Mouat v. United States
United States Court of Claims
The Reporters’ statement of the case: The only allegation of the petition involved in the decision1 will be found stated in the opinion of the court. The question in this case is as to whether a paymaster’s-clerk is an officer in the Navy. The case of Hendee, lately decided by this court, is not conclusive on this point.
Read the full summary
The Reporters’ statement of the case: The only allegation of the petition involved in the decision1 will be found stated in the opinion of the court. The question in this case is as to whether a paymaster’s-clerk is an officer in the Navy. The case of Hendee, lately decided by this court, is not conclusive on this point. It is decided in that case that a paymaster’s clerk is an officer of the Navy within the meaning of the Act of March 3, 1883 (22 Stat. L., 472, 473), known as the longevity pay act. But it is recognized in the opinion rendered that a paymaster’s clerk may be considered as an…
1Opinion of the Court
Richardson, Ch. J.,
delivered the opinion of the court:
The claimant alleges in his petition that on the 16th of November, 1885, he was appointed a paymaster’s clerk in the Navy; that he accepted the appointment November 19, 1885, took.the oath of office on the same day, and entered upon his duties, and that he traveled 1, 041 miles, under orders, for which he has not been'paid. He claims 8 cents a mile, under the provisions of the Act of June 30, 1876, chapter 159 (Supp. Bev. Stat., 218, 219, par. 1), allowing that rate for travel to “ such officers [of the Navy] while so engaged [on public…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United States v. HartwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1868
- United States v. TempleSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Hendee v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1887