evening, and remained over until the Monday morning following. "The inconvenience to the public by this order appears to have been so great, that the postmasters on the route and other citizens solicited and urged the petitioner to continue the transportation of the mail every day, notwithstanding said order of the Postmaster General. He did so; and by so doing, the line was continued unbroken, and the mail was transported regularly from Boston to the capital of Vermont, and thence to Burlington, and vice versa, every day in the week. The petitioner, therefore, claims the sum of $1,008 90, being the sum withheld from him by the Postmaster General on account of the order for discontinuing the transportation of the mail aforesaid." The committee are well satisfied, from the proof filed in the case, that the order of the Postmaster General, if it had been carried out, would have occasioned great inconvenience to the public. It would have delayed the mail thirty-six hours on one of the most important and productive routes in that section of the country. The order, though peremptory on its face, was, no doubt, designed as a temporary measure for the relief of the department in its then embarrassed condition. This is apparent from the fact, that after the expiration of the petitioner's contract, the department ordered a daily mail upon the route. The service, then, having been performed at the request of the postmasters and other citizens on the route, and to the great convenience of the public, should in justice and equity be paid for. The committee, therefore, report a bill for the relief of the petitioner. It also appears that the mail was carried by the petitioner, at the request of the Postmaster General, after the contract had expired, to wit: on the 1st of January, 1837, to the 1st of July of the same year. The one-seventh part of the amount of the original contract for performing that service was also retained by the Postmaster General, and is included in the bill. The Committee on Public Lands, to whom was referred the petition of Charles Byrne, respectfully report The petitioner alleges, that in March, 1840, he entered, at private sale, in the land office at St. Augustine, a tract of land containing eight hundred acres; that he soon after applied for his patent, which was delayed, and he was subsequently informed that the land was claimed by General Clinch as a private grant; that this grant was eventually found to cover the land entered by him; that, in October, 1848, the money paid by him for the land was restored to him, but without interest. The petitioner now prays that interest may be allowed on the money. By the act of January 12, 1825, a repayment of the purchase money is authorized to be made to the purchaser of land the title to which fails by reason of a prior sale thereof, or the confirmation of a prior grant, or from any other cause whatsoever. (Land Laws, part 1, 402.) Under this act, no interest on the money is allowed; and the committee can see no reason for applying any other than the general rule to the case of the petitioner. The annexed correspondence with the Commissioner of the General Land Office on the subject will exhibit more clearly the facts in the case. The committee recommend the adoption of the following resolution: Resolved, That the prayer of the petitioner be not granted. GENERAL LAND OFFICE, January 22, 1850. SIR: I have the honor to return the enclosed memorial of Charles Byrne, of East Florida, praying that he may be allowed interest on the amount paid by him to the receiver of public money at St. Augustine, in March, 1840, for certain tracts of land entered by him in that district, which was referred by you to this office on the 19th instant. I find, on examination of the case, that Charles Byrne entered at the land office at St. Augustine, Florida, on the 21st day of March, 1840, the following described tracts of land in township 13 south, of range 21 east of the 5th principal meridian: Southeast quarter and east half of northeast quarter of section 34, containing East half of southeast quarter of section 27, containing - 235.47 acres. - 80.04 |