/ 

2194 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY~ 28, 

James, Money, Pound, 

Johnston, Morse, Richardson, D.P. 

Jones, . Morton, Ross, 

Joyce, Muldrow, Russell, DanielL. 

Ketcham, Muller, Scales, 

Xillinger, Murch, Scoville, 

Klotz, Myers, Shallenber~er. 

Lindsey, Neal, Singlet()n, 0. R. Loring, Newberry, Steele, 

Lounsbery, O'Brien, Talbott, 

Lowe, O'Connor, Taylor, Robert L. 

Marsh, O'Reilly, Thomas, 

McCoid, Osmer, Thompson, P. ll. 

Mitchell, Poehler, Thompson, W. G. 

ToWilShend, R. W. 

Tyler, 

Updegraff, Thomas 

Upson, 

Warner, 

Weaver, 

Wellborn, 

Williams, C. G. Willis 

Wood,' 

Wright, 

Young, Casey Young, Thomas L. 

So the amendment was agreed to. . During the roll-call the following pairs were announced from the 

Clerk's desk : Mr. TOWNSJIEND, of illinois, with Mr. HENDERSON. 

Mr. HARRIS, of Massachusetts, with Mr. WARNER. Mr. HARRIS 

would vote" av," Mr. WARNER "no." 

Mr. THOMPSON, of Kentucky, for the remainder of this legislative 

day, with Mr. T.HOMAS. 

Mr. GEDDES with Mr. WILLIAl\IS of Wisconsin, for this day. 

Mr. YOUNG, of Ohio, with Mr. SINGLETON, of Mississippi, on all 

questions, until Monday at noon. Mr. 0RTH with Mr. MYERS. 

Mr. JAMES with Mr. O'BRIEN. 

Mr. EINSTEIN with Mr. MULLER. 

Mr. POUND with Mr. TALBOTT, on this vote. 

Mr. ERRETT with Mr. ScALEs, on this vote. 

Mr. BRlGHAM. I a.sk permission to vote. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair under the rules cannot entertain that 

request. • 'l'he vote was then announced as above recorded. 

Mr. GOODE moved toreconsiderthevote by which the amendment was agreed to; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. · The latter motion was agreed to. 

The next amendment was read~ as follows: 

.After the amendment just adopted insert the following: "To enable the Secretary of the Navy to protect and preserve cemeteries in for· 

eign countries used for the most part for the burial of citizens of this Government. 

the sum of 3,000, or so much thereof asmaybenecessary,iaherebyappropriated." 

The amendment was agreed to. · The next amendment wa.s read, as follows: 

After line 845, insert : "For the ;purchase of Ingall's portrait of the late Thomas Ewing, first Secretary of the In tenor, 600." 

The amendment was agreed to. 

The next amendment was read, as, follows: 

After line 856, insert the following: "For passenger elevator in the south "\ting of the Capitol, to be located by tihe 

Architect of the Capitol, $7,000; such elevator to be so located as to interfere as little as possible with the use of the offices and rooms of the House." 

The amendment was agreed to. · The next amendment was read, as follows: 

After line 963, insert the following : "Under head of 'Surveying the public lands,' strike out $200,000 and insert 

$300,00d." 

The amendment was agreed to. 

The next amendment was read, as follows : 

Under the bead of "Surveying the public lands," insert the following: "Provided,, That the part of the sum hereby appropriated that may be appor· tioned to the surveying district of ~ouisiana, together with such sums as have been or may be deposited for survevs there by actual settlers under sections 2401, 2402, 

and 2403 of the Revised Statut£s, may be, in whole or in part, employed in making such resurveys as may be necessary in the discretion of the Commissioner of the 

General Land Office." 

The amendment was agreed to. 

The next amendment was read, as follows: 

In line 1016, under the heading" For completion of the tenth census," insert as follows: 

"To be immediately available." 

The amendment was agreed to. 

ThE\ next amendment was read, as follows: 

Under the heading of the "Columbia Institution for the Deaf and Dumb," strike out the proviso in lines 1044, 1045, and 1046, which reads as follows: "Provided, 

That hereafter one-half of the expenses of this institution shall be paid out of the revenues of the District of Columbia." 

Mr. BLOUNT. On that amendment I demand the yeas and nays. 

The yeas and nays were ordered. 

Mr. BLOUNT. As itisnownearlyeleven o'clock,ImovetheHonse 

adjourn. 

The motion was agreed to; and accordingly (at ten o'clock and 

forty-eight minutes a.m., February 28) the House adjourned. 

PETITIONS, ETC. 

The following petitions, memorials, and other papers were laid on the Clerk's desk, nnde1· the rule, and referred as follows, viz : By Mr. WILLIAM ALDRICH: The petition of 1440 citizens and 

business men of Chicago, Illinois, for the repeal of the tax on bank 

deposits-to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By.Mr. BAILEY: The petitionof350citizensof Albany, New York, _of similar import-to the same committee. 

By Mr. CARPENTER: The petition of F. C. Jennings and 64 

others, oitiz·ens of Ida County, Iowa, for legislation to protect stockgrowers from pleoro-pneumonia and other contagious cattle diseasesto the Committee on Agriculture. 

By Mr. HORACE DAVIS: Resolutions adopted by the convention 

of wheat-growers of California, in relation to an interoceanic canalto the Committee on Interoceanic Ship Canal. 

By Mr. ERRETT: The petition of 520 citizens of Pennsylvania, for 

the repeal of the tax on bank deposits-to the Committee on Ways 

andMeans. . By Mr. HAWLEY : The petition of Charles D. Barnes and others, 

of Southington, Connecticut, against the passage of Senate bill No. 

496-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. LEFEVRE: The petition of 'Vf. T. Exline and 16 others, 

that a pension be gran ted Simeon M. Hickman-to the same committeeAlso, the petition of Herman Laut and others, for the reduction ot 

the tax: on cigars-to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

Also, the petitions of Joseph Turner and others, and of J. B. Robbins and 170 others, citizens of Ohio, for the imposition of a tax on incomes-to the same committee. 

Also, the petition of W. C. Davis and others, citizens of Willshire, 

Ohio, against the passage of Senate bill No. 496-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

Also, the petitions of John J. Alexander, H. C. Wilson, and 175 

others, of Joseph Turner and others, of Anna, and of E. Blanchard 

and others, of Oran, citizens of Ohio, for legislation to protect innocent purchasers of patented articles-to the Committee on Patents. 

Also, the petitions of John J. Alexander and 176 others, and of Joseph Turner and others, citizens of Ohio, that the Commissioner of 

Agriculture be made a member of the President's Cabinet-to the 

Committee on Agriculture. 

Also, the petitions of John Gartley and 228 others, of D. Cortner 

and others, of Michael Clouse and others, and of J. B. Robbins and 

176 others, citizens of Ohio, for legislation-to regulate interstate com- merce-to the Committee on Commerce. 

By Mr. LORING: 'l'he petitions of 300 citizens of Salem and of 1,080 

citizens of Boston, Massachusetts, for the repeal of the tax on bank 

deposits-to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. MILLS: The petition of citizens of McLennon County, 

Texas, of simil~ import-to the same committee. 

By Mr. NEAL: The petition of S. P. Wood and 150 others, citizens 

of Ohio, for legislation regulating transportation on railroads-to the 

Committee on Commerce. 

Also, the petition of A. Jacoby and 15 9thers, citizens of Ohio, for 

such changes in the patent laws as will protect innocent purchasers 

-to the Committee on Patents. 

By Mr. O'NEILL: Resolutions of the Board of Trade of Philadelphia, favoring the appointment of a commission to prepare a bill regulating interstate commerce-to the Committee on Commerce. 

By Mr. RAY: The petition of Luther W. Smith and 5 others, against 

the sixty-surgeons bill-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. W. A. RUSSELL: The petitions of E. A. Coffin and 319 

others, citizens of Lowell, and of Richards & Currier and 199 others, 

of Lawrence, Massachusetts, for the repeal of the tax on bank deposits-to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. SAMFORD: Memorial of the city council of Eufaula, Alabama, as 'king an appropriation for dredging the harbor at Appalachicola, Florida-to the Committee on Commerce. 

By Mr. William E. SMITH: The petition of citizens of Randolph 

County, Georgia, for the pa-ssage of a law regulating interstate com- merce-to the Committee on Commerce. 

Also, the petition of the same parties, for the passage of a law to 

protect innocent purchasers of patented articles-to the Committee on Patents. 

Also, the petition of the same parties, for the passage of an incumetax law-to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. WISE : Two petitions of citizens of Pennsylvania, that the 

Commissioner of Agriculture be made a Cabinet officer-to the Committee on Agriculture. 

Also, the petition of the same parties, for an income tax-to the 

Committee on Ways and Means. 

Also, two petitions of the same parties for the amendment of the 

patent laws-to the Committee on Patents. 

By Mr. YOCUM: The petition of D. C. Walter and others, citizens 

of Clinton County, Pennsylvania, against the passage of Senate bill 

No. 496-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

IN SENATE. 

MONDAY, February 28, 1881. 

The Senate met at eleven o'clock a. m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev.J.J.~oCK,D.D. 

On motion of Mr. RANSOM, and by unanimous consent, the reading 

of the Journal of the proceedings of Saturday last was dispensed 

with. 

PIIILEMON B. HAWKINS. 

Mr. RANSOM. I regret to be compelled this morning to ask a personal kindness of the Senate. _I am so sick that I am fearful I can-
'· 

1881. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- · SENATE: 2195 -

not even remain here during the session to-day. I seldom trespass 

upon the indulgence of the Senate. There are two small bills on the 

Calendar which have been passed by the House and reported on favorably and unanimously by two careful committees of the Senate, 

the Committee on Finance and the Committee on Claims, which I 

hope the Senate will permit me to call up and have disposed .of. If 

they provoke any discussion, I shall not insist upon their consideration now. First I ask the Senate to consider House bill No. 375. 

By unanimous consent, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, 

proceeded to consider the bill (H. R. No. 375) for the relief of Phile- mon B. Hawkins. It authorizes the Treasurer of the United States 

to pay to Philemon B. Hawkins $7,190.63 for stone furnished for the 

court-house and post-office building in the city of Raleigh, North 

Carolina. 

The bill was reported to the Senate, ordererl. to a third reading, 

read the third time, and passed. 

, WILLIAM H. THOMPSON. · 

Mr. RANSOM. The other bill that I ask the Senate to consider is 

House bill No. 346. 

By unanimous consent, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, 

proceeded to consider the bill (H. R. No. 346) for the relief of William 

H. Thompson. It relieves William H. Thompson, late collector of 

internal revenue for the :fifth collection district of North Carolina, 

from the payment to the United States of $2,709.60, which came to 

his hands as taxes due the United States, but was forcibly taken 

from one of the deputies of the collector by disguised robbers in the 

public highway while the deputy was on his way to make return 

thereof. 

The bill was reported to the Senate, ordered to a third reading, 

read the third time, and passed. 

CREDENTIALS. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT presented the credentials of William 

Mahone, chosen by the Legislature of Virginia a Senator from that 

State for the term beginning .March 4, 1881; which were read and 

ordered to be :filed. 

EXECUTIVE COM:\fUNICATIONS. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT laid before the Senate a letter from the 

Secretary of War, transmitting a commuiiication of the Chief of Engineers and accompanying report of Lieutenant-Colonel Q. A. Gillmore, Corps of Engineers, upon a survey for the reopening of the 

Santee Canal, South Carolina, made in compliance with the provisions of the river and barpor act of June 14, 1880. 

Mr. McMILLAN. As that communication relates to the river and 

harbor bill, which has already been disposed of, (the chairman of the 

Committee on Commerce is not in the Senate,) I do not know whether 

it is necessary to refer it to that colDlllittee. I move that the com- munication lie on the table. 

The motion was agreed to. 

.Mr. BUTLER. I move that it be printed. 

The motion was agreed to. 

'!'be VICE-PRESIDENT laid before the Senate a letter from the 

Secretary of the Interior, transmitting a communication from R. H. 

T. Leipold, commissioner of the Freedman's Savings and Trust Company, relative to the omission of an estimate for rent of rooms for 

the Court of Claims, and asking that an item for that purpose be inserted in the sundry civil appropriation bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Appropriations. 

He also laid before the Senate a letter from the Secretary of War, 

transmitting a communication from the Quartermaster-General rec- ommending an appropriation of $15,000 for the construction of two new bridges over the Hell Gate and Bitter Root Rivers, near Fort Missoula, Montana Territory; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations. PETITIONS .A....""'D MEMORIALS. 

Mr. McMILLAN presented the petition of E. M. Ostrander and 

others, citizens of Paynesville, Minnesota, praying for the establishment of a post-route between that place and Grove City, Minnesota; 

which was ordered to lie on the table. 

Mr. I(AMLIN. I present certain tesolutions adopted by the Legislature of Maine, relating to the East River bridge. I suppose this 

may be a legal question, and I move the reference of the resolutions 

to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

The motion was agreed to. 

Mr. WILLIAMS presented two memorials signed by James McBlanset and others, citizens of Litchfield and Hudsonville, Kentucky, 

ex-Union soldiers, remonstrating against the passage of the bill (S. 

No. 496) providing for the examination and adjudication of pension 

claims; which were ordered to lie on the table. ' 

Mr. CAMERON, of Pennsylvania, presented a memorial of 64 ex- soldiers of the late war and members of the Grand Army of the Republic of Pennsylvania, protesting against the passage of tho bill 

(S. No. 496) providing for the examination and adjudication of pension claims; which was ordered to lie on the table. 

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES. 

Mr. COCKRELL submitted the views of a minority of the Committee on Military Affairs on the bill (H. R. No. 3477) for the relief 

of Carlile Boyd; which were ordered to be printed. 

Mr. KIRKWOOD. I present, from the Select Committee to exam- ine into the circumstances connected with the removal of the North- ern Cheyennes from the Sioux Reservation to the Indian Territory, 

the testimony taken by them at the present session in regard to the 

removal and present condition of the Ponca Indians, which matter was also committed to that committee. I move that it lie on the 

table and be printed. 

The motion was agreed to. 

Mr. JONES, of Florida. I am directed bythe Committee on Naval 

Affairs, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. No. 2437) for the relief 

of several persons impressed into the United States naval service, to 

report it without amendment. The bill is for the relief of ·the sur- vivors of the vessels Champion No. 3 and No.5, which were destroyed on Red River during the late war, and I a-sk that the Senate consider 

it at this time, for the reason that I was not able to report it earlier 

in consequence of my absence. 

Mr. TELLER. It is a House bill 'l 

Mr. JONES, of Florida. It is a House bill. It has passed the 

House, and .is a highly meritorious measure. The object of the bill 

is to enable the Navy Department to do in this particular case what 

the military establishment has power to do under the gene:ral lawthat is, to audit and pay the accounts of persons impressed into the 

naval service of the United States during the time that they were held in captivity. These men were taken prisoners on Red River 

after the destruction of the vessels upon which they were employed, 

and bnt a few escaped out of the whole crew. In one boat seven men escaped, and there were ten in all who escaped out of one hundred and seventy. They were taken captive and brought to Texas, 

where they remained in captivity, and the bill authorizes the Secretary of the Navy to pay them their wages during the period that 

they were held in prison. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. Is there objection to the present consideration of the bill 'l 

Mr. TELLER. I shall object to ita present consideration. I want 

to obtain the assistance of the Senator from Florida to hold a night 

session. 

Mr. McPHERSON. One objection, I suppose, puts the bill over! 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. It does. 

Mr. McPHERSON. Then I ask that the Senate consider House bill 

No. 3983. 

Mr. McMILLAN. Has the morning busineSB been conclud~d f 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. It has not. 

Mr. COCKRELL. I call for the regular order. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The regular order is demanded. 

Mr. McPHERSON. I will simply state that this bill was passed over on Saturday in my absence from the Senate. It is a. Honse bill, 

and comes under the rule for considering House bills on the Calendar, 

and is a very important bill relating 1io the Navy. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair will recognize the Senator 

after the regular morning business shall have been concluded. Are 

there further reports from committees, standing or select f 

Mr.McDONALD,fromtheCommitteeontbeJudiciary,towhomwas 

referred the bill (H. R. No. 6479) for the relief of Thomas Snell, re- ported it without amendment, and submitted a report thereon; which was ordered to be printed. 

Mr. CONKLING, from the Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill (H. R.No. 5088) to authorize the registration of 

trade-marks and protect the same, reported it without amendment. 

He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred the bill 

(S. No. 1751) to provide for the publication and registration of the 

title and claims to the property called trade-marks, moved ita indefinite postponement; which was agreed to. 

Mr. LOGAN, from the Committee on Military Affairs, to wliom was referred the bill (S. No. 2214) donating condemned cannon to the 

Brooklyn Veteran Union, Brooklyn, Iowa, reported it without amendment. · 

BILLS INTRODUCED. 

Mr. HILL, of Colorado, asked and, by unanimous consent, obtained 

leave to introduce a bill (S. No. 2223) to amend section 2326 of the 

Revised Statutes in regard to mineral lands; which was read twice 

by its title, and referred to the Co.mmittee on Mines and Mining. 

Mr. WALLACE asked and, by unanimous consent, obtained leave 

to introduce a bill (S. No. 2224) for the relief of Orange M. ·Blair, administrator of Thomas P. Blair, deceased; which was read twice by 

its title, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT signed the following enrolled bills and 

joint resolutions, which had previously received the signature of the 

Speaker of the House of Representatives: 

A hill (S. No. 76) for the relief of M. }.,, Clark; 

A bill (S. No. 326) for the relief of Henry F. Lines; 

A bill (S. ~o. 367) granting an increase of pension to Isabel L. 

Evans; 

A bill (S. No. 753) to provide for the sale of the remainder of the 

reservation of the confederated Otoe and Missouriatribes of Indians, 

in the States of Nebraska and Kansas, and for other purposes; A bill (S. No. 1181) for the relief of Dodd, Brown & Co., of Saillt 

Louis, Missouri ; 

A bill (S. No. 1905) changing the name of the First National Bank 
,• 

2196 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY 28, 

of West Meriden, in the county of New Haven, and State of Connecticut; 

A bill (S. No. 2184) to authorize the commi813ioners of the District 

of Columbia to appoint additional policemen for temporary service 

in the District of Columbia, and for other purposes ; 

A bill (H. R, No. 7036) to establish post-routes ; 

A bill (H. R. No. 7033) making the city of Chattanooga, in the State 

of Tennessee, a port of delivery ; 

A bill (H. R. No. 7103) to constitute Atlanta, Georgia, a port of 

delivery; 

A joint resolution (S. R. No. 79) directing the Secretary of War to 

investigate the claim of the State of Florida against the United States 

for expenditures made in suppressing Indian hostilities in said State 

:between the years 1855 and 1860, and to report the result of such investigation to Congress ; and 

A joint resolution (S. R. No. 156) in relation to the international 

ailiibition of 1883. WILLIAJI H. DAVIS. 

Mt·. BOOTH. On Saturday House bill No. 6ti60 for the relief of 

William H. Davis was referred, by mistake I think, to the Committee on Military Affairs. It should have gone to the Committee on Claims. 

With the consent of the chairman of the committee I move that the 

Committee on Military Affairs be discharged from its further consideration and tnat the bill be referred to the Committee on Claims. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The vote ordering the former reference 

will be regarded as reconsidered and the bill referred to the Committee on Claims, if there be no objection. 

ISTHIIIUS SHIP-CANAL' . 

Mr. WINDOM. I ask permission to give notice to the Senate that 

at three o'clock to-morrow I shall ask the consent of the Senate, if it 

does not.too much interfere with its business, to address to the Senate some remarks upon the subject of the resolution reported by the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. EATON] from the Committee on Foreign 

Relations in relation to the Isthmus ship-canals. I give the notice 

because I am constantly engaged on appropriation bills, and I shall 

be very much <rbliged to the Senate if I can have that opportunity 

to-morrow. 

Mr. EATON. I hope that my friend may make his remarks to-mor- row, because I shall then ask for a vote upon the resolution. I do not 

ieaire to discuss it myself, but I want a vote of the Senate upon it. 

Mr. BECK subsequently said: This morning the Senator from Minnesota [Mr. WINDOM] gave notice that to-morrow at three o'clock he 

desired to be heard upon a given subject. I rise for the purpose of 

asking if it would not snit his convenience this afternoon at three as well as to-morrow, because we hope by to-morrow to have the sundry 

civil bill ready to report to the Senate and may by three o'clock to- morrow desire to go on with it. If he could do it as well this afternoon, it would be much safer than to wait till to-morrow. 

Mr. WINDOM. It will suit my convenience quite as well; and if 

the Senate is agreeable, I shall be glad to go on at three o'clock this 

afternoon. I therefore give notice that I will endeavor to take the 

floor at that hour. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection to the 

request of the Senator from Minnesota. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

Mr. McPHERSON and others addressed the Chair. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. Is there further business for the morning 

hour f If not the Senator from New Jersey [Mr. McPHERSON] asks 

the Senate to consider--

Mr. SAUNDERS. I ask unanimous consent to take up--

Mr. COCKRELL. I call for the regular order. 

Mr. TELLER. I call for the regular order, and I give notice that 

I shaH object te any bill being passed by unanimous consent out of 

its order. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The regular order is called for, which is 

the consideration of the Calendar of General Orders. · Mr. SAUNDERS. I wish the Senator from Colorado would withdraw that objection for a moment. I will state that a bill--

Mr. TELLER. I decline to withdraw it for anything. There is no use wasting the time of the Senate in talking about a bill that will 

be reached in its order on the Calendar. 

Mr. SAUNDERS. We do not know about its being reached. That 

is the trouble. If we knew it would be reached there would be no objection to letting it go over; but what I want to state is that--

The VICE-PRESIDENT. 'l'he regular order is demanded by sev- eral Senators. 

Mr. COCKRELL. I ask for it. 

Mr. McPHERSON. I ask to have the Senate consider House bill 

No. 3983. 

Mr. SAUNDERS. I think I have the floor. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator had not the floor. 

Mr. SAUNDERS. I certainly thought I had the floor unless we were going to the Calendar. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair recognized the Senator from 

New Jersey [Mr. McPHERSONl fifteen minutes ago to ask for the con- sideration of the bill he indicated when the business of the morning 

hour should have been completed. 

Mr. McPHERSON. This bill was passed over in my absence; it 

is upon the Calendar; is a House bill, and a very important one. It 

provides for a permanent construction fund for the Navy by the sale 

of old vessels and old materials that are to-day costing the Government hundreds of thonsands--

Mr. SAUNDERS. I insist on my right to the floor if we do not go 

to the Calendar. If the call of the Calendar is proceeded with, I am willing to abide by that. 

Mr. McPHERSON. Does the Senator object to the consideration 

of the billY 

Mr. SAUNDERS. Is it the first bill in order on the Calendar f If 

it is the first in order then I yield. 

Mr. BURNSIDE. The bill was passed over without prejudice. 

Mr. SAUNDERS. I do not understand about bills being passed o>er without prejudice. 

Mr. JO~ES, of Florida. I ask the Chair what is the meaning of 

the term "passing over without prejudice f" The bill to which the 

Senator from New Jersey refers was passed over without prejudice. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. It means simply that when the Calendar 

shall again be called in regular order it shall be the first stated. 

Mr. JONES, of Florida. That is my understanding of it; and that 

bill was passed over without prejudice. 

Several SENATORS addressed the Chair. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. There is nothing in order but the regular 

order, which is the call of the Calendar for House bills, under. the 

special order adopted on Saturday last. 

Mr. SAUNDERS. I am willing to yield to that. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Secretary will state the first bill. 

Mr. McPHERSON. Do I then understand that it is not in o11der 

to go back and call for a. bill passed over without prejudice f 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair has made no such ruling. 

Mr. McPHERSON. If the Chair so rules, then I shall ask for a vote 

of the Senate to take up the bill (H. R. No. :~983) to provide a con- struction fund for the Navy, and for other purposes; and in that con- nection I wish to state--

Mr. TELLER. I ask the Senator to yield to me a moment until I 

explain. Last Saturday when that bill was called nobody was here 

to explain it, and I objected simply, not to put it at the foot of the 

Calendar, but that it gooverwithont prejudice, to be taken upwhen 

the Calendar was again called. It really stands at the head of the 

Calendar. If the Senator insists upon go-ing into a discussion here we shall lose an hour. All he has to do is to wait until the Calendar 

is called, and then the bill is at the bead of the Calendar. 

Mr. BURNSIDE. Mr. President--

The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from New Jersey yield 

to the Senator from Rhode Island 'l 

Mr. McPHERSON. I yield to everybody. 

Mr. ROLLINS. I call for !he regular order. 

Mr. BURNSIDE. I desire to say in reply to the Senator from Celorado that he did not state the exact fact, that there was n()body 

here to explain the bill. I so stated distinctly, and the bill was passed over without prejudice, with the understanding that it should not 

lose its place. 

Mr. McPHERSON. Has the Chair ruled that the bill stands at the 

head of the Calendar! 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair has not so ruled. 

Mr. McPHERSON. Then I ask for the ruling of the Chair. 

Mr. TELLER. I believe I am incorrect. I believe the statement 

the Senator from Rhode Island refers to was made, and finally I said 

inasmuch as the Senator from New Jersey was not here, and if discussion arose it probably would lead to a lengthy debate, I would 

object. 

Mr. McPHERSON. I ask the Chair to please rule whether the bill 

stands at the head of the Calendar. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The present occupant was not in tha 

chair at the time. He understands from the Secretary of the Senata. 

that the bill was passed over without prejudice. 

Mr. BURNSIDE. That was the understanding. 

Mr. HOAR. What is the bill f 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. It will be announced by title. 

The CHIEF CLERK. "A bill (H. R. No. 3983) to provide a construction 

fund for the Navy, and for other purposes." 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. If that be the fact-is it disputed f 

Mr. JONES, of Florida. That was the fact. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. If that be the fact, t:fte Chair rules that 

it is first to be considered upon this call. 

Mr. PADDOCK. There was yet another bill which went over without prejudice before this one, if I recollect-a bill in charge of th& 

SAnator from Tennessee, [Mr. H.Aruus.] 

Mr. McPHERSON. Then I call for the Calendar. 

Mr. TELLER. Why do we not have the Calendar called and proceed to the consideration of cases on the Calendar f 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. If precedence be not claimed for any 

other bill, the Secretary will report at length the bill called for by the Senator from New Jersey. 

CONSTRUCTIO:N FUND FOR THE NAVY. 

The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, proceeded to consider 

the bill (H. R. No. 3983) to provide a construction fund for the Navy, 

and for other purposes. 

Mr. ALLISON. I think some member of the committee ought 1,o 

make an explanation of the bill. 
. ·,, ,,. 

1881. \ / CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 2197 

Mr. McPHERSON. But ~le explanation is needed; it seems to tion1 and secondly, for repairs. It will be noticed that, by the fourth me the bill speaks for itself very plainly. · section of the bill, when repairs are made "the cost of such compleThe first section of the bill provides that an inventory shall be taken tion or repairs shall be made from said permanent Cf>nstruction fund 

of the goods and stock on hand in the Navy Department and in the of the Navy." I apprehend that for the next two or three years no several navy-yards of the Government, which has not been done since part of this construction fund will be used for any purpose except 

the war, which seems to be a very proper thing indeed. for tho repair of those vessels deemed most worthy of l'epair by a com- The second section of the bill curtails the power of the Secretary of petent board. · the Navy. Section 1541 of the Revised Statutes gives the Secretary Mr. BECK. I do not propose to offer any amendment to the bill, 

of the Navy power to sell any old vessels he may choose to sell and nor do I propose to discuss it under a five-minute rule, but £desire to 

report the same to Congress. This bill provides that it shall not be say to the Senate, after looking at it with as much care as I could 

done except upon the report of a competent board of officers recom- some time ago, that it is a bill which ought to be carefully and fully 

mending such a thing to be done, and gives the Secretary of theN avy discussed. It is a bill which gives the Secretary of the Navy a right 

then the power of either adopt.ing or rejecting the report. to dispose of our ships, that he may call unseaworthy, just as he plea-ses, 

The third section of the bill provides for the establishment of a to sell them for what he pleases,·and to make a construction fund 

fund consisting of the proceeds of the sale of old and worthless rna- which shall not be covered into the Treasury, but held as a permanent 

terial now in the yards, the sale of old and worthless vessels not fund to the amount of a million a year to do as he likes wit_b. It is 

worthy of reconstruction or repair, and the placing of that money in too dangerous a power to be conferred on anybody; and such a bill a fund to be called the permanent construction fund of the Navy, should not be entertained at all unless there is time to consider it 

which money shall be drawn from it in accordance with the fourth more carefully than can be done now. and :fifth sections. While I do not propose to object to its consideration .'I I think it is 

The fourth section of the bill provides for the repair of vessels, and the most dangerous bill I have seen in the Senate. It rs going back 

that if the completion or repair shall exceed 40 per cent. of the cost, to the old trouble we had ten years ago, which we got rid of withso 

and if in the opinion of a board of naval officers it is not best to make much difficulty. When we limited the right of sale to old scraps, 

the improvement, then it shall not be made. charges were made that vessels were broken up and sold as old scraps, 

The :fifth section provides for the report of the Secretary of theN avy and it will be so again. It is a surrender of the power of Congress 

to Congress in detail. not only over the· ships of the Navy but over the proceeds of those 

The sixth section provides that not more than $1,000,000 shall be sales. It surrenders to the Secretary the power to do as he likes with 

expended by the Secretary of the Navy during a fiscal year except in any of the fund on hand arising from these sales. I shall call for the 

the manner provided, and by appropriations by Congress. yeas and nays on the passage of the bilJ, and shall vote against it 

The Committee on Naval Affairs, who had this bill under consid- for that reason. eration, considered that the very large amount of ma,teriallying at The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, ordered 

the different naval establishments of the country which was compar- to a. third reading, and read the third time. 

atively worthless should be sold, and the money placed in a perma- Mr. BECK. I ask for the yeas and nays on the passage of the bill. 

nent construction fund to be used by the Secretary of the Navy for Tho yeas and nays were ordered; and the Secretary began the call 

the purpose of the repair of vessels which are worthy of repair. of the roll by calling the name of Mr. ALLISON. 

The Senate Committee on Naval Affairs have adopted as their re- -Mr. EATON. Mr. President, I desire to say one word. I agree with 

port the report of the House Committee on Naval Affairs; and if the the Senator from Kentucky thut this bill gives a very dan~erous 

honorable Senator from Iowa will turn to that report, he will :find on power to be placed in the hands of one man. I cannot vote tor the 

the :first puge, if he has it before him, that there are to-day in the bill under these circumstances. I do not think there ought to be a United States Navy one hundred and forty-two vessels borne on the fund of this sort placed in the hand of the Secretary Qf the Treasury 

Naval Register. Of these, sixty-seven are steam sea-going vessels of or the Secretary of the Navy or anybody else. If it is necessary to 

war, twenty-two are sea-going sailing vessels of war1 twenty-four are break up the old vessels of the Navy and sell them, break them up 

iron-clads, two are torpedo vessels, and the remaimng twenty-seven and sell them at public auction and turn the proceeds into the Treas-. are tugs, dispatch boats, &c. ury of the people; and when it is necessary to build a new vessel 

The steam-vessels of the Navy are divided into four cla&Ses, as. first appropriate the money out of the Treasury to build that vessel; not 

rates, second rates, third rates, and fotlrth rates, and to this particu- have a fund here that will be seized. I do not undertake to say that 

lar part of the report I wish to call the att-ention of the Senatorfrom the incoming Secretary of the Navy will do anything that ts wrong; 

Iowa. The first rates are :five in number, of the steam-vessels. Not but I will not give him the power to do it; I will not permit him to one of the :five is to-day a worthy sea-going vessel. They are used for do it by my vote. When it is necessary to build a ship let Congress 

traning-ships and receiving-ships. Of the twenty-seven second-rate appropriate the money needed for the purpose. 

vessels wa :find that there are only nine of them :fit for the sea; under In the few days that I stay here, if it becomes necessary to vote 

repair, two; awaiting repair, three; disabled on account of yellow- $1,000,000 or $2,000,000 or $5,000,000 to the public defense of the 

fever, one; a mere store hulk, one; worthless, and to be sold, seven; United States, I stand ready to vote it; but not to vote money into on the stocks unfinished, worthy of completion, one; rotten on the irresponsible hands to do what they please to do hereafter. It is aug- stocks and worthless, three. Of the twenty-seven vessels we :find that gested to me that if the Secretary of the Navy were to do what I 

only nine of them are fit for sea, and the rest of them are hardly have stated he would be guilty of a misdemeanor, and my friend from 

worthy of reconstruction. New Jersey might say that he may be punished for a misdemeanor if 

Of the twenty-nine third-rate vessels we find that six are laid up he does not do what is right. That will not answer. Do nat let ns inordinary, worthless for naval purposes, and should be sold or broken give him any power to be guilty of a misdemeanor. Thatismyview 

np to save the expense of their care; six are deemed worthy of re- of the case. I have spoken my five minutes. . pair, and are undergoing repair or laid up awaiting repair; two are Mr. McPHERSON. Mr.President, I shonldliketohaveunanimons 

antiquated paddle-wheel steamers, and have scarcely any value what- consent, as I suppose under the rule I can speak but once on this ever for naval purposes; fifteen are comparatively small cruising ves- question, to answer the objections of the Senator from Coanecticut, 

Bels, the largest being less than 1,000 tons burden. So with regard to and the Senator from Kentucky. If these two Senators WO'Qld adthe Sailing-vessels. dress themselves to the COITection of the present law which COnfers 

These old worthies of a past age- upon the Secretary of ~ho Navy extraordinary power, it would be 

Says the report of the House Committee- much more consist-ent than to find fault with this bill. I will read 

can no longer serve their country in war. Their cost for care and preservation is section 1541 of the Revised Statutes : greater than their usefulness can justify, and their names should disappear from The Secretary of theN avy is authorized ami directed to sell, at public sale, such 

the Navy, some of them to reappear in new vessels worthy of themselves and of vessels and materials of the United States Na\y as, in hisjud:nnent, canDot be adtheir country. Only five of them are now in condition to navigate tho ocean. · vantageonsly used, repaired, or fitted out; and he shall, at the opening of each 

Without detaining .the Senate longer with respect to the present session of Congress, ma.ke a full report to Con~ress of all vessels and materiaJs 

condition of the Navy, I will simply state that in the opinion of the sold, the parties buying the same, and the amount realized therefrom, together with such other facts as may be necessary to a full understanding of his acts. committee the bill is sufficiently guarded. It simply confers upon the 

Secretary of the Navy this power, and only this additional po~er to So the Secretary of the Navy has foil, unrestri~ted, unlimited power that which he now exercises-- to sell any and every vessel of the Navy that in his judgment and 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator's time bas expired under opinion is not worthy of repair. -the rule. - Now I will call the attention of honorable Senators to section 2 of 

Mr. McPHERSON. If permitted, I should like to go on one minute this bill, which we propose to enact into a law: 

longer. It shall also be the duty of the Secretar:y of the Navy, as soon as may be after 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. Is there objection T the passage of this ac~ to cause to be examined by competent boards of office:..s of 

Mr. ANTHONY. I hope the chairman of the committee will be the Navy, to be designated by him for that duty, all vessels belonging to the 'F.avy 11 ed to ed not in actual service at sea, and >essels at sea as soon as they shall return to any a ow proce · naval station within the United States, and said boards shall ascertain and report The VICE- PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection; and the to the Secretary of the Navy, in writing, which of said vessels are unfit for further 

Senator from Now Jersey will proceed. service, or, if the same are unfinished in any navy-yard, which cannot be finished 

Mr. McPHERSON. The bill gives the Secretary of the Navy the without great and disproportionate expense, and shall in such relJOrt stare fully 

power to expend a million dollars annually from this permanent con- the grounds and reasons for their opinion. 

struction fund, which will be in the Treasury Department as at pres- Then, after having received that report, the Secretary of the Navy 

ent. The sums for which these old vessels will be sold will be placed has the power to accept or reject it. In other words, he has the re· in the Treasury to be used for two purposes: first, for new construe- port of a competent board to advise him, in connection. with his 
2198 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. / 

i 

FEBRUARY 28, 

present.power, and over all that is the power of the President of the 

United States. 

