The Congressional Globe, Volume 13, Part 1: Twenty-Eighth Congress, First Session Page: 132
This book is part of the collection entitled: Congressional Globe and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
132
CONGRESSIONAL GLOB®.
of the district court of the United States, in the dis-
trict where the fine accrues, who is authorized in a
summary way to take testimony in the case, and to
report the same to the Secretary of the Treasury,
who is empowered, should he deem it to be right, to
remit the fine.
Now, the first, and perhaps sufficient answer to
this is, that it is too late for the petitioner to avail
himself of that remedy. The money has been paid
into the treasury of the United States, and is beyond
the control of the Secretary. The Constitution pro-
vides that "no money shall be drawn from the
treasury, except in consequence of appropriations
made by law." Let the case be then as it may
upon the report of the judge, exhibiting never so
strong1 features of accident and want of intentional
wrong, the Secretary has no power to afford a rem-
edy.
But, in addition to this view, he (Mr. F.)
thought the remedy provided was entirely impracti-
cable. Just recur to the facts. The defect was not
discovered, it will be observed, until the ship was
on the eve of sailing. It was on the clearance of the
ship that the want of the collector's endorsement on
the certificate of registry was first discovered. It is
probable, then, that in order for this petitioner to
avail himself of the provisions of this law, the ship
would necessarily have been detained in port,
though all ready for sea. And supposing that the
district judge was willing to put aside any busi-
ness then in hand, or before the court, if then
in session, and . devote himself at once to this
application: still some time must necessarily be
consumed; and, sir, by every day's delay of
the ship, a greater loss would be incurred than
the fine itself. But consider further sir, that the
witnesses, upon whom the petitioner would probab y
rely to show his innocence in the matter, were then
residing in Maine and New York, and that the
quarter would end on the thirtieth of that month,
when the collector would be obliged to pay the fine
into the treasury, and thereby place it beyond the
control of the Secretary for the purposes of that law:
and who, under the circumstances, will say it was
reasonably to expect Capt. Kennard to delay the
sailing of his ship one hour to pursue such a
remedy?
\ But it is said that the captain in this case was
unfit for his office, being ignorant of the law as ap-
plying to his duties; and the old principle is invoked,
that "ignorance of the law excuses no one." Sir,
this couid with much more propriety be urged in a
legal prosecution than in the halls of legislation.
But, sir, this captain, who is highly intelligent, and
one of the first in his class, places his claim on no
such foundation. He no where admits that he was
ignorant of the law. On the contrary, he avows his
knowledge of the law, and avers that Jie believed
all its requirements were fulfilled by the owners and
the collcctor. That is, that the change of masters
liad been reported to the collector by the owner, and
the fact endorsed on the certificate of registry by the
collector.
But the bill is further opposed, on the ground that
the violation of law in this case was through the
wilful negligence of the captain. How this position
is consistent with the other—that it was committed
through ignorance—is not forme (said Mr. F.) to
show, fie denied, however, that there was any-
thing wilfully wrong on the part either of the cap-
tain or owners. What object could they haw?
Men do not act without motive. If they were
American citizens, as he averred them to be,
then they had no fact to conceal in order to
obtain the privileges rightfully attaching to Ameri-
can ships; for the sole object of the law is to con-
fine these privileges to vessels both owned and com-
manded by American citizens. Being American citi-
zens, they had no inducement to avoid a compliance
with (he requirements of the law. The fee to be
paid to the collector for the endorsement is one dol-
lar. Can any mortal suppose that, to avoid the
payment of this petty fee, they would incur the
risk, he might say certainty, of paying subsequent-
ly, and at no distant period, a hundred dollar^ for
it was a matter that must sooner or later be known.
The register must, some time or other, be sur-
rendered at the custom-house; and then, the omission
being discovered, the fine would inevitably have to
be paid. I am persuaded (said Mr. F.) that even
the honorable Senator from North Carolina, on fur-
ther reflection, will he satisfied that there could have
been nothing wilfully wrong in any of these parties.
Eut perhaps, Mr. President, (said Mr. F.)'I have
Hid more than was necessary—probably I have.
But, having been a piece of a sailor myself when a
boy, I cannot help feeling a deep interest in whatever
concerns them. And no class of men, sir, are more-
deserving our sympathy and regard. No class of
men are exposed to greater perils, endure more fa-
tigue, suffer more hardships, labor more severely
for their pittance of wages, or show more true gene-
rosity and philanthropy in expending those wages,
than sailors. The technicalities of law they know
nothing about. Unwary and unsuspecting, they
are too often a prey for the vile rapacious land-shark.
The hard earnings of years often slip through their
fingers in as many days; and not unfrequently
through their too liberal indulgence of the better, no-
ble r feelings of our nature. If, sir, the object of the
law was to set a trap to ensnare the poor sailor and
supply the wants of the treasury by petty exactions
from his hard earnings, then this bill ought not to
pass. But, if the whole object of the law has been
attained, the master and owners being American
citizens, and the violation of the law was wholly
unintentional and without any design whatever to
defraud the treasury, then I trust the bill will pass.
Mr. HAYWOOD said the amount involved in
this bill was of no importance; it was the principle
involved which made it a matter of some importance.
He wished to satisfy his own conscience, without
regard to sympathy for the individual. The indi-
vidual commanded nothing of his sympathy, except
what belonged to him as a legislator. The question
involved was, whether they would take from the
treasury money to relieve an individual who had
committed, an admitted and palpable violation of
the law of the land—a law known to exist, and the
provisions of which were understood. According to
his understanding of the matter, it was for a wilful
omission of duty, and not corrupt, that the law im-
posed the penalty. If a man is bound by law to do
a duty, and he knows that duty, and fails to do it,
he commits, an act which, in the meaning of the law,
subjects him to the penalty of it. Such was his case.
The principle involved is an important one, whether
there was a precedent or no precedent. If the pre-
cedent was disregarded by the rejection of the bill, the
consequence would be, a great saving of money—
money which belonged to the hospital fund. The
law provides that these penalties shall be exacted
for the benefit of the decriped sailor who served his
country until he couid serve it no longer. Congress,
however, has provided the remedy ill cases of this
kind. He. could, by application to the district judge,
and by giving notice to the district attorney, have
procured a remission of the fine if the facts of the
case warranted it. The Secretary of the Treasury
has the power to remit the penalty. He whose
property is forfeited to the country by omission,
or neglect of duty, was not entitled to sympathy.
The payment of the forfeiture was an admission of
his guilt. There was a tribunal organized, before
which the party aggrieved could prove a statement
of facts, and obtain redress. But gentlemen say
that the money cannot be taken from the ^treasury
unless by special law. Because money cannot be
taken from the treasury, except by law for that pur-
pose, is no reason a law should be annulled, or ren-
dered impracticable. Let this individual make his
proof to the Secretary of the Treasury, though the
proper channel, as required by the law; and if that
officer would furnish a certificate of the remission of
the fine, an appropriation could then be made to
cover the amount. It was not proper to pass such
a bill, unless the petitioner set forth in his petition
the reason why he did not apply to the Secretary,
or do as the law directed. He did not deny that
there were precedents to justify the passage of the
law. There are plenty of them. But we should
not follow precedents, when they are improper.
That the Senate had the power to pass tins bill, he
did not deny.
Mr. HUNTINGTON had-already endeavored
to give an explanation of the grounds on which the
committee reported the bill. He again went into a
history of the case. The vessel was ready for sea; she
cleaved; the former master declined going, and this
captain took ohargc of the vessel and sailed, without
reflecting that he had not endorsed his name on the
register. If it was right, under any circumstances,
for Congress to interfere, this was a case which de-
manded their interference. Power, it is true, is given
to the Secretary to remit the fine. But the circum-
stances in which the captain was? placed—being in a
foreign port—rendered it impracticable for him to
comp'y with the law. He submitted whether, un-
der the circumstances, it would not have cost the
captain more, by delay, and by going through tile
to prevent the fine, than by paying it. The
gentleman from North Carolina suggests that
this penalty goes to the navy hospital fund.
He did not understand that it did. If it does,
the committee have come to the conclusion, that,
though the party in the bill committed a vio-
lation of the law, it was not an intentional vio-
lation, and should be indemnified. The case is
so plain, that we have been told by the Sec-
retary, that, if the facts had been laid before him at
a proper time, he would have refunded the money.
But the captain was prevented from complying with
the law, and now asks relief at the hands of Con-
gress.
The bill was then read the third time, and passed
—ayes 24, noes not counted.
On motion by Mr. FOSTER, the Senate proceed-
ed to the consideration of executive business; and
after some time spent therein, adjourned till Monday
next.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Thursday, January 11,1844.
The journal having been read and approved,
Mr. BROWN of Indiana moved that the rules be
suspended, for the purpose of receiving from the
standing committees of the House such reports as
would give rise to no debate; which motion was
agreed to.
The standing committees were then severally
called on by the SPEAKER for reports, and the
following were made:
Mr. SMITH of Indiana, from the Committee on
Commerce, to which had been referred the petition
of William Neilson, praying compensation for ex-
tra services, made an adverse report thereon; which
was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. DAVIS of Indiana, from the'Committce on
Public Lo.tw.ls, to which had been referred the peti-
tion of the heirs of Elihu Hall Bay, moved that
the committee be discharged from the further con-
sideration thereof, and that the same be referred to
the Committee on Private Land Claims: agreed to.
FLORIDA SQUADRON.
Mr. REDING, from the Committee on Public
Expenditures, submitted the following resolution;
which was considered, and agreed to:
Resolved, That the Secretary of the Navy be di-
rected to lay before the House the expenditures of
the Florida squadron, whilst under the command of
Lieutenant John T. McLaughlin; and the settlement
of his accounts as purser for the same squadron; and
the amount of hospital and medical stores furnished
before sailing; and the amount, and the items of the
accounts,for other medical and hospital stores furnish-
ed by him while in command of the Florida squadron;
the number of men, and the length of service, under his
command; the amount of money paid him as a pur-
ser or lieutenant-commanding, or while acting in
any other capacity, during the time of his acting in
that service; whether he presented any accounts, and
for what sum beyond his pay as lieutenant-com-
manding; and the decisions thereon, and the amount
actually paid him, if any, beyond his regular pay,
and by whom allowed.
liesolved, That the Secretary of the Navy be di-
rected, further, to lay before this House any charge
or charges of misconduct, made against the said
Lieutenant John T. McLaughlin whilst in command
of the Florida expedition, and all papers connected '
therewith, and the disposition made of them by the
department; and that the said Secretary be directed
to lay before the House the proceedings of the court-
martial which tried Lieutenant Robert Tansil of the
United States marine corps, and all papers connected
with the same.
LOUrSIANA LAND CLAIMS.
Mr. BROWN of Indiana, from the Committee on
Private Land Claims, to which the subject had been
referred, reported a bill to direct the issuing of pa-
tents for confirmed land claims in the State of Loui-
siana, and for other purposes; which was twice
read, referred to the Committee of the Whole Hon^e,
and ordered to be printed.
Mr. BLACK of South Carolina, from the same
committee, made a fyvorable report on the petition
of John McLaughlin, accompanied by a bill for his
relief; which was read twice, and referred to the
Committee of the Whole House, and ordered to be
printed.
BRANCH PILOTS OF NEW ORLEANS.
Mr. POTTER, from the same committee, to which
the subject had been referred, reported a bill to author-
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Congress. The Congressional Globe, Volume 13, Part 1: Twenty-Eighth Congress, First Session, book, 1844; Washington D.C.. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth2367/m1/156/: accessed April 19, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.