« AnteriorContinuar »
tial payment first to the accumulated interest and then to the
principal. Such recovery is not properly interest within the
prohibition of section 177 of the Judicial Code. Mattern et al.,
See also Dent Act; Sovereignty.
Notice by the Comptroller General to a claimant that if he de-
sired a review of the settlement "he should not accept pay-
ment of the amount allowed as to such item, and that the
check inclosed should not be cashed if its amount includes
any item as to which review is applied for,” does not preclude
the claimant from suing for the balance alleged to be due,
when in cashing the check he advises the Comptroller General
that the sum tendered is accepted in part payment only and
that the right to claim the remainder is reserved. Benedict,
See also Settlement Contracts, I (1); Taxes, VII, XVII.
Where the books of account, upon which a case is based, in-
volve an enormous number of entries, it is sufficient if they are
verified on the stand by a supervising officer who knew them
to be the books of regular entries kept in the establishment
and which were relied upon in the regular course of the busi-
And expert testimony as to the result of a calculation
made therefrom is not to be excluded merely because the
witness was an accountant of the party not bearing the
burden of proof. Dold Packing Co., 525.
See also Contracts, IV (1), XV; Patents, (1); Pay, X; Postal
Service, I; Practice and Procedure, I; Settlement Contracts,
III; Taxes, VII, XVII, XXIII.
See Jurisdiction, I; Settlement Contracts, II, IV.
See Postal Service, II; Sovereignty; Tenure of Office.
See Taxes, IX.
See Indians, II.
GRAVES REGISTRATION SERVICE.
See Pay, I.
I. A treaty between the United States and Indian tribes is a
part of the supreme law of the land, and can not be re-
formed by the courts or treated by them as inoperative.
The power to make, modify, or abrogate is political and
with Congress, which can not assign to the courts duties
not properly judicial. Osage Tribe of Indians, 64.
II. Gratuities can not be recovered in the Court of Claims in
the absence of an enabling act. The special jurisdictional
act of February 6, 1921, did not contemplate the recovery
of gratuities to the Osage Tribe of Indians where the con-
clusion of the court was against the tribal claim, nor did
the act direct a consideration of counterclaims against the
individuals of the tribe. Id.
See also Constitution.
On a mandate of the Supreme Court, filed in the Court of
Claims June 27, 1927, directing judgment in a tax case in
favor of plaintiff with interest to date of judgment, interest
is not allowable under the amendment of May 29, 1928, to
sec. 177, Judicial Code, notwithstanding pending disposition
of an additional claim, the judgment was not settled by the
Comptroller General until after the effective date of the amend-
ment. White Dental Mfg. Co., 624.
See also Eminent Domain; Jurisdiction, IV; Taxes, XI, XXVII.
I. Reimbursement of deficits during Federal control; trans-
portation act of 1920. Niagara Junction Ry. Co., 204.
II. Section 8 of the act of March 4, 1925, 43 Stat. 1269, 1273,
authorizing the Secretary of the Navy to investigate and
report upon claims under certain fixed-price contracts, does
not afford exclusive relief or create an exclusive forum.
Electric Boat Co., 333.
III. The courts have jurisdiction to review the determination
of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue of the value of
property for purposes of taxation. Mimnaugh, jr., execu-
IV. (1) Where Congress has made an appropriation to pay in-
terest as specified in the judgment of a court, claim for
such interest is founded upon a law of Congress, section
145, Judicial Code, and cognizable by the Court of Claims,
notwithstanding the judgment was rendered in another
court, and on a cause of action over which the Court of
Claims did not have jurisdiction. (2) In giving judg-
ment for the interest so specified and appropriated for
down to the date of its own judgment, the Court of
Claims is not allowing interest on a claim. (3) The
award of interest by the court rendering the original judg-
ment is res adjudicata, and the Court of Claims can not
review such decision. Benedict, trustee, 437.
See also Contracts, XVIII; Indians, I, II; Postal Service, I;
Statute of Limitations; Taxes, I, XVIII, XXIV.
See Tenure of Office.
Although there may be no express covenant in a written lease
to repair or to leave the premises in as good condition as
when received, there is an implied covenant against volun-
tary waste. Italian National Rifle Shooting Society of the
United States, 418.
See also Taxes, XL.
See Postal Service, II.
MARINE CORPS PAY.
See Pay, VII, VIII; Tenure of Office.
See Postal Service, I.
See Pay, III, VI, VII, IX, X, XI.
PANAMA CANAL PAY.
See Pay, VII.
(1) The special jurisdictional act of March 3, 1927, requires a
rendition of judgment as to legal liability on facts here-
tofore reported to Congress, and validity of a patent in-
volved therein is not res adjudicata where the judgment
of another court affirming the validity did not rest upon
proof of abandonment which was thereafter reported to
Congress by the Court of Claims.
(2) The special jurisdictional act of March 3, 1927, requires
the application of the statutory law in force and in exis-
tence at the time the controversy arose and continued.
Colgate, administrator, 667.
See also Taxes, V.
I. His contract of hire with the Quartermaster Corps, United
States Army, in connection with the Graves Registration
Service, being for services abroad and for a specified com-
pensation per annum, the plaintiff was not entitled to the
bonus provided by section 7, act of March 1, 1919, 40 Stat.
1213, 1267. Wall, 23.
II. Under the act of June 30, 1922, 42 Stat. 721, plaintif,
retired as a captain, Philippine Scouts, October 31, 1918,
was promoted to the grade of major on the retired list
effective January 1, 1923. He was never at any time
prior to his retirement a captain in the Regular Army,
by reason thereof could not have been a major in the
Philippine Scouts, and was not entitled, prior to January
1, 1923, to the retired pay of a major, notwithstanding
length of active service. The act of June 10, 1922, granted
him the retired pay of a captain, which he duly received
from and after cessation of active duty on the retired
list July 1, 1922, up to the date of his promotion to a
majority, and this he was entitled to retain. De Court,
III. An officer of the Navy, detached from duty and ordered to
his home to await further orders, has been ordered to
make a permanent change of station within the meaning
of section 12 of the act of May 18, 1920, as amended by
the act of June 10, 1922, providing for reimbursement of
cost of transportation of wife and dependent child or
children. Bullard, administratrix, 264.
IV. Training for commission; act of June 15, 1917; overseas
school. Brown, 407.
V. The act of June 15, 1917, was a deficiency appropriation
and did not authorize pay at the rate of $100 per month
beyond June 30, 1918, to enlisted men in training for
commissions. Nor was said rate authorized by the ap-
propriation act of July 9, 1918, or of November 4, 1918.
VI. An officer of the Navy, whose resignation was accepted
July 28, 1923, was thereafter, on March 17, 1927, in pur-
suance of the relief act of March 3, 1927, and after com-
pliance with its provisions, commissioned as a lieutenant
commander and immediately retired. Held, (1) that he
was not entitled to retired pay prior to his commission,
and (2) under the act of June 10, 1922, by resigning in
1923, he surrendered his right to count previous service
while a midshipman in computing longevity pay, and
being an officer appointed after July 1, 1922, was entitled
to count active commissioned service only. Hoffman, 452.
VII. The retired pay of an enlisted man of the Marine Corps is
not “official salary” within the meaning of section 4 of
the act of August 24, 1912, establishing a permanent or-
ganization for the Panama Canal, and providing for tbe
deduction from the salary or compensation of its em-
ployees the official salary, if any, paid them for naval or
military service. Calhoun, administrator, 545.
VIII. Appointment as an officer in the Marine Corps without the
examination prescribed by the act of August 29, 1916, is
not valid, and suit can not be maintained by the de facto
officer for uniform gratuity not paid him. Aikins, 622.
IX. The question of dependency of a Navy officer's mother on
him for her chief support is one of fact, to be determined
by the mother's station in life and other special circum
stances. Tomlinson, 697.
X. Section 4 of the act of June 10, 1922, does not intend that
the dependent mother should receive only the bare neces-
sities of life, but contemplates the mother's station in
life. The question of dependency is one of fact in which
the moral obligation of other children to support the
mother does not enter. Haas, 718.
XI. Where no quarters are assigned to an officer of the Navy
for the occupancy of himself or his dependents, he is
entitled under the act of June 10, 1922, as amended by the
act of May 31, 1924, to rental allowance as an officer with
dependents. This is so notwithstanding the dependents are
the guests of an officer of the Marine Corps in quarters
assigned thereto. Glennon, 723.
See also Tenure of Office.
See Practice and Procedure, I.
I. Under the acts creating and regulating the post-office money-
order system payment for lost money orders is with the
Postmaster General, upon proof satisfactory to him, and
where there has not been such proof suit can not be
maintained in the Court of Claims. Whether the Court
of Claims has jurisdiction in a case where the proof is
satisfactory to the Postmaster General, not decided.
Former Corporation, 83.
II. The ports in the Panama Canal Zone are not foreign within
the meaning of section 4009, Revised Statutes, providing
for the compensation allowable for transporting mail be-
tween the United States and foreign ports. In the absence
of a contract a carrier is entitled, for such services on a
United States steamship, prior to the act of July 3, 1926,
amending said section, to reasonable compensation only.
Luckenbach 8. 8. Co., 679.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE.
I. The Court of Claims is authorized under its forms of plead-
ing to award a judgment in accord with the facts stated
and proven, notwithstanding the absence of a count in
the pleadings for the particular recovery. Electric Boat
II. Where officers of the Government have pursued a practice
long continued, in payments made for services rendered,
such practice does not bind the Government if it was
clearly never authorized or legal. Luckenbach S. S.