Parish v. United States

Supreme Court

Parish v. United States

75 U.S. 489, 19 L. Ed. 472, 8 Wall. 489, 1868 U.S. LEXIS 1125

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedDecember 13, 1869

StatusPublished

Cited by18 cases

This text of 75 U.S. 489 (Parish v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Parish v. United States, 75 U.S. 489, 19 L. Ed. 472, 8 Wall. 489, 1868 U.S. LEXIS 1125 (1869).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice FIELD,

after stating the facts, delivered the opinion of the court, as follows:

Upon the facts found by the Court of Claims, it is difficult to perceive upon what ground the contractors can urge any claim for damages against the government. The contract with New Orleans erased, superseded all other proposed contracts. No other had any validity. The action of Magruder, until the approval of the Secretary of War, was merely initiatory to a contract. He could not bind the United States in any way.

If the claimants had any objections to the provisions of the contract they signed, they should have refused to make it. Haviug made it, and executed it, their mouths are closed against any denial that it superseded all previous arrangements.

The case of Gilbert & Secor v. United States, * is one much stronger than this. There it was insisted that the act of Congress, under which the secretary acted in making a contract with Gilbert & Secor, was itself an acceptance of certain proposals presented by them, and that, taken in connection with the proposals, it constituted a contract binding on the government. The secretary made with the parties a contract requiring, in one particular, different kind of materials from those originally proposed; but this court held that the parties were bound by the contract signed,- and could not claim any compensation for the difference in value between the materials used and those proposed.

*491 But, independent of any consideration respecting the character of the contract, it nowhere appears that the claimants suffered any damages • from the supposed injury alleged. They did not offer to deliver any ice at New Orleans, and it is not shown that they secured any for such delivery, or, if they secured any, that they were unable to part with it at prices as remunerative as those they might have obtained at New Orleans.

The appeal is frivolous, and the decree of the court below is Affirmed.

*

Supra, 358.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mr. Justice FIELD,

after stating the facts, delivered the opinion of the court, as follows:

Upon the facts found by the Court of Claims, it is difficult to perceive upon what ground the contractors can urge any claim for damages against the government. The contract with New Orleans erased, superseded all other proposed contracts. No other had any validity. The action of Magruder, until the approval of the Secretary of War, was merely initiatory to a contract. He could not bind the United States in any way.

If the claimants had any objections to the provisions of the contract they signed, they should have refused to make it. Haviug made it, and executed it, their mouths are closed against any denial that it superseded all previous arrangements.

The case of Gilbert & Secor v. United States, * is one much stronger than this. There it was insisted that the act of Congress, under which the secretary acted in making a contract with Gilbert & Secor, was itself an acceptance of certain proposals presented by them, and that, taken in connection with the proposals, it constituted a contract binding on the government. The secretary made with the parties a contract requiring, in one particular, different kind of materials from those originally proposed; but this court held that the parties were bound by the contract signed,- and could not claim any compensation for the difference in value between the materials used and those proposed.

*491 But, independent of any consideration respecting the character of the contract, it nowhere appears that the claimants suffered any damages • from the supposed injury alleged. They did not offer to deliver any ice at New Orleans, and it is not shown that they secured any for such delivery, or, if they secured any, that they were unable to part with it at prices as remunerative as those they might have obtained at New Orleans.

The appeal is frivolous, and the decree of the court below is Affirmed.

*

Supra, 358.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

75 U.S. 489, 19 L. Ed. 472, 8 Wall. 489, 1868 U.S. LEXIS 1125, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parish-v-united-states-scotus-1869.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack