• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Main














Group Title: Florida Indian War claim : S.I. Wailes answers his critics concerning his contract and demand for commissions on the Indian War Claim fund.
Title: Florida Indian War claim
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00055643/00001
 Material Information
Title: Florida Indian War claim S. I. Wailes answers his critics concerning his contract and demand for commissions on the Indian War Claim fund
Physical Description: 37 p. : ; 23cm.
Language: English
Creator: Wailes, Sidney I
Publisher: Collins Book and Job Print
Place of Publication: Tallahassee
Publication Date: 1905
 Subjects
Subject: Seminole War, 3rd, 1855-1858 -- Claims   ( lcsh )
Genre: non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00055643
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: aleph - 000130266
oclc - 01654551
notis - AAP6286

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front page 1
        Front page 2
    Main
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
Full Text
=: .* ^- :-



Florida Indian War Claim


ti



S. L WAILES


Answers His Critis Concerning His

Contract and Demand for

Commissions


-ON THE


Indian War Claim Fund






COLLINS BOOK AND JOB PRUIT
TALLAHAEB, PFLA.
905
S*





F052
V\JPa8t


4


spow


-











Foundation of Wailes' Claim.


ACTS OF THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE.
CHAPTER 3030-(No. 54).
An act to provide for the settlement of claims between the State of
Florida and the United States.
The People of the State of Florida, represented in Senate and Assembly
do enact as follows:
Section 1.-That the Governor is hereby authorized and empowered to
appoint an agent to adjust and settle all claims between the State and the
United States Government, growing out of the war with the Seminole Indiana
in the years 1856 and 1857, as well as other claims that may exist between
the two governments.
Section 2.-The expenses of such agent shall be paid out of the amount
appropriated for contingent expenses of the State, and shall not exceed the
sum of eight hundred dollars.
Section 3.-Such agent shall report to the Legislature at its next regular
session.
Approved March 2, 1877.
CHAPTER 3113-(NO. 15).
AN ACT to Provide for the Examination and Settlement of Claims
Against the State of Florida for Services rendered during the
Last Seminole Indian War, and for the Settlement of Claims of the
State of Florida against the United States
The People of the State of Florida, Represented in Senate and Assembly,
do Enact as Follows:
*
Section 5. That the Governor is hereby authorized and empowered to
appoint a Commissioner with power to proceed to Washington and to adjust
the claims of the State of Florida against the United States; and the moneys
paid by the United States, or so much thereof as may be necessary for
that purpose, shall be and are hereby appropriated for the payment of the
certificate issued as aforesaid, and to defray the expenses of the aid Board
of Commissioners; and the sum of two thousand dollars, or so much thereof
as may be necessary, from any moneys in the State Treasury not other-
wise appropriated, is hereby appropriated to defray the expenses of said
Commissioner to Washington, and the incidental expenses of the sail Com-
miisioner.
ACTS OF GOVERNOR AND CABINET.
The following letters explain themselves and furnish the basis of my
contract as Agent of the State:
Executive Oee,
Tallahassee, Fla., April 12th, 1879.
Dear Sir:-Since I wrote you a day or two since, important business
pertaining to the revenue of the State calls Col. W. K. Beard to Key West,










-2-

Florida, and he will be away about two weeks. Unless Col. Beard is here
when you are it will be almost useless for you to come to Tallahassee. I
would therefore ask that you do not come to Tallahassee until about the
5th or 6th of May. You can go on with your work, which you are doing
to our satisfaction, until you get ready to come to Florida. I feel assured
that your labors will result in much benefit to the State.
Very respectfully,
(Signed) GEO. F. DREW.
To Hon. S. I. Wailes. W.
I was repeatedly urged to name a percentage upon which I would pay
all expenses, and at first declined to take it on a contingent fee, but finally
agreed to do so, paying all expenses as indicated in the following letter:
Executive Office,
Tallahassee, Fla., June 12th, 1879.
Dear Sir:-Your favor of the 5th inst. is to hand and contents noted.
We are very well satisfied with what you have done for us so far, and we
believe that no one could have done better.
We have concluded to appoint you as State Agent to collect the Indian
War Claims, provided you will agree to associate Col. Beard with you in
the matter and pay all the expenses that have been or may be incurred by
Col. Beard or yourself in getting up the data and prosecuting the claims to
a successful termination. We will give you fifteen per cent. of whatever
you succeed in collecting upon those claims. I hope that this will be satis-
factory to you. Accept my thanks for the letter of Governor Reeds, and for
all evidences of your friendship. Respectfully,
GEO. F. DREW.

[Copy of Records of Cabinet Meeting, June 15th, 1879.]
Present: George F. Drew, Governor; W. D. Bloxham, Secretary of
State.
The following resolution was unanimously adopted, to-wit:
That the Governor be authorized to appoint S. I. Wailes, Esq., of Wash-
ington City, Agent for the State of Florida to settle the Seminole Indian
War Claini, Mr. Wailes to receive as compensation fifteen per cent. of the
moneys collected.
(Signed) L. B. WOMBWELL,
Private Secretary.

My acceptance of this offer led to the contract which is as follows:
"STATE OF FLORIDA,
"Executive Department.
"Know All Men By These Presents, That I, George F. Drew, Governor
of the State of Florida, reposing especial trust and confidence in the ability,
fidelity and prudence of Sidney I. Wailes, do hereby constitute and appoint
the said Sidney I. Wailes Agent for the State of Florida to represent the
said State before the departments of the General Government at Washington
City, and to ask, demand and receive of the Government of the United










-3-

States of America any and all sums of money due to the State of Florida
for expenses incurred by said State on account of Indiaa hostilities in said
State from the year A. D. 1849 to the year 1856, inclusive.
"The said Wailes to receive as compensation for performing the above
mentioned work, fifteen per cent. of all eume collected from the General
Government upon such Indian War Claims, and defray all expenses incurred
in the prosecution of the same.
"In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand
and caused the Great Seal of the State of Florida to be
[Seal] affixed this, the seventh day of July, in the year of our
Lord, one thousand eight hundred and seventy-nine.
"GEO. F. DREW,
"Governor.
"By the Governor-Attest:
"W. D. BLOXHAM,
"Secretary of State."
On the 9th of August, finding that the original resolution of the Cabinet
did not cover the year 1857, this additional order was made to cover it:
[Copy.]
At a meeting of the Governor and his Cabinet, held this, the 9th day
of August, A. D. 1880, the following resolution was passed:
Resolved by the Governor and his Cabinet, that the resolution of June
15th, 1879, employing and appointing S. I. Wallee, of Washington, D. C., to
represent the State of Florida before the department& of the General Gov-
ernment at Washington City, to ask, demand and receive of the United
States Government all sums of money due said State on account of Indian
hostilities in said State, be so amended as to include the year 1857.
W. N. CONOLY,
Secretary.










-4-


Laws of 1879 and 1881 Explained.


CHAPTER 3113-(No. 15).
Approved March 11, 1879.
Section 1. That the Governor is
hereby empowered to appoint three
suitable persons, who shall constitute
a Board of Commissioners, to examine
and approve or reject any and all
warrants issued by the Comptroller of
this State in payment for services reon
dered during the last Seminole Indian
war, under and by virtue of-Chapter
1175 of the laws of Florida, approved
February 8, 1861, which may be pre-
sented to said board.
Section 2. Any person presenting
any warrant as aforesaid, shall by
himself or herself, his or her agent or
attorney, make affidavit and file the
S same with the said board that he or
she is the original payee named in
said warrant and actually rendered
the services for which the same was
issued, or that he or she actually be-
came the owner of the same for a
valuable consideration and without
notice of any defect in the said war-
rant, or that he or she are the legal
heirs or assigns of the original payee,
or of the bona fide purchaser of the
warrant or warrants presented, and
shall produce such other evidence as
to the validity of the original claim
for which the said warrant was is-
sued, or any part thereof, as the said
board may in each'case deem proper
and be satisfactory to said board.
Section 3. Every warrant examin-
ed and approved shall be endorsed
by the Chairman of said board and
deposited with the Comptroller; and
the" Comptroller shall thereupon make
and deliver to the owner or holder of
such warrant his certificate, under
Sthe seal of his office, that the warrant
specified therein had been so ex-
amined, approved and surrendered,
and that the holder of said certificate
is entitled to the amount of said war-
rant
Section 4. That the said board
shall, without unnecessary delay, give
such public notice as it may deem
necessary for all persons holding
said warrants to present the same
for examination.


It will be seen upon examination
that sections 2, 3 and 4 were for one
purpose, viz: An examination of the
outstanding warrants Issued by the
State of Florida; and there were ap-
pointed as Commissioners under that
law: General Robert Bullock, W. C.
Brown and W. K. Beard. General
Bullock and W. K. Beard made a re-
port to Hon. W. D. Bloxham, Jan. 20,
1881. (See pages 291 to and including
309, Florida House Journal, 1881).
In his testimony before the Senate
Judiciary Committee at Tallahassee,
1903, Governor Bloxham under oath
said:
"I will state that Col. Beard oc-
cupied %wo positions with the State.
He was engaged also in looking up
the claims of old soldiers against the
State, which the State had not paid.
The Legislature passed an act cre-
ating a commission to ascertain what
the State of Florida owed to the old
soldiers and had not paid, and Col.
Beard was engaged in this work. The
commission appointed consisted of
Col. Beard, Gen. Bullock and W. C.
Brown."
Under this law the following com-
missioners were appointed to com-
plete the work: George W. Walker,
Chas. F. Hall and W. H. Long










-5--

The commission appointed under
the act of 1879 did not complete its
work, and in consequence thereof and
the death of one of its members, the
following supplemental act, chapter
3930, was passed in 1889:
S"An act Supplemental to an Act to
provide for the Examination and set-
tlement of the Claim against the
State of Florida for Services Rena
dered during the last Seminole Indian
War." Approved March 11th, 1879.
Whereas, By an act of the Legis-
lature of the State of Florida entitled,
"An Act to provide for the Examina-
tion and settlement of the Claims
against the State of Florida for Ser-
vices Rendered during the last Sem
tole Indian War; approved March
11th, 1879, the Governor did, in pur-
suance thereof, appoint three Commie-
sioners for the purpose therein set
forth; and whereas, said Commisc
stoners, on account of the death of Col.
William K. Beard (one of eaid Com-
missionere) in the year 1881, did not
complete the work of examination and
settlement as provided by said act;
and whereas it is important to many
of the citizens of this State who have
been for many years kept out of their
just pay for services rendered in eaid
Indian war,
Be it enacted by the Legislature of
the State of Florida:
Section 1. That the Governor be
empowered to appoint three suitable
persons to act as Commiasioners to
examine and settle said claims, as
provided in section one, two, three
and four of said act 'And said Com-
missioners shall be authorized to
take possession of all warrants, ac-
counts and other papers left by the
late W. K. Beard, pertaining to said
war claims, for the purpose of carry-
ing out the provisions of said act.
Section 2. That said Commission-
ers shall receive such compen-
sation for their services as may be
allowed by the Governor as reason-
able and Just to be paid upon accounts
approved by him.
Section 3. That when said Comn
missioners shall examine and ap-
prove any warrant or claim as pro-
vided for in said act, they shall de-
posit the same in the Comptroller's





/ "


S\










-6-

office with an endorsement thereon
to that effect.
Section 4. When the claim of the
State of Florida against the United
States for and on account of expendi-
tures in eaid Indian war shall be set-
tied and paid over to the State Treas-
urer, the Comptroller shall draw his
warrant on said Treasurer to pay
such claims as have been examined
and approved, and so endorsed and
led with him by said Commissioners,
with the same rate of interest as the
United States Government shall al-
low the State in the settlement of its
claims.












Wailes Answers His Opponents.


On the first day of July, 1902, what is popularly known as the Indian
War Claim, amounting to one million, eighty-nine thousand, one hundred
and fifty-eight dollars and sixty-six cents, was paid to the State of Florida
by the United States. At that time the Hon. W. B. Lamar was Attorney-
General of the State, had been since 1889, and continued to be until March
3, 1903, when he resigned and J. G. Whitfield was appointed Attorney-Gen-
eral on that day by Governor W. S. Jennings. On the day that Mr. Whit-
field was appointed Attorney-General, namely, March 3, 1903, he rendered
a voluminous opinion at the request of Governor Jennings, attacking the
validity of the contract entered into by Governor Drew with Col. S. I.
Walles. It is a remarkable fact that Governor Jennings did not ask and
obtain the opinion of Mr. Lamar, who had been Attorney-General for twelve
years; who was familiar with the contract and work done by the agents
under the contract, and who had from July 1, 1902, the day of the payment to
the State by the United States, to March 3, 1903, the day of his resignation,
to have investigated the question and given an intelligent and honest
opinion.
Governor Jennings was fully advised that Col. Wailes- and the Beard
estate demanded the commissions under the contract made by Governor
Drew with Col. Wailes. Major W. E. Wailes, representing S. I. Wailes and
himself, made a demand on Governor Jennings in July, 1902, for these com-
missions; John S. Beard, representing the estate of W. K. Beard, deceased,
made a similar demand in September, 1902, and Col. S. I. Wailes, with whom
the contract was made by Governor Drew, made a similar demand on Gov-
ernor Jennings in November, 1902. The fact that Governor Jenaings
neglected for nearly'nine months to get the opinion of Mr. Lamar, Attorney-
General, as to the obligation of the State under the contract of Col. Wailes,
and secured the opinion of Mr. Whitfield (whose commission as Attorney-
General was not then a day old), upon this important matter, forces the
conclusion that the Governor knew that Mr. Isnar'e opinion would have
protected the honor of the State, and that he, Governor Jennings, and Mr.
Whitfleld had agreed upon the opinion to be rendered by Mr. Whitfeld
before Mr. Whitfield's appointment as Attorney-General, and that this
opinion of Mr. Whitfield was the consideration for his appointment to the
office of Attorney-General. Note that Mr. Whitfeld's opinion, dated March
31, the same date as his commission, purported to be based upon, and in
terms therein referred to, a letter received by Mr. Whitield dated February
28th, 1903, at which time the Stte had an Attorney-General who had served
for twelve years.
In order to emphasize the answer to every argument (socalled) that has
been advanced for the purpose of defeating the Wailes claim and contract,
both are here given in the "deadly parallel column:"










-8-


WHITFIELD'S OPINION.
[Extract from House Journal, 1903,
April 15, pages 265 et seq.]
By Mr. Gilchrlr.:
House Resolution No. 45:
Be it resolved by the House of Rep-
resentatives, That the following opin-
ion of the Attorney-General of the
State of Florida be spread upon the
Journal of the House as information.
This is an opinion relating to the
validity, power, and effect of the in-
strument of writing appointing S. I.
Walles as agent for the State in cer-
tain matters.
Mr. Gilchrist moved the adoption
of the resolution.
Which was agreed to.

OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY-GEN-
ERAL.
Office of the Attorney-General.
Tallabasee, Fla., March 3rd, 1903.
To His Excellency, W. S. Jennings,
Governor of Florida, Tallahassee,
Fla.
Sir:-I have the honor to acknowl-
edge the receipt of your letter of Feb-
ruary 28th, 1903, in which you state
that your predecessor, Honorable
George F. Drew, appointed Mr. Sidney
I. Wailes agent for the State of Flor-
ida, under an instrument of writing,
of which the following is a copy:
State of Florida,
Executive Department.
Know all men by these presents,
that I, George F. Drew, Governor of
the State of Florida, reposing special
trust and confidence in, the ability,
fidelity and prudence of Sidney I.
Wailes, do hereby constitute and ap-
point the said Sidney I. Wailes, Agent
for the State of Florida, before the
department at Washington City, and
to ask and demand and receive of the
government of the United States any
and all sums of money due the said
State of Florida for expenses in-
curred by said State on account
Indian hostilities in said State from
the year 1849 to the year 1856 in-
clusive.
The said Wailes to receive as com-
pensation for performing the above
work fifteen per cent. of the sums


OPINIONS OF VARIOUS COURTS.
[Cited by the Senate Judiciary
Committee, 1903.]
In Mo. ex rel, vs. Walker, 125, U. S.
339, "A contract made under authority
of the statute by a State with an in-
dividual to procure at his own ex-
pense before Congress and the depart-
ments certain specified claims of the
State against the United States, and
to receive as full compensation for
his services a certain rate or com-
mission on the amount collected by
him," was held to constitute an agen-
cy and to be recoverable until con-
summated by the performance of the
work. If the appointment had crea-
ted an office, it could not have been
revoked and the officer could only
have been removed for causes desig-
nated by law.
Chief Justice Marshall says: "Al-
though an office is an employment, it
does not follow that every employ-
ment is an office." "A nman may cer-
tainly be employed under a contract,
express or implied, to do an act or
perform a service without becoming
an officer." In Hall vs. Wis. 103 U. S.
5, it was held that the commissioners
appointed to make a gelogical survey
of the State under an act naming
them, were not officers, but were con-
tractors with the State under a con-
tract made by the. Governor with them
in pursuance of the act. One of the
commissioners who was involved was
a non-resident of the State The
court says: "The legal position of
the plaintiff in error (commissioner)
was not materially different from that
of parties who pursuant to law enter
into stipulations limited in point of
time with a State for the erection,
alteration or repair of public build-
ings or to supply the officers or em-
ployees who occupy them with fuel,
light, stationery, and other things nec-
essary for the public service."
In U. S. vs. Hatch, 1 Pinney, 182,
the Supreme Court of Wisconsin held,
that the term "office" embraces
"only those officers in whom a portion
of the sovereignty of the State is In-
vested, or to whom the enforcement
of municipal regulations or the con-









-9-


collected from the General Govern-
ment upon such Indian War Claim
and to defray all expenses incurred
in the prosecution of the same.
In testimony whereof, I have here-
unto set my hand and caused the
Great Seal of the State of Florida to
be attached, this 16th day of July A.
D. 1879.
GEO. F. DREW, Governor.
(Seal) Attest: W.D. Bloxham, Sec.
State.
You asked to be advised as to the
validity, power and effect of the above
Instrument, and request that I fur-
nish you with an opinion on this sub-
ject covering the following points:
(1.) Does this appointment carry
with it the powers &nd functions suf-
ficient to create an office and make
the appointee an officer?
(2.) If so, what were the powers
and duties of the appointee there-
under?
(3.) Is this commission or au-
thority in force at this time?
(4.) If not when did it expire,
either by operation of its conditions,
the operation of the law or the con-
stitution?
(5.) Has the Governor the power
to make such an appointment, and, if
so, would such an appointment, when
made, become perpetual or continue
in force until revoked by a written
instrument signed by the Governor or
his successor in office, attested by
the Secretary of State, with the great
seal affixed thereto?
When the'appointment referred to
was made the following act of the
Florida Legislature was in, force:
Chapter 3030, (No. 54.)
An act to provide for the settle-
ment of claims between the State of
Florida and the United States.
The people of the State of Florida,
represented in Senate and Assembly
do enact as follows:
Section 1. That the Governor is
hereby authorized and empowered to
appoint an agent to adjust and settle
all claims between the State and the
United States Government, growing
out of the war with the Seminole
Indians in the years 1856 and 1857, as


trol of the general interest of society
is confided."
"A contractor is not an officer of
government when he undertakes to
perform work or render services for
the government for a compensation
to be paid to him with a view to his
own profit and when his subordinates
are employed and paid by him and
dismissed at his pleasure."
19 A. & E. Ency. of Law, p. 387;
Sawyer vs. Corse, 17 Gratt. 230.
In Illinois the Legislature named
commissioners to build a State house
and it was contended that such ap-
pointments were void because the
Constitution provided that no officer
should be appointed or elected by the
General Assembly. The court held
that they were not officers saying "a
person employed for a single and
specified object, in whose epiploy-
ment there is no enduring element,
nor designed to be, and whose duties,
when completed, although years may
be required for their performance,
ipso facto terminates the employ-
ment, is not an officer in the sense in
which that term is used in the Con-
stitution." Bun et al. vs People, 45
Ill. 397.
See a full discussion in the 19th
A. &. E. Ency. of Law, pages 382-388.
The case of Cann vs. Evans, 74
Penn. St. 124, held an agent author-
ized to collect and collecting money
for the State to be an officer, but
such collection of money is a govern-
mental fitnetion, which Wailes did
not perform and which the Governor
had no power to authorize him to per-
form.
We think that this matter in con-
cluded by the decision of our own
Supreme Court in the case of State,
ex rel Clyatt vs. Hocker, 39 Fla. 477,
in which the court distinctly decides
that an office embraces the idea of
tenure, duration and not merely a
transient, occasional or incidental
employment, that it must not be be-
gun nor limited by a contract, and
that it must continue though the en-
cumbent dies or is changed, and that
it must consist in authority to exer-
cise some portion of the sovereign









- 10 -


well as other claims that may exist I
between the two Governments a
Section 2. The expenses of such
agent shall be paid out of'the amount
appropriated for contingent expenses
of the State, and shall not exceed the
sum of eight hundred dollars.
Section 3. Such agent shall report
to the Legislature at its next regular
session.
Approved March 2, 1877."
This act gave authority to exercise
a goVermental power, towit:
"Agent to adjust and settle all
claims between the State and .the
United States Governments, growing
out of the war with the Seminole
Indians in the years 1856 and 1857, as
well as other claims that may exist
between the two governments;" and
also provided for the appointment of
a person to exercise this governmen-
tal power.
A person having lawful authority
to exercise any governmental power
is a public officer.
State ex ret. Clyatt v. Hocker,
Judge, 39, Fla. 477.
Such officer can exist only by force
of law.
Section 27, article 4, Constitution
of 1868.
Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.
S. 425.
There was no law other than the
act above quoted to warrant the ap-
pointment in this case. That act
established an office.
Commonwealth v. Evans 74 Pa.
St. 124.
If section 5, of chapter 3113, Acts
of 1879, was constitutionally enacted
it has no application here.
The authority conferred by this ap-
pointment was "agent for the State of
Florida, before the Department at
Washington City, and to ask and de-
mand and receive of the government
of the United States any and all sums
of money due the said State of Flor-
ida for expenses incurred by said
State on account of Indian hostilities
in said State from the years 1849 to
the year 1856 inclusive." This an-
thority was within the scope of, but
not as board as, the terms of the act


power, either in making, executing or
administering the laws.
Wailes embodied none of the sover-
eignty of the State; his term was not
mixed, but was to last only until the
accounts were adjusted, which might
have taken place in a few months or
years. His death would have de-
stroyed the function, and every new
incumbent of the position which he
held would come in only by contract.
He entered upon it for his own profit
and was to pay all the expenses there-
of. His subordinates were amenable
to him alone, and not in any wise to
the State. In short, he was a mere
contractor or agent. The fact that
he performed this service, which was
necessary for the State in order that
it should carry out its duties to its
people, does not show that he was an
officer. If so, then the lessee of State
convicts is an officer, and so the at-
torney employed in the' convict lease
litigation, and so the architect who
built the Capitol, etc., etc.
The suggestion is also made that
Governor Drew exceeded his power in
fixing the compensation of Wailes, be-
cause the Legislature did not author-
ize him to do so. The committee
thinks that the suggestion is not
sound, because the Legislature did
authorize the appointment, but did
not itself fix the compensation and
did not forbid the Governor to do it.
No appointment could be made with-
out an agreement with the appointee
as to compensation, and under a
familiar rule of law, the express
power to appoint carried with it all
the incidental powers necessary to
secure and effectuate the appoint-
ment.
It is also suggested that the com-
mission of July 18th, 1879, to Walles
empowered him only to adjust the ac-
counts relating to the Indian hostili-
ties in said State from the year. A.
D. 1849 to the year 1856, inclusive;
that there were hostilities in the early
part of the year 1857, and that since
the commission did not embrace this
period, Wailes is not entitled to any
compensation for services rendered
in connection therewith. The com-
mittee thinks the position not tenable,









- 11 -


above given, chapter 3030, Acts of
1877.
The appointment therefore, in so
far as is designated the agent and
stated his authority was provided for
by law, and constituted an officer, i
the person appointed wa qualified to
hold office. Section 27, Article 4,
Constitution of 1868. The qualifca-
tions then required for officers are
stated in Section 22, of Article 16, of
the Cqpstitution of 1869. The expen-
ses of this officer to a given limit,
were by aid act authorized to be
paid from the State Treasury.
The act fixed no term of office, but
Section 14, of Article 16, of the Con-
stitution of 1868, in force when the
appointment was made, provided that
"the Legislartie shall not create any
office the term of which shall be
longer than four years" This limited
the tern of office of Ihe appointee to
a period not "longer than four years"
from the date of the appointment, if
the official dutie to be performed
were not completed before that time.
There is no general provision is the
Constitution of 1868, as is contained
in Section 14, of Article 16, of the
present Constitution, that "all State,
County and. Municipal officers shall
continue in office after the expiration
of their official terms until their suc-
cessors are duly qualified."
Section 27, of Article 4, of the Con-
stitution of 1868, in force at the
time this appointment was made is
as follows:
"The Legislature shall provide for
the election by the people or appoint-
ment by the Governor, of all State,
County or Municipal officers not
otherwise provided for by this con-
stitution, and fix by law their duties
and compensation."
This constitutional provision vested
in the Legislature the power to fix
the compensation for such officers as
the one here referred to.
The Governor, as chief executive,
had no inherent or constitutional
power to fix the compensation of any
officer. There was no law fixing the
compensation for such an officer as
the one in this case. As a result the
provision for compensation in. the ap-


for the reasons that the commission
in speaking of years 1849 to 15.
evidently uteaded to embrace the
two wars beginning in those years,
Just as we constantly speak of the
war of 1776, although it lasted seven
years thereafter; or of the war of
1812, although it continued until
1814, and of the war of 1861, although
it came to an end only in the spring
of 1865. Moreover, the same Gover-
nor and cabinet who authorized and
made this contract expressly exten-
ded it, as we have shown, so as to in-
clude the year 1857.
Not only was there no reason for
making a separation between the
years.1856 and 1867, when the hostili-
ties were continuous, running from the
former into the latter, but the res-
olution of the Cabinet (Jane 15th,
1879) under which the Governor
acted, au-horised the appointment of
Wailes as "Agent of the State of
Florida to settle the Seminole Indian
War Claim," and no Governor or Leg-
islature ever m.de a separation of the
year 1856 from the year 1857, but
upon the contrary all dealt with these
years as continuing and as a whole.
It is also suggested that Wailes did
not complete his contract, and there-
fore was not entitled to compenswion,
or if to compensation, not to the
amount agreed upon. Whether this
be true or not, depends upon the con-
tract
The scope of the contract author-
ized by the Legislature in the act of
1877 (March 7th), was "to adjust and
settle the claims between the State
and the United States Government,
growing out of the war with the Sem-
inole Indians, in the years 1865 and
1867, as well as other claims that
may exist between the two govern-
ments," etc.
The authority>given under the act
of March 11th, 1879, was to appoint
a Commissioner with power "to adjust
the claim of the State of Florida
against the United States." The di-
rection given to the Governor by is
Cabinet was to appoint Wailes "Agent
for the State of Florida, to settle the
Seminole Indian War Claim."
The first appointment of Wailes by










- 12 -


pointment here considered was made
without authority of law.
Section 4, Article 16, Constitution
of 1868.
Mechem Public officers, Sec. 856;
Commonwealth v. Evans, 74 Pa.
St. 124.
The requirement in the act that
"such agent shall report to the Legis-
lature at its next regular session" did
not terminate the office, or the term
of the officer, if appointed before the
next regular session and. the duties
were not completed by that time; and
it did not take from the Goverior the
authority to appoint an agent after
such "next regular sesston1' when
this appointment was made if the
duties prescribed by law had not been
completely performed.
It is within the provence of the
Legislature to fix the compensation
for services previously rendered the
State by authority of law, and to make
appropriation therefore. Section 11,
Article 16, Constitution of 1885.
Very respectfully,
J. B. WHITFIELD,
Attorney-General.
Office of Attorney-General.
Tallahassee, Fla., March 3, 1903.
Hon. W. S. Jennings,
Governor of Florida,
Tallahassee, Fla.
Sir:-I have the honor to acknowl-
edge the receipt of your letter of
February 28th, 1903, in which you
state that your predecessor In office,
Hon. George F. Drew, appointed Mr.
Sidney I. Wailes commissioner for
the State of Florida by a written in-
strument of which the following is
a copy:
"Executive Office,
Tallabassee, Fla., Oct. 30, 1877.
Know All Men By These Presents
that reposing special confidence in S.
I. Wailes, I have this day appointed,
him commissioner for the State of,
Florida to represent the interests of
said State in all matters of business
in the War Department of the United
States, in Washington, and ask the
heads of the departments and chiefs
of bureaus to so recognize him as


the instrument of October 30th, 1877,
was "to represent the interests of
the State in all matters of business
in the War Department of the United
States," and the appointment under
the instrument of July 16th, 1879, was
as "Agent" before the Departments of
Washington, and to ask, demand and
Receive of the Government of the
United States, and any and all sums
of money due the State of Florida,"
etc. e
Under this authority, all that Wailes
was to do, was to act as Agent before
the proper departments at Washing-
ton for the adjusting and settling of
the claims of the State against the
United States. He performed all of
these services in the acts shown
heretofore, ending upon his procure-
ment of the statement by the Secre-
tary of the Treasury stating the ac-
count which the exact basis on which
it was afterward paid.
When this was accomplished, his
contract was accomplished.
It is more than probable that he
wais elected by Governor Drew be-
cause of his friendly relations with
Senators, members of Congress and
officials of the departments, and his
familiarity with the minutiae of legis-
lation, which might be availed of in
procuring the passage by Congress
of the necessary legislation, but this
was no part of the contract, and could
not have been insisted upon by the
State, and was not covered by the
legislative authority to Governor
Drew. Moreover, he did unquestion-
ably perform during his presence in
Washington such services as were re-
quired to procure the friendly offices
of persons in authority, dealing with
this claim. Besides, he substituted
his brother, W. E. Wailes, in his
stead, and this was done with the con-
sent of the State, acting by its Gover-
nor, H. L. Mitchell, who on June 9th,
1894, made and delivered the follow-
ing to W. E. Wailes:
Executive Departmenxt,
Tallahassee, June 9, .1894.
Hon. W. E. Wailes, of Selma, Ala.,
is hereby authorized to act as agent
for the State of Florida in the matter
of the State Indian War Claims, now









- 13 -


long as this commission remains in
force.


(Great
Seal
of
State)


In Testimony Whereof, I do
hereunto set my hand and
cause to be affixed the Great
Seal of the State at Tallahae-
see, the capital, this 30th day
of October, 1877, and of the In-
dependence of the United
States the 102nd year.
GEO. F. DREW,
Governor of Florida.


By the Governor,
Attest: W. D. Bloxham, Sec. State.
You also state that a similar au-
thority was given Mr. Wailes directed
to the Land Department of the United
States, in Washington.
You asked to be advised as to the
validity, power, force and effect of
the above instrument, and that I furn-
ish you with an opinion, on this sub-
ject covering the following points:
(1) Does this appointment carry
with It the powers and functions suf-
ficient to create an office and make
the appointee an officer;
(2) If so, what were the powers
and duties of the appointee there-
under;
(3) Is this commission or author-
ity in force at this time;
(4) If not, when did it expire,
either by operation of its conditions,
the operation of law, or the constitu-
tion;
(5) Has the Governor the power
to make such an appointment, and, if
so, would such appointment, when
made, become perpetual or continue
in force until revoked by a written
instrument signed by the Governor
or his successor In office, attested by
the Secretary of State, with the Great
Seal affixed thereto?
If the appointment and commission
referred to were authorized by law,
they would have conferred upon the
appointee some of the sovereign pow-
ers of the State, and would have thus
constituted him a public officer.
State ex. rel. Clyatt v. Hocker,
Judge, 39 Fla. 477;
Clark v. Stanley, 65 N. C. 59.
Section 27, of article 4; of the con-
stitution of 1868, in force at the time


pending before Congress, in lieu of
S. I. Wailes.
[Seal]
(Signed) H. L. MITCHELL,
Governor.
Attest:
JNO. L. CRAWFORD,
Secretary of State.
Of course the State cannot object
to the absence of S. I. Wailes from
Washington, and contend that such
absence constituted a breach of con-
tract in whole or in part, when it
consented thereto. The power of
Governor Mitchell to give this con-
sent, cannot be questioned, for the
authority conferred by acts of the
Legislature in 1877 and 1879 were
continuing powers, and were exer-
cisable at any time, until taken away
by the Legislature.
There is one part of the authority
to Walles, given by the instrument of
July 16th, 1879, which was not exer-
cised by him, to-wit, the receipt of
the money paid to him upon his claim
by the United States. It was imposs-
ible for him, however, to do this, be-
cause the Government of the United
States will not pay to an attorney or
agent a claim allowed to the prin-
cipal, unless such attorney or agent
is acting under a power of attorney
given after allowance of the claim,
and no such power has been given or
tendered by the State to Walles, but
on the contrary, as shown by the
testimony, Governor W. S. Jennings
has properly taken into his own hands
and control, the receipt of all money
from the General Government
There are other suggestions made
in the way of objections, but this
Committee does not consider them of
sufficient merit to justify a discus-
sion or an extension of this receipt.
The Committee has\ hereinbefore
dealt with this matter asit the State
was stable, and the quesUon was
whether there existed a legal liability
against it. But the State is not
suable by Wailes on this claim, and
the real inquiry is whether it the acts
recited had been done between two
individuals, they would have constitu-
ted a legal or moral obligation upon
the one receiving the services and










- 14 -


of this appointment ordains as fol-
lows:
"The Legislature shall provide for
the election by the people, or appoint-
ment by the Governor, of all State,
county or municipal officers not other-
wise provided for by this constitution,
and fix by law their duties and com-
pensation." This limits the Gover-
nor's power of appointment to these
officers provided for by the consqitu-
tion and statutes of the State.
Mayor of Baltimore v. Howard,
15 Md. 376.
Chapter 3030, Acts of 1877, provides
"that the Governor is hereby autho-
rized and empowered to appoint an
agent to adjust and settle all claims
between the State and the United
States Government, growing out of
the war with the Seminole Indians in
the years 1856 and 1857, as well as
other claims that may exist between
the two governments." A "commis-
sioner for the State of Florida to rep-
resent the interests of said State in
all matters of business in the War
Department of the United States in
Washington" is not included within
the power conferred by the act above
mentioned. There was no law author-
izing the appointment of such an of-
ficer or commissioner.
As a consequence the appointment
recited in the "written instrument"
or "commission" or "authority" re-
ferred to, could not and did not con-
stitute the appointee an officer or a
commissioner under the authority of
the State of Florida.
If the appointment can be regarded
as constituting a representative of
the chief executive, the authority
could not extend beyond the official
term of the chief executive making
the appointment.
Very respectfully,
J. B. WHITFIELD,
Attorney-General.
March 7, 1903.
To His Excellency, W. S. Jennings,
Governor, Tallahassee, Fla.
Dear Sir:-I have the honor to
acknowledge the receipt of your letter
of March 4th, 1903, which is as fol-
lows:
"In addition to the commission is-
sued by my predecessor, Hon. George


the benefit thereof to pay therefore, ac-
cording to the understanding between
them. There is no doubt as between
individuals, the acts would have con-
stituted a contract, either by force of
the original agreement or of the subse-
quent acquiescence and ratification.
No court in any civilized country
would hesitate to declare that there
was a valid, binding contract upon
one or the other of these grounds.
Any discussion as to the moral ob-
ligation would seem to be unneces-
sary, for the enlightened conscience
cannot fail to recognize it to be a
high duty to pay for services rendered
and benefits received according to
the understanding under which they
were rendered and received.
The Supreme Court in case of Stan-
ton et al v. Embrey, Administrator,
3 Otto, U. S. Reports, pages 549, 550,
557 and 558, charged as follows:
Were an attorney in the exercise
of his ordinary labor and calling, and
with the instrumentalities of his pro-
fessional learning and industry, under
takes to work out a desired result
for his client, not through personal
influence, but through the instrumen-
talities of the law, by persuasion, as
distinguished from influence, such an
undertaking is not an unlawful one,
or contrary to public policy. That,
in dealing with the government
and its departments, there is frequent-
ly and necessarily required a degree
of knowledge and skill, and an ac-
quaintance with forms and princi-
ples, not possessed by the unlettered
citizen, before a person can obtain
that which is justly his due. When,
therefore, the class of persons pos-
sessing such knowledge perform that
labor as attorneys, no reason exists
for defeating them of their compen-
sation. If, therefore, Atkinson's em-
ployment was that of a professional
man in the line of his. profession, and
not for the purpose of exercising and
wielding an undue influence over the
administrative officers of the govern-
ment, and was so engaged by the de-
fendants, the plaintiff is entitled to
recover.
* *
Professional services, to prepare
and advocate just claims for compen-










