Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/427

UNITED STATES V. MASON. 413 �Baxter, C. J. Defendant's demurrer raises two questions. Three counta of the indictment allege tiiat on the tenth of May, 1879, the defendant received from Barbara A. Bently, for his services as lier agent in the prosecution of a pension elaim, a greater cqmpensation than is provided for in the title in the Revised Statutes pertaining to pensions. These counta are hased on sections 4785 and 5485 of the Revised Statutes. The first declares that no agent or attomey shall receive a greater compensation for his services in the prosecution of a pension claim than such as the commissioner of pensions shall direct, not exoeeding $25. The latter provides that if any agent or attomey shall receive a greater compensation for such services "than is pro- vided for in the title pertaining to pensions," he shall be indictable, etc. Such was the law for several years prior and up to the twentieth of June, 1878, when congress passed the act of that date, fixing the fee of agents and attorneys for such service at $10. This act does not in terms profess to repeal the foregoing sections, or either, or any part of either of them, but necessarily supersedes so much of section 4785 as vested the commissioner of pensions with authority to tix the amount of fee to be paid within the limits mentioned, and to that extent repeals said section. There was, therefore, at the time the defendant received the compensation complained of in the indictment, no provision in the title of the Revised Statutes pertaining to pen- sions, limiting the fee which an agent or attomey might lawfally de- mand and receive for sUch services, and it follows that the coant charg- ing that defendant received a greater compensation than is provided for in said title cannot be maintained. The demurrer will therefore be sustained to these eounts. �The other eounts of the indictment are for an alleged unlawf ul with- holding by defendant of a part of the pension money due to Mrs. Bently. His contention is that as the law requires all pension moneys to be paid directly to the pensioner, the court must judicially know that it is impossible for an agent or attomey to wrongfully withhold it, and that for this reason the defendant's demurrer ought to be also sustained to these eounts. �This very question was considered by Judge Drummond in the case of U. S. V. Connally, 1 Fed. Eep. 779, in which the learned judge held adversely to the defendant's view of the law. His decision is able, full, and satisfactory. I think it right and adopt it, and, for the reasons stated therein, defendant's demurrer to said last-mentioned eounts will be overruled. ��� �