I opposed the repeal of the act providing for the resumption of specie payments, January 1, 1879. In a somewhat careful speech (November 16, 1877), I insisted that the act "to strengthen the public credit" (March 18, 1869), and the resumption act of January 14, 1875, reaffirmed the original promise and renewed the pledges of the nation to redeem, when presented, its notes issued during and on account of the Rebellion, thus making them the equivalent of coin. I then, also against the prophecy of many in and out of Congress, demonstrated the honesty, necessity, and ability of the government to resume specie payment.
The act was not repealed, and resumption came under it without a financial shock, and the nation's credit, strength, honor, and good faith were maintained inviolate with its own people.
I advocated the payment of claims of loyal citizens of the insurrectionary States for supplies furnished or seized by the Union Army, necessary for its use for subsistence, but opposed payment, to even loyal citizens, of claims based on the loss or destruction of property incident to the general devastation of the war. Claims for destruction of property were the most numerous, and the most energetically pressed, and, in some instances, appropriations were made to pay them, but the great majority of them failed. The loyalty of claimants from the South was often more than doubtful. For want of a well defined rule, which it is impossible to establish in Congress, very many just claims against the United States never are paid, or, if paid, it is after honest claimants have been subjected to the most vexatious delays, and, in many instances, forced to be victimized by professional lobbyists. Many claimants have spent all they and their friends possessed waiting in Washington, trying to secure an appropriation or to pay blackmailing claim-agents or lobbyists. It is doubtful whether the latter class of persons ever really aided, by influence or otherwise, in securing an honest appropriation, though they, to the scandal of the members, often had credit for doing so. It is doubtful whether there is any case where members of either House were bribed with money to support a pending bill, yet many claimants have believed they paid members for their influence and votes.
An illustrative incident occurred when Wm. P. Frye of Maine was serving on the War Claims Committee of the House. A lobbyist in some way ascertained that Mr. Frye was instructed by his committee to report a bill favorably by which a considerable claim would be paid. The rascal found the claimant, and told him that for five hundred dollars Mr. Frye would make a favorable report, otherwise his report would be adverse. The claimant paid the sum. But for an accident Mr. Frye never would have known of the fraud, and the claimant would have believed he bribed an honest member.
I opposed the payment of a large class of claims presented for institutions of learning or church buildings destroyed by one or the other army, not so much on account of their disloyal owners, but because their destruction belonged to the general ravages of war, never compensated for, as of right, according to the laws and usages of nations.
Besides making reports on various war claims, I spoke (December 13, 1878) at some length against a bill to reimburse William and Mary College, Virginia, for property destroyed during the war, in which I collated the precedents and reviewed the law of nations in the matter of payment of claims for property destroyed in the ravages of war by either the friendly or opposing army. I also frequently participated in the debates on the floor of the House involving war claims and other important matters.
The necessity for presenting claims for the judgment of Congress results in the most grievous wrong to honest claimants, and often results in the payment of fraudulent claims through the persistency of claimants and the lack of time and adequate means for investigation. In the absence of judicial investigation according to the usual forms of procedure it quite frequently happens that fraudulent claims are made to appear honest, and hence paid. Want of time causes other, however just, to fail of consideration, thus doing incalculable injustice. The government of the United States suffers in its reputation from its innumerable failures to pay, at least promptly, its honest creditors. Thousands of bills to pay claims are annually introduced which go to committees and to the calendar, never to be disposed of for want of time. To remedy this, on April 16, 1878, I proposed in the House an amendment to the Constitution in these words:
"Article ——
"Section 1. Congress shall have no power to appropriate money for the payment of any claims against the United States, not created in pursuance of or previously authorized by law, international treaty, or award, except in payment of a final judgment rendered thereon by a court or tribunal having competent jurisdiction.
"Section 2. Congress shall establish a court of claims to consist of five justices, one of whom shall be chief-justice, with such original jurisdiction as may be provided by law in cases involving claims against the United States, and with such other original jurisdiction as may be provided by law, and Congress may also confer on any other of the courts of the United States inferior to the Supreme Court, original jurisdiction in like cases.