Tillson v. United States
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | WAITE |
| Citation | 100 U.S. 43,25 L.Ed. 543 |
| Decision Date | 01 October 1879 |
| Parties | TILLSON v. UNITED STATES |
APPEAL from the Court of Claims.
This was a suit brought by Robert Tillson & Co. against the United States.
The Court of Claims found the following facts:——-
Page 44
'I. The claimants and the defendants entered into the various contracts and agreements set forth in the petition.
'II. The claimants, at various times between the 9th of October, 1862, and the 24th of October, 1864, delivered horse equipments and infantry accoutrements, under said contracts and agreements, to the defendants' officers at the United States arsenal in St. Louis, to the amount of $494,972.66.
'III. There were one hundred and fifteen distinct deliveries of the above-described goods made by the claimants, extending from the 9th of October, 1862, to the 24th of October, 1864; and the goods delivered were then, at the respective times of delivery, inspected and approved by the defendants' officers, and bills therefor were duly authenticated by the proper officers of the Ordnance Department, as provided by the contract, and no negligence or delay is attributable to the officers of the Ordnance Department in regard to the inspection of the goods or the issuing of the vouchers. The vouchers so received by the claimants were by them presented to the Ordnance Office in Washington, and were by the Ordnance Office transmitted to the treasury, to be audited and paid, and no delay in so transmitting them is attributable to the Ordnance Office. After the vouchers reached the Treasury Department, intervals of different length occurred before they were audited and drafts issued in payment thereof. The shortest interval between the receipt of a voucher by the Treasury Department and the issuing of the draft in payment was seven days, and the longest was one hundred and fourteen days; the average was thirty-six days. During the period of the fulfilment of their contracts and agreements, before described, the claimants' buiness necessities compelled them to borrow money by hypothecating or selling their vouchers, and the rate of discount paid by them generally was ten per cent per annum.
'IV. A portion of the payments made to the claimants upon the vouchers before described were made, to the extent of twenty-five per cent thereof, by certificates of indebtedness issued under the act of 1st March, 1862. 12 Stat. 352. These certificates were sent by mail to the claimants, accompanied by ordinary treasury drafts for the remaining seventy-five per cent of the payments. The claimants neither solicited such
Page 45
certificates nor objected to them. Being below par in the market, the claimants sold them at a discount of seven and a half per cent. The total amount of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brown & Williamson, Ltd. v. United States, No. 39-81T.
...The consent necessary to waive the traditional immunity must be express, and it must be strictly construed. Tillson v. United States, 100 U.S. 43 25 L.Ed. 543; United States v. Thayer-West Point Hotel Co. 329 U.S. 585, 67 S.Ct. 398, 91 L.Ed. 521 * * * * * * Had Congress desired to permit th......
-
Shaw v. Library of Congress, No. 82-1019
...85 L.Ed. at 780-782 (construing 48 Stat. 1322 (1934)), or "the amount equitably due," Tillson v. United States, 100 U.S. (10 Otto) 43, 46, 25 L.Ed. 543, 544 (1879). In contrast, the statutory provision before us specifically names the United States as a potential payor and stakes out the sc......
-
District of Columbia v. Langenfelder & Son, No. 87-834.
...States v. North American Transp. & Trading Co., 253 U.S. 330, 336, 40 S.Ct. 518, 521, 64 L.Ed. 935 (1920); Tillson v. United States, 100 U.S. 43, 46, 25 L.Ed. 543 (1879); Acme Process Equip. Co. v. United States, 171 Ct.Cl. 324, 347 F.2d 509, 537 (1965), rev'd on other grounds, 385 U.S. 138......
-
United States v. Gerlach Live Stock Co United States v. Potter United States v. Erreca United States v. James Stevinson United States v. Stevinson United States v. 8212 Securities Co, Nos. 4
...329 U.S. 585, 67 S.Ct. 398, 91 L.Ed. 521; United States v. Goltra, 312 U.S. 203, 61 S.Ct. 487, 85 L.Ed. 776; Tillson v. United States, 100 U.S. 43, 25 L.Ed. 543, on the question of claimants' right to interest. Unless we choose to disturb these cases we could not limit ourselves to saying t......
-
Brown & Williamson, Ltd. v. United States, No. 39-81T.
...The consent necessary to waive the traditional immunity must be express, and it must be strictly construed. Tillson v. United States, 100 U.S. 43 25 L.Ed. 543; United States v. Thayer-West Point Hotel Co. 329 U.S. 585, 67 S.Ct. 398, 91 L.Ed. 521 * * * * * * Had Congress desired to permit th......
-
Shaw v. Library of Congress, No. 82-1019
...85 L.Ed. at 780-782 (construing 48 Stat. 1322 (1934)), or "the amount equitably due," Tillson v. United States, 100 U.S. (10 Otto) 43, 46, 25 L.Ed. 543, 544 (1879). In contrast, the statutory provision before us specifically names the United States as a potential payor and stakes out the sc......
-
District of Columbia v. Langenfelder & Son, No. 87-834.
...States v. North American Transp. & Trading Co., 253 U.S. 330, 336, 40 S.Ct. 518, 521, 64 L.Ed. 935 (1920); Tillson v. United States, 100 U.S. 43, 46, 25 L.Ed. 543 (1879); Acme Process Equip. Co. v. United States, 171 Ct.Cl. 324, 347 F.2d 509, 537 (1965), rev'd on other grounds, 385 U.S. 138......
-
United States v. Gerlach Live Stock Co United States v. Potter United States v. Erreca United States v. James Stevinson United States v. Stevinson United States v. 8212 Securities Co, Nos. 4
...329 U.S. 585, 67 S.Ct. 398, 91 L.Ed. 521; United States v. Goltra, 312 U.S. 203, 61 S.Ct. 487, 85 L.Ed. 776; Tillson v. United States, 100 U.S. 43, 25 L.Ed. 543, on the question of claimants' right to interest. Unless we choose to disturb these cases we could not limit ourselves to saying t......