- 15 -


F. Drew, Governor, bearing date the
16th day of July, A. D. 1879, to Sydney
I. Walles, an agent for the State of
Florida, before the departments at
Washington City, relative to expenses
incurred by said State on account of
,Indian hostilities from the year 1849
to the year 1856, inclusive, which was
recently referred to you for consider-
ation, etc., I find that the commission
was copied at length in a communica-
tion dated executive office, Tallahas-
see, Florida, August 28th, 1888, ad-
dressed to Hon. William C. Endicott,
Secretary of War, Washington, D. C.,
with a certificate, a copy of which is
as follows:
"I hereby certify that the said ap-
pointment or commissioner has not
been revoked or canceled, and I
would, therefore, request you to al-
low the said Walles access to what-
ever papers in your department it
may be necessary for him to examine,
and to give him permission to file
such papers as may be needful and
proper in the settlement of said
claims. *
In testimony whereof I have here-
unto set my hand and caused the
Great Seal of the State of Florida
to be hereunto affixed.
Done at the Capitol this 28th day
of August, A. D. 1888.
E A. PERRY, Governor.
(Seal)
By the Governor:
Attest, Jno. L. Crawford, Secre-
tary State.
With a note of which the following
is a copy:
"A copy of the above was transmit-
ted to the Secretary of the Interior,
and also to Secretary of the Treasury,
Washington City, D. C."
(2) I find from the Secretary of
State's office that it appears that Hon.
Henry L. Mitchell, then Governor of
Florida, gave a memoranda in writing
to Col. W. I. Walles, of which the fol-
lowing is a copy:
"Executive Department, State of
Florida,
"Tallahassee, June 9, 1894.
"Hon. W. E. Wailes, of Selma, Ala.,
is hereby authorized to act as agent
for the State of Florida, in the matter


station, are as legitimate as services
rendered in court in arguing a cause
to convince a court or jury that the
claim presented or the defence set up
against a claim presented by the
other party ought to be allowed or
rejected. Parties in such cases re-
quire advocate; and the legal pro-
fession must have a right to accept
such employment, and to receive
compensation for their services; nor
can -courts of Justice adjudge such
contracts illegal, if they are free
from any taint of fraud, misrep-
resentation, or unfairness.
* *
Enough has already been remarked
to show that the theory of the plain-
tiffs In error, that the contract is pro-
hibited by certain acts of Congress
referred to, cannot be sustained, for
the reason that the contract was a
legitimate one for professional ser-
vices of an, attorney who held no of-
ficial station at the time the contract
was made, nor at any time during
the period he was engaged in pros-
ecuting the claim.
The Supreme Court in case of Tay-
lor v. Bemiss, 110 U. S. Reports, p. 45,
charged as follows:
"It remains to be considered
whether there is in this contract of
employment anything which, after
it has been fully executed on both
sides, should require it to be declared
void In a court of equity, and the
money received under It returned. It
was decided in the case Stanton v.
Embrey, 93 U. S. 548, that contracts
by attorneys for compensation in
prosecuting claims against the United
States were not void because the
amount of it was made contingent
upon success, or upon the sum re-
cqvered. And the well-known dif-
ficulties and delays in obtaining pay-
ment of Just claims which are not
within the ordinary course of pro-
cedure of the auditing ofcers of the
government, Justifies a liberal com-
pensation In successful cases, where
none is to be received in case of
failure.
Any other rule would work much
hardship in cases of creditors of
small means residing far from the










- 16 -


of the State's Indian War claims now
pending before Congress, in lieu of
S I. Walles.
[Seal] (Signed)
HENRY L. MITCHELL,
Attest: Governor.
JNO. L. CRAWFORD,
Secretary of State."
"I am informed by the Secretary of
State that there is no other record
relative to the appointment of any
other person or persons as agent or
commissioner or otherwise on this
subject, as appears from the records
of his office.
"I desire to advise you that on or
about the 21st of February, 1901, Mr.
W. E. Wailes, of Selma, Alabama,
came to my office, in Tallahassee,
Florida, and presented to me an
original memoranda dated June 9th,
1894, signed 'Henry L. Mitchell, Gov-
ernor,' attested, etc., above referred
to, and made application for a renewal
of such authority and the grant of
some authority to act as agent for the
State of Florida in the matter of the
State's Indian War claims then pend-
ing before Congress, which applica-
tion was then and there declined and
refused, and no authority whatever
was given to him, and has not been
granted to him or any other person
or persons by me.
I desire to be advised of the vali-
dity, power and effect of the above
Instruments, and, therefore, have the
honor to request that you furnish me
with an opinion on this subject, cover-
ing the following points, especially:
(1) Did the powers and duties, if
any, under the commission issued to
S. I. Wailes cease upon the appoint-
ment of W. E. Walles?
(2) Does the appointment of W. E.
Wailes carry with it the powers and
duties set out at greater length in the
commission issued to S. I. Wailes?
(3) Is the commission issued to
W. E. Wailee in force at this time?
(4) If not, when did it expire,
either by operation of its conditions,
the operation of law or the constitu-
tution;
(5) Has the Governor the power
to make such appointment, and, if so,
would such appointment when made,


seat of government, who can give
neither money nor personal attention
to securing their rights.









17-

become perpetual or continue in force
unta revoked by a, written instru-
ment signed by the Governor, or his
successor in office, attested by the
Secretary of State, with the Great
Seal affixed thereto, or the appoint-
ment of a successor to such ap-
pointee?" -
I had the honor to furnish you on
March 3rd~ 1903, with an opinion that
'the "appointment or commission,"
dated July 16th, 1879, and referred
to in your letter "in so far as it desig-
nated the agent and stated hie au-
thority was provided for by law, and
coniituted an officer it the person
appointed was qualified to hold the
office Section 27, of Article 4, Con-
stitution of 1868, Chapter 3030, Laws
of Florida, approved March 2nd, 1877.
The opinion also stated that the act
fixed no term of office; but Section
14 of Article 16, of the Constitution
of 1868, in force when the appoint-
ment was made, provided that "the
Legislature shall not create any office
the term of which shall be longer
than four year." This limited the
term of office of the appointee to a
period not "longer than four years"
from the date of the appointment, if
the official duties to be performed
were not completed before that time."
The qualification of the appointee was
not considered in that opinion nor
was the defective form of the com-
mission referred to, as the commis-
sion did not on Its face show a dis
qualification of the appointee, and it
was in form at least a partial com-
pliance with Section 13 of Article 5,
Constitution of 1868.
The certificate of the Governor,
dated August 28th, 1888, attested by
the Secretary of State with the Great
Seal of the State affied, attached to
a copy of said "appointment or com-
mission" dated July 16th, 1879, as
stated by your letter is as follows:
"I hereby certify that the said ap-
pointment or commission has not
been revoked or canceled, and I would
therefore request you to allow the
said Wailes access to whatever papers
io your department it may be neces-
sary for him to examine, and to give
him permission to file such papers as









-18-

may be needful and proper in the set-
tlement of said claim"
This certificate could not have oper-
ated to revive or extend a term of
office which by Section 14, Article 16,
Constitution of 1868, could not have
existed longer than four years after
the date of the appointment, even if
the appointee was eligible and had
qualified under the law and had been
commissioned in the form. required
by the Constitution. Sections 10 and
22, Article 16, Section 13, Article 5,
of the Constitution of 1868; Section
2, Chapter 12, Laws of Florida, ap-
proved July 24th, 1845; Sections 213
and 214, Revised Statutes of Florida.
The Governor simply certified "that
the appointment or commission has
not been revoked or canceled" and
requested the official to whom the
communication containing the certify
cate was addressed "to allow the said
Walles access to whatever papers in
your department it may be necessary
for him to examine and to give him
permission to file such papers as may
be needful and proper in the settle-
ment of said claims."
This certificate was not in form
sufficient to operate as an appoint-
ment of an "agent to adjust and settle
all claims between the State and the
United States government, growing
out of the war with the Seminole
Indiane in the years 1856 and 1857,
as well as other claims that may exist
between the two governments," as is
provided for by Chapter 3030, Acts of
1877, or as an appointment of an
"agent for the State ot'Florida before
the departments at Washington City,
and to ask and demand and receive
of the government of the United
States any and all sums of money due
the said State of Florida for expenses
incurred by said State on account of
Indian hostilities in said State from
the year 1849 to the year 1856 in-
clusive" as the commission dated
July 16th, 1879, purported to do. And
even If this certificate could have
conferred such authority the records
do not show that the appointee named
in the original "appointment or com-
mission" ever qualified under this cer-
tificate as an officer or agent of the
State of Florida.









--19-

The conclusion, then, is, that even
if the appointee named In the appoint-
ment dated July 16th, 1879, was
eligible and actually qualified and was
properly commissioned, his term of
office did not continue "longer than
four years" from the date of the ap-
pointment, and was not revived or
extended by the certificate dated Aug-
ntt 28th, 1888, that said certificate
alone did not constitute the appoint-
ment of an agent for the State of
Florida with powers and duties under
the laws of the State; and that aid
certilfcate could have been nothing
more than a request from the Gover-
nor to the official to whom it was ad-
dressed asking that certain courtesies
be extended to the person referred to.
I now consider the "memoranda in
writing" which you mention and
quote as follows:
"Executive Department, State of
Florida,
"Tallahassee, June 9, 1904.
"Hon. W. E. Walles, of Selma, Ala.,
is hereby authorized to act as agent
for the State of Florida in the matter
of the State's Indian war claims now
pending before Congress, in lieu of
8. I. Wailes.
(Signed)
"HiNRY L. MITCHELL,
"Governor.
(Seal)
Attest: "JNO. L. CRAWFORD,
"Secretary of State."
This document purports on its face
to authorize a resident of another
State "to eat as agent for the State
of Florida in the matter of the State's
Indian war claims now. pending be-
fore Congress."
Such authority if lawfully conferred
would have constituted an officer:
Clark v. Stanley, 66 N. C. 59;
Commonwealth v. Evans, 74 Pa.
St. 124;
State ex rel Clyatt v. Hocker,
Judge, 39 Fla. 477.
Chapter 3030, Acts of 1877, pro
videos "That the Governor is hereby
authorized and empowered to appoint
an agent to adjust and settle all
claims between the State and United
States Government, growing out of










-20-

the war with the Seminole Indians in
the years 1856 and 1857, as well as
other claims that may exist between
the two Governments."
If the executive document dated
June 9th, 1894, was intended as a
commission or an appointment with
powers and duties under the laws of
this State (State ex rel Crawford, 28
Fla. 497) it does not comply with
section 14 of article 4, of the Consti-
tution of 1885, as to form; and it does
not conform to any authority provid-
ed for by law. If the commission was
sufficient to confer a lawful authority
and the appointee could have quall-
fled to exercise such authority (State
ex rel. Attorney General v. George, 23
Fla, 585-595), the record does not
show that he did qualify as required
by section 213 of the Revised Statutes
of Florida, by taking and filing the
oath prescribed by section 2 of article
16, of the Constitution of 1885. If
the appointee failed to qualify the
office became vacant by section 214,
of the Revised Statutes. If the ap-
pointee actually qualified, the office
would become vacant "by his ceasing
to be an inhabitant of the State."
Paragraph 4, section 214, Revised
Statutes of Florida.
Very respectfully,
J. B. WHITFIELD,
Attorney General









-21-


GILCHRIST ANSWERED.


In 1903, in the House Journal
(page 601), Hon. Albert W. Gilchrist,
a member, charged that "Wailes had
been paid." The following will show
what and what for payment was made
to Wailes, and that it was not for
services in collecting the Indian war
claim:
Washington, D. C., Feb. 3, 1879.
State of Florida to S. I. Wailes, Dr.
To amount paid out for services
rendered in searching old
Indian Acts in 2d and 3d
Auditor's office, also in Comp-
troller's and War Depart-
ment.............. ..$67.50
Received payment,
S. I. WAILES.
Washington, D. C., July 25, 1879.
State of Florida to S. I. Walles, Dr.
On account of copying the
records in the Treasury of
the United States which re-
latee to the collection of
war tax in the State of
Florida .............. $250.00
Received payment,
S. L WAILS.
The first claim was ordered by the
Governor to be paid out of fund ap-
propriated Ior Indian War Caims.
The second bill was paid out of the
contingent expenses for State, both
being the same fund.
Washington, D. C., Aug. 14, 1879.
State of Florida to S. I. Wailes, Dr.
To copying at Treasury, con-
densing and recopying pa-
pers in relation to the sales
of lands for war tax...... $513.50
Paper ............. 5.00
Printing .............. 6.00
Total .......... $525.00


Washington, D. C., Nov. 27, 1878.
HON. GEORGE F. DREW,
Tallahassee, FLa.
My Dear Sir:-I am just in receipt
of a letter from Mr. W. K. Beard, ask-
ing for information from the Depart.
ments here in relation to your claims
The procuring of this information will
cost considerable labor and money,
but I shall try at once to secure it
and forward the information to you,
with the cost of the same unless
otherwise directed. *
(Signed) S. I. WAILES.
Executive Office,
Tallahassee, Fla., Dec. 14, 1878.
Dear Sir:-As it is very necessary
for us to have the information men-
tioned in my last letter, vi.: that re-
quested by CoL W. K. Beard, I would
respectfully urge that you use all
possible diligence in procuring it nd
to send it on to CoL Beard as soon as
you procure it Our Legislatre
meets in January next and it is very
necessary that we have it by that
time.
Yours very respectfully,
(Signed) GED. F. DREW.
To S. I. Wales, Esq.
Answered by Governor Bloxham in
his testimony before the Senate Com-
mittee in 1903:
"That payment had nothing to do
with the Indian War (laim during
the war, the United States Govern-
ment, as you know, placed a direct
tax upon the State for the purpose of
carrying on the war. Of course,
Florida didn't respond through her
officials, and the United States seised
property of individuals in Fernandina
and other points and sold it, andthis
account was for getting the Informa-
tion and the records from W hing-
ton, as I understand, in connection
with that transaetion. Afterwads
Congress passed an act to retand it
to the States and the act gave Florida
between $8,000 and 39,000, with the
understanding that if there were no
claims for it in six years the balance
should be turned into the treasury of
the State of Florida. There were










-22-

claims for some $30,000 of it, and the
other $8,000 I turned into the State
Treasury because their were no
claims for it"
It will be seen that books, records,
etc., ordered through me on which I
did not charge one cent of profit, col-
lected for the people of the State
forty thousand dollars and left a bal-
ance unclaimed in the State Treasury
of eight thousand dollars, which was
almost clear profits to the State, and
was turned in to the school fund.


Payments to Col. Beard Discussed.


Gilchrist cites the following to
show that the State has paid portions
of the compensation due under the
Wailes contract:
[See House Journal, 1903, pages
601, 602.]
State of Florida to W. K. Beard.
For part pay for services in
making statement of the
claims of the State of Flor-
ida against the United
States growing out of Indi-
an hostilities ...... .... .$100.00
Paid November 26, 1878, out of con-
tingent fund.
Tallahassee, Nov. 27, 1878.
State of Florida to W. K. Beard.
For services in making out
the claims of the State of
Florida against the United
State growing out of the
Indian hostilities of 1849,
1852, 1856 and 1857, on ac-
count ......... ....... $100.00
Paid out of app. to pay for Indian
War Claims.
State of Florida to W. K. Beard.
For services as agent in
making up the account of
the State of Florida with
the United States on ac-
count of Indian hostilities.. $750.00
Credit by amount paid
Nov. 26, 1879...... 200.00
$550.00
Paid out of fund appropriated for
examination and settlement of Indian
War Claims.


When the payments to Beard were
shown in the Journal of 1903, in Gil-
christ's statement I had never before
heard or known of his having re-
ceived any such sums for any such
account. The fact was a perfect sur-
prise to me, because for the reason
that I did not authorize any person or
persons to receive or collect any sum
or sums of money on account of my
services under my contract with Gov-
ernor Drew. I have never received
one cent, even of the money I had
expended on account of my compen-
sation for services in prosecuting the
Indian War Claim, under the con-
tract with Governor Drew. Not a
dollar of the amounts so received by
Col. Beard, so far as my knowledge
goes, was used in the prosecution of
the Indian War Claim.
[From Governor Bloxham's evi-
dence before Senate Judiciary Com-
mittee.]
"Q. Do you know of any expen-
ses for -services in this particular mat-
ter paid to Col. Beard and Mr. Wailes
during their time?
"A. There was nothing paid to
Col. Wailes that I can recall in con-
nection with this service.
"Q. What did Col. Beard receive?
"A. I know of nothing regarding
what Col. Beard received from Gover-
nor Drew more than is shown from the
records.
"Q. You were Secretary of State
at the time this contact was made,
and you have been connected with
the Executive Department ever









-23-

Tallahassee, Aug. 8, 1899. since. Do you believe that it
His Excellency, Geo. F. Drew, Gover- would have been possible for the
nor: passage of the bill allowing a state-
,net of account between the State
Dear Sdr:-I respectfully ask an mr o o wiout having
advance from the State of $500.00 to ad th n which waw oh-
defray my expenses to Washington in d by th Sat Aget?
the investigation of the claims of the "ained by the Stae Age bee
State against the United States on obliged to have had the information
account Indian hostilities, to be re- from some source before making an
funded from my commission inrce before making an
amount received from United States. ap operation dersand you to
W. K TBARD "Q Do I understand you to say
K. BEAR that these payments to Col. Beard
Appd. pay out of appropriation un- and Col. Wailes were not made on
der Chapter 3113. account of the Indian War Claim?
GEO. F. DREW, Governor. "A. I mean that Col. Wailes never
Paid Aug. 9, 1878. received a dollar to the beat of my
knowledge and information on the
Ellaville, Nov. 22, 1879. Indian War Claim.
HIon Ci Drew, Comptroller, "Q. These amounts that purport
Tallahassee: to have been paid to Col. Beard, have
Dear Sir:-Please issue a warrant you any information as to what they
in favor of Col. W. K. Beard for the were paid upon?
sum of $100.00 on account of services "A. None except what I see in the
authorized by Chapter .3113, Act of journals."
March 11, 1879, and charge to ap- We will meet this brilliant discovery
propriation under said Act. of Mr. Gilchrist by the following ex-
Yours respectfully, tracts from the testimony in the case:
GEO. F. DREW, Governor. Before the State Senate Committee
Paid Nov. 25, 1879. W. D. Bloxham, being duly sworn,
testified ae follows:
Tallahassee, Fla. March 27, 1880. "This fs an investigation under the
Hon. C. Drew, Comptroller: authority -of the Senate of the claim
Will you please issue warrant for of S. I. Wailes and Mrs. Beard for
$100.00 in favor of Col. W. K. Berd, commissions alleged to have been
out of the contingent fund. earned by S. I. Wailes and W. K. Beard
Yours respectfully, for services in connection with the
GEO. W. DREW, Governor. Indian War Claim, so known. I know
Paid March 27, 1880. at the time Governor Drew made the
Tallahassee, Fla., June 7, 1880. agreement with Mr. Wailes, I signed
as Secretary of State the document
To Hon. C. Drew: appointing him agent of the State,
You will please draw warrant for this was in 1879. I became Governor
$100.00 in favor of Col. W. K. Beard, of the State, and went to Washingion
payable out of Contingent Fund, to in 1881 on some other matters, and
reimburse him for expenses incurred while there I went through the War
in Washington, D. C., on business for Department, and saw Col. Beard, and
the State. an officer of the United States Army,
GEO. F. DREW, Governor. the name I have forgotten, and they
Paid out of Contingent Expenses, had been at work in the War Depart,
June 8, 1880. ment for several months at that time.
I was there the first of the summer,
Tallahassee, Fla., June 8, 1880. and the last of the summer: I saw
To Hon. C. Drew: them at work, saw the table piled up
You will please issue your warrant with vouchers and other papers, and
to Hon. Walter Gwynn for $300.00 saw Col. Beard and this officer of the
payable from funds appropriated to 'United States Army discussing the
pay expenses of Indian War Claims. claim. One representing the United










-24-


(Act of 1879.) Money advanced to
W. K. Beard.
GEO. F. DREW, Governor.
Paid June 24, 1880, out of that fund.
[On page 606 of the House of Rep-
resentative Journal, we find the fol-
lowing from Hon. Albert W. Gilchrist]L
Of the sums received by W. K.
Beard, judging from the amount paid
R. Bullock, I should think that the
said Beard was entitled to about
$500.00, as a Commissioner. The
balance is undoubtedly chargeable to
the account of the said Walles.
At the end of the appropriations,
made by the Legislature of 1881, there
will be found an appropriation of
$280.50 for R. Bullock.
Examine the report and it
will be found that R. Bul-
lock received, according to
this report.. .... .. ..$ 780.50
W. C. Brown received .. .. 63.00
It is difficult to determine
amount W. K. Beard re-
ceived. It looks like.. .. 2,797.00
$3,640.50
In this statement it has already
.been shown where the said Wailes
received of the $800.00 appropriated
in the Act of 1877 $525.00, where W.
K. Beard received, doubtless on ac-
count of said Wailes, $200.00.
In this connection I wish to insert
the following:
Tallahassee, Fla., April 28, 1903.
Hon. A. W. Gilchrist:
My Dear Sir:-Replying to your in-
quiry, will state there is no appoint-
ment, commission or contract of rec-
ord in this office to W. K. Beard in
relation to collection of Indian War
Claims.
Yours very truly,
H. CLAY CRAWFORD,
Secretary of State.
[From House Journal, 1903, pages
604-5.]
His Excellency, W. D. Bloxham, Gov-
ernor:
By authority of an Act approved
March 11, 1879, a board of three com-
missioners, consisting of Robert Bul-
lock, W. C. Brown, and W. K. Beard
were appointed in December, 1879, to


States Government and the other the
State of Florida, as to the price of
forage, the muster rolls, pay rolls,
etc., and I was also in Co'. Wailes'
office, somewhere In the City of
Washington, I have forgotten where,
but I was in his office, and saw him
have a good many clerks at work in
his office, which he said were con-
nected with this claim, and they were
trying to strike a balance between
the United States and the State of
Florida in order that the Congress of
the United States might have an op-
portunity of action on that balance.
Q. In the year 1881?
A. Yes, sir,
Q. Did you have any connection
with it prior to that, except as Sec-
retary of State in, Governor Drew's
Cabinet?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you know what these vouch
ers were, except from conversations
with Mr. Wailes?
A. No, sir.
SQ. What were these conversations?
A. With reference to bills paid for
forage, etc.
Q. Do you know what Col. Beard
was doing in Washington at that
time?
A. He was representing the State
of Florida with Mr. Wailes in endeav-
oring to collect moneys which the
State had paid out during the Indian
war for the United States, and which
had never been refunded the State.
Q. How long, of your knowledge,
did Mr. Wailes and Col. Beard con-
tinue to work upon the claim of the
State of Florida against the United
States as to the Indian war claim?
A. They worked together until the
death of Col. Beard.
Q. When did that occur?
A. In 1882, I believe.
Q. How long, so far as you know,
did Mr. Walles continue on this mat-
ter?
A. Up to the time the balances
were adjusted, as I understand it, and
then he, or his brother, rather, did
what they could to secure favorable
action in Congress on the claim.
Q. When did your offcia connec-
tion with the State of Florida cease?









-26-


'examine and approve or reject any
and all warrants" issued by the Comp-
troller under and by virtue of an
Act approved February 8, 1861.
(Chapter 3113, Laws of Florida.)
On page 602 of Senate Journal of
1881, the following report may be
found: ,
Senate Chamber, Tallahassee,
March 1, 1881.
Hon. L. W. Bethel,
President of the Senate:
Sir:-Your Special Committee, ap-
polnlted to examine the claim of W. K.
Beard and R. Bullock against the
State, have examined the same. In
1879 Governor Drew appointed W. K.
Beard, R. Bullock and W. C. Brown
as Commissioners to examine and set-
tle the Indian War Claims. Governor
Drew also appointed W. K. Beard a
Commissioner to go to Washington
to settle claims of the State against
the United States, and to defray ex-
pensee of said Commissioners and
Commissioner the Legislature of
1879 appropriated $2,000.
And we find that the State is due:
Col. Beard for examining
the Indian War Claim. $1,350.00
Col. Bullock for examining the
Indian War Claim .. .. 500.00
Col. W. K. Beard received
of the $2,000 ...... .. .. ..1,160.00
Col. R. Bullock received of
the $2,000 .. ........ 219.50
W. C. Brown received of the
$2,000 ............ 63.00
Wailee received of the $2,000 67.50
Balance due Bullock.. .. 280.50
Your committee do not know by
what authority Walles was paid $67.-
50.
Col. W. K. Beard states that the
$1,659.00 that he received of the $2,-
000.00 that he entered into a written
agreement with Governor Drew to
pay the same back to the State out of
his commissions when said claims are
allowed, and asks that the $1,350.00
be allowed to him to enable him to
prosecute the claims of the State
against the United States Govern-
ment.
Very respectfully,
A. D. McKINNON,
CHASE. DeLANE,


A. Well, with an interim, on the
8th of January, 1901.
Q. What wee that interim between
that.time and 1891 that you have just
mentioned?
A. I was in the executive office
from 1885 to 1889, and then in the
Surveyor-Gen'eal ofce. and went
into the Comptroller' office, and then
the Executive ofc I was practie
cally comaected with e Govermnent
of the State during all thi time.
Q. You were In a position to know
whether Mr. WUalee was, or was not,
continually recognized as the agent of
the State of Florida in the posecn-
tion of these claims of the State of
Florida against the United States?
A. He was so far as I know.
Q. Were you a position to know
while occupying these different -o
fices?
A. No, sir; I cannot recall any
thing now.
Q. Do you know anything about
the report of Major Thomas F. Barr?
A: That was the result of the long
contest between the State of Florida '.
and the United States Government;
-the State of Florida represented by
oL Beard ad a ol. Wwiles, and the
United States Government -by
Barr; that was the result of their
long discussion and paSimg of ao-
counts and be imply reported the
findings he had reached.
By Mr. Law:
Q. During your administratio, did
you recognize the contract between
Governor Drew and Mr. Wailes?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you express an opinion as
to the ad contract a aany time? I
mean as to the legal force of it.
A. No, sir; I have never passed any
opinion as to its legal force.
Q. It was e oognesed by you as
the Chief Executive of the State?
A. Yea, sir.
Samuel Pasco, being duly sworn,
testifed as follows:
In answer to question as to what
you know of your own knowledge of
any tendering of service or lack of
rendering of service by Mr. Walles
and CoL Beard in Washington.
A. I was elected to the Senate and


* --L..ui **^^.i ....^-^^ ^^ ^. .- L..,..^:.;j- -.-a-.r im-ur










-26-


Again on pages 606-7, House Journal
of 1903, we find another wonderful
discrepency made by Florida's dis-
tinguished citizen, Albert W. Gil-
christ. Not made from any com-
mittee examination, but made by him
without any other authority than that
of a member of the Legislature, while
such distinguished attorneys as Wm.
A. Blount, W. H. Harris and others of
the Senate were there and had been
for some days making a full ex-
amination for the Senate by examining
such distinguished ex-members of the
United S.ates Senate and House of
Representatives as Hon. S. Pasco,
Cha9. Dougherty and Robert Bullock,
the men who for years had been try-
ing to have the State paid, and he,
- Mr. Gilcbrist, wished to print
in the Journal something that he
alone knew or thought he had found
out that would do away with a State
contract under seal.
SI have known men to try to give
,the impression that this claim of the
State grew out of nothing. The evi-
dences of the justice of the claim of
the State were all a matter of record.
''. Read the following: Ex. Doc. No.
203, 47th Con. "Claim of the State
of Florida, 1855-1860. Report of Major
Thomas F. Barr, Judge Advocate U.
S. Army, made May 20, 1882."
"From the data afforded by the War
Department and executive publica-
tions of the State of Florida, the his-
tory of the affairs that caused the
expenditures set forth in the claim
now under consideration, appears as
follows: "Therein follows the ex-
hibits, giving the various muster rolls,
the name of the men and oftcers and
amounts paid each. amounts paid for
forage and other expenses. This
claim was authentic. It was a mere
matter of-the complication of the va-
rious data in the offices indicated.
Conclusion: The Governor ap-
pointed S. I. Walles agent, with the
understanding that his compensation
should be 15 per cent. of the sums
collected, and with the understanding
that the said Walles should defray
all expenses. The Governor had ab-
solutely no authority to fix this com-
pensation. The Legislature alone had


took my seat in 1887. Mr. Beard had
been dead a good many years at that
time, and I knew nothing about the
claim until after my election except
in a general way. I can tell the status
of the claim at the time of my elec-
tion. I found that the foundation for
its collection had already been laid
by somebody. This foundation cone
sisted of various reports made by the
committees of the House of Repre-
sentatives and Senate and one by the
War Department under a joint reso-
lution. There had been two or three
reports upon it by the Committee on
Military affairs, Senate, and there
had been a recognition of the claim.
These Senate reports had all been
against paying any interest. At the
preceding Congress, Forty-ninth Con,
gress, Mr. Dougherty and Mr. David-
son, who represented us then in the
House of Represeniatives, had sue
ceeded in getting a bill through the
House, and each of these gentlemen
made speeches on the subject, and
succeeded in getting a bill through,
carrying both principal and interest,
and it was sent to the Senate. Before
this the claim had been before the
Committee on Military Affairs. But
this bill was sent to the Committee
on Claims and there an adverse report
was made upon it
By Mr. MacWilliams:
Q. Are you familiar with the data
that went to make up the basis of
this claim in any way?
A. Somewhat; all of it is set forth
in that report. It is made up of three
different items, in report of the Fif-
tieth Congress, second session.
Q. Do you know who laid the found
nation for this claim, got up the data,
etc?
A. This foundation was built be-
fore I was elected, to the Senate, and
I have always understood that it was
the work of the State Agent, and that
Governor Drew was the cause of its
being brought up again after it had
lapsed for some years. It lapsed dur-
ing the war and had to be commenced
again.











it That the said Walles, on his own
account and through his associate,
he said Beard, did violate the con-
tract, ff there could oe any such con-
tract, by causing the State to defray
these expenses, and far more than
these expenses.
That the claim was adjudicated upon
the "data afforded by the records of
the War Department and executive
publications of the State of Florida."
That It is only charitable to assume
that the said Wailes and his assocd-
ate, the said Beard, did render some
assistance in the complication of this
"data." The amount of money ex-
pended warrants the belief that there
were surely some results.
That is now the duty of the said
Walles and his associate, the said
Beard, to render an account of the
actual service performed by them in
order that it may be seen whether
the service was commensurate with
the money already paid them or
whether the money already paid
them is commensurate with such ser-
vice.
Respectfully,
ALBERT W. GILCHRIST,
of DeSoto.


Wailes' Gain for the State $600,298.


On the 22nd of May, 1882, the Sec-
retary of War reported that he had
investigated the claims of the Sr ate
of Florida and allowed the sum of
$224,648.09, and Senator Jones, of
Florida, offered a Bill accepting as a
full settlement the return of
$132,000.00 in bonds and
92,648.09 in cash, making a
total payment of

$224,648.09, as per War Depart-
ment allowance.
As the Agent of the State, I knew
the State's interest as well as my own
were being sacrificed, and opposed
such settlement. I notified Governor
Bloxham, who sustained my position
and advised Senator Jones of his op-
position to such settlement in a letter
dated April 11, 1884.
In Journal of 1887, page 20 of Gover-


Before the Senate committee of
1903 Governor Bloxham answered
why he did not want to take $92,648.09
as a full settlement, and now that the
State has been paid $1,089,158.66 the
wisdom of his action in refusing is
fully justified.
Governor Bloxham, being recalled
by Mr. Harris, testified as follows be-
fore State Senate committee, 1903:
Q. Governor, the Legialature, I be-
lieve, of 1887, passed a resolution an-
thorizing the State to accept ninety-
two thousand dollars to settle with
the United States Government for the
return of the bomd, and a certain
sum of money. Do you know how
much it wee?
A. During my incumbency of the
Executive office, I think it .was 1884
Senator Jones telegraphed me that we










-28-


nor Perry's message, when he asks
the Legislature to decide if it would
not be better to accept the $92,648.09,
"in full settlement which proposition
my predecessor in office on behalf of
the State rejected in 1884."
The Legislature, acting upon his
advice, passed a joint resolution (page
289, Laws of Florida), instructing our
Senators and Representatives in
Congress "* if no better
terms can be secured, to use their
utmost efforts at the next session of
Congress to secure the passage of a
bill providing for the settlement of
said claims and counter claims upon
the terms and conditions stated in the
bill mentioned in the Governor's mes-
sage, as above referred to. Approved
June 7, 1887."
Amount State Legislature ordered
to be accepted, $92,648.09.


could get some $92,000 if the State
would accept it
Q. What action did you take on
that?
A. I declined It.
Attorney General Raney, Comptrol-
ler Barnes and Treasurer L'Engle
were in the Executive office about
that time and we rejected it on two
ground While in Washington CoL
Beard had given me a pamphlet he
had prepared-he and Col Walles-
Sshowing the number of States that
had gotten interest, and it seemed
to be a universal rule to pay Interest
and to settle with Florida without in
terest, when the other States had 1t,
I didn't think was right This woul4
have deprived the State of interest
from 1857 to 1884, or nearly thirty
years, on $92,000. I telegraphed Sea
ator Jones declining to accept the
terms. I also wrote to Senator
Jones that Governor Drew's con-
tract with Col. Walles called for 15
per cent, and taking the other ex.
penses connected with it, there would
be mothing- left for the State.
Q. The Legislature of 1887, aftei
that to which you refer, was during
Governor Perry's adminietraiton?
A. That I have no knowledge of
except what I have seen in the Jour
nals.
Senator Pasco testifies as follows
before Senate committee as to the
Indian war claim, and that Governor
Perry was then trying to'get it taken
up:
"I know that Governor Perry went
to Washington about that time to try
and secure favorable action and he
failed. I think he became discour
aged about the matter, as far as the
interest was concerned, as indicated
in his message to the Legislature In
1887, in which he left it to the mem-
ben to decide whether to accept the
action of the Senate Military Com-
mittee recommending the payment of
the principal only. A bill wee passed
at one time on that recommendation.
My recollection is that Governao
Bloxham was Governor, and he ad-
vised against It. After the bill was
passed in the House of Representa-
tives it came over to the Senate
(Dougherty) and Senator Jones of









-29-
Arkansas made an adverse report
upon t. From that time I began to
study the claim; went through the
messages of the Governor and the
Acts and resolutions, which authorize
the borrowing of money and the is
suing of bonds. When I went to
Washington in December, 1887, I met
Mr. Wailes, whom I had never seen
before, and cooerred freely with him
about the matter.
In hi testimony before the same
committee, General Bullock said:
"Then Mr. Wailee sid to me: 'My
contract has been fulflled by me as
I understand It' 'When the account
bad been stated and reported upon
by the Secretary of the Treaury to
Congress, but you know, General, my
compensation is contingent, asad
though I have given so many years
to this work, I realize that my com-
pensation will not come to me until
Congress has made the appropriation;
therefore, I am at your services at all
times to aid you in may way in my
power in securing favorable action
by the committee, and afterwards an
appropriattoo by Congrem covering
the account which has already been
stated.' Then I set about making
this report from the sub-committee.
of which I was a member, to the full
committee, and in the work of this
preparation I was aided ealously and
energetically by Mr. Wates In fact
I could not have done this work so
thoroughly without the aid of Mr.
Waller When I had succeeded in get-
tlng a unanimous report from the
full committee oa the Homie I report-
ed the same with the bill to the
House for the calendar The Sonat
having previously reported the same
bill, which occupied a big position on
the calendar of the House, I then
asked and obtained leave to substi-
tute the Senate bill for the House bill
on the calendar. It being in the clow
ing session of my second term, I bad
great doubts of it being reached for
action by the House, ad so expressed
myself to Mr. Waflea who suggested
that he thought we could try and
secure form the committee on rules
a day for its diMscusin. I answered
I thought that would be a good thing,
but I am physically unable to do so










-30-

much work, as the canvass of this
House involves, but shall be glad to
avail myself of your suggestion, pro
viding that you will make the can-
veas yourself, as you are so well ac-
quainted with so many of the mem-
bers. That was done and a petition
signed by two-thirds of the House
to the Committee on rules was se-
cured, and that committee set the 17th
day of December for its consideration.



Minority Report Analyzed.


Messrs. Guy Gillan, C. A. Carson, J.
B. Crews and C. L. Wilson, in Sen-
ate Journal, 1903, page 1906, use the
following language:
Addressing the second point, name-
ly, the construction of the original
contract, If it were a contract, your
Committee dissent from the calcula-
tions made by the majority. In Ex-
ecutive Document No. 68, on page 2,
we find that the Treasury Department
on December 16th, 1889, stated the ac-
count as follows: "On the claim
originating in the years 1855 and 1859
videe detailed statement), I find an
expenditure proven in the sum of
$246,426.21. Deducting the amount
realized by the State of Florida by
sales of military stores, $1,405.65,
leaves a difference of $245,020.86. In
the item of expense in 1849, paid by
the State In 1859, find an expenditure
proven videe detailed statement), in
the sum of $16,913.45, an aggregate
of $261,934.31." Deducting from this-
the amount of bonds due by Florida
to the United States Government
$132,000, would leave 4te difference
in favor of Florida $129,934.31.


An examination of Ex. Doc. No. 6b,
51st Congress, 1st Session, page 2,
we find the following:
On the claim origi-
nating in the years 1855-
59 videe detailed state-
ment), I find an expen-
diture proven In the sum
of................ $246,426.51
Deduct the amount realized
by the State by sales
of military stores (Ex. 111)..1,405.65
$245,020.86
In the items of expenses in
1849 (paid by State in
1859) I find an expendi-
proven videe detailed
statement) in the sum of $16,913.45

Aggregate ........ $.261,934.31
Again on page 3:
Aggregate due the State..261,934.31
Interest thereon at 7 per
cent Jan. 1, 1858 to Jan.
1, 1890.. ........ ..$ 586,732.85
How could any one with such a
statement find anything about de-
ducting $132,000 of bonds? Both pages,
2 and 3, state the allowance of $261,-
934.31, and it is said that figures will
not lie.
Page 3, Ex. Doc. No. 68, 1st Con-
gress:
Aggregate due the State..$261,934.31
Interest thereon at 7 per
cent., Jan. 1, 1858, to Jan.
1, 1890 ......... 586,732.85
$848,667.16









-31-


Principal of bonds held
by United Statee .. .... $132,000.00
Interest from November
27, 1873 (to which date
interest has been paid),
to January 1, 1890 .... 148,712.66

$280,712.66

Balance ........ ..$567,954.50
In J.B. Witfleld's voluminous re-
port to Goveror Jennings, page 15,
the account thus stated Is as follows:
THE UNITED STATES DUE THE
STATE OF FLORIDA.
Amount of claim estab-
lished by the act..$ 261,934.31
Interest to January 1,
1890, established by
the act .......... 586,732.85
Interest at 7 per cent.
from January 1, 1890,
to June 30, 1902, on
$132,000.00.. .. .. .. 115,500.00
Interest at 7 per cent.
from January 1, 1890,
to January 1, 1901, on
$129,934,31. ...... 100,049.4187
Interest at 6 per cent
from January 1, 1901
to June 30, 1902, on
$129,934.31 ..... 11,694.0879

$1,075,910.8666
Afterward United States
Government pad.. .. $ 13,248.00

Total ......... .$1,089,158.66










-32-


Land Payments to Wailes.


See page 1095, Senate Journal, 1903,
report of a minority of the Senate
Judiciary Committee on Walles'
Claim.
On October 19th, 1878, the following
extract from the minutes of the Board
of Trustees of the Internal Improve-
ment Fund is presented: "The Sec-
retary laid before the board a letter
from S. I. Wailes, Esq., stating what
progress had been made in the gen-
eral land office toward the adjustment
of the land claims of the State, and
inquired what compensation would be
allowed him for procuring the ap-
proval and patenting of swamp lands
selected for the State since 1861.
"It was unanimously agreed by the
board that they will allow as compen-
sation to Mr. Wailes for procuring
the confirmation of the swamp lands
selected for the State since the war,
two cents per acre for every acre
patented to the State, to be paid in
lands at the current price of such lands
at the date of any payment"
In the above it will be seen that
Wailes paid all his own expenses and
got 2 cents per acre, most of which
was valued at 40 cents per acre.
The same Minority Committee cites
the following extract from the min-
utes of the Trustees of the I. I. Fund,
to show that Wailes was receiving
compensation for other services:
"Be Rt resolved by the Board of Trus-
tees of the Internal Improvement
Fund of Florida, that as compensation
for the services of Sidney I. Walles,
Esq., agent and attorney of the State
of Florida before the Department of
the Interior at Washington in pro-
curing an adjustment of the claims
of the State for lands granted by
Congress under the act of September
28th, 1850, this board will pay to said
Wailes 20 per cent. of all moneys paid
over to the State on account of swamp
lands purchased from the United
States prior to the 3rd day of March,
1857, under the act of Congress of
March 2nd, 1855, and March 3rd,
1857, and also 20 per cent of all war-
rants or certificates issued to the
State under said acts on account of
lands located by warrants or script


The payments referred to, like
those above discussed, had nothing
whatever to do with the services of
Walles in connection with the Indian
War Claim; but the records of the
board show that the policy of employ-
ing competent agents under contract
was long continued and must have
been essential to the progress of the
board. S. W. Teague was employed
in 1902 to continue the work of se-
curing indemnity money from the
United States on lands previously
sold, and for that service the board
agreed to pay him twenty-five per
cent. and advanced several hundred
dollars before the discovery that
under the present act of Congrese
nothing could be collected. And
therefore the board urged the Florida
delegation at Washington to have the
law changed:
December 23, 1904 the following
resolution was adopted:
WHEREAS, Under the provisions
of the Act of Congress, approved Sep-
tember 28, 1850, the swamp and over-
flowed lands as therein characterized
within the State of Florida were ves-
ted in said State, and that certain of
these lands have been from time to
time been sold and otherwise disposed
of by the United States Government
for which the State of Florida is en-
titled under the law, to indemnity,
at the rate of one dollar and twenty-
five cents per acre for lands thereby
granted to the State of Florida and
sold and disposed of by the United
States prior to 1857, and
WHEREAS, A large acreage has
been sold and otherwise disposed of
by the United States Government, the
title to which vested in the State of
Florida, under the Act of Congress
aforesaid, subsequent to 1857, to
which the State of Florida is justly
entitled; therefore be it
RESOLVED, By the Trustees of the
Internal Improvement Fund of the
State of Florida, that the Senators
and Representatives in Congress of
the United States of America from
Florida, be, and they are hereby urged
to introduce a bill to amend the ex-
isting statute on this subject by








-33-


prior to said 3d day of March, 1857.
4=.d, upou. 4ecelpt..9t the p*tMt1j4)r
4w 440s P~j*ddby. the. %We OW
siwampladq pioPro ~6L~wb~cp ba~d
fq:t. aT iaqw tbjmjhgjd, w4ll CoMM
to~rthLf"X,4 W4 Aq*.AW4,pe'rqrC~e~!nnf
tiezom,44 coasidgrAoAPAP jis JWP,
fqPr seeIurtlW f ap q
AimauJor. v tui 1mwp&,'J lg Q
tW" %# as gpMJ 4l6,1861
the WMA.d Wllrpal' p1e4W rl4*4QPAlbk
comv;@getion. as,..', ,
agyq~d UeQJ1.' T.
-WA*leq1, was entitled by contract,
foir .aMjup lvd .iinnitrco~ectQg)
tq,,T20.-Aw..pectv, 4_.WmmeY,, T.4ft at
rscaive c tbkq*oney. at 46e ,Uwe..tjk
k4Ksan4,'Wag-ClMCw4Aw paW4,' jth As~
wp*s; Wgil".4mag jbempqd.Md.Lp t jW
PgAVIUR1r, 044 V" Apti~erq4L. VAh13q
wouuA aamount, tg.More*haun $7,0O0j.__
r It!.


eliminating from the present statute
of the United States the limitation
of the year 1857, thus granting to the
State of Fl6rida the rigbt to indem-
nity for its lands acquired under the
Act of Congress aforesaid that have
been sold and otherwise disposed of
by the United States Government
and not heretofore paid.
I dislike to take up time and space
In answering this charge. This is work
done on and by a Land Contract,
while what was being considered
by that Committee was a contract to
collect the money due on Indian War
Claim under a contract, no similarity
at all, but as charge by Committee
must be answered.
When the contract was made with
me, October 19, 1878, the Internal Im-
provement Board was a Board only
in name. Under the Vose Judgment
the United States Court has saeied
all the lands belonging to the State
of Florida (controlled by said Board)
and had installed in. charge United
States Receiver, Dogget, who prompt-
ly took possession of all receipts
from sale of lands.
The plan of patenting swamp lands
from 1850 to date of that contract
had been to make up lists of seleo-
tions from the Field notes of survey,
and upon falling those liete of lands
in the Surveyor-General's office
of the State of Florida, he could ex-
amine, and those which he approved
were patented to the State. When 1
commenced work in the Uaited Sttoa
Land Office under the amid contract
with four clerks, two of whom were
old clerks of the Department (r
moved for the drnk habit) the Secre-
tary of the Interior promptly issued
an order changing the whole plan of
selection, and requiring all seletions
to be made by agents in the field on
each forty aore piece a majority of
which must be awamp. Of course
that meant a long delay for the State
because the Democratic House of
Representatives then in power had
made a general reduction of the force
in all the Dpartments at Wadshgton,
and as there wa no appropriation
that could be used by the Commlston-
er of the landoffice, for the pay of
such United States agents, the pros-
pect of any action was gloomy indeed.









-34-

I got Hon. Montgomery Blair to go
with me, and tried to have him, the
Secretary, go back to the selection by
Field notes; he refused. Then I com-
menced the hopeless task of trying
to get Congress to appropriate the
money under which the work could
be done, going to the capitol with the
Oommiesaoner of Public lands. He
laughed at the idea of the Democratic
Committee making an appropriation,
and said, Wailes, this Is not the day of
miracles, and you have no chance.
Said I, 'Should I succeed, what
can I expect in the way of help?'
'Well,' said he, 'if you get the half of
what you are asking for, $100,000.00,
I will out of it, first, provide for Flor-
ida's wants, and give you not only
all agents in the field, but clerks
in the Land Office to furnish the work
to patent' We succeeded, got the ap-
propriation, and true to his word, Gen.
Willalmson, United States Land Com-
misesioner, put four agents to work
here, Gen. Ankeny, Col. Protols, B.
D. Jones and M. Fuller, and I had as
agents representing the State, H.
Blokar, Oapt. James Gibbs, James
Dancy and Col. M. A. Williams. I
desire -to make the statement as
short as possible, so that the
facts may be stated. In the
course of time, after wranges
between the United States agents, as
to what was swamp land and what
was dry, we got their firat report for-
warded, and in the course of what
would be considered a very short
time, we had the pleasure, under the
land contract, In bringing to the
State nearly 4,000,000 acres of land,
which Governor Bloxham was able to
sell to Hamilton Disston for 25 cents
per acre, $1,000,000, with which he at
once got possession of the Vose script,
and the United States Court relieved
its Receiver Dogget, and the State
was once more in possession of its
own lands, and the Legislature com-
menced to give away land grants to
those who would build railroads, and
Florida's great future commenced, be-
cause It is well known that emigra-
tion will follow railroads. Yes, I got
2 cents an acre to be taken in lands,
paying my own expenses, most of
them at 40 cents per acre or more, as
I should have been happy to have










eold much of At at fifteen cents per
acre, because the work wee very
costly.
Just here let me add that the wise
policy of having land agents before
the war, and followed up wtb the con-
tract with me, must have been con-
sidered profitable to the State In
looking over the report of the Trusr
tees of the Internal Improvement
fund for December 31, 1904, on page
98, Mr. Sam'l W. Teague, Land Agent,
appeared before the Trustees aad pre
sented evidence from the Land De-
partment of the Commisioner of
Agriculture that 23,168.49 acres of
swamp and overfwed lands had
been patented by te Uited States
Government to the Sftt, the emae
being a part of the aelestoa maie by
the maid Teague under an order of
March 22, 1902, as agent of the Trus-
tees.
It appearing to the saaefacton of
the Trustees that the 23,168.49 acre
so patented are of such a elarmter
as to value, that the said Teage could
not afford to bear the expense at
tached to seletUg and examining
with the Government Agent, therefore
the Commnissoner of Agriculture i
directed to convey to the aid Teagne
or he order, 5,792.12 acres, this being
25 per cent of the amount patented,
it appearing from the mape in the
Commiseoner'e office that the amount
of acres to be conveyed by the Stats
to the said Tegue are of equal vaae
as compared with any other 25 pwr
cent of aid lands patented Under
the above order there have been 5,-
617.12 acres of lands o conveyed to
Mr. Teague or his order, the convey
ance of the remainder of the mid 25
per cent to put of record when deeds
are made. Mr. Teague agreed to con-
fine himself to the 15 per cent. basis
on the other laad, selected by ldm
and not yet patented. The Secretary
of the Trutees wil file a copy of
thiJ order with the Comimnm owner of
Agriculture for is government.
On the same page of the report
from which come the foregoing ex-
tracts, appears the order of the
Trutees to sell auch land at $2.0O
to $2.50 per acre.
Teague was entitled, by contract,
for similar services to 25 per cent.





I








-36-


WHY THIS DEMAND?
The following letter shows an at-
tempt to make the State of Flprida pay
upon its bonded indebtedness not recog-
nizng any claim due by the United
States to the State of Florida:
Department of the Interior,
Washington, April 10th, 1879.
Messrs. Henry Meigs, Jr., & Smith.
New York.
Gentlemen:-I have this day address-
ed a letter to J. J. Cisco, Esq., Assis-
tant Treasurer of the United States at
New York, instructing him to present
to you for payment coupons of mterest
due on Bonds of the State of Florida,
held in trust by the Secretary of the
Interior for various Indian Tribes; pay-
ment to be made by you to the extent
of the funds of that State in your
hands
This Department will guarantee and
hold you harmless against the State of
Florda for the payment of the cou-
pons, out of the moneys beloging to
said State, held by you as aforesaid.
Very respectfully,
Your ob't servant,
(Signed) J. P. UPSHER,
Secretary.
Washington, D. C., April 11, 1879.
His Excellency, George, F. Drew, Gov-
ernor, Tallahasse, Florida.
Dear Sir:-Enclosed I send the letters
from New York to me from the Inter-
ior Dept. It will be seen by these that
Mr. Meigs was some kind of financial
agent for your State in 1861. I hope
from these that you will be able to get
your matter satisfactorily arranged. I
expect to leave next Monday and go to
Jacksonville by steamer from Savan-
nah, and I shall try to leave Jackson-
ville on Sunday, the 20th, for Tallahas-
see; shall avail myself of your kind
offer and stop off with you Monday.
Truly yours
(Signed) S. i. WAILES.


sorting to "Subtraction, Division, and
Silence."
I will do myself the honor to call
again and see you personally before I
leave.
Ver truly your obt. svt.
(Sign HARRISON REED.
Nothing more than this letter is
necessary to show what induced Secre-
tary Schurz to change the policy fol-
lowed for years in making patents from
Field Notes, to having agents work in
the field before patenting, which
worked such a hardship on the State
and its agent.


EXPLANATION OF IT.
Washington, D. C.,
(Copy) No. 381 Pa. Avenue,
March 24th, 1879.
HON. CARL SCHURZ,
Sec. Interior
Dear General:-Allow me the free-
dom to submit for your personal con-
sideration a few suggestions in view of
the belligerent attitude of the South,
and the State of Florida, as well in de-
manding further concessions while at
the same time seeking favors from the
Administration.
1st. Make no farther conveyances of
land to Florida under the Swamp Land
Act until the question of the legality of
the disposition of those already con-
veyed shall have been determined by
suits Senator Call is preparing to insti-
tute.
2nd. Adjudicate no claims for monies
spent or claimed to have been spent in
the Seminole War.
3d. Make immediate demand upon
the Governor for the payment of the
principal and interest of Florida State
Bonds of 1857 now past due, and held
by the Indian Trust Fund. Senator
Call who is opposing the old Democratic
leaders alleges fraud on the part of
men high m authority, anterior and
subsequent to the war, n substituting
these Bonds for Railroad or Internal
Improvement Bonds and is taking
steps to ascertain when, where and by
whom the alleged frauds were com-
mitted.
4th. Continue the vigorous policy
you have inaugurated in regard to de-
predations upon the Public Lands;
through reliable officers capable of such
discrimination so as not to involve inno-
cent parties. In one ease in our State
Messrs. Bixford and Dutton, two
Northern Republicans of high character
for fair dealing, I am informed are ar-
rainged for violation of law. I know
nothing of the merits of the casebut I
do know that they would not wlfully
violate the law, and that their fair
dealing with their employes, and their
Republican influence, have rendered
them obnoxious to. the rebel element,
which would rejoice to see them com-
pelled to leave the State.
-th. In selecting a Register for the
Land Office at Gainesvlle appoint a
Republican of high character and influ-
ence, instead of one who seeks to be
rewarded for improper conduct at elec-
tion olls, whom I understand has been
Tth. Appoint a Surveyor General
who will not add to his salary by re-


In c -.




Fo6'z


-37-


Increase to the State Gained by
Wailes Work.
Wailes' demands for the State of
Florida as its agent (see copy of letter
given to Senate Committee):
Hon. Willliam Windom, Secretary
United States Treasury, in exceptions
taken by him [Waile] on the disallow-
ances of the War Department, made in
Executive Document 203 to 47th Con-
gres, made by Maj. Thomas F. Barr
on May 20, 1882:
Allowances by War Depart-
ment -------------- .- 224,648.09
Disallowances
claimedby Wailes
(should have
been allowed)
from the account-
ing officers from
the War Depart-
ment settlement $39,440.96
Allowances made under that
demand --------------- 37,286.22
Allowances by the U. S.
Treasury Depatment (by
accounting officers) see
Ex. Do8---------------- 261,934.31
If we take these allowances- 37,286.22
together with the interest on
same at 7 per cent., which
was paid the State of Flor-
ida m the settlement of
July 1, 1902, when the State
received $1,089,158.66, and
add the interest on the
$37,286.22 to the extra
amount gained by said de-
mand, andwe have for that
portion of Wailes' work__ 116,146.70
Total------------- 158,482.99
Exp nQ of Wailcs
In collection of Indian war claim,
which brought to the State $1,09,-
158.06 without one dollar of expense to
the State, and from which Wailes has
not had one dollar.
General Bullock testifies that in 1892
he examined Wailes' expenditures and
found they amounted to.---- $23,000
Interest from January, 1892, to
July, 1906, 124 years, at 7 per
cent---------- --------- 20,125
Advances made to others -- ,750
Interest since 82. -------- 6,000
Expenses attending two ses-
sions of Legislature, includ-
ing railroad fare, board and


printing .--.---------------- 1,000
Total------------------ $68,87
I worked on these claims, commeec-
ingsoon after ntm t, July 7,
9,until May when I left Wash-
ington, D. C., for h eWt; but, that
n njur by my absence might come to
the' tte i the .o of the
claim, at my request Governor Miethell
appointed my brother, William E
iles, of Alabama, gent ce
June', IM (les than me month
the date I leftWas migtanad he, W.
E. Wailes, went at once to aUnton,
saw Florida's Senator and Members of
Congress and offed is sevces to
them; and then before leaving, as re-
uested by me, employed ers Shelly,

bama; Senator Butler, former a Sen-
ator from Soth Caro
Twoye ex-Coacgrsan S ly
ofAlwane wa befor the Hoa, of
state seou nt t this State
and gave id tat o If the whor
was completed whea tnh Secretary of
the Treasury made Us repot to Con-
g : Set e xective Document 68u De-
cember 16t 18 with
Allowance of ----------- $21,S8 .81
Andinterestd --m----ke te 88,18
Total ------. ----. 88.,667.16
Not a sngle change in that
stated account of that
date and that of the final
settlement, July 1, 1al ,
only to bring forward the
interest and make the
amount --------- ---$1,08,165L86
Will any honest man claim, with a h
a statement of facts before ehi that
S. I. Wailes left anythinaw undone that
he cold do to get a final settlement
from the Unite States for the State
of Florida, or that in any way be vio-
lated his contract, made under seal with
Governor Drew?
Ido notbelieve that the honest people
of the State of Florida, to whom my
work for the State was we know, nd
to whose officials and the Legislature
the work being done has been reported
at the close of each C ss waib that
amid contract, byrefs to pay, shall
be repudiated.
Ver respectfully
S. I WAILES,
For himself and his late associate, W.
K. Beard.


















Since this was printed a majority of the Senate Judiciary
Committee, composed of some of the ablest attorneys in the
SState, presented to the Senate a bill to allow S. I. Wailes, and
' the estate of William K. Beard to sue in the State's court on
the contract made by Governor Drew under seal with S. I.
Wailes. The recommendation of the Senate Committee was
4 defeated by one vote. That Committee had before it the
incontrovertible evidence that in the prosecution of the claim:
against the United Stat by me, from July 7, 1879, until its
payment to Florida, J5;1, 1902, that my expenses in the
matter had been about 1,000, and the State had not paid a
dollar (for expenses), but had received in bonds and money
July 1, 1902, the sum of one million eighty-nine thousand
one hundred and fifty-eight dollars and 66-100, so that up to
date the status of the whole matter is as follows:
The Legislature authorized Gov. Drew to make a con-
tract, all subsequent Governors and Legislatures up to the time
v/ //i that the money due the State was safely in her Treasury,
ratified that contract. That contract was made with myself,
I p as complied with according to its letter and its spirit, in
S3 yhat the State has received her due. The Legislature of 1903
offered me $12,500, saying in effect, I should receive no
larger sum. That amount I declined. I came before the
Legislature, which has just adjourned, and asked to be
allowed to submit my case to the courts of this State (as
arbitrator), that too has been refused. Is that repudiation
of the obligations of a contract, or not?
I have the honor to be,
Very respectfully,
SS. I. WAILES.


-C -T'---- ---~6'~iT. -r ----r--r:~---~.-;---- r-Il




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs