Title: Amos T. Akerman to D. M. DuBoise, 15 December 1871
Date: December 15, 1871
Source: Transcribed from digital images or a microfilm reproduction of the original item. For a description of the editorial rationale behind our treatment of the correspondence, see our statement of editorial policy.
Location: National Archives and Records Administration
Whitman Archive ID: nar.03548
Contributors to digital file: Elizabeth Lorang, John Schwaninger, Anthony Dreesen, and Melanie Krupa
Dec. 15, 1871.
Hon. D. M. DuBoise,
H. of R.
I have received your letter of the 7th instant, with its enclosures. They do not remove the obstacles to paying Mr. Weems's claim.
The case is simply this: Mr. Milledge, the District Attorney, or Mr. Morrill, the Commissioner, or both, thought proper to employ Mr. Weems to appear for the United States in proceedings against persons charged with violating the Neutrality Laws; and for this service pay is claimed by Mr. Weems.
The fatal deficiency is, the want of authority for such employment from the Secretary of State or Attorney General, or any other proper officer. I know no law or regulation authorizing the Commissioners or District Attorneys to employ counsel at the expense of the United States. If, as it is stated in one of the papers, Mr. Milledge was unable on account of sickness to attend to the business, that circumstance would have authorized him to employ Mr. Weems as his substitute, and Mr. Weems would have been entitled to the legal fees which the law gives to the District Attorney. But I do not understand that such is the claim presented.
A. T. Akerman,
Mr. Weems' claim