i 

j 

1887. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 1333 

PETITIONS, ETC. 

The following petitions an<J_ papers were laid on the Clerk's desk, 

under the rule, and referred as follows: 

By :Mr. BINGHAM: Petition of Florian Lischewsky, late private of 

Company C, Twenty-ninth Regiment New York Volunteers, for restoration to pension-rolls-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

Also, resolution of the Philadelphia Drug Exchange, asking for the 

passage of House billl621-to the Committee on Commerce. 

By Mr. BLANCHARD: Papers relating to the claim of Frederic 

Williams, of Natchitoches, La.-to the Committee on Private Land 

Claims. · 

By Mr. BLOUNT: Papers relating to the claim of James Stevens, of 

Gordon Coun_ty; and of Mrs. Emily Speight, of Baldwin County, Georgia-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. BOYLE: Memorial of Letter-Carriers' National Association 

and of the Knights of Labor, in favor of a law making eight hours a day's labor for letter-carriers-to the Committee on Labor. 

By Mr. BRUMM: Petition of George W. Kenedy and 33 others, citi- zens of Pottsville, Pa., for repeal of internal taxes-to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. BYNUM: Petition of Frank Emerich and others, of Marion 

County, Indiana, for reduction of postage on seeds, &c.-to the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads. 

By Mr. CLEMENTS: Papers relating to the claim ofLucretiaFrealix, of Walker County, Georgia-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. CRAIN: Petition to accompanying House bill, granting a pension to William E. Parker-to the Commi,ttee on Invalid Pensions. 

By .M:r. CUTCHEON: Petition of Post No. 271 and of Post No. 285, 

Grand. Army of the Republic, of Michigan, in favor of the anti-polygamy bill-to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

By Mr. DINGLEY: Petition of Grover Post, No.126, Grand Army of 

the Republic, of Fryeburg, Me., for the passage of anti-Mormon bill-to 

the same committee. 

By 1\fr. DORSEY: Petition of officers of the Independent Order of 

Good Templars, of Nebraska, in reference to the liquor traffic in the 

District of Columbia-to the Committee on the District of Columbia. 

By Mr. ERMENTROUT: Memorial of enlisted men of the Signal 

Corps, asking for the passage of House bill 5190-to the Committee on Military Affairs. 

Also, memorial of S. S. Stevens and others, citizens of the eighth 

district of Pennsylvania, for the repeal of internal-revenue taxes-to 

the Committee on Ways and Means; 

By Mr. HARMER: Resolution of the Philadelphia Drug Exchange, 

in favor of the bill (H. R.1621), to regulate commercial sales of goods by 

samples-to the Committee on Commerce. 

By Mr. HEARD: Petition of citizens of Boone County, Missouri in 

favor of the Miller bill to extirpate cattle diseases-«> the Committee 

ou Agriculture. 

By Mr. HERMANN: Petition of citizens of Oregon for land-grant 

forfeitures-to the Committee on the Public Lands. 

By Mr. KLEINER: Petition of cattle-growers ofN ew Harmony, Ind., 

in favor of the Miller bill-to the Committee on Agriculture. 

By Mr. LINDSLEY: Petition of General Grant Post, No. 209, of Benjamin Marvin Post, No. 209, and of Pratt Post, No. 127, Grand Army 

of the Republic, in favor of the Edmunds-Tucker bill-to the Committee on the Judiciary. . By Mr. LORE: Petition of James A. Hopkins and 41 others, citizens 

of Delaware, for the repayment of expenses entailed by. the draft of 

1865-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. LYMAN: Resolution of the Iowa State Horticultural Society, 

in favor of the passage of the Hatch experiment-station bill-to the 

Committee on Agriculture. 

ByMr. MORROW: PetitionofGeorgeG. Meade Post, No. 48, Grand 

Army of the Republic, of San Francisco, Cal., for the passage of the 

anti-polygamy bill-to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

By Mr. O'FERRALL: Petition of Jonathan Carpenter, of Rappahannock County, Virginia, praying that his war claim be referred to 

the Court of Claims-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By. Mr. OSBORNE: Petition of enlisted men of the Sjgnal Corps, 

favormg the passage of House bill 5199-to the Committee on Military 

Affairs. 

Also, petition of owners, masters, and seamen of American sailina 

vessels, favoring the passage of the Dingley pilot bill-to the Selecl 

Committee on American Ship-building and Ship-owning Interests. 

By Mr. PIDCOCK: Petition of citizens of Bound Brook, N.J. for 

the repeal of internal taxes-to the Committee on Ways and Mean's. 

By Mr. PIND.A.R: Concurrent resolution of the Legislature of New 

York, in favor of the -pleuro-pneumonia bill-to the Committee on Agriculture. 

By Mr. RIGGS: Letter of S. D. Nokes, of Mound Station Ill. in 

favor of House bill9733-to the Committee on Ways and Me~. ' 

By Mr. R-r:AN: Petition. ofNeosha Falls Post, No. 73, Grand Aimy 

of the Republic, of Kansas, m favor of the Edmunds-Tucker bill-to the 

Committee on the Judiciary. 

asking that eight hours shall constitute a day's work-to the Committee on Labor. 

Also, petition of enlisted men of the Signal Corps, _United States 

Army, for transfer of said corps to the new Executive Department con" 

templated in House bill 5190-to the Committee on Military Affairs. 

By Mr. STAHLNECKER: Petition of enlisted men of the Signal 

Corps of the United States Army, favoring House bill5190-tothe same 

committee. 

Also, petition of the Legislature of New York, favoring the bill (H. R. 

10359), to extirpate pleuro-pneumonia among cattle-to the Committee 

on Agriculture. 

Also, petition of Letter-Carriers' National Association, for relief-to 

the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads.: 

Al&o, petition of the Western Virginia leaf-tobacco trade, in favor of 

the repeal of the tax on tobacco-to the Committee on Ways and 

Means. 

By Mr. STEELE: Petition of 75citizens of Howard County, Indiana, 

in favor of the Miller bill to prevent contagious diseases among cattle-to 

the Committee on Agriculture. _ Also, petition of Lieut. E. D. Pierce, late Company H, Fifth Indiana 

Volunteers, Mexican war, and numerous citizens of Indiana and Wash" 

ington Territory, asking arrears of pension for Lieutenant Pierce, and 

giving reasons therefor-to the Committee on Pensions. 

By Mr. THROCKMORTON: Petition of citizens of Wise County, 

Texas, praying for an appropriation to buy seeds for the drought sufferers of that State-to the Committee on Appropriations. 

By Mr. WHEELER: Papers relating to the claim of Francis M. 

Wedgeworth; of Sophronia Hughes, administrator of A. C. Hughes; of 

Thomas M. Barksdale; of David F. Bates; of Sarah J. Graham; of Anderson A. Clem; of James M. Newby; and of William R. Hanserd, of 

Limestone, Ala.-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. WILSON: Papers in the claim of William F. Turner, ad" 

ministrator of Jacob Custer; of John W. Ott; of Mrs. Elizabeth B. 

Welsh; of John J. Lock, administrator of Uriah Rutherford, deceased; 

of DavidA. Wazeley~ ot:William C. Ramey; of Samuel Ruckle, of Jefferson County; and of John D. Conard, of Loudoun County, Virginiato the same committee. 

The following petitions, praying for the enactment of a bill providing temporary aid for common schools, to be disbursed on the basis of 

illiteracy, were severally referred to the Committee on Education: 

By 1\Ir. GILFILLIAN: Of citizens of Minneapolis, Minn. 

By Mr. D. B. HENDERSON: Of 115 citizens of Allison, and of 66 

citizens of Quasqueton, Iowa. 

By Mr. HERMANN: Of 165 citizens of Yam Hill County, Oregon. 

By Mr. HOLMES: Of 143 citizens of Dakota City and Eldora, and 

of 90 citizens of Clarion, Iowa. 

By Mr. OSBORNE: Of 193 citizens of Pennsvlvania. 

By Mr. OWEN: Petition of the Women's ~Christian Temperance 

Union of Indiana. 

By Mr. PLUMB: Or 315 citizens of Joliet, ill. 

By Mr. PRICE: Of 389 citizens of the eighth district of Wisconsin. 

By :Mr. RIGGS: Of 65 citizens of Perry and Pittsfield, ill. 

By Mr. SCOTT: Of the Methodist, Baptist, and Congregational 

churches, and of 192 citizens of Corry, Pa. 

By Mr. SWINBURNE: Of the Presbyterian, l'llethodist, and Baptist 

Churches of West Troy, N.Y. . By Mr. TARSNEY (by request): Petition of t.he Women's Christian 

Temperance Union of Michigan. 

By Mr. E. B. TAYLOR: Of 148 citizens of Berea, Ohio. 

SENATE. 

FRIDAY, February 4, 1887. 

Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. J. G. BUTLER, D. D. 

The Journal of yesterday's proceedings was read-and approved. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate the followinoo 

communication from the Secretary of the Treasury; which was read.t" 

TREASURY DEPA.RTME...'fl', February 3,1887. 

Sm: I have the honor to transmit herewith, for the consideration of CongreS: copy of letter of the Secretary of the Interior of the 2d instant submitting a~ ~stimate of a~propr~ation for pay of special agents to make allotments of lands m severalty, mcluding actual and necessary traveling and other expenses of 

such agents, $25,000. 

Respectfully yours, D. MANNING, Secretary. 

The PRESIDENT j»"O tem,pore United States Senate. 

Mr. HALE. I should like to have the letter from the Secretary of 

the Interior accompanying that communication read. . 

By Mr. SHA 'V: Petition of Letter-Carriers' National Association, The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It will be read. 
-------------------,-----------~-=----------------------,--....,---------- --------, 

133J CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE: FEBRUARY 4, 

The Chief Clerk. read as follows: DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, 

Washington, Februa1y 2,1887. 

_ Sm: In accordance with the provisions contained in the second section of the act of July 7, 1384. (23 Stat., 254), I have the honor to transmit herewith for pre- sentation to Congress copy of a letter of 1st instant from. the Commissioner of 

Indian Affairs, inclosing an item of appropriation in the sum of 525,000 to pro~ 

vide for the salaries and necessary expenses of special agents to make allo~ 

ments in severalty, including actual and necessary traveling expenses of such 

agents. I have the honor to be, very respectfully, 

The lion. SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY. 

H. L. MULDROW, 

Acti:ng Secretary. 

Mr. HALE. I should like to have the estimate, not read, but :printed 

in the RECORD. It is a very important matter. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Nothing further accompanies the 

communication from the Secretary of the Treasury except a short letter 

of the CQmmissioner of Indian A.ffuirs. That will be printed in the 

RECORD; and all the papers will be referred to the Committee on Ap~ 

propriations and printed in document form. 

The letter of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs is as follows: 

DEPARTIIENT OF THE L.'ITERIOR, OFFICE OF !:!'>""DIAN AFFAIRS, 

Washington, Februar;v 1, 1887. 

Sm: The general allotment bill (S. 54), now before the President for his sign~ 

ture, provides that the allotments of lands in severalty therein authorized shall 

be made by special agents appointed by the President for that purpose, but 

makes no provision for the payment of the salary and expenses of such special 

agents. 

I there.fore have the honor to recommend that the attention of Congress be 

called to the matter, through the proper channels, with the request that an item 

(draught of which is herewith submitted} be inserted in the Indian appropriation bill appropriating the sum of $25,000 for that purpose. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

'l'he SECRETARY OF THE lli'TERIOR. 

J. D. C. ATKINS, Commissioner. 

Item of appropriation: For pay of special agents to make allotments of lands in severalty, including 

actual and necessary traveling and other expenses of such agents, $25,000. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate a communi~ 

tion from the Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting, in reply to a resolution of January 11, 18R7, an estimate of contingent expenses of 

the Treasury Department; which, with the accompanying papers, was 1·eferred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be 

printed. 

He also ]aid before the Senate a communication from the Secretary 

of the Treasury, transmitting a. letter from the Secretary of the Interior, 

submitting an estimate of $1,500 appropriation for removing the Jica~ 

rilla~Apache Indians in New Mexico to a more suitable location; which, 

with the accompanying papers, was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed . He also laid before the Senate a. communication from the Secretary of 

the Treasury, transmitting a letter from the Secretary of tbe Interior, 

submitting an estimate of appropriation for the erection of shops, &c., 

at the Indian Industrial School at Genoa, Nebr.; which, with the ac~ 

companying papers, was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, 

and ordered to be printed. 

PETITIONS AND MEl\IORIALS. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore presented a letter from the secretary 

of the Territory of Dakota, transmitting a resolution of the Legisl~ 

tive Assembly of Dakota, remonstrating against the removal of Fort 

Abraham Lincoln; which were referred to the Committee on Military 

Affairs, and ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: 

TERRITORY OF DAKOTA, SECREFARY1S OFFICE, 

Bistnarck, D. T., January 31,1887. 

Sm: In compliance with the instructions contained in the inclosed joint res~ 

olution of the Legislative Assembly of the Territory of Dakota, I have the 

honor to transmit herewith a copy of house bill No. 50. I am, your obedient servant, 

Hon. JOHN SHERMAN, 

President of the Senate, Washington, D. C. 

111. L. McCORMACK, 

Secretary of Dakota. 

Whereas it is reported that the early abandonment of Fort Abraham Lincoln, 

in this Territory, is contemplated by the United States Government: Therefore, 

Be it TesoLved by the Legislative Assembly of the Territory of Dakota, That we earn~ 

estly protest against any such cont-emplated action, and do respectfnlly petition 

that said fort be maintained and further improved for the following reasons: Its location at the crossing of the Northern Pacific Railroad over the Missouri 

River makes it pre-eminently suited for a distributing post for arms and su~ 

plies for other posts along the Missouri River and iil the country farther west. Its facilities are the very best for the massing of troops, and for their prompt dispatch in case of Indian outbreak, riots, or emergency of any kind to exposed points in every direction. · Its abandonment would necessitate the removal of the bodies of the dead in its 

cemetery to some other point, many of whom have but recently been brought 

there from other posts and interred. Its adequate maintenance is a. necessity to the settlers in the adjacent country, 

who are unprotected, except by the near presence of United States troops, from 

the depredations of the roving bands of Indians who are continually wandering over the country, or from the horrors of an outbreak of the thousands now massed on the adjoining Sioux reservation, whose atrocities and massacres are still fresh in the memories of tbe people, while its abandonment would not only greatly alarm and jeopardize the present scattered settlers and small commun~ 

ities, but would also seriously retard further settlement and development of that section of the country. 

Resolved That we urge upon our Delegate in Congress, Hon. 0. S. GIFFORD, 

to use eve~y effort to secure the object above set forth. 

.Resolved That duly certified copies of the foregoing preamble and resolutions 

be forwarded to Hon. 0. S. GIFFORD, the President of the Senate, and the 

Speaker of the House of Representatives, at Washington, to be laid before both Houses of Congress, and ordered printed and referred to appropriate commi~ 

tees. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 

TERRITORY OF DAKOTA, SECRETARY'S OFFICE. 

I 1\I. L. 1\IcCormack, secretary of the Territory of Dakota, do hereby certify th~t I have carefully compared the ·foregoing copy of ho.use bill No. 50, being a joint resolution against the removal of Fort Abr!!-~am Lmcoln, ap~rove!l by the governor January 29, 18S7, with the enrolled ongmal now on file m this office, 

and that the same is a correct transcript therefrom, and of the whole thereof. In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the great seal 

of the Territory of Dakota, at Bismarck, this 31st day of January, 1887. [SEAL.] 1\I. L. 1\IcCORMACK, 

Secretary of Dakota Territory. 

Mr. EUSTIS presented the petition of J. L. Lyons & Co. and other 

citizens of New Orleans, La., praying for the repeal ofthe internal- revenue laws; which was referred to the Committee on Finance. 

Mr. ALLISON. I present a petition signed by all the national banks 

of the city of Omaha, Nebr., suggesting certain amendments to the bill 

(H. R. 9110) in relation to national banks. The petition suggests 

that Chicago be added to the list of cities where reserve banks can deposit money as now in the city of New York. I also present a similar petition signed by all the national banks of Kansas City, Mo., suggesting that Saint Louis also be added to the list. I move the refer- ence of these petitions to the Committee on Finance. 

The motion was agreed to. 

Mr. CAJI!ffiRON presented a. petition of druggists of Reading, Pa., 

and a petition of druggists of Scm,nton, Pa., praying for a reduction ot 

internal-revenue taxes; which were referred to the Committee on Fi- nance. :Mr. UORRILL presented the memorial of G. F. Dunlop, M. I. Adler, Robert E. Frey, and a large number of other citizens of Georgetown, D. C., remonstrating aga.inst the proposed franchise to allow the 

Washington Caole Railroad Company to lay its tracks through the 

streets of Georgetown and Washington; which' was referred to the 

Committee on the District of Columbia. 