I ha.d an idea that we had repealed section 1541 of the Revised 

Statutes, but on examination of the matter I can find no repealing 

act. But whether it has been repealed or not, I wish to a.sk the Senate 

how it is possible for the Government to dispose of this old and worthless material which is to-day burdening the Government with a vast 

expenditure of money yearly for the purpose of keeping these old 

hulks alive f They have to be caulked and painted for the purpose 

of keeping them in fit repair, and after that they are of no use what- ever to the Government. Unless we confer the power somewhere to 

dispose of these old worthless hulks, they are a continual burden on 

the Government. 

The committee believed that it was proper to give that power to 

the Secretary of the Navy with the guards this bill throws around 

him, a competent board of naval officers first to take charge of the 

matter and make report to the Secretary, and if that report is con- :firmed by the Secretary the vessels are then to be sold at public sale 

to the highest bidder. I cannot for my part see any other method 

that can be suitably adopted. 

Mr. D.A.VIS, of West Virginia. Mr. President, I notice in the third 

section of this bill a most dangerous precedent. It will be recollected 

that some years ago a system grew up under the sale of old materials 

that induced Congress to pass a statute, which this bill recogniz~s, 

and proposes to repeal, to some extent, directing that the proceeds 

of all such sales should go into the Treasury and not be used till re- appropriated regularly. This is the first great step-there have been 

several smaller steps in the same direction, but this is the first great 

step made-in the direction of repealing that act. It is most dang erous, I say again, and I cannot but think the Committee on Naval 

Affairs, as well as the Senate, have not had their attention called to 

this third section, which says : 

No unexpended balances of said construction fund shall hereafter be covered 

into the TreasuryNotwithstanding the law which now requires that all such moneys 

should be covered into the Treasury. This bill goes on to repeal that 

law and is intended, r think, to give a large sum, a million dollars per 

annum, into the hands of the Navy Department to do that which 

Congress knows nothing about. It ought not to pass, and if a single 

objection stops this bill I must enter that objection. I think it the 

most dangerous provision I have known presented here this year, and 

it would lead to greater abuses than any measure which ha1:1 been proposed. It is a bill of which, apart from that section I have called 

attention to, I know nothing about ; but this particular section is 

most dangerous, and I shall either move to ha.ve it stricken out or I 

shall object to the bill. I cannot think the Senate will agree to repeal a law which has worked so much good to the public Treasury and 

which has stopped so much evil, as my friend from Kentucky has well 

said, and which but a few years ago Congress was ready to enforce 

almost to the verge of impeachment of some officers. I hope the 

Senate will not, under any circumstances, consent to the third section 

of this bill. 

The ViCE-PRESIDENT. This bill ha.s passed the amendable stage, 

except by unanimous consent. 

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. Then, unless the committee agree 

that this third section be stricken out, I must object to the consideration of the bill. 

Mr. ROLLINS. It is too late to object. The roll-call has already 

commenced on the passage of the bill. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The roll-call has not commenced. 

Mr. ROLLINS. The roll-call had commenced, and the Senator from 

Iowa [Mr. ALLISON] had responded. Mf· DAVIS, of West Virginia. The Senator from Iowa is not in his 

seat. 

Mr. ROLLINS. The Senator from Iowa was in his seat, and responded to his name on the roll-call. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. That is not the declaration of the Secretary. 

Mr. BURNSIDE. The name of the Senator from Iowa was called. 

Mr. ROLLINS. It is a fact, whether the Secretary says so or not. 

'l·he VICE-PRESIDENT. If the Senator from West Virginia objects to the consideration of this bill, it goes over. Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. I object, unless by consent of the 

committee the t hird section is stricken out. 

Mr. McPHERSON. The committee cannot consentThe VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator from West Virginia cannot atta-ch conditions to his objection. He must object absolutely and 

without condition or not at all. Does he object . 

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virgini a. I do object. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The bill goes over. Mr. McPHERSON. Does one objection put the bill over The VICE-PRESIDENT. It does. 

Mr. McPHERSON. I ask for a vote of the Senate on the question. I move to postpone the pending and all prior orders, for the purpose 

of continuing the considern.tion of t~s bill by taking a vote on its 

passage, which is all that is necessary to conclude it. 

The VICE-PRESIDE~T. The bill has gone over and the Senator 

from New Jersey now proposes to postpone the pending order, which 

is the consideration of the next House bill on the Calendar, and states 

his purpose if that motion shall prevail to move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the bill just postponed under the rule. 

Is the Senate ready for the qq.estion f 

Mr. TELLER. I hope the Senate will stay by the Calendar. This 

bill is of no more importance than hundreds of others on this Calendar. Why should we stop now at this hour f If there is anything in 

this rule at all I cannot understand why we should not carry it out. 

There will probably be opportunities for this bill to be called up after 

the mornin~ hour and have proper discussion. 

Mr. McPHERSON. Why not have a vote on it and vote it down if 

the Senate does not wish to pass it. 

Mr. TELLER. I am willing to have a vote on it; but I am not 

willing to have the Calendar displaced. 

Mr. McPHERSON. It will take no longer to vote now than at any 

other time. 

Mr. BURNSIDE. I rise to a question of order. I ask the decision 

of the Chair as to whether after a name has been called on the yeas 

and nays debate is in order. . 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. It is in order if the Senator called has 

not answered to his name, as in this case. 

:Mr. ANTHONY. I hope this motion of the Senator from New Jersey will prevail, and that we shall have no discussion on the bill, but 

take the vote. It is very important, if we ever mean to have a navy. • Mr. TELLER. You will have discussion. 

Mr. ANTHONY. The Senator from West Virginia says we are authorizing the Secretary of the Navy to do what we know nothing about. 

Of course we are. We know nothing about ships, and he and the 

heads of his bureaus do know something about them; and this bill is 

to delegate to him the authority to do what we do not know how to 

do ourselves. 

Mr. HOAR. I think the Chair is really right in his ruling on the 

point of order; and even if the Senator from Iowa had answered when 

without objection, by general consent, debate proceeded, it is to be 

considered as a waiver of that call. It seems to me that the Senate 

ought in this instance to take up the bill, and not stand by the Calendar, because the discussion of the bill had taken place ; it had gone 

on; the Senate had voted upon it; it had been reported from the 

Committee of the Whole to the Senate; it had passed its amendable 

stages; and it seems to me, therefore, that we ought not to lose all 

the time we have occupied. I hope the motion of the Senator from 

New Jersey will prevail. · 

Mr. McPHERSON. I call for a vote on my motion that the pending order be postponed for the purpose of voting on this bill. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on the motion of the 

Senator from New Jersey. 

The question being put, there were on a division-ayes 23, noes 15. 

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia, and Mr. TELLER called for the 

yeas and nays ; and they were ordered. 

Mr. JONES, of Florida. I just wish to sa.y a few words in reply 

to what has been said. I do not think the objection presented in such 

strong terms by the Senator from West Virginia is entitled to mnch 

weight. The object of thiti bill, in short, is to get rid of a lot of 

accumulated, worthless material of the Navy, to dispose of it for 

money, and place that money in the hands of the Secretary of the 

Navy to substitute for the old material new material which will be 

of some use for the service of the country. The bill guards in every 

possible way the sale of the old material, and you must have confidence somewhere or in somebody. It is not possible for Congress to 

superintend personally business of this description. It is purely 

executive business, and you must have faith in somebody to carry 

out your wishes. The bill clearly prescribes the duty of the ~ecretary of t1ie Navy, what he shall do with this fund, and from what is said here, one would suppose that there would be under this bill an annual balance of millions every year to be expended. It may be all 

disposed of in one year. If we can get one good ship out of the sale 

of three ·bad ones, surely the country would be profited by the ex- change, however you accomplish it. If you dispense with the existing vessels of war and provide no fund to supply their pla<Jes, the 

country, in case of an emergency,may be helpless. It will not do to 

provide for tho sale of this material and then put the money into the 

Treasury and await the meeting of Congress to authorize the Secretary of the Navy to build a ship. 

We had some experience on this subject in 1870, when we were brought face to face with a very great emergency in our complicatiofls with Spain, and it became necessary for the executive government to expend a very large sum of money to meet the exigencies of 

that ca~e. The country does not stop to inquire in times like that 

how it ought to be done; but it must be done, and if these ships are not of the proper size and character to meet emergencies of this kind, 

you must repose confidence somewhere, and I am not one of those 

who are entirely without faith in the officers the people have designated to give effect to the popular will. 

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. It isnotthepartof the bill of which 

the Senator from Florida. has been speaking that I object to specially, but it is the third section, which prevents the proceeds of the sale of 

those vessels going into the Treasury, and gives tho Secretary of the 

Navy power to do as he may think proper with the fund. 

Mr. LOGAN. Read the section. 

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. I ask that the Clerk read the third 

section. 
1881. CONGRESS! ON AL RECORD-SENATE. 2199 

The Chief Clerk read as follows : 

There is hereby established a fund, to be called and known as the construc- tion fund of the Navy, which shall comprise the appropriations made therefor 

from time to time by Congress and the proceeds arising from the sale of old or ·condemned vessels of theN avy and of old and condemned materials and condemned stores and supplies as hereinbefore provided, which said fund shall be used and 

expended by the Secretary of the Navy in the construction, armament, and equip- ment of new naval vessels, and for no other purpose. No unexpended balances of 

said construction fund shall hereafter be covered into the Treasury or be made 

avallable for any purpose not provided by this act, any law to the contrary not;. 

withstanding. The Secretary of the Navy shall not contract to expend for the 

purposes provided for in this act, dnring any one fiscal year, a greater sum than the amount standing to the credit of said fund during said year, including additions 

from the sale of vessels, materials, stores, and supplies, and the balance of the pre-

-viouslear, if any. But in the construction, armament, or equipment of new ves- sels o the Navy as herein provided for, the Secretary of the Navy may make use of any materials, stores, or supplies now on hand, which, in his opinion, will not probably be required in the repair of the vessels, their armament or equipment, now in the Navv, but not otherwise. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair reminds Senators that the 

merits of this bill are not to be discussed on this motion. 

Mr. DAWES. The Senator from West Virginia and the Senator 

from Florida have been discussing the merits to some extent; and, if 

the Senate will indulge me, I think t-here is a perfect answer to the 

objection made by the Senator from Kentucky and the Senator from 

West Virginia. I do not want to trespass upon the rule, but if I may 

be indulged by the Senate I will state what seems to me to be a perfect answer. The law that requires the proceeds of the sale of old materials to 

be turned into the Treasury and reappropriated was enacted for this 

purpose, to meet this trouble. In the Army and in theN avy Departments it was the custom to dispose of old material and then to con- aider themselves at liberty to apply the proceeds to any exigency in 

those Departments that the heads of those Departments thought nec- essary and proper. There was no account of such dispositions regularly made and they were not known except as one wonld go through 

the books of the Departments covering ten, fifteen, or twenty years. 

A law wa-s passed-the Senator from Kentucky and myself bad some- thing to do with the making of that law; either he or myself drew 

it, I do not remember which-which required the proceeds of such 

material, when sold, to be turned into the Treasury and there await a specific appropriation. 

Now, in reference to the old material of ships, it is proposed by this 

bill, instead of that, to make an account of those proceeds and appropriate the money here in this bill specifically to the sole use of con- struction in the Navy; and it is just as much a specific appropriation 

of the proceeds of old material as it wou1d be for the ~ecretary of ·the 

Navy under existing law to report to Congress that he had sold old 

material to the amount of $20,000, and Congress should thereupon 

appropl'iate that $20,000 to the repair of a ship. It is specific, just as much so a~ the course contemplated by the law to which the Senator 

from West Virginia calls attention, and the fnrid is as clearly accounted 

for and always before the country as if that law remained applicable 

to these materials. There is no curtailment of the provisions of that 

law. It is only in advance directing how this fund shall be kept by 

itself before the public and used for this specific purpose. 

Mr. PADDOCK. I rise to a question of order. I would like to inquire if it is in order to discuss this question upon tlle merits on the 

motion to postpone. 

1\'Ir. DAWES. I understand that, and I asked the indulgence of the 

Senate to be allowed to follow in the line of the other Senators, and no oue objected to my request. If the Senator from Nebraska thinks 

I ought not to proceed under those circumstances, I retire; but I 

thought the Senate was indulging me in what seemed to me to be an answer to the objection. 

Mr. LOGAN. While the Senator is on that point I should like to 

ask him if this proposed law does not affect the existing law so far as that law requires the proceeds of these sales to be turned into the 

Treasury'/ 

Mr. DAWES. I have stated wherein it affected that law. That 

law was made because turning these proceeds into the Treasury prevented the using of them for anything the Departments desired, ac- cording to the former practice; but tnis, instead of that, requires an account to be kept of this particular fund, and is in advance a direction by Congress how it shall be used. That is the difference. All 

the good that wa-s to come from the present law, in the way of having 

knowledge on the part of Congress of what the sales of materials came to and what was done with the proceeds, is still retained. If 

Congress do not desire to appropriate the money to the uses indicated 

in this bill, of course they will not pass the bill; but if they desire 

to use so ~uch money for the purpose indicated, they keep it within 

the spirit of the existing law precisely, but do not,., as that law does, , turn the proceeds into the Treasury and require a future appropriation to take them out. ~Ir. TELLER. Mr. President, if there is any rule of the Senate 

which will require the Senate to confine itself to the subject before 

it, I propose to invoke it. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on the motion to postpone. 

Mr. COCKRELL. I do hope the Senate will not lay aside the Calendar. If we are to do any business at all, we must stick to the Calendar and dispose of other cases. Mr. BURNSIDE. I ask that the rule be enforced. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. What rule? 

Mr. BURNSIDE. If this motion is not debatable on the merits of 

the question, why is such debate allowed Y 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator from Missouri has not alluded to the merits of the bill at all. He is entirely in order. 

Mr. COCKRELL. If I ever spoke out of order, I do not kno it, 

Mr. President. 

Mr. BURNSIDE. I beg the Senator's pardon; I thought he was out 

of order. 1 Mr. COCKRELL. If other Senators would attend to the rules as closely as I do, we should transact business more rapidly than we do. 

The question being taken by yeas and nays, resulted-yeas 30, nays 

23; as follows : 

Allison, 

Anthony, 

Baldwin, 

Brown, 

Burnside, 

Butler, 

Call, 

Cameron of Pa., 

Beck, 

Blair 

Booth, 

Cockrell, 

Coke, 

Davis of W. Va., 

YEAS-30. 

Conkling, 

Dawes, 

Farley, 

Groome, 

Hampton. 

Hill of Colorado, 

Hoar, 

Johnston, 

Jones of Florida, 

Jones of Nevada, 

Kirkwood, 

Lamar, 

Mc:Millan, 

McPherson, 

Morrill, 

Platt, 

NAY~23. 

Eaton, , Ferry, 

Garland, 

Hereford, 

Hill of Georgia, 

Logan, 

McDonald, 

Maxey, 

Mor!mll, 

Padc'iock, 

Plumb, 

Saunders, 

ABSENT-22. 

Bailey, Edmunds, Kellogg, 

Bayard, Grover, Kernan, 

Blaine, Hamlin, Pendleton, 

Bruce, Harris Randolph, 

Cameron of Wis., Ingall!i, P..anaom, 

Davis of Dlinois, Jonas, Saulsbury, 

Pugh, 

Rollins, 

Vance, Voorhees, 

Whyte, 

Withers. 

Sla~r, 

Teller, 

Walker, Williams 

Windom: 

Sharon, 

Thunnan, 

Vest, 

Wallace. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator from New J erseynowmoves 

that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the bill (H. R. No. 

3983) to provide a construction fond for the Navy, and for other purposes. 

The motion was agreed to, and tP.e Senate resumed the consideration of the bill. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on the passage of the 

bill. 

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. I should like to amend section 3 by 

striking out from the word " no," in line 10, to the word "notwithstanding," inclusive, in line 13. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The bill is not now amendable. The 

question is, Shall the bill pass, upon which the yeas and nays have 

been ordered. 

Mr. DA. VIS, of Weat Virginia. Do I understand that the bill has 

been reported to the Senate and is not now amendable Y 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. It has been reported to the Senate, or- dered to be read a third time, and read the third time, and is not now amendable. The question is, Shu.ll the bill pass Y 

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. I simply wish to call the attention 

of the Senate to the words commencing on line 10 of section 3, down 

to line 13, which I will read: 

No unexpended balances of said construction-fund shall hereafter be covered 

into the Treasury or be made available for any purpose not provided by this act, 

any law to the contrary notwithstandingShowing clearly that this bill itself recognizes that it is contrary 

to the present law as to covering money into the Treasury funds obtained from condemned vessels or from any other sales. It is an innovation upon the law as it now: exists and prevents the money from 

going into the Treasury as itshouldand being appropriated if its use is necessary. It is intended, as I understand, to put a permanent 

fund of $1,000,000-ifthere be so muchrealized from condemned ma- terial sold-into the hands of the Secretary of the Navy to do as he 

thinks proper with it. · Mr. JONES, of Florida. Does the Senator say it gives the Secretary the power to do whatever he pleases 7 

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. Certainly for construction. 

Mr. JONES, of Florida. He must use it for the construction of 

ships. 

:Mr. DAVIS, of \Vest Virginia. It is the same thing. He is to use it, as far as he thinks proper, without Congress knowing what it is. 

He can sell under this provision, as I understand, anything that is 

condemned and use the money realized as he may think proper, so far as it goes, to construction. 

It is an unusual thing, and perhaps the only innovation on the law 

passed some years ago requiring everything to be turned into the 

Treasury and regularly appropriated, and that law ought not to be 

repealed, but this bill repeals it to a certain extent. 

Mr. McPHERSON. Does the Senator know that it is not to be put 

into the general Treasury fund appropriated for the Navy, but put 

into a separate fund which is set apart in the Treasury as a separate 

fund to be known as "the construction fund of the Navy," which 

shall receive the moneys arising from the sale of old material, and 

that fund is to be applied to the construction of new ships! Everything goes into the Treasury, but only to the credit of a fund from 

which no money can be drawn except for certain purposes. Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia.. _ Why not let it go regularly into 
I 

2200 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY 28, 

the Treasury to be appropriated by Congress, as is done in all other cases f Why make an exception here and make this fund one to be 

under the control of the Secretary of the Navy when all other funds 

go into the Treasury regularly and come before Congress for an apprQpriation f It is wrong in principle. 

Mr. BECK. l\Ir. President, are we now debating this bill under 

the five· minute rule 'f 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chah· so understands. 

Mr. BECK. That being the case, I will say to my friends that I do 

not want to be interrupted, as lam limited tofiveminutes. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator has three minutes of his 

five minutes left. 

Mr. BECK. Three minutes will do me. Mr. President, I object to this bill for these reasons : we have passed 

laws time and again requiring all the officers of the Government to 

account tons for all sales made of Government property. Vie stopped 

alate Secretary of the Navy from selling ships, and confined him to 

selling old scraps and old material, because he was selling what Congress thought good and valuable vessels. We required all proceeds of 

tb.e sales to be paid into the Treasury; we confined him to expending 

moneys appropriated by Congress, and we took supervision over these 

matters our~lves and endeavored to retain it. 

Now, here 18 a bill which not only deprives Congress of all power over the vessels of the Navy, but authorizes in the first section the 

Secretary of the Navy to appoint any board he may please, they may 

be his own subordinates, and they may not only condemn all the ships 

at our yards which they say are not sea-worthy, but all on foreign stations as soon as they arrive at home, and all the iron-clads now on the stocks if they say they are not fit for use hereafter and sell th~m, 

without submitting the matter to Congress or taking our judgment 

upon it. Every ship that has not such rooms as the gentlemen on these boards would like to sail in may be sold at public auction before the next Congress meets, and we may have no Navy at all if 

the Secretary and three of his clerks see fit to sell them. The mean- ing of it all is to absolutely make the Secretary of the Navy master 

of the existing ships of the Navy, without the consent of Congress, 

to sell them as he pleases, and then deposit the money received a-s a special fund subject to his order, which he is to call a construction 

fund, and out of it he can build what he likes, put it where he chooses 

without our ·consent and without our knowledge. He may build 

palaces if he pleases for his officers, ships that would not resist a Whitworth gun or any other gun of any foreign nation, and Congress has no control or power over him. 

It is a bill transferring the whole power over the Navy of the 

United States to the Secretary of the Navy. and his subordinates, and 

all the money that they may receive will be expended in such con- struction as he may see fit; and, my word for it, when this bill passes 

nine-tenths of the old ships of the Navy that these fancy ~entlemen 

do not want to sail in will be condemned as unfit for therr use, and a system of building up magnificent vessels such as would be agreeable to them will be established, and Congress cannot stop it. If 

you allow the Secretary to begin the construction of such ships as these boards may advise, without coming to us and without giving us any authority over them, you will be forced year after year to furnish all the money needed to carry them out. This means to sell all 

the iron·clads on the stocks; it means to soil every old ship these men do not want to sail in, and sell it for nothing, for that will be 

tke result, and to get the construction fund to do what they like with 

it, and we are not to be allowed to say a word or to know whether 

it is right or wrong. There is not a ship in the American Navy that .they cannot sen under this bill. Even the best ships we have got 

with improved arms they can sell to-morrow on short advertisement, 

if the Secretary of the Navy can get three of his clerks to say it ought 

to be done. 

I The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair desires to say to the Senator 

from Kentucky that he may speak without limit. The Chair in his 

previons statement overlooked the fact that the rule had been set 

aside in order to continue this bill. 

Mr. BECK. I hope it will be a long tLme before any such power will be given to any executive officer. 

Mr. McPHERSON. I should like to call the attention of the Senator from Kentucky to the second section of the bill, by an examination of which he will see how unnecessary his argument has been on this question. A competent board of naval officers are required to 

examine into the condition of these vessels and report to the Secretary of the Navy. . Mr. BECK. Am I to understand the Chair to say that I have a right to go on 'l 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator from Kentucky has a. right 

to speak without limit, the pending order having been set aside for 

the consideration of this bill. 

Mr. BECK. I only want a very few minutes longer. I will read 

the second section. The first section provides thatSuch appraisal shall be made by boards of officers of the Navy, to be designated by the secretary. 

He has the appointment of the officers to constitute the board, and 

he can sell the old ships as he likes. Then section 2 provides : 

It shall also be the duty of the Secretary of theN avy, as soon as may be after 

the passage of this act, to cause to be examined by competent boards of officers of 

the Navy, to be designated by him for that dutyWhoever he says is competent is competent; whoever he wants can be placed on the boardall vessels belonging to the Navy not in actual service at sea, and vessels at sea as soon as they shall return to any naval station within t.be United Statea, and said 

boards shall ascertain and report to the Secretary of the Navy, in writing, which 

of said vessels are unfit for further service, or, if the same are nnfinishe<J. in any navy-yardThat includes all tho iron-cladswhich cannot be finished without great and disproportionate expense, and shall in 

such report state fully the grounds and reasons for their opinion. And it shall be 

the duty of ~e Secretary of the Navy, if he shall concur in opinion with said 

report, to strike the name of such vessel or vessels from the Navy Register and 

withdraw them from the Navy. And such vessels shall thereupon be appraised in 

such manner as the Secretary of the Navy may approve. And if the said Secretary shall deem it for the best interest of the United States w sell any such vessel or vessels, he shall advertise for sea1ed proposals for the purchase of the sam~! for a period not less than three months, in such newspapers as other naval advertise· ments are published in, setting forth the name and location and the appraised value 

of such vessel, and that the eame will be sold for cash to the person or persons or corporations offering the highest price therefor above the appraised value thereof. 

That is the authority; any ship in commission, out of commission, 

at sea or in port, built or being built, which the Secretary and his 

board say they do not want and think is not fit for the service, they can sell. Congress might disagree with them ; the sense of the country 

might be against them; we know that all officers seek to have all the 

authority an ft. power they can, and they will usurp it whenever they can. 

It is, in other words, as I said, withdrawing all our supervision over the whole of the ships of the Navy and ·transferring it to the power 

of the Secretary and such board as he may appoint, and after they are sold it overturns a carefully prepared law which provides that 

the proceeds of all sales of the property of the United States shall be 

paid into the Treasury of the United States and then shall be drawn 

out under the Constitution in accordance with an appropriation made 

by law. Congress ought to determine what ships shall be built, what 

construction fund shall be nsed, how it shall be used. The Secretary 

of the Navy, one of the executive officers of this Government, is the 

servant of Congress, but yon seek by this bill to make him the maa- ter. He is not to deposit this money ln the Treasury to be subject to 

your appropriation, but deposits it subject to call by him whenever 

he wants to have a ship constructed in any way he sees fit without even advising you how he is going to do it. The Senator from Alabama [Mr. MORGAN] says to me that he cannot do it under the Constitution. Pass this bill, and he will not wait to have any constitutional scruples about it. Did you ever know an officer of this Government to hesitate to assume all the power given·him on the ground 

that it might beunconstitutionalf You have seen officers often nsurp 

authority not given them; but never have any constitutional scru- ples stopped them from exercising any authority granted by law. 

This is the provision in the third section : • No unexpended balances of said construction fund shall hereafter be covered 

into the Treasury or be made available for any purpose not provided by this act, 

any law to the contrary notwithstanding. 

I do not care to argue it longer; I shall record my vote against it, 

it is an overthrow of all the safeguards which for the last twelve years we have been attempting to throw around the executive department 

of this Government. I could state the abuses which once existed ani 

verify them by the record; but I willnotdoanythingthat looks like 

getting up a party quarrel now. Mr. BUTLER. May I ask one question for information¥ What 

accountability attaches to the Secretary of the Navy under this bill as to the expenditure of the money ! 

Mr. BECK. No other acconntabilityJthat I know of except that the 

money shall be expended in the construction of something that he 

calls ships. 

l\Ir. BUTLER. Is he not required to rep.ort annually that expendi- tnre'l 

Mr. BECK. He reports annually what he has done; that is, after 

he has constructed a ship which the Senate would not authorize at 

all, which Congress would not authorize, he tells you what he has 

done, and he has done it by authority of this law and you cannot prevent him from doing it. 

l\Ir. McPHERSON. Is there not a limit to the exercise of that 

power by the Secretary of the Navy 

Mr. BECK. There is a limit of a million each year, I understand, 

and only that limit; but he may begin a work and invest a million 

in it that will either have to be abandoned or require you to appropriate millions more to carry it on. He may have the iron-clads lying 

at the navy-yards condemned as old iron, upon which we have ex- pended already $3,600,000; and care is taken to insert in section 2-

the Secretary I suppose had it arranged-that he may not only sell 

ships at sea and those that are here, but all that "are unfinished in 

any navy-yard.1

' ' He can sell them if he thinks there is going to be. 

" a disproportionate expense" in finishing them. We have some ironclads now that were contracted for, as many of us contend, in plain 

violation of law; the contracting party had no power to bind the 

United States by the contract; but I am not going into that. 

The meaning of it is that not only will these iron-clads be sold,. 

but sold for old iron. They will bring no more. Any wooden ships 

that a board of officers will report ought to be condemned will be 

sold, because they do nob want te sail in them any more, and the-y 

will begin under this construction fund to build such ships as suit 

their comfort and convenience without consulting us. 
1881. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE. 2201 

I have heard no argument in favor of the bill; I never saw the bill 

until it came up the other morning, and then only for a few minutes; ·I have read it very hurriedly now; but I know it is going baQk on all 

that for twelve years Congress has been trying to do in the way of 

placing limitations on the power of executive officers. 

LEGISLATIVE, ETC., APPROPRIATION BILL. 

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. I rise to present a conference re- port. I offer the report of the committee on conference on the legislative, executive, and judicial bill. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator from West Virginia, from 

the committee of conference on the legislative, executive, and judicial appropriation bill, makes a report which will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read the report, as follows: 

The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. No. 7101) making appropriations 

for the legislative, executive, and ,judicial expenses of the Government for the 

fiscal year ending June 30, 1882, and for other purposes, having met, after fnlland 

free conference have agreed to recommend, and do recommend, to their respective Houses as follows : That the Senate r ecede from its amendments numbered 2, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 

24, 28, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 56, 57, 66, 67, 70, 84, 85, 86, 91, 95, and 97. 

That the House recede from its disagreement to the amflndments of the Senate 

numbered 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 22, 23, 25, 26, 29, 30, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 

~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 93, and 94, and agree to the same. Amendment numbered 1 : That tho Honse recede from its clisagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 1, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows: Strike out from the words proposed to be inserted by said amendment " eight thousand and nineteen" and insert in lien thereof "seven thousand seven hundred and thirty-one; " and the Senate agree to the same. Amendment numbered 3: That the House recede from its disagreement to the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 3, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows: Strike out from said amendment the word "laborer" and insert in lien 

thereof the word" assistant; " and the Senate agree to the same. Amendment numbered 5: That the House recede from its clisagreement to the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 5, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows: Insert. after the word " clerk" the word.s ''and stenographer; '' and 

the Senate agree to tbe same. • Amendment numbered 27: That the House recede from its disagreement to the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 27 and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows: Strikeout the word" monthly" proposed to be inserted by said amend. ment ; and the Senate agree to the same. , Amendment numbered 31: That the Honse recede from its disagreement to the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 31, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows : Strike out, in line 15, after the word "thousand," at the end of line 14, 

page 15 of the bill, the words " two hundred and fifty; " and the Senate agree to the same. 

Amendment numbered 40: That the House recede from its disagreement to the 

amendment of tbe Senate numbered 40, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows: In lien of the sum proposed insert "$1,975,000 ; " and the Senate agree to the same. Amendment numbered 43: That the Honse recede from ita disagreement to the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 43, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows : Strike out therefrom the word "four" where it first occurs and insert 

in lieu thereof 1!be word "two; " strike out the word "four" where it last occurs and insert in lien thereof the word ' ' six: ; " and the Senate agree to the same. .Amendment numbered 44: That the House' recede from its disagreement t~ the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 44, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows: Strike out the words yroposed to be inserted by said Senate amend. ment and insert in lieu thereof " siX hundred and forty;" and the Senate agree to the same. Amendment numbered 69: That the House recede from ita disagreement to the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 69, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows : Strike out the words" four thousand" and insert in lien thereof" three 

thousand six hundred ;" and the Senate agree to the same. Amendment numbered 71: That the House recede from its disagreement to the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 71, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows: In lieu of the sum proposed insert " $591,010;" and:' the Senate agree to the same. 

Amendment numbered 73: That the House recede from its disagreement to the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 73, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows : Add after the word "dollars," at the end of the amended paragraph, 

the following : "And the provisions of section 5485 of the Revised Statutes shall 

be applicable to any person who shall violate the provisions of an act entitled 'An aet r elating to claim agents and attorneys in pension cases, ' approved June 20, 

1878 ;" and the Senate agree to the same. Amendment numbered 81: That the House recede from its disagreement to.the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 81, and agree to the same with au amendment, as follows: In lieu of the sum proposed insert '' 4,500 ;" and the Senate agree to the same. 

Amendment numbered 83: That the House recede from its disagreement to the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 83, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows: In lieu of the sum proposed insert " $17,100;" and the Senate agree to the same. 

Amendment numbered 89: That the House recede from its disagreement to the 

amendment ofthe Senate numbered 89, and ap;ree to the same with an amendment, as follows: In lien of the sum proposed insert ~4,660; " and the Senate agree to the same. Amendment numbered 92: That tho House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 9-2, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows: In lieu of the sum proposed insert; " $51,200; " and the Senate agree to the same. Amendment numbered 96: That the House recede from its clisagreement to the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 96, and agre.e to the same, with an amend· 

ment, as follows: Strike out "ten " l.I.Dd insert "twelve ; " and the Senate agree to the same. H. G. DAVIS, 

WILLIAM A. WALLACE, W. B. ALLISON, 

Manaaers on the part of the Senate. J. D. C. ATKINS, 

HIESTER CLYMER, 

JOHN H. BAKER, 

Managers on the part of the Hou.se. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. Will the Senate consider this report at 

this timet The Chair. hears no objection. Mr. INGALLS. Mr. President, there were so~e of the amendments 

I 

made by the Senate of very great importance, and it is manifestly 

impossible to ascertain from a numerical r ecitation what were agreed 

to and what were disagreed to and what were modified. I allude- especially to the amendments made by the Senate providing for a - large increase in the clerical force of the Pension Office and of theSurgeon-General's Office, and I ask upon that point particularly if theSenator from West Virginia will advise us what action was taken by 

the conference committee and how does the bill now stand '1 

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. In reference to the pension question, the amendments providing additional force and facilities to the· three offices, that of the Commissioner of Pensions, the Surgeon-General, and the Adjutant-General, the bill stands, I believe, precisely,. without a single change, as the Senate pa-ssed it. There is no differ- ence whatever in these respects. As to the amendment offered by th& 

Senator from Illinois, [Mr. LoGAN,] about the three medical assistants, the committee on the part of the Senate felt itself bound, after 

what took place here, to insist upon that amendment, but the House 

resisted it, and at last the Senate receded in that particular. In all 

other respects, so far as the -pension items are concerned, the bill is 

left precisely as the Senate passed it. 

Mr. LOGAN. The amendment the Senator referred to is not agreed 

to-the one offered by me. Mr. DAVIS, of Illinois. Not agreed to by the House, and the Senate did not insist upon it. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on the report of the com- mittee of conference. The report was concurred in. 

NAVAL CONSTRUCTION FUND. 

The Senate resumed the consideration of the bill (H. R. No. 3983) 

to provide a construction fund for the Navy, and for other purposes. Mr. BLAIR. Mr. President, the condition of the American Navy is 

certainly no source of pride to the American citizen ; and this not by reason of any fault whatever on the part of its personnel, for if any 

nation now or at any time ha-a had reason to be proud of the officers 

and of the seamen of its Navy, I believe we are that nation; and in case of collision with any foreign power, so far as the men who com- pose the Navy are concerned, we are certainly in as good condition 

to compete with the world as we have been at any former period of our history or as we could ever desire to be in any future war t hat 

it may be our misfortune to wage. But, sir, owing to modern improvements, to changes in the conditions of naval warfare, we are without the vessels wherein to carry on with vigor and with success a contest upon the ocean at the present time. The consequence of 

this is that at the present.time we are under the necessity or we are. coming directly to the necessity of substituting almost wholly a new Navy for the old. Then we must sell our old ships or we must use our old ships as material to be converted into the construction of the-. new; and at this particular point, .inst at this juncture, in comes this 

bill proprosing at very great disadvantage to the Treasury and to the 

American people, as I think, to sell out the Navy to such customers as we may find for it at a very great sacrifice to the nation at large 

and to the very great advantage of such individual combinations as can be made to purchase the old ships and the old material. I think, 

sir, if we could get to the bottom of this bill, learn who are its urgers 

and its promoters, we should find that the same class of men who have 

in former times profited largely by the sales of American vessels belonging to the Navy are hoping for a repetition of the profits they 

received hitherto. I believe that the bill is a bad bill in that direction, and if we dispose of the vessels of our Navy in conformity with 

its provisions we shall realize but the merest song in comparison wjth 

the true value of the ships and the material of which they are com- posed. 

Now, we have navy-yards; we have an existing machinery; we have the means of taking apart our vessels, those of them which are not suitable to the conditions of modern naval warfare, those of them 

which must be replaced by new ships, and we have the means of taking them apart as cheaply as anybody else can do it. We are lacking 

in labor. Those who have control of our navy-yards complain con- stantly that they are without the necessary amount of work to keepthe capital there invested properly employed. Now, if we can, with 

the machinery which we possess to make a ship, also take it apart as cheaply as anybody, what is the reason that we may not take the 

vessels which perhaps should be condemned and which should be 

replaced, and ourselves separate them into their constituent parts, as must thesepurcha-sersin order to make them of any value whatever, 

and preserve the materials f 

I have ma{}e a little inquiry, not in reference to this bill particularly, because I have never seen it until this morning, but with re- gard to the genocal proposition. I know some of the leading con- structors of the Navy say that the vessels which it is proposed tosell under some bill-and I suppose this must be the bill, for there is no other one pending-can be taken apart at our own navy-yards, and 

the material, wood, brass, iron, and other things which enter into 

their composition and which can be used in the construction of the 

vessels we must have hereafter can in that way be made to realize 

to us many times the value which we can obtain by the sale at auc- tion outright to private parties. 

Mr. McPHERSON. May I ask the Senator a question in that con- nection f 
1 

( 

i 

2202 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY 28, 

Mr. BLAIR. Certainly. 

Mr. McPHERSON. Would not, therefore, a competent board of 

naval officers be very likely to so report 7 

Mr. BLAIR. In regard to the "competent board of naval officers," 

what will they report f What does the bill provide that they shall 

do 7 They take a ship as it stands, a ship which is not suitable to 

modern naval warfare, which is of no use to the country whatever 

in its existing form, and they appraise the value of that ship, and it 

is not worth a whalebone to the United States; it is of no conse- ·qnence whatever to the United States as a ship to do fighting with; 

and what will that board of naval officers appraise the vessel to be 

worth 7 Instead of appraising it to be worth anything, they will 

.appraise it to be worth nothing or next to nothing, except possibly 

what the materials which enter into its composition mi~ht be worth· 

after it was taken apart. They may possibly say that It is worth a little something in that way, but they appraise it as it stands, and, 

'()f course, in the separation of these mat-erials, the separation of the 

good from the bad, the taking apart of the vessels, there is a large 

amount of labor necessary; and one point I am now making is that we may just as well utilize the capital which we have invested in our navy-yards and perform that labor ourselves. It is going to be some ,years before we are satisfied precisely what form of vessel we should 

substitute for those we now nse. Constant improvements, constant 

inventions, are taking place, and before we decide on the navy which 

it is necessary for us to have when we assert the Monroe doctrine, 

and assert it with vigor, as I hope we shall, there must be some delay, 

very considerable delay; and during this interim, while the intellectual process is being carried on which invents the Navy we are to 

build, our yards remain in idleness, and the capital therein invested 

is unemployed. 'Ve may just as well keep these vessels by themselves; and when the proper time comes, not by any wholesale con- demnation, but ship after sbip, as it is found necessary or deemed judicious, condemn it and separate it into its constituent elements, and 

in that way give employment to labor at our navy-yards, and em- ployment to the capital which we have therein invested. These yards are now rotting down; the machinery is going to waste, and we may 

just as well use it in taking apart the old vessels as sell them to private 

individuals, who expect to come in here by virtue of their combinations and buy the navy for a song, and then convert it into material 

to be disposed of otherwise. No doubt it is expected that these individuals, when they get this material, will sell a very large portion 

of it right back to the Government when we commence our new ships. 

These are nc mere idle suspicions and whims on my part. It is true 

I have not made any very thorough investigation into this matter, 

but when I have come in contact with .men who are interested in the 

reconstruction of our Navy who do know and who are competent to 

give au opinion on this subject, I am bnt reiterating ideas which I 

have I'eceived from them. The navy will sell for a song in this way. 

We may as well keep it as sell it. · This naval construction fund which it is expected to realize c2>n, 

from the very nature of things, be but a very small one if we adopt 

the theory of the bill itself, because, as I was saying a moment ago 

in reply to the suggestion of the Senator from New Jersey, a naval 

board must appraise a naval ship at that value which it is worth to 

the United States, and a single gun upon any of the modern vessels 

of France, or of England, or of other continental powers, would knock 

two-thirds of our Navy into pieces, and therefore our ships are utterly 

valueless for fighting purposes at the present time, and will likely be 

.appraised accordingly. 

I do not believe, at all events, that a bill like this should be put 

through until its features are more carefully examined than they 

have been by the Senate, and I protest against our selling out what 

little Navy we have got at the value which is likely to be realized 

from that class of combinations which have in similar instances 

hitherto been found to be the only purchasers. There can be no competition for these ships. 'Ve do not want to buy them, and the 

few individuals who want to take them and perform the labor of 

their separation will not have the slightest difficulty in the future 

any more than they have had in the past in so combining that each one of them will take the vessel which he wants at a mere nominal 

price, a.nd I believe the bill should be defeated. 

:Mr. CONKLING. Mr. President1 may I inquire what is the stage 

of this billY 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is, shall the bill pass 

Mr. CONKLING. It has been ordered to a third reading ! 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. It has been. 

:Mr. CONKLING. Without amendment f 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. Without amendment; and the question 

is, Shall it pass T and upon the question of its passage the yeas and 

nays have been ordered. ' 

Mr. CONKLING. Has it been read the third time, or has it merely 

been ordered to a third reading f · 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. It has been read the third time, aml the 

question is, Shall it pass'? 

Mr. CONKLING. I beg pardon of the Chair; I misunderstood the 

condition of the bill. 

Mr. President, I shall venture to move to reconsider the vote ordering the bill to a third reading in order t.hat I may offer an amendment which, before asking that the motion be put, I will state and ~ndeavor to explain. 

I move to strike out in section 3 from lines 10 to 13 the words: 

No unexpended balances of said construction fund shall hereafter be covered into 

the Treasw-y or be made available for anypurposenotprovided by this act, any law to the contrary notwithstanding. 

This is Honse phraseology and therefore the committee of this body 

will take no exception if I say that it is rather extraordinary, not to 

say defiant language, "any law to the contrary notwithstanding." 

However, my objection is not to the phraseology of this provision; it 

is to its substance. 

Section 1 of the bill exposes to condemnation all the stores of the 

Navy: · 

.And aJ1 such swres and supplies as shall be found by boards of appraisers to be 

unserviceable for use in the Navy shall be condemned and sold in the manner hereinafter provided for the sale of old materials, and the proceeds thereof shall be 

paid into the Treaaury to the credit of the permanent construction fund of the 

Navy in the same manner as is hereinafter provided concerning the proceeds of the 

sale of old vessels of the Navy. 

In view of these words, I repeat that all the stores and all the supplies of theN avy from time to time are liable to condemnation at the 

hands of boards of appraisers without its being possible to know now who they are to be, and as far as they are condemned and sold the 

proceeds are to have the light which I will speak of in reference to 

the proceeds of vessels condemned. The next section provides : 

SEC. 2. It shall also be the duty of the Secretary of the Navy, as soon as may be 

after the passage of this act, to cause to be examined by competent boards of offi· cers of the Navy, to be designated by him for that duty, all vessels belonging to the Navy not in actual service at sea, and vessels at sea as soon as they shall re- turn to any naval station within the United States, and said boards shali ascertain 

and report to the Secretary of the Navy, in writin~, which of said vessels are unfit 

for further service, or, if the same are unfinished m any navy-yard, which cannot be finished without great and disproportionate expense, and shall in such report state fully the grounds and reasons for their opinion. 

Thus all the Navy ships in ordinary, ships not at sea, ships uncom- pleted, and ships consisting of parts not yet assembleu, are exposed 

to appraisement, condemnation, and sale, and for this purpose when- ever tb.ey return to any naval station anywhere they are exposed to 

inspection and condemnation. 

The Senate will observe that these broad terms invite appraisers 

and other scrutinizers to consult their own judgment as to the tonnage, the fashion, the character of vessels which it is wise to be con- tinned in the Navy. The test is not seaworthiness. 

Mr. McPHERSON. Would it disturb the Senator if I should ask 

him a q nestion f 

Mr. CONKLING. Far from it. 

Mr. McPHERSON. If be will turn to section 1541 of the Revised 

Statutes, the Senator will find that the Secretary of the Navy has all 

the power now unguarded which we propose to give him under the 

proposed bill. 

Mr. CONKLING. Will the Senator be kind enough to read it 'f 

}!r. :McPHERSON. It is as follows: ' 

The Secretary of tbeNavy is authorized and directed to sell, at public sale, such 

vessels and materials of the United States Navy as, i.n his judgment, cannot be advantaaeously used, repaired, or fitted out; and he shall, at the opening of each ses- sion of Congress, make a full report to Congress of all vessels and materials sold, 

the parties buying the same, and the amount realized ~erefrom, together with such 

other facts as may be necessary to a full understanding of his acts. 

If the Senator will yield to me one moment longer, be will take 

notice that under the second section of the bill which he is now criticising, our purpose, in addition to the power already conferred upon 

the Secretary of the Navy, is to create an adviRory board of competent 

naval officers; and if the judgment of competent officers cannot be 

taken on a matter of which they are supposed to have greater knowledge'tban anybody else, certainly I think greater knowledge than 

the Senator from New York or myself can have upon the value of a naval vessel, then I do not see whom we are to trust. 

Mr. CO~TJCLING. Mr. President, it frequently happens in the course of debate that a Senator is interrupted by s. question which seems very pertinent, a.s this does, but which, did the Sena.tor who 

puts it withhold itforafewmoments, would not seem so pertinent. I 

think I can show my honorable friend from New Jersey that his citation of the statute does not bear upon thea.rgumentwhichiamgoing 

to level at the words I want to strike out. 

I need not remind the Senator from New Jersey how individuality 

centralizes responsibility. The Secretary of the Navy as an individual official bas the power, whenever in a given case be is moved to 

do it, and feels that he can justify it, to say of a particular vessel w:Q.at 

disposition shall be made of her as there indicated by the statute. 

When you come to appoint boards in the plural to catch every ves- sel when she comes in to any naval station in the United Statesthat is what the bill says-and begin to ransack and examine and 

cat-haul the whole Navy, big and little, with a view to disposing of 

it, vessels finished and vessels unfinished, you have changed entirely, as every practical man knows, the whole scope and bearing of the 

provision. But it is not for that reason that I criticise the language 

I have moved to strike out. I will state to the Senate now the rea- son for which I do it. 

Under the existing statutes the proceeds of sold vessels, like aJl 

other proceeds and all other money whatsoever, under the uniform 

legislation for years, are covered into the Treasury, become subject 

to the expiration of the time when they may be used, go upon the 

books of the Treasury Department, appear in the reports, and become 

parts and undivided parts of the moneys in the Treasury. By the 

words to which I have called attention . this fund, the amount of 
f881. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 2203 

which is to depend absolutely upon the wish of the Secretary of the 

Navy and these manifold boards whom he may designate-a fund 

which may be a million, two million, three million, five million as they from time to time elect by the number of vessels and the amount 

of stores and supplies they condemn and sell, is to be perpetually 

kept segregated, intact, a fond by itself never to expire, never to be 

eovered in under those drag-nets of statutes which lay hold of every 

other particle belonging to tl:).e United States after a certain time 

and cover it into the Treasury whence it cannot go again except by 

direction of the law-making power. That is the reason why I inveigh 

against these provisions. 

I say that to take any Department of the Government and except 

it out of provisions which experience has shown to be wholesome for 

all Departments, namely, those provisions that fix a day after which 

funds shall not run unaccounted for but when they shall return to 

the Treasury, is to expose it to uncomfortable suspicion and accusa.. tion, to put it upon a footing which I think no bead of that Department would care to have it occupy. But when in addition to that 

you commit to the head of the Department to say how large and how 

small from time to time this fund shall be, so that its amount no longer 

depends like aJl other fonds upon appropriations made by Congress 

but upon the ipse di$it of the Secretary of the Navy, he not even to 

appear in prop1'ia persona but to appear by proxy here and there 

through boards to roam all over the naval stations and determine 

how many vessels in their estimation are out of fashion ; bow many are underneath a certain minimum of tonnage; how many are not 

elad with armor as thick as in their estimation would be desirable; 

how many in their porli-holes are too diminutive to permit such guns 

to speak as they may think a vessel should carry, and so on, and then 

to condemn them, one by one, or in classes-when you provide for 

that and then provide that in perpetuity ''any law to the contrary 

notwithstanding" this shall remain a special fund in the bands and 

.subject to the absolute direction of those who create it, ! -submit to 

the honorable Senator from New Jersey that such a statute would 

be what doctors would call a foreign substance in the legislation of 

the country. • Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. Will the Senator from New York · allow me to call his attention to the words of the statute, "vessels 

and materials'" In the bill are added the words" stores and supplies," so that the bill goes much further than the present statute. 

Mr. CONKLING. I agree with the Senator, and I should agree with 

him if he were to affirm that the bill as to vessels themselves goes a great deal further. The whole intendment of the act, what I may 

speak of as the atmosphere of the act, is entirely different. That 

statute intends to provide for the disposition of a crippled or an un- desirable vessel here or there; this act is intended as a drag-net to 

spread all over the Navy and create machinery by which not an ex- eeptional vessel now and another vessel again some other time may 

be dropped, but by which vessels as a rule as they return to a naval 

station are to be examined with a view to their dismissal from the 

Navy and their disposition to private parties. That is enough to distinguish between the two acts; but the broad distinction, the active, 

()perative, and, as I think, pernicious distinction which will strike ~very business man is this: thel'e stands a statute under which a vessel may be sold and the money turned into the Treasury to be govverned by the forces and methods applicable generally to moneys in 

the Treasury; here comes a statute which commits to certain execu- tive officers the final disposition of the fond, its maintenance separately in perpetuity, and then commits to them the question whether 

by selling more or less they shall from time to time make that fund 

.greater or smaller as they may choose. 

In common phrase, it is burning the candle at both ends. It is, in 

the first place, depositing with these men the power to appropriate 

money practically, and in the second place depositing with them the 

option and judgment what shall be done with that money ultimately, 

and if I have the ear of the honorable Senator from New Jersey I 

venture to direct his attention to some lines at the top of page 5, 

which, if I read them aright, are to the effect-and I should not object to that if it stood alone-that these same authorities in place of 

selling in the modes provided materials and stores and supplies now on hand may use them by way of barter, that is, may make a con- tract for the construction of a vessel to pay so much in money and 

to turn in so much of material in kind. If I apprehend aright the intention of the provision that might be very provident. It is one of 

the reasons why these other provisions should not be so broad. I do 

not know whether I apprehend this aright or not. 

:Mr. McPHERSON. Will the Senator yield to mo a moment~ 

Mr. CONKLING. Certainly. 

Mr. McPHERSON. I do not consider that the section to which the 

.SenatQr has invited my attention confers any such }lower at all upon 

the Secretary of the Navy. 

Air. CONKLING. Let me read the words : 

But in the construction, armament, or equipment of new vessels of the Navy as herein provided for, the Secretary of the Navy may make use of any materials 

stores, or supplies now on hand, which, in his opinion, willnotprobabll be required :;~~h~~~~-of the vessels, their armament or equipment, now in t e Navy, but 

What do those words mean, will the Senator tell me '? 

Mr. McPHERSON. I suppose the meaning is that the Secretary of 

the Navy may make use of any materials, stores, and supplies now on 

band which will probably not be required for t.he repair of vessels. 

We confer upon him the power to sell any materials not required. 

Mr. CONKLING. That is conferred by the preceding section; there 

is no doubt about that. I asked him what is the force of the words 

"may make use of any material." 

Mr. McPHERSON. It certainly does not mean to exchange it, be- cause we would not employ the word ''use" if we meant to confer 

any power to exchange. He may make use of it in any mannar he 

pleases, I suppose, so far as the repair and construction of vessels is 

concerned. . Mr. CONKLING. Suppose he pleased to make a contract for con- structing a vessel and pay so much in money and to turn in for use such material as be has on hand, would not that be competent under 

this section ' 

Mr. McPHERSON. I do not think it would. 

Mr." CONKLING. The Senator is certainly wrong about that. The 

words " the repair of the vessels" are for a different purposeWhich. in his opinion, will not probably be required in the repair of the vessels, 

their armament or equipment, now in the Navy, but not otherwise. 

That is, if I understand it, he may use not all the materials, but he 

may use all such as he thinks will not probably be required for the 

repair of the vessels which we own now, and he may use these ma- terials in the construction, armament, and equipment of new vessels. 

Mr. McPHERSON. He may u,se in new construction the materials 

which will not be required for the purpose of repairing the old ves- sels. This is the intent and meaning, I suppose, of the section. ~Ir. CONKLING. That is what I said in thefirstpb.ce, but I understood my honorable friend to challenge the assertion. 

Mr. McPHERSON. If the honorab1e Senator can make use of any 

other language that will convey the idea or make it any plainer, the 

committee will accept tho language . Mr. CONKLING. The Senator .from New Jersey entirely misapprehends me. I do not wish to use other language; I do not wish 

to defeat this language; I make no objection to it. My whole purpose in referring to it was to state its meaning, which meaning is as now ascribed to it by the Senator from New Jersey, and to say that 

that power, very proper as it seemed to me, being contained in the 

bill was an additional reason why these preceding and unexampled 

powers should not also be conferred. It is, I submit, a reason why 

the Secretary should not have other powers that by this section he 

has power not only to contract for vessels and pay for them with 

money derived from appropriations and also from the sale of other 

vessels, but that he ha.s also power to put into the contract that paying so much in money he will also use in construction such and such 

materials, be those materials live oak, Russian cordage, iron, or any 

other of the materials which enter into the act of ship-building. I 

say by as much as he bas that power, by so mnch--

Mr. McPHERSON. I must confess it is a very far-fetched con- struction. 

Mr. CONKLING. Mr. President, then my honorab1e friend farfetched it, because the echoes of his eloquent voice have scarcely died 

away since be told us that that was what it meant, and my regard 

for him as a Senator and as a mariner is so great that I never doubt 

anything he says. 

Mr. McPIIERSON. Will the honorable Senator yield to me just one moment? 

Mr. CONKLING. Always. 

Mr. McPHERSON. In order that I may not be misunderstood 

again by him, let me repeat that I declared it to be my understanding. of the section tbat the matepal not needed for repairs of vessels 

could be used by the Secretary of the Navy in permanent construction. Now, does the Senator understand me distinctly Y If not, I 

will r~peat it again. • ?tlr. CONKLING. I think I do, and I have thought so all the time. 

I understand my honorable friend. Now, I affirm that this section means that materials-! leave out supplies, to simplify it,-materi'als 

at any time on hand and not needed for the repairs of vessels in the 

Navy may be made use of in the construction of new vessels. Does 

he not say so' If I have been so unfortunate as not to say so myself, it certainly convicts one of astonishing stupidity. I have en- deavored to say that the meaning of the section is that in addition 

to the money which is used in constructing new vessels materials on hand may also be used, thus increasing indefinitely the amount practically which is to be expended in this regard. Then the Senator 

says he does not agree with me and corrects me, and then he states 

it himself; and although he states it more clearly than I can, he states . exactly in effect what I have been two or three times trying to affirm . 

Now, Mr. President, I submit that all this ought not to be put in 

any bill touching any Department, and I leave the subject for the 

moment by asking Senators to observe that should the words be 

stricken out which I have proposed to strike out, they do not disarrange any other part of the bill, or render ineffective any provision of 

the bill or require any other amendment. They simply take out a very exceptional provision standing by itself, under which if adopted 

this fund would continue indefinitely to run and to assert itself against all statutes covering any unexpended balances, and to do that whether 

doubled or quadrupled by the sale of vessels, or whether it remained . only a fund of some such dimensions as are indicated by the hill. There-

. 
2204 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY ·28, 

fore I ask that we may by unanimous consent have the vote re- considered by which this bill was ordered to a third reading, so that 

the sense of the Senate may be taken upon this one isolated question. 

Mr. McPHERSON. Mr. President, before addressing myself to the 

amendment of the Senator from New York, I wish to call attention 

to one or two objections which have been made to the bill by other 

Senators, and I wish especially to call attention to the objection made 

by the honorable Senator from Kentucky, whom I do not see in his 

seat. That Senator made a long speech upon this point, tha~ under 

this proposed bill the Secretary of the Navy could sell the iron-clad 

vessels which were now being constructed in private ship-yards of 

the .country. I asked the Senator to rea-d section 2 of the bill, and 

repeated twice my invitation to him to read that sect.ion. Notwithstanding that, he went on with a long dissertation inveighing against 

that section of the bill which permitted the Secretary of the Navy to 

sell the iron-clads now under construction. Let me call the attention of the Senator to that section of the bill and see bow well that 

is guarded. I refer :first to lines 9 and 10: 

Or if the same are unfinished in any navy-yard. 

The four iron-clads of which the Senator spoke are not in any navy- yard of the United States. It simply refers to vessels now in the 

navy-yards, some upon the stocks. For instance, in the New York 

navy-yard we have the old New York and the Java upon the stocks, 

and they have been there since the war, completely rotted down, in 

the way. ·we have old hulks lying at the dock unfit and unworthy 

of repair. Mr. HARRIS, a member of the Committee on Naval Affairs 

in the House, says in his report that some :fifty-odd vessels are now borne on the Navy Register which are unworthy of repair and unfit 

for use. It is well known to every member of the Senate that thousands upon thousands of dollars in money are every year appropriated 

for the purpose of the care of these old hulks. Now I wish to ask 

Senators, how are we going to arrive at the condition of the Navy 

unless it be done by a commission of competent officers Y I suppose 

the honorable Senator from New York will not insist upon knowing more about the value of this property than a competent board of 

officers whom the Secretary of the Navy may select. For my part, 

I profess to have no knowledge--

The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. RoLLINs in the chair.) The 

morning hour has expired. The bill goes over under the rule, and 

the unfinished bnsiness--

Mr. McPHERSON. I hope permission will be ~ranted to continue 

the bill. 

Mr. CONKLING. I hope the honorable Senator will be allowed at 

least to conclude his own observations. I think nobody will object 

to that. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there be no objection the Senator 

from New Jersey will be allowed to continue his remarks. 

Mr. HOAR. What is the effect of voting to lay aside all pending 

orders and proceed to the consideration of a bill Does that confine 

that bill still to the morning hour 1 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair understands it confines 

the bill to the morning hour, and on the expiration of the morning 

hour the unfinished business comes up for consideration. The Senator from New Jersey asks permission t o continue his remarks. Is 

there objection 'i 

Mr. PENDLETON. I ask that the unfinished business be laid before the Senate, and then I will bear any suggestion the Senator from 

New Jersey desires to make in reference t o it. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair will lay before the Senate the unfinished business, which will be reported. 

The CHIEF CLERK. The unfinished business is the bill (S. No. 1441) 

for the relief of the captain, owners, officers, and crew of the late 

United States private-armed brig General Armstrong, their heirs, 

executors, administrators, or assigns. 

The PRESIDING OF.l<~ICER. Is there objection to giving the Senator from New Jersey leave to continue his rem:uks The Chair 

hears none, and Honse bill No. 3983 continues before the Senate. 

Mr. McPHERSON. I do not think it will take more than :fifteen 

minutes to reach a vote on the naval construction fund bill, and I 

will suspend my remarks in order that the Senate may take the vote. 

The PRESIDING OF.l<~ICER. Is there objection to the Senator 

continuing his remarks f 

Mr. TELLER. There is objection to doing anything except allowing the Senator to finish his remarks. I do not object to that, but I 

object to any further discussion of this bill except by the Senator 

from New Jersey. 

The PRESIDiNG OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey 'will 

proceed. 

Mr. McPHERSON. :Mr. President--

Yr. PENDLETON. I consent that the unfinished business ma.y be 

laid aside informally. 

Mr. McPHERSON. It will not take more than fifteen minutes for me to :finish mv temarks and have a vote on the bill. 

The PRESllHNG OFFICER. The unfinished business will be laid 

aside informally in order that the Senator from New Jersey may finish his remarks. 

Mr. PENDLETON. Subject to my call. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Subject to the call of the Senator 

from Ohi . 

Mr. McPHERSON. No man in the Senate would be more unwilling to confer unnecessary power, much less extraordinary power t 

upon any Secretary of the Navy than myself. For one, I must say 

that our experience during several years of our national life iu thia 

particular has not been at all flattering to our pride; but we find 

ourselves confronted by a peculiar condition of circumstances; we find this old dilapidated material in the Navy, which is of no uso whatever to the Navy, and we desire. to dispose of it; and I can con- ceive of no modo in which the power could be better guarded than 

in this bill. We give the Secretary of the Navy the power to sell old 

material on the report of a board of naval officers. The money derived from the sale is covered into the Treasury, but placed to the 

credit of a permanent construction fund. It is to be drawn out by 

appropriations ma~e by Congress. with the exception of $1,000,000, 

which the Secretary of the Navy is qualified at any time to use. I do not know that it is necessary for me to say more. It is so well 

guarded as this, that if we sell the old material we convert it int() new. 

?tfr. JONES, of Florida. Is not the sum of money which is :mnn- ally paid at the discretion of the Secretary of the Navy for the purpose of repairs of ships just as liable to abuse as this fund 'l Nearly a million dollars annually under the general appropriation bills is 

placed at his disposal to be used aa he may think proper in the 

repairs of vessels of the Navy. 

Mr. McPHERSON. This bill confers less power than he now bas. 

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. But the Secretary has to make his 

estimates and tell Congress what he wants the money for and what 

he proposes to do with it. 

Mr. INGALLS. Mr. President--

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Senators will allow the Chair t() 

state the pending question. The Senator from New York asks that 

the vote ordering this bill to a third reading be reconsidered. Is 

there objection to that request¥ The Chair hears no objection, and 

the vote ordering the bill to a third reading is reconsidered. 

Mr. INGALLS. I have heard no reason during this debate yet 

given for conferring the extraordinary powers of this bill upon theSecretary of the Navy, when similar powers are denied to every other 

executive officer of the Government. The provisions of the bill are- directly in conflict with every theory of executive administration. If 

this bill prevails and we are to allow the Secretary of the Navy to 

sell all the vessels of the Navy that may be condemned by a board, 

finished and unfinished, and all the stores and material, at any sum that such a board may see fit to affix, and place the amount of money 

in the Treasury as a permanent construction fund for the Navy, I am at a loss to understand why we may not abandon legislative control over every other branch of the Government, why we may not authorizethe Secretary of the Treasury to sell every custom-house, why we· may not authorize the Secretary of War to sell every arsenal, every 

garrison, every fort, every cantonment in the country, and have the 

funds arising from the sales placed in the Treasury subject to the disposition of the head of the Department without the control of Congress; 

and why we may not by statute authorize the Secretary of the Interio.rto dispose of all the Indian reservations and all the public lands of the 

country, and have the funds so derived placed in the Treasury subject to his control, because it is idle to say that legislative control 

is not removed by the provisions of this bill. In pursuance of the 

argument made bythe Senator from New York, and as afnrthersnggestion aa to t.he extraordinary provisions of this measure, I call attention to the first part of section 6 of the bill : 

Not moro than $1,000,000 shall be expended or authorized to be expended out of 

the permanent construction fund of the Navy during any one fiscal year without 

authority of Congress. 

Although that is expressed in the negative, yet it is an express. 

conferrence of power upon the Secretary of the Navy to expend 

1,000,000 annually from this fund without authority of Congress, 

vesting the disposition of this sum entirely at his discretion. 

Mr. EATON. Permit me to ask my friend, for it is in his own lineof thought, could not the Secretary of the Navy commence the con- struction of one, two, three, or a dozen vessels so that it came within 

the amount of $1,000,000 

Mr. INGALLS. Any number. There is no limitation whatever 

upon the power of the Secretary of the Navy to expend the $1,000,000 

in any way that he sees :fit. I should like the Senator from New 

Jersey, or any other Senator who proposes to support this bill, to answer me under what constit utional provision this power is vested~ 

The Constitution says that ''no money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law." 

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. Will the Senator allow me a minute in the line of his thought~ 

?tfr. INGALLS. Yes, sir. 

1\Ir. DAVIS, of West Virginia . It will be recollected that the Senate at the last session passed a bill providing that hereafter all appropriations should be made direct each year, and in addition to that 

the bill repealed all permanent appropriations such as this would be. 

Mr. INGALLS. Certainly, and that ought to be so. Congress, 

which is the purse-holding and the law-making power of this Government, never ought to relinquish its absolute control over the revenues 

of the country. 

Mr. McPHERSON. Will the Senatoryield to mea moment! 

Mr. INGALLS. Certainly. 
1881. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 2205 

Mr. McPHERSON. Will the Senator show me by what nice line would be the last man in the s~nate to insist upon such a course, and 

of demarkation a distinction is made between an appropriation made he does not insist upon it. 

in this way and one made by law Y Mr. McPHERSON. I did not nnderstand the circumstances, ami 

Mr. INGALLS. TheSenatorfrom New Jersey knows thatt.heterm · therefore withdraw the objection. 

"appropriations made by law" has a distinct and technical significa- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question was submitted to the 

tion. It will not do to say that this is an appropriation made bylaw. Senate a-s distinctly as the Chair could state it. 

1\ir. McPHERSON. Will the Senator yield to me again a moment ? Mr. COCKRELL. There is no question about that. 

Mr. INGALLS. Yes, sir. Mr. INGALLS. I also desire before making a motion to recommit 

Mr. McPHERSON. Does the Senator not know that every year we the bill to suggest an amendment for the consideration of the com- make appropriations of money for the purpose of repairs to vessels in mit tee in case the bill should be recommitted. 

the Navy amounting to several million dollars We give that money The PRESIDING O~'FICER. There is one amendment now pendto the Secretary of theN avy upon his request. He sends to Congress in g. an item of appropr:iation that he wishes Congress to pass. We con- l\1r. INGALLS .. I nnde~t~nd that. I s~ggest as a:n amen?meni 

fer upon him the nght and power to expend say $3,000,000. Do we that I shall move if the b1ll1s not recomiDitted to strike out m the 

k now to w bat vessels he is to apply it 9 Do we know tow hat use he first line of section 6 the words " not more than $1,000,000" and inis to apply it Y We have no more knowledge of that t.han we have of sert the words "no money," and in lines 3 and 4, after "Navy," to 

what would become of this appropriation of $1,000,000. strike out the words "during any one fiscal year;" so as to read: 

Alr. DAVIS, of West Virginia . . The Senator will recollect that tho No money shall be expended or authorized to be expended outof the permaned 

Book of Estimates every year states the objects for w bich appropria.- construction fund of the Navy without authority of Congress. 

tions are desired. I now move that the bill be recommitted to the Committee on Naval 

Mr. INGALLS. Yes; and I know beyond all that that the Secre- Affairs. t ary of the Navy goes before the Committee on Naval Affairs and Mr. McPHERSON. I wish to say one word in this connection. If 

tells tbem what he wants to do with the money, and that they never the Senate are disposed to amend the bill in any particular, it seema recommend the appropriation of millions of money out of the public to me as though it would be impossible at this late day in the session revenues to be disbursed by him until he has told the committee what to have the amendments concurred in by the Honse. It does seem he wants to do with it. There could be no more vicious departure to me that the amendments proposed by both the Senator from New 

from a wholesome and salutary policy than to allow not only an ex- York and the Senator from Kansas are of no vital force or conse- ecutive officer of t his Government to spend money without congres- quence. Therefore I hope that the bill will not be recommitted, and 

eional supervision, but to provide the fund out of which the money I hope that the amendments will not be agreed to. . may be so spent . I am satisfied that upon more mature consideration The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the motion of the 

the committee would not be willing to leave the bill in its present Senator from Kansas [Mr. INGALLS] to recommit the bill to the Comshape, and I thereforemovetbat tbe bill be recommitted to the Com- mittee on Naval Affairs. 

mitteo on Naval Affairs. Mr. McPHERSON. I call for-the yeas and nays. We may as well 

Mr. CONKLING. May I inquire, bas the vote ordering the bill to have them taken first as last. a third reading been reconsidered Y . The question being taken by yeas and nays, resulted-yeas 28, naya 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The vote bas been reconsidered by 22; as follows: 

unanimous consent. YEAS--28. 

Mr. CONKLING. Then! should like to have my amendment pend- Allison, Davis ofTilinuis, Ingalls, 

}~f.~ rJa~?~ ~fsv~!~i~:~~dr!~!mb~t. if my friend will allow me· ue- ~f~~: ~:~.of w. va., ~~ood, 

Morrill, 

Plumb, 

Slater, 

Teller, 

Vest, 

Wallace, 

Williams. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Sen-or from Kansas with- ~:~n, ~::~d, i{<'~~ald, draw the motion to recommit Y Coke, Harris,' Jfaxey, 

Mr. CONKLING. Only for a moment. Conkling, Hereford, :Horgan, 

l1r. INGALLS. Certainly. :NAYS--22. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion is withdrawn. Anthony, Butler, Kernan, 

Mr. CONKLING. I move to amend by striking out the words that Bail~!_\ Call, McPherson, Rollins, 

Vance, 

Voorhees, 

Withem. 

I indicated before in section 3 from line 10 to 13, "no unexpended Bayaru, Cameron of Pa., Pendleton, balances," &c. Brown, Dawes, Platt, 

h d Bruce, Hampton. Pugh, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Secretary wm report t e amen - Burnside, Jones of Florida, Randolph, 

ment. .A:BSENT-25. 

The CHIEF CLERK. In line 10, after the word "purpose," it is proposed to strike out the words : 

No unexpended balances of said construction fund shall hereafter be covered 

into the Treasury or be made available for any purpose not provided by this act., any law to the contrary notwithstanding. 

Mr. INGALLS. I also want to offer an a.mendment--

1\ir. McPHERSON. I wish to make a statement before the Senator 

from Kansas goes on, if he ·wn1 yield to me. I did not understand 

that there was to be any motion to amend submitted to the Senate, or I certainly should not have agreed to a. reconsideration of the vote. 

I did not hear the Chair put any such motion to the Senate as that 

the Chair now declares, that the vote had been reconsidered by unan- imous consent for the purpose of entertaining the amendment of the . Senator from New York. I never beard it. 

Mr. CONKLING. Will the honorable Senator allow me amomentf 

Suppose it had not been done ; if a bill bad been formally. ordered to a. third reading without attracting the attention of the Senate, would 

the Senator insist upon that and object to its being undone in ~rder 

that the sense of the Senate might be taken upon an important amendment? 

Mr. McPHERSON. I should object to this proposition. The Senator !rom New York bad already announced the manner in which be 

wished to amend the bill. Not consenting to the amendment, and 

having in some measure charge of the bill, I should object to a recon- eideration of the vote for the purpose of emasculating the entire bill. 

Mr. CONKLING. My honorable friend will pardon me. Iwantto 

differ with him there. He has not bad an opportunity of reflecting a moment. If I bad charge of the bill and it had been ordered to a. third 

reading, and t.hc Senator should rise and say he was taken by surprise 

and bad an amendment to offer, if the Senator will reflect a moment 

be knows that I would not insist upon cutting him out; and by as much as I would not do it I am q nita sure the honorable Senator from 

New Jersey would not do it. I was amazed whenlbeard that the bill 

had been ordered to a third reading. I was attending to it, but some Senator addressed .me by my side here, and turning to talk to him a moment, while I was thus talking the bill was ordered to a third reading it seems, which I did not hear at all. 

Mr. McPHERSON. Under those circumstances !shall withdraw my objection. 

Mr. CONKLING. I knew it. I knew my friend from New Jersey 

Baldwin, Grover, Lamar, 

Blaine, Hill of Colorado, McMillan, 

Cameron of Wis., Hill of Georgia, Paddock, 

Edmund!!, Hoar, Ransom, 

Farley, Johnston, Saulsbury, Ferry, Jones of Nevada, Saunders, 

Groome, Kellogg, Sharon, 

So the motion to recommit was agreed to. 

SUNDRY CIVIL BILL. 

Thurman. 

Walker, 

Whyte, 

Windom. 

A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. T. F. KING. one of its clerks, announced that the House had passed a bill (H. R. 

No. 7203) making appropriations for sundry civil expenses of the 

Government for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1882, and for other 

purposes; in which it requested the concurrence of the SAnate. 

Mr. DAVIS, of West Virginia. I ask that that bill btl Lderred a~ 

once. The bill (H. R. No. 7203) making appropriations for sundry civil 

expenses of the Government for the fiscal year ending June 30,1882, 

and for other purposes, was read twice by its title, and referred to th& 

Committee on Appropriations. 

AMENDMENTS TO BILLS. 

Mr. HARRIS, from the Committee on the District of Columbia, re- ported an amendment intended to be proposed to the bill (H. R. No. 

7203) making appropriations for sundry civil expenses of the Government for the fiscal year ending J nne 30, 1882, and for other purposes; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and 

ordered to be printed. 

1\ir. VOORHEES, from the Committee on the Revision of the Laws, 

reported an amendment intended to be proposed to the bill (H. R. No~ 

7203) making appropriations for sundrycivilexpensesof theGovernment for the fiscal year ending J nne 30, 1882, and for other purposes; 

which wa-s referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered 

to be printed. 

He also, from the Committee on the Library, reported an amendment intended to be proposed to the deficiency appropriation bill ; 

which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered 

to be printed. 

He also, from the same committee, reported an amendment intended 

to be proposed to the bill (H. R. No. 7203) making appropriations for 
2206 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY 28~ 

t 

sundry civil expenses of the Government for the fiscal year ending 

June 30, 1882, and for other purposes; which was referred to the 

CoJDmittee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed. 

Mr. MAXEY and Mr. WITHERS submitted amendments intended to 

be proposed by them respectively to the deficiency appropriation bill; 

which w~re referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered 

to be printed. 

Mr. BALDWIN, Mr. BOOTH, Mr. BURNSIDE, Mr. COCKRELL, 

Mr. FARLEY, Mr. GARLAND, Mr. McPHERSON, Mr. MORRILL, 

Mr. SAUNDERS, Mr. VEST, Mr. VOORHEES, Mr. WITHERS, and 

Mr. WHYTE submitted amendments intended to be proposed by them 

respectively to the bill (H. R. No. 7203) making appropriations for 

sundry civil expenses of the Government for the fiscal year ending 

J nne 30, 1882, and for other purposes; which were referred to the Com· 

mittee on Appropriations. 

THE BRIG GENERAL ARl\ISTRONG. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The' Senate resumes the consideration of its unfinished business. · The Senate resumed the consideration of the bill (S. No. 1441) for 

the relief of the captain, owners, officers, and crew of the late United 

States private-armed brig General Armstrong, their heirs, executors, 

administrators, or assigns. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. '.rhe question is on the passage of 

the bill. 

Mr. PENDLETON. I wish to offer an amendment to the bill. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair will inform the Senator 

from Ohio that an amendment is not now in order. The question is on the passage of the bill. 

Mr. PENDLETON. Has the bill passed beyond the stage at which 

amendments are in order'1 

The PRESIDING O~'FICER. The Chair is so informed. 

Mr. PENDLETON. I then ask unanimous consent of the Senate to 

make two verbal amendments, and I offer them in pursuance of a con- sultation that I have had with the Senator from Massachusetts, [Mr. 

RoAR,] who objected to the words, for which I propese to substitute 

others. I ask unanimous consent of the Senate to offer the amendments. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. That may be done by a reconsideration of the vote by which the bill was ordered to a third reading. 

Mr. PENDLETON. I ask that that vote be reconsidered. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection Y The Chair hears no objection, and the vote is 1·econsidered. The question now is on ordering the bill to be engrossed for a third reading. 

Mr. PENDLETON. In line 4 I move to strike out "cJ.aims" and 

insert " losses ; " so as to read : 

That the Secretary of State be, and be is hereby, authorized and requested to examine and adjust the losses of the captain, owners, officers, &c. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

Mr. PE~TDLETON. In line 12 I move to strik~ out the words "the 

said claimants" and insert " them;" so as to read: 

And that be be, and is hereby, further authorized aud requested to pay to said 

claimants, their heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns, the amount which may be found dne to them, not exceeding 70,739. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

PUBLIC LANDS IN OIDO. 

Mr. McDONALD. I request the Senator from Ohio to yield to me for a moment that I may ask the consent of the Senate to take up and 

consider Senate bill No. 1825; a bill reported from the Committee on Pnblic Lands, and it will not take any longer to pass it than to read 

it. If it is not passed now it is not possible for it to be passed· at this 

Congress. 

Mr. PENDLETON. If the bill will not consume any time, and if 

the pending bill shall not be displaced, I yield for a moment. 

Mr. McDONALD. If there is any objection after the nature of the 

bill is understood; I shall not press it. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the request of 

the Senator from Indiana that the pending bill be informally laid 

aside, and that the Senate consider the bill to which he has referred f 

The Chair hears no objection and the .pending bill is informally laid 

aside. 

Mr. McDONALD. I ask the Senate to consider the bill (S. No. 1825) 

to provide for the survey of certain public lands in the State of Ohio. 

By unanimous consent, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, 

proceeded to consider the bill. It provides that the marsh lands of 

the United States lying in Lucas and Ottawa Counties, Ohio, between 

Cedar Point and Crane Creek, shall be surveyed and laid off in the manner prescribed by law i. and it authorizes the Commissioner of the 

General Land Offico to sel them at public or private sale, according 

to law, but no sale of them shall be made at a less price than fifty 

cents per acre. Mr. INGALLS. What bill is this 'I I thought we were considering 

the General Armstrong bill. 

Mr. McDONALD. lt is a bill to authorize the survey and sale of a little strip of land in Lucas and Ottawa Counties, Ohio, on the lake 

margin. That is all there is of it. It is recommended by the Committee on Public Lands. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there are no amendments in Committee of the Whole the bill will be reported to the Senate. 

Mr. CONKLING. I am inclined to think the bill had better be 

~ 

""' ·reported to the Senate at length. It is a very short bill. Suppose we hear it read. 

The bill was read at length, and reported to the Senate. 

The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the. 

third time, and passed. 

RETIRE.MENT OF CHIEFS OF NAVAL BUREAUS. 

The PRESIDING OFFICE.R. The Senate now resumes the consideration of its unfinished business, which is Senate bill No. 1441. "T 

Mr. VOORHEES. I appeal to the Senator from Ohio to allow me to have passed a bill reported from the Committee on Naval Affairs. 

It will not take three minutes, and I will help the General Armstrong 

matter all the time. May I ask the Senator to do that much f 

Mr. PENDLETON. Yes, sir, if it can be done without displa.cing 

the Armstrong bill. 

The PRESIDING OFFICE.R. The Senator from Indiana asks that 

the bill now under consideration be informally laid aside in order 

that he may ask the Senate to take up the bill which he has indicated. -

Mr. VOORHEES. And which has the approT"al of the Committee on Naval Affairs, and my course in regard to which has the approbation of the chairman of that committee. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection f 

Mr. INGALLS. Let us hear the bill reported, subject to objection. 

The Chief Clerk read the bill (S. No. 1025) fixing the relative rank 

and pay of certain officers on the retired list of the Navy. 

1\Ir. CONKLING. Is that an amendment to the Armstrong bill f 

Mr. VOORHEES. No, sir. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair will state the proposition. 

The Senator from Indiana asks the Senate to lay aside the bill now under consideration, the Armstrong bill, that he may move to proceed to the consideration of the bill which has jnst been reported. Is. 

there objection t 

Mr. CONKLING. Not if we are to have a fair understanding all 

around. If the Armstrong bill being up, is to be the occasion when 

all of us may take up and consider all the other bills, I am for the 

Armstrong bill, certainly as long as that arrangement lasts. I have one or two bills that I am afraid I cannot get up without that, and if 

I can just slide them in as riders to the Armstrong bill I am for it; 

but I submit that if the Armstrong bill is before the Senate it ought 

to be acted upon. 

Mr. VOORHEES. I •am for the Armstrong bill all the time, both 

while this is going on and subsequently. I have acted upon a usage 

of courtesy in the Senate in asking the Senator from Ohio to allow me to have a bill passed which has been considered and reported 

favorably by the Committee on Naval Affairs; and in the course I am pursuing I have the approbation of the chairman of that committee 

and other members of the committ-ee with whom I have consulted. 

I can only say that of course the Senator from New York can rule 

this out, but we have served here some time, and if he can tind wlter- e..-er I made an obstruction to any business that he wanted to perform here, I think then be ought to undertake the course he is taking now. If he cannot recall any such circumstance I hope he will let 

the bill pass. 

Mr. CONKLING. I am sorry that my usually amiable friend acts a little as if his plumage was rufiled this morning. 

Mr. VOORHEES. The Senator means "unusually amiable." 

Mr. CONKLING. Unusually and usually both. I did not intend: 

to interfere with the honrable Senator from Indiana. If his ways were not near so winning and irresistible as they are, I should never put myself across his track. I did not even know that be asked to 

have the bill taken up; and now that I do know it, the la-st thing in 

the world that I . want to do is to object to the honorable Senator, and 

especially at a time when he has a-little feeling about it, which seems to be this time. 

Mr. VOORHEES. I was sure the Senator would not object when 

he knew the circumstances. 

Mr. CONKLING. So that I wish the Senator would consider the 

fact that I not only withdraw my remark but the gesture that ac· companied it, "if any," as we said in the electoral bill. 

By unanimous consent, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, 

proceeded to consider the bill (S. No. 1025) fixing the relative rank 

and pay of certain officers on the retired list of the Navy. 

The bill was reported from the Committee on Naval Affairs with an amendment in line 4, after the word "bureau," to insert u and whose name ha..s been borne on the Navy Register thirty years;" so as to 

make the bill read: 

Be it enacted, &c., That any medical, pay, or ·engineer officer who bas served, or may hereafter serve, a full term as chief of bureau, anrl whose name bas been 

borne on the Navy Register thirty years, shall, when retired, ba>e the relative 

rank and pay of commodore on the retired list. 

Mr. CONKLING. May I now inquire of my friend, since the bill is 

up, in respect of the merits, how many persons will the bill put on the retired list now t 

:h1r. VOORHEES. I do not know that it would put on any body now. If so, it may be three or four persons. It will provide for some old 

officers who will be retired within a short time, and very few of them. 

It is a very harmless bill and a very j nst one, and has, as I understand, 

the entire approbation of the committee. The chairman of the com- mittee had this matter submitted to him before I made the motion to 

take it up, and it was also submitted to the Senator from Rhode 
1881. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 2207 

Island [Mr. ANTHONY] who is not now in his seat; so I think it is 

safe. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. 'l'he question is on agreeing to the 

amendment reported from the Committee on Naval Affairs. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amendment was concurred in. , Mr. VOORHEES. In line 4 I move to strike out "full" before 

"term ; " so as to read : 

That any medical, pay, or engineer officerwho has served, or may hert>afterserve, a term as chief of bureau. 

Mr. WITHERS. I should like to ask ' what would be the effect of 

that amendment Y As I understand it, it would simply give the increased rank of commodore to any man who has ever served temporarily, if only for a day, as the chief of a bureau. 

Mr. VOORHEES. No; this amendment was submitted to the com- mittee, and it is with the approval of the committee--

Mr. WITHERS. I understand that, but I_ want to know the effect 

of it. 

Mr. ALLISON. I suggest to make the term fouryears; that isthe 

term. 

Mr. VOORHEES. I will withdraw the amendment, and let the 

bill apply to the full term, whatever that is. 

The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the 

third time, and passed. 

INTERSTATE COMMERCE. 

Mr. CAMERON, of Pennsylvania. I rise to morning business. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. 'l'he Chair will receive it. 

Mr. CAMERON, of Pennsylvania. l\1r. President, I present a memo- rial of the Philadelphia Board of Trade in favor of the appointment 

of a commission to prepare such legislation as is necessary to regulate interstate commerce in a manner which, without injustice to 

vested rights, will clearly define and protect the interests of produce 

shippers and transporters. 

It will be remembered that I had the honor of introducing a joint 

resolution at the la-st session having in view the appointment of a commission such as is recommended by the Philadelphia Board of 

Trade. I endeavored upon several occasions at the last session to have 

the Senate pass upon it, but was unsuccessful. As it is a. subject in 

which the whole country is deeply interested, I should feel it my duty 

to make another attempt now to bring it before the Senate were it 

not for the fact that there are only a few days of the present session 

remaining, and I know how futile it would be, even though I should 

be so successful as to have the Senate pass it, to expect it to receive 

the :final action of the other branch of Congress. I give notice, bowever, Mr. President, that I shall avail myself of the tirst opportunity 

at the next session to reintroduce the joint resolution on the subject 

of interstate commerce, and shall do my utmost to press it to final 

action at that time. 

I now ask that the memorial which I send to the desk be read. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The memorial will be read if there 

be no objection. 

The ' memorial was read, and referred to the Committee on Commerce, as follows: 

THE PHll..ADELPBIA BOARD OF TRADE. 

To the honorable the Senate and PHILADELPHIA, February 24, 1881. 

House of llep'Tesentatives in Congress a&sembled: 

The following memorial respectfully showeth that the Philadelphia :Board of 

Trade on February 21, instant, adopted the preamble and resolutions herewith set forth, namelv: · Whereas House bill No. 4748 (commonly known as the Reagan bill) proposes to regulate interstate commerce; and · Whereas in our opinion the aforesaid bill is very defective in its construction 

and calculated to work great injustice to a very large class of the citizens of the 

United States; and 

Whereas we believe that Congress has power to enaet such legislation as is nec- essary to regulate interstate commerce in a manner which, without injustice to vested l'ights, will clearly define and protect the rights of all transporters: Therefore, . We earnestly pray your honorable body to a.ppoint a commission, consisting of 

parties prac.tically familiar with the interests of produce shippers and transporters, who shall be char..,.ed with the duty of preparing such a bill as will protect the 

interests of all and' do no injustice to the vested rights of any; and that, pending the report of such commission, all legislation of the kind proposed, including Honse bill No. 4748, shall lie upon the table. 

And your orators will ever pray, &c. 

FRED. FRALEY, Vice-P·resident. 

GEO. L. :BUZBY, Secretary. 

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. 

A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. GEORGE M. 

AnAl\IS, its Clerk, announced that the House had concurred in the 

reports of the committees of conference on the following bills : A bill (H. R. No. 3788) granting an increase of pension to William 

Hamill; 

A bill (H. R. No. 6730) making appropriations for the current and 

contingent expenses of the Indian Department, and for fulfilling 

treaty stipulations with various Indian tribes, for the year ending 

J nne 30, 1882, and for other purposes; and . A bill (H. R. No. 6972) making appropriations for the service of the 

Post-Office Department for the fiscal yem.- ending June 30, 1882, an(\ 

for o~er purposes. 

POST-OFFICE APPROPRIATIO~ BILL. 

Mr. WALLACE submitted the following report: 

The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the 

amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. No. 6972) making appropriations for· the service of the Post-Office Department for the fiscal year endin~ June 30, 1882, 

and for other purposes, having met, after full and froe conference have agreed to, recommend, and do recommend, to their respective Houses as follows : That the Senate recede from its amendment numbered 5. .Amendment numbered 1: That the House recede from its disagreement to the. amendment of the Senate numbered 1, and a~ree to the same, with an amendment, as follows: In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by said Senate amendm~nt, 

insert the following : "And hereafter the Postmaster-General shall cause advertise- ments of all general maillettin~s of each State and Territory to be conspicuously- posted up in each post-office in the State and Territory embraced in said advertisements, for at least sixty days before the time of such general letting, and no otheradvertisement of such lettings shall be required; but this provision shall not apply to any other than general maillettings. And whenever it shall become necessary to employ temporary service on any mail route it shall be the duty of the Post- master-General to advertise for bids or proposals for such seiTiee by postin~ notices. 

in the post-offices at the termini of such route, and upon a bulletin- board m a. public place in the Post-Office Department building, at 'Va.sbington, in the District of 

Columbia, for at least ten days prior to such letting; " and tho Senate agree to the same. 

.Amendment numbered 3 : That the House recedb from it.s disagreement to the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 3, and agree to the same, with an amendment. as follows : Strike out the last proviso of s:rla amendment and insert in lieu thereof 

the following: "And provided further, That the annual rental of such building or buildings shall not exceed the sum of $5,000, and the cost of the furniture for the same shall not exceed $10,000 ;" and the Senate agree to the same. Amendment numbered 8: That the House recede from its disagreement to the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 8, and agree to the same, with an amendment, as follows: Strike out the word" fifty" and insert in lieu thereof" twenty-five;" 

and the Senate agree to the same. Amendment numbered 9 : That the Honse recede from its disagreement to the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 9, and agree to the same, with an amendment. as follows: Strike out the word ".fifty " and insert in lieu thereof "twenty-five;" 

and the Senate agree to the same. Amendment numbered 10: That the Honse recede from it:! disagreement to the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 10, and agree to the same, with an amendment, as follows: In lieu of the sum propgsed insert " 7,900,000 ;" and the Senate agree to the same. Amendment numbered 13: That the House recede from its disagreement to the- amendment of the Senate numbered 13, and agree to the same with au amendment, as follows: Strike out the words proposed to be inserted by said Senate amend- ment and insert in lieu thereof "one hundred and fifty-two; " and the Senate 

agree to the same. 

The report was concurred in. 

WILLIAM A . WALLACE, 

JAS. B BECK, 

N. BOOTH, 

Managers on the part of the Sp,nate. 

JO. C. S. BLACKBURN, 

JAMES H . BLOUNT, 

J. G. CANNON, 

Managers on the part of the House. 

INDIAN APPROPRIATIO~ BILL. 

Mr. WALLACE submitted the following report: 

The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the 

amendments of the Senat.e to the bill (H. R. No. 6730) making appropriations for 

the current and contingent expenses of the Indian Department and for fulfilling 

treaty stipulations with various Indian tribes for the yea.r ending June 30, 1882, 

and for other purposes, having met, after full and free conference have agreed to 

recommend, and do recommend, to their respective Houses as follows: 

That the Senate recede from its amendment numbered 31. 

That the 1louse recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate 

numbered 30, and agree to the same. WILLIAM .A.. WALLACE, J AS. B. BECK. 

WILLIAM WINDOM, 

.Managers on the part o.f the Senate. 

ERASTUS WELLS, 

J. D. C. ATKINS, 

JAY A. HU:BBELL, 

Managers on the part of the HOU8e. 

1\Ir. TELLER. I a-sk the Senator from Pennsylvania to state what 

amendments numbered 30 and 31 are Y 

Mr. WALLACE. '!'hey relate simply to the In<lian commission. 

The House and Senate disagreed. The House repealed the act creating the commission. The Senate struck out the section repealing the 

act, and appropriated $10,000, the money necessary to continue it for 

the coming year. The conferees of the House and Senate discussed 

that question at length and compromised finally by the Senate con- ferees receding from its provision which appropriated the money and 

the House conferees receding from the provisions which struck out 

the clause creating the commission, allowing the law to stand without appropriating any money for the continuation of the commission. 

Mr. DAWES. Has anything been added to the bill since it left 

the Senate T 

Mr. WALLACE. Nothing has been added to the bill whatever. 

It is pr-ecisely in the form I have stated. The law stands creating 

the commission, but no money ha-s been appropriated for its continu- ance during the coming year. 

:Mr. DAWES. The bill as it went from the Senate is shorn of the 

appropriation for the commission Y Is that allY 

Mr. WALLACE. That is all there is of it, sir. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. ·The question is on concurring in the 

report. . The report was concurred in. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS • 

The VICE-PRESIDENT laid before the Senate a message from the 

President of the United States, transmitting, in answer to a resolution .of the 20th ultimo, a communication from the Secretary of State 

I 

/ 

/ 
2208 CONGRESSION.P_._Ij RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY 28, 

-eontaining copies of correspondence in relation to the landing of foreign convicts, paupers, and insane persons on our shores, which has 

•ot heretofore been printed; which, on motion of Mr. KERNAN, was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations, and ordered to be 

printed. 

He also laid before the Senate a. letter from the Secretary of the 

Treasury, transmitting, in answer to resolutions of the 8th and 14th instant, a communication from t.he collector of customs at New York rel~ive to appointments, salaries, and promotions in the New York 

custom-house between January 1, 1880, and December 1, 1&:!0, together 

with names of all persons so employed and the workings of the civilservice rules in that office; which, on motion of Mr. CONKLlNG, was ordered to lie on the table, and be printed. 

CIVIL-SERVICE RULES IN lO~W YORK. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT laid before the Senate the following mes- sage from the President of the United States; which was read: 

To the Se:nate and House of Representatives: 

I transmit herewith a copy of a letter addressed to the chairman of the civil-service commission on the 3d of December last, requesting to be furnished with are- port upon the results in the post-office and custom-house in the city of New York 

of the application of the civil-service rules requiring open competitive examinations for appointments an<l promotions, together with the report of Hon. Dorman 

B. Eaton, the chairman of the commission, in response. The report presents a very gratif:ving statement of the results of the application of the rule referred to in the two 'largest and most important local offices in the 

civil service of the Government. The subject is one of great importance to the 

people of the whole country. I commend the suggestions and recommendations of the chairman of the commission to the careful considtlration of Congress. R. B. HAYES. EXECUTlVE :r.!ANSIOX, February 28, 1881. 

Mr. HOAR. I move that the message lie on the table, and be 

printed. 

The motion was agreed to. 

THE BRIG GENERAl, ARMSTRONG. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. RoLLINs in the chair.) The Senate resumes the consideration of its unfinished business, being the 

bill (S. No. 1441) for the relief of the captain, owners, officers, and crew of the late United States private-armed brig General Armstrong, 

their heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns. The question is on ordering the bill to be engrossed for a third reading. 

Mr. MORRILL. There is no amendment now pending f 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is no amendment naw pending. 

Mr. MORRILL. I then move to amend the bill. 

Mr. HOAR. What became of the amendments proposed by the 

Senator from Ohio 'I 

Mr. PENDLETON. They have both been adopted. 

Mr. MORRILL. In line 13 I move to strike out "seventy" and insert" sixty;" so as to read, "not exceeding $60,739" instead of" not 

exceeding $70,739." 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the 

amendment of the Senator from Vermont. 

Mr. MORRILL. I do not know t.hat this bill ought to pass. I do 

knowtbat it is averyold customer and has been before Congress for some fifty or sixty years. It has never received the favor of either 

House so far as I know, while it may have received the favor of two 

Committees on Foreign Relations, one of the House and one of the 

Senate. In the first place, it was submitted to the arbitration of Napoleon the Third, and by him was decided against. It was then submitted to the Court of Claims, and by the Court of Claims an adverse 

report was made. I do not understand that it has ever been claimetl 

that there should be more than $60,000 paid to these parties, for the reason that they received $10,000 of prize-money ; so that the report 

made by one committee of the Senate, by Mr. Mason, of Virginia, 

struck out $10,000 of the amount and left it at $60,000 instead of 

$70,000. 

I should be glad to hear from the Senator in charge of the bill the reasons why it should passatall, and at all events I think he will not 

contend that the amendment proposed by me is not a proper one. Mr. PENDLETON. I was in hopes that the bill would pass without the necessity of my saying a word on the subject, and I shall be 

relieved if at any moment the Senate will indicate its disposition to 

pass the bill even while I am still in the midst of the explanation of 

its merits that I intend to make. 

The Senator from Vermont says that this is an old claim. Unfortunately that is true. It is an old claim; very old. It has become 

hoary with age. It is sixty-seven years old; but its age is not due 

to any laches on the part of these claimants in prosecuting their demands; nor yet to a refusal on the part of the Government or of any 

Department or officer to recognize its justice and take measure for 

its payment. Of the sixty-seven years which have elapsed forty 

years were consumed in an effort to secure its payment by Portugal. 

Six Secretaries of State, beginning with Mr. Adams, have in every 

form of diplomatic language asserted its justice and required satisfaction by tba.t power. President Taylor, .under the advice of 1\Ir. 

Clayton, of Delaware, made a peremptory demand for its payment, 

and when an evasive response was made, broke off diplomatic relations and brought oft' the minister in a man-of-war. 

Afterward Mr. Fillmore accepted the payment of other claims on the condition that this claim should be submitted to arbitration, and 

the terms of the submission were so defective that our Government 

refused to permit the claimants to make argument or offer proof, and 

withheld all t1lA diplomatic correspondence which had taken place 

while the court of Portugal was established at Rio Janeiro. 

Mr. HOAR. Will the Senator state the ground of the decision of 

the arbitrator! 

Mr. PENDLETON. The ground of the decision was that there was an invasion of the neutrality of Portugal by the American brig. 

Mr. HOAR. I had this claim referred to me once as a member of a committee of this body, though I did not report upon it. ,As I un- derstand, Louis Napoleon decided against us on the ground that the 

evidence left it doubtful whether this little brig did Bot begin the 

attack upon the three British men-of-war. That was the only point. 

:Mr. PENDLETON. That is true. 

Mr. INGALLS. I can read for the information of the Senate the 

paragraph from the decision of the arbitrator which expressed tha 

ground of the rejection, if the Senator would like to hear it. 

Mr. PENDLETON. I shall be glad if the Senator will read it. 

Mr. INGALLS. It is as follows: 

Considering, in this state of things, that Captain Reid, not having applied from the 

beginning for the intervention of the neutral sovereign, and having had recourse to arms, in order to repel an unjust aggression of whicli he pretended to be the object, has thus failed to reapect the neutrai:i.ty of the territory of the foreign sovereign, and released that sovereign of the obligation in which he was to afford him pro- tection by any other means than that of a. pacific intervention. 

Mr. JONES, o.£ Florida. From what does the Senator read 7 

Mr. INGALLS. Thearbitratiou rendered by Louis Napoleon, President of the French Republic, on the 30th day of November, 1852. 

Mr. PENDLETON. After the decision had been made by the arbitrator under the circumstances to which I have alluded the claimants came to the United States courts. The claim has been once before the Court of Claims, and judgment was rendered in favor of 

claimants. On a rehearing the judgment was reversed, on technical 

ground, but the equity of the claim was fully established. Favorable bills have several times passed the Senate, and twice passed the 

House; every department of the Government-the executive, the 

legislative, and the judicial-has acted favorably to this claim and 

appropriated money for its payment, and yet the concurrent action 

of these two Houses and the other departments could never ba 

obtained to make their decisions effective. The facts attending the 

effort to secure payment have been as remarkable as was the transaction out of which the claim grew. I beg no Senator will content 

himself with turning his back and saying this is an old claim; I beg 

each Senator to listen to me for two minutes and he will hear a story 

of the event out of which these losses grew, its incidents and conse- quences, which is the very romance of history. 

The event which occasioned these losses was one of the most heroic 

and brilliant exploits in all the annals of na.val warfare. It reflected 

great luster on the American arms; it exerted great influence on the 

American interests. It was an engagement between the American 

private-armed brig General Armstrong and the British naval forces 

cruising in the waters of the Azores. It occurred on the night of the 

26th September, 1814, in the neutral port of Fayal, a possession of 

Portugal, which had maintained its neutrality in the then pending war with Great Britain. 

The brig had an equipment of seven guns and ninety men. Tho 

British squadron consisted of a. man-of-war ship of the line of seventyfour guns, a frigate of forty-four guns, and a brig of eighteen guns. 

Its entire armament was one hundred and thirty-six guns and mor& 

than two thousand fighting men. In the afternoon, after an eventful and exciting day, the Armstrong ran into the harbor. The British commander determined to 

seize her. At nine o'clock he sent four large boats, manned with 

forty men each, to cut her out. Silently, in the gray of a moonlight 

night, they came swiftly on, and neglecting to answer the hail of th& 

watch they reached almost boarding distance. The brig opened fire, 

and with such effect that the boats after delivering one shot'retired 

with many of their crew killed or wounded. Exasperated bythisill 

success, the British renewed the attack at midnight. Fourteen boats, 

with four hundred picked men, commanded by the best officers, 

moved steadily on to the assa.ult. When the order to grapple and 

board was given every gun of the brig was fired, every man was at 

his post, and so determined was the resistance that many boats were disabled, some were sunk, and the remainder, filled with the dead 

and dying, pulled away from the floating wreck and the drowning men. : In the morning the British brig, with eighteen guns, ran into the 

harbor and poured , two broadsides into the American, but her un- daunted crew fought her, all injured as she was, so gallantly that the 

enemy, with hull pierced and mast fallen and rigging destroyed, was driven to retire. 

