say in their letter, not to dwell upon contingencies coming within its scope that might make the time longer. Should the suit reach the House of Lords, for example, by appeal, it would not be easy to assign a limit to its duration. I trust, therefore, it will be thought that I exercise a proper discretion, as representing the interests of the United States, in determining not to expose myself to any of these hazards, and new ones that might even chance to spring out of them as time was opened for their operation. It seems to me, conclusively, that I should henceforth rather strive to obtain a decision of their suit as speedily as possible, regardless of the small and temporary diminution of the fund, should it be finally adjudged in their favor, which the foregoing payments to Madame de la Batut would occasion. Opposition has been effectively made to the claim up to the point, it is believed, that duty enjoined and prudence would sanction; to go farther seems not reconcilable with the latter, under the certain and contingent delays and dangers I set forth. The occasion may be a fit one for remarking, that when this claim first assumed a vexatious aspect last summer, my immediate wish and suggestions were to get a decree in favor of the United States for the general fund, leaving such fractional portion of it sub judice as would have been sufficient to satisfy the claim if established; thus cutting short delay from this source, by which this agency might have had the chance to be closed the sooner, and the bulk of the fund secured to the United States at the earliest possible day. The last I hold an object of pressing importance, encompassed, as all law suits more or less are, (to say nothing of the peculiar nature of this,) by hidden risks. But it was part of the vexation of the claim that our legal advisers found the course I desired to pursue impracticable, for the reason mentioned in the letter of the solicitors of the 22d of July, a copy of which was forwarded with my No. 15 on the 19th of August. Now that this obstruction is removed from my path by the determination I have taken in regard to it, I indulge the hope that no new one will be thrown across it; and can only repeat the assurance, that nothing within my power shall be left undone towards accelerating the suit, anxiously desiring, on all public and personal accounts, (if I may speak in the latter sense,) to see it terminated. In the continued hope that the decision, when it comes, may be favorable, I have the honor to remain, with great respect, your obedient servant, RICHARD RUSH. The Hon. JOHN FORSYTH, Secretary of State. S. Pleasanton to John Forsyth. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, FIFTH AUDITOR'S OFFICE, March 14, 1838. SIR: In reply to your letter of this morning, I have the honor to inform you that the amount of the appropriation made by the act of Congress of July 1, 1836, for the expenses of prosecuting the claim of the United States to the Smithsonian legacy, was remitted to their bankers in London, on the 16th of the same month-$10,000. Of which sum the said bankers have paid to the order of Richard Rush, the agent appointed under that act, from 1st August, 1836, to 31st December, 1837 Applied as follows, viz: Agent's salary for one year, ending 31st July, 1837-- $3,000 00 same period‒‒‒‒ Paid Clarke, Fynmore & Fladgate, solicitors, at London, for various professional services in relation to the legacy 2,000 00 889 77 Credited to Mr. Rush on accounts rendered by him-- $5,889 77 Leaving a balance, to be accounted for by him, of... $8,493 11 2,500 00 8,389 77 $103 34 The balance remaining unexpended by the bankers, of the appropriation in question, on the 31st of December last, was, as will be perceived from the above statement, $1,506,895. I have the honor to be, very respectfully, sir, your obedient servant, S. PLEASONTON. Hon. JOHN FORSYTH, Secretary of State. Richard Rush to John Forsyth. LONDON, March 28, 1838. SIR: Since the date of my last letter, the report of the master has been duly made, and yesterday it was confirmed. This is a step forward in the case which I am at length happy to announce. It is second in importance only to the decree of the court on the whole merits, and has laid the best foundation for speedily obtaining that decree. The precise sum that the report allows to Madame de la Batut is one hundred and fifty pounds and nine shillings, to be paid to her annually during her life, with a payment of arrears, to be calculated on this basis, from some period in 1834; the exact date of which I have not at this moment, but will mention when I next write. The court takes a recess next week for the Easter holidays; these will last until the 17th or 20th of April. The case will be set down for another hearing before the court at as early a day as I can command after it re-assembles. A decree, I am informed, will be pronounced after this hearing on all the facts as settled by the master-a favorable one, as I hope, for the United States. By the determination I took respecting the claim of Madame de la Batut, as announced in my last, her professional advisers, knowing that she can now get no more than the report allows her, are interested in co-operating with me towards a prompt decision, instead of resorting to adverse proceedings to prolong or thwart it-a course which they have been more or less pursuing hitherto. On better grounds than ever I think I may, therefore, flatter myself that the case approaches its conclusion; and I will only add that its remaining stages shall be watched by me with a care proportioned to the auspicious results that I believe to be near at hand. I have the honor to remain, with great respect, your obedient servant, RICHARD RUSH. Hon. JOHN FORSYTH, Secretary of State. Richard Rush to John Forsyth. LONDON, April 24, 1838. SIR: The court re-assembled last week, since which I have been doing all that is practicable, by personal calls upon the solicitors and otherwise, to urge on the case: and shall continue this course. Judging by all they say to me, and my own knowledge of the present situation of the case, I have a confident and, I trust, well-founded belief that May will not elapse without its being brought to a hearing. Referring to my No. 22, I now beg leave to state that the 22d of September, 1834, is the date from which the annuity allowed by the master's report to Madame de la Batut was to commence; and that the arrears to be paid to her, in the event of a decision in favor of the United States, were to be computed from that time to the 22d of March last. This makes three years and six months, so that the sum due on an annuity of £150 9s. would be £526 11s. 6d. I have the honor to be, with great respect, your obedient servant, Hon. JOHN FORSYTH, Secretary of State. RICHARD RUSH. Richard Rush to John Forsyth. LONDON, May 3, 1838. SIR: I am glad to say that the confidence expressed in my last that a hearing of the case was near at hand has been justified, even sooner than I expected, for it was heard on the 1st of this month, and I am now to have the honor of reporting to you the nature of the hearing. Mr. Pemberton, our leading counsel, rose, and after recapitulating the general nature of the case, as formerly heard by the court, proceeded to state that the reference to the master as ordered by the decree in February, 1837, had duly taken place, and that all the requisite evidence had been obtained in England and from Italy and France, as to the facts on the happening of which the United States were to become entitled to the fund bequeathed by Mr. Smithson for the purpose mentioned in his will. These facts I need not here repeat, being already set forth specially in my No. 9, of the 25th of March, 1837. Overlooking a volume of matter merely technical in the evidence and report, or now become immaterial to the main points, it will be sufficient to say that it was satisfactorily established by the former that Henry James Hungerford, named in the pleadings, was dead; that he died at Pisa, in the summer of 1835; that he was not married at the time of his death, nor at any time; and that he died childless. It was not found how old he was at the time of his death; nor is that material to any of the issues. As to John Fitall, it was found that he died in London, in June, 1834; and as to Madame de la Batut, the mother of Henry James Hungerford, the master, on the evidence before him, found her to have a claim on the estate of Mr. Smithson to the amount of one hundred and fifty pounds and nine shillings a year, payable as long as she lives, and for the arrears of this annual allowance from the 22d of September, 1834, to the 23d of last March. The establishment of all the foregoing facts will be found to meet the essential inquiries to which the master's attention was directed by the court's first decree, as reported in my No. 9. Mr. Smithson's will having provided, among other things, that on the death of his nephew, Henry James Hungerford, "without leaving child or children," the whole of his property should go to the United States; and this primary fact being now incontestably established in due and legal form under the authority of the court, and all other proof required by the pleadings obtained, Mr. Pemberton asked for a decree declaring the United States entitled to the property. The representative of the attorney general, who was present in court, said that he believed everything had been established, as stated, and that the rules relating to public charities, as applicable to this case, calling for no objection on the part of the Crown, none would be interposed-a course that falls in with what was said by the same officer on the occasion of the first decrce, as reported in my No. 7. The counsel of the defendants, Messieurs Drummond, agreed also to what was stated, and had nothing to allege in opposition to the claim of the United States. The counsel of Madame de la Batut were also content; the course I took, as made known in my No. 21, having put an end to opposition from that quarter. All essential facts being at length fully and formally established, and opposition from all quarters quicted by the measures I have directed, there seemed no reason why a decree in favor of the United States should not at once be pronounced; but Mr. Pemberton having stated that, in the end, a petition would have to be presented for a transfer of |