Mr. RIDDLEBERGER presented a petition of citizens of Virginia, 

praying for the passage of what is known as the Colquitt bill to regulate the granting of liquor licenses in the District of Columbia; which was referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia. 

Mr. BUTLER presented resolutionS adopted by the Board of Health 

of Charleston, S. C., favoring legislation looking to the erection· of a hospital near Key West for the purpose of assisting the proper authorities in keeping out yellow fever from the United ·States; which were referred to the Committee on Epidemic Diseases. 

He also presented the petition of Joseph Berry, of Aiken County, 

South Carolina, praying to be allowed a pension; which was referred to 

the Committee on Pensions. 

Mr. BLAIR presented the petition of W. T. Dale and other citizens 

of Spring Hill, Tenn., praying for the passage of a bill in relation to 

the observance of the Sabbath; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor. 

Mr. HAWLEY presented resolutions adopted by the Board of Trade 

of Norwich, Conn., favoring an appropriation for the improvement of 

the Thames River;· which were referred to the Committee on Commerce. 

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES. 

· Mr. McMJLLAN, from the Committee on Commerce, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 6538) to define the boundaries of the collection 

districts of Miami and Sandusky, in the State of Ohio, reported it without amendment. 

Mr. MANDERSON, from theCommitteeon Military Affairs, to whom was referred the bill (S. 3013) for the relief of First Lieut. James Regan, 

reported it without amendment, and submitted a report thereon. 

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

R. 7819) to establish the order of promotion in the Medical Depa.rtment 

of the Army, reported it without amendment, and submitted a report 

thereon. 

He also, from the Committee on Military Affairs, to whom was re~ 

ferred the bill (H. R. 10048) to authorize the Fremont, Elkhorn and 

Missouri Valley Railroad to build its road across the Fort Meade Mili~ 

tary Reservation, reported it without amendment and submitted a report 

thereon. 

:Mr. BLAIR, from the Committee on Pensions, to whom was referred 

the bill (S. 3146) granting a. pension to John W. Reynolds, reported it 

without amendment, and submitted a report thereon. 

Ur. WILSON, of Iowa, from the Committee on Pos~Offices and Pos~ 

Roads, to whom was referred an amendment intended to be proposed to 

the pos~office appropriation bill, reported it favorably, and moved its 

reference to the Committee on Appropriations; which was agreed to. 

BILLS INTRODUCED. 

Mr. HALE introduced a. _bill (S. 3265) to increase the pension of 

Lucy Moore; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the 

Committee on Pensions. 

I 
1887. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 1335 

Mr. BUTLER introduced a bill (S. 3266) for the relief of Lacon R. 

Tillman; which was read twice by it8 title, and, with the accompanying papers, referred to the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads. 

l\lr . .1\ITLLER introduced a bill (S. 3267) to increase the appropriation for the erection of a public building at Troy, N. Y.; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Public Build .. ings and Grounds. 

SCHOOL BUILDINGS IN THE DISTRICT. 

:Mr. VAN WYCK. I offer the following resolution: 

ResoE'I:ed, That the Committee on Appropriations be directed to make suitable appropriations for the rent or construction of buildings for school purposes suf- ficient to accommodate all children of school age in the District of Columbia.. 

In connection with the resolution I desire, in order to show the importance of the subject and the oversight or neglect which has followed 

the want of buildings for school-houses, to have read as part of my remarks a preamble and resolutions adopted at a meeting of citizens of 

this city. · 

The PRESIDENT pro tempo·re. The Senator from Nebraska asks that 

the preamble and resolutions he sends to the desk be read. If there be no objection they will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

Preamble and resolutions unanimously adopted at a public meeting of citizens and tax-payers of East Washington, D. C., held December 29, 1886. 

Whereas Congress has by law imposed a penalty of $2.0 on every person or guardian in the District of Columbia who fails to send each child of school age to school twelve weeks each year; and Whereas the official record for 1886 shows that there are 5,000 more school children enrolled than there are school seat.s in the District; and . Whereas Congress" by its laws has deprived the people of the District of the legal right or power to build a school-house with their own taxes even, except 

by its permission ; and · Whereas the record shows that,pecause of the want of school buildings, over 12,000,--considerably more than one-third of the children enrolled-are com- pelled to attend half-day schools; and · Whereas in t.he third school division, known as East Washington, out of a total of 83 schools, 35 are half-day schools, embracing 1,750scholars, 786 of whom are in the third and fourth grades, and who are compelled to occupy an old stable, a loft. over a. tin and paint shop, an old engine-house, and sim.ilar unfit places; and 

Whereas the eight-room building now being erected will not provide room for half of these children; and · Whereas the children of the poor seldom attend school beyond the fourth or ti.ft.h grade, and therefore receive little or no benefit from the high grades or the high school; and 

Whereas it is an axiom that" ignorance is the mother of crime and vice," and it has been publicly charged by a high officer of the United States Government that in consequence of this condition of our educational affairs there is more crime in proportion to the population in the District of Columbia than in the city of New York; and Whereas it has been publicly slated by a Senator that this bad condition of our school affairs is the fault of the people of the District, because they had not made their wants known to Congress, notwithstanding their repeated memorials and petili!lns, backed by. m:gent appeals from the ~ecretaries of the :rreasury a?Jd the In tenor, the CommlSSioner of the Land Office, and by Washmgton, Jefferson; and Monroe from 1804 to the present day; and notwithstanding the fact also that the official record of Congress shows that, while it has given to the States over $28,000,000 in money, over 80,000,000 acres of the public lands for school purposes, and 155,000,000 acres for railroads, it haS never given to the District of Columbia a dollar of money or a foot of land for such purpose, but, on the con- trary, received ass free gift from the citizens of the District three-fourths of all the land occupied by the city of Washington; and notwithstanding also that more than one-third of the pupils are the children of colored people, a large por- tion of whom were brought here by exigencies of the war as "freedmen" and left on our hands1 and for whom we are required by a law of Congress to expend as much per capita as fo1· the white children for school purposes, very few of whom are able to or do contributes. cent to the Districtrevenuesor school fund, besides whom we are required to provide school facilities for a large number of non-residents in the employ of the United States Government, who also con- tribute nothing to the school fund: Therefore it is hereby resolved by the citizens and tax-payers of East Wash- ington, in public meeting assembled, as follows: 1. Resolved, That we here and now call the attention of Congress to the terri- ble condition and needs of the public schools of the District, as set forth in the report of the board of school trustees and of the superintendents of the schools; and ask for the publication of this preamble and resolutions in the CoNGRE'>- SIONA.L RECORD, to the end that all Members and Senators may be informed as to the facts in the case. 

2. Resolved, That for the reasons above set forth it would, in our opinion, be a great wrong to expend any more of our limited revenues to enlarge high- school buildings or to increase the expenditures for said schools until the lower grades have been more fully provided for. 3. Resolved, That the conditions and needs of the third school division imperatively demand the erection of at least one twelve-room school building in said division the coming season. 4. Resaved, That a committee of three be appointed by this meeting to wait on the Committee of Appropriations for the District of Columbia of the House and Senate and urge on said committees the necessity and propriety of increas- ing the school facilities for the lower grades first, and of providing for at least one twelve-room school building in the third division the coming season. Fifth. ResoLved, That in view of the facts herein set forth, simple justice would seem to require that Congress should, by a grant of land or otherwise, provide a public school fund for the District of Columbia at least equal to that provided for the several States of the Union; and we hereby invoke the earnest attention of Congress to the matter. 

T. B. l't!ARCHE, Secretary. Wa-shington, D. C., December 29, 1886. · 

S. C. CLARKE, Chainnan. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the 

rec;olution offered by the Senator from Nebraska. 

Mr. PLUMB. What is the resolution? 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The resolution will be again read. 

Mr. PLUMB. I understood that the resolutions presented were res- olutions of a meeting of citizens of this District. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. A resolution was offered by t.he Senator from Nebraska, which will be again read. 

The Chief Clerk read the resolution submitted by Mr. VAN WYCK. 

Mr. PLUMB. I move that the resolution be referred to the Com· 

mittee on Appropriations. 

The PRESIDENT p·ro tempore. The Senator from Kansa8 moves · 

that the resolution be referred to the Committee on Appropriations. 

Mr. VANWYCK. I have no objection to that motion. I intended 

to ask that the resolution be referred. to the Committee on Appropriations. I offered the resolution for the purpose of laying the founda· 

tion in order that the resolutions of the citizens of this city might be 

properly presented to this body and referred to the Committee on Ap· 

propriations. I presume all that will be necessary will be that the 

wants of the citizens as expressed should be called t.o the attention of 

the committee. 

The facts stated in the resolutions are alarming, if they be true, and 

no doubt they are true. While great efforts have been made by Congress 

to appropriate millions and millions of dollars for school purposes, 

right in the shadow of this Capitol this neglect has been going on year 

after year, so that there are not absolutely buildings or seats provided 

for the children of school age, and to such an extent has it grown that 

it has been published to the world that the ratio of crime is really 

greater in the city of Washington, in proportion to population, than in 

the great city of New York, which we always supposed took precedence 

in that regard. 

I therefore ask that the resolutions of the citizens and the resolution 

which I have offered may be refer.ced to the Committee on Appropriations. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The resolution and accompanying 

papers will be referred to the Committee on Appropriations. 

1\Ir. HAWLEY. I wish to say just a word upon the motion to refer. 

It is not alone the fact that there is not school room enough for all 

the children of school age in the District. If there were seats and 

benches for three-fourths of them it would probably be enough, but 

there are not enough for those of school age who are enrolled as desiring to attend. I think I explained this once before. If the school age 

be from four to sixteen, as it used to be in my State, it covers twelve 

years. If children on the average go -to school eight years out of the 

twelve they are doing tolerably well, as an average. That would re- quire school room only for two-thirds of the number who are returned as of the school age. But in this District that is not what the Sen& tor 

from Nebraska refers to, if he will allow me to say so. The difficulty 

is that there is not room for those who do apply and desire to attend 

school, and they are only a fraction of the total number-a large fraction it is true, but not all by any means. Mr. DAWES. I do not think that Congress is open to the criticism 

implied in these resolutions and in the remarks of the Senator from 

Nebraska. Congress has never. failed to come up to all that those who are clothed with the authority of administering public affairs in this 

District have asked. 

The law does not require the Committee on Appropriations to make 

the estimates for public schools in this District. The law imposes that 

duty upon others, and if they have been more engaged and enlisted in 

other enterprises looking to the prosperity of the District or of any portion of it than they have to the education oft.he children of school age .in this District, the criticism should be applied to them and not to 

Congress. . The resolution of the Senator from Nebraska and the resolutions 

which it covers suggest that the Committee on Appropriations make 

the estimates, and that they determine for themselves what is necessary 

for the schools in this District. What is the purpose of having a board 

of commissisoners to manage the affairs of this District, what is the 

object of having a school superintendent in this District, what is the 

purpose of having a board to which the interests of the schools in this 

District are committed, if the Committee on Appropriations, which has 

considerable to do, I am of opinion, is to go and visit all the schools, 

is to go and enumerate all the scholars, is to go and ascertain the 

average attendance, and the standald of progress made by the scholars, 

and to determine where it is best to have a school-house, and what is 

the shape best to have it built, and how much is to be expended? 

Those officers appointed here under the Government are ornamental if 

that is the purpose and the object of all these resolutions. I suggest 

to my distinguished friend from Nebraska that he open his cannonade 

upon those officers to whom the interests of this District are committed. 

I happened to attend the public meeting to which those resolutions 

allude, and I heard a high official of the Government make the statement that the crimes committed in this District were greater in pro. 

portion than they were in the city of New York, and he did not seem to understand what the matterwas. He declared that the whole difficulty was with Congress. 

The Committee on Appropriations have never failed, nor has Congress 

ever failed, to give to this District for the purposes of education everything its officials have asked. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The resolution and accompanying 

papers are referred to the Committee on Appropriations. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. Mr. President-
I 

1336 CONGRESSIONAL REOORD-SENATE. fEBRUARY 4., 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. There is no question before the Senate; concurrent or other resolutions are still in order. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. The Senator from Massachusetts seems to misunderstand the extent and the purport and the object not onlyoftheresolution which I offered but of the resolutions adopted by sundry citizens 

of Washington on this behalf. There was no cannonade int-ended on the 

part of the citizens, neither was there any cannonade intended on the 

part of the resolution which I felt it my duty to offer. 

I do not know why it should be that when the Congress of the United 

States are appealed to, or a distinguished committee of this body are solicited, mildly, humbly, gentlemen at once feel it their duty to suppose that some attack is made upon them and to characterize it as a 

cannonade. This is the petition of the citizens of Washington, humbly 

beseeching and ask"ing, as they have to do when any of their rights are 

recognized, coming obsequiously, with hat in hand, begging that they 

may be recognized in their rights. They come to this body year after 

year to seek for redress of wrongs and for the prevention of outrages, 

and neither the committee to which the gentleman refers, nor any other 

committee, nor Congress itself manifests any disposition to take them 

by the hand, or to relieve them from the scourgings that are inflicted 

upon them. They come now, meekly as usual, to ask Congress at least 

to prevent them from the increase of crime by giving them school room sufficient to educate their children. That is all they ask, and the Senator from the grand old State of ~Iassaehusetts, which boasts of the ex- cellence of education to all her children, charges the citizens of Washington, when they make this humble appeal, with a cannonade upon 

the committee. It is remarkable in the source from whence the objection comes. . Is the right pf petition to be thus stigmatized when their petition only 

asks to be allowed to expend their money for the purpose of educating 

their own children and the children of the poor that there may be less 

of crime and less of poverty in the District of Columbia? 

Then my friend says that it is beyond the duty of the Committee on Appropriations to make estimates. Certainly. The citizens are not asking them to make estimates. Did the distinguished Senator, who is a member of the committee, read the report of the school board of this 

city? Did he find time for that, may I ask him? Has he read the 

report of the superintendent of public schools for this year presented 

to this body? · 

Mr. DAWES. If the Senator does not ask the committee to make 

estimates and they have made appropriations for all the estimates, what 

does he ask the committee to do? 

Mr. VAN WYCK. I ask the Senator if he has read: the report of 

the superintendent of schools of this city? Has he read the one for 

the current year? Has he read it? 

Mr. DAWES. Suppose I have? 

1\fr. VAN WYCK. It is not a question of supposition; it is a question of fact. Has the Senator read it? [A pause.] 

Mr. DAWES. The Senator has come to a full stop because I have not 

answered his question. Perhaps I should be tempted not to answer it 

at all. · Mr. VAN WYCK. Just as the Senator chooses. I can not enforce 

an answer. 

:Mi-. DAWES. I am quite free to say that I have read it with great 

pleasure and delight, and I have derived a good deal of profit from 

reading it, but it has thrown no light on the question as to what the 

Committee on Appropriations can do if they are not called upon to 

make estimates and have made appropriations for every estimate that 

somebody else has submitted to them. 

Mr. VANWYCK. If the Senator had gone a little further he might 

have characterized the proper feeling which the reading of that document would naturally have inspired. He says he read the report with 

profit and pleasure. I think he could have added that he read it aleo 

with pain. That such a state of facts exists as is set forth in the report of the superintendent of the public schools in this city should 

produce pa.in in the mind of a distinguished Senator coming from a State which values education so highly as does the State of Masschusetts; that such facts could be stated !n the report of the superintendent of education in this city should have brought the Senator to his 

feet at once in this body and not caused him to enjoy the pleasurable 

sensation of which he speaks-the idea that such a state of facts could 

have ex.isted beneath the shadow of the Capitol of this great Republic 

is a matter which might have better produced pain than pleasure in 

the mind of the Senator reading it. 

The facts are there, and now the committee shields itself under this 

cannonade, as the Senator calls it, from the fact, he says, that it is beyond the dignity of the committee to make estimates. Certainly the 

citizens do not ask the committee to make estimates. The necessary 

estimates will be gladly furnished to them. All the people of the District want is a disposition on the part of the Senate to do for them what 

they ask and implore and have a right to demand. If Congress is determined to keep its clutch and hold upon a population of 200,000 citizens, intelligent, and desiring that their children should grow np i.n 

intelligence, if Congress will insist upon denying to the people of this 

city home rule, the power to regulate their own matters in regard to a 

question so important as education, then Senators should not stand up 

here and find fault with the duty and labor which they impose upon 

themselves and arraign a feeble people and call it a cannonade becau~e 

they rlare come and ask Congress to relieve them from the stigma and 

stain that their children should grow up in idleness and that vice and 

crime should come commensuratewith that ignorance and poverty. It 

is a startling proposition. England answered Ireland, when Ireland 

demanded home rule and she denied it, in no more opprobious terms 

than the gentleman who stigmatizes this humble effort as a connonade 

on the part of the citizens of Washington. If Congress are determined 

to deny this little of homo rule to this people, this little of self-control 

to this people, then they must not arrogate to themselves anv special 

prerogatives of dignity when they are called upon to yield in so important a matter as that of education a little of the time and attention which 

they give to other matters. 

Mr. President, I have said all I need to say upon this matter. It was 

only called out by the very remarkable expression of the Senator from 

Massaehusetts, and I trust what I have said will be sufficient. I trust 

I may say to those who passed the resolutions that all they have to do 

is to ask, to stretch forth their hands and to implore, and the doors of 

the Treasury will be opened at least in.the matter of education. 

I will say to my friend from Connecticut [Mr. HAWLEY] that there are thousands and thousands of children in this city who are only 

allowed the advantages of school one-half of each school day because 

there is not room enough in this great city of this great Republic for 

which the Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. BLAIR] desires to appropriatenearly a hundred million dollars for educational purposes. Thousands of children in this city are denied the privileges of education 

one-half of each school day of the year because this great Republic 

will not allow to the citizens of this ciL-y the privilege of taxing themselves to build houses or rent rooms for that purpose. 

ltir. BLAIR. Mr. President, I only rise to suggest to the Senator 

from Nebraska what perhaps hehas overlooked, that the appropriation 

in the bill to which he refers of $77, 000,000 would carry to this District its proportion and would do thus much toward helping out and 

relieving the evil that the District is suffering from in common with 

the whole country. 

Mr. VANWYCK. But as that bill is so far offin thefutureitgives 

very distant prospects of relief to the citizens of this city, who immediately need relief, and they want it. What a disgrace! And the 

Committee on Appropriations do not know it! The intelligent Senator 

from the highly cultured State of Massachusetts does not seem to know 

that there are thousands of children here to-day not only of school age 

but upon the roll seeking education, demanding it, and yet the inno- cence of Senators who have not been properly approached is such that 

they do not know it; and the report which states that fact does not 

excite any feeling of dissatisfaction or pain. 

Mr. President, I trust that with this explanation on the part of the 

Committee on Appropriations and the liberality manifested they will see to it that if the commissioners have neglected to press it, as I think 

they have not, if the superintendents of education in this city have 

neglected to press it, as I think they have not, they will press this 

matter now even at the risk of being charged with another cannonade 

as against the Committee on Appropriations or the Congress of the 

United States. 

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President--

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Are there further '• concurrent or other resolutions?" 

Mr. HAWLEY. Idesiretosayawordortwomoreupon thissubject. 

The PRESIDENT -pro tempore. The resolution has been already referred to the Committee on Appropriations. 

Mr. HAWLEY. I rose as soon as the Senator from Nebraska closed 

his remarks. At any rate I do not think it out of place altogether to 

say something about the report to which reference has been made, because the discussion will inevitably arise, and it is quite as well that 

something should be said at least before the Committee on Appropriations has come to' any decision. I will confine myself to giving an official statement briefly of the chief facts in this matter as presented by 

the board of trustees of the schools of this District. They say: 

In the first place, it is shown that the basements of eight of our public school 

buildings are, under the pressure of absolute necessity, crowded with children. No one of these basements was ever intended for any such purpose, and every one of them is wholly unfit for it. As stated by the superitendents, they are dark, damp, and incapable of proper heating or proper ventilation-so dark that on many days in the year the schools must be dismissed because the children can not see to read their lessons. 

* * * * * * * But, in the second place, these reports show that, even after resort to these 

basements and to the thirty-nine unsuitable rented school-rooms, 9,120 children, or more than one-third of the entirA attendance, were restricted to half-day 

schools last year, for the simple reason that the total seating capacity provided 

for the accommodation of pupils, these objectionalJle make-shifts included, left 4,550 children wholly unprovided for, and compelled the unseating of that many other pupils for one-half of each day throughout the school year in order that 

the first-named might not be wholly excluded from the benefit of the schools. 

And the statistics for the current year included in the two reports show that 

the number of children whose common-school opportunities are thus dwarfed 

and mutilated is now increased to 12,089. 

And again: 

We have in actual attendance about 5,000 pupils in excess of the seo.ting capa.- city provided-
\ , 

1887. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 

In attendance, mind; 5,000 in excess of the seating capacitythe basement and rented school-rooms all included. 

Mr. DAWES. From what is the Senator reading? 

Mr. HAWLEY. The ''report of the board of trustees of public 

schools of the District of Columbia for the school year ending June 30, 

1886." 

Mr. DAWES. To whom is it addressed? 

Mr. HAWLEY. I know the legal point the Senator makes. I will 

nttend to it when I get through reading from the report. 

Mr. DAWES. I want to know towhom it is addressed. 

Mr. HAWLEY. It is addressed to the commissioners of the District 

of Columbia, who are the mere instruments of Congress. 

Mr. DAWES. So I supposed, and they address their conclnsion--

Mr. HAWLEY. I will attend to that before I get through. 

Mr. DAWES. They address their conclusion to--

Mr. HAWLEY. I will attend to it before I get through. The Senator pleaded in abatement that miserable evasion before. The board 

of trustees say: 

Each teacher, with us, is intrusted with about fifty pupils; so that, retaining 

the basements n.nd rented buildings, we actually need, at the present time, one hundred additional school rooms. 

Again, from Mr. Powell to the president of the board of trustees: 

I herewith present a summary of statistics compiled from records in my office 

and from the report of Superintendent Cook. 

This is submitted to the trustees: 

'.rhe total number of school rooms owned and rented (458) accommodated 21,-

663 pupils, but there were 26,223 pupils enrolled on an average throughout the 

school year, excluding those enrolled in the Washington High School. 

There were therefore 4,560pupils for whom there were no seats and 4,560other pupil~ were compelled to give up their seat-s to them a half of each day; that is, 

there were 9,120 pupils on an a verage throughout the entire school year who were attending half-day schools. 

The condition of the schools for the current year is worse than was that of last year, because the additional demand for school room because of the increase in 

the populat.ion of the city is much in excess of the additional supply. 

The additional demand does not keep up with the increase of the 

number of pupils. 

The Senator from Massachusetts says that a cannonade is made upon 

the Committee on Appropriations. Not at all, sir. I am saying nothing savage or harsh about either the commissioners or the Committee on Appropriations; they must do their duty as seems best to them; but 

I submit that Congress can not escape its obvious duty in this matter 

by saying that the commissioners have not asked for all that is needed. 

They are afraid to ask for all that is needed. That is what I have been 

told over and over again. 

Mr. DAWES. Mr. President--

Mr. HAWLEY. To wait until I get through would be just as well 

nnd much better. The commissioners do not estimate for what they 

know to be needed. I state that, and I ask the Committee on Appropriations to summon those commissioners and put them upon their 

honor to testify-! say nothing of their oath-whether they have asked 

nJl that was in their judgment needed by the demands of humanity 

and common decency for the schools of the District. I say they have 

not; but whether they have or not, if there be any legal authority in 

this body to increase that appropriation upon the District appropriation 

bill I hope it will be done by the Committee on Appropriations, and 

if not, I hope it will be done by the Senate, that we at least may clear 

ourselves. 

I say deliberately that somebody is disgracefully neglecting duty. It 

is either the commissioners or the Congress, one or the other. I do not 

care to attempt to apportion it, but the evil is unquestionable, and is a shame to civilization. Here we have proposed to vote $77,000,000 as a 

gift to the various States because we say the States are too indolent, or too stupid, or too ignorant to take care of their own children, when right 

here in the District of Columbia, in the center of the country, in that 

bit of land which ought to be the typical presentation of the benefits of 

free government, we are exhibiting a worse neglect of schools, I venture 

to say, than prevails in any State or Territory of the Union. 

Mr. DAWES. No member of the Committee on Appropriations that 

I have heard of has fallen short of the Senator from Connecticut or the 

Senator fi·om Nebraska in denouncing the condition, hopelP,ss almost, 

of the children of this District for want of education. If any commissioner of the District has attempted to shield himself from responsibility by saying that he dare not ask the Committee on Appropriations 

for what he deems necessary for the education of the children in this 

District, he has stated tothe Senator from Connecticut or to somebody 

else that which does not exist in fact. Every commissioner of the 

District ever since I have been upon the subcommittee connected with ~e District appropriation bill knows that the committee themselves 

have attempted and have put in appropriations beyond the advice of 

the commissioners; and when they prefer to have the money taken 

from the purposes of school education to extend streets out from the 

boundary of the city, or to expen.d money in other methods of improvement in this District, they shall not undertake to shield themselves 

here in this body from any dereliction of duty to the poor beggar chil-

{lren of this District by saying they did not dare to ask for appropriations 

from the Committee on Appropriations. They never have asked for a 

dollar since I have served upon that committee for the purposes of e<lucation that they did not get, and they have got more than they asked 

many a time. 

Mr. HAWLEY. I disclaim any reflection upon the Appropriations 

Committee, gentlemen for whom I have t.he highest respect, personally 

and officially. I simply state that the condition of the District is infamous. 

Mr. DAWES. I agree with the Senator in that. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. Mr. President--

Mr. BUTLER. If this cannonade can be suspended fora little while, · 

I sbould like to present some morning business. 

The PRESIDENT pro te-mpo1'e. There is no question before the 

Senate. 

Mr. BUTLER. Then I think we had better cease firing. 

:Mr. VANWYCK. The question is on the reference of the resolution:' 

The PRESIDENT pro tempo1·e. The resolution was referred long 

since. The Chair endeavored to stop the debate, but could not. 

MESSAGE FRO:ll THE HOUSE. 

A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. CLARK, its 

Clerk, announced that the Honse had passed an order, in which it re- quested the concurrence of the Senate, directing the Clerk to make a duplicate engrossed copy of the amendment of the House to the bill 

(S. 2~ 72) restoring to the United States certain of the lands granted to 

the Northern Pacific Railroad- Company to aid in the construction of a 

railroad from Lake Superior to Pnget Sound, and to restore the same to settlement, and for other purposes, indorsing thereon the action of 

the Honse in requesting a conference with the Senate on said amendment, and after indorsing on the duplicate engrossed copy of said bill 

furnished by the Senate in compliance with the request of the House, 

the action of the House on said bill, he deliver all of said papers to the 

Senate, and request that body to have indorsed on the duplicate en- grossed copy of the amendment of the Honse the action of the Senate 

on said amendment in agreeing to a conference, and request the Senate 

to return all of said papers to the Honse of Representatives. 

The message also announced that the House had disagreed to thereport of the committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of. the 

two Rouses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 8869) 

granting a. pension to Mrs. Henrietta M. Drum Hunt, further insisted 

upon its disagreement to the amendment, asked a further conference 

on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon, and had appointed 

Mr. SCOTT, Mr. ELDREDGE, and Mr. ZACH. TAYLOR, managers at the 

conference on the part of the Honse. 

PACIFIC R.AILROAD INVESTIGATION. 

:Mr. HOAR. I am directed by the Committee on the Judiciary, to 

whom was referred the joint resolution (H. Res. 170) authorizing an investigation of the books, accounts, and methods of Pacific railroads 

which have received aid from the United States, to report it favorably with an amendment and to ask the preselit consideration of the 

joint resolution. 

Mr. HALE. Let it be read :first. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Thejointresolution will bereported 

at length. 

Mr. HOAR. The joint resolution is altered by recommendation of 

the committee to a bill. 

1\fr. CULLOM. I should like to hear it read before we give consent 

to its consideration. 

The PRESIDENT p1·o tempore. The substitute reported by the com- mittee will be read. 

The Chief Clerk proceeded to read the amendment reported by the 

Committee on the Judiciary. 

Mr. HALE. This is a long proposition and a very important matter, 

and there are other subjects that ought to come up this morning. I 

think it had better go over and be printed. 

Mr. HOAR. If any Senator wants it to go over I am indifferent. 

The resolution bas been submitted to Senators who have represented 

in debate various views of this question, and so far as I am aware the 

amendment has the general approbation of all those Senators except 

in one respect, in which I dissent from it myself, but I think when it 

is read it will pass without discusson. Still it is quite reasonable that 

it should go over if the Senator prefers. 

Mr. HALE. I do not know that I am opposed to the resolution, but 

I think it had better go over. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It will be placed on the Calendar. 

Mr. HOAR. I give notice that I shall call it up at the :first possible 

.moment, probably to-morrow, at the proper time. 

Mr. ALLISON. I suggest that this be printed in the REOORD. I 

do not know what it is. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The order to print has already been 

made. 

Mr. ALLISON. That is in bill form. 

Mr. HOAR. The Senator from Iowa asks that the amendment may 

be printed in the RECORD. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. If there be no objection the sub· 
1338 CONGRESSIONAL REOOR-n-SENATE. FEBRUARY 4, 

~?titute reported by the Senator from Massachusetts will be printed in 

the RECORD. The Chair hears no objection. 

The substitute reported by the Committee on the Judiciary is as follows: 

That the President of the United States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, be, and he is hereby, authorized to appoint three commissioners, 

whose compensation shall be $750 per month to each, and the necessary traveling expenses and board bills, for which proper vouchers shall be returned, to be approved by the Secretary of the Interior; and said <:ommission may ap- point a stenographer, if necessary, and fix his compensation i and the persons appointed on the said commission shall have power to examme all books, pa- pers and methods of the companies hereinafter named, employ experts if nec ~sary · and they shall ·at all times be under the immediat~ direction and 

control of'the President of the United States, and may at any time be removed 

by him in his discretion. S EC. 2. That the duty of said commission shall be to examine into the working and financial management of all of the railroads that have received aid from 

the Government in bonds; to ascertain whetherth.ey have observed all ~he obli- gations imJ?osed upon them by the laws of the Umted States under which they 

received such aid, or which have been since passed in reference thereto, and 

complied with all other obligations t.o the United States; and whether their 

books and accounts are or have been so kept as to show the net earnings of the 

aided roads, and what said books and accounts actually show in regard thereto, 

and what have been in fact said net earnings; or whether there has been a di- version of earnings of aided roads to less productive branches, through con- structive mileage allowances, or average mileage allowances between aided 

and non-aided roads or parts of roads, or otherwise, and also whether such sys- tem of constructive mileage allowances is fair and usual, and in practical opera- tion bas resulted adversely or otherwise to the aided roads and the interest of the 

United States: or whether there has been a diversion of earnings of aided roads to wrongful or improper purposes, and, if so, t.o what extent; whether there is a discrimation of rates in favor of unaided against aided roads; whethe.t any, and, if so, how much, money is due and owing to the United States on. account of mistaken or erroneous accounts, reports, or settlements made by satd roads; 

whether any traffic or business which could or should be done on the aided 

lines of said companies has been diverted to the lines of any other company or to non-aided lines, and what amounts have been deducted from the gross earn- ings of any of said aided railroad companies, by their general freight and pas- senger agents or auditors, by way of rebate, percentage of ~usiness done, con- structive mileage, monthly or other payments on any poolmg or rate arrange- ment, contract, or agreement; and also to inquire•into,_ascerta.in, ~nd report as to the kind character, and amount of the assets of said companies, and what assets of ea~h company are now subject to the lien of the Government, and the 

value thereof; and also whether any dividends have been unlawfully declared 

by the directors or paid to the stockholders of said companies, and, if so, to what extent and whether the amount thereof may not be recovered from the direct- ors un'lawfully declaring the same or persons who have unlawfully received 

the same; whether the proceeds of any trust funds or lands loaned, advanced, or. granted have been diverted from their lawful use; whether any new stock or bonds have been issued or any guarantees or pledges made contrary to or without authority of law; whether any of the directors, officers, or employes of 

said companies respectively have been or are now, directly or indirectly, interested and to what amount or extent, in any other railroad, steamship, telegraph, expr~, mining, construction, or otbe! business company or corporation, aad 

with which any agreements, undertakmgs, or leases have been made or entered 

into· whatamountsofmoneyorcredithave beenorarenowloaned byanyofsaid 

companies to any person or corporation ; what amounts of money or credit have 

been or are now borrowed by any of said companies, giving names of lenders 

and the purposes for which said sums have been or are now required; what amounts of money or other valuable consideration, such as stocks, bonds, passes, and so forth, have been expended or paid out by said companies, whether for 

lawful or unlawful purposes, but for which sufficient and detailed vouchers have not been given or filed with the records of said companies; and, further, to inquire and report whether said companies, or either of them, or their officers or agents, have paid any money or.other v~luable c:ons~deration, or _done ~ny other act or thing, for the purpose of mfluencmg legiSlatiOn; and to mvestigate and 

report all the facts relating to an alleged consolidation of the Union Pacific Railroad Company, the Kansas Pacific Railway Company, and the Denver Pacific 

Railway and Telegraph Company into an alleged corporation known as the 

Union Pacific Railway Company .• Said investigation shall include the alleged sale of the stock of the Kansas Pacific Railroad Company to the Union Pacific 

Railroad Company, and all the circumstances and particulars pertaining to said 

alleged sales and whether any of the Pacific railroad corporations which obtained bonds'from the United States to aid in the constructiOn of their railroads 

have expended any of their moneys or other assets in the construction, or to aid 

in the construction, of other railroads, or invested of their moneys or other assets "in the stocks or bonds of any manufacturing, mining, and commercial compa- nies or corporations, or of other railroad corporations; and if any such expendi- tures or investments have been made, the extent and character thereof made by each of said corporations shall be inquired into, and also the present interest of any of said corporations in the railroads auxiliary to their respective railroads. 

And said commission shall also ascertain and report the names of all the stockholders in each of said companies, from its organization to the date of the in- vestigation herein provided for, as they appear on the books of said companies at the date of its annual meeting in each year; the amount of stock held by 

each· what consideration, if any, was paid by each stockholder to said company for hls stock and when and in wbatpropertysuchpaymentwas made; the date 

when each stockholder so appearing on the books became such; and whether stock is now held or has heretofore been held in the name of any person in trust or for the benefit of any other, and the names of all such persons; the total amount of stock in each company, and the dates and amount of any increase of 

such stock, and the reason for such increase; and the amount of the annual salaries or compensation that are now or at any prior time have been paid t.o any officer or employe of said company, when such S..'l.lary or compensation amounts to $5,000 or more per annum, and the names of the persons now receiving or who have heretofore received such salaries or compensation, and all bonuses or donations which may have been gi>en or.paid to any such person; and all pay- ments made under the bead of legal expenses, to whom made, and the amount paid to each, and for what specific services such payments were made. 

Said commissioners shall also consider a nd reportwhether the interests of the United States require any extension of the time for the performance of the obligations to the United States of sa.id companies, or any of them, and the facts and cir- cumstances upon which said opinion is based, inc I uding the security held by the 

United States for the performance of such obligations, and the value thereof, 

and the value of the property of such companies, and either of them, not included in such security~ and what further security it is expedient that said com- panies shall he requirea to give; and if, in their opinion, such extension shall 

be required by the interests of the United States, they shall submit aschemefor 

such extension, which shall secure to theUnitedStatesfullpaymentofalldebts due them from said companies, with a reasonable rate of interest, in such time as the commissioners shall propose, having due regard t.o the financial ability 

of said companies and the proper conduct of their business in such manner as shall afford efficient service to the public. 

And the said commission shall report in full in regard to all such matters aforesaid, and in regard to any othet: matters~hich may !Je ascertained or come l-<> 

their knowledge in regard to said compames respectively, on or before Decenlber 1 1887 to the President of the United States, who shall forward said report to Co~gre~s with such recommendations or comments n.s he may see fit to make 

in 4~:tfh~!m.issioners hereby created, or either of them, shall have power to require the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of all 

books, papers, contracts, agreements, and documents relating to _the 'matter un- der investi!Z'a.tion, and to administer oaths; and to that end may mvoke the aid 

of any co~t of the United States in requiring the attendance and testimony ot 

witnesses and the production of books, papers, and documents under the pro- visions of this section. Any of the circuit or district courts of the United States 

within the jurisdiction of which such inquiry is carried on may, in case of con- tumacy or refusal t.o obey a subpoona issued to any person, issue an order requirinoo any such person to appear before said commissioners, or either of them, as b~ case may be and produce books and papers if so ordered, and give evidence 

touching the mS:tter in question; and any failure to obey such order of the court m ay be punished by such court as a. contempt thereof. 

The claim that any such testimony or evidence may tend to criminate the per- son giving such evidence shall not excuse sue!>- witness from testifying i but such 

evidence or testimony shall not be used agamst such person on the trial of any criminal proceeding. 

SEc. 3. That the sum of $100,000, or so much thereof as may b~ necessary, is 

hereby appropriaU:d, out of any money in the :rt:easuqrof ~he Umted States not otherwise appropnated, for the purposes of this mvest1gat10n. 

SEc. 4. That whenever, in the opinion of the President, it shall be deemed nec- essary to the protection of the interests and the preservation of the security of 

the United States in respect of its lien, mortgage, or other interest in any of the 

property of any dr all of the several co!Dpa~es upo_n which a lien, m<?rtgage, or other incumbrance paramount to the r1ght, title, or mterest of the Umted States 

for the same property or any part of the same, may exist and be then lawfully 

liable to be enforced the Secretary of the Treasury shall, under the direction of 

the President redee~ or otherwise clear off such paramount lien, mortgage, or other incumb~ance by paying the sums lawfully due in respect thereof out of 

the Treasury; and the lfnited States shall th_et:eupon become and be subr<?gated to all rights and securities theretofore pertammg to the debt, mortgage, ben, or other incumbrance in respect of which such payment shall have been made. It 

shall be the duty of the Attorney-General, under the direction of the President, to take all such steps and proceedings, in the courts and otherwise, as shall be 

needful to redeem such lien, mortgage, or other incumbrance, and to protect and 

defend the rights and interests of the United States in respect of the mat~rs in 

this section mentioned, and to take steps to foreclose any mortgages or hens of 

the United States on any such railroad property. 

SEc. 5. That from and after the first day of July,1887, there shall be charged to and collected from the Central Paeific Railroad Company, the Union Pacific 

Railway or Railroad Company, by wl?lchev~r description it ma~ be lS:wfully 

known the Central Branch Union Pacific Rail way Company, the S1oux C1ty and 

Pacific Railroad Company, and the Kansas Pacific Railway Company, as all the same are described and known in ~he acts of Congress providing for issuing 

bonds in aid of the same, or acts in addition thereto, their successors and assigns 

respectively, 4~ pe~ cent .. of their respective annual n~t e~unings, to be ascer· tained as proVlded m sectiOn 1 of the act of May7, 1878, m lieu ~f the 25 ~er ce~t. 

provided for in said act, so far as the same respects the compames mentioned 1n said act and as to the others herein mentioned absolutely; and to tha~ end the 

said act' of May 7,1878, and any and all amendments or ~odifi;ca.tions thereof, 

be and the same are hereby, extended to the Kansas Pac1fic Railway Company, 

to' the Sioux City and Pacific Railroad Company, and to the Central Branch 

Union Pacific Railroad Company; and said act, and all amendments thereto or modifications thereof, shall henceforth apply_ to the said ~espe~tive corporations 

herein last named, as well as to the corporations named 1n said act. SEC. 6. The sinking-funds which are or may be held in the Treasury for the 

security of the indebtedness of either or all of said railroad companies may, in addition to the investment now authorized by law, be invested in any bonds 

of the United States heretofore issued for the benefit of either or all of said 

companies, or in ~ny of the first-mortgage_ bonds of either of said .companies 

which have been Issued under the authonty of any law of the Umted States 

and secured by mortgages of their roads and franchises, which by any law of 

the United Stat~s have been made prior and paramount to the mortgage,lienJ or other security of the United States in respect of its advances to either of saia 

companies as provided by law. 

Amend the title so as to read; "An aet. authorizing an investigation of the 

books, accounts, and methods of railroads which have received aid from the 

United States, and for ot,her purposes." 

Jtir. McPHERSON. Do I understand that objection has been made 

to the present consideration of the joint resolution? 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection has been made to its present consideration, and it goes over and will be placed upon the Calendar. 

HOURS OF SITTING. 

The PRESIDENT pro.tempore. The Chair lays before the Senate a resolution submittedyesterdaybytbeSenatorfromFlorida[Mr. CALL], 

which comes over under objection. The resolution will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

Resolved That, for the remainder of the session, the Senate will convene at 11 o'clock's.. m., and, with a recess of one hour, will continue in session until 

9p.m. 

Mr. ALLISON. I hope that resolution will not be adopted. I do 

not think the public business requires--

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator move to refer it? 

Mr. ALLISON. I move to refer it to the Committee on Appropria~ 

tions. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on the motion of the 

Senator from Iowa to refer the resolution to the Committee on Appropriations. 

The motion was agreed to. 

THE 1\I.A.CKEB.EL FISHERY. 

"Mr. PALMER. I move that the Senate proceed to the considera~ 

tion of Order of Business 1833, being the bill (H. R. 5538) relating to 

the importing and landing of mackerel caught during the spawning season. },fr. MILLER. I hope the Senator will not insist on that now. I 

shall necessarily leave the Chamber within a very short time, and I can 
i 

J 

1887. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 1339 

not be here for the remainder of the day. I trust that bill will be allowed to go over. It is set apart as a special order. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair will submit the question 

to the Senate. _ 

Mr. PALMER. I would state that this bill was passed last session 

by the House of Representatives and was acted upon by the Senate 

Committee on Fisheries, but, on account of the unavoidable absence of 

myself :first, and of the Senator from New York secondly, adion has 

been deferred at this session. I should like to grant the courtesy that 

the Senator from New York asks, and if he will not ask it to too great an extent I shall be willing to. defer the consideration of the bill at 

present. If he can state a time when I can call it up, I should like to 

have him do so. · 

M:r. MILLER. I shall be prepared on my part to take up this bill 

nex:t Tuesday without fail, and perhaps on Monday, but I am not positive that I can be here on Monday. I certainly shall be here on Tuesday and will make no objection to taking it up then. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempo1·e. Does the Senator from Michigan 

withdraw his motion? · 

Mr. MILLER. If I am not here on Tuesday I shall make no objection. 

fu. PALMER. I withdraw the motion. 

TERM OF COURTS AT TEXARKANA. 

Mr. BERRY. I move to take up Order ofBusiness 2071, being House 

bill9116. ·It is a local matter that will not take :five minutes. 

Mr. CULLOM. Regular order. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arkansas moves that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the bill (H. R. 9116) 

to provide for holding terms of United States courts at Texarkana, 

Ark., and for other purposes. 

Mr. BERRY. It will not take five minutes. The readi~g of the 

bill will be sufficient. 

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate, as in Committee of the 

Whole, proceeded to consider the bill. 

The bill was reported from the Committee on the Judiciary with an amendment to strike out all after the enacting clause and to insert: 

That the circuit judge of the United States for the circuit in which the eastern district of Arkansas is situated maY, in his discretion, whenever in his opinion the public interest shall require it, order special terms, not exceeding two L'l each year, of said circuit court, to be held at the city of Texarkana, in said dis- trict. Notice of the time of holding such special terms shall be publicly given 

by such advertisement in two newspapers printed in said district as said circuit ~udge shall think proper, which notice shall be published at least twenty days before the day fixed for holding such term. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amendment was concurred in. 

The amendment was ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read 

a third time. 

The bill was read the third time, and passed. 

Mr. BERRY. I move that the Senate insist on its amendment and 

ask a conference with the House of Representatives. 

The motion was agreed to. 

By unanimous consent, the President pro tempore was authorized to 

appoint the conferees on the part of the Senate; and Mr. EDMUNDS, 

Mr. WILSON of Iowa, and Mr. CoKE were appointed. 

NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD LA.ND. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate the following 

order from the House of Representatives: 

Ordered, That the Clerk be directed to make a duplicate engrossed copy of the amendment of the House to the bill (8. Z172) restoring to the United States cer- tain of the lands granted to theN orthern Pacific Railroad Company to aid in the construction of a railroad from Lake Superior to Puget Sound, and to restore the same to settlement, and for other purposes, indorsing thereon the action of the House in requesting a. conference with the Senate on said amendment, and after indorsing on the duplicate engro sed copy of said bill furnished by the Senate in compliance with the request of the House the action of the House on said bill, he deliver all of said papers to the Senate, and request that body to ha.ve indorsed on the duplicate engrossed copy of the ameudment of the House the action of the Senate on s~id amendment in agreeing to a conference, and request the Sen- ate to return all of said papers to the House of Representatives. 

Mr. DOLPH. I offer the following order, to comply with the request 

of the House: 

Ordered, That the Secretary be directed to indorse the action of the Senate agreeing to the conference asked by the House on the amendment of House to the billS. 2172 on the duplicate engrossed copy of the said amendment, and re- turn the papers to the House of Representatives agreeably to ita request. 

The order was agreed to. 

REFUNDING OF DIRECT TAX. 

1tir. MORRILL. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Senate bill 995. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Vermont moves 

that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the bill indicated by 

him. 

Mr. DAWES. I do not like to interrupt the Senator, but I desire 

to call up the Indian appropriation bill. 

M:r:"'MORRILL. The question is on the motion of the Senator from 

Vermont. 

The motion waB agreed to; and the Senate, as in Committee of the 

Whole, proceeded to consider the bill (S. 995) to credit and pay to the 

several States and Territories and the District of Columbia all moneys 

collected under the direct tax levied by the act of Congress approved 

August 5, 1861. 

The bill was read. 

Mr. HOAR. I rise to a question of order. It is absolutely impossible to hear where I sit the Chief Clerk reading from the desk, the 

disorder in the Senate is so great. 

The PRESIDENT pro te-mpore. The business of the Senate will be 

suspended until order is resumed. Conversation among Senators should 

cease. 1tir. COCKRELL. Is there a report on the bill? 

Mr. HOAR. Will the Chief Clerk read again the bill which he has 

just read? It is short. 

The PRESIDENT JYro tempore. The bill will be again read. 

The Chief Clerk read the bill. 

fu. MORRILL. I desire to say that the Committee on Finance propose to amend the proposition in the bill which would pay 15 per cent. 

where the States promptly paid the tax. In other words, the bill only 

proposes to pay back to the several States that have paid the direct tax 

the exact amount that has been paid. 

I presume that this subject is well understood by nearly all Senators; 

that the major part of the States have paid the tax in full, whereas 

several of them have not. Some have paid a part, and some perhaps none at all. The documents in relation to this matter are very Yoluminous, amlin order to present the case as it would be presented by a 

report, I will ask -the Secretary to read the statement of the case by 

Secretary Folger, and I presume it will be understood by all, that there 

is no method by which this matter can be actually and :finally settled 

and made just and equitable to the several States except by collecting 

from those Stafes thathaye not paid the balance that maybe due from 

them, or restoring to all those who have paid the full amount so paid. 

Mr. CULLOM. Will the Senator state what the aggregate amount 

will be? 

1tfr. MORRILL. About $15,000,000, less 15 per cent. 

Mr. CULLOM. Does the report ~how the amount which each State 

would be entitled to under the bill? 

Mr. MORRILL. That it isimpossible to statewithentireaccuracy, 

because the register's office would not, perhaps, agree with the ac- counts of the Treasury Department. Some States have paid something, 

and where claims of theirs have been allowed to the States the amount 

has been credited to them, and that may not appear in the accounts 

kept in relation to the direct tax. I ask the Secretary to read what I 

have marked on the margin of the paper wlrich I send to him, from Secretary Folger. 

M:r. SHER~IAN (Mr. HAWLEY in the chair). Before· that statement is read I think a few words, if! can get the attention of the Senate fer a moment, will inform .them as to the condition of this very 

important bill. I only wish to recall facts known to every Senator. 

This bill has been several times recommended by the Treasury Department, partly because it is an act of justice to the States that paid 

the money, but chiefly as a relief from legal complications and many 

lawsuits in which the United States are likely to be and are now involved with the Southern States, or the States lately in rebellion. It 

is only necessary to state a few historical facts to bring the whole case before the Senate. 

During the war a tax: of $20,000,000 was levied upon all the States, 

North and South alike. The proposition was made that if any State 

would pay its share ofthetax it would be allowed a di'5count ofl5per 

cent., and under that provision almost all the States not in rebellion 

paid the tax to the General Government. Some did not because they 

had not the means to do it, and it was gradually collected or paid by 

them subsequently. Practically, I think, all the States, with one or two 

exceptions, that were not in rebellion paid the tax:. 

This amount was charged to the States formerly in rebellion, and was 

collected in some of those States from private individuals, as in the 

State of South Carolina, where a greater amount was collected from 

private individuals by the sale of lands than the tax levied against 

South Carolina. 

Under the law as it now stands, whenever any money becomes due 

to a State it is placed to the credit of the State; but as this charge 

stands on the books of the Treasury against eleven or twelve or thirteen 

States of the Union, and has not been paid, there has been a constant 

state of irritation between the Treasury Department and the Southern 

States in regard to their claims as shown upon the books of the Treasury Department. Occasionally the FirstComptrollerwillgive a credit 

to a State, the State of Georgia for instance. A bill passed Congress 

allowing Georgia a certain sum of money, which the Secretary of the 

Treasury at once placed to the credit of Georgia, but did not pay over 

the money because under the plain language of ·the law he was forbidden to pay over to any State any money accruing to it in the course 

of business until it had settled its various dues and accounts with the 

Government. 

The result is that the United States are now in litigation with sev- eral of the Southern ·states and have some controve1'Sies with several 
1340 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENA1'E. FEBRUARY 4, 

of the Northern States that did not pay up the amount of their direct 

tax promptly. Under the circumstances three or four Secretaries of 

the Treasury have recommended that out of the overflowing money in 

the 'l'reasury there be paid back to the States that paid this tax the 

actual amount they paid of the direct tax, and that there be credited 

to the States that did not pay the money their quota of the tax, so as to 

practically equalize and restore things to the condition in which they were before the tax was levied. It is manifestly just. It has been 

uniformly recommended by the Department of late years, and it is now recommended, I know, by the Committee on Finance unanimously 

after a full examination. 

There are voluminous documents and reports here without number, 

giving the details and showing the amount due to each Stat-e. 

The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. BECK] desires me to incorporate, 

and I will make it part of my remarks, a table which shows the exact 

state of the account with each State, and whether it paid the tax or 

not. I will make that a part of my remarks. 

Statement of the condition oj the direct-tax accounts of the several States 

and Te-rritories and the District of Ool1tmbia, under acts .of August 5, 

1861, and June 7, 1862, as appeat·s from the books of the Register of the 

Treasury to date. 

15 per cent. allowance. 

'"""'(*)''""" 

... S46,'232"io· 

""¥4','350'50' 

""i7i","982 '7()' 

135,731 30 67,813 20 (*) 

107,054 30 

"'""63,"123'90" 

65,523 50 123, 6ff1 19 75.264 50 16;278 60 

... il4."169"1o· 

""""'($j""'""' 

32,761 ()() 

67,519 17 

'"'390,'587'8i"' 

... 235.:063· 4o· 

(*) 

292,0CI7 90 17,54.4 56 

.... si:·500·2o· 

""""27,"i7.2"72' 

""3ii,'346'43' 

State or Territory. 

Alabama. ................... . Arkansas .................. . California ................. . Colorado ................... . Connecticut ............. . Dakota. ...................... . Delaware .................. . DistrictofColumbia ... Florida. ...................... . 

~~~::::::::::::::::::::::: Indiana. .................... . Iowa ............ ............. . Kansas .................... .. 

~~~~!::::::::::::::::::: l'tlaine ...................... .. l'tlaryland .................. . Massachusetts ......... .. Michigan ................. .. l\1innesota ................ . 

~~==~~~1:~::::::::::·::::: : Nebraska ................. . Nevada.. ............... ~ ... .. New Hampshire ...... .. New Jersey, .............. . New Mexico~ ............ . New York ................. . North Carolina ........ .. Ohio .......................... . Oregon ...................... . Pennsylvania. ............ . Rhode Island ........... .. Tennessee ................. . Texas ........................ . Utah .......................... . Vermont ................... . Virginia ft ................. .. 

West Virginia. ft ......... . 

Wf;\Shin~ton .............. . WISconsm ................ .. South Carolina. ....... .. 

Amount imposed. 

$'>29, 318 83 261,886 ()() 

254,538 67 22,905 83 308,214 ()() 

3 241. 83 74:683 83 49,437 83 77,522 67 584,367 33 l, 146, 551 83 904,ff15 33 452,088 ()() 

71,743 33 713,695 33 385,886 67 420,8"26 ()() 

436,823 33 824,581 33 501.763 83 108,524 ()() 

413,084 67 761,127 33 19,312 ()() 

4,592 67 218,406 67 450,184 ()() 

62,64.8 ()() 

2, 603, 918 67 576,l94 67 1,567,<m9 33 35,140 67 1, 946, 719 33 116,963 67 669,498 ()() 

355,]06 67 26,982 ()() 

211,068 ()() 

729,071 02 208,479 65 7, 755 83 519,668 67 363,570 67-

Amount collected. 

$18,285 03 184,08"2 18 254,538 67 22,189 96 

261,981 90 3,241 33 70,332 83 49,437 33 4.3,529 81 106, 9G3 17 fJ74,568 63 769,144 03 384.,274 so 71,743 83 606,641 03 268,515 12 357,702 10 371.299 83 700,894 14 426,498 83 92,245 40 101,717 04 646,958 23 19,312 ()() 

4,592 67 185,645 67 382,614 83 62,648 ()() 

2, 213, 330 86 386,194 45 1, 332,025 93 35,140 67 l, 654, 711 43 

Balance due 

United States. 

$'>ll, 028 80 77,803 82 

............... 715"37 

.......... 33",'992"86 

477,404 16 

......... u7",'ini""55 

99,419 11 387,734 31 """'""28i",'763""69 

130, 008 06 225, 098 61 26,982 ()() """"i79,"407"'~' 515,569 72 """"'"'2'i3,'50i"'30 18!: ~: ~ ............ 3:"4"87"i"7 

454, 944 84 25, 3fJ7 40 377,961 30 ( ) 

"'Payments made on account, 15 per cent. allowance for cost of assuming collection, namely: To California., September 10, 1884, deficiency act July 7, 1884.... $31,583 26 To Kansas, August 23, 1882, deficiency act August 5, 1882.......... 10,761 50 To Nevada, September 3, 1884, deficiency act July 7, 1874......... 688 90 To Oregon, September 16, 1884, deficiency act July 7, 1884......... 5,27110 

1 In part on compromise. 

Nebraska.: 

A.mount collected........................................................................ 4, 281 60 Amount allowed by First Comptroller of Treasury March 27, 

1884, under act August 7, 1882...... ............................................. 15,030 40 

19,312 ()() ~New Mexico: 

A.mount allowed by First Comptroller of Treasury, March 27, 

1884, under act July 1, 1862................ .............................. ........ 62,648 00 I Sec. 1. J. R. Feb. 25, 1867, authorized the Secretary of the Treasury to trans- fer $208,479.65 of the amount originally imposed on Virginia. to the State of West Virginia. f Balance due State. 

TREASCRY DEPARTMENT, 

Register's Ojfice, March 22, 1886. 

ROS. A. FISH, 

.Assistant Register. 

Mr. HALE. What is the aggregate as shown by that which was 

collected from the States which did pay? 

Mr. SHERMAN. Between fourteen and fifteen million dollars, but 

they got a discount of 15 per cent. and that we do not allow. We give 

them back the exact amount they paid. 

Mr. CULLOM. Will the Senator allow the table showing the amount 

each State is to receive to be read by the Secretary now so that we may 

understand what it is? 

Mr. SHERMAN. It would be quite a complicated thing. It can be printed in the RECORD and the Senator can read it there. 

Mr. CULLOM. But if we are now to vote on the bill, I should like 

to know what it is. 

1\Ir. SHERMAN. The Senator can see the table. He can not un- derstand it from the reading at the desk because the table is made up on the condition that 15 per cent. is remitted, and also on the condition 

that it is not remitted, and also the various other conditions. However, the amount is stated in the table. 

1\Ir. MORRILL. illinois gets over $1,100,000. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Illinois will receive, in one view of the case, that 

is if the 15 per cent. is allowe~, $1,146,000. Without the 15 per cent. 

it gets $974,000. The whole amount is stated here. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. What is the aggregate? 

1\Ir. SHERI\1AN. The aggregate of the refund! think is about fourteen or fifteen million dollars, and the balance is credited to the several 

States that did not pay, so that they are relieved from any further 

claim for payment of the direct tax. 

I have made this statement simply that the Senate may understand 

the importance of this question and the fact that the bill has been ma- turely and fully considered, and I believe it is a measure that will be 

highly acceptable to all the States of the Union at this time. 

Mr. MORRILL. After the statement of the Senator from Ohio I do 

not know that it is necessary to read the report of Secretary Folger on 

this subject, but I ask to have it appended to my remarks. 

Mr. COCKRELL. Let it be read also. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. This is an important bill, and I think the statement should be read. 

Mr. MORRILL. Let the portion I have marked be read . The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, June 14, 1884. 

Sm: I have the honor of acknowledging the receipt from you of the bill (H . R. 110) entitled ".A. bill to adjust certain accounts between the United States 

and the several States and Territories and the District of Columbia.." 

This bill relates to the direct tax of $20,000,000 annually laid upon the United 

States, and apportioned to the Stutes, the Territories, and the District of Columbia under the act of Congress passed August 5,1861 (12 Stat. at Large, page 294). 

The purpose of the bill is to relieve and discharge from further liability for that tax those States and Territories which have not paid the portion thereof appor- tioned to them respectively; and to repay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to those States and Territories which have paid any portion the sums by them respectively paid. Though by the act above cited 

this tax was made an annual one, an attempt to collect it for more than one year has never been made. By that attempt there were collected about $15,000,-

000, principally from. the States which did not seek to go out of the Union, and 

there were left uncollected about S5,000,000, principally in the States which did • seek to go out of the Union. The sum uncollected remains a charge against 

those States, and for the purposes of this letter it m.ay be assumed that it is a valid and enforceable charge. It is plain, however, that no legislator at this 

day would propose to raise revenue by a. tax of that kind. There is no need of 

resorting to such method. 

The revenues of the Government, from sources not so extraordinary, and col. 

lectible by means and appliances not so objectional as those involved therein, are ample for its purposes. They are, indeed, superabundant, and the concern of statesmen is rather how they m.ay be reduced than how they may be increased. The Government, then, needs not the money to be got by enforcing 

this tax. At the same time it is plain that to enforce it would put a. grievous burden upon the people of the States which are in default in payment. It needs no array of facts to show this. Congress in one, if not both branches, has this 

session considered the proposition of large pecuniary aid to these people to help 

them place and keep up common schools, and the Senate has passed a. bill 

therefor. If there be need for that succor, there would be harm. in enforcing 

this charge. It is to be considered, too, thatwhileta.xes are seldom looked upon with favor, this would be specially objectionable. The purpose for which it was laid can but be remembered with distaste. It can scarcely be expected 

that there would be cheerful aid from the State aut.horities in the enforcement 

of it. It may be doubted whether there would be any. Indeed it would, with· out further legislation, have to be enforced by the machinery provided by the act under which it was laid. This would call for the appointment of numerous Federal officials who would go am.on~ the people as obnoxious exactors. I 

think it must be conceded that there ts, and ever will be, great reluctance to ever setting about the collection of this tax. That it never had great favor is 

shown by that it was never put in force but one year. In practical effect, then, 

the law for it isobsolete. Why, then, should there remain this unenforced liability; a menace to the people, the enforcement of which is called for by no public need nor by any public opinion? In my judgment the people and the property of the States in default should be relieved and discharged from it. But to give such relief and discharge would be to put an inequality of burden upon the States which paid unless they in turn were in some way relieved. 

This the bill proposes to do by repaying to them. the sums received from them. 

Assuming that the tax was lawful, and the collection as far as made was war- ranted, this, apart from the circumstances, would be a proposition to donate to the States surplus moneys of the United States, aproposi5fon which I should not favor. But as connected with the proposition to discharge from onerous and 

needless liability one portion of the people, it takes on a. different character; it 

is presented as an adjustment between different bodies of the people, and is 

worthy of acceptation. Indeed, it would be unjust to the people of the loyal 

States to release the people of the once insurrectionary States from their Habilit.y without refunding to the former the su.ms paid by them., and there are analogies in the legislation of Congress. 

Acts have been passed, refunding to States moneys raised by them. for the rais~ 

ing, arming, and equipping of troops for the A.rmy of the United States in the 

civil war; and for making other refunds oflike character. 'fhepurpose of laying this direct tax was to aid in the ultimate payment of the extraordinary ex- penses of the Government caused by the civil war. The raising, arming, and 

equipping of troops by the States served to keep down those expenses for the 

time. It was a. voluntary act upon the part of the States. There is no violation 

of principle or fundamental law in repaying to the States from the funds of the 

United States the cost thereof. The purpose and effect of this bill is not so un- like in nature to that as not also to be freed from the objections to a. bald distribution among the States of what are called the surplus revenues of the United 

States. 

Under the peculiar facts of the case, and ns it is not likely to become a prece-
1887. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 1341 

dent for other disposals of Federal moneys, my judgment is that the propo~d measure is a good one. It is true that exactly equal justice can not be done in carrying out the proposition of the bill. Thus, in some of the Southern States, 

the tax was to some extent enforced. Tax sales were made of pieces of real 

estate, in instances, for less than the value of them. Only the surplus of purchase money over the tax and charges has been available to the owners, and t.hey have lost the difference between that and the total of the purchase money 

and between the purchase money and the real value. On the other hand, in 

most, if not all, of the Northern States the payment to the United States of the' tax was assumed by the State government, which collected the amount of its own people in its own tax levy. Of course, in the changes of citizenship and of 

ownership of taxable property, while a repayment into the State treasury will 

tend to reduce the amount of State tax, it will not inure to the benefit of some of those who, in 1861, were tax-payers. But these failures of full and general compensation in dealing with transactions so long past must ensue, and are not to be potentially urged against proposed measures which, in the main, do work 

equal benefit. I also inclose herewith a: communication to me from the First Comptroller of 

the Treasury, which presents viewl,'l in accord with some of those expressed by me, and gives tables of value, and a draught of a bill; and to this communication I ask attention. 

Very respectfully, CHAS. J. FOLGER, Secretary. 

Kon. A. J. "\VARNER, 

Chairman Subcommittee of Committee on Olaims, 

House of Representatives. 

The PRESIDENT p1·o tempo1·e. The question is on the amendment 

reported by the Committee on Finance. 

Jtlr. VAN WYCK. I think the amendment has not been read. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It will be read. 

The CHIEF CLERK. In section 1, line 8, after the word "thereto," 

the committee propose to strike out the words "with an additional 

sum of 15 per cent. upon all amounts so collected where such States or Territories or the District of Columbia have collected the same, without cost to the United States;" so as to make the section read: 

That it shall be the duty of the Secretary of the Treasury to credit to each 

State and Territory of the United States, and the District of Columbia, a. sum equal to all collections made from said States and Territories and the District 

of Columbia under the act of Congress approved August 5,1861, and the amendatory acts thereto. 

Mr. BECK. In section 3, line 6, after the word '' same,'' I suggest 

to add " the governor of the State., All I want is that the money 

shall be paid to the authorities of the State, either the treasurer or governor. 

Mr. TELLER. I think it should be paid to the treasurer. 

Mr. BUTLER. Say, "paid on the warrant of the governor." 

Mr. BECK. What I desire is that the money shall go directly to the 

State, and if any agent or anybody has any claim let him make it to 

the State. 

Mr. CULLOM. Warrants o.re always issued to the governor of a State, at any rate. 

Mr. BECK. The Senator from Illinois has been a governor and 

knows exactly the language which is necessary. 

Mr. CULLOM. It ought to be paid directly to the gove.rnor of a State. 

Mr. TELLER. I submit to the superior knowledge of t:qe late governor of illinois. 

The PRESIDENT pro te-mpore. The amendment of the Senator from 

Kentucky will be read. 

The CHIEF CLERK. In section 3, line 6, after the word "same" it 

is proposed to insert "to the governor of the State;" so as to read: 

SEo. 3. That there is hereby appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sums as may be necessary to reimburse each 

State, Territory, and the District of Columbia for all money found due to them 

under the provisions of this act; and the Treasurer of the United States is 

hereby directed to pay the same to the governor of the State. 

])fr. WILSON, of Iowa. I suggest to the Senator from Kentucky 

that his amendment does not provide for payments to the Territories 

and the District of Columbia. It merely provides for the States. The 

Territories and District of Columbia are also interested. 

Mr. BECK. Add the words "and Territories." The amendment was proposed in such a hurry that I did not have time to put it in 

proper shape. I move to insert the words: 

To the governors of the States and Territories and to the commissioners of 

the District of Columbia. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. From the statement that this bill receives the 

entire approbation of the Finance Committee, it would seem probably 

useless to say a word in opposition to the proposition. 

From the report of the Secretary of the Treasury it appears that the em ba.rrassment arises from the difficulty of collecting from the Southern 

States the quota of this tax which was due from them. That is one distinct proposition which can readily be understogd. If there be any 

reason, at this length of time from the war, which caused the necessity of this tax, why those States should be exempt from the payment 

which is due to the Government from them, that is one question 

which might call for the attention of Congress and the country. But 

when it is proposed to take from :fifteen to twenty million dollars out 

of the Treasury and pay it to the States which paid it in, it seems to 

be establishing a precedent which may come back to curse Congress if 

they should feel themselves bound to follow the precedent. 

_ We have manyclaimsarisingfrom the war which arenotpaid, claims 

that are honest, preferred by citizens whose property was taken. We 

have been told repeatedly that persons who suffered by the loss of their 

property by the ravages of war must regard that loss as an incident of 

war, and if we commenced to pay debts of that kind there never would 

be any end, and therefore the Treasury would be depleted by paying an honest debt to an honest citizen. Is there any reason why, because a Union man's buildings lay in the pathway of war and were subject 

to its havoc and destruction, he should not be compensated when he 

has been impoverished, upon the pretext that it was a consequence of 

war, unfortunate for him but too great for the GQvernment to attempt 

to liquidate? 

Now, we propose what? To take from fifteen totwentymilliondollars out of the Treasury which was put there in response to the law and 

by its act. Since then there have been changed conditions in the coun- try. Could we have received it one day and have paid it the next 

day there would be no injustice in making this voluntary gift; but 

inj ostice will be done to some sections of the country because there have 

been changes in population, and those who contributed in New York 

and in Pennsylvania, and other great States, will receivt) a large portion of this donation, of this gift, of this charity-for it is notbing elseon the part of the Government. The population has gone out from 

those older and richer States, and the men who have gone from them 

are now citizens of the younger States, that receive none of this bounty. 

If it is well to distributefifteen or twentymillion dollars as charity, or as a gift, why should it not be distributed on the basis of population 

among, if you please, the loyal States? The States of the South which 

were in rebellion contributed not their share; and if the loyal States were the only ones which contributed, then why not appodion this fifteen or twenty million dollars from the Treasury among those Statesin 

proportion to their population. By that measure the younger, the 

poorer, the most heavily-taxed portion of this Republic would receive some of the benefits of this great munificence, instead of pouring it into 

the laps of States already overgrown in wealth, like New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Ohio. The States in the Northwestcontributed 

then, and are contributing to-day, in proportion to their wealth, more than the Eastern States; contributing more of their labor than these 

wealthy S ta.tes; and why should they not receive a. share of this bounty? 

The money has gone into the Treasury. It will go out.:to repay New 

York, where it was raised how? Not by direct taxation. The wealth 

of New York did not contribute; but the poverty of the Northwest con- tributed, if I may use that term, and only in contradistinction with the 

great wealth of the East. They contribute by the charges which they 

pay in tariff duties, by the charges which they pay upon sugar, for instance. The humble settler in any of theN orthwestern State..c:; pays precisely the same into the National Treasury in the duty upon sugar as the millionaire in New York or Pennsylvania. 

Mr. SAULSBURY. How about whisky? 

Mr. VAN WYCK. They pay the same on whisky, and I will say to 

my friend who asks about whisky, that they may pay a. little more than 

the Eastern States, because there is more population belonging to that 

potential political family to which my friend [Mr. SAULSBURY] belongs. 

Therefore it is that there seems to be no sort of justice in this proposition. Is there any reason why New York should be paid nearly 

$3,000,000 because she contributed near $3,000,000 to carry on the war. Then the individual citizen of the State, then the municipalities and 

counties which impoverished themselves by raising. money to pay bounties to soldiers who went to the war ought to be repaid. 

If this is unanimously reported from the Finance Committee, it seems to be in the spirit which is manifested very much prevalent at this 

time, to deplete the Treasury, to empty it, when the difficulty with 

the people of this Republic to-day is that there are surplus millions in 

the Treasury. The people are demanding to-day that the sources of 

taxation, that the sources from which these millions are drawn, shall 

be stopped; not that you shall open oue end of the Treasury and let it run out and hunt for avenues in which it may escape, but that you may 

stop the drain ·on the people which dravys taxes from them and fills the 

Treasury full. There is the point with the people; not that the money 

is there; and when one and another attempt is made to drain this 

money from the Treasury and not stop the sources of supply from 

which this money is taken, there arises objection in the public mind. 

We can not escape our duty in that direction. It is to reduce the 

excessive duties imposed by our tarifflaws; but those are perhapato be 

continued. You empty this fifteen or twenty million dollars into the 

treasuries of the various States of the Republic, but you do not seek 

to take fifteen or twenty million dollars of burden off the people who are required to pay the money. They who use sugar in the East and 

in the West, in the North and the South, arestillrequired to paytheir 

2 cents upon the pound of sugar; and you have an equality in the collection. There is no difference between the laborer and the millionaire: 

each pays his 2 cents per pound upon the sugar be uses. You have 

equality there, but in the distribution of this gift, of this bounty, the 

equalit.y ceases. 

I desired merely to make this suggestion more in the nature of a 

protest, because there is evidently power enough. There are strong, 

powerful States sufficient to pass this bill into a law; and when it is 

done, the next we shall hear if there be a few more such measures, and we can not stop, will be that we can not ask for a reduction of tariff 

duties because we must have money in the Tre.asury. 

It has been said here by the chairman of the Appropriations Com-
1342 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--SENATE. FEBRUARY 4, 

mittee and other distinguished gentlemen that it is extremely doubtful 

whether in the future there will be any surplus in the Treasury. Then, 

had we not better pause? There is no need of haste about this. These 

great States, these wealthy States have paid this tax, a deb~ which they 

owed to the United States. They have received fnll consideration for 

it. Then, let the money remain in the Treasury to be appropriated in some other way besides paying it ba-ck to those who paid it. Let us see whether there will be an objectionable surp~us in the revenue, and 

then direct our attention to the stoppage. of taxation, which is the only 

matter of which the people complain. 

It may be deemed necessary in order to strengthen the arguments of 

the high protectionists, it may be necessary in order to strengthen the 

arguments of those who think that internal-revenue taxation should 

be continued, to show an apparent necessity for their continuance by 

pointing to a diminution of the amount in the Treasury; but I ask, 

of course without any expectation of-its being complied with, that 

this money at least shall beequallydistributed, because, as I have said, 

there is more jus.tice in giving to the humble citizen who has lost his 

all and been beggared, there is more justice in paying a portion of his 

honest claim against the government that despoiled him on the ground 

of the necessities of war, than in paying three millions into the trea.suryofthe StateofNewYork, two millions into the treasnryofPennsylvania, and nearly two millions into the treasury of the State of Ohio. 

Yon may do this because yon have the power, but it will be only upon 

that ground. 

If the Southern States, as I have said before, are unable to pay their 

quota, forgive them the debt, if yon please; but do not in connection 

with that, in the way of magnanimity or generosity, couple with it a -proposition unjust as I think this proposition to be. Therefore it is 

that I have a right to state, and I do state and believe, that.this is only one of kindred propositions to deplete the Treasury so that there may 

be no apparent excuse for granting what the people ask-a reduction 

of taxation and a reduction of duties which weigh heavily upon the 

people of this nation. 

1\Ir. MORRILL. :M:r. PresidentMr. IiA WLEY. I should like to ask a question of the Senator from 

V e..rmont before he goes on. This bill disposes, as I understand, of something like $18,000,000 of 

assets, which are in the form partly of charges against certain States 

and partly in the form of cash paid into the Treasury. I should be 

glad to know what the total is on the books, and how much of that 

tota.l is to be restored to the States in cash, and how much is to be ac- counted for simply by settling the accounts on the books by forgiving 

the debts. 

M:r. UORRILL. The nearest approach to accura-cy on the subject 

that I have been able to arrive at is that a trifle over twelve millions 

of money will go out of the Treasury, and about five millions D'f un- paid tax will be relinquished. · I will say, Mr. President, that I think it is unnecessary to continue 

the debate after the very lucid speech of the Senator from Nebraska. 

'Ve have the money on hand; we are riot about to tax anybody for 

money to pay this debt, and it is the nearest approach to justice that 

it is possible to devise from all the information we can obtain on the 

subject from the Treasury Department, from documents, and from 

other sources. Mr. VANWYCK. Now one word as to that proposition that we have the money on hand, as an excuse for taking $18,000,000 out of 

the Treasury that we have the $18,000,000 there. If we take $18,000,-

000 out of the Treasury we must continue our excessive duties and 

taxes and put $18, 000, 000 more there again to provide for the expenses 

of this Government. It is a fallacious argument that we have the 

money there. Certainly we have it there. We could have no government without money there. But the fact is that $18,000,000 has been 

paid there when it has been required to be paid by the laws of this 

nation. It is there, and I say to my friend, and I desire to say to the 

people of this country that when that $18,000,000 is taken out $18,-

000,000 more will be drawn by taxation from the people to supply its 

place, and it necessarily must be so. But this and other projects like this are to be the excuse for con- tinuing to draw from the pockets of the people this unjust and, as I 

think, altogether oppressive burdens of taxation. Keep your eighteen 

million; do not give three million toN ew York which she does not need; 

she received consideration for what she gave. Give pensions to soldiers 

who are wasting out their lives in poor-houses, and then we can talk 

about the ~ighteen million being in the Treasury to pay the States. I 

have seen growing, and so have the people of this nation, this desire, 

this determination at every conceivable opportunity to deplete the 

Treasury of the United States so as to prevent any reduction in taxation by the tariff and other things which the people of this nation feel 

to be oppressive and unjust. 

Mr. HAWLEY. I think there onghtto appear somewhere upon the 

record a statement of this account. The Senator from Vermont did 

not quite complete it, but the Chair has kindly furnished me some- thing upon the subject. The total amount is about $20,000,000 to be 

repaid, less 15 per cent., or $17,000,000, which, roughly, is cash $12,-

000,000 to be taken out of the Treasury, and a reduction of the sur-

'. 

' 

plus to that amount and a credi~ of $5,000,000. That is to say, $17,-

000,000 are disposed of by this bill. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The occupant of the chair handed 

to the Reporter the precise statement giving the amount to be repaid 

to each State under the operation of the bill, but it was not read. 

Mr. H.A. WLEY. But it will appear in the RECORD, then. 

Mr. SAULSBURY. I understand the necessity for this bill is in 

order to adjust the accounts between the Treasury and the several 

States of this Union. Personally I would prefer to have forgiven the 

debt due by the Southern States that were out of the Union when the 

tax was imposed so that the money could not be collected from them. 

I would have preferred myself that the committee should have proposed, in order to adjust the accounts of the Treasury, to forgive those 

delinquent States all their debt and let the money that had been paid 

in twenty-odd years ago remain in the Treasury. I remember when 

it was collected in my State. Being a direct tax, of course it had to 

be levied on all the States then recognized as being in the Union, 

the Southern States as well as the others. But. the Southern States were not in a condition for the Government to collect it, and nobody at 

that time expected that it would be collectedontof the Southern States. 

But the States that were in the Union and could be reached by the 

Federal collectors were compelled to pay it. I know in my own State we assumed the debt and levied the tax upon the holders of real estate 

in the State and raised the money and paid it into the Treasury. I 

suppose that was done in most of the States. Now, you can not return 

it to the men who paid it; you return it to the State governments. 

.As I before remarked, if the committee could have prepared a bill 

by geheral acquiescence providing that the delinquent States should 

be forgiven their debt I would have preferred that to any other ar· rangement. The bill seems to be equitable on the principle upon which 

it is proposed; that is, to return to the States which did pay the amount 

which they paid and forgive the others. Personally I would have preferred the absolute gift to the States that were then Confederate States 

and out of the Union, for at that time there was not a single member 

of Congress who ever expected one dollar of the tax levied on these 

States to be collected i but being a direct tax, and the ConstHution re- quiring that all direct taxes should be equally laid, Congress had of course to apportion a partof it to the Southern States. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. This is a matter of importance. Perhaps people 

generally may have given the matter some consideration, but I think 

there are Senators who have not had opportunity, certainly I have not 

had, to give it that thought which its importance deserves. I ask the 

Senator from Kentucky whether there was objection in the committee, or has there been in the Senate, to releasing the defaulting States from 

their obligation by reason of this tax, without imposing the onerous con- dition of distributing the money actually collected back to the States 

that paid? 

Mr. BECK. I had the honor to serve for, I believe, six years -upon 

the Committee of Ways and Means of the House and eight years in 

this body, and this has been a bone of contention and annoyance ever since I first came to Congress, andiseenoother equitable way to settle 

it unless the way we now propose. We are able to do it. We shall never do it in any other way. It has been a contention all the time. 

Any attempt to give up what is charged to the Southern States when 

the others have paid the tax would be utterly impracticable, and such a proposition never could approach success. We can not do it in any 

other way than this. The Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. DAWES] 

knows that when he was chairman of the Committee of Ways and 

Means in the Honse, and I served under him, we had the subject before us, and at last, I believe, there is no way to do it but this. 

!lfr. VAN WYCK. If the Southern States had directly paid their 

quota under this law, does ·the Senato}::' think there would ever have 

been a proposition to repay the other States what they paid? 

Mr. BECK. I think not. I think there would have been no neces- sity for it in that contingency. 

Mr. VANWYCK. Precisely; that is the point I desire to impress on the Senate. Had all these defaulting States paid promptly, the 

Senator admits, as I presume the whole committee will admit, that 

there never would have been an attempt to divide this money among 

the States of the Union. Then they were embarrassed by this one question, how they should deal with the defaulting States. I fail to see in a proposition presented to Congress to relieve the defaulting States 

from the payment of their debt which by reason of certain circumstances it may be magnanimous or even just, perhaps because of their 

poverty after the war, and I think the people generally will fail to see any reason why in doing tha.t act of justice we should couple with it 

another act which has not the chara-cter of justice at all. The other 

States have paid their debt to the Government. They have only paid 

what they were obliged to pay-NewYorknearly $3,000,000, Pennsylvania nearly $2,000,000. They only paid what was their due; and now because there are other debtors who have not paid theirs, is that 

any reason, any pretense even, why we should pay back to the debtors 

who did pay and received consideration for their money, because there are poor defaulting debtors who can not pay? 

I see no propriety in that, !lfr. President, and I only want to stop 

long enough to protest, because I think all I may say will amount to 

. 
! 

/ 

l) 

-

1887. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 1343 

nothing. This thing is all fixed and settled, undoubtedly. New York 

must vote for it for the $3,000,000 that comes back to her treasury; 

Ohio must because there is a million and a. halftogointohertreasury, 

and she can not forego the opportunity to take a million and a. half 

out of the Treasury of the United States. Pennsylvania gets nearly 

$2,000,000, and of course her statesmen must not hesitate a moment if 

they can put their hands in far enough and strong enough to take out 

$2,000,000 from the Treasury of the United States and put it into the 

treasury of the State. 

So the bill will go through. Why? Under what pretence? There are claims against you that you can pay with this $18,000,000. Can 

you, sir, stand before the people of Ohio and say it is just? There is no justice in taking $3,000,000 out of the Treasury of the United States 

and putting it in thetreasuryoftheState of New York. No New York 

Senator can make an argument that will induce the citizens of New 

York to believe there is anything just in that. There is no reason for 

it. We have claims on ns, we have honest debts against this Government, we have citizens without number who have been impoverished 

by reason of the war, by having their property taken from them, as I 

said before, and they receive no consideration at the hands of a Senate 

which is willing to take $18,000,000 out of the Treasury and pay it 

where it does not belong, where there is no pretense of a claim for it, 

not the least; and you tum impoverished men from your doors and you 

refuse to give what the ordinary principles of justice require. You 

turn themoutofthe doors ofyourSenate Chamberwhen youacknowledge the justice and equity of their chims, and content yourselves with 

saying that to pay them would establis~ a precedent that would cost ns millions of dollars. 

Look at it just for a moment. These wealthy States with no claim 

against this Government are to receive this money, andyoutumoutof 

doors the beggared man who lost all in the track of war; you tum him 

out and tell him his claim is just and equitable, but there is danger 

that the Treasury may give out before such honest claims are paid. 

Mr. GEORGE. It is well, Mr. President, for the Senate to understand the true attitude of this case, so far as the Southern States are concerned. It has been stated on the floor that this question has been 

distinctly presented in the case of a debt dne to the State of Georgia 

by the United States. What is the ad under which the tax was apportioned among the States, and what is the Constitution on that point? 

But I especially now call atttention to the act. There was no attempt on the part of Congress to assess the tax against the State in its corporate capacity; that is, to create a debt against the State as a State debt 

and a State obligation. The whole effect of the law of 1861 apportioning the tax among the several States was to authorize the tax-collectors of the United States to collect from the tax-payers in each State 

up to the amount apportioned to the State; and the result of all that 

legislation was simply that when the tax was assessed the separate share 

of each tax-payer became a legal debt to the United States, and unless 

the State by act of its Legislature assumed the debt, as that act provided it might do, then there was no debt against the State. And so far now as the rebel States are concerned the tax stands in this attitude exactly: there is no claim against the State governments; none whatever. The claim which the United States have is against the taxpayers, and not against the tax-payers of 1887, but against the tax-pay- ers of 1861. 