The commander of the Armstrong, seeing that further resistance 

would be fruitless, .then scuttled his ship and took his wearied crew to land. The British demanded their surrender by the authorities of 

Fayal, and when this was refused prepared a force to seize them. 

The Americans retired to an old convent, barricaded and fortified it as well as they could, and awaited the attack. It was never made. 

The immediate result of this engagement was that the Americans 

had two killed and seven wounded, and the British had more than one hundred and twenty killed and ninety wounded. The ultimate 

result was more extraordinary still. The squadron was detained at 

Fayal more than ten days in repairing damages and burying their 
1881'.. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 2209 I 

dead. Two sloops which had joined it the day after the fight were sent back to England with their wounded. 

This squadron formed part of a secret expedition then concentrating 

at Jamaica for the capture and conquest of New Orleans. That city was unprepared for defense and ignorant of this intended attack. 

Celerity and secMcy were essential to success. Admiral Cochrane 

sailed from the Chesapeake, united with the transports and troop ships of Pakenham at Jamaica, and there awaited the re-enforcement · of this squadron. The delay of ten days and its shatterefl condition 

caused a still further delay of a week in the sailing of the fleet, and, as a consequence, it rea-ched the entrance of Lake Borgne just four 

days after General Jackson with his troops entered New Orleans. If 

the British had arrived even a week earlier New Orleans would probably have fallen, and the story of the war would have been greatly 

changed. 

An eye-witness of the engagement, an Englishma,n, writmg to London, October 15, 1814, gives this graphic description: 

The authorities all considered the American privateer perfectly secure, and 

that His Majesty's officers were too well acquainted with the respect due to a. neutral port to molest her; but, to the great surprise of every one, about nine in 

the evening, four boats were dispatched, armed and manned, from His Majesty's 

ships, for the purpose of cutting her out. It being about full moon, the night per. 

fectly clear and calmJ we could see every movement made. The boats approached with rapidity towara her, when, 1t appears, the captain of the privateer hailed 

them and tofil them to keep off several times. They, notwithstanding, pushed on, and were in the act of boarding before any defense was made by the privateer. A warm contest ensued on both side~ The boats were finally repulsed with great loss. 

After the first attMk all the inhabitants were gathered about the walls, ex. pecting a renewal of the fight, At midnight fourt~en launches were discovered to be coming in rotation for the purpose. When they got within gunshot, a tre- mendous and effectual discharge was made from the privateer, which threw the 

boats into confusion. They now returned a spirited fire, but the privateer kept up so continual a discharge it was almost impossible for the boats to make any progress. They finally succeeded, after immense loss, to ~ret alongside of her, and at- tempted to board at every quarter, cheered by the officers with a shout of "No 

quarter," which we could distinctly hear, as well as their shrieks and cries. The 

termination was near about a total massa{)re. Three of the boats were sunk, and 

but one poor solitary officer escaped death in a boat that contained fifty souls. He was wounded. The Americans fought with great firmness. Some of the boats were left without a single man to row them; others with three and four. The most that any one returned with was about ten. Several boats floated ashore full 

of dead bodies. With great reluctance I state that they were manned with picked men, and commanded by the first, second, third, and fourth lieutenants of the Plantagenet ; first, second, third, and fourth ditto of the frigate and the first officer of 

the brig, together with a great number of midshipmen. Our whole force exceeded 

four hundred men. :But three officers escaped, two of whom were wounded. This 

bloody and unfortunate contest lasted about forty minutes. Nothing more was attempted until daylight next .morning, when the Carnation hauled in alongside and engaged her. The privateer still continued to make a most gallant defense. 

These veterans reminded me of Lawrence's dying words of the Chesapeake, "Don't 

give up the ship." TheCarna.tionlostone of her topmasts and her yards were shot a. way. She was much cut up in her rigging and received several shots in her hull. 

This obliged her to haul off to repair and to cease firing. The Americans now finding their principal gun {Long Tom) and several others dismounted, deemed it 

folly to think of saving her against so superior a force. They therefore scuttled 

her and went ashore. Two boats' crews were soon after dispatched from our ves- sels, which went on board, took out some provisions, and set her on fire. 

For three days after we were employed in burying the dead that washed on shore 

in the surf. 'l.'he number of :British killed exceeds one hundred ancl twenty, and 

ninety wounded. The enemy, to the surprise of mankind, lost but two killoo, and seven wounded. We may well say " God deliv-er us from our enemies," if this is 

the way the Americans fight. 

After burning the privateer, Commodore Lloyd made a demand on the governor to deliver up the Americans as his prisoners, which the governor refused. He 

threatened to send five hundred men on shore and take them by force. The Amer· 

leans immediately retired with their arms to an old Gothic convent, knocked away the adjoining draw-bridge, and determined to defend themselves to the last. The 

commodore, nowever, thought better than to send his men. 

I desire now that the Secretary shall read the report which was made by the Committee on Foreign Relations upon this subject. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The report will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read the following report, submitted by Mr. PENDLETON, March 9, H:!SO: 

The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was referred the memorial of 

Sam. C. Reid, on behalf of the captain, owners, officers, and crew of the late United 

States private.armed brig General Armstrong, their heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns, report: 

That the claim set forth in this memorial has been before tlie Government, in one form or another, for sixty-five years. It has been the subject of much diplo. 

matic correspondence with the government of Portugal. Its validity against that 

government has been asserted by Messrs. Monroe, Adams, Forsyth, Webster, Upshur, and Clayton, Secretaries of State under the administrations of Presidents 

Madison, Monroe, Jackson, Tyler, Polk, Taylor, and Fillmore. It has received the 

sanction of the Committees on Foreign Relations of the Senate and House of Rep· resentatives in the Thirty-third and the Thirty.fifth Congresses. It has received 

the favorable a{)judication by a majority of the judges of the Court of Claims; and, 

although the decis10n was reversed on a. rehearing, the reversal was also by a. divided court on a. question of technical legal right. It is now presented by- the Secretary of State with the recommendation that an appropriation be made for its 

payment. '.rhe event out of which the claim arose is most creditable to the valor and skill 

of American seamen, and in its remoter influences probably secured victorytothe American arms at New Orleans. The accompanying papers will give the narra,. tivt~, which in romantic incidentR almost equals the tale of the imagination. The history of the event and of the prosecution of the claim to which it gave rise 

is to be found in tJ;t~ diplomatio_cc;>rrespondence, the reports of the committees, the 

reports of the testimony and opllllons m the Court of Claims, and the letter of the 

present Secretary of State. 

F:r om a thorough examination of these very voluminous documents, the commit- tee find the following facts : First. That in September, 1814, the private-armed brig General Armstrong was destroyed by the boats of three :British men·of-war in the port of Fa.yal, belong· ingto the neutral power of Portugal. · Second. That such destruction was in breach of the neutrality of Portugal. Third. That the local authorities of the Azore Islands, as well as the govern- ment of Portugal, then residing a~ Rio Janeiro, admitted to the American minister, 

XI-139 

immediately on the happening of the event, that there had been a breaeh of its 

neutralityl and, asserting that fact to the :British Government, demanded satisfaction theretor in the mm;t peremptory terms. Fourth. That, after fruitless negotiations for many years, President Taylor, in 

1850, made a peremptory demand upon the government of Portugal for the settle. ment of "incontrovertible claims of Amencan citizens upon that government," 

among which was the claim for the loss of the brig General Armstron~. The gov. ernment of Portuga.l, not admitting their validity, but pro bono pacis, offered to pay all the claims except this, which it proposed should be referred to the arbitration of a third power. President Taylor declined this proposal. insisted on immediate settlement of all the claims ; and on an evasive answer being given, required the American minister to demand his passJ?Orts and to leave Portugal in an .American man-of-war which had been sent for him. 

Fifth. A subsequent Administration accepted the offer of the Portuguese Gov-

$-nment, received payment of the other claims, and submitted this claim to the 

arbitration of Louis Napoleon, then president of the French Republic. This sub. 

mission was made without the knowledge of the claimants, and provided only 

~thr!:e:~~~s :,fih~ ~~C:i:ll'b~J!~J'o~;~::~i:~. ~he two governments 

Sixth. The interpretation put on this article by the State Department excluded 

all proofs and all arguments except those contained in the correspondence. And 

in point of fact, not only were the claimants prevented by the Government from 

making such proofs and a.rp:u..ments, but the correspondence of the Fa.yal authorities and of the Portuguese Government while at Rio Janeiro, admitting the breach 

of neutrality, was not laid before the arbiter. 

Seventh. Louis Na~oleon, in 1853, forty years after the event, decided a~ainst 

the validity of the claim on the ground of a doubt as to whether the :British torces or the brig commenced the hostilities. 

Eighth. Subsequently the committees of both Houses of Congress reported favorably on the claim and referred it to the Court of Claims. The court reversed 

its opinion on a rehearing and decided that these above. recited facts constituted no legal claim against the Government of the United States; and thereupon the 

Senate passed a. bill for the relief of the claimants, which received a. very large majority of those voting in the House of Representatives; but by reason of the 

failure of a quorum did not become a Jaw. 

On these facts this committee concurs with its predecessors of the Thirty-third 

and Thirty-fifth Congresses in holding that these claimants have good title against the Government to be reimbursed for their loss, and aecordingly report a. bill au- thorizing the payment of the amount·proven before the Court of Claims, to wit, 

$70,739. The committee does not doubt the power of the Government to submit this claim, or any other claim, however just it may be, to arbitration, or even to surrender it~ 

for reasons of State policy or public interest., or question the finality of the arbitrament; but it maintains with entire confidence and on grounds of the simplest .jus· tice, which is the highest e"l'ediency, that if the Government, either to secure a peMe or other advantage to Itself, or to obtain the payment of other claims, or to subserve any public or private interest, surrenders the claim of any individual, or if for any such inducement it refers to arbitration any just claim, limiting tho 

:proof or the argument which might be made in its behalf, or refusing or neglect. 

mg to produce the proofs which are within its knowledge and control, the Govern· 

mentis bound ex aquo et bono to compensate his loss to that individual. 

In this case the Government did submit this just claim to arbitration, in order to secure the payment of other claims, did limit unduly- the proofs and ar~ents 

to the diplomatic correspondence, and did neglect to lay before the arbitrator a part of the correspondence which was entirely within its control. 

Mr. MORRILL. I ask the Senator from Ohio to assent to the . amendment proposed by me. He will see by the report embodied in 

the report that he made himself in relation to this case, on page 23, 

that all that has ever been claimed as being due these parties was $60,000, and that was the amount reported once, and not a-cted upon, 

from the Committee on Foreign Relations. I have moved to strike 

out "seventy" and insert "sixty," which would leave the amount 

$60,739. 

Mr. PENDLETON. I can hardly consent to that amendment being 

made. I do not see that the amount paid as prize-money to the offi- cers and crew grew in anywise out of this transaction, or that it modified in any degree the losses that were sustained by reason of it. 

That seems to have been prize-money paid for other prizes and in 

connection with other engagements and actions than this. 

Mr. MORRILL. I read from the report: 

On the whole, the committee, on further examination, a.~ain concur in their re- port, before adverted to, of March 10, 1854, in favor of this claim, and make the same a. part of this report; and on the proofs as to the amount due, established before the Court of Claims, and set forth in its report, pages 149 and 150, report a. bill for the relief of the claimants. 

The proofs before the Court of Claims show : 

The value of the vessel at •. . .. .•.. . ··----·-..••••• ·--··---· •• ---·-- ....•• f43, 000 

Loss of officers andmen ..•....... ·········----··--·· ·····-··-···· · ····--·· 27,739 

From which is deducted70,739 

Amount paid heretofore as prize money to officers and men .•..... ---·.... 10,000 

60,739 

Mr. JONES, of Florida. That is from Mr. Mason's report. 

Mr. MORRILL. It is Mr. Mason's report. It is conclusive on the 

point of the amount that is due. There is no question about that. 

Mr. PENDLETON. I have no disposition to delay the Senate by further argument on this case. I will submit it to the Senate; and 

if the amendment is agreed to, then we can take the vote upon the 

biJl as it shall stand. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the amendment 

of the Senator from Vermont, [Mr. MORRILL.] 

Mr. JONES, of Florida. I wish to say a word on the amendment. 

I think this is a subject on which there ought to be no littleness. I 

think we ought to give full compensation or nothing. When I say 

"littleness," I use the expression in no offensive sense to the Senator 

from Vermont. I do not propose to vote for this bill on any nice calculation about money. I propose to support it on higher and broader 

ground. I do not intend to enter into any minute calculation about 

injuries or anything of that kind. 

Mr. MORRILL. But the Senator would not propose as a mere gift the sma.ll sum of $10,000. When it appears from the examina-
- 2210. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY 28,-

tion that bas been made and given to the subject by a previous com- mittee of Congress and by the Court of Claims that $60,000 is the 

sum, I do not see why it should be disputed. 

Mr. JONES, of Florida. Will the Senator hear me through Y The 

Senator has during the past session exhibited a very commendable 

spirit for the erection of public monuments to departed heroes, looking to the commemoration of the deeds of the many great men who 

have figured in the past. When a proposition comes here to com- memorate them the Senator takes high ground, as I well remember. 

I have appreciated it, and I have felt in me the spirit of happiness 

and pride whenever I have heard the Senator speak in support of 

those measures. I say that if ever an occasion p1esented itself to the American mind 

calculated to excite just sentiments and feelings of patriotism it is 

the case which is now before the Senate. The Court of Claims went 

into a valuation of this property, it is stated, and upon that the Senate committee, headed by Mr. Mason, in 1854, proposed to make a deduction of $10,000, the amount of prize-money which was previously 

paid to these meritorious claimants. If they were entitled to $60,000 

in 1854, I ask the Senator from Vermont if they are not entitled to 

$70,000 now T The Senate in 1854 passed a bill providing for the payment of the claim as recommended by Mr. Mason. It passed also the 

Honse of Representatives, and failed to become a Jaw only on account 

of the absence of two members of that body. So the Senator from 

Vermont was not exactly correct when he said that this claim had never received the sanction of Congress. It did receive the sanction 

ef both Houses of Congress, and but for the want of two members to 

cdnstitute a quorum in the other body it would have become a law. 

Thirty years ago these claimants, after having followed this thing up 

session after session, day after day, were declared entitled to the sum named by the Senator from Vermoni: ; and justice having been withheld from them so long, is it proper now for the Senator from Vermont to come in and say that we will cut it down by the amount of 

$10,000 as proposed by Mr. Mason in 1854 T 

Now, sir, one word wit-h respect to the merits of this claim while I am on my feet, for I have no disposition to make two speeches. It is 

my fortune to know one of the most meritorious of the survivors of 

this gallant affair, my personal friend, the surgeon of this ship, and I 

take an interest beyond what I would ordinarily feel in the measure. It is not altogether a question of property, not altogether a question 

of dollars and cents; but I am sure I cannot but feel, as I said a while 

ago, that exalted sentiment which animates us all, including the Senator from Vermont, when a question presents itself which is calculated to awaken patriotic feeling. 

This vessel was commissioned by the Government of the United 

States to make reprisals upon the commerce of Great Britain; and I 

would say to the ~en a tor, coming as he does from New England, that 

if there is any portion of this country that ought to feel a greater 

interest than another in maintaining that very important arm of our public defense, the privateer system, it is New England. New England's commerce, New England's sailors furnish in times of emergency 

the means with which to defend this Government; and I say it is all 

important, with a view to its future security, that an example shall 

be shown not only to our own people but to the world that we never intend to abandon a crew or a master that made the heroic sacrifices 

that these men did. I do not care for the value of the ship; I care for the example, and I want it to go out to Great Britain, as it will, 

that we do not intend in any emergency, to abandon the privateer 

system, which is all essential to the protection of our commercial ma- rine, especially in the present state of our Navy. 

These people were commissioned to do what Y To roam the high seas and to make prizes of the commerce of Great Britain. They were not especially commissioned to fight the battles of the United 

States. No privateer is. It is true that such vessels are usually armed 

for self-defense, but they are not strictly speaking vessels of war. For the purpose of securing early peace they are empowered to make war upon the commerce of the adversary. This vessel was commissioned for that purpose. She was lying under the guns of a neutral 

port when she was assailed by an overwhelming force of the enemy. 

The men had it in their power to surrender or to defend the flag that 

:fioated over them; they could have made terms with the enemy and 

'Possibly have secured the little remnant of their property if they bad 

been animated by any narrow spirit; but they preferred to risk their 

lives in defense of their flag. They said the ship might go; and while 

they were not entirely commissioned to carry on war, as I said, es- pecially against an overwhelming force like that which was brought 

against them, animated by a just pride ·and a national spirit they 

sacrificed everythin~ to the honor of the flag, and I am not going into 

any little narrow calculation now respecting the value of their vessel. 

As a distinguished Senator said on the floor of the Senate when 

this question was discussed here before, pointing to examples verified 

in the history of Britain herself, whenone ofthegallant commodores 

bad defeated a Spanish fleet off Cape Saint Vincent, how did they reward him f They brought him home in triumph; they made him an earl, and gave him an income of $25,000 a year; and still the num- ber of lives which were lost on the part of the British in that fleet, 

with nearly equal numbers opposed to them, did not exceed the num- ber that they lost in the conflict with this little brig. 

I say, sir, there are some things that are worthy of example, and 

it is the duty of this Government to protect above everything else 

the interest which it has in the maintenance of our privateer system, 

and never let it go forth to Great Britain or to any power that we mean to abandon it. 

When this question was referred to the Prince President of France, 

it was supposed that there was a little republican sympathy there, 

and that we might expect some justice from the Republic of France 

at that day; but, unfortunately, before the decision was rendered he 

became an Emperor, and breathing the fell spirit of the rotten mon- archies around him, I suppose, he felt that he had. to render a judgment that would be agreeable to them. When the proposition was made to submit this question to the King of Sweden, our republican 

Secretary of State said, "No, we cannot afford to confide republican 

interests t~ the decision of monarchs;" but they selected a republi- can president, the president of a republic only in name, and before 

the time came for the rendition of the judgment the republic transformed itself into an empire, and we had to submit to a decision on the part of Napoleon III, Emperor of France, and there it stands to 

remain a perpetual disgrace as long as the principles of justice are respected by honest men. I say it after having read the history of 

this ca.se, and I never intend that that shaH stand between me and 

the duty of giving justice to these honest men. It never was invoked 

here by but one man in his day, and that was Mr. Benjamin, of Louisiana; but I shall never follow his example in thisvote. I think these 

claimants are entitled to the full measure of relief provided in this 

bill. 

Mr. MORRILL. Mr. President, I very innocently supposed it would 

be proper to correct this bill where there had evidently been a mistake 

made as to the sum appropriated. · I do not understand that this is a bill to build a monument to the captain and crew of the brig General 

Armstrong, but it. is to pay the heirs, executors, administrators, and 

assigns of the captain and crew of that vessel for the amount of their 

claim found to be due. If it appears by the' very report made in this case that a mistake has been made of $10,000 in the bill, it seems to me proper that it should be corrected. If we are going to vote money 

for a monument or as a gratuity to any heroes, I have not been advised of it. It is merely to pay a claim due to the heirs in consequence 

of the destruction of this vessel, and therefore I think the sum should 

be correctly named. 

Mr. HOAR. Mr. President, I do not understand that this sum of 

$10,000 was to be deducted from the debt due to these heirs. Mr. 

Mason, in a former report in determining what gratuity, if you call it 

gratuity, at any rate what sum should be paid over to the owners and 

officers and crew of this brig on account of this gallant exploit and on account of the failure of the Government by its own omission to recover from Portugal what it was clearly proper for Portugal to pay, 

recommended the deduction of a sum which had been paid as prizemoney. It was not on the ground that that sum was fairly applicable 

to this debt as a payment on account of it, but it was on the ground 

that in making an equitable adjustment of the whole matter it was reasonable and perhaps it was thought it would commend it more to 

the favor of Congress to have the deduction made. 

It seems to me that in dealing with the amendment of the Senator 

from Vermont the Senate ought to consider that these men have been 

waiting sixty-six years. It is true we cannot introduce the principle of 

paying interest to claimants against the Government; we never have 

done it; we do not propose to do it; but it is also true that in dealing with equitable deductions from claims the fact that by reason of 

the lapse of time, without their fault, this vast period of time has 

transpired so that the interest on the claim would be many times its 

principal, it is reasonable that we should look with great strictness • on attempts to make deduction from a claim by reason of fancied or real equities. I hope the amendment will not prevail. 

Mr. VOORHEES. Mr. President, I shall not vote for the amendment 

offered by the Senator from Vermont. I do not know that any argument is necessary to be made for this :most just and righteous bill; 

but whenever the argument that an old claim i§ brought here is presented, I cannot refrain from saying a word. I wish to live to see the hour when the argument against a claim that it is old shall cease to be uttered in this Chamber and be scouted whenever it is uttered. 

If Senators would rise here and say, "This is an unjust claim," l 

should listen to them with patience; but whenever the argument iB 

urged that we have been successful in avoiding the payment of a claim, however just it may be, for years and yean~, and that that is a reason why we should not pay it at all, I shall not sit idly by and 

listen to such an argument. I know of claims of absolute justice 

that grew to be nearly one hundred years old before they were paid, 

and at last were paid by the common consent of mankind as to their 

justice and righteousness. Now, here is a. claim t.hat had the indorsement of Daniel Webster in his day, of John Forsyth, of James Monroe, of John Quincy Adams, tolerably fair authority, of Mr. Upshur, 

when Secretary of State, of John M. Clayton, and when it was up on a former period before this body it received the votes of the two Senators then from Vermont, Mr. Collamer and Mr. Foot. I believe it to 

be quite as safe to follow in the line of such precedents as to com- mence caviling now about cutting down this old claim. It would 

not hav.e been so old if Congress had long since done what is right. 

I am always reminded when this argument iii injected into this 
1881. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 2211 

Chamber of some fellow who had been successful in some of those 

States which have statutes of limitation in avoiding the payment of a just debt until six years had run a~ainst the claim, l!'nd then wh~n 

his creditor came to him to ask for his dues, says "It IS an .old clarm 

barred by the statute of limitations." I have just exactly as much re- spect for the argument in one case as in ~he othe~. This claim is sixtysix years of age, as the Senator from Ohw has sat d. I have often bef.ore 

in my service in Congress, particularly in the other branc~, been rm- nressed with the weak, timid, I will not say cowardly, for it IS not cow- ardly, foreign policy on the part of this Government. The truth is, we are so accustomed to look only to ourselves and have such small and 

feeble neighbors around !Is on our ?wn co~tinent, that '!e ha~e never felt the necessity of havrng a foreign policy to make this natwn felt. 

The result is that the insignificant Government of Portugal allowed 

the brig General Armstrong to be destroyed in neutral '!aters, shot to 

pieces, and burned to the water'~ edge and her orew dnven from her 

deck and obliged to seek refuge rn an old castle on the shore. Years 

passed on, and this Government never bro?ght that governme~t to 

its duty to pay for the losses; but at last, m a moment of lassitude 

and weariness on the part of this Government, we were pleas~ to ar- bitrate it before that perfidious prince, Napoleon, and when It went 

before him-! have the record-the American minister was not even instructed to follow it up. Mr. Rives had no official instructions to 

present and try our side of the case, and Louis. Napoleon! we being 

neighbors farther away than Por~ugal, he havi_?g more mterest ~ 

conciliate Portugal than us, gave JUdgment agamst us by default rn 

the arbitration. Then this question cama back before Congress and 

I should like to commend the Senator from Vermont in his spasm of 

economy to a sentence from Mr. Se'Yard on. this subject. 0~ t~e 2d 

of February, 1855, in a debate on this question, Mr. Seward sa1d m re- ply to an argument made by Mr. Benjamin, of Louisiana~ against the 

claim: 

The same defense which the Senat~r has made for the Gilvernment of the United 

States against this claim would have been a good defense for the people of the 

United States aaainst the claim in favor of General La Fayette. who was allowed 

the sum of $200,000 for his services in the Revolution. The same defense would 

be equally good against the allowing of a single one of the thousands or tens of 

thousands of grants of bounty lands, and against the whole pension system of the 

United States. 

Mr. Benjamin had spoken of the impolicy of placing this claim on the ground of gratitude for a. gallant action. Mr. Seward continues: 

The dangers w hicb Captain Reid incurred and the losses which he sustained were incurred in the service and in the defense of our country; and it is always right if 

the Government is able, and can do it in justice to other citizens, to acknowl. ed"'e and discharj!.e the duty of trratitude which the honorable Senator admits. 

* '* • If all these circumstances shall occur again, I think this precedent will be one of the most valuable iu our history; but we have no reason to apprehend that 

this will be extended into a precedent for any future claims of this kind. On the 

other hand, the precedents which, of all others, I least like to see on our statute- books are the precedents of refusing a just indemnity to citizens of the United 

States whose property baa been lost and whose lives have been periled in the defense of the liberties and independence of the country. 

The Senator from Arkansas [Mr. GARLAND] cites to me a passage 

from the report of a committee upon this question, a committee com- posed of Senator Mason, of Virginia; Judge Douglas, of Illinois; 

Mr. Slidell, of Louisiana.; Mr. Clayton, of Delaware; Colonel Weller, 

of California; and Mr. Norris, of New Hampshire. The committee 

say: 

Under all the peculiar circumstances of the case, the committee are of opinion 

that the claimants are justly entitled to relief on strict legal principles; and even were their convictions on the subject less decided than they are, they would find 

iu the heroic conduct of Captain Reid and his gallant crew strong inducements to give them the benefit of their doubts. 

I confess, sir, I habitually and constitutionally sympathize with 

such views. Were there any legal doubts in my mind, the conduct 

of Captain Reid and his crew in that memorable and most brilliant 

exploit of arms solves all such doubts in their favor. 

There are two pointsContinues this reportof general interest involved iu this matter, which should not be without their influ- ence on the action of the Senate. The effect to be produced on our own citizens by 

according indemnity in stimulating them to emulate the noble example of Captain Reid; for there can be no doubtthatif he bad suffered himself to be captured with- out resistance, full pecuniary satisfaction would long since have been accorded by Portugal to the claimants. Shall we refuse it because he has added to our naval 

history one of its most brilliant pages ? Again: If we act upon the avowed prin· ciple tbat our citizens ><re always to be compensated for any jnjuries they may suffer from the violation by belligerents of t be law of nations, other countries will be more earnest in maintaining the inviolability of their territory. 

I can add but little to that, Mr. President. I wish, however, to cite 

the opinion of one of the most able men of our recent history. John 

M. Clayton, spe:\king upon this subject in the same debate with Mr. 

Seward, said: 

Sir, I know that these men are not all to whom this Gilvernment is bound to look 

when acting upon this matter. Sailors in future wars will regard the precedent esta.blisbed. and the course of action of their Gilvernment in relation to this priva. 

teer, with anxious attention. They will see, if the bill passes, that this GOvern- ment is determined to maintain their rights in neutral ports; that if, by means of an error, those rights have been sacrificed, the Government will make the 

acknowledgment of the en or and pay them. I hold that it is a great principle which is involved in this bill, so far as relates to our naval marine. No case more brilliant than this can ever occur again. Ay, sir, I say now, as I have said before1 that I do not think this will be e. xactly a. precedent for anything else, for I do not oelieve there will ever occur again an instance equal to this, exbibiting the 

courage, patriotism, perseverance of American sailors under the moat desperate 

circumstances. SurrGunded by a British squadron containing thousands of troops, 

transports. one or more line-of-battle ships, frigates, sloops of war, closing up the 

harbor, most men, seeing the force about to be opposed to them was overwhelming, would have abandoned the flag and ~one ashore; but what did they 7 Sir, with a. perfect know ledge that the odds agamst them were as twenty to one, they resolved to stand by the flag while they bad life. Shall we desert them now, and ignore their claim for the property lost iu our defense 7 ~ 

To the many instances of almost if not quite national disgrace in 

not recompensing those who have periled their lives and fortunes 

for us in time of war, this ought not to be added any longer. We 

have it in our power to rectify this injustice, even late as it is, and I 

hope that it will be done and done thoroughly, and in no grudging 

spirit, for! as the Senator from Massachusetts baa said, it must be re- membere<l that the men who are entitled to this recompense to-day were entitled to it sixty-six years ago. These years have rolled over and passed by; men and women and children were denied what they were entitled to each day that passed by, and instead of voting for 

the amendment, but for the fact that it would be setting an unsafe 

precedent, I would rather give them an increased amount than cut 

them down a single dollar. 

Mr. WINDOM. Mr. President, I do not wish to take the :floor for 

the purpose of the remarks that I suggested if there can be a vote 

within a little while on this bill. Is there any probability of it f · 

Mr. PENDLETON. Oh, yes. · Mr. WINDOM. Then I will postpone my remarks a few minutes. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. EATON in the chair.) The question is on the amendment of the Senator from Vermont, [Mr. MoRRILL.] • 

The amendment was rejected. 

The bill was ordered. to be engrossed for a third reading, and was read the third time. 

'rhe PRESIDll{G OFFICER. Shall the bill pass 7 

Mr. PLATT. I do not rise, Mr. President, to make a speech in re- spect to this bill ; bot I want to say that having given the matter some considerable attention, I cannot believe that this claim is founded 

either in law or in equity or in justice, and if it be put upon the sole 

ground of gratitude it cannot be distinguished from one of many 

heroic acts performed in the war of 1812. I therefore desire that upon 

the passage of this bill I at le::tst may have an opportunity of recording my vote against it, and I ask for the yeas and nays. 

The yeas and nays were ordered ; and the Secretary prooeeded to 

call the roll. . Mr. WALLACE, (when his name was called.) I am paired with 

the Senator from Michigan, [Mr. FERRY.] 

The roll-call was concluded, and the result announced-yeas 4Z, 

nays 9 ; as follows : 

YEAS-42. 

Bailey Garland. .Jones of Nevada, Bayard, Groome, Kellogg, Brown, Grover, Kernan, Bruce1 Hamlin, Lamar, 

Burnside, Hampton, McPherson, 

Butler, Hill of Georgia, Maxey, Call, Hoar, More· Cockrell, In~, Pad ock, 

Coke, Jo ton, Pendleton, 

Dawes, Jonas, Pngh, Eaton, .Jones of Florida, Randolph, 

NAYS-9. 

Baldwin, McMillan, Platt, 

Davis of lllinois, Morrill, Rollins, 

Logan, 

ABSENT-24. 

Allison, Cameron ofPa., 

Anthony, Cameron of Wis., 

~~~'e, g~~i~!·w. va.. 

Blair, Edmunds, 

Booth, Farley, 

So the bill was passed. 

Ferr:y-, 

Hams, 

Hereford, 

Hill of Colorado, 

Kirkwood, 

McDonald, 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

Mr. COCKRELL. I call for the Calendar. 

Slater, 

Teller, 

Vance, 

Ves~ Voor ees, Walker, 

w·. w~ , Windom. 

Saunders, 

Thurman. 

Plumb, 

Ransom, 

Saulsbury, 

Sharon. 

Wallace, 

Withers. 

Mr. EATON. I am very anxious that the Senate should proceed to 

the consideration of a bill that I do not think will take long-1 cer- tainly shall not occupy more than a moment upon it. It is the Jap- anese indemnity bill. Really the whole country demands that that. bill s}lould be acted upon. I only want to get the bill up, if I can, 

and then I will give way to my friend from Minnesota, [Mr. WINDOM.] 

Mr. COCKRELL. I wish to reply to my good friend from Connecticut I did not want to obstruct any business. We had an examplethis morning of violating the rules of the Senate; we spent two hotu'8 

and a half, and then recommitted the bill to the committee. Now, 

there is but one way of disposing of business that is before us that can be disposed of, and that is to go to the Calendar and dispose of 

the cases which have passed the Honse of Representatives and been 

favorably reported by the committees of the Senate, act upon them, 

and then, after that, we can act upon other cases. We have now a. larger Calendar than we have ever had. In the House of Represent-
221.2 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY 28, 

atives there is a Calendar of over one hundred pages, and the records 

of the l!'orty·sixth Congress will show that we have passed fewer bills 

than have ever been pa~sed . by any other Congress; and in addition 

to that we have done more committee work-there have been more reports made from committees of the Honse and committees of the 

Senate, and more bills placed upon the Calendar than ever have ooen reported in any one Congress-and yet we have passed fewer 

bills. It is because we have not observed any rules of business and 

regular proceeding. Now, we are upon the Calendar of cases that 

have passed the .Honse, come to the Senate, and been favorably re- ported by Senate committees, and we can soon dispose of them, and 

that will_ end those caseR. Now, my good friend from Connecticut 

wants t.be Japanese indemnity-fund bill up. It has not passed the 

Honse. If we pass it through the Senate there are nine hundred and 

ninety-nine cases out of a thousand that it will not get through the 

House. 

Mr. EATON. Let us give that one chance to save the honor of the 

country. 

Mt·. COCKRELL. The honor of the country I do not think is in 

anch·peril. 

1\ir. EATON. I do. Mr. COCKRELL. It has been a long time since that fund was re- ceived; and if the honor of the country has been tarnished, a delay 

of eight er nine or ten months will not make it any darker or more prominent. 

1\Ir, EATON. I differ with the Senator. I propose to ask the Senate to-postpone the regular order for. the purpose of my making a motion to take up this bill. I move to postpone all prior and other 

()rders. 

Mr. TELLER. What is the prior orderY 

'£he PRESIDING O~..,FICER, (Mr. ROLLINS in the chair.) The 

Calendar. The Senator from Connecticut moves that the present 

and all prior orders be postponed for the purpose of taking up the 

bill indicated by him. 

Mr. VOORHEES. I desire to say that I presume there is nobody more attached to the work of his own hands than I am, and I have a great many bills on this Calendar; but I am going to vote with the 

Senator from Connecticut, because I believe that our honor as a great 

and pow~rful Goyerument toward the weak government whose money we have dem~mda at our hands to settle that Japanese indemnity 

fund, and do it at once. Therefore I shall vote for the motion. Mr~ HOAR. I r~se to ask a parliamentary question. What is the 

order of business 'i No business has been laid before the Senat-e since we disposed of the Armstrong bill. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut has 

submitt-ed a motion to the Senate. The Calendar would be in 

order. 

Mr. HOAR. My question is this: It is past the morning hour and 

past half past one. What is the order which the Senator from Connecticut moves to lay aside f I suppose it is in order for the Senator 

to move to take up his bill without any other motion. 

Mr. EATON. I supposed the Calendar was before the Senate. 

1\Ir. HOAR._ No. 

Mr. EATON. I move then to take p the bill (S. No. 2022) in relation to the Japanese indemnity fund. 

1Mt. TELLER. Is not the Calendar the first thing in order unless "WO take this up f Do we not g.o to the Calendar unless we do take hisnp'l 

Tho PRESIDING OFFICER. That would be so during the mom- i.ng hour, but the morning hour has expired. 

Mr. TELLER. I understand that; but when we get through with a bill before us we go to the Calendar as a matter of course, no matter ·what the hour, and the Calendar is now to be displaced by this bill. ·That_ is all there is in it. I do not know much about the Japanese in-

-odemnity fund. · It has been here a long time; it is like the old case just passed, it is stale; but I do know that there are a great number of •cases on the Calendar that ought to be taken up, and if Senators ·would only agree to give us a sitting here one evening or two evenings ~ oould dispose of them. I am opposed to taking anything up out ~f order until we get through the Calendar. There are things on the 

Calendar of great importance to individuals. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the motion of the 

Senator from Connecticut. · 1\Ir. THURMAN. If we take up the Calendar now, we do not take 

itupundertheAnthonyrule,andtheremaybennlimiteddebateonany 

bill that comes up, and my friend will find perhaps that he will not 

get as many bills passed as he wishes to have passed. I hop.e the 

motion of the Senator from Connecticut will prevail. This Japanese 

ind61Ilnity fund bill need not take much time; it has been fnlly discussed again and again, a.nd there has always been a majority of this 

body for the bill. More than six years ago it was fully discussed in 

the Senate, and if ever there was a proper thing to be done, it is to 

pass this bill. I do not think it need take much time. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the motion of the 

Senator from Connecticut. 

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate, as in Committee of the 

Whole, proceeded to consider the bill (S. No. 202'2) in relation to the 

Japanese indemnity fund. 

1\ir. WINDOM. I now ask unanimous consent of the Senate that 

the bill may be informally laid aside that I may call up the resolntion reported lly the Senator from Connecticut from the Committee on Foreign Relations. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from :Minnesota asks 

that the bill be informally laid aside. 

Mr. EATON. Without prejudice. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without prejudice to the bill now before the Senate. Is there objection ! The Chair hears none. Mr. EATON. The Senator from Delaware [Mr. BAYARD] desires a moment. 

Mr. BAYARD. I understand that the honorable Senator from Minnesota desires to address the senate on the matter he has just called 

up. I do not propose to antagonize him. I have been waiting only 

to say that I should like to pass a measure of great importance in 

less time than it will take for gentlemen to explain their objection 

to having bills considered. Over and over again where a bill is not 

open to objection gentlemen rise and explain at snob great length 

their reasons for objecting to the hearing of any bill at all that nothing is accomplished. 

RIVER AND HARBOR BILL. 

A message from the Honse of Representatives, by Mr. T. I!~. KING, one of its. clerks, announced that the House had disagreed to the 

amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. No. 7104) making appropriations for the construction, completion, repair, and ·preservation 

of certain works on rivers and harbors, and for other purposes; asked a conference with the Senate on the disagreeing votes of the two 

Houses thereon; and had appointed Mr. JoHN H. REAGAN of Texas, 

Mr. JoHN E. KENNA of West Virginia, and Mr. JOSEPH R. HAWLEY 

of Connecticut, manag~rs at the conference on its part. 

The Senate proceeded to consider the action of the Honse on its 

amendments to the said bill disagreed to by the House. 

On motion of Mr. RANSOM, it was 

Resolved, That the Senate insist npon its amendments to the said bill disagreed 

to by the House, and agree to the conference Mked by the House on the disagree- ing :votes of the two Houses thereon. 

By unanimous consen~.) it was 

Ordered, That the conferees on the part of the Senate be appointed by the Presiding Officer. 

The PRESIDING ,OFFICER appointed Mr. RANSOM, Mr. FARLEY, 

and Mr. MCMILLAN;. 

ISTHMUS SHIP-CANALS. 

Mr. WINDOM Mr. President, I ask for the reading of the res.,. 

olntion. 

The Chief C read the following resolution, reported by Mr. 

EATON from the Committee ou Foreign Relations February 16, 1881: 

ResoltJed by the Se'J'Iate, (the House of Representatives concurring.) That the inter- ests of the people of the United States of America and the welfare and security of 

their GQvernment are so involved in the subject of the construction of ship-canals and other ways for the transportation of sea-going vessels across the isthmus con- necting North and South America that the GQvernment of the United States, with 

the frankness which is due to all other peoples and governments, hereby Mserts 

that it will insist that its consent is a necessary condition-precedent to the exoou- tion of any such project; and also 1U! to the rules and regulations under which 

other nat_ions shall participate in the use of such canals or other ways, either in 

peace orm war. 

Mr. HOAR. I desire when the resolution comes up for consideration to offer an amendment to it by way of addition, and perhaps it 

would be convenient to the Senator from Minnesota to have me offer 

the amend\flent now, that it may be pending before the Senate. I 

propose to amend the resolution by adding these words: 

Resolved, That the commercial and other interests of the people of the United 

States require the provisions of one or more such ways, withont further delay, and 

that it is the duty of this GQvernment to take immediate steps for securing th& same. 

Mr. WINDOM. It is not my purpose, Mr. President, at this time to 

discuss the abstract principle enunciated by this resolution, nor shall 

I now consider the question whether the Monroe doctrine is applicable 

to the proposed work at Panama. I stand upon the broader ground 

and assert the American doctrine, that under no circumstances shall a foreign government, or a company chartered by a foreign government, have control over an isthmian highway. Who does not know 

that an investment of foreign capital is entitled to, and will receive, 

the protection of foreign power 7 I am unwilling to enter into any ar- gument on this point. It is enough to know that the security of our country requires that we should not only prevent foreign encroachments, but that we should do all we can to prevent the motive for 

such encroachments. 

Our national dignity, as well as our highest interests, demand that some such declaration shall be made before the close of this Congress; 

but we cannot content onselvea with the mere verbal assertion of this 

policy. We must go further. If we deny to the rest of the world the 

right to break down this isthmian barrier between the two great 

oceans, we must be prepared to remove it ourselves. I am obliged 

to the honorable Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. HoAR] for the 

amendment he has just proposed. It does not comport with our honor or our national traditions to stand stubbornly blocking the world's 

progress. Onr mission is to lead, not to obstruct. 

Mr. President, let me for a moment invite your attention to a map of 

the world. Starting from a point near the extreme southern boundary of Mexico, there is a narrow neck of land, extending southeast-
r 

1881. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 2213 

erly more than fifteen hundred miles, :washed upon the one side by 

the waters of the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea, and upon the 

other by the Pacific Ocean. Bordering upon the Gulf on the north 

lie the great States of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and 

Florida. North of these lies that mighty empire drained by the Mississippi River, while to the east are the Atlantic States, stretching 

from Florida to Maine. On the Pacific are the States of California 

and Oregon, and Washington Territory ; and from the Atlantic to the 

Pacific stretches a domain whose magnificence is the pride of every 

American. Obstructing, embarrassing, and burdening the commerce, 

between these great sections of the Union, lies this narrow strip of 

land, at some points not over forty-five miles in width. 

To avoid it, the twelve hundred thousand tons of wheat, raised in 

California and Oregon last year, are compelled to seek a European 

market by a costly and tedious voyage of fourteen thousand miles 

around Cape Horn. Even the exchange of products between our own Atlantic and Pacific States must be made by the same circuitous, 

expensive, and dangerous route, or else submit to the heavy burdens 

imposed for railway transportation across the continent. The com- merce of all the leading nations is in like manner obstructed and 

burdened. 

The time has come when this barrier is about to be removed. The 

wonder is that it bas been permitted to remain so long. If we do not remove it somebody else will. It is now too late to discuss the question as to whether there shall be a ship-transit way across the Isth- mus. The necessities of commerce as well as the spirit of progress 

have decreed it; and powerful a~ we may be, we cannot resist that 

decree. Already a company has been organized, in France, for the 

purpose of constructing a tide-level canal at Panama, and subscriptions amounting to $60,000,000 have been obtained, a large part of 

which bas already been paid in, and another payment is about to be 

made. 

Nor is this French projectbyanymeansanewone. For nearlytwo· years the newspapers have been full of it. At the last session of Congress M. De Lesseps appeared in person before a committee of the 

Hoose of Representatives, and boldly asserted his determination to 

construct the work. On two different occasions, since that time, the 

President of the United States has by special message called the attention of Congress to the importance of asserting the doctrine that 

under no circumstances would our Government consent to the con- trol, by a foreign government, of a highwayacrosstheistbmus. The 

press of the country expressing, as I believe, an undivided public 

sentiment, has over and over again sounded the note of warning and 

called upon Congress to act promptly and intelligently in the matter; bot all warnings, all solicitations, have been unheeded. We 

have found time enough to consider matters of minor importance, 

but this great question, so vitally affecting our commercial interests 

and our national honor, has been almost wholly ignored. 

I submit that this ·session should not close without some vigorous 

and decisive action on this subject. The work under forei~ au- apices will go on during the vacation, and having by our silence 

permitted the heavy expenditure to be made, we cannot object to 

it next year with the same force and propriety as now. But, it may be asked, "How shall we prevent theM. De Lesseps Company from going on with the work 7" I answer, by aiding an Ameri- can company to construct a transit-way which shall be under our own direction and control. Resolutions, to have any effect, should declare 

in plain terms that the Government of the United States will not 

permit the construction of the canal, and if the work be afterwards 

commenced, it should be promptly stopped. Who can doubt, however, that such a course, unless accompanied by something more, 

would be both unwise and undignified. 

Should the United States attempt to stop this work, and yet offer no relief from the obstructions and burdens which this barrier imposes 

upon the commerce of the world, we would merit respect neither at 

home nor abroad. When we declare to the nations of Europe that we will not consent to their control of or interference with an isthmian 

highway, we must also be prepared to declare that we are ready to 

strike down this barrier ourselves and give to the commerce of the 

world those facilities which it demands and to which it is-entitled. 

Then, and then only, will we speak. with a voice potential and in a way to command the attention of the nations of the earth. Inasmuch, then, as a transit-way must and will be constructed either•under foreign auspices or those of our own Government, it will at once be conceded that such transit should be located at that point on the 

Isthmus whioh offers the greatest advantages to our own country. 

SEVERAL ADVANTAGES OF TRHUANTEPEC ROUTE. 

The several advant ages of this route are well expressed by Commodore Shufeldt, of the United States Navy, in a very able report 

made by him to Congress in 1871, in which he says: 

Each isthmus rises into importance as it lies nearer to tbe center of .American 

political and social influence, and the intrinsic value of this eminently national 

work oup:ht to be based on theinverae ratio of the distance from tbecenter. * • * 

A canal at th.ispoint becomes a part of our own internal water communicatwn a.s weU as affording a channel for the external commerce of ourselves and the world. * * * 

A canal through the Isthmus of TehoontPpec is an extension of the Mississippi. Rive-r to the Pacific Ocean. lt convert& the Gulf of Me:l7ico into an American lake. * * * 

As a matter of political economy, as well as commercial necessity, a canal here assumes the grandest proportions. 

The value of Tehoantepeo as a commercial highway has always 

been recognized by our Government. In 1847, during the negotiations for the treaty of Guadalupe Hildalgo the United States com- missioner was authorized to offer Mexico $15,000,000 for the right of 

way across the Isthmus, bot Mexico was precluded by reason of the ' 

existence of a previous grant from accepting the offer. 

In 1850 Mr. Webster, Secretary of State, in a letter to our minister 

to Mexico, said : 

The American public at large has a. great and obvious interest in the Tehuantepec passage. 

Again in 1851 Mr. Wesbster, in a letter to the same officer, said: 

All know that a communication from ollean to oeean across the Isthmus in this. 

direction for many years baa been a matter of anxious consideration. 

Mr. Fillmore, in his annual message, December 2, 1851, says : 

In investigating upon this important subject this Government has had in view one, and only one, object. That object has been, and is, the construction or attain- ment of a passage from ocean to oce~1 tbe shortest and the best for travelers 

and merchandise, and equally open to au the world. 

Again, in 1852, in a letter addressed to the President of Mexico, 

Mr. Fillmore said: 

Your enlarged and enlij!htened views must enable you fully to appreciate the 

importance of opening an interoceanic communication between the Atlantic and 

Pacific, a~ross the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. 

Hon. C. M. Conrad, Acting-Secretary of State, ill October, 1852, in a letter addressed to Hon. Alfred Conkling, United States minist er to Mexico, said : 

A communication affording a cheap and rapid means of transporting passengers and merchandise across tbe Isthmus of Tehuantepeo has long been considered an object of great importance to the commercial world. To the United State , in 

particular, it is difficult to estimate the value of such a communication. 

In 1857, Hon. Lewis Cass, Secretary of State, in a letter said : 

The proximity of tbe Isthmus to our shores, the salubrity of the climate, the 

adaptation of the ground for the construction of a railroad, and the great diminu- tion of distance, in comparison with more southern routes between our Atlantic 

and Pacific possessions, all conspire to point it out as far preferable to any ot her route outside of our own territory. 

In December, 1866, Hon. Caleb Cushing said: 

The construction of a railroad and line of telegraph for interoceanic communication by the way of the Isthmns of Tebuantepec, with suitable harbor impr ove- menta at Coatzacoalcos and La Ventosa, including light-houses, is an object of 

great and manifest utility to the whole commercial world but primarily to the 

United States and the Me.rican Republic. It has at all times been thus regarded by the public authorities and the p.eople of both countries. 

Expressions of this character might be extended indefinitely. For a half century or more far-seeing statesmen have looked with longing 

eyes upon this natural and most desirable pathway of commerce. 

SPECIFIC ADVANTAGES OF THIS ROUTE OVER ALL OTHERS. 

It will be apparent, by a glance at the map, that Tehuante'pec is in 

every sense the American route, but I desire to indicate briefly some of its peculiar and specific advantages to our own country over all 

other routes. 

First. It is much aborter and hence will afford cheaper transportation. 

Second. It will require far less time and money for its construction, and hence will afford much earlier relief, and cheaper transit. . Third. It will be peculiarly adapted to the use of sailing-vessels. 

Fourth. For the above reasons, and others, it will prove a far better and more effectual regulation of railway charges. 

:F'iftb. Its military advantages are incomparably superior to any 

other route. 

Sixth. It will establish intimate commercial relations between 

the United States and Mexico, while the other routes would not. 

Seventh. It will prove the moat effectual method of rebuilding our, commercial marine, and restoring our lest supremacy on the ocean. Mr. President, let me briefly invite your attention to each of these 

specific advantages: 

I. THE COM!' ARA.TIVE DISTANCE BY WAY OF TRBU.ANTKl'EC. 

A vessel leaving the mouth of the Mississippi River for California, 

Oregon, China, or Japan, first crossing the Gulf of Mexico and pa.ssing 

through the Yucatan channel into the Caribbean Sea, must sail southeasterly along the coast for more than a thousand miles before she 

reaches Panama. Crossing here she must reverse her course, and steering northwesterly, sail about twelve hundred miles along the coast on the Pacific side, before she reaches a point directly opposite that 

from which she started on her voyage. In other words, she must pass Tehuantepec on the Gulf Bide and sail twenty-two hundred miles before she 

reaches it on the Pacific side. If the transit were at Pan~ma, the course of a vessel leaving New York for our Pacific possessions, or for the 

Orient, would be southwardly until she reached Hayti and then westwardly through what is known as tbe "windward passage" into the 

Caribbean Sea, and then southwardly ngain to Panama. From the 

time she left New York uniilahe crossed at Panama ht> r bead would 

not once be turned in the direction of the port tow Licb she was bound. 

If the nansit were at Tehuantepec, however, she would enter from the Atlantic Ocean the Florida channel, from thence to 1 he Gulf of 

Mexico, and from the time she left tbe Atlantic her hea,d would be 

turned in the general direction of her destination. 

The great saving in distance by the Tehoantepec over the Panama 
2214 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY 28, 

route is apparent when we examine the following table, taken from 

Stuckle's work on interoceanic canals : 

New Orleans to San Francisco, via Tehnantepoo: Miles. 

New Orleans to Isthmus...... .............................................. 918 

Across Isthmus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 

Isthmus to San Francisco. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . • • • • • . . . . . . . . . . . . 2, 304 

Total...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . • . . . . . . 3, 384 New Orleans to Snn Francisco, via Panama .................................. 5, 718 

Difference in bvor of Te'huantepec (one way) ................ . .............. 2, 334 

Difference in favor of Tehuantepec (round trip) ..•........ ...•.............. 4, 668 

New York to San Francisco, via Tehuantepec: New York to Isthmus .................••................................... 2, 275 

.Across Isthmus...... ............ ........................................... 162 Isthmus to San Francisco ............................. . ..................... 2, 304 

Total. ............... ...•...•...........•.......... . . ................ .. 4, 741 Difference in favor of Tehuantepec (one way) .................•............ 1, 477 

Difference in favor of Tehuantepec (round trip) ........... ..........•...•..• 2, 954 

So, t oo, there is a. great saving of distance by Tehnantepec over Nicam guu. A vessel making a voyage from New Orleans tO San 

F r ancisco and return, and crossing the Isthmus at Nicaragua, would 

be required to sail a distance of 2,500 miles further than she wonld 

if she crossed at Tehuantepec. In a voyage from New York to San 

Francisco and return there wonld be a saving in distance in favor of 

Tehnantepec over Nicaragua of more than 1,500 miles. , An ordinary steamship will average about two hundred and fifty 

miles every twenty-four hours. As she would save in the ronnd trip 

between New Orleans and San Francisco, via Tehuantepec, over Panama, 4,668 miles, she would save in time about nineteen days, or more than 40 per cent. of the e,ntire time required. In a voyage from 

New York to San Francisco and return she would save about twelve 

days. The saving in time by Tehuantepec over Nicaragua would be 

ten days in a round trip between New Orleans and San Francisco, and 

six days in a round trip between New York and San Francisco. This 

saving, in time and distance, means a saying in the expense of fuel, 

wages, and insurance, and necessarily involves decreased freight charges and a corresponding benefit to both producer and consumer. 

ll. COST OF RESPECTIVE ROUTES A.'\"1> TIME REQUIRED FOR CO:YSTRUCTION. 

The total cost of the ship railway and appurtenances is estimated at $75,000,000, on $50,000,000 of which the Government is asked to 

guarantee 6 per cent. dividends for fifteen years. The time required 

for its completion will. probably not exceed four years, and pOBSibly 

it may be done in less time. 

A congress of distinguished engineers, from all parts of the world, ~ssembled in Paris in 1878 at the instance of M. De Lesseps, estimated 

the cost of a sea-level canal at Panama at 1,200,000,000 francs, or about 

two hundred and forty million dollars. Subsequently more careful 

estimates reduced the amount to $168,000,000. As has been tmly said 

by a distinguished engineer, "In a locality where for six months in the 

y ear the rain-fall is incessant and enormous, it is not probable that 

such a work can be completed iu less t.han twenty years. But if we assume that it can be done in ten, the interest at 5 per cent. during 

this time would add $84,000,000 to this estimate, making a grand 

total of $252,000,000." I am not advised as to the probable cost of 

the Nicaragua canal, but it will probably fall but little below one hundred million dollars. . Therefore, the construction of either of these canals will postpone 

the desired relief from ten to fifteen years longer, and in order to pay 

interest on the investment must. in the end, impose an annual tax on commerce very much greater than would the proposed ship-railway at Tebuantepec. 

I need not enlarge upon this point. The mere statement of facts 

is the strongest possible argument. 

III. THE TEHUAJ'j"TEPEC ROUTE OFFERS PECULIAR ADVANTAGES 'fO SAILING·VESSELS. 

I understand that certain ship~bnilders and ship-owners object to 

any transit-way ·being constructed across the Isthmus, on the ground 

that the effect of such a work would be to give all the carrying trade 

to steamers and drive their sailing-vesselR from the seas. Have those 

gentlemen considered whether their condition would be more tolerable if there were a canal at Panama-or Nicaragua, instead of a transitway at Tehuantepec 7 It would be wise for those representing these 

interests to think over this carefully before committing themselves 

against Tehuantepec. I have been reliably informed that at Panama 

calms prevail to such an extent as to render a transit-way at that 

point useless to sailing-vessels, and that the same conditions, although 

to a less extent, prevail at Nicaragua; while at Tehuantepec winds 

always prevail, and calms are unknown. At Tehuantepec, on the 

Pacific side, is the" Bay of Ventosa," meaning the "Bay of Winds." 

It is claimed by those familiar with such subjects that more sailingvessels would use the passage-way at Tehuantepec than steamers, 

and in view of the many favorable conditions, this prediction may indeed be verified. 

Captain Silas Bent, a former naval officer of the United States and a gentleman of great experience and information, in arecentspeech, 

made before the Merchants' Exchange in Saint Louis, said: 

The northeast trade-winds, which e:x:tt>nd across the A antic, are so broken and 

interrupted when they encounter the West India Islands that they never pene- trate the Caribbean Sea; but the northwest portion of them, however, does extend 

into the Gulf of Mexico, and often so far down as to reach well toward Tehuante· 

pee; so that while in the Gulf winds are always found, yet the Caribbean Sea 

remains a region of almost relentless calms. 

Nor is this all ; for the mountain range extending the length of the Isthmus of 

Panama and thron h Central America offers a still more formidable barrier to the 

passage of these wmds, thns throwing them still higher into the upper regions of 

the atmosphere, and extending these calms far out mto the Pacific Ocean on the 

parallel of Panama, and which extend, with lessening width, forfifteen or eighteen hundred miles, to the northwest, along the coast of Central America. 

Thi!!l whole region of calms, both in the Caribbean Sea and in the Paeific Ocean, is so well known to navigators that sailing-vessels always shun it if possible, though they may have to run a thousand miles out of their way to do so. This absence of wind of course leaves this vast area exposed to the unmitigated heat of a torrid sun except when relieved momentarily by harassing squalls in the 

dry season and by the deluging rainfalls of the wet season. ,. * * Let us start 

two sailing-ships of equal tonnage and equal speed from the month of the Mississippi, with cargoes for China, one to go by way of Panama and the other by way of 

Tehuantepec, anrl I venture to affirm that by the time the Panama vessel 'bas 

cleared the canal and floats in the waters of the Pacific, the Tehuantepec vessel 

will have scaled that isthmus and be well on to the meridian of the Sandwich Islands, and that before the other vessel can worry through the fifteen or more hundred miles of windless ocean before her to reach the trade-winds to the westward 

of Tehuantepec, the latter will have sped five thousand miles on her way across the Pacific, and be full thirty days ahead of her adversary. For it is a fact worth 

mentioning here that the strength of the northeast trade-winds in the Pacific, as well as the maximum strength of the northern portion of the great equatorial cur- rent in that ocean, are both found on or near the parallel of latitude of Tehuantepec, the former blowing with an impelling force to the westward of ten or twelve 

miles an hour, and the latter with a following strength of three or four miles per hour. 

These facts are submitted for the careful consideration of those who are interested in sailing-vessels, and to demonstrate the great superiority of this route for cheap transportation. It is well known that no cheaper method of transport bas ever been devised than by large 

sailing-vessels on the open ocean. 

IY. THE TEHUA."iTEPEC ROUTE WILL PROVE A I<"AR BETTER AJ'j"l) MORE EFFECTIVE REGULATOR OF RAILWAY CHARGES THAN ANY OTHER. 

This is apparent from the facts and reasons just stated. The great 

question in the near futnre is to be, " How shall we best control and 

regulate the colossal railway corporations of this countryT" I can- not enter upon that question now further than to say that wherever, 

and whenever, it can be done by the competitive power of lines of 

transportation which shall be beyond the power of corporate com- bination and monopoly, we shall have provided the safest, surest, and 

best possible regulator. I do not know of any place in the world, nor ofanyplaneverpresen~d which, for the money required, offers so great advantages for the attainment of this end as does the proposed 

ship-railway at Tehuantepec. ,. We have expended over one hnndred millions in money to build one line of railway to the Pacific Ocean, and that done we have appropriated untold millions of acres of the public domain to provide 

competition for the first line. The result will probably be, when all are completed, that a grand combination will be made by which the 

earnings of all will be pooled, and competition be wholly defeated. 

True, laws may be passed forbidding such combinations, and to some extent securing the objects for which these princely donations were made; but such laws will encounter many difficulties and embarrassments, and will be subject to the changes of public opinion. Give us a direct and cheap ocean line from all parts of the Atlantic, to all parts 

of the Pacific coast, and you will have provided a competitor which 

will be beyond the power of combination, and which will need no law, 

but the law of human nature, to maintain its vigor and unceasing ac- tivity. Such a line, if constructed at the right place, and at reason- able cost, and subject to the right of the Government to fix tolls, will 

regulate every line of railroad that shall ever do business between the 

two oceans. I have already indicated the superiority of the ship-railway at 

Tehuantepec over all other routes and methods for this purpose, 

namely: That it will be from 1,400 to 2,400 miles. shOJ:ter; will be 

available from ten to fifteen years earlier; will require many millions 

less of annual tolls, and will afford far better facilities for sailingvessels. The distance from all our Atlantic to all our Pacific ports, 

Yia Tehuantepec, will average only about one thousand miles greater, 

by this ocean route, than the distance by rail across the continent. 

The effect of all these advantages, in cheapening the cost of transportation, and in regulating railway charges, can hardly be overestimated. And yet I am entirely satisfied that the immense increase of 

travel and of business, demanding quick transit, which would result 

from the more rapid development of the distant West, through the 

agency of cheap transportation produced by the proposed work, would 

ultimately prove a great benefit to the railroads themselves. 

V. ITS MILITARY ADVANTAGES ARE IXCOMPA.RABLY SUPERIOR TO ANY OTHKR ROUTE. 

It is, of course, of the utmost importance that a point should be 

selected which can be most easily and effectually defended in case of war. In this respect Tehuantepec offers special advantages over any 

other point upon the Isthmus. Commodore Shnfeldtsaysthat it ''is 

the only route which our Government can control." We could not 

(with our present Navy) successfully defend a work constructed either 

at Panama or Nicaragua against the attack of any of the great naval 

powers of Europe, but it would be otherwise with at work at Tehnantepec. A few iron-clads and torpedoes, placed in the Yucatan and 

Florida channels, would entirely close the Gulf of Mexico, making an entrance into it almost impossible. Nor would there be any difficulty, should it become necessary, in conveying overland and con- centrating at Tehuantepec an army of 200,000 men. There are now two lines of rail way extending into Mexico in course of con-
' 

1881. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 2215 

stroction: one from New Mexico and the other from Texas. When 

these are finished the transportation of troops to the Isthmus will be an easy thing. To transport such an army to Nicaragua or Panama, 

however, would be most difficult and its maintenance there, far 

removed as it would be from its base of supplies, would be well-nigh 

impossible. Mexico, whose interest would be joint with ours, could 

render us much more efficient aid in the protection of such a work 

than we could hope to receive from the smaller and much less powerful republics of Central America. 

VL rr WILL ESTABLISH INTIMATE COMMERCIAL RELATIONS WITH MEXICO, 

which the other routes would not. 

The question how we shall best establish commercial relations with 

Mexico that will open her markets to our products, bas long been a most 1mportant problem with American business men and statesmen. 

She a.bounds in all the natural resources that are needed to make a nation rich and powerful. Her soil is unsurpassed in fertility. Her 

mountains contain mines of fabulous wealth. Her climate is salubrious and delightful. She produces many things which we need, 

and her people require innumerable articles which our manufacturers 

and farmers can supply. Though this republic, fashioned after the 

plan of our own, and in full sympathy with us, stands at our very 

doors, yet the United States to-day enjoys, as I am informed, but 

about 5 per cent. of her trade. This should not be. 

During the year 1874-'75, there were coined in the mints of 

MexicoSilver .••••...••..••..•..••..••.........•..•..••.•. $19,886,958 50 

Gold •..• -•..• -•• -•• - •••• -.. - -.•• -..•• --- •..• -.. - -- 762, 619 00 

Copper.... • • . . • • . • • . . . • • • • • . • . . . • . . • . . . . • • • . • . . . . . 21, 712 33 

Total •......•..•••. ~... . . • • • • . . . • . . . • • • . . . . . 20, 671, 289 93 

The whole coinage of the country up to 1875 is estimated to have 

been $2,985,488,165.55, and her local interior trade is estimated to have 

amounted in the year 1876 to upwards of $400,000,000. It must be 

remembered also that the mineral and agricultural developments of 

Mexico are,:yet in their infancy. Struggling with internal revolution 

and foreign invasion, her advancement and development have been 

greatly impeded. We have every reason to believe that her present 

governmentisastableone, and that a newe1a of prosperity has dawned 

upon her people. 

General Grant in speaking upon this subject said: 

They have thirteen years really of growth, and considering that they have been 

impoverished by warsil foreign and domestic, I think they have done remarkably well, and I am perfec y satisfied that with the bnilding of railroads and of tele- ~rapbs there need be no more apprehension for the safety of capital invested in 

Mexico than in our own country. 

I look for o. brighter and prosperous fntnre for Mexico, and it must result in a very large commerce with some part of the world. If we take advantage of the time -it will accrnetothe benefit of the United States more than to that of any other conn- try except Mexico. * " * As I have said, I have no donbt that with the building of railroads they will be able to export $200,000,000, not a dollar of which will 

be bnllion. 

, We have long desired this trade. The time has now come when we can do much to secure it. Mexico herself has take.n the initiative. She says to us "we have done our part; now do yours by aiding the construction of this great work, and by joining us unite the 

two great republics by the strongest ties of interest and sympathy." 

She has given a concession which will enable the company, to be 

formed under it, to discriminate as to tolls in favor of the United 

States. She has made a most generous contribution to the work. 

Here is our opportunity. What shall be our reply f 

The commercial advantages of this work are by no means confined 

to Mexico. The following table, taken from official records exhibiting the commerce with the various nations therein named, shows our present commercial1·elations with the countries most readily reached 

by this route : 

:British India ••••••••••••••.••••••••..••••..•••••.•••.••..•..•••••• .Australia .•.••••••••••.••••.••.••••••••.•..•..•••••.••••• __ . __ ..••. China ••••••...••••••.••..••.••.•••••••••••••••••...... ---- ....••.. 

~~~-~~~~:: ·_:: -.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 

New Zealand ••••••••••••••....••.•........•••.•..••.•....••••••... Chili .••..•••••.•••••.••••••.•••••.•••.•••....••••.•.•.•••••.••..... Japan ..•..••..•.••••••..••••••.•••..••..•.......•••.••..•..•.•. ___ . Phillipine Islands ••••••••••••• ~ ••.•••••.•......••.••............... Tasmanico ----- -.•••••••••.••••••.•••••...•••.•••.••••.••••..••••.• :Hawaiian Islands ••••••.•.•...•.....•...••......•.••••••..••.•...•. 

423, 000, 000 375, 819, 000 

HIS, 000, 000 

ll:l, 000, 000 

75, 000,000 71 718,000 

58,000,000 

55,230,000 

34, 76:l, 000 

14,835,000 

7,524, 000 

----- Total • • • . • • • . • • • . . • • • . • . • • • • • . . • • • • • • • • . • • . . . . . . • • • • • . . • . . .. . . 1, 425, 953, 000 

Of this trade the United States now enjoys only about 4 per cent. 

"VII.-IT. WILL PROVE ONE OF THE MOST EFFECTUAL :&ffiTHODS OF REDUILDIYG OUll 

COMMERCIAL :MAlUNE A!<'D OF RES'IORING OUR SUPREMACY OY THE OCEA..'\ •• 

The right conceded by Mexico to discriminate in favor of American commerce will do more to rebuild our shipping intereRts than 

would the expenditure of many millions in any other way. I regard 

this concession as of very great value. Suppose we reject this prop-

-QSition and Great Britain, wiser than we, shall accept it. What will 

be the effect upon our commerce f In my judgment it could hardly 

receive a more fatal blow. This concession will enable any other 

-government that shall aid the enterprise to enjoy the advantages now ·offered to us. Mr. Eads is patriotic, and hence comes first to his own eountry, and offers her the great advantages he has secured. If we 

spurn that offer and refuse to avail ourselves of its benefits, can he 

be blamed for submitting it to some other government that will better appreciate its advantages f It may be said in reply, that no other nation shall be permitted to control this isthmian highway. 

That sounds well. It is brave talk; but I repeat that in this last 

quarter of the nineteenth century we cannot afford to stand in the 

way of the world's progress, refusing to open this highway of com- merce ourselves or to permit any other nation to do it. Have we counted thepossiblecostofenforcingsuchadog-in-the-mangerpolicyf 

May it not cost us vastly more thus to obstruct the commerce of the 

world than to accept the proposition of Mexico and avail ourselves of 

its immense advantages 7 Should we decline this proposal, we could 

not object to the acceptance of it by England for the same reasons which justify us in stopping the work of De Lesseps; forsuchaccept- ance by England would not be the chartering of an English company 

under a Mexican concession to build the ship-railway. It would simply be an agreement between England and a Mexican company, by 

which the commerce of England would secure immense and exclusive 

benefits for ninety -nine years, in consideration of certain aid advanced 

by England to the company in its infancy, and which by the conces- sion it is authorized to receive from England or from any other government. 

