vor of these claimants. As to the claim for
$140,000, no reason is stated why it was not included in the original
suit nor why action upon it was not brought against the Government
within the six years allowed by the statute for that purpose. To permit
such an action to be brought now is simply, without any reason of a
special nature, to grant a privilege to these claimants which is denied
to all other citizens of the United States, in accordance with the
provisions of the general statute of limitations. The principle
underlying statutes of limitations and the reasons for the maintenance
of such a rule of litigation are much more cogent when applied to claims
against the Government than when applied to claims against individuals.

These claims do not differ in their character from ordinary business
transactions such as transpire every day between private persons or
business corporations. The Government can only defend itself against
claims of this nature through its public officers and with the use of
such public records as the Departments may furnish. Great difficulties
are experienced by it in contesting fraudulent and unjust claims, and it
is only fair in the interest of the public that a rigorous adherence to
some rule of limitation should be maintained.

The provision of the bill which practically directs a new trial of the
claim for $25,000, decided adversely to the claimants more than twenty
years ago, is still more objectionable. These parties had their day in
court. They produced their witnesses and were heard both originally and
upon appeal, and upon the case they were then able to make the court
decided they had no claim against the Government. It is now suggested
that other witnesses have been discovered who can supply the lack of
proof which was produced on the former trial. Such a ground for a new
trial would never be considered in any court of law in the land in a
case between private parties where such a length of time had intervened
since the former trial. No explanation of a satisfactory nature is
furnished for the failure of the claimants to produce these witnesses
upon the original trial.

The bill further provides that upon a retrial of the original claim, or
upon the trial of the new claim, the claimants shall be at liberty to
offer in evidence the depositions of witnesses now on the files of any
of the committees of Congress in relation to the aforesaid matters,
which may be introduced as eviden