Mr. GARRETT. I would like to suggest that Colonel Hull take some case-I do not care which one-and present the exhibits here in such a manner that one case may be completely published here.

Mr. OLMSTED. A case that would be typical of most of the other

cases.

Mr. GARRETT. Typical of the general run of the cases. Of course, I think that, perhaps, he might select the case because no one else could select it as well.

Colonel HULL. I do not think that I could select a case typical of all.

Mr. DAVIS. Let us have No. 351.

Colonel HULL. What is the exhibit numbers? Mr. DAVIS. Nos. 952 and 955. This seems to be a claim for rent and damages to church and convent, which seems to cover most of the cases. This claim is for rent and damages to convent and church.

The CHAIRMAN. I had in mind exactly what Mr. Garrett stated, but it was the suggestion of Colonel Hull to me, in conversation, that he be not called upon to make a selection of cases, but that the selection of cases be left to the members of the committee, so that there would be nothing of prearrangement. He wanted the committee to select any case from this record, and said that he would be prepared to explain it.

Mr. GARRETT. That is very commendable: I did not want to impose upon him the making of the selection. All I want is to get a typical case in that record.

The CHAIRMAN. He wished the board to be perfectly justified, and so preferred that the selection of particular cases be made by the committee.

Mr. OLMSTED. Let me ask you how large a place Vigan is?

Colonel HULL. Vigan is one of the most important places in northern Luzon; I should say that the population is somewhere in the neighborhood of 100,000.

Mr. OLMSTED. How much of a place is Goa?

Colonel HULL. Goa is in the southern portion of Luzon. We had the exact figures before us all the time, but we have not got them here now. Goa is not as large a place as Vigan.

Mr. FORNES. May I ask which case this is?

Colonel HULL. Case No. 351. The case is presented on the affidavits of three of the natives. Translated, it reads:

That the American troops during the war against the Filipinos occupied for eighteen months, from the 26th of June, 1900, until December, 1901, the priest's house of the pueblo of Goa, and that the rent that should be paid for such occupancy amounts to 2,160.

There is also a claim for damages.

Mr. LARRINAGA (translating). "Fifty pieces of wood 9 yards long and 6 points"-I don't know what this means in the Filipino langauge; I suppose inches " 6 points thick, at 9.15 each piece." Mr. OLMSTED. Nine dollars for a piece of wood?

Colonel HULL. Yes, sir. Timber, building timber, 9 yards long. Mr. LARRINAGA (continuing translation). "Nine yards wide by 6 inches thick, at 9.75 each," $9 and some cents each.

The CHAIRMAN. Dollars or pesos?

Colonel HULL. Yes; in pesos.

The CHAIRMAN. Do those items indicate the general character of the claim?

Colonel HULL. They run down.

Mr. LARRINAGA. The first item makes 1,522 pesos.

Mr. GRAHAM. As I understand it, the Commission cut all that out. They did not allow any damages besides for rent, so that it is not necessary to go into that at all.

Colonel HULL. There is a claim for building materials, for furniture, for a small carriage, for a wall clock, for 79 pieces of galvanized iron, and for destruction to the stairway and to the bricks of the passageway, making a total claim of 4,666.90 pesos.

Mr. DAVIS. You allowed 2,200 pesos for damages for something? Mr. GRAHAM. I thought that you had cut that all out.

Colonel HULL. I have here a memorandum prepared by our searching of military information as to all the officers in the commands that had served at Goa during our occupancy of the buildings there. I find here several letters that we wrote to the officers, asking for information, and I find here a report signed by George P. White, captain and quartermaster:

Report on the Roman Catholic Church, etc., used by the Army.

"1. Town, Goa; province, Ambos, Camarines; island, Luzon, P. I." "2. Use to which the building was applied before American occupationsuch as churches, convents, church schoolhouses, bishops' or priests' residences, hacienda buildings, offices, etc."

As a convent and also as a dwelling of the local priest.

"3. General description and size of structures, whether stone, wood, nipa, etc."

This was a large building, the first story of stone and the second of wood, size about 100 feet front and an ell of about the same dimensions. The roof was of corrugated iron. The basement was useless for dwelling purposes and never so used as I would judge from the building itself.

"4. Military use to which property has been applied-such as barracks (stating number of men or companies), hospitals, officers' quarters, storehouses, offices, etc."

From April 7, 1901, to the time I left, about May 15, 1901, we used the upper story for barracks and the lower ones for storehouse purposes. This was only by a detachment of about 35 men of the Ninth Cavalry, Troop C.

"5. Was the building or other property used by the forces of the insurrection or at immediately previous to the occupation by the United States troops, or by civil authorities or constabulary, with dates thereof?"

At the time I took charge of the building I relieved a company of the Fortyseventh Volunteer Infantry under command of Captain Goodman. Further than this I do not know.

"6. Reporting officer to estimate value of rental during period of United States Army use of same, rental values to be based on rents current during period of occupation and use. If boards of officers have already reported on question of rent, refer to same, when, and by whom forwarded. Reporting officer will also give his estimate of the value of buildings, in Philippine currency.”

The rentals were different in each town that was occupied by the United States troops and the question of rental of this town never came before me during my stay of a month and a half. No records whatever were given me and I know nothing of any board being appointed to judge the same.

"7. Has any prior claim been made to the military authorities for rental or damages, or has any amount been paid? If so, give necessary information to trace action."

None to my knowledge.

"8. How long were buildings occupied by Army, giving dates?"

I only know as to dates given.

"9. Have any buildings occupied by the Army been injured, wantonly or accidentally, or have they been improved and repaired by the Army? Give all facts and amounts. This item is very important, and full remark is requested."

This building was in no way damaged by troops during the time I was there nor were any improvements made except that a stable for thirty horses was erected in the lot back of the building on land supposedly belonging to the church premises, but at the time unused and overgrown with weeds. No past records were kept at this station and the morning report was sent regularly to San Jose de Logonoy, which was considered as station headquarters, under command of Major Paxton, Thirteenth Infantry (then captain, Fifteenth Infantry). I was the only officer with the command at Goa during the period, and when ordered away no one took my place, but the detachment was left under command of the first sergeant of Troop C, Ninth Cavalry.

My belief is that no damage whatever was done the building while occupied by the United States forces.

Brief statement of Church claims submitted to board:

months rental at P.

Damages

Total.

GEO. P. WHITE,

Captain of Cavalry, Quartermaster U. S. Army.

Place, Presidio of San Francisco, Cal.
Date, September 29, 1905.

That is a very poor report. It is not as full as the ordinary reports we received.

There was also at the sessions of the board Bishop Barlin, who had a certain amount of personal knowledge of the facts, and my interpreter. He had been down through this portion of the country as the official interpreter at the headquarters of this district, and had been in most of these buildings, so that we probably had in front of us, at the time this case was considered, my employee of large personal knowledge, and the bishop, who had personal knowledge of the case, and this report that I have indicated, from which to arrive at our finding. What was the amount of the award?

Mr. GRAHAM. Four thousand pesos.

The CHAIRMAN. Two thousand dollars.

Colonel HULL. Yes, sir. The rental was 100 pesos.

The CHAIRMAN. That is $50 a month.

Colonel HULL. They claimed at the rate of 150 pesos per month, and we cut that to 100 pesos.

The CHAIRMAN. They claimed at the rate of 150 pesos, and you cut that down to 100 pesos?

Colonel HULL. Yes, sir. For the damages they claimed $3,263.45. We reduced that to $1.100. We probably cut out a large portion of the claim for wood building material.

Mr. DAVIS. If you will allow me to make a little statement and ask a question right there?

Colonel HULL. Certainly.

Mr. DAVIS. This is a claim for rent and for damages to the church. and convent. Are not a great majority of the cases for rent and damages to the churches and convents?

Colonel HULL. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Davis, please make plain what you mean by "convent."

Mr. DAVIS. It reads "convent " in the report.

Colonel HULL. We used the word "convento " for not only the conventos, but also for the parish houses.

Mr. DAVIS. That does not have any reference to a seminary, a girls' school, or boys' school?

Colonel HULL. Óh, no.

Mr. DAVIS. Then the majority of the cases in this report are similar to this; it is only a question of different locality and different circumstances.

Colonel HULL. The church was not occupied at Goa.

Mr. DAVIS. In this particular case have you data as clear and explicit upon which to base your findings, as ordinarily?

Colonel HULL. No, sir.

Mr. DAVIS. Then this is one of your weak cases as to damages. I think that it would be well to have in the record the way in which you arrived at your conclusions, because in this case documentary evidence was wanting more than in the other cases. Hence, if it came up on the floor of the House, I do not see why this would not be a good case for illustrating to Congress the method by which you arrived at your conclusions.

Colonel HULL. The claim was for rental and damage to the buildings. We found that we had no report from the military authorities, and the bishop of the diocese made a verbal statement in regard to the case, and we then proceeded to go to The Military Secretary's office and got all the names of the officers who were there and the length of time the troops were in the town. We then proceeded to write to the officers who had been there for information.

Mr. DAVIS. And that was the only way that you had of obtaining the facts?

Colonel HULL. Without going to the town itself.
Mr. FORNES. May I ask a question?

Colonel HULL. Just allow me to complete this statement, so as to make it complete. Upon the receipt of this very poor report of Captain White's, with our knowledge of the conditions existing, and the fact that our interpreter was in the same town and could give us information in regard to it, we thought that we were able to dispose of the case approximately correctly.

Mr. DAVIS. Without visiting the place?

Colonel HULL. Without visiting the place. If we had visited all of these places we would never have completed the work, and if we had waited for positive testimony one way or the other, we would never have completed the work, but here is a case where there is a claim for a lot of building material. Now, our general experience showed us that where the church authorities had been driven out of their possession by the insurrectionists, where they had an immense amount of building material, the natives of the town were not opposed to carrying off that building material, and that the United States was afterwards charged with taking it away.

Mr. DAVIS. Then you indulged in the presumption

Colonel HULL. We gave the Government the benefit of the presumption that the natives had carried away part, at least, of the material.

Mr. OLMSTED. Then the claim for building material was exaggerated, I should say. I should say that $4.50 was a very high price for a plank.

Colonel HULL. These were very big beams. We took up with the merchants of Manila the valuation of these logs, and we found that the amount alleged for the lumber was ordinarily the commercial rate charged, but the question arose as to the amount of the lumber, and the method by which the church had lost it.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood you to say that besides the officers to whom you wrote, you had the sworn testimony of Bishop Barlin. Colonel HULL. He was before the board.

The CHAIRMAN. And you also had your interpreter, who was familiar with the case.

Colonel HULL. I think that the interpreter was familiar with this case. Wherever there was one of these cases, in which he had been in the town, he would give us his personal knowledge.

Mr. DAVIS. Then you used and sought for the best testimony

available.

Colonel HULL. We tried to do this in all cases. I would not like to say positively that this interpreter was in that town. There are too many cases for me to say positively that this interpreter was in that particular town. I can not remember positively.

Mr. DAVIS. The best evidence is all that can be expected.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Colonel HULL. Now, you can see that where there was some lumber, boards things like that-some of that would be likely to be used. I should say, in going over this case again, in view of the fact that we built a stable out in the back yard for the shelter of the horses, that it is very likely that we used some of that lumber and galvanized iron. It is very likely that we used some of those beams or joists, and poles.

Mr. DAVIS. It is natural to suppose that you did.

Colonel HULL. There is also a claim for the destruction of some of the bricks. By going through the claim in that way I could segregate to a great degree the number of items that we allowed, but I probably could not arrive at the exact figures that we did at the time we made the investigation.

Mr. DAVIS. Would the statement of facts that you have just put into the record apply to similar cases all over the islands, generally speaking?

Colonel HULL. Generally speaking, this was the way we obtained our information, although I can say that in most of the cases the reports of the army officers were better.

Mr. DAVIS. This, then, is one of the poorest cases, or, at least, was backed by the least positive and direct evidence; one of the poorest

cases.

Mr. HELM. What variety of timber was that referred to in this case?

Colonel HULL. It was always "hard wood," building material, such as beams and things that would be used in the construction and repair of buildings.

Mr. GRAHAM. Is hard wood generally used for that purpose in the islands?

Colonel HULL. Oh, always by the natives. We are the only people who use soft wood.

Mr. FORNES. When you speak of a convent or convento, would not that term be known in this country as a monastery?