officers so furloughed shall receive one half only of the pay to which they would have been entitled if on leave of absence.
Rank of assistant surgeons under certain circumstances.If any assistant surgeon shall have been absent from the United States, on duty, at the time others of his date were examined, he shall if not rejected at a subsequent examination be entitled to the same rank with them; and if from any cause, his relative rank cannot be assigned to him, he will retain his original position on the register.
Rations.One ration per day, only, shall be allowed to all officers when attached to vessels for sea service.
No allowance to be made for drawing bills, &c.Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That no allowance shall hereafter be made to any officer, in the naval service of the United States, for drawing bills, for receiving or disbursing money, or transacting any business for the government of the United States, nor shall he be allowed servants, or pay for servants, or clothing or rations for them or pay for the same, nor shall any allowance be made to him for rent of quarters or to pay rent for furniture, or for lights or fuel, or transporting baggage. It is hereby expressly declared that the yearly allowance provided in this act is all the pay, compensation, and allowance that shall be received under any circumstances whatever, by any such officer or person, except for travelling expenses when under orders, for which ten cents per mile shall be allowed.
Approved, March 3, 1835.
Statute ⅠⅠ.
Chap. XXVIII.—An Act supplementary to an act entitled “An act to authorize the extension, construction, and use of a lateral branch of the Baltimore and Ohio railroad into and within the District of Columbia,” passed December, eighteen hundred and twenty-nine.[1]
Construction of road within the District of Columbia.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company be, and they are hereby, authorized to locate and construct their said road within the city of Washington, through squares nine hundred and nine, eight hundred and eighty-eight, eight hundred and fifty-eight, eight hundred and thirty-two, nine hundred and eight, eight hundred and eighty-seven, eight hundred and fifty-six, eight hundred and fifty-seven, eight hundred and thirty-one, eight hundred and seven, seven hundred and seventy-six, seven hundred and fifty-one, seven hundred and eighteen, in the same manner, and with the same rights and privileges which are granted to them by the act to which this is a supplement, for the construction of their said road within the District of Columbia, beyond the limits of the city of Washington, any thing in the said act contained to the contrary notwithstanding, and the assent of Congress is hereby given to the construction of the said railroad through or over any of the said lots or parts of lots which are owned by the United States.
- ↑ The following decision of the Supreme Court is introduced, as it is one of the occasions in which the Baltimore and Ohio railroad has been the subject of the legislation of Congress.The state of Maryland, in 1836, passed a law directing a subscription of three millions of dollars to be made to the capital stock of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company, with the following proviso, “that if the said company shall not locate the said road in the manner provided in this act, then and in that case, they shall forfeit one million of dollars to the state of Maryland, for the use of Washington county.” In March, 1840, the state passed another act, repealing so much of the prior act as made it the duty of the company to construct the road by the route therein prescribed, remitting and releasing the penalty, and directing the discontinuance of any suit brought to recover the same. Held, that the proviso was a measure of state policy, which it had a right to change, if that policy was afterwards discovered to be erroneous; and neither the commissioners, nor the county, nor any one of its citizens, acquired any separate or private interest under it, which could be maintained in a court of justice. State of Maryland v. The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company, 3 Howard, 534.It was a penalty, intended to be imposed on the company for disobeying the law; and the assent of the company to it, as a supplemental charter, was not sufficient to deprive it of the character of a penalty. Ibid.A clause of forfeiture in a law is to be construed differently from a similar clause in an engagement between individuals. A legislature can impose it as a punishment; but individuals can only make it a matter of contract. Being a penalty, imposed by law, the legislature had a right to remit it. Ibid.