It has been urged that we would get no right to take possession of 

the road in the event of the ship-railwaycompanyfailingto keepits 

engagements with us; that in such case our only recourse would be 

through the courts of Mexico. The absurdity of such objection is seen at once if we reverse the position of affairs and suppose that 

Mexico or any other foreign government desired, for any cause whatever, to take possession of any railroad or other public work in this conn try. We should only give to such government, or to its citizens, 

the right to go into our courts for redress, and that Mexico gives to 

any government that aids this work. We have no rlght to ask, or to 

expect from her, what we would not ccmcede if our positions were reversed. SUBSIDY. 

I am aware that the cry of "subsidy'' may be raised against this 

proposition. I deny that it is in any sense a subsidy; but if it were, 

that would not deter me from supporting a measure so essential to the 

development of our commerce, and so advanta~eous to the whole 

country. Mexico has granted a million acres of land, and made con- cessions of far greater value, in aid of thiti work. Can we do less than 

give a guarantee, which in effect is but a loan of credit, with a moral 

certainty that every dollar will eventually be repaid f 

All tha.t our Government is asked to do is to give a guarantee which 

will enable Mr. Eads to raise the enormous sum of money necessary 

to construct the work. The total cost of the railway, as I have said, 

is estimated at i5,000,000, and the Government is a-sked, not to ad- vance any portion of this sum, but simply to guarantee the payment 

for fifteen years of a dividend of 6 per cent. per annum on $50,000,000 

of the stock. For the repayment of whatever may be advanced un- der this guarantee, one-half the net receipts is pledged, and to avoid 

any question as to what are net receipts, it is provided by the bill that 

one-half the gross receipts shall pay all operating and extraordinary 

expenses, repairs, &c., so that when the total receipts Mhall reach 

6,000,000 the obligations of the United States shall cease. In no event 

shall such annual obligation exceed the amount by which one-half 

the gross receipts falls short of the sum of $3,000,000. 

It is estimated by M. De Lesseps that the revenues of a canal at 

Panama would amount to 20,000,00u per annum, and on this estimate $60,000,000 of private capital has already been subscribed. The 

prospectus of the Nicaragua route estimates that its revenues would 

amount to $12,000,000. If the gross receipts at Tehuantepec reach 

$6,000,000, the Government will have nothing to pay under its guarantee. Nor is this Government aid sought as a gift. On the con- trary, it is proposed upon the basis of a good and sufficient consideration to be given in return. This consideration is, first, the transportation of all Government veRSels, troops, and mails, and the transmission 

of all Government telegrams free of charge; second, the right upon 

the part of the Government of the United States to regulate the tolls 

upon the railway. increasing or reducing them at pleasure; and, 

third, the right to dism'iminate in, favor of A:rnerican com:nwrce. Not only are these rights reserved to continue for ninety-nine years, but the 

most amp~e provision is made for the repayment by the company to 

the United States of the amount it may be called upon to advance 

under its guarantee. 

I do not hesitate to declare that I am in favor of wise and judicious 

expenditures to develop our magnificent resources, expand our foreign trade, and restore our lost ocean commerce. 

IS THE PROPOSED SHIP-RAILWAY PRACTICABLE 1 

This seems to me the only question in connection with this work 

that will bear discussion. If it be practicable, I do not see how any 

American can doubt his obligations to give it a hearty support. I 

confess my inability to discuss it from an engineering or mechanical 

Rtandpoint, for the reason that I have but little knowledge on such 

matters. I will not, however, as many do, make my ignorance of the 

subject the reason for denouncing it. The King of Siam, when told 

that in some countries water became hard enough to walk upon, at once pronounced it false, because it contradicted all his experience. 

The fact w~ that his experience was somewhat limited. 
, 

2216 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY 28, 

The profound scientist, De Lardner, delivered a. lecture in New 

York, in which he demonstrated to his own satisfaction at least, and 

doubtless to that of many intelligent listeners, that it was simply impossible for a steamship to cross the ocean because she could not carry 

coals enough for the voyage; yet the same number of the New York 

Herald, whicll published his lecture, announced the arrival of the 

steamship Great Western from Liverpool, to the utter confusion of 

the learned lecturer. 

De Witt Clinton was considered almost a lunatic when he proposed 

to connect the waters of the lake and the Hudson River by a canal. 

Nevertheless he did it. 

When it was first proposed to build a railroad, on which coaches 

should run at the rate of fifteen miles per hour, the idea was scouted as utterly impracticable and visionary, and the wise ones demonstrated that such a road would require for its bed a solid stone wall, 

perfectly level and perfectly straight. 

When Captain Eads proposed to erect the present bridge over the 

Mississippi River, at Saint Louis, it was said by many to be impossible, 

but, undaunted by the croakings of skeptics, he went on with his 

work, and the magnificent structure stands to-day a fitting monu- ment to his genius and energy. 

Seven years ago, as chairman of the Senate Committee on Transportation Routes to the Seaboard, it became my duty to consider the 

very important problem of how to relieve the suffering commerce of 

the Mississippi River. The month of that mighty river was closed 

to any vessel drawing more than eighteen feet of water, and the un- certain and dangerous passage of even these was only secured by an expensive system of dredging. For half a century the nation had 

struggled in vain with this problem. Numerous plans of improvement were proposed to the-committee; but one by one they were re- jected, until at last the committee seemed forced to the conclusion 

that nothing but a canal would accomplish the desired end. The 

Honse of Representatives had appropriated $8,000,000 to construct a canal which would have cost from $12,000JOOO to $15,000,000 before 

completed. 

It was at this juncture that James B. Eads, having just completed 

the Saint Louis bridge, came forward with his proposition to deepen 

the mouth of the river by means of jetties. Wearied with propositions possessing no merit, I confess that I approached the consideration of the jetty project with a. prejudice against it; but when Mr. 

Eads explained to me his whole plan, and when I saw his unfaltering 

faith, amounting almost to inspiration, I became convinced that here 

at last was the solution of the problem. He undertook the work un- der circumstances and conditions most inauspicious and onerous. Not a dollar of public money could he receive until he had demonstrated 

the success of the work by securing twen\y feet of water where there were then but eight feet, and all payments thereafter were to be con- ditioned upon the depth of channel secured. From the beginning I 

felt sure be would succeed, and during the darkest days of the enterprise my faith never faltered. 

To-day, at a cost of only .five and a quarter millions, the problem 

has been solved; and the largest ocean vessels may float upon an unobstructed channel to the Gulf, and every great commercial interest of the Mississippi Valley, springing into new life, rejoices in 

the accomplishment of this wonderful work. This same quiet, earnest, 

and energetic man comes to us to-day and says, "Give me your aid 

and I will realize for you the cherished dreams of centuries, by st~ikingdown this isthmian barrier and giving to commerce an unobstructed 

highway between the two great oceans." I for one have faith in Mr. 

Eads. I most firmly believe he will a-ccomplish all he promises. Bnt 

if there are doubters, I ask them to look at his proposition. Again, he 

shows his perfect confidence in his project by insisting that under no circumstances shall the Government guarantee attach, or have any 

force or eflect, until he has demonstrated by the severest tests the 

entire practicability of the ship-railway. Nor does be stand alone in 

his assertion that the work is pra-cticable and will accomplish all 

that he claims for it. His proposition has the indorsement and support of many of the most distinguished civil engineers and naval con- structors both in Europe and America, and so far as I know the practicability of the plan is denied by none. Let me read a few brief 

extracts from some of the many indorsements it bas received. 

Ron. E. J. Reed, member of Parliament, and formerly chief con- structor of the British navy, in a letter on Mr. Eads's plan of a ship 

railway, published in the London Times, says: 

I have for some time past had under consideration a similar scheme of my own for conveying ships across the north of the great peninsula. of Florida, and although I have not had the leisure to develop it sufficiently to justify me in puttin~ it in 

detail before the public, I have gone a long way toward satisfying myself that it 

is a feasible plan and highly economical in compaiison with a ship-canal. 

He adds: 

I am satisfied that ships can be conveyed across intervening land much less 

expensively than by canlll where the distance to be traversed is great. 

Captain Edward Hart, naval constructor United States Navy, says in a letter to .Mr. Eads: 

With a substantial road-bed for your railway, on the easy grades across the 

Tehuantepec, which I understand do not exceed one or two feet in a hundred, there can be no mechanical difficulty in the way of traDSJ,>Ortin~ loaded ships b_v railroad 

with entire safety to the vessel, whether she be built of wood or iron. The speed 

with which you can move the vessel will depend entirely upon the size and num· be"r or your locomotives. 

Mr. F. L. Fernald, another constructor in the United States Navy, 

in a letter addressed to Mr. Eads, says : 

Having carefully examined the plans and papers pertaining to yonr proposed ship-railway across the Isthmus of Tehuantepeo, I do not hesitate to say that in 

my judgment there will be no difficulty whatever in transporting in the manner you propose any properly-built vessef with absolute safety. Your railway will 

possess one quite important advantage over an ordinary canal. and that is that a vessel's bottom, propeller, &c., can be examined and, if necessary, cleaned in 

transit. 

It should be remembered that these three gentlemen have received a scientific education, and have been fitted by long practice and a. thorough knowledge of the subject to speak intelligently upon it. 

They are all recognized as high authority in ship-building. 

General Q. A. Gilmore, of the United States Engineers, declares in a letter to Mr. Eads : 

In my judgment the construction of the ship-railway across the Isthmus in general accordance with your plan is not only feasible as an engineering problem, but 

the successful maintenance and operation of such a road is entirely pra.cticahle as a. business enterprise. 

Major Charles R. Suter, also of the United States Engineers, says: 

The project has great and obvious advantages to recommend it, and from an engineering point of view it is, in my opinion, perfectly practicable. 

Professor E. A. ]:i1Jertes, dean of the department of civil engineering in Cornell University, was the chief engineer of Commodore Shnfeldt's survey of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. He says: 

I have made computations which proved conclusively to my mind that the Great Eastern conld be carried safely overland upon rails with less strain to her timbers 

than in any of her sea. voyages. 

Again he says : 

I am perfectly familiar with every possible point throu~h which the railway or canal could be located at Tehuantepec, and I am sure it 1s easy to prove that all routes outside of the Gulf of Mexico will be det-rimental to the most vital interest.s 

of the United States and the source of great danger to our national stability. 

He says further : 

I can assure you upon knowledge of every inch of the ground, that you will find no difficulty about curves, grades, or bridges. The ascent of the -t-tiantic elope will offer no more difficulties than the Hudson River Railroad; and on the Pa.cilic 

side, either of the three passes in the neigJ;lborhood of Tarifa or Chi vela will allow 

of no steeper grades than twenty-five to thirty-five feet per mile to bring yon down to the Pacific plains. 

Colonel Henry Flad, a distinguished civil engineer, president of 

the board of public works in Saint Louis, says in a pnbli~bed letter: 

Ships can be transported on such a railroad with absolute safety and with the same dispatch as throu~h a canal; and that although the cost o.f transferrin~ ships 

by railroad will exceed that of passing them through a ship-canal. the difference 

will be insignificant compared with the saving of interest on the first cost. 

Mr. 0. Cbaunte, an accomplished civil engineer, and superintendent 

of the Erie Railway, says of the ship-railway: 

I gave some attention to the subject myself nearly a. year ago, and reached con- clusions almost identical with yours as to the feasibility and general features of the 

~~~~~t. I see no reason why the railway should not be worked at ten miles per 

General Beauregard, formerly of the United States Engineer Corps, 

says: 

I feel no hesitation in saying that I see no great difficulty in constructing a railway strong enough to carry out the object referred to. 

He says further : 

The ship-railway has other important advantages over a. canal, such as the facility 

with which the number of tracks could be increased to a{)(lommodate the demands 

of commerce, the rapidity of transit, and thegreateruumberof ves els per day tbat 

could be transported, the ability of building a railway where a canal would be impossible, an<l the ability of estimating correctly first cost, &c. 

Colonel C. Shaler Smith, a civil engineer of the highest standing, 

says: 

The engineering problems involved have all been solved on a smaller scale in 

the construction of various works in thls country and in Europe during the lMfi 

thirty years, and the arlaptation of these tried and proved principles in mechanical 

designs to the case in hand is not by any means ditticult. 

Mr. Dempster, city engineer of Pittsburgh, says: 

I heartily indorse the project of a ship-railway across the cord of the continents 

in preference to a canal. 

He says further : 

The facilities of transportation can be much more readily, cheaply, and advantageously increased on the rail way than on the canal. and the leviathans of the 

merchant-marine can be transported more easily and with as much safety on a railway as through a canal, and without any break: of cargo or any injury to the vesseL 

Mr. H. D. "Whitcomb, civil engineer, in chargo of the works of improvement on the James River, who was sent by the United States 

Government with others to Europe to investigate the merits of the 

jetty system in 1874, says of the ship-railway: 

The idea is worthy of the a~e, and to make it a success you have simply to improve and expand the details of the old marine railway and make it more per- fect. I have the greatest confidence in your ability in this particular and hope 

you will have the opportunity to demonstrate it. 

Mr. Thomas C. Clarke, vice-president of the American Society of 

Civil Engineers and one of the most eminent civil engineers in the 

lJnited States, says: 

I am desirons that my opinion shonl~ be ;put on rOO?rd that your ship; railway is 

practicable to construct, and can be mamtamed aseasdy as any other railway bear- In~ as large a tonnage, and that vessels of 4,000 tons can be carried across without 

injury to themselves or their cargoes. 
1881.· CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 2217 

Mr. J. J. Williams, a civil engineer who has made several surveys 

of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, says: 

Having carefully examined the details of your plans for accomplishing this ob-

~~\!t~~s~ to express to you my full conviction of their entire practicability on 

Mr. E. L. Corthell, a gentleman who has had large experience in 

railroad engineering, and who was resident engineer of the jetties, 

declares his full faith in the merits of the ship-railway. 

Major B. N. Harrod, civil engineer, and member of the Mississippi 

River commission, has written to Mr. Eads to the same effect. 

In regard to the popular error that loaded ships cannot be taken 

out of water in safety, Mr. Eads has received a letter from William 

F. Buckley, president of the New York Balance Dock, (February 

14,) in which he ~ives the names of five large sailing-ships and six 

large steamers wh1ch have been taken out upon that dock, with their 

cargoes, and he adds: 

We do not refuse any class of ships or steamers, even with their cargoes and 

coals on board, whose length does not exceed that of the dock. In any case in 

which we have taken up steamers with cargoes it bas been done without the least 

strain or injury to the vessels. .A.s the rule is to make a charge for raising cargo 

in the vessel, they usually come to us without cargo. 

Among the naval officers who look with decided favor upon the 

ship-railway plan may be named Commodore Shnfeldt, Commander 

Farquhar, and Captain Silas Bent. 

These eminent authorities, in connection with the fact that the 

guarantee is to attach only as the work is practically demonstrated 

to be a success, ought to be enough for even the most skeptical. I 

will only say, in conclusion, that confident of the practicability of 

this great work, of its incalculable benefit to the whole country, and 

of its incomparable superiority over all other plans proposed, I should 

feel that I do not fairly represent the State which has so long honored me with a seat in this body, nor express the sentiment of the 

American people, were I not to &peak and vote in favor of our Government grasping the outstretched hand of Mexico and joining her 

in an enterprise promising so much of benefit to both republics and 

w the world. · Mr. EATON. I ask the Senate to proceed with the consideration 

of the bill which I called up. 

BALTIMORE AND POTOMAC RAILROAD. 

Mr. WHYTE. There is a bill to authorize the Baltimore andPoto- mac Railroad Company t.o reorganize after there shall be a sale of the 

road of the company under the mortgages to secure the bonded debt. 

It is absolutely necessary. I ask that the pending order may be laid 

aside informally. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the request of 

the Senator from Maryland f The Chair hears no objection. 

The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, proceeded to consider· the bill (S. No. 2064) to reorganize and incorporate anew t.he Balti- more and Potomac Railroad Company. 

The bill was reported from the Committee on the District of Columbia with an amendment, at the end of section 2 to add: 

PromiUd, That nothing in this act shall be so construed as in any way to impair the rit:;ht of the United States to require at any time the removal of the tracks now laid on Sixth street southwest, or on any of the streets enterin,:t the city of 

Washington whereon tracks of the Baltimore and Potomac Railroad Company are now laid, or as in any way to prevent the United States from taking, at a reason- able compensation to said comtKany, the depot building at the corner of B street 

. :!:~: ~e'!e~~~ street sou west, and requiring the said railroad company to 

SEc. 3. That this act may be altered, amended, or repea ed at any time by the 

Congress of the United States. 

Mr. MORRILL. I desj,re to call tbe attention of the Senate to the 

amendment. It does not go far enough to snit me. I think, at the 

present time, if we are to recharter this corporation, we should take 

this as the most opportune moment to have the present railroad track 

removed from SixtJ::t street. We all know that•it is a great nuisance as it is now. Certainly it seems to me that we could have no better 

time than when they ask for new favors of us, and that we should 

seek the present occasion to have that track removed. I am perfectly 

willing that there should be a provision by which we should pay the 

appraised value of it, or perhaps the original cost of the building, for 

I suppose that we really need it, or might make use of it to a good 

purpose for the Pension Bureau or some department of the District 

government. · Mr. W_HYTE. I beg to say, in reply to the Senator from Vermont, 

that 3: b~ has alr~a~y passed both Ho~ses of Con~ress authorizing the D1stnct comiDlsswners to select a s1te for a umon depot, providing for the change of this depot hereafter. I have pot an amendment 

in the bill which reserves all our rights to do that whenever we are ready, and I really think nothing more stringent than that ought to 

be put in the bill. 

Mr. MORRILL. The bill to which the Senator refers may become a law and it may not, probably not; and if it should, there is no cer- tainty that it would be accepted by the different companies, so that 

the object I have in view would be accomplished for years and years. 

I tru~~ that the Sen~tor from ~aryland will agree to so amend this 

proV1s1on sa to proVIde that thl,s shall be. done within the coming 

year. I presume we could alter the third section so as to effect that. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the 

amendment of the Committee on the District of Columbia. 

The amendment was agreed to-ayes 27, noes not counted. 

Mr. CONKLING. I have no doubt about the fact, but I rise to 

ask a question that it may appear on the record if it has not appeared. The bill as I understand it has no effect save only to authorize the railway company in question to reorganize as it is organized 

now, after certain foreclosure proceedings are consummated f 

Mr. WHYTE. Precisely. 

Mr. CONKLING. And it ll;nparts no right to change the route or to occupy any ground in the District, but leaves all that in Btatu, q!UJ '! 

Mr. WHYTE. Precisely ; and with an amendment reserving any 

question in regard to the depot hereafter, so that there can be no implication the other way. 

The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amendment was concurred in. 

Mr. MORRILL. The third section has not yet been adopted 'I 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The two clauses were treated as on& 

amendment. • Mr. WHYTE. It is but one amendment. 

Mr. HARRIS. I desire to make two or three formal amendments 

that the Committee on the District of Columbia, after the bill was reported, considered and agreed upon. The Senator from Maryland 

forgot them at the moment, but the Senator from Maryland and myself understand the ·exact object and purpose of the amendments. 

While they do not materially affect the principle of the bill, it is better that they should be inserted in it. I will hand the amendments 

that I propose to incorporate in the bill to the Secretary. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendments proposed by the 

Senator from Tennessee will be reported in their order. 

The CHIEF CLERK. In section 2, line 23, it is proposed to strike 

out "the" and insert "any existing ; " in line 27 to strike out " as in 

any way to prevent " and insert " any existing right ;" in line 28, 

after "United States," to strike out ''from taking" and insert " ro 

take;" and in lines 30 and 31 to strike out ''requiring" and insert 

" to req nire ; " so as to make the proviso read : 

Provided, That nothin,:t in this act shall be so construed as in any way to impair 

any existing ri~ht of. the United States to require at any time the removal of thetracks now laia. on Sixth street, southwest, or on any of the streets enterin,:t the 

city of Washington whereon tracks of the Baltimore and Potomac Railroad Company are now liiid, or any existing right of the United States to take, at a reason- able compensation to said company, the depot building at the corner of B street 

:!~! ~:e~~!.street, southwest, and to require the said railroad company to 

The amendments were agreed to. 

The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read th& 

third time, and passed. 

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. 

A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. T. F. KING,. one of its clerks, announced that the Honse had agreed to the report 

of the committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two 

Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. No. 7101} 

making appropriations for the legislative, executive, alld judicial ex- penses of the Government for the fiscal year ending J nne 30, 1882, and 

for other purposes. 

The message also announced that the House had passed a joint reso- lution (H. R. No. 373) relative to printing the Agricultural Report forthe year 1880. 

ENROLLED •BILLS SIGNED. 

The message further announced that the Speaker of the House had 

signed the following enrolled bills and joint resolution; and they wer& 

thereupon signed by the Vice-President: 

A bill (H. R. No. 346) for the relief of William H. Thompson; 

A bill (H. R. No. 375) for the relief of Philemon B. Hawkins; 

A bill (H. R. No. 1197) for the relief of settlers upon the absente& 

Shawnee lands of Kansas, and for other purposes; 

A bill (H. R. No. 1996) for the relief of W. A. Reid; 

A bill (H. R. No. 2098) for the relief of the heirs of Edward B. 

Clark; 

A bill (H. R. No. 2844) for the relief of James E. :Montell; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3788) granting an increase of pension to William 

Hamill; 

A bill (H. R. No. 4002) for the relief of the estate of J. M. :Micon,. deceased; 

A bill (H. R. No. 4646) for the relief of the heirs of Cornelius Boyle;. 

A bill (H. R. No. 6023) to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury 

to change tbe name of vessels onder certain circumstances; 

A bill (H. R. No. 6545) to amend section 2524 of the Revised Statutes, so as to authorize a charge for melting or refining bullion when 

at or above standard; 

A bill (H. R. No. 6717) for the allowance of certain claims reported 

by the accounting officers of the United States Treasury Department;. 

A bill (H. R. No. 6972) making appropriations for the service of the 

Post-Office Department for tbe fiscal year ending June 30, 1882, and 

for other purposes; and 

A joint resolution (H. R. No. 401) in relation to the barge W. J. 

Spicer. 

PHILA.])ELPHIA .AND READING RAILROAD. 

Mr. CONKLING. There is on the Calendar a bill reported by the 

Committee on the Judiciary relating to trade-marks--

Mr. EATON. If my friend will permit me, I have a bill beforeth& 

Senate, but promised my friend from Delaware [Mr. BAYARD] that I 

would give way to him, and then made a further promise to my friend 

from Indiana, [Mr. McDoNALD.] 

/ 

j 
2218 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY 28, 

Mr. CONKLING. I will put up my prayer when I get an opportunity. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate resumes the consideration of the Japanese indemnity bill. 

Mr. EATON. Let it be laid over informally without prejudice. 

Mr. BAYARD. With the assent of my friend from Connecticut I 

-ask that the pending order be laid aside informally for the purpose 

of considering Senate jo-int resolution No. 157. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection ? The Chair hears 

none, and the pending order is laid aside informally. The Senator 

.from Delaware asks the Senate to consider the joint resolution be 

has named. 

Mr. INGALLS. Let us hear it reported subject to objection. 

The Chief Clerk read the joint resolution (S. R. ~o. 157) for the 

re1ief of the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Company. 

Mr. INGALLS. Is there any report in that case ' 

Tbe PRESIDING OFFICER. There is no report. 

Mr. BAYARD. The joint resolution is unanimously reported; I 

will explain it. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware asks 

for the present consideration of the joint resolution. 

By unanimous consent, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, 

proceeded to consider the joint resolution. It releases the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Company from the payment of the taxes 

assessed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue upon the interestbearing promissory notes heretofore issued by it to its employes, com- monly known as wages certificates. But the company is to pay the 

.actual costs and expenses incurred in the proceedings taken to en- force the payment of the taxes. 

Mr. BAYARD. I will state that under the act of Congress of the 

8th of February, 1875, it was provided: 

That every person, firm, association, other than national-bank association, and 

.every corporation, State bank, or State banking association, shall pay a tax of 10 

.per cent. on the amount of their own notes used for circulation and paid out by them. (18 Stat. atL., part 3, page 311.) 

In 1878 and 1870 the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Company, 

which hau no banking powers what ever, found itself exceedingly 

.emba.JTassed; eleven thousand of its men were wholly without the means f support; anu the company was t.oo embarrassed to raise money to pay them the wages then due. They issued to these men their promissory notes, promising to pay the money one year after 

date and bearin~; interest. 

Mr. INGALL~. What was the aggregate amount : Mr. BAYARD. The aggregate amount so issued was nearly five 

million dollars, $4,837,000. They issued these notes to their men and 

relieved their immediate wants. I may say that they were not in the 

form of bank notes. They were promissory notes payable one year 

.after date with interest from date, and as was expressly stated npon 

their face were issued for wages, and would be received either before -or at maturity for the amount thereof in freight and tolls of the com- p&ny. 

Mr. ROAR. When was that 7 What was the date? 

Mr. BAYARD. In 1879 these notes were issued. I may sa.y they never were issued, they never were pretended to be issued as banking circulation, but they were taxed. to an amount of 10 per cent. 

"The Commissioner of Internal Revenue invited the company to go 

i nto court and test the tax. To do so in the condition of the company 

would simply have been ruinous. On the face of the paper and ac- cording to the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States 

there can be no pretense to call such instruments as were issued by 

them bank notes, nor were they circulating notes. 

Mr. DAWES. Of what denominations were they . Mr. BAYARD. The denomination was ten dollars for all. 

Mr. DAWES. No odd cents Y 

Mr. BAYARD. They were a~l of the same denomination; and I 

mere1y say they were not issued and reissued as bank notes. It was nothing in the world but the legitimate and ordinary use of credit at a time when the debtor was unable to meet his payment in money. 

Mr. DAWES. This payment was for wages t 

Mr. BAYARD. Yes, sir. 

Mr. DAWES. Did it appear before the committee that everybody 

who worked for the railroad company workedj ust ten dollars' worth ! 

Mr. BAYARD. No, nothing of that kind was proposed. The cer- tificates were issued and given to the employes. I do not suppose the 

hands were paid in full, but it was simply the case of an employer 

unable to meet his debt who to prevent his hands from absolute distress and starvation issued a deferred promise to pay, bearing interest. 

There is, I may sa.y, none of the legal definitions of a bank note 

.attached. to these certificates at all. 

Mr. INGALLS. But the Commissioner of Internal Revenue held 

that they were liable to excise' 

Mr. BAYARD. He taxed them, and he invited the company to go 

into court to contest the tax. 

Mr. INGALLS. Did they take any appeal from bini' to the Secretary of the Treasury '1 

Mr. BAYARD. They have not paid the tax, but their property was levied npon and will be sold, when to sell the property of the com- pany for this tax would be exceedingly ruinous to them. 

Mr. INGALLS. But it was not necessary to litigate every note that was emitted. Why could not a tast case bavo been made up on one 

and the principle established, so that we might have had a judicial 

determination whether the decision of the Commissioner of Internal 

Revenue was right or wrong T 

Mr. BAYARD. The certificates were not issued serially; they were issued at once to relieve from starvation 11,000 men. It was not a case where you could make a test case. It was not the case of a con- tinued or a serial emission of notes. They were issued at one time 

and only at one time, and the tax is unanimously admitted by the 

committees of both Houses not to be witllin the law. 

Mr. INGALLS. Does not the law permit an appeal from a decision 

of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to the Secretary of the Treasury or to some other officer of the Government f 

Mr. BAYARD. No, sir, it does not; nor can you enjoin the collection of a tax under the present law, no matter how palpably erroneous it may be on its face. 

Mr. COCKRELL. There is no written report in this case, and I 

should like to ask whether $5,000 or $500,000 are involved f 

Mr. BAYARD. I will state the amount. 

Mr. COCKRELL. I will put one or two questions to the Senator so that he may understand me. In the first place, what amount of 

this circulating medium was issued by the railroad company! Was 

it issued to pay off the employes month by mouth, week by week, 

and issued in amounts con-esponding with the amounts the company 

owed the employes' or was itacirculating medium, a promissory note, 

issued and paid out like money f Then, did not these parties have a legal remedy, a perfect right to go into the courts of the State, or of 

the United States, and test whether the assessment made by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue was legal and valid or not T 

Mr. McDONALD. Not without paying the tax. 

Mr. COCKRELL. I know they would have had to pay it. What 

is the amount that Congress would give to the railroad company by 

the pa-ssage of this joint resolution Y · Mr. BAYARD. Congress does not give one dollar . Mr. COCKRELL. How much would it take! 

Mr. BAYARD. In the first place, there was not one cent of circulating medium. That is precisely the point. There was no such thing as circulation attached to it. The company owed these men $4,837,000. 

They were indebted to 11,000 workingmen to that amount at the 

time their embarrassments accrued. They were unable to pay those men. They were unable to borrow money in the ordinary method by reason of the heavy mortgages upon their property, which had been 

foreclosed and the road virtually placed in the hands of receivers. 

For the sake of preventing the human distress that would follow 

such a debt they issued $4,tl37,000 in these wages certificates, which were in the shape of promissory notes payable one year after elate 

with interest, and stating expressly upon their face that they were for wages and wero to be redeemed at maturity with interest, or could be paid for tolls due the company . Mr. HOAR. Will the Senator allow mo to ask him a question' 

Mr. BAYARD. Certainly. 

Mr. HOAR. What is the principle, the general rule of public policy, on which the Committee on Finance, if that is the committee 

which recommends this measure, act in prescribing the limits within 

which Congress is to act as a court to revise the decisions of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, and outside of which it is not to act, 

but leave the citizen to his remedy at law~ 

Mr. BAYARD. It is a ca-se palpably of erroneous assessment. The 

only means by w~h that can be remedied in the courts of law is by a payment of the tax under protest and a suit to recover it back. In 

this ca-se you are dealing with a corporation entirely distressed, and 

if subjected to the payment of this large amount, which is $487,000, 

great and ruinous loss will come to them before the case can be decided. 

Taking the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States we find that they have exoneJ,"ated similar certifit}ates where they were not bank notes in any of the legal definitions of that term. Therefore taking the case upon its facts, there bein~ the concurrent agreement of the committees in each House that this was not the circulation contemplated by law and according to the definition of th~ Supreme Court of the United States, they said that rather than send 

these parties to the courts with the long delay, probably three years, 

before a decision could be reached, and which only can be reached 

by the payment of the tax under protest and an appeal, they would 

grant the relief which they are satisfied in law and in equity ought 

to be granted now. If this money is to be paid and recovered back 

three years hence infinite damage will be done which this measure is intended to relieve these parties from. 

The Senate will see that these wages certificates were nothing more than the legitimate issues of an impoverished debtor obtaining 

credit for the cash which it was unable at that time to pay. Therefore the committee recommend that relief should be given to the 

parties who palpably have been assessed under an erroneous con- struction of the law. It is not circulation, it is not bank notes; it is 

the promissory notes of a company for wages due, payable after date 

with interest. It lacks all tbe definition of a bank note. 

Mr. HOAR. Did the committee hear the Commissioner of Internal 

Revenue or the Secretary of the Treasury in support of the ground 

taken by the officers of the Government f 

Mr. BAYARD. This assessment has been made. The Senator knows no doubt that under existing law yon cannot enjoin the collection of 
1881. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 2219 

any tax, however unlawful or erroneous, by process either of State 

<Or Federal courts. Your only remedy is to pay the debt under protest, and then bring your suit against the officer; but the payment 

.of this sum by this company at this time, by both committees of Congress and by the Commissioner himself would be admitted to be absolutely ruinous. 

Mr. HOAR. Let me repeat my question. I do not now exactly 

understand what are the limits. It seems to me itls a very seriou'3 

assumption of jmisdiction for Congress to undertake to reverse, without the action of any court, the opinion in favor of the Government 

of the Treasury officials. I understand that it may be very inconvenient to the citizen to pay his taxes. A wealthy citizen who is taxed a large sum finds it more inconvenient, so far as the difficulty is estimated by amount, than the ordinary citizen who pays a smaller sum. But what I desire to ask the Senator is, whether the committee who 

undertook to overrule and reverse the action of the Commissioner of 

Internal Revenue have given any hearing to the Government on the 

question Y The committee think that this tax was erroneously as- ses.«ed. The Comn:W>sioner of Internal Revenue, whose business it was t-o assess it, thiilks it was properly assesaed. It does not seem to me that this off-hand way is the way to reverse the opinion of this 

hlgh officer of the Government, without, at any rate, a very clear and 

plain case. Mr. BAYARD. The title to this joint resolution clearly expresses 

ita intent. It is a joint resolution for the relief of this company. It 

is certainly within the power of Congress to grant this relief, and 

where the special circumstances--

Mr. HOAR. I am afraid I did not make my question heard. 1\Iy 

question was, Did the committee give t.he Government a hearing' 

We are assuming or asked to assume the judicial .duty of deciding a~ainst a public officer whose duties are quasi-judicial, and who is the 

hlghest officer of the Department except the Secretary of the Treasury. I do not knowwhether an appeal in any instance lies to him in 

the assessment of taxes. Now, did the committee hear the argument 

of the Government by which this Commissioner was convinced--

Mr. BAYARD. The committee did not hear any argument from 

the Government, because they had the practice before them undisputed by the Department. There was no doubt about the fact that 

the Commissioner had given a construction to the act. Under it he 

had levied this tax of 10 per cent., and under it this company's property was seized and put under execution. 

The Senate of the United States have several times within my ex- perience interfered to relieve against just such ruinous assessments, 

which if they were carried. out would necessarily crush the party and 

make it idle to attempt to relieve after all the injury had been done. 

I remember very well about five years ago in the Lake Superior mining regions the mining and smelting companies had issued notes in 

small denominations, fives, tens and twenty dollars in the form of 

drafts upon their Boston house, which never went forwatd for accept- ance but which remained in the community in which they were issued, 

and were used as paper money. They were used and reused, issued 

and reissued; which is not the case with the certificates now before 

the Senate. Under the Sanborn contra.cts--

Mr. HOAR. May I ask the Senator another question Y Were these 

ten-dollar notes payable to bearer¥ 

Mr. BAYARD. They were payable to bearer. I have one of them 

here. 

Mr. DAWES. The Reacting notes f · • 

Mr. HOAR. The Reading notes. 

Mr. BAYARD. They were payable to bearer with interest from 

date. I well remember the theu Senator from Michigan, Mr. Chandler, coming to me as a sub-committee and showing me that taxes to 

the amount of $1,500,000 had been assessed upon a number o£ miners 

and smelters of common ores in that region. To them the payment 

of such a tax was irresistible; the courts could not enjoin; the law 

expressly declared that no injunctioa should be issued. The remedy was to pay the tax and then take an appeal and sue for it. In the 

first place the paymeri.t was impossible to those men in such sums, 

and ruin awaited them in case the payment had been enforced. They came to Congress and a "bill was passed promptly for their relief by 

declaring that the tax should not be levied upon those notes, and 

they f~mnd that relief. . '!'heir case I wish to say was much more plainly within the act of 

Congress, or rather it was not so plainly outside the meaning of the 

act of Congress, as the case now before the Senate. To say to a man, 

"yon shall pay the sum which ruins you and breaks up your business, 

and then take your appeal," is no relief; the relief comes too late. 

The object of this appeal to Congress, which has met the approval of 

the committee of the other Honse as it has of the Committee on ~,inance 

of this body, is if yon mean to stay this palpable injustice you must 

do so now in the form of law. 

By what right do you levy this 10 per cent. tax T The Commissioner 

of Internal ~avenue has assessed it; he has put their property under 

execution. If the money is collected and paid upon the execution it 

will be ruinous to the property of these people. They are, as the Senator knows, and as the public well know, embarrassed. Their road 

I think to-day is in the hands of receivers, and to put this load upon 

them and compel the sale of their property to pay this tax, would be 

utterly ruinous to them. 

Therefore the Senate now wiil have to judge, and they may be 

informed much or little by the action and judgment of the two com- mittees, whether a note issued· in this form, a promissory note payable after date, with interest, fluctuating in value from day to day be- cause of the increase of that interest, issued as a wages certificate and 

receivable in payment of the tolls of the company, is the circulation 

taxable under the law of 1875. If the Senate shall not consider it circulation, if upon looking at the law and looking at the instrument 

you do not consider it the species of paper that was intended to be 

taxed, then you will grant the relief; but you certainly will not com- pel these people to wait until the relief would be a mockery, and when 

the forms of Jaw from which they may emerge with a legal judgment 

would leave them broken and damnified beyond remedy. 

Mr. MeDON ALD. I ask the Senator to read the section of the 

statutes under which the assessment was made. 

1\Ir. BAYARD. The act approved the 8th of February, 1875, is as follows: 

That every. person, firm, association, other than national-bank association, and 

every corporation, State bank, or State banking association, shall pay a tax of 10 

per cent. on the amount of their own notes nsed for circulation and paid out by them.-18 StatuWI at Large, part 3, page 311. 

Mr. CONKLING. Mr. President, we shall all, I think, agree that no kind of legislation is more vicious than that which proceeds from 

partiality or the activity of particular claimants. I know this case, 

and I shall speak of it only as it belongs to the class of which this 

instance is one. The notes which have been referred to were or were not issued and 

used as circulation. If they were, as much as any other notes they were liable to this tax. If they were not, they were not liable. 

The internal-revenue law, speaking to and of this claimant and all 

others alike, provides three modes of relief in the case of a contested 

tax, which are hard alike or equitable alike for all alleged sufferers. 

One is to pay the tax under protest and demand its restitution. Another is to refuse to pay it and allow distraint to be made, and bring an action of trespass against the officer who makes the distraint. 

The third is to present the equities which are supposed to bear in 

favor of the tax-payer to the executive branch of the Government, 

and if the Secretary of the Treasury, the Attorney-General, and a. third officer, as I rememb-er the statute, think that rebate or deduction should ~e made, an offer, which I believe is denominated in the 

statute a compromise, is accepted and the party acquitted. 

Subject to these provisions of the law, it has occurred several times 

in my own State that firms and corporations have done some such 

thing as seems to have been done here, although I am bound to say never so broadly as it seems to me was the mode adopted in this instance. All remember, for example, that the New York Central and 

Hudson River Railway Company issued to its stockholders certain 

certificates. It was affirmed, 011 the one hand, that that was a script 

dividend; on the other, it was stoutly denied. The officers of the 

Treasury, with somewhat more of energy than would appear in this 

case, insisted upon the tax. They made distraint of the rolling-stock 

of the company and sold a. great quantity of it. Thereupon the railway COIJlpany went into the courts of the State of New York as it had a right to do, as t.his company has a right to go into the courts of the 

State of Pennsylvania. I hear a Senator say that the company paid 

the tax ; and as that reaches my ears I beg to restate the case to which 

I refer. They did not pay it; they refused to pay it. They eaid it was a bald and naked trespass; the Government had no more right 

to the tax than it had to so much money belonging to them under 

any other guise. Thereupon the colle"ctor of internal revenue issued 

his warra.nt prescribed by the statute, and by that warrant the rolling-stock of the railway company was taken and in large quantities 

sold, so as to amount to the sum total of the tax; whereupon in the 

courts of New York they brought trespass against the collector, and 

I was about to say they tried their cause. They did not, because the 

United States by its district attorney appeared and moved to transfer 

the case into the national courts. It was transferred, and was tried 

in the district court, and came up to the Supreme Court, where a new trial was ordered, and they went back and subsequently, as I understand, some proposition that they made was accepted in the way that 

I indicated before, in which a proposition may be accepted under the 

statute. 

Mr. THURMAN. If the Senator from New York will yield to me for a few moments, I shall be obliged to him. 

Mr. CONKLING. Certainly I will. Mr. THURMAN. Mr. President, I have tried for a good many years 

in the Senate to do what I thought the national honor, the principles· of equity and good policy, if such a thing could be brought into this 

consideration, required the American Government to do. There have 

been very many things in the history of this world that no morality 

could justify; and among those things that no morality could justify 

is the extortion that the American Government and other govern- ments exact-ed of the Government of Japan-a government and a 

people who are attached to America, who are friendly to America, 

and whose commerce is in the waters of America. Among the exac- tions enforced by superior power there are few that are less defensible 

than that by which we extorted from the Japanese Government that 

contribution which the bill of the Committee on Foreign Relations 

proposes to return. We claim that this is a government of morality; 
2220 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY 28,. 

we claim to be a ~overnment of justice ; and if we are, how can we defend the retentwn of this money which no man who ever investigates the subject can say we were justified in taking T 

Mr. President, I have argued this question over and over again 

during the time I have sat in the Senate, and I never have found a majority of the Senate opposed to the view which I entertained. I am very glad that the Committee on Foreign Relations has again 

reported, as every committee has reported, in favor of doing an act 

that would shed renown and gloryupon theAmericanRepublic-the 

restitution of this rtwney to Japan. 

I am admonished that that is not the subject that is before the Senate; yet it is the subject that is before the Senate, because I understand that that bill is laid aside informally in order that some little 

bill about a tax on some company's checks or some individual's checks 

shall be remitted. Great God! what is that compared with the question of whether the great American Republic shall be an example to 

the world of justice We got this money; we got it when we were not entitled t o it; and when the question is between the great Ameri- can Republic and the rest of the world whether we shall set an ex- ample that shall be like a shining light in all the future history of 

the world, we see it put aside to consider whether Peter Jones shall 

be excused from a tax on his check or not. 

Now, I am in favor of the bill of my friend from Delaware; I will 

vote for it, and I hope the Senate will pass it right away and let 

Peter Jones and all t.hose companies on Lake Superior who wished 

to issue $6,000,000 in notes be exempted from taxation, for I do not 

think a man ought to be taxed because he drew a check for his debt. 

But, Mr. President, is it not time for us to consider the question of 

whether this great Republic shall set an example that the world has never yet set, an example thM ought to be set T When a great government has found that it has an advantage over a weak government, 

shall it wait and hold on to its ill-gotten gain, or shall it make restitution t Oh, Mr. President, never in the history of this world of ours will there have been such an example set in favor of morality, in 

favor of honesty, in favor of what I believe to be the true policy, as we shall set when we say to the Government of Japan, "We obtained 

from you what we ought not to have obtained, and we return it." 

It may be that there is no such thing as morality in government; 

it may be that the strongest may do what they can; but we in America 

have thought that with our system of go"Vernment there was a higher 

standard of morality; we have thought it behooved .the great Republic of the world to set an example of mora~ty and virtue as well as an example of strength. 

Sir, I wish to say this night, after having studied this question 

again and again for twelve years, that no such bright example in 

history in this world will have been exhibited as when we have re- stored to Japan the money we had no right to extort from her. 

Mr. CONKLING. · Mr. President, whenever the distinguished leader 

of the democratic party takes ground in favor of doing what is right, 

I feel bound to join in following, and therefore I shall vote with the 

honorable Senator to refund this money in the interest which be has 

referred to so eloquently and so impressively. In the mean time, 

that we may be able to refund to Japan the money which the Senator says we ought not to have taken, I want to devote a moment to 

retaining, if I can, in the Treasury that which may be found ·neces- sary in the rendition of this very payment. 

I bad referred to an instance of a tax imposed in which the cor- poration at whom it was leveled went into court and obtained a verdict of a jury giving them back something more than a half million dollars on the ground tliat the tax was erroneously imposed. 

Manifestly, if we follow the report of the Committee on Finance, in 

place of resorting to the courts, that company should have come here 

and asked that by legislation interrupting and arresting not only 

existing proceedings but overthrowing a judgment of the Internal 

Revenue Bureau we should make immediate restitution to it. 

I might put other cases which have fallen within my own observation in which this should have been done if it be right to do it in 

the instance now before the Senate. I think it was not right. It never occurred to me to advise any of the people who have been 

caught in instances of this sort that without going to the courts in 

either of the modes prescribed, without going to the three officers if 

they are three to whose discretion it is committed to accept compromises, they could come to Congress and by an act of legislation proceed to do such a thing. I said, and again I want to say, that this case, as I understand it, is not so clear as most of the other instances in behalf of the claimants. These notes, if I understand them, were notes 

issued and notes used as circulation--

Yr. BAYARD, and Mr. CAMERON of Pennsylvania. They were not. 

Mr. CONKLING. Before either Senator corrects me, I beg him to 

loan me tqe form of the note, and before I read it I will say that it is 

not only a note issued by a corporation as circulation and used as circulation, but it is a note on its face a legal tender as between the 

person who used it and the person who received it. 

Mr. COCKRELL. A legal-tender between the company and its 

employes 7 

Mr. CONKLING. If the Senator 'will be patient with me I will 

read the whole of it. I would not say what I have said unless I thou~ht I knew what I am talking about. I say before reading it 

that 1t is not the instance of issuing to operatives an I 0 U or a certificate of indebtedness; on the contrary it is the emission of a vol- ume of currency reaching nearly five million dollars, in denominations 

each note of $10, all alike, discarding all fractions, which on its faceis irreconcilably repugnant to the idea that it was ever issued in the 

precise amount of accounts due for wages to different operatives. What was the form of this note Y 

Philadelphia. and Reading Railroad Company. Wages certificate No. - . Phila- delphia., September 18, 1879. 

The Philadelphia. and Reading Railroad Company promises to pay to the bearer hereof the sum of $10 on the 21st day of February, 1 80, with interest from date 

without defalcation, for value received. ' 

This note is for wages due from the Philadelphia. and Reading Railroad Company and will be received, either before or at its maturity, for the amount due thereon. 

in payment for frei,ght and toll bills of the Philadelphia and Reading P..ailroad 

Company, for coal bills of the Philadelphia and Reading Coal and Iron Company or any other debts due to either of the said companies. • 

Is not that a legal tender by contract between these parties, to wHr the corporation that issues the notes and the bearer whoever thebearer may be, and in addition the Philadelphia and Reading Coal 

and Iron Company, a second corporation, whio8 did not emit the 

note and which in some business arrangement stood in such privity 

with the corporation that did that the issuing corporation undertook 

to speak for it also and to say that the note should operate as a le"'al 

tender not only against the corporation which did issue it but aga~st this other corporation as well t 

Now, Mt'. President, of this, four million eight hundred and odd 

thousand dollars in amount was issued, all in notes of 10 each alike,. 

and all on their face and by their agreement performing every one of 

the functions of money between the parties and also between them 

and a third party. What does the statute say T That any corporation which issues notes which are used-not bank notes; not notes in 

the similitude or likeness of bank notes; but promissory notes which are used as circulation, shall pay a certain tax. That is the statute. 

A corporation emits nearly five million dollars in round numbers, not 

of notes in variety, not of notes to pay to any person the amount dueto him, but notes all alike of 10 each, and says these notes are re- ceivable for all debts whatsoever by the Reading Railway Company 

and also by the Reading Coal and Iron Company, another corporation,. for freights, for tolls, for the carrying of coal, or for any other debt 

whatsoever. 

It is not my business to express an opinion, and although the form 

of my statement may indicate it I do not intend to venture an opinion, 

whether the courts would decide that these notes are or are not ~xempt 

from taxation. That I conceive to be beside the purpose, for I can hardly think that the Senate on ex parte testimony and ex parte- argument, or without any testimony, would take up and undertake 

judicially to pass upon a question of that sort. It is enough for me to know that here is a case presenting doubts so grave as this, an<l 

further to know that all other parties in any respect in like instance as far as I know, certainly those in my own State, have gone as they were compelled to go to the courts and litigated the question and had 

the court.s decide whether they were liable to taxation or not. If they 

say they are not liable certainly there is a reasonable presumption 

that the court will decide the law as it is. Is there anything elB& 

that can be said 7 It is irksome to pay this tax; it is a hardship. 

Certainly it is. It is one of the hard features of tl::e internal-revenue 

laws, not applicable to these parties more than to any other, but applicable to all parties alike; and now how can it be said that because a corporation or an individual has, in one House or the other House 

of Congress, somebodyw hose relations are such that they are able to get a hearing, which others might not be able to get, therefore this case shall be taken ex grego, picked out of the flock, and all other persons 

remitted to the courts and these persons by a single act of legislalation be exonerated '1 

I cannot see that any such thing ought to be done, and the more clear the matter is to this claimant, the more easy it is to go to the 

courts, the more easy it is to go to those officers who have the power 

to compromise if they want to pay a part; but I submit that unless 

other parties are to be treated in this way, it will hardly do, in pres- ence of the fact that the Internal Revenue Department is insisting 

upon these things continually and the calendars of the courts illustrating the controversies to which they gave rise, forusjustwith the 

strong hand to assume this case and undertake to dismiss this tax 

without any opportunity, even if this was the proper place to do it,. 

to investigate and understand its merits. 

I have one other remark to make. My honorable friend from Pennsylvania [Mr. CAMERON] says to me that the company did not trdat 

this note as circulation. Who knows anything about that Y I mean in the sense that any court must act upon it. 

Mr. CAMERON, of Pennsylvania. I know from statements of offi- cers of the company that the notes when they came in were canceled. 

Mr. CONKLING. My honorable friend discloses now that he means one thing and I mean another. Does the honorable Senator consider 

the notes of the Bank of England circulating notes T 

Mr. CAMERON, of Pennsylvania. I believe their habit is to destroy them. 

Mr. CONKLING. My honorable friend, acute as he always is, sees the point, and I do not want to say much about that. I say all the 

notes emitted by the greatest bank on this planet, whenever they once come ba{}k to the counter of that bank, never cross it again; 

but does anybody doubt that they are circulating notes f 
,, ·,- . ,, . . 

1881. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 2221 

llr. CAMERON, of Pennsylvania. That is a matter of protection. 

Mr. CONKLING. And then on the matter of protection; my hon-

-'Orable friend refem me to an equivalent fact. He says that when 

these certmcates came back and reached the till of this corporation 

.and were paid they were not put out again. Very likely. In the mean time what did the notes do, the ten-dollar notes consliitnting a total of nearly five million dollars payable to bearer, put into everybody's bands as a legal tender to the corporation for every conceivable debt f Is not that a circulating medium ! Is not that a symbol 

of value f Is not that of the very essence of the function of circulation T Why, 1\Ir. President, suppose it were provided, as it ha.a as to 

:Some of them, that whenever a legal-tender note of the United States 

after its long, sinuous pilgrimage through the pockets of the people, -comes back to the Treasury it should not be reissued Y 

Mr. SAULSBURY. I ask the Senator if these notes were at all different from a promissory note which I give to my creditor who chooses 

to use it; a promissory note payable at some future time, drawing 

interest Y Can it be distinguished at all from the promissory note of an individual, my own or any other individual's, payable at a future 

time, drawing interest, which may be used by the party to whom I 

.give it in the payment of some debt which he owes f I want to know 

what is the difference between the character of this note and the 

-character of an ordinary promissory note Y 

Mr. CONKLING. There is a radical difference. In the first place, 

the honorable Senator is not a corporation, and we are dealing with a statute which refers to corporations. The Senator is not a corporation; he is not two corporations. Here is an instance of a large 

-corporation carrying on a varied business with many persons. It 

issues a note, not like the Senator's note for a specific and exact sum -of money due, but it issues a great body of ten-do,llar notes; it makes 

them payable to bearer, and it says in the body of the note, as the 

Senator being an individual, a natural person, could not say with 

practical effect, that all these notes are receivable for every manner -of debt or obligation by the one corporation which issues them in all 

its agencies and extensions and also by another corporation engaged 

in a different and various business. Here is the secliion and I read the 

-operative words leaving out banks: 

Every corporation sball pay a like tax of 10 per cent. on the amount of notes used for circulation and paid out by them. . 

These are the operative words "used for circulation and paid out 

by them." Here are these notes-480,000 individual notes of 10 each. 

That; I submit to the honorable Senator from Delaware is not like his -one note to me for $55.53, if that is what he happens to owe me, or his check for that sum; 480,000 different notes all of the same amount, 

all payable to bearer, and all saying to all the bearers in Christen-

<lom that in their hands they are good in all the a~tivities and busi- ness and branches of two great corporations for any debt whatever. 

Is not that circulation 'I Is not that the act of circulating . · Mr. SAULSBURY. Wottld that be any more circulation than if a company of men associated together in the mercantile business 

should give their note to a party who takes to them his produce and 

sells it and they buy it payable in notes and receive the notes in payment for hardware, or any other article in their line sold by them 'I 

Such a note goes out, it passes from hand to hand. I ask if one of 

these notes was any more circulation than an order that is payable 

in a particular article which the party may be engaged in the sale of 7 

Mr. CONKLING. I will answer the Senator by another supposition, if he will allow me. Suppose a number of persons associated 

in the dry goods businesa; a familiar illustration would be A . T. 

Stewart & Co. Suppose they agree that they will issue checks of 

the denomination of $10, 480,000 of them in number, and put on those checks that they shall run for a certain time, and then say that 

until that time and after that time, for that is what this says, both 

before and after maturity, they should be receivable by that mercan- tile association for all and all manner of debts. Will the honorable 

Senator from Delaware tell me tl;lat $4,800,000 of these pieces of 

paper, put out to circulate, stated on their face so that they might 

-circulate not only till their maturity but afterwards, is not a circulating medium V 

Mr. SAULSBURY. I should think the purpose for which they were isBued had much to do with determining their character, whether 

they were a circulating medium or not. 

Mr. CONKLING. If this mercantile association were in debt as is stated here, and they issued them to pay their debts in the first 

instance? Take tha.t case. Mr. SAULSBURY. Describing them as certificates given for indebtedness of the company 'I 

Mr. CONKLING. Certainly. 

Mr. SAULSBURY. I do not see that they fall under the clear, ·obvious meanin~ of that statute. 

Mr. CONKLING. Will the Senator pardon me a moment 'I 

.Mr. SAULSBURY. The Senator will allow me. 

Mr. CONKLING. Bot just at that point I am seeking light as the 

Senator seems to be. I shall get it, though he may fail. If the Sen3tor writes in his check that it is given for an indebtedness, does he 

think that changes the natnre of it 7 If he puts in his promissory 

note not only that this~ for value received but that he has given it 

for an indebtedness, does he think that that changes the character of 

that piece of paperf • Mr. SAULSBURY. I think that has much to do with determining 

the character whether it was intended as a circulating medium or not. The object of that statute was to prevent any corporation from 

giving its obligations to be used as a circulating medium to pass from 

hand to hand in order to increase its own business; but I undemtand 

that these certificates of indebtedness were actnn.p.y delivered to per- sons to whom the corporation was indebted. They were to pay that 

which tQ.e money in their coffers would not allow them to pay. Therefore their object in issuing the certificates was not to escape from any 

taxation properly attaching to their operations, but it was simply to 

discharge their debts to their operatives, and in the hands of their 

operatives these certificates were good to buy coal, to pay for freight, 

to buy anything which the company had to sell. 

Mr. CONKLING. For all debtsT 

Mr. SAULSBURY. l!'or all debts to the company. 

Mr. CONKLING. Suppose these notes had recited that they were issued for borrowed money or issued to borrow money on, would 

that in the estimation of the Senator change their character 7 

:J.\.Ir. SAULSBURY . . I think it would, because that would be an operation by which the parties sought to obtain money for business 

purposes, in order that they might make money ; but the object of 

these notes. as I understand, was simply to discharge the obligation 

which they owed to their employes. If they were in the hands of 

the employes, it is true they would enable their employes to buy such 

coal or iron or other things a.a the company had to dispose of, or to pay 

freight, or pay any indebtedness due t.o the company. I think the 

object had much to do in determining what their real character was. .Mr. CONKLING. The honorable Senator has made as clear no doubt as it can be made the distinction which he thinks he sees. I 

cannot see it. The only shadow of distinction that I see makes the 

other way in consiuering the immunities and privileges to which 

commercial paper is entitled. A case in which it is received for 

money paid at the time places it upon a higher footing than it has in 

the instance of being received in payment of a debt. The Senator reverses that and he says that if I, an individual, put out my checks 

in order to borrow money upon them, with which money I am going 

to take and pay my debts, that would be one thing ; but if I say on their face that they are issued to pay my debts, then, although I do 

the same thing with them, that would be a different case. I submit, Mr. President, that distinction is without a difference. 

The question all the time is whether a corporation issued these 480,000 

pieces of paper to be used as circulation. If they did not int-end them 

for that purpose, I think the phraseology is nonsensical; it was absurd 

to make payable to bearer and to provide expressly that they might 

be used if they did not intend that they should be. How the fact was we know nothing except that the Senator from Pennsylvania 

says that they were treated as every note of the Bank of England is 

treated Without exception, namely, 'when they at last came back to 

the counter of the corporation that issued them, those notes went out no more, they were canceled. Unquestionably they never could have come back if they had not been used; they never could have found 

their way there if they had not been used. 

But as I said before, it seems to me that is not the question before 

the Senate. The question is whether in the instance of existing proceedings CongresR will interfere and set aside the pending adjudication of. the Department, at least of the Internal Revenue Bureau; 

and I have heard-perhaps I ought not to say it in this debate-that 

the head of the Internal Revenue Bnreau is not the only officer of 

the Government who has adjudicated this; I am told that this very 

question has been before the Law Department of the Government, 

and yet in spite of what is said, not referring it to the courts, not 

sending it where all other claimants are obliged to go, it is proposed 

that we take this up as an arbitrary act, because we have the power, 

and dismiss the whole thing. 

Mr. CAMERON, of Pennsylvania. Will the Senator from New York 

allow me to say a word 

1\fr. CONKLING. Certainly. 

Mr. CA~IERON, of Pennsylvania. My attention was called to this 

claim of the Government against the Reading Railroad Company some time since. I called, with the attorney of the Reading Railroad 

Company, upon the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to ask the 

officials to take it into court. They declined to settle the matter in 

that way. They required the company first to pay the money assessed as a tax. That was the statement of the Department ; first the com- pany must pay the money, and then bring suit to recover it. The 

Senator knows more about the law than I do, of course; but I know 

something about the merits of this case. The Reading Railroad Company, as every Senator probably knows, met with great pecuniary 

embarrassment. It. had ten or twelve thousand employes, with no money in its coffers to pay them. 'l'o enable them to get their daily 

pay, it took this mode of relieving these people from distress and 

lrom starvation. Having done that, it probably admits a technical 

violation of the law, and comes to Congress and asks for relief, having relieved these people. That is the whole case ·n a nutshell. It was a good act on the part of the Reading Railraad Company, and 

deserves recognition from Congress, in my judgment. 

:J.\.Ir. CONKLING. Mr. President, I agree witb every word that the 

honorable Senator from Pennsylvania has said. He has put this case in the most persuasive way and has put it in a way that I suppose, 

if addressed as the statute permits it to be to the officers of the Government whose business iii is to pass upon this, the Attorney-General, 

1 

• 
r 

• 

2222 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 28,. 

the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Commissioner of the Internal 

Revenue, it can hardly be possible on a state of facts like that that 

the Government as thus represented would stand upon a technical 

point. But when they come and ask us to adjudge that as matter of 

Jaw, as has been argued here, this tax is not due and that we are going so to decide, that is a horse of a very different color. It is a decision that would fly in the face of other decisions made by courts and 

made by the Internal Revenue Department, and therefore I say that 

this bill in this form ought not to be adopted. . My honorable friend told us that he went, very properly and very 

kindly, with the representatives of this corporation and presented the 

question to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, and although the 

Senator himself took the trouble to go there and although we know 

that his going secured the attention and the friendly attention of this 

officer, what did he say Y That he, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, standing upon the law and sworn to execute it, could do nothing except to insist upon this tax, thereby affirming in the most sol- emn manner his judgment that the l~~tw covered the tax. 

Now, change the argument. Present to the officers of the Government the meritorious and praiseworthy act to which the honorable 

Senator has referred; dismiss technicalities, and say "Conceding that· technically the tax is due, we ask to adjust this upon fair principles, 

right between man and man, right on the part of officials who have a heart to feel and a head to think," and then if the officials refnso to 

do that and you come here with a bill not trampling the law under 

foot but proposing to accept a fair compromise, l will say to the honorable Senator in advance, without meaning to make any technical 

pledge, that he will find me by his side for doing a fair and liberal 

thing; bnt that is no reason why we should undertake to adjudge in 

this case that on facts like these the Government is technically wrong 

and that no tax is due. 

Mr. BALDWIN. Will the Senator having this bill in charge kindly 

consent to lay it aside temporarily for a moment that the Senate may 

give present consideration to the bill that will take not more than a minutef 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan asks 

consent of the Senate to lay this bill aside temporarily, in order to take 

up another indicated by him. 

Mr. BALDWIN. It is a bill which will not take more than a minute. This is the first time during the session, I believe, that I 

have asked snch a favor. 

Mr. BAYARD. The joint resolution for the relief of the Reading 

Railroad Company is before the Senate . The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is before the Senate, and the 

Senator from Michigan asks that it be temporarily laid aside. 

Mr. BAYARD. I hope not. 

Mr. BALDWIN. The bill I ask to take up will excite no discussion. 

The PRESIDING' OFFICER. Is th~re objection 7 

Mr. BAYARD. Yes, sir, this resolution must go on. The PRE8IDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware.objects 

to- the request of the Senator from Michigan. 

Mr. KERNAN. I move that the Senate do now adjourn. 

Mr. HARRIS. Had we not better take a recess Y 

Mr. KERNAN. Allow me to make a statement f We have accepted 

the invitation of the House of Representatives to attend the services 

ordered this evening in commemoration of Hou. FERNANDO WOOD, 

and I presume we cannot properly sit here while they are going on. That is the reason why I must insist on the motion. If it were not 

for that I would vield for a recess. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from New York 

insist on his motion to adjourn 7 • 

Mr. KERNAN. I yield for a moment to the Senator from Connecticut. 

Mr. EATON. I ask that the bill which was under consideration 

when I gave way temporarily to the Senator from Delaware betaken 

up so that it may be the order of the day. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut baa a right to call it up it having been informally laid aside subject to his 

call. The titlt> of the bill will be reported. 

The CHIEF CLERK. "A bill (S. No. 20~) in relation to the Japanese indemnity fund." 

Mr. KERNAN. I renew my motion that the Senate adjourn. 

The motion was agreed to; and (at six o'clock and eight minutes 

p.m.) the Senate adjourned. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 

MONDAY, February 28, 1881. 

The House met at eleven o'clock a.m. Prayer by Rev. DA vm WILLS, 

chaplain United &f;ates Army. 

The Journal of Saturday was read and approved. 

MESSAGE PROM THE SENATE. 

A message from the Senate, by Mr. BURCH, its Secretary, announced 

the passage of the bil~ (H. R. No. 7104) making appropriations for the con~trnct1on, completion, repair~ and preservation of certain works on ~1vers and harbors, and for other purposee, with amendments, in 

which concurrence was requested. 

It further announced the passage of the following bill and joint resolution, without amendment: 

A bill (H. R. No. 6717) for allowance of certain claims reported by 

the accounting officers of the Treasury Department; ancl 

Joint resolution (H. R.No. 401) in relation to the barge W. J. Spicer~ 

DECADE~CE OF AMERICAN COMMERCE. 

Mr. REAGAN. I rise to a privileged question. On Saturday the 

gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. RUSSELL,] by unanimous con- sent, presented the report of the sub-committee of the Committee on Commerce, authorized under House resolution of J nne 4, 1879, to inquire into the causes of the decadence of the merchant marine; which was ordered to be printed and recommitted. The Journal makes no statement of the fact that the minority of the committee had leave 

to print with the majority report the views of the minority. I d() 

not know whether it is necessary that fact should appear upon the 

Journal; but I ask the question Y 

The SPEAKER. The RECORD and Journal are exactly in accord. 

There seems to have been no privilege given to the minority to present their views. The Chair will now ask, by unanimous consentt 

that the views of the minority may be allowed to be presented and 

printed in connection with the report of the committee. 

There was po objection, and it was ordered accordingly. 

SUNDRY CIVIL APPROPRIATION BILL. 

The SPEAKER. The previous question prevailing, the yeas and 

nays have been ordered on an amendment repGI'ted from the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, which the Clerk will 

read. 

The Clerk read as follows : 

Strike out the following proviso in relation to the Columbian Institution forth& 

Deaf and Dumb: 

"Pro'Vided, Hereafter one-half of the expenses of this institution shall be paid out of the revenues of the District of Uolnmbia." 

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will call the roll. 

The Clerk proceeded to call the roll. 

Mr. ATKINS. Mr. Speaker, I do not think the House understands 

the effect of t.hat provision. 

The SPEAKER. The question is on concurring in the recommendation of the Committee of the Whole Honi!e on the state of the Union, 

which is to strike out the proviso just read. 

Mr. HUNTON. If there is an explanation desired of the effect of 

this proviso I will make it for the gtmtleman. 

Mr. ATKINS. I do not suppose the gentleman wants us to vote in 

the dark upon it. 

Mr. HUNTON. By no means. . Mr. ATKINS. Unless the effect of that amendment is clearly ex- plained to the House I shall feel it my duty to decline to vote. 

Mr. ROBESON. Mr. Speaker, those who vote "ay" vote to strike 

out the proviso; those who vote "no," to retain it. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair has already so stated. 

Mr. STEPHENS. Let the whole text be read as it will stand i1 

that paragraph is stricken out. 

The amendment was again reported. 

The question was taken; and there were-ayes 136, noes 106, noi 

voting 48; as follows: 

YEAS-136. 

Aiken, Deering, Kenna, Ryon, .John W • .Aldrich, N. W. Dick, Ketcham, Sapp, .Aldrich, William Dunnell, King, Sawyer, Bailey, Dwight, Lapham, Sco""ille, Ballou, Ellis, Lindsey, Shelley, Barber, Errett, Mann in~ Sherwin, 

Batfue, Ferdon, Martin, nj. F. Singleton, .T. W. 

Be ord, Fisher, Martin, Edward L. Slemons, 

Belt.zhoover, Forsythe, Mason, Smith, A. Herr Bicknell, ~e, McCook, Smith, William B. 

Bisbee, G son, McGowan, Speer, Blake, Gillette, McKinley, Stalin, 

Bowman, Goode, McLane, Stephens, Boyd, Hammond, .John Miles, Stone, 

Bngham, Harmer, Miller, Talbott, 

Browne, Harris, Benj. W. Money, Taylor, Ezra B. 

Buckner, Harris, John T. Monroe, Thomas, 

Butterworth, Hawk, Neal. Thompson, W. G~ 

Calkins, Hawley, Newberry, Townsend, .Amos 

Camp, Hayes, Norcross, Tucker, 

Carpenter, Hazelton, O'Neill, Updegra~ J. T. 

Caswell, Heilman, O'Reilly, Urner, 

Chalmers, Henkle, Orth, Valentine, 

Uhittenden, Hiscock, Osmer, VanAernam, Clardy, Horr, Overton, Voorhis, 

Conger. Hubbell, Pacheco, Ward, 

Cowgill, Humphrey, Page, Washburn, 

Crapo, Hunton, Price, "Wilber, 

Crowley, .Johnston, Ray, Willits, 

Daggett, Jones, Reed, Wise, 

Davidson, .T orgensen, Rice, Wood, 

Davis, George R. Joyce, Robertson, Yocum, 

Davis, Horace Keifer, Robeson, Young, Casey DeLa.Matyr, Kelley, Robinson, Young, Thomas lo ~ 

NAYS-106. 

Acklen, Bland, Burrows, Clements, 

.Anderson, Blount, Cabell, Cl~er, Armfield, :Bouck, Caldwell, Cob, 

Atherton, :Bragg, Cannon, Coffroth, 

Atkins, :Brewer, Carlisle, Colerick. 

Berrv, Brig~, Clark, .A.lvah A. Converse. 

Blackburn, Brig t, Clark, .John B. Cook, 

. 

I