It is an obligation which the tax-payers who then existed owed, each 

for his separate share of the tax. That is exactly the legal attitude of 

this case; and that view of it, I want to state to the Senate, has received 

the unanimous sanction of the Judiciary Committee of this body, wno in the Georgia case directed the report of a; bill to pay to the State that 

which the Treasury officials had detained from the State, which was her 

acknowledged right against the United States on account of this debt. 

The Judiciary Committee all agreed that it was such a set-off as could 

not be enforced against the State, because there was no legal obligation on the part of the State to pay it; and so it is with all the other States. 

I want the Senate to exactly understand the condition of the case. You may go into l'\fississippi and Georgia and collect as much of this tax as you can, but you must find the tax-payer of 1861; you must assess it upon him for the amount which he owed at that time. 

I wish the Senate to understand another proposition in this matter. 

The tax was no lien upon the land beyond two years; so that if a man in 1861 had 10,000 acres ofland in :Mississippi, and on that account owed 

$5,000 for taxes, and to-day he is in solvent, and his land belongs to some- body else, you can not collect that at all. 

The equity of the bill, however, so far as the Southern States are concerned, is this, and I believe I shall vote for it upon that equity: 

The United States Treasury officials, by a ruling of the Treasury Department which is now acknowledged-not only now, but was under 

the last administration-to be erroneous, have charged on the books of 

the Treasury Department against each of the Southern States, for instance, Mississippi, the amount due by the tax-payers of that State of 

1861 under theactofl861. They havechargeditagainsttheState as a 

State debt~ and whenever anything is due from the United States to the 

State of Mississippi or the State of Georgia, or any other Southern State, 

the Treasury officials, without warrant of law, acting, as they concede 

they are acting, in violation of law and in violation of the decision of the 

Judiciary Committee of this body, instead of paying the debt to the 

State, undertake to credit the State upon this charge which they have 

put on the books of the Treasury against the State without authority 

of law. In that way about $100,000 due the State of l'\fississippi by 

the Government has been kept on the books of the Treasury Department against this supposed and illegal charge made by the Treasury 

Department against the State of :Mississippi. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. May I ask a question? 

Mr. GEORGE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. VANWYCK. Your proposition, as I understand it, is that it was unjust to the State of l'\fississippi that the United States should credit 

money due her as against this debt, that the tax was not a debt against 

the State, and therefore you consider it equitable, so far as Mississippi isconcerned, to discharge the amount of the tax. Now, before you sit 

down will you please go on and show how you consider it equitable 

when New York State paid nearly $3,000,000 into the Treasury to pay 

back to New York the $3,000,UOO? 

Mr. GEORGE. ldonotcareanythingaboutthisbill. lthinkthey 

ought not to charge the State of Mississippi with this amount; but I 

see they are going to do it; I see they have been doing it all along; I see that the present administration will not change the rule on that 

subject; and there is some sort of equity, !suppose, in the idea that as 

these Northern States paid their money to whip us fello'Ys d_own there, and we did not pay our share of the cost of the whipping, now after the whipping is all over we ought to return to them the money 

which they paid for whipping us. The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amendment was concurred in. 

The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, and was read the third time. · 

.Mr. 1\I.AHONE. I wish to ask if the bill covers the penalty imposed 

by the law of 1862 on individuals? 

Mr. MORRILL. It does not. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. I ask for the yeas and nays on the passage of 

the bill. . The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded to call 

the roll. • Mr. DAWES. I think the hour of 2 o'clock has arrived. 

Mr. MORRILL and others. Let the roll-call proceed. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The roll-call has commenced. 

The Secretary resumed and continued the calling of the roll. 

Mr. COLQUITT (when his name was called). I am paired with the ·Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. CHACE]. 

Mr. KENNA (when his name was called). I am paired w:ith tho 

Senator from New York [Mr. MILLER]. If I were not paired I 

should vote ''yea.'' 

M.r. COKE (when Mr. MAXEY's name was called). ltfy colleague [Mr. MAxEY] is absent. If present he would vote "ye..'ll." 

Mr. HAWLEY (when Mr. PLATT's name was called). 1\Iy col- - league [Mr. PLATT] is absent by reason of indisposition in his family. 

If be were here I think he would vote ''yea.'' 

Mr. RANSOM (when M:r. VANCE's name was called). My colleague 

[Mr. V A.NCE] has just been called from the Senate. He is paired on party questions with the Senator from Michigan [M.r. PALMER], but 

this is not a question of that character. If my colleague were here he 

would -vote ''yea.'' . The roll-call was concluded. 

Mr. BERRY. I am paired with the Senator from Indiana [Mr. HARRISO~]. 

Mr. KENNA. I announced my pair with the Senator from New 

York, but I am assured he would vote for this proposition if present, 

and so !vote ''yea.'' 

Mr. WHITTHO.RNE. My colleague [Mr. HARRIS] is absent. I 

understand he is generallypaired with the Senator from Vermont [Mr. 

EDl\IUNDS]. It is unnecessary to say that if he were present my colleague would vote ''yea..'' 

:Mr. DAWES. I understand that the absent Senator from Texas 

[Mr.l\!A.xEY], with whom I am paired, would vote "yea" if present, 

and therefore I vote ''yea." .Mr. FRYE. My colleague [Mr. HALE] is necessarily detained from 

the Senate. If present he would -vote " yea." 

The result was announced-yeas 53, nay 1; as follows: 

A.I~rich; 

Allison, 

Beck, 

BlaC'kbnrn, 

Blair, 

Bowen, 

Call, 

Cameron, 

Cheney, 

Cockrell, 

Coke, 

Conger, 

Cullom, 

Dawes, 

YEAS-53. 

Dolph, McMillan, Sherman, 

Eustis, McPherson, Spooner, 

Evarts, .l\Iahone, Stanford, 

Farwell, 1\fanderson, Teller, 

Frye, Mitchell of Oregon,Vest, 

George, Morrill, Voorhees, 

Gorman, Palmer, Walthall, Gray, Payne, Whitthorne, 

Hampton, Ransom, \Villia.ms, 

Hawley, Riddleberger, Wilson of Iowa, 

Hoar, Sabin, Wilson of Md. 

.Tones of Arkansas, Saulsbury, 

.Tones ofNevada, Sawyer, Kenna, Sewell, 

NAY-1. 

VanWyck. 

,. 
1344 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY. 4, 

Berry, Edmunds, 

Brown, Fa.ir, 

Butler, Gibson, 

Camden, Ha.le, 

Chace, Harris, 

Colquitt, Harrison, 

So the bill was passed. 

I 

ABSENT-22. 

Ingalls, 

Jones of Florida, 

Maxey, 

Miller, 

Mitcheil of Pa., 

Morgan, 

:MESSAGE FBOlii THE HOUSE. 

Platt, 

Plumb, 

Pugh, 

Vance, 

A message from the House of Representatives, by :Mr. Cr .. ARK, its 

Clerk, announced that the House had passed a bill (S. 269) for therelief of W. H. Powell. 

The message also announced that the Honse had passed a bill (H. 

R. 7508) granting the right of wa,y to the Annapolis and Baltimore 

Short-Line Railroad Company across the Government farm connected 

with the Naval Academy at Annapolis, Md.; in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate. 

PRESIDENTIAL APPROVALS. 

.A. message from the President of the United States, by Mr. 0. L. 

PRUDEN, one of his secretaries, announced that the President had on the 3d instant approved and signed the following acts: 

.A.n act (S. 9) to fix the day for the meeting of the electors of President and Vice-President, and to provide for and regulate the counting 

of the votes for President and Vice-President and the decision of questions arising thereon; and ' . .A.n act (S. 258!,)) authorizing the construction of a bridge over the 

Missouri River at Saint Louis, Mo. 

AMENDMENT TO RIVER AND HARBOR BILL. 

Mr. CALL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him 

to the river and harbor bill; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce and ordered to be printed. 

RAILROAD ATTORNEYS. 

The PRESIDENT pt·o tempore. The Chair lays before the Senate the 

unfinished business, being Senate bill 2578. 

• The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole,' resumed the consideration of the bill (S. 2578) to prohibit members of Congress from acting as attorneys or employes for railroad companies holding charters or having received grant of lands or pecuniary aid from the United States. 

Mr. WILSON, of Iowa, obtained the floor. 

:Mr. DAWES. Mr. President--

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from Iowa yield 

to the Senator from Massachusetts? 

Mr. WILSON, ofl;owa. For what purpose? :Mr. D.A. WES. I was going to ask unanimous consent that this bill 

be laid aside informally, so that I might call up the Indian appropriation bill. 

Mr. WILSON, Of Iowa. I shall occupy the attention of the Senate 

but a short time, and I prefer to say now what I wish to say on this 

bill. 

The PRESIDENT pro te1npore. The Senator from Iowa is entitled 

to the floor. 

Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. Mr. President, the bill we are now considering was reported by the Committee on the Judiciary with a recom- mendation in favor of its passage. It is true that the original bill as introduced by the Senator from Kentucky [Mr. BECK] was not approved by the committee, and that the report presentB a substitute for 

that measure. But it is also true t.hat the substitute approves the 

principle upon which the original bill is based. Hence the report of the 

committee by necessary implication affirms the constitutional power of 

Congress to pass either the original bill or the substitute. .A. report in 

favor of the passage of a measure which it presents conveys to the 

Senate, by implication at least, the judgment of the committee that 

the thing which it approves is not obnoxious to any constitutional objection. 

The bill introduced by the Senator from Kentucky [Mr. BECK] is as follows: I 

That it shall be unlawful for a.ny member of either House of Congress to ac- cept employment as attorney-a.t-la.w, or payment for services of any kind, or any gratuity whatever from any railroad company, or any officer or agent 

thereof, which obtained its charter, or any grant of lands, or pecuniary a.id from the United States; and a.ny person who violates this provision shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on conviction, be fined in any sum not exceeding $5,000, and imprisoned not more than one year, in the discretion of the court. 

This bill was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary for its con- sideration. After due deliberation the committee reported it back to 

the Senate with an amendment in the nature of a substitute in form 

as follows: 

That it shall be unlawful for any member of either House of Congress to ac- cept employment as attorney-at-law, or payment for servic~s or a.ny kind, in opposition to the United States, in any case to which the United States ma.y be 

a party or in which its interests may be concerned; or from or against a.ny ra.il- . roa.d company which obtained its charter, or any grant of lands, or pecuniary aid from the United States, when measures specially affecting the interests of such railroad are pending before Congress; or from or against any bank or corporation or other officer or agent thereof, which obtained its charter or a.ny pecuniary a.id from the United States; or from or against a.ny corporation or company, its officer or agent, engaged in the business of interstate commerce by la.nd or water, or in the business of any interstate transportation, or in the transporta.tion of the United States mails; or from or against any corporation, com- pany, firm, or person, or officer or agent thereof, engaged in the production, 

manufacture, or sale in the United States, or in the business of importing into the United States from a.ny foreign country, any article whatsoever upon the importation of which any customs duty is now levied, or shall a.t: any time hereafter be levied ; or from or against a.ny manufa.cturer of any article on which an excise tax is now levied, or shall at any time herea.fter be levied, by any act of CongreRS. 

SEC. 2. That a.ny person who ·violates the provisions of this act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, a.nd may be punished by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by fine not exceeding $500, or by both, in the discretion of the <fOUrt. 

This amendment received the support of a majority of t.he commit. 

tee. .A. minority of the commitLee reported an amendment in the following language and form, namely: 

That it shall be unlawful fora.ny member of either House of Congress, or a.ny civil officerlof the United States, to accept employment as attorney-at-law, or pay- ment for services of any kind, or any gratuity whatever from any railroad com- pany, or a.ny officer or agent thereof, which obta ined its charter, or a.ny grant of lands, or pecuniary a.id from the United States; a.nd any person who violates this provision shall be guilty of a. misdemeanor, and, on conviction, be fined in any sum not exceeding $5,000, and imprisoned not more than one year, in the discretion of the court. 

This amendment incorporates into the original bill the w01ds "or 

any civil officer of the United States." 

In no other respect does it propose to change the form or text of the 

original bill. 

It will be apparent to every Senator that if these proposed amendmente; are within the constitutional power of Congress, then the original 

bill does not exceed that power. 

This was admitted by the Senator from New York [Mr. EVARTS] 

when, in the course of the remarks which he made to the Senate on yesterday, he said: 

The Senator from Kentucky asked me how the amendment reported by the Committee on the Judiciary had improved the bill's denunciation of lawyers. 

It ha-s not improved his bill at all, but it has admitted the logic of his bill and applied it discreetly and decorously and logically to other employments, a.nd that wound that the amendment of the Committee on the Judiciary has given to the bill ha.s troubled the Senator from Kentucky. It has taken his logic and reduced it to an absurdity. The Senator denounced it as bringing ridicule and contempt on the profession. He even questioned the good taste of the members of the Judiciary Committee. Now you may read every clause here, and I defy him a.nd challenge him to say that there is a clause here which is not according to the logic of his bill. · I do not think any distinction can be made in regard to some of the matters, nothing can be drawn in the wa.y of distinction between the orinciple of the measure as it came from the hands of the Seuator f1·om Ken- tucky except that you say there is not any such occasion and is not any com- plaint, any restless apprehension about the other classes named in the amend- ment. I challenge the Senator to show the difference between any one of the clauses the Judiciary Committee has appended to tha.t first·clause to distinguish it from the operation of the first one except tha.t there is some fear that some-' body may think we may g·o too far in the ramifications of the principle of the Senator's bill. 

This is a very forceful affirmation of the constitutionality of the original bill when considered in connection with the action of the Committee on the Judiciary in respect of the two several amendments to that measure which it reported to the Senate. Surely nothing in this respect 

bas come from that committee, of which the Senator from NewYorkis a member, with the stamp of its approval accompanied by a denunciation of unconstitutionality. No one will pretend that this is ~o. We are not dealing with any such ridiculous predicament as this. The 

bill is before the Senate with its constitutionality declared by the Committee on the Judiciary. From this judgment I did not and do not now dissent. On the contrary I concur in the opinion held by the other 

members of the committee that it is within the constitutional competency of Congress to enact the bill of the Senator from Kentucky, or to 

substitute therefor either of the proposed amendments. The constitutional question being out of the way there still remains one of another 

character to be answered. Is there any sufficient reason to be found in 

considerations affecting public policy that demands or will justify the 

passage of this bill? The Senator from Alabama [Mr. MoRGAN] in his 

remarks on the bill dudng the session of Friday last said: 

No bill of particulars, no specification of the facts which show a public neces- sity for the public criminal law we are asked to epa.ct here, has been stated; and I think it is due to the Senate of the United States before it shaH act upon a. matter of this kind, of this gra.Ye importance, tha.t somebody should arise on the floor of the Senate and specify that at least some Senator had been guilty of some conduct of a. character that was not reached by law-in the present state of the la.w, which required that our criminal laws should be amended by the in- troduction of this statute into them for its punishment. But nothing of that kind seems to have occurred: at all events it has not been named. If it could be shown here that some Senator had cast a corrupt vote Cor a. land- grant railroad corporation there would be no difficulty in the exercise of the conceded constitutional right of the Senate to expel him from this body, for that right is expressly found in the C~mstitution, two-thirds. of the ~t:nate con, cur- ring therein. If there \VBS anythmg more than an outside susp1c1on to ag1ta.te the mind of this body to ma.ke a.n inquiry and a.n enactment of this kind based upon that inquiry it ought to.be stated, so that the Senate ~ould ha.vea.c~ance 

to expurgate itself by the ordma.rymethods known to pa.rhamentarybodies, by the method secured in the Constitution of the United States, and not by goiog outside of this body and asking a. court of justice in the District of Columbia., or 

wherever it may be, to impose penalties upon that Senator, penalties which may 

be exactly contrary to his duties in this body. 

Evidently that Sena.tor had not discovered such a reason as the question I have stated suggests. But it seems to me that his view of the 

case, as presented in the quotation I have made from his remarks, is 

superficial. To wait until the things which be suggests shall have 

been done before applying to them the denunciation of law would not 

be, it seems to me, the best way to conserve the public welfare. It is 

not ~he usual mode of action in matters of this kind. Communities do 
l 

< 

< 

1887. CONGRESSIONAL REOORD-~SENATE. 1345 

not wait until things which tend to their hurt have transpired before 

declaring against them the prohibition of affirmative law, and I am glad 

to be able to say that the vote which I intend to cast for the enactment 

in proper form of the principle of this bill will not be induced by a 

belief that the things which the Senator from Alabama seems to think 

should precede the enaetment of the proposed legislation do now exist. 

I have no sufficient reason for believing that such things do now exist. 

I place my support of the bill. on a different ground. I believe that 

the bill presents a question of political ethics rather than of present 

criminal conduct. I believe that the ethical principle that it presents 

is a sound one, and that its recognition by affirmative law will be 

promotive of the public good. Holding to this view of the case I can not vote against the principle and purpose of this bill, and I shall derive more satisfaction from the fact of voting to affirm a correct canon 

of political ethics than I possibly could from a conviction of the present 

existence of results which it aims to prevent and which the Senator 

from Alabama affirms should precede its enactment. 

Mr. President, I am not unmindful of the often-asserted charges and 

frequently-expressedsuspicionswhichcometousinthepublicpress, and 

in other ways, and through a multitude of channels indicating a pretty 

widespread demand for some such legislation as this bill proposes. I can not but believe that this demand does very great injustice to this 

body. If called upon to name a member of this Senate who could be 

knowingly swerved from the conscientious discharge of legislative duty 

by reason of professional employment, I could not do it. I donot believe that the case exists. Still I shall vote for the affirmation of the 

doctrine of this bill, without thereby expressing in the slightest degree even a suspicion, not to say belief, that any present member of 

this body by aecepting professional employment of kind and character 

prohibited by its terms would thereby surrender himself to influences 

from which that unknown quantity called bias is evolved, and I make 

this statement without any intention of entering upon a discussion of 

the subjects to be found in that interesting field of mental phenomena 

which in all ages have appeared as the results of the subtle force of intellectual operations inappreciable to the persons affected, but never- theless affirmative in the matter of inducing effects. 

It is in this field of inquiry that the reasons for the suspicions and 

beliefs which may have found lodgment in the public mind in respect 

of the propriety of such legislative action as this bill suggests can be 

found; and the fact that so many people are inclined to enter upon 

that field of inquiry and therein formulate suspicions and beliefs is a 

forceful suggestion, as it seems to me, w by we should declare by law 

the correct principle of political ethics upon which this measure rests. 

If it does no more than s_erve as a protection to the good name of the 

branch of the public service to which it relates, it will not wholly fail 

in the office to which it is assigned. It is best on all accounts that no 

encouragement be given to the people to have other than a good opinion of the public service and of all connected therewith. 

I recognize it as a part of my public duty to do whatsoever I rightfully may to protect the good name of the branch of the public service 

to which I belong. But I do not expect all others to agree with me in 

all that I may do to effect that end. I can only act for myself as the 

light which I have may point the way. The debate on this bill has disclosed sharp divergences of opinion, and they will be affirmed by the 

final vote when it shall have been cast. It seems to me a duty to vote 

for its passage in such form as will most tend to effect its declared purpose. It is, doubtless, quite as clear to others that the principle of the 

bill is all wrong. But however we may differ here, lam quite sure that an affirmative declaration of the doctrine of this bill will be approved 

by the thoughtful people of this country. And this approval will, in 

my judgment, be given-not because of a beliefthatthemembersof this 

body are corrupted by the methods suggested by the bill, but for that 

other and better reason that it will be regarded as a marked recognition 

of a correct principle of political ethics, as well as a resolute affirmation 

of sound public policy. 

Mr. DAWES. I move to lay aside this business and take up the 

Indian appropriation bill. 

Mr. BECK. I ~o not like to antagonize appropriation bills, but I 

know the Indian appropriation bill passes almost on the reading of it, 

and this bill will perhaps take less-than half the time to finish it, if it 

is disposed of now, that it will take if it be postponed for a day or two. 

Mr. DAWES. If no other Senator desires to speak on itMr. BECK. I do not know of any; butlthinkwecan more readily 

dispose of it now than if it is postponed, ·and the Indian bill is a very 

simple one. 

Mr. DAWES. I will not interpose if the bill can be disposed of 

during the next hour; but it is very important, considering that the 

Post-Office appropriation bill is expected t-o be brought up to-morrow, 

that the Indian bill be finished to-day, but I will wait a little while. 

Mr. FRYE. Let us come to a vote. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. MITCHELL, of Oregon, in the 

chair). The question is on the amendment oftheSenatorfromMassachusetts [Mr. HoAR] to perfect the text of the bill. The amendment 

will be read. 

The SECRETARY. .After the word "kind," in line 5 of the original 

XVlll- 85 

bill, it is proposed to strike out down to and including the word 

"court," in line 11, in the following words: From any railroad company, or any officer or agent thereof, which obtained 

its charter, or any grant of lands, or pecuniary aid from the United States; and any person who violates this provision shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on conviction, be fined in any sum not exceeding $5,000, and imprisonment not more than one year, in the discretion of the court. 

And to insert in lieu thereof: 

In opposition to the United States, in any case to which the Unit-ed States may be a party, or in which its interest-s may be concerned, or from any railro~ com- pany which obtained its charter, or any grant. of lands, or pecuniary a1d from 

the United States, if such member shall have reasonable cause to believe that measures specially affecting the interests of such railroad are pending before 

Congress. or are about to be so pending during his term of office. Any person who violates the provisions of Uris act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and may be punished by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by a fine not ex- ceeding $500, or by both, in the discre~ion of the court. 

Mr. DOLPH. I should like to inquire what the amendment just 

read is. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Committee on the Judiciary reported a substitute for the original bill, and the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. HoAR] moves to perfect the text of the bill. 

Mr. DOLPH. Does the proposed amendment, just read, take the 

place of the amendment reported by the committee? 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Not entirely. 

Mr. FRYE. Very largely. 

Mr. DOLPH. I call for the reading of the amendment, tl;en, as it 

would stand if the amendment to the bill were adopted. 

The PRESIDING OF.JiiiCER. The bill as it would stand, if amended, 

will be read. 

The Secretary read, as follows: 

That it shall be unlawful for any member of either House of Congress to ac- cept employment as attorney-at-law, or payment for services of any kind, in 

opposition to the United States, in any case to which the United States may be a party or in which its interests may be concerned, or from any railroad com- pauy which obtained its charter, or any grant of lands, or pecuniary aid from, 

the United States, if such member shall have reasonable cause to believe that measures specially affecting the interests of such railroad are pending before 

Congress, or are about to be so pending during his term of office. Any person who violates the provisions of this act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and may be punished by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by fine not ex- ceeding $500, or by both, in the discretion of the court. · 

Mr. GEORGE. I desire to make one rema1·k on that amendment. 

It is a very difficult question to be determined by a jury whether the 

member of Congress had reasonable ground to believe so and so. With 

that provision in, it would be almost impossible to convict any party 

who should say that he was ignorant that anythin~ affecting the interests of a railroad would come before Congress. For that reason alone 

the amendment ought to be voted down. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the umendment 

of the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. HoAR]. 

Mr. COKE called for the yeas and nays, and they were ordered. 

Mr. TELLER. I should like to inquire if this amendment should 

be voted in, would it be in order to propose the amendment offered by 

the Senator from Delaware [Mr. SAULSBURY], which I think is a better 

amendment than this? Will it be in order after this is a.dopted, if it 

should be, to move that n.mendment? 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. This is a motion to perfect the original text. After that is perfected the proper question will be the 

amendment proposed by the committee. Then it will be in order to 

amend the amendment of the committee. 

Mr. GEORGE. Are we voting on the substitute of the committee? 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. No, sir. 

Mr. FRYE. TheamendmentoftheSenator from Delaware is a substitute for the original bill. Therefore the Chair is entirely right in 

saying that this is to be voted on first. Then that will be in order. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The pending amendment is one to 

perfect the original bill introduced by the Senator from Kentucky. 

After that has been perfected, then the next proper question will be on 

the amendment proposed by the Judiciary Committee, which is subject to amendment. · 

Mr. SAULSBURY. Would it be in order now to offer my amendment, which is in the nature of a substitute for the whole bill? 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is not in order now. The yeas and nays were taken. 

Mr. DAWES (after having voted in tbe affirmati~e). It did not oc- cur to me when I voted that I was paired with the absent Senator from 

Texas [Mr. MAXEY]. I withdraw my vote. If he were present, I 

should vote for the amendment. 

Mr. COKE. I desire to saythatmycolleague [Mr. MAXEY] if present would vote "nay." 

Mr. KENNA. I am paired with the Senator from New York [Mr. 

MILLER 1. If not paired, I should vote "nay." 

Mr. BECK. The Senator from Tennessee [Mr. HARRIS] is paired 

with the Senator from Vermont [Mr. EDMUNDS]. The Senator from 

Tennessee requested me to announce the pair and to say that he would 

vote against all these amendments. If present, he would vote "nay" 

on this amendment. 

Mr. PLUMB. I am pn.ired on this question with the Senator from 

Georgia [Mr. BROWN]. If he were present, I should vote "nay.'' 
I• 

1346 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY 4, 

Mr. COCKRELL. I n,m paired for the day with the Senator from Connecticut [.Mr. PLATT], who is necessarily detainedathomeinconsequence 

of the indisposition of his family. I understand if present that he 

would vote ''nay,'' and therefore I will let my vote ''nay '' stand. 

Mr. EDMUNDS (after having voted in the affi.nnative). I withdmw my vote. I am reminded of what I did not observe before, that 

my friendfrom Tennessee [Ur. HARRIS], with whom I am paired on 

this bill and everything else, is not here. So I withdraw my vote. 

Mr. PALME.R. I am paired with the Senator from North Carolina 

[Mr. VANCE]. Ifhe were here, I should vote "yea." 

.Mr. JONES, of Arkansas. I am paired with the Senator from Indiana [.Mr. HARRISON], but I have transferred the pair to the Senator 

from Louisiana [Mr. GIBSON], so that those two Senators are now paired. 

The result was announced-yeas 2'6, nays 21; as follows: 

YEAS-26. 

Allison, Evarts, 1\IcMillan, 

Blair, Farwell, Mahone, 

Bowen, Frye, 1\Iorrill, 

Call, Hale, Payne, 

Cheney, Hawley, Pugh, 

Conger, Roar, Riddleberger, 

Cullom, Jones of Nevada, Sawyer, 

NAYB-21. 

Aldrich, Coke, McPherson, 

Beck, Dolph, :Manderson, 

Berry, Fair, Mitchell o reg., Blackburn, George, Saulsbury, 

Butler, Gorman, Voorhees, 

Cockrell, Jones Of Arkansas, Walthall, 

ABSENT-29. 

Brown, Gibson, Maxey, Camden, Gray, Miller, 

Cameron, Hampton, Mitchell of Pa., 

Chace, Harris, Morgan, 

Colquitt, Harrison, Palmer, 

Dawes, Ingalls, Platt, 

Edmunds, Jones of Florida, l'lumb, 

Eustis, Kenna, Ransom, 

So the amendment was agreed to. 

Sewell, 

Sherman, 

Spooner, 

Teller, 

Williams. 

'Vhitthorne, 

Wilson of Iowa, 

Wilson of l\ld. 

Sabin, 

Stanford, 

Vance, 

VanWyck, 

Vest. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question now is on the amendment proposed by the Senator from Florida [Mr. CALL], which will be 

read, it being to perfect the amendment reported by the committee. 

The CHIEF CLERK. In line 11 of the amendment of the Committee on the Judiciary, after the word "Congress," it is proposed to strike 

out all down to the end of section 2~ as follows: 

Or from or against any bank or corporation, or other officer or agent thereof, 

which obtained its charter or any pecuniary aid from the Unit.ed States ; or from or against any corporation or company, its officer or agent, engaged in the busi- ness of interstate commerce by land or water, or in the business of any inter- state transportation, or in the tra.nsportation of United States mails; or from or against any corporation, company, firm, or person, or officer or agent thereof, en- gaged in the production, manufacture, or sale in the United States, or in the busi- ness of importing into the United States from any foreign country, any article 

whatsoever upon the importation of which any customs duty is now levied, or shall at any time hereafter be levied; or from or against any manufacturer of any article on which an excise-tax: is now levied, or shall at any time hereafter be 

levied, by any act of Congress. 

SEc. 2. That any person who violates the provisions of this act shall be guilty 

of a misdemeanor, and may be punished by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by fine not exceeding $500, or by both, in the discretion of the court. 

Mr. BECK. Is that the amendment of the Judiciary Committee? 

There is so much noise we can not hear. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Theamendment"just read is an amendment proposed by the Senator from Florida to the amendment proposed 

by the Judiciary Committee. 

Mr. BECK. I have endeavored to get every amendment, but I have 

not seen that. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Thependingamendmentis theamendment offered by the Senator from Florida. 

Mr. BECK called for the yeas and nays, and they were ordered". 

lli. GEORGE. I should like to know before I vote on that amendment whether the last vote substituted 'the amendment of the Senator 

from Massachusetts [Mr. HOAR] for the original bill? 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It did substitute the amendment of 

the Senator from Massachusetts for the original bill so far as it went. 

The Chair will state to the Senator from Mississippi that the amendment proposed by the Senator from Massachusetts was not an entire 

substitute, but a substitute for the greater portion of the text of the 

bill. 

1\fr. GEORGE. The print I have reads, "Strike out all after the 

enacting clause and insert the following." That was offered by the 

Senator from 1\Iassachusetts [Mr. HOAR]. 

.Mr. FRYE. That was not the amendment voted on. 

Mr. GEORGE. It reads, "Strike out all after the enacting clause." 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment of the Senator from 

Massachusetts was not to strike out aU after the enacting clause, but 

after the word " kind " in line 5, and insert what the Senate has 

n,lready agreed to. 

Mr. DAWES. I ask the attention of the Senator from Kentucky. 

I suggest to him that he allow this bill to be laid aside informally and 

that we take up the Indian appropriation bill. [" Oh, no."] Let the 

Senate come to understand where it stands on this bill. 

.Mr. BECK. I hope that will not be done. A postponement of this 

bill now will involve a good deal more debate. I believe we have all 

agreed not to debate it any more. If tbe bill goes over another day 

there maybe extended debate. I am willing to go on now and have it 

disposed ~f. The Indian appropriation bill, as the Senator knows, can 

pass in an hour any day, astbe House and Senate committees have not 

disagreed at all on any matter of principle. 

Mr. HOAR. We can :finish this bill in a few minutes . 

Mr. BECK. Let us have it disposed of. 

Several SENATORS. Go on. 

ThePRESIDINGOFFICER. Thependingquestionison the amendment proposed by the Senator from Florida [Mr. CALL] to the amendment of the Judiciary Committee. 

1\Ir. CALL. That amendment will leave the committee's bill to 

read: 

That it shall be unlawful for any member of either House of Congress to accept 

employment as attornP.y·at-law, or payment for services of any kind, in oppo- sition to the United States, in any case to which the United States may be a party or in which its interests may be concerned; or from or against any railroad company which obtained its charter, or any grant of lands, or pecuniary 

aid from the United States, when measures specially affecting the interests of 

such railroad are pending before Congress. 

1\Ir. BECK. The motion of the Senator, I understand, is to strike 

out all that part of the amendmentofthe Committee on the Judiciary 

after the word '' Congress," in line 11 ? 

1\fr. CA.LL. Yes, sir. 

Mr. CULLOM. I suppose the Senator from Florida does not propose to strike out all the rest of the bill, but simply the rest of that 

section? 

Mr. BECK. The rest of that section. 

M:r. CALL. I propose only to go to the end of that section. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendmentwill be so modified. 

The yeas and nays have been ordered on this amendment. 

The Secretary proceeded to call the roll. 

1\Ir. KENNA (when his name was called). I am paired on all questions with the Senator from New York [Mr. MILLER]. I would vote 

for this amendment if I were not paired. 

Mr. PLUMB (when his name was called). On all questions pertaining to this bill I am paired -with the Senator from Georgia [Mr. 

BROWN]. I do not know how he would vote on this particular proposition; so I withhold my vote. 

The roll-call was concluded. 

Mr. MORRILL. I desire to say that my colleague [Mr. EDMUNDS] 

is paired with the Senator from Tennessee [Mr. HARRIS] on all questions relating to this bill. 

Mr. PA.Ll\IER (after having voted in the negative). I had forgotten 

when my name was called that I was paired with the Senator from 

North Carolina [Mr. VANCE]. I now announce the pair again, and on all further votes on this bill I shall not announce it. I withdraw my 

vote on this amendment. · 

Mr. COLQUITT. I am paired with the Senator from Rhode Island 

[Mr. CHACE]. 

The result was announced-yeas 25, nays 26; as follows: 

YEAS-25. 

Beck, 

Berry, 

Blackburn, 

Bowen, 

Call, 

Cameron, 

Coke, 

Cullom., Eustis, 

Fair, 

Frye, 

George, 

Gorman, 

Gray, 

Hale, Voorhees, 

Hampton, Walthall, Jones of Arkansas, Wