Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 10.djvu/520

508 FEDERAL REPORTBB. �the property, alleging that he bas been neglectful and wasteful in the discharge of his duties, etc. �W. W. Murray, Dist. Atty., and John B. Clowjh, Asst. Atty., for the United States. �J, E. Bigelow, for defendant. �Hammond, D. J. When this motion was firsfc made it occurred to me that the court had no jurisdiction to grant it, or that it involved the exercise of authority beyond the power of the court to enforee, if the jurisdiction be eonceded. It may be assumed that the United States, wheuever it cornes into this court and brings its suit against a citizen, consents to submit to and carry out whatever decrees may be lawfully made against it in the ordinary course of the legal pro- cedure. But we have no jurisdiction here to decree against the United States for the delivery up of its property, or of that of the citizen in its possession, or to order accounts against its executive agents, or to decree the payment by them of the money of the United States. �We certainly do not enforee contracts against the United States, although we have jurisdiction to enforee them in its favor. Section 1059 of the Revised Statutes enacts that — �"The court of claims shall have jurisdiction to liear and determine the fol- lowing matters: First, all claims founded upon any law of coiigreEis, or upon any regulation of au executive departaient, or upoii any contnvct, express or implied, with the government of the TJnited States." �The case of U. S. v. Bostwick, 94 U. S. 53, was a suit in the court of claims founded upon a contract with the United States about the use and occupation of land and improvements thereon ; and that of De Groot v. U. S. 5 Wall, 420, was a suit in that court upon an arbi- tration award on a similar contract, though it was brought under a special aot of congress, and held to be not properly brought on the award which had been abrogated by congress. The court there says of the rule that the United States cannot be sued for a daim or de- mand against it without its consent : �" This rule is carried sofarby this court that it lias bceu held that wlienthe United States is plaintiti in one of the federal courts, and the defendant bas pleaded a set-of£ which the aets of congress have authorized him to rely on, no judgment can be rendered against the government, although it may be judi- cially ascertained that on striking a balance of just demands the government is indebted to the defendant la an ascei-tained amount. And if the United States shall sue an individual in any of its courts and fail to estaljlish a claim, no judgment can be rendered for the costa expended by the detemlant in liis defence." ��� �