
    GORDON’S CASE. Michael Gordon v. The United States.
    
      On the Proofs.
    
    
      Immediately after the capture of Savannah, a first sergeant of a troop of United States cavalry certifies to the commanding officer that the claimant has concealed, and aided United States soldiers who have escaped from the rebel prisons. The commanding officer sends a communication stating the fact, and inclosing the first sergeant’s statement, to the chief quartermaster. On the trial the claimant proves the signature of the commanding officer, and offers both papers in evidence as proof of his own loyalty.
    
    The official contemporaneous reports and communications of public officers made in the line of their duty, before the controversy began, are admissible in evidence. And the communication of a first sergeant of a troop of- cavalry to the commanding officer at Savannah, made immediately after the capture of that city, showing that a resident had concealed and aided United States soldiers escaping from rebel prisons, and the communication of the commanding officer to the chief quartermastor of the army on the same subject, are in effect official reports, which may be put in evidence for, what they may be worth as proof tending to establish a party's loyalty.
    
      
      Messrs. Hughes, Denver & Peclc for tbe claimant:
    This claim is for sis bales of upland cotton, owned by the claimant, and taken by the United States authorities at Savannah, and sent to New York and sold.
    The testimony shows that two bales and a large quantity of loose cotton belonging to the claimant were taken by the United States authorities when General Sherman’s army took possession of Savannah. The two bales weighed 510 and 515 pounds respectively, and there were two or three thousand pounds of loose cotton.
    The ownership and loyalty of the claimant being established, as well as the seizure of the cotton by the United States authorities, a judgment is prayed for by the claimant for $1,059 36, that being the net proceeds of the sale of the same, as shown by the reply of the Treasury.
    
      Mr. Alexander Johnston, for the defendants, filed no brief.
   Nott, J.,

delivred the opinion of the court:

This is an action, brought under the Abandoned, or captured property act, to recover $1,406, the net proceeds of six bales of upland cotton captured at Savannah.

The only point in the case relates to the admissibility of evidence. The claimant proves the signature of General John W. Geary, commanding officer at Savannah, immediately after the capture of that city, and offers in evidence the following communication, with the report upon which it is an indorsement :

“Headquarters City oe SavaNNAh,
“ December 28,1864.
“Michael Gordon, the bearer, has been very kind and beneficial to the prisoners of our army at this place. He should be rewarded, and I most respectfully commend him to you.
“ Yours, truly,
“ JNO. W. GEAEY,
Brigadier General Commanding City.
“ Brigadier General EastoN,
Chief Quartermaster Army of Georgia.”
“ Savannah, Georgia, December 21,1864.
“ General : Tbe bearer, Michael Gordon, a citizen of this city, at the risk of his life, as he was hiding from conscription, at' the time concealed the undersigned, escaped Federal prisoners of war. He has some cotton which he wishes to obtain protection for. Hoping, general, that you will grant it and any other favor that he may request, we have the honor to be, very respectfully, your humble obedient servants,
“LOUIS NUGENT,
“ Mrst Sergeant Troop F, 12th New Yorlc Cavalry.
“ J. F. WILLIAMS,
Company S, 95th Neio Yorlc Volunteers.
“ Brigadier General Geary.”

The official contemporaneous reports and communications of public officers, made in the line of their duty, before the controversy between the parties began, this court has always admitted in evidence for what they might be worth. We think this comes within the rule. The certificate of Sergeant Nugent is, in effect, a report to his commanding officer; the indorsement thereon of General Geary is, in effect, an official communication to the chief quartermaster of the army of Georgia. Bequiring a claimant to call as witnesses the defendants’ officers, to prove by them the contents of their official reports, would work a public inconvenience. Such reports, when admitted, are open to explanation and contradiction, and are received with caution, and taken only for what they may be worth.

As to the claimant’s loyalty, ownership, and right to the proceeds, they are proven to the satisfaction of the court, and its judgment is that the claimant recover the net proceeds of six bales of upland cotton, captured at Savannah, being $175 33 a bale, amounting in the aggregate to $1,051 98.  