Relief of Certain Claimants who Sufferd Loss by Fire in Minnesota During October, 1918, Hearing ..., on S.2667 ..., Dec 21, 1932
1932 - 145 pages
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
50 per cent accept actual adjustment agreed amount appeal ARNOLD attorneys basis believe bill called caused cent CHAIRMAN city of Cloquet claimants claims committee companies compromise Congress consider consideration County course courts of Minnesota damage DANCER Davis decision determined director district dollar Duluth entered entire equity evidence fact fair final fire sufferers five further give Government Governor hearing held HOLMES House interest judges judgment jury lawyers letter liability litigation loss matter ment miles Minnesota never Northern October offer origin paid payment percentage persons plaintiff presented proposition question Railroad Administration Railway reason record referred representing result rule Senator BAILEY Senator LOGAN settle settlement situation started statement stipulation submitted Supreme Court taken territory testimony tion trial tried understand United verdict witnesses YETKA
Page 41 - Any person who charges or collects, or attempts to charge or collect, either directly or indirectly, any fee or other compensation for assisting in any manner a veteran...
Page 91 - MR. DAVIS: The supreme court has to-day affirmed the district court of St. Louis County in the case of Philip Hall v. James C. Davis, as agent of the President under the transportation act. The supreme court found the defendant responsible for the destruction of property in the fires of October, 1918. When Senator Kellogg and I had a conference with you in Washington...
Page 49 - ... detail, the Railroad Administration, with due respect to the decisions of the courts of Minnesota, and in spite of those decisions, still believes that, as a matter of fairness and in fact, it is not liable for the destruction of that city, and that the forest fires in Minnesota in the fall of 1918 would have occurred to the same extent and with the same destructiveness if there had been no railroads located in that State. The Railroad Administration still retains the view that the liability...
Page 48 - Hon. JAMES C. DAVIS, Director General of Railroads, Washington, DC MY DEAR MR. DAVIS : The supreme court has to-day affirmed the district court of St. Louis County in the case of Philip Hall v. James C. Davis, as agent of the President under the transportation act. The supreme court found tne defendant responsible for the destruction of property in the fires of October, 1918.
Page 41 - ... under this act, shall, upon conviction thereof, be subject to a fine of not more than $500 or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both.
Page 41 - SEC. 2. No payment under the provisions of this act shall be made unless an application therefor is filed with the Secretary of the Treasury by or on behalf of the person entitled to payment within two years after the date of the enactment of this act. All applications shall be referred to the United States Railroad Administration for investigation and adjustment, and payment shall be made by the Secretary of the Treasury in accordance therewith. " SEC. 3. The words " person " and
Page 139 - Of course, you gentlemen know that I made a written proposition. I said : ' Gentlemen, this is the best I can do ; take it or leave it.' If they preferred to take 50 per cent in cash, I did not deprive them of any legal right. They had their choice. If that is coercion, there was coercion.
Page 64 - The committee will stand adjourned until 2:30. (Whereupon, at 12 o'clock m., the committee took a recess until 2:30 o'clock pm) AFTER RECESS The committee reconvened, at the expiration of the recess, at 2.30 o'clock pm The CHAIRMAN. The committee will please come to order.
Page 41 - That no person who makes claim under this Act by virtue of having acquired and succeeded to the rights of the original claimant through purchase and assignment, from said claimant of said claim, shall receive more than the amount actually paid for such claim and assignment.