United States v. Mitchell
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. This was a suit by the appellee, Charles Mitchell, to recover a balance which he claimed to be due him as Indian interpreter at the Santee agency in thé State of Nebraska, under section 2070, title XXIII., of the Revised Statutes.
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. This was a suit by the appellee, Charles Mitchell, to recover a balance which he claimed to be due him as Indian interpreter at the Santee agency in thé State of Nebraska, under section 2070, title XXIII., of the Revised Statutes. That section, and section 2076,-which constitutes part of the same title, and also relates to the compensation of interpreters, are as follows: Sec. 2070. “ The salaries of interpreters lawfully employed in the service of the United States in Oregon, Utah, and New Mexico, shall be five hundred dollars a year each, and of all so…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Woods
It is contended on behalf of the- United States that, by the appropriation acts which cover the period for which the appellee claims compensation, Congress* expressed its purpose to suspend the operation of section 2070 of the Revised Statutes, and to reduce for that period the salaries of the appellee and other interpreters of the same class from $400 to $300 per annum. We think this contention is well founded. ■
The law fixing the salaries of interpreters, as found in section 2070 of the Revised Statutes, was first passed in the Indian appropriation act of February 27, 1851, 9 Stat. 587.…
2Cited by69 opinions
- United States v. WillSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- United States v. DickersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Maine Community Health Options v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2020
- United States v. LangstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Moda Health Plan, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2018
64 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.