Viewing page 155 of 248

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

we have control of and by this decision this is remitted to the Lessee, leaving us nothing. Or is it to be understood that 1/2 is to be remitted before the division with the owner, giving the Bureau and the lessee each 1/4 of the entire rent?

The Court of Claims takes cognizance I apprehend of cases of damage done & property of loyal men by U.S. troops. There is no other fair ground for compensation here. Ought this Bureau out of its limited resources to pay compensation when another method is expressly provided to meet the case?

Messrs Smith & Bowman after their cotton was ginned & baled were so unfortunate as to have seven (7) bales stolen. The share due the Bureau was supposed to be fourteen (14) of which they turned in seven (7) in the hypothesis that the stolen cotton was entirely out of our share. They immediately shipped all the rest, regardless of our claim, and without my knowledge I informed Mr Bowman that we considered them bound for their full rental just if none had been lost. But that in view of the great damage he had suffered I would share the loss with him proportionately. This account is still unsettled The portion we received was shared with the owner of the place and our share of it shipped to New York-

I would respectfully urge that this Bureau is not to render compensation to its leases for loss by ordinary failure of crops. That the Court of Claims offers compensation for the damage done by troops. That the loss by stealing of cotton is one which should justly be borne by by the lessee alone & not even than by us - and that in shipping