That letter
was never answered and I continued service three times a week till
3d of September following, then run twice a week.
Thus it appears that this contractor, who in August, 1860, claimed that
he continued full service upon the invitation of his own unanswered
letter for less than four months, insists twenty-seven years after the
date of the alleged service that he performed such service for seventeen
months, and up to October, 1860. Not only has he himself in this manner
almost conclusively shown that the claim now made and allowed is
exorbitant, but the evidence gives rise to a strong presumption that it
is entirely fictitious.
The remainder of the amount allowed to the claimant in this bill is
based upon an alleged performance by the contractor of the same mail
service which has been referred to from October 1, 1860, to February 14,
1861, a period of four months and fourteen days.
Prior to October 1, 1860, the claimant's contract was annulled and a new
or more extended route established, entirely covering that upon which he
had carried the mails. Thereupon a month's extra pay was allowed to him,
and new contractors undertook the service and were paid therefor by the
Government for the period covered by the claimant's alleged service.
From the 14th day of February, 1861, Mr. Belding's contract with the
Government was reinstated; but if he performed the service alleged
during the period of four months and fourteen days immediately prior to
that date, it is quite clear that he did so under an arrangement with
the new contractors, and not under circumstances creating any legal or
equitable claim against the Government.
Pages:
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441