--*> 1 \S16i' Geneva Award, Petition Ship Delphine by K,W. Fetcalf kV GENEVA AWAED, Pi I'liTITION OF E. W. ,MCTCALF. SHIP DELPHINE. To the Jfonorahle Senate of the United States of America : The undersigned, builder, part owner, and agent for all the owners of ship Delphine^ respectfully prays that H. R. bill No. 2685 may receive 'the early and favorable consid- eration of your honorable body. The Queen's proclamation, granting belligerent rights, made it possible foi' Confederate vessels of war to exist on the ocean.^^^ Through the sympathy and assistance of the English "* The Queen's proclamation granting belligerent rights Was issued before Mr. Adams, our Minister, had been received by the British government. At his first interview he said : " I must be permitted to express the great regret I had felt on learning the decision to issue the Queen's proclamation, which at once raised the insurgents to the level of a belligerent State. * * * j^^ pronounced the insurgents to be a belligerent State before they had ever shown their capacity to maintain any kiud of warfare whatever. * * It considered them a maritime power before they had ever exhibited a single privateer on the ocean." — {Cor. concerning Claims vs. G-. B., Vol. 1, />/). 183-4.) Our Government said, Oct. 5, 1863 : " The successive prepara- tions of hostile naval expeditions in Great Britain are regarded here as fruits of that injudicious proclamation." — (^j. 270.) And Jan. 6, 1864 : " On our part, we trace all the evils to an unneces- sary and, as we think, an anomalous recognition by Her Majesty's government." * * — (^;. 273.) In the notice of our Government to that of Great Britain, that she would be held responsible for the depredations of the /Shenan- doah befoi'e she reached Australia, Mr. Adams said: " I am reluctantly compelled to acknowledge the belief that, practically, this evil has its origin in the first step taken, * * of acknowledging persons as a belligerent power on the ocean before they had a single vessel of their own to show floating upon it." — The result of that proceed- 2 Government and people, such vessels were dispatclied to prey upon American commerce/^^ Twelve yeai's ago, (Dec. 29, 18(54,) one of these ves- sels — the Shenandoah — destroyed my ship Delphine. The circumstances were such that the American people believed England should be held responsible for this and all similar destructions.'^^ ing has been that the power in qnestion, so far as it can be entitled to the name of a belligerent on the ocean at all, was actvally created in consequence of the recognition, and not before ; and all that it has subsequently attained of such a position has been thi'ough the labor of the subjects of the very country which gave it the shelter of that title in advance. Neither is the whole case stated even now. The results equally show that the ability to continue these operations with success during the Avhole term of four j'ears that the war has continued, has been exclusively owing to the opportunity to make use of this granted right of a belligerent in the courts and the ports and har- bors of the very power that furnished the elements of its existence in the outset. In other words, the Kingdom of Great Britain can- not but be regarded by the Government I have the honor to repre- sent, as not onlj' having given birth to this naval belligerent, but also as ha\'ing nursed and maintained it to the present hour. * * So far as I am aware, not a single vessel has been engaged in these depredations excepting such as have been so furnished ; unless indeed I might except one or two passenger steamers belonging to persons in New York, forcibly taken possession of whilst at Charles- ton in the beginning of the war, feebly armed, and very quickly ren- dered useless for any aggressive purpose. * * * '2' In a formal note to the British government, dated May 20, 1865, our Government declared — J^irst. That the act of recognition * * was precipitate and vmprecedented. iSecond. That it had the elfect of creating these parties belliger- ents after the recognition, instead of merely acknowledging an ex- isting fact. * * J^hurth. That diiring the whole course of the struggle in America, of nearly f(nu' years in duration, there has been no appearance of the insurgents as a belligerent on the ocean, excepting in the shape of British vessels, consti'ucted, equipped, supplied, manned and armed in British ports. * * {p. 304.) <3' Kint/i. That the injiuies thus received are of so grave a nature as in reason and justice to constitute a valid claim for reparation and indemnification. * * The nation that recognized a power as a belligerent before it had built a vessel, and became itself the sole source of all the belligerent • ••.•••••• •• •••"• ,• » • • ••• •«• ••«•« ••• • .. • ; . • • •*.*.• .• • . . Both bef oi'e ^*^ and after ^^^ my ship was destroyed, the character it has ever possessed on the ocean, must be regarded as responsible for all the damage that has ensued from that cause. — {p. 304.) * * "I have been singularly unfortunate in my corres- pondence if I have not given it to be clearly understood that a vio- lation of neutrality by the Queen's iDroclamatiou, and kindred pro- ceedings of the British government, is regarded as a national wrong and injiuy to the United States ; and that the lowest form of satis- faction for that national injury that the United States could accept would be found in an indemnity without reservation or compromise by the British government, to those citizens of the United States who had suffered individual injury and damages by the vessels of war unlawfully built, equipped, manned, fitted out or entertained and protected in the British ports and harbors. * * * " William H. Seward. '•Charles Francis Adams." — {Cor., dicated, and iiifortning his lot-dshi^) that if it is correctly stated, this Government considers that Her Majesty s government may be ^ held justly res2)onsible for any losses accruing to citizens of the ^ United States, through the depredations of the Sea King, \_Shen- ^ andoah.'] \' I am, su', youi' obedient servant, William H. Seward. "^ Charles Francis Adams, Esq., &c. i.^ — {Correspondence concerning Claima vs. Gt. Brit., Vol. 3, ji.). 330.) '5i {]^o. 1250.) Department of State, Washington, Jayi. 27, 1865. Sir : Referring to my dispatch of the 3d ultimo. No. 1171, in regard to the piratical vessel Sea King or Shenandoah, and to subsequent 4261^9 Government of the United States gave definite notice that it ^vould hold Great Britain responsible for this specific damage. After long coiTespondence and delay, England having correspondence on the subject, I now transmit a copj of a dispatch of the 29th of November last, from James Monroe, Esq., the consul of the United States at Rio de Janeiro, containing a statement in rela- tion to the destruction of ionr United States merchant vessels, with their cargoes. * * * It appears fi*om the information presented with Mr. Monroe's dispatch, that, with the exception of the name of the commander, the representation contained in my No. 1171 is corroborated. Under these circumstances I have to request you to inform Her Majesty s governmeitt that the United /States will claim redress /'or the hijuries and losses injlicted on their citi- zens by the depredations of the Sea King or Shenandoah. I am, sir, your obedient servant, ^ William H. Seward, Charles Francis' Adams, Esq., &c., &c., &c. {Correspondence, Claims, Jtc, Vol. 3, 2^- 335.) Legation of the United States, London, April 7, 18G5. My Lord : I have the honor to transmit to you a copy of a letter addressed to the Secretary of State at Washington, by the consul of the United States at Rio Janeiro, Mr. Monroe, making a report of the depredations committed upon the commerce of the United States by the vessel known in the port of London as the Sea King, but since transformed into the Shenandoah by a process already fully explained in a note which I had the honor to address to yoiu* lordship on the 18th November last. I regret to be obliged to add that this same vessel has been, since the date of JMi*. Monroe's letter, heard of at Melboiu'ne, from which place further details of similar outrages have been received * * * * Were there any reasons to believe that the operations, carried on in the ports of Her JMajesty's kingdom and its dependencies to main- tain and extend this systematic depredation upon the commerce of a friendly people, had been materially relaxed or prevented, I should not be under the })ainfnl necessity ojt' amioufici/ig to your lordship the fact that my Governuient cannot aoold entailing upon the gov- ernment of (rreat Jiritain the resjyonsibility for this damage. * * In view of all these circumstances, I am instiiicted, while insist- ing on the protest heretofore solemnly entered against that proceed- ing, further respectfully to represent to your lordship that, in the opinion of my Government, the gi'ounds on which Her Majesty's government have rested their defence against the responsibility in- cuiTed in the manner heretofore stated, for the evils that have fol- lowed * * have now failed. * * * Charles Francis Adams. Right Hon. Earl Russell, &c., &c., &c. {Same, j). 345.) refused to meet this responsibility, the President of the United States, in a message to Congress, December 5, 1870, recommended that the claims of private citizens who had suffered like myself should be audited and paid by the United States, and held by this Grovernment against England.^6) Before there was time for Congress to act on this ad- vice, the Joint High Commission was appointed, to which, at its fourth conference, the American Commissioners pro- posed that it should then and there agree upon a gross " sum which should be paid by Great Britain to the United States in satisfaction of all the claims." The British Commissioners declined this proposal, but the Conunission framed the Treaty of Washington, by which " all the claims growing out of the acts of the sev- eral vessels " were referred to the Greneva Tribunal. The Treaty established three new rules of international obligation, under Avhich it required the Tribunal to decide cei"tain international questions, but by Art. VII it author- ized the Tribunal, " if it thought proper," to do what the English Commissioners had declined to take the responsi- bility of doing, viz : " proceed to award a sum in gross to be paid by Great Britain to the United States for all the claims referred to it." On the 14th September, 1872, ''The Tribunal, making use of the authority conferred upon it by Art. VII of the (6) " The Cabinet of Loudon, so far as its views have been ex- pressed, does not appear to be willing to concede that Her Majesty's government was guilty of auj^ negligence, or did or permitted any act, during the war, by which the United States have just cause of complaint. Our firm and uualterable convictions are directly the reverse. I therefore recommend to Congress to authorize the ap- pointment of a commission to take proof of the amount and the ownership of these several claims, on notice to the representatives of Her Majesty at Washington, and that authority be given for the settlement of these claims by the United States, so that the Govern- ment shall have the ownership of the private claims as well as the •responsible control of all the demands against Great Britain." said Treaty," awarded a gross sum, paya>)le in one year, " as tlie indemnity to be paid by Great Britain to the United States for tlie satisfaction of all the claims referred to the consideration of the Tribunal," and declared "that all the claims I'eferred to in the Treaty, as submitted to the Tribunal, are lierehij fully, perfectly, and finally set- tled, •"•' * whether the same may or not liave been pre- sented to the notice of, or made, preferred, or laid before the Tribunal." When Congress next assembled, the President, in his message, said : "It will be the province of Congress to provide for the distribution among those who may be entitled to it of their respective shares of the money to be paid, * * ■"•' it is deemed advisable that no time be lost in making an examination of the several cases in which indemnification may be due." It soon became appai'ent that opinions differed as to who wei'e entitled to it — as to what the cases were in which indemnification miiJ:ht Ije due. This difference arose from different theories as to the relation of the Government of the United States to the case and the fund. One party held that the Government, in the whole matter, acted as agent or attorney for private citizens who had claims against England; That as such attorney it had prosecuted the claims of its several clients before the great Court of Geneva; Tliat the interlocutory decisions of international ques- tions by this Court were final, as to determining wliat claims were included in and sliould be paid from the gross sum awarded; That this attorney had no discretionary right to adjudge the several cases on their merits, and to distriljute the fund collected to those who in its own judgment had suffei'ed by England's fault, to the exclusion of tho§e wliom that fault liad einichcd. This theory was earnestly and ably maintained by at- torneys for Insurance C' »mpanies, in order to establish their right by subrogation to payment, from the award, of what they had paid for destructions, without taking into account what they had received for war premiums. Hon. Mr. Ev^arts, as such attorney, referred to the claims of Insurance Companies as " placed in the hands of the Gov^ernment for collection," and said to the Judiciary Committees : " The insurer does not apply for a share of this indenmity because he lias lost money during or by reason of the war." These attorneys seemed awai'e that on no other theory than that of hard legal necessity would the American Congress and people allow such claims of Insurance Com- panies, and thus consent to pay the money to those who were enriched by the fault for which it was awarded, to the exclusion of those who, like myself, were impover- ished by that fault. Others held the theory that in the whole matter the Government of the United States acted for itself as a nation, to maintain its own honor and establish its own rights, both of which required it to use due diligence to protect its citizens from wrongful injury ; That this nation was itself the plaintiff in the great case at Geneva ; That it called upon its aggrieved citizens to appear as witnesses, not plaintiffs, at the Court ; That the nation had the right to manage the whole case in the manner it deemed best for all its people ; That, in the exercise of this right, it had wisely so con- ducted the case before the Tribunal as to insure such de- cisions as would be most advantageous to the whole nation in the future, '^'^^ reserving to itself the right to judge who '7) iVo. 18. Mr. Fish to 3Ir. Sehenck. * * * ''In this correspoudence I have gone as far as prudence would allow in intimating that we neither desu'ed or ex- 8 of those entitled to its protection had suffered loss by the acts complained of, and were therefore entitled to indem- nity from the amount recovered ; That the arbitration was between the United States and Endand, ^®^ and in no sense between the United States and its own citizens ; That the Tiibunal intentionally left this nation in pre- cisely the same relation to the " gross sum " it awarded " in satisfaction of all the claims " as the action of the Joint High Connnission would have left it to the sum agreed upon had the pro})osition for it to agree upon " a gross sum in satisfaction of all the claims " been acceded to ; pected any pecuniary award, and that we should be content with an award that a state is not liable in pecuniary damages for the indirect results of a failure to observe its neutral obligations. It is not the interest of a country situate as are the United States, with theii' large extent of sea-coast, a small navy, and smaller internal pohce, to have it established that a nation is liable in damages, &c. * * This Government expects to be in the future as it has been in the past, a neutral much more of the time than a beUigerent. , * * "Hamilton Fish." —{Papers, <&c. Vol. 2, p. 476.) " The Arbitrators, however, disposed of the question * * in a manner entirely satisfactory to this Government, and in accordance with the views and the policy which it had maintained." — {Presi- dent's Message, Dec. 2, 1872.) '8' British property was in, and British underwriters had insured the cargoes of ships which were destroyed by the Alabama. They, claiming that by the Geneva Award American citizens had been in- demnified for similar loss, asked indemnity of their government. Under the advice of the law officers the British government re- jected their claim. During debate in the British Parliament Mr. Anderson asked : " If we were obliged to pay for damage sustained by the Americans by reason of the conduct of the Alabama, why were we not equally bound to pay for the damage sustained by our own subjects by rea- son of the acts of that vessel ? " Mr. Gladstone, then Prime ]\Iinister of England, said : It ap- pears to be implied that the Government submitted the claims of certain persons not subjects of Her Majesty, to arbitration. " This is altogether a mistake. Ho claims of individuals have been submitted to arbitration in relation to the Ahdxtma. " What loas submitted to arbitration was entirely a question, be- lt oeen the two Governments.'" — {London Times, May 24, 1873.) 9 That the Government of the United States was careful to guard, by especial instruction to its counsel, against any otlier construction of the Treaty or award ; ^^> That both parties to the Treaty wished to leave the nation in that relation, therefore intentionally embodied in Art. VII of the Treaty the precise words of the orig- inal })rt)position, "which are also the precise words of the award ; Hence, that the money should be distributed in accord with the nation's obligation to protect its citizens from wrong ; That indemnity is due to those who have, through the (9) (J/^. I^lsh to Mr. Gushing, and same to Mr. Evarts and Mr. Waife.) Sir : The President having aiDpointed you one of the counsel of the United States in the matter submitted to the Tribimal of Arbi- tration, to meet in Geneva, * * it becomes necessary to give you briefly the President's instructions on the subject of yom* duties. * * The President desires to have the subject discussed as one between the two Gorermn€)its, and he dii-ects me to urge upon you strongly to secure, if possible, the award of a sum in gross. Li the discus- sion of this question, and in the treatment of the entire case, you will be careful not to commit the Government as to the disposition of what may be awarded. * * The Government wishes to hold itself free to decide as to the rights and claims of insurers, upon the termination of the case. If the value of the property cap- tured or destroyed be recovered iti the name of the Governtneiit, the distribution of the amount recovered ruill be made by this Gov- ernment, without committal as to the mode of distribution. It is expected that all such committal be avoided in the argument of counsel. * * Hamilton Fish. — {Papers, &c. Vol. 2, p. 414.) In accordance witii these instructions our counsel said to the Tribunal : " From these arrangements of the Treaty it is apparent * * Second. That these claims are all prefeiTed by the United States as a nation against Great Britain as a nation, and are to be so com- puted and paid, whether awarded as 'a sum in gross,' under the seventh article of the Treaty, or awarded for assessment of amounts, uuder the tenth article." The Tribmial acted without objection upon this statement, and ainarded " a sum in gross, in satisfaction of all the claims" — as far removed as possible from deciding whom the United States should indemnify fi-om the award. 10 fault of England, suffered such especial loss on the sea that they, after being indemnified for sucli loss, will still be, equally with all the othei" people of the United States, entitled to share in any ])art of the fund which may re- main, and that no others are entitled to it. The advocates of this theory claim that it is vindicated by all the history and record of the case. The Judiciary Committees of both Senate and House, to which the subject had been referred, after careful con- sideration reported bills based on the theory that no legal right or fiduciary ti'ust restrains Congress from the exer- cise of its own judgment in determining who were the actual, ultimate, unindemnified losers by the acts and faults complained of, and equitably distributing the fund among such losers, and such only. The House bill specifically, and the Senate bill practi- cally, provided indemnity to Insurance Companies for losses caused " by either or all cruisers bearing the Con- federate flag." Both bills required them in showing such loss to take into account the extra premiums which they had received for war risks. Tlie friends of Insurance Companies in both Senate and House made strenuous, but luisuccessful, efforts to so amend the bills as not to restrict insiu'ers to their net loss. The Senate and House each passed its bill, and in this respect just as reported by its connnittee. The bills differed broadly in their provisions. One created a new Court to adjudicate the claims on the fund; the other refeiTed them to existing Coiu'ts. One did not, the other did, provide indemnity for loss by payment of war premiinns. Neither House concurring in the other's views, a con- ference connnittee was appointed, which, having failed to agree uj)on a mode of distribution, left the whole subject 11 to the Forty-Tliird Congress, by reporting a bill (enacted and approved March 3, 1873) providing that upon the payment of the money awarded at Geneva it "shall be invested in the 5 per cent, registered bonds of the United States, to be held sul)ject to the future disposition of Congress." The money was paid by Great Britain on the 9th of September, 1873, and immediately so invested. Dui'ing the first session of the Forty-Third Congress the H. R, Judiciary Committee listened to the advocates of different theories and claims, and at last reported a bill which allowed payment to citizens and corporations of the United States out of the money paid by Great Britain — " First. For all loss, destruction, or damage by any Confederate cruiser, for whose acts the Government of the United States have made demand upon the Govern- ment of Great Britain ;" * * * and " to all insurers * * who shall show that the war premiums actually re- ceived by them did not equal in amount the losses paid by them because of property thereafterward captured and lost or destroyed by either or all of said cruiser s^ Secondly. To those who had paid a premium for war risks, and provided that Mutual Insurance Companies who have paid a loss shall be indemnified for the same. Amendments relieving Insurance Companies from the obligation to take into the account their receipts for war premiums ; also a substitute, offered by Mr. Poland, in the interest of Insurance Companies, were very earnestly insisted on by their friends, but rejected. The proviso in fay or of Jfutual Insurance Companies was stricken out by a vote of more than two to one, and the bill passed in the House by 31 majority. The Judiciary Committee of the Senate adhered to its previous action creating the Court of Commissioners of Alal)ania Claims, and reported a bill, which j)i-actically 12 gave indemnity to Insurance Companies for actual loss by- all Confederate cruisers, requiring them to deduct war pi-emiums received from tlie amount of their gross loss. It provided indemnity for other sufFerers by the Ala- bama, Florida, and their tenders, and l)y the Shenandoah after she left Melbourne, requiring tliem to deduct from their gross loss all that they had received from Insurance Conq^anies or otherwise, but as yet made no provision for private citizens who had suffered l)y the depi'edations of the other Confederate cruisers, or by payment of war premiums. As before, very earnest efforts were unsuccessfully made in behalf of Insiu'ance Companies to sti'ike out the proviso which excluded them from further pay unless they could show ultimate loss. Amendments were also oft'eretl to provide for loss by the other cruisers, and by payment of war premiums, but rejected, Senator Frelinghuysen remarking : " There is a class of claims provided for in this bill that all agree ouglit to be paid. Now do not let us burden the bill. Hereafter there will be a balance, and then provision can be made for the war premiums and the other claims," and the bill passed the Senate. On disagreement, a conference committee was appointed which adopted the Senate plan creating a new court, and including only the sufferers provided for in the Senate bill, but enacting that the balance of the money " shall be and remain a fund fi'om which Congi'ess may hereafter authorize the payment of other claims thereon." Tliis bill became law January 23, 1874. The Court which it created convened July 22, 1874, and would ex- pire by limitation January 22, 1876. At the second session of the Forty-Third Congress a bill (II. R. 471 5)" was reported from the House of Repre- sentatives Judiciary Committee, providing indemnity for loss by all Confederate cruisers not provided for by the 13 act of 1874, and dividing the ])alance among Insurance Companies and those wlio paid them the war premiums ; also a special hill (H. R. 4845) in my favor, but no action was reached in either House or Senate. It being apparent by the time the Forty-Fourth Con- gress assembled that the Court of Commissioners of Ala- bama Claims could not complete its work in the time allowed, a law was enacted extending its duration until July 22, 1876. Its labors had so far progressed as to show that a very large balance of the Geneva Award fund would be left after the claims provided for by the law of June 28, 1 874, should have been paid. The question to whom this balance should be paid at once became prominent. Bills were introduced in Senate and House, and warmly advocated by several celebrated attorneys for Insurance Companies, to give it to them, by repealing the proviso which denied them payment beyond their actual loss. Bills providing indemnity to other sufferers for such loss occasioned by all the Confederate cruisers, and by payment of war premiums, were also introduced, and re- ferred to the Judiciary Committees. A sub-committee of four members of the H. E,. Judi- ciary Committee, after careful and exhaustive examination, •unanimously agreed upon a bill which followed the theory and mode of distribution already embodied in the law of June 2-^, 1874, in that it so extended its provisions as to give indemnity (to the extent of the fund only) for — First^ actual, ultimate loss, caused by all the Confed- erate cruisers ; Second, for such loss by payment of war premiums, thus providing the same redress for other Insurance Com- panies and for other sufferers as was already provided by the law for most of the Insurance Companies. For, althouo-h the lltli section of the law of 1874 14 seemed to .idniit only damage caused by the Alahama, Florida, and tlieir tenders, and the Shenandoah after Mell)onrne, the 12th section allowed Insurance Compa- nies whicli liad lost by either of these cruisers, and thus obtained a standing in the Court, in making up their account to include all they had paid for destructions by all the Confedei'ate cruisers, and also all they had paid for wai' premiums. This bill, however, went beyond the theory of the law of 1874 (which allowed indemnity only to tlie extent of actual loss) in that it ])rovided that if a l>alance of the fund should remain after paying for actual loss, rather than return it to Enoland or cover it into the United States Treasury, it should be given to Insurance Compa- nies in payment beyond their net loss. The H. R. Judiciary Committee adopted this bill, and reported it to the House. A minoi'ity of the committee, headed by Mi', Knott, its chairman, adopted the theory that the tindings of the Tri- bunal at Geneva left no discretionary power to the Gov- ernment of the United States as to the distril)ution of its award. They I'eported a substitute repealing tlie proviso which restricted Insiu-ance Companies to indemnity for their net loss, and suggested that, should there still be a surplus, " national honor would perhaps require that it shoidd be returned to Great Britain," This minority report was rejected, receiving but 35 votes. Tlie bill of the committee was so amended as not to pay Insurance Com})anies beyond their actual loss, but to leave unex])ended any balance which might remain, thus making it accord exactly with the theory of existing law. As thus amended, the bill was passed by the House of Representatives, July 6, 1876. No action was reached 'in the Senate, except to pass a 15 bill, which became law, extending the duration of the Conrt until January 1, 1877. Meantime the anxiety of attorneys for Insurance Com- panies to have the proviso requiring them to account for their receii)ts for Avar premiums repealed was explained by the proceedings of the Coui-t of Alabama Claims, which show that most insurers were benefited instead of injured by the faults of England complained of by the United States. Only three companies showed a net loss, and these for an aggregate of only $116,870.70, for which amount they received the judgments of the Court.^^^^ Of this $59,850.99 was paid by these Insurance Com- panies for war premiums on reinsured risks, and $57,- 019.71 was net loss by destructions of property. A few Insurance Companies who lost to a small amount were not admitted by Article II of the law. These are provided for in the bill as it passed the House, and awaits action in the Senate. In view of these facts I humbly, but earnestly, ask that this bill may receive prompt and favorable attention by the Senate, that I may thus receive the indemnity which I so fidly believe is justly my due, and for which I have waited so long. The beneficiaries of this bill have, in common with all the people of the United States, and in addition to their losses on the sea, for which this bill pro- vides, sustained on the land their full share of all the hardships, dangers, losses, and expenses of the war. If, after the provisions of this bill are fully met, there shall remain a balance of the fund for the benefit of all the nation, no men in all the nation will be more justly entitled to a share of that balance than those for whose extraordinary losses this bill provides. E. W. METCALF, Builder of ship Deljyhine. (10) The Commercial Mutual Marine, claim No. 1089 ; The Ocean Mutual, claim No. 1093 ; The Mutual Marine, claim No. 1098. (all of New Bedford.) 4261?9 AN ACT for the distributiou of the unappropriated moneys of the Geneva award. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assenihled. That it shall be the duty of the Court of Commissioners of Alabama Claims, in the mode and subject to all the conditions, limitations, and provisions of chapter four hundi-ed and fifty-nine of the laws of the Forty-third Congress, except as changed or modified by this act, to receive and examine the claims mentioned in section two of this act, and to en- ter judgment for the amounts allowed therefor in two classes, sucli claims to be tiled with the clerk of said court within six months from the passage of this act ; and said court is hereby continued until July twenty-second, anno Domini eighteen hundred and sev- enty-seven. Sec. 2. That the first class shall be for claims directly resulting from damage done on the high seas by Confederate cruisers during the late rebellion, including vessels and cargoes attacked or taken on the high seas or pui'sued therefrom, although destroyed within four miles of the shore, except as provided for in section eleven of said chapter four hundred and fifty-nine. The second class shall be for claims for the payment of premiums for war-risks, whether paid to corporations, agents, or individuals, after the sailing of any Con- federate cruiser. Sec. 3. That in examining claims in the second class, it shall be the duty of the court to deduct any sum in any way received by or repaid to the claimant, diminishing the amount paid for any such premium, so that the actual loss of the claimant only shall be al- lowed. Sec. 4. That the judgments rendered by said court under this act shall be paid by the Secretary of the Treasury out of the sum of money paid to the United States pursuant to article seven of the treaty of Washington, and accruing tlierefrom, not appropriated to claims provable under the j^rovisions of said chapter four hundred and fifty-nine, and the act extending the time for the filing of claims thereunder. • Sec 5. That judgments entered in the first class shall be paid be- fore judgments of the second class are paid. If the sum of money so unappropriated shall be insufficient to pay the judgments of the first class, they shall be paid according to the proportions which they severally bear to the whole amount of such una^ipropriated sum. If such sum shall be sufficient to pay the judgments of the first class, and not sufficient to pay the judgments of the second class, the lat- ter judgments shall be paid according to the projiortions which they severally bear to the residue of such unappropriated sum. Sec. 6. That in all other respects the said judgments shall be re- ported and paid in the mode provided for the payment of judgments by said chapter foiu' hundred and fifty-nine, and the act providing I below for the payment of judgments rendered and to be rendered there- under. Sec. 7. That all claims filed, or that may hereafter be filed, in said Court in the name of one or more claimants, relatiupr to a vessel in which other claimants are interested, shall be deemed and held to be legally filed the same as if all the parties in interest had joined in the filing of the petition. Passed the House of Re])resentatives July 6, 1876. Attest: GEO. M. ADAMS, Clerk. \ r« . o y ) AT LOS ANGELES UBRARY r This DOOK IS i^ U Xj uii "'"'^ '^^ date stamped below ijiT'-^ FEB 1 3 1962 '9L JAU 5 W uX.-V.4^36^ mt2 UC SOUTHERN Rtbiu AA 000 517 3 5m-6,'41(3644)