Miller v. United States

Decision Date26 April 1900
PartiesMILLER v. UNITED STATES.
CourtU.S. District Court — Southern District of New York

The following are the findings of fact:

I.

Claimant a citizen of the United States, was, on May 19, 1891 appointed an assistant inspector of steam vessels for the district of New York, under section 4414, Rev. St. U.S., with compensation at the rate of $2,000 per annum. He took and forwarded the oath required by law, and while holding such office of assistant inspector of steam vessels he was appointed special inspector of foreign steam vessels. Said appointment reads as follows:

II.

'Division of Appointments.
'Treasury Department, Office of the Secretary,
'Washington, D.C., May 19, 1891.
'Mr. John Miller, New York City, N.Y.-- Sir: Under the provisions of an act of congress approved August 7th, 1882, entitled 'An act to amend section 4400 of title 52 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, concerning the regulations of steam vessels,' you are hereby appointed to serve, in connection with your appointment as assistant inspector of steam vessels, as a special inspector of foreign steam vessels, without additional compensation, for the port of New York, N.Y.; the appointment to take effect from date of oath.
'(Signed) Respectfully yours,

Charles Foster, Secretary.'

III.

Thereupon the claimant took the oath therein referred to, which was in the usual form of an oath of office, and transmitted the same to the secretary of the treasury. He was not required to, and he did not, give nor offer to give the bond prescribed by statute for the office of special inspector of foreign steam vessels. From the time of taking the oath aforesaid until March 1, 1895, the claimant performed whatever duties were required of him as special inspector of foreign steam vessels at said port.

IV.

By letter dated November 20, 1893, from the secretary of the treasury, under the provisions of section 4414 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, the claimant was appointed an assistant inspector of boilers of steam vessels for the district of New York, with compensation at the rate of two thousand dollars ($2,000) per annum. Subsequently claimant accepted said appointment, and duly qualified by taking the prescribed oath of office, and by forwarding the same to the treasury department. No bond was required. He then and there entered upon the discharge of his duties, and continued to perform the same until the appointment of his successor on October 8, 1894.

V.

On or about November 20, 1893, claimant received from the secretary of the treasury a communication, of which the following is a copy:

'Division of Appointments.
'Treasury Department, Office of the Secretary,
'Washington, D.C., November 20, 1893.
'Mr. John Miller, 73 Henry Street, Brooklyn, N.Y.-- Sir: Under the provisions of an act of congress approved August 7, 1882, entitled 'An act to amend section 4400 of title 52 of the Revised Statutes of the United States concerning the regulation of steam vessels,' you are hereby appointed to serve, in connection with your appointment as assistant inspector of boilers of steam vessels, as a special inspector of foreign steam vessels, without additional compensation, for the district of New York; the appointment to take effect from data of oath, which must not be administered before December 1, 1893.
'(Signed) Respectfully yours,

W. E. Curtis, Acting Secretary.'

VI.

On or about the 20th day of November, 1893, the claimant took the oath above referred to, which was in the usual form of an oath of office, and transmitted the same to the secretary of the treasury on that date. He was not required to nor did he give or offer to give the bond prescribed by statute for the office of special inspector of foreign steam vessels. From the time of taking the oath of office the claimant performed whatever duties were required of him as special inspector of foreign steam vessels.

VII.

On or about September 8, 1894, claimant received from the secretary of the treasury a communication, of which the following is a copy:

'Division of Appointments.
'Treasury Department, Office of the Secretary,
'Washington, D.C., Sept. 7, 1894.
'Mr. John Miller, Assistant Inspector of Boilers of Steam Vessels, New York, N.Y.-- Sir: Your services as assistant inspector of boilers of steam vessels at the port of New York, Second district, are hereby discontinued, to take effect upon the appointment and qualification of your successor.
'(Signed) Respectfully yours,

...

To continue reading

Request your trial
23 cases
  • In re International Match Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • June 25, 1951
    ...by statute. Judge Lacombe, speaking for the circuit court of the United States for the southern district of New York in Miller v. United States c.c. 103 F. 413, 415, well said: `Any bargain whereby, in advance of his appointment to an office with a salary fixed by legislative authority, the......
  • Mayor and Council of Rockville v. Brookeville Turnpike Const. Co.
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • April 4, 1967
    ...in County Com'rs of Anne Arundel County v. Goodman, 172 Md. 559, 562, 192 A. 325, 326 (1937), quoting from Miller v. United States, 103 F. 413, 416 (Cir.Ct.S.D.N.Y. 1900), '* * * (A) court should be astute not to give effect to such illegal contract by indirection, as by spelling out a waiv......
  • Galvin v. Kansas City
    • United States
    • Kansas Court of Appeals
    • December 5, 1938
    ...rel. v. Neosho, 203 Mo. 40; State ex rel. v. Gordon, 251 Mo. 303. (5) Discussion of appellant's cases. Glavey v. U.S. 182 U.S. 595; Miller v. U.S. 103 F. 413; Orthwein v. City St. Louis, 265 Mo. 556. SPERRY, C. Campbell, C., concurs. Shain, P. J., and Bland, J., concur; Kemp, J., not sittin......
  • Galvin v. Kansas City, Missouri, 19126.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • December 5, 1938
    ...153 Mo. 18, 54 S.W. 439; State v. Walbridge, 153 Mo. 194, 54 S.W. 447; Glaney v. United States, 182 U.S. 595, 21 Sup. Ct. 891; Miller v. United States, 103 F. 413; Bodenhofer v. Hogan, 142 Iowa, 321, 134 A.S.R., 418, 120 N.W. 659, 19 Ann. Cas. 1037; Gallaher v. Lincoln, 63 Nebr. 339, 88 N.W......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT