incurred by him, which were entirely removed by the pardon of the President, furnish a good ground of claim upon the Government for remuneration? Your committee think not. Nor can they now admit the principle, that the informer would have a valid claim for remuneration in case of pardon, even if the defendant were able to pay the penalties recovered against him. At any rate, they would require positive and unquestionable proof that the informer had been deprived of a vested right to a penalty, forfeiture, or reward, by the action or the interference of the President, or some other functionary of the Government. Such does not appear to be the fact in this case, and the committee therefore recommend the following resolution, viz: Resolved, That the prayer of the petitioner ought not to be granted. for the Committee. 2d Session. WILLIAM VAUGHAN. DECEMBER 29, 1841. Read, and laid upon the table. Mr. BURKE, from the Committee of Claims, submitted the following REPORT: The Committee of Claims, to which was referred the petition of William Vaughan, report : That the petitioner, a sailingmaster in the service of the United States, was absent from duty, on leave of absence, from March 27th, 1826, to April 17th, 1827, on which last-mentioned day he was ordered to New York for duty. Upon the receipt of that order, he applied to the Secretary of the Navy for a furlough for twelve months, which was refused; but, on a subsequent application, the Secretary granted him a furlough for six months, commencing May 21st, 1827, and ending November 21st of the same year. At the expiration of the last-mentioned period of time, he applied for a further furlough, which was denied, and at that time he alleges he reported himself for duty, but was not ordered into service until the 20th day of March, 1835. During his absence from duty, viz: from the date of his furlough until he was again ordered into service, his pay was $240 per annum; and he claims full pay, viz: $660 per annum, from the 21st day of November, 1827, the day on which he reported himself for duty, to the 20th of March, 1835, the day on which he was ordered into service. It further appears, that it was then one of the rules of the Navy Department, that an officer once on furlough is so considered, and paid, until he is again ordered into service. The petitioner did not apply for orders, nor did he receive any, until the 21st of March, 1835; and that application, under the law regulating the Navy Department approved March 3d, 1835, placed him on full pay. It appears further, in proof, that the petitioner was paid furlough or half pay from the 22d March, 1827, to the 20th March, 1835, and leave of absence pay since. The committee, therefore, cannot see the shadow of justice or equity in the claim he prefers, and they accordingly submit the following resolution, viz: Resolved, That the petitioner is not entitled to relief. 2d Session. WILLIAM TRYON. DECEMBER 29, 1841. Read, and laid upon the table. Mr. GIDDINGS, from the Committee of Claims, submitted the following REPORT: The Committee of Claims, to whom was referred the memorial of William Tryon, report : That said memorialist states that, on the 9th October, A. D. 1814, he owned and occupied a shop at Sackett's Harbor, in the State of New York, in which he had a quantity of leather, boots, and shoes; that the troops of the United States, by order of General Collins, took possession of his dwelling-house, store, and shoe shop, and threw his leather, boots, and shoes, into street, most of which was destroyed or plundered by the soldiers; and estimates his loss at five hundred dollars, which he asks to be refunded to him. This case has been twice referred to the Committee of Claims in the House of Representatives, and unfavorable reports made thereon. The committee have again examined the claim, and fully concur in the former reports, (vide manuscript reports, vol. 8, p. 227.) They find there is no evidence whatever that the house or store was occupied by the troops, or that any orders for that purpose were issued by any officer; both of which have at all times been required, before allowing claims of this description. As to the loss of the leather, shoes, and boots, there is some evidence that a loss of that kind did take place, but to what extent does not appear, or whether it was to the value of five or five hundred dollars; but it has never been the practice of this Government to pay for the wanton destruction of property destroyed by the troops of the United States, (vide manuscript reports, vol. 5, page 8, 2d sess. 16th Congress.) Officers and soldiers in the employment of Government are at all times liable for their trespasses, nor is it easily discovered how such trespasses can be supposed to render the Government responsible. The United States are no more liable for the trespasses or crimes of persons serving in the army than they are for those in the other departments of the Government, or those of private individuals. The committee, therefore, recommend to the House for adoption the following resolution: Resolved, That the petitioner is not entitled to relief. |