Cases Decided in the United States Court of Claims Volume 54 (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1920 Excerpt: ...v. United States, supra. As was said in the case just cited: "It is an error to suppose that the officers of customs, including the Secretary, are in regard to this law created a special tribunal to ascertain and decide conclusively upon a right to drawback. Their function is entirely ministerial." The drawback provision being a governmental grant of a privilege or benefit is to be construed in favor of the Government and against the party claiming the grant. United States v. Allen, 163 U. S., 499; Swan, etc., Co. v. United States, 190 U. S., 143; Hannibal etc., R. R. v. Missouri Packet Co., 125 U. S., 260. In granting gratuities Congress may specify the conditions upon which it will be bestowed and designate the persons who shall be entitled to receive it. Labadie v. United States, 32 C. Cls., 368; Davis v. United States, 17 C. Cls., 292. In the last case cited, which was a suit for recovery of drawback, the court said, pp. 300, 301: "In the first place, as we held in Campbell's case (12 C. Cls. 470) so we hold here, that a drawback is a mere gratuity, proffered by the Government, imposing no obligation on the Government until the exporter's right thereto is ascertained and established in the manner prescribed by law; and that not until after all the preliminary steps and acts have been taken and done in accordance with law and regulations can a claimant's right to the drawback become established. Opinion of the Court. "When a government declares by law that certain specified acts must be done, in order to a citizen becoming entitled to a gratuity out of the public treasury, to which, aside from that law, he would have no right, every one of the acts must be done before he can claim the gratuity." When the drawback statute provides...