Skip to content


United States Vs. Bond - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number124 U.S. 301
AppellantUnited States
RespondentBond
Excerpt:
united states v. bond - 124 u.s. 301 (1888) u.s. supreme court united states v. bond, 124 u.s. 301 (1888) united states v. bond submitted january 9, 1888 decided january 23, 1888 124 u.s. 301 appeal from the court of claims syllabus claimant was a private in the marine corps, and one of the marines who composed the organization known as the marine band. he performed nn the capitol grounds and on the president's grounds under proper page 124 u. s. 302 order. held that he was entitled to the additional pay provided for by rev.stat. § 1613. this was an appeal from a judgment against the united states in the court of claims. mr. justice miller delivered the opinion of the court. this is an appeal.....
Judgment:
United States v. Bond - 124 U.S. 301 (1888)
U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Bond, 124 U.S. 301 (1888)

United States v. Bond

Submitted January 9, 1888

Decided January 23, 1888

124 U.S. 301

APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS

Syllabus

Claimant was a private in the Marine Corps, and one of the marines who composed the organization known as the Marine Band. He performed nn the Capitol grounds and on the President's grounds under proper

Page 124 U. S. 302

order. Held that he was entitled to the additional pay provided for by Rev.Stat. § 1613.

This was an appeal from a judgment against the United States in the Court of Claims.

MR. JUSTICE MILLER delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims awarding to John Bond, the appellee, the sum of $72.27. The following facts were found by that court, upon which this judgment was rendered in favor of the claimant, and from which the present appeal is taken:

"Claimant enlisted in the United States marine corps at the Marine Barracks, Washington, D.C., October 29, 1879, as a private, was assigned to duty with the marine band at the time of his enlistment, and remained and performed duty with the band as a private from that time until May 1, 1881, when he was rated as a musician. Prior to this last-mentioned date, he was at no time rated as a musician, although playing in the band."

"Between the date of enlistment and May 1, 1881, the organization known as the 'Marine Band' performed, under proper order, on the capitol grounds and on the President's grounds. Prior to May 1, 1881, claimant received no additional compensation for such service."

Section 1613 of the Revised Statutes reads as follows:

"The marines who compose the corps of musicians known as the 'Marine Band' shall be entitled to receive at the rate of four dollars a month each in addition to their pay as noncommissioned officers, musicians, or privates of the marine corps so long as they shall perform, by order of the Secretary of the Navy or other superior officer, on the capitol grounds or the President's grounds. "

Page 124 U. S. 303

In the opinion of the Court of Claims it is said that

"The claimant was a 'private of the marine corps.' He was one of the marines who composed the organization known as the 'Marine Band.' He performed on the capitol grounds and on the President's grounds, under proper order, and thus falling within the phraseology of the statute, he should have received the additional pay."

In this statement we entirely concur, and see no reason to disturb the judgment of the court, which is accordingly

Affirmed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //