# Prologue — Williams v. United States

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386008_0375%3A0

## Record

- **Collection:** Supreme Court brief
- **Document type:** Prologue
- **Published:** January 1, 1933
- **Citation:** 289 U.S. 553

## Text

CERTIFICATE

Supreme Court of the United States
OCTOBER TERM, 1932

No. 728

THOMAS 8. WILLIAMS
vs.

_ THE UNITED STATES

ON CERTIFICATE FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS

FILED FEBRUARY 24, 1933

(37,425)

(37,425)

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
OCTOBER TERM, 1932.

No. 728

THOMAS S. WILLIAMS
vs.
THE UNITED STATES
ON CERTIFICATE PROM SHE COURT OF CLAIMS

INDEX

Original Print

Certincate from Count of Cinims. 6.605664 oo cdedkcccesca 1 1
ate TRL SE Sa Gc oso xc bela isic eo ray ee 1 1
(QUGHIIGtia CUTeION ssc ane who ween anaes HN 4
PUGECN s ENN TUNER Sout 5 criss ade CSS ESOS Te 6 4
Exhibit “A"—DPetition of Thomas S. Williams......... ‘3 hy
HOPES - COPUUUOG Sf i5ce5 5c oc ceases kao been een 12 S

upp & DeETWeILeR (INC.), PRInrTeRS, WASHINGTON, TD. C., FEBRUARY 27. 1923

ROI YT One

SOR ANTE Me

[fol. 1]
IN COURT OF CLAIMS OF THE UNITED STATES

No. 42313

Tuomas S, “YILLIAMS
v.

Tue Unirep States
STATEMENT OF Facts anp CERTIFICATE

Messrs. George A. King, George R. Shields, and Herman
J. Galloway appeared for the plaintiff.

Messrs. Charles F. Kincheloe and H. B. Holland appeared
for the defendant.

Before Acting Chief Justice Green, Judge Littleton, Judge
Whaley (Judge Williams Taking no Part; Chief Justice
Booth Taking no Part on Account of Tllness)

The Court of Claims hereby certifies that the record of
the above-entitled case now pending before it Ciscloses the
following:

The plaintiff, Thomas S. Williams, has duly filed his peti-
tion in the Court of Claims on the eighth day of February,
1933, in which he claims and asks judgment against the
United States for the sum of $1,458.33, as salary due him
from July 1, 1932, to January 31, 19338, all of whieh will
more particularly appear from his said petition, a copy of
which accompanies this certificate and is marked ‘‘Ex-
hibit A’’.

The petition of the plaintiff, among other things, alleges
[fol. 2] that on November 1, 1929, he was appointed by the
President of the United States, a Judge of the Court of
Claims by and with the consent of the Senate; that he took
the oath of office and entered on duty on November 11, 1929,
and has continuously since that date and still is exercising
the duties and powers of a Judge of the Court of Claims.

From and after the date of his appointment and entry
upon his duty, he received a salary as Judge of the Court
of Claims at the rate of $12,500 a year until June 30, 1932,
and this salary was paid pursuant to the Act of December

5)

13, 1926, Ch. 6, See. 1, 44 Stat. 919, ‘‘An Act to fix the sala-
ries of certain judges of the United States’’, providing as
follows: ‘‘To the Chief Justice of the Court of Claims and
to each of the other judges thereof the sum of $12,500 per
year.”’

From and after July 1, 1932, he has been paid only at
the rate of $10,000 a vear owing to a ruling of the Comp-
troller General of the United States that the salary of a
Judge of the Court of Claims is reduced to that amount by
the provisions of Part IT of the Act of June 30, 1932, ‘*Mak-
ing appropriations for the Legislative Branch of the Gov-
ernment for the fiseal year ending June 30, 19337’, ete., Ch.
314, 47 Stat. 382, 399-403.

The amount of difference in said salary between the legal
rate of $12,500 and the lesser amount paid of $10,000 a year
amounts, from July 1, 1932, to January 31, 1933, to $1,458.33,
[fol.3] being the amount which he claims.

The petition further alleges that plaintiff is advised by
counsel and believes that by means of no other proceeding
or in no other court can he sue to recover the salary herein
claimed or obtain an authoritative definition of the status
of the Court of Claims.

That his claim is based upon the following, amone other,
provisions of the Constitution and statutes of the United
States:

Constitution: Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 9, provid-
ing that ‘‘The Congress shall have power,’’ among other
things, ‘‘To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme
Court.’

Article III, Section 1, providing:

‘*The judicial power of the United States shall be vested
in one Supreme Court, and such inferior courts as Congress
may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges,
both of the Supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their
offices during good behavior; and shall, at stated times, re-
ceive for their services a compensation, which shall not be
diminished during their continuance in offiee.”’

Article TIT, Section 2, providing that ‘The judicial power
shall extend’’, amone other things ‘*to controversies to
Which the United States shall be a party.’

FR TD

%)
»

The Act of February 24, 1855, creating the Court of

Claims; the Act of March 3, 1863, conferring upon the Court
of Claims the power to enter final judgrnent upon claims

against the United States; the Act of March 12, 1863; the
Aet of Mareh 17, 1866; the Act of May 9, 1866; the Act
[fol. 4] of March 3, 1887, commonly known as the Tucker
Act, entitled ‘*An Act to provide for the bringing of suits
against the Government of the United States’’, conferring
jurisdiction upon the Court of Claims, among other things,
{o hear and determine ‘‘claims founded upon the Constitu-
tion of the United States or any law of Congress’

Also the Judicial Code, so far as it relates to ~ Court
of Claims: the Aet of December 13, 1926, to which reference
has hereinabove been made; and the Act of July 1, 1932,
making appropriation for the payment of the salaries of
the Judges of the Court of Claims for the year ending June
30, 1933.

That plaintiff was informed that about the thirteenth day
of July, 1982, the Comptroller General of the United States
held that the Court of Claims as well as certain courts of
the Distriet of Columbia are ‘‘legislative’’ rather than
‘Cconstitutional’’ courts, and that the compensation of the
Judees thereof might constitutionally be diminished during
their term of office.

That plaintiff is the owner of the cl.'m of which there has
heen no assignment or transfer and has at all times borne
{rue allegiance to the Government of the United States and
never in any way voluntarily aided, abetted, or given en-
couragement to rebellion against the said Government, and
is a citizen of the United States.

To this petition, the defendant has filed a demurrer on
the following grounds:

‘1. The petition does not state a cause of action against
(fol. 5] the defendant within the jurisdiction of this Court.

2. The petition does not state a cause of action against
the defendant.

3. The defendant specially demurs to sail petition for
the reason that the judges of the Court of Claims of the
United States are not judges of ‘inferior courts’ within
the meaning of Section 1 of Article 3 of the Constitution
of the United States, and are, therefore, not ‘judges whose

PAPO METEOR eR

4

compensation may not, under the Constitution, be dimin-
ished during their continuance in office’ within the meaning
of Section 107 (a) (5) of the Act of June 30, 1932, ¢. 314,
47 Stat. 382, 402.’’

The defendant, by the filing of this demurrer, admits the
facts stated in the petition to be true, and upon the record
before it the Court finds it necessary for a proper disposi-
tion of the’case that certain constitutional questions should
be determined. These constitutional questions are as fol-
lows:

Questions CERTIFIED

I. Does Section 1, Article ITI, of the Constitution of the
United States apply to the Court of Claims and forbid a
reduction of the compensation of the Judges thereof during
their continuance in office?

II. Does the provision of Seetion 2, Article III, of the
Constitution, wherein it is stated that ‘‘The Judicial Power
shallextend * * * to controversies to which the United
States shall be a party’’, apply to the Court of Claims, and
does this provision authorize the creation and establish-
[fol. 6] ment of that Court?

III. Can the compensation of a Judge of the Court of
Claims be lawfully diminished during his continuance in
office?

It is respectfully requested that the Supreme Court of
the United States give appropriate instructions on the
above questions and certify and transmit the same to the
Court of Claims of the United States for its guidance in
the further progress of the case.

Wm. R. Green, Acting Chief Justice. Benjamin H.
Littleton, Judge. Richard S. Whaley, Judge.

[fol. 7] Exarsit ‘‘A’’ To CEertiFicAaTE
In rus Court or CLAIms
No. 42313

Tuomas W. WiILuiAMs
v.

Tue Unitep States
Petition—Filed February 8, 1933

To the Honorable the Court of Claims:

I. The plaintiff was on the Ist day of November, 1929,
appointed by the President of the United States, by and
with the advice and consent of the Senate, a judge of the
Court of Claims. He took the oath of office and entered
on duty on the 11th day of November, 1929, and has been
continuously since that date and still is exercising the du-
ties and powers of a judge of the Court of Claims.

II. From and after the date of his appointment and entry
upon duty he received a salary as judge of the Court of
Claims at the rate of $12,500 a year, prescribed by law,
until the 30th day of June, 1982.

From and after July 1, 1932, he has been paid only at the

rate of $10,000 a year, owing to a ruling of the Comptroller
General of the United States that the salary of a judge of
the Court of Claims is reduced to that amount bythe pro-
visions of Part II of the act of June 30, 1952, ‘* Making
appropriations for the Legislative Branch of the Govern-
ment for the fiseal year ending June 30, 1985,7" ete. Ch.
314, 47 Stat. 382, 399-403.
[fol.8] The amount of difference in said salary between
the legal rate of $12,500, and the lesser amount paid at
410,000 a year, amounts from July 1, 1952, to January 31,
1933, to $1,458.33, which amount he claims.

III. This suit is brought by plaintiff with reluctance to
sue in the court of which he is a member. He sues prin-
cipally to obtain an authoritative decision in regard to the
status of the Court of Claims as an inferior court of the
United States, the compensation of whose members may

6

not constitutionally be diminished during their continuance
in office.

IV. Plaintiff is advised by counsel and believes that by
means of no other proceedings or in no other court can he
sue to recover the salary herein claimed or obtain an au-
theritative definition of the status of the Court of Claims.

V. This claim is based upon the following, among other,
provisions of the Constitution and statutes of the United
States:

Constitution: Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 9, provid-
ing that ‘‘The Congress shall have power,’’ among other
things, ‘*To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme
Court.”’

Article III, Section 1, providing:

€ ‘*The judicial power of the United States snall be ve-ted
; in one Supreme Court, and such inferior courts as Con-
gress may from time to time ordain and establish. The
judges, both of the Supreme and inferior courts, shall hold
their offices during good behavior; and shall, at stated times,
receive for their services a compensation, which shall not
be diminished during their continuance in office.’’

[fol. 9] Article LLL, Section 2, providing that **The judicial
power shall extend,’’ among other things **to controversies
to Which the United States shall be a party.’

Act of February 24, 1895, Ch. 122, 10 Stat. 612, **.An Act
to establish a court for the investigation of claims against
the United States,’’ creating the Court of Claims,

Act of March 3, 1863, Ch. 92, 12 Stat. 765, *‘An act to
amend ‘An Act to establish a court for the investigation of
claims against the United States, approved February 24,
1855,’ ** conferring upon the Court of Claims the power to
enter final judgments.

Act of March 12, 18638, Ch. 120, 12 Stat. 820, conferring
upon said court jurisdiction of all claims for abandoned or
captured property in any State or Territory designated as
in insurrection against the Government of the United States
and providing for judgments in favor of owners of such
property for the proceeds thereof.

Act of March 17, 1866, Ch. 19, 14 Stat. 9, ‘*An Act in re-
lation to the Court of Claims,’’ repealing the provision for
estimate or revision by the Secretary of the Treasury over

7

judgments of the Court of Claims and providing for appeal
to the Supreme Court from such judgments.

Act of May 9, 1866, Ch. 75, 14 Stat. 44, an act extending
the jurisdiction of said court to claims of any paymaster
or quartermaster, ete, or other disbursing officer of the
United States for relief from responsibility for Government
funds, ete,

Act of March 3, 1887, commonly known as the Tucker Act,
Ch. 359, 24 Stat. 505, **An Act to provide for the bringing
of suits against the Government of the United States,’’ re-
defining the jurisdiction of the Court of Claims and con-
ferring upon it jurisdiction, among other things, ‘tof claims |
(fol. 10] founded upon the Constitution of the United States
or any law of Congress,’’ ete.

Judicial Code, Ch. 7, relating to the Court of Claims,
particularly Section 136 thereof, now included in the United
States Code, Title 28, as Section 241, providing that the
Court of Claims shall consist of a Chief Justice and four
judges, all to be appointed by the President by and with
the advice and consent of the Senate, and to hold their
offices during good behavior.

Act of December 13, 1926, Ch. 6, Seetion 1, 44 Stat. 919,
“An Act to fix the salaries of certain judges of the United
States,’’ providing as follows: ‘To the Chief Justice of
the Court of Claims and to each of the other judges thereof
the sum of $12,500 per year.’’

Act of July 1, 1982, Ch. 361, 47 Stat. 475, 491, making
appropriations for the Departments of State and Justice
and for the Judiciary, ete., for the fiscal vear ending June
30, 1933, in which appropriation is made for payment of
the salaries of the Chief Justice and the four judges of
the Court of Claims at $12,500 each a year.

VI. No action has been had on said claim in Congress,
The only action bearing on this question of which plaintiff
is informed is that on or about the 13th day of July, 1952,
the Comptroller General of the United States held that the
Court of Claims, as well as the higher courts of the District
of Columbia, are ‘legislative’? rather than ‘*constitu-
tional’? courts and that the compensation of the judges
thereof might constitutionally be diminished; no person
other than the plaintiff is the owner thereof or interested
therein; no assignment or transfer of this claim, or of any

PP eae aero Mei FH

OSE EAL SAE ON HMA

8

part thereof or interest therein, has been made; the plain-
tiff is justly entitled to the amount herein claimed from the
[fol. 11] United States, after allowing all just credits and
offsets; the plaintiff has at all times borne true allegiance to
the Government of the United States and has not in any
way voluntarily aided, abetted, or given encouragement to
rebellion against the said Government. The plaintiff is a
citizen of the United States. The plaintiff claims as due
him from July 1, 1932, to January 31, 1933, the sum of
$1,458.33.

Thomas S. Williams. George A. King, George R.
Shields, Herman J. Galloway, Attorneys for
Plaintiff.

Duly sworn to by Thomas S. Williams. Jurat omitted
ie printing.

[fols. 12 & 13] CLEeERK’s CERTIFICATE

I, Willard L. Hart, Chief Clerk of the Court of Claims of
the United States, do hereby certify that the foregoing cer-
tificate in the case of Thomas S. Williams v. The United
States, No. 42,313, was duly filed and entered of record in
my office by order of said court, and as directed by said
court, the said certificate is by me transmitted to the
Supreme Court of the United States for its action thereon.

In testimony whereof I hereunto subseribe my name and
affix the seal of the Court of Claims of the United States,
at my office in Washington, D. C., this 24th day of February,
A, D. 1933.

Willard L. Hart, Clerk Court of Claims of the
United States. (Seal Court of Claims.)

Endorsed on cover: File No. 37,425. Court of Claims.
Term No. 728. Thomas S. Williams vs. The United States.
Certificate, Filed February 24, 1933. File No. 37,425.

(3052)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386008_0375%3A0. Public record. Not legal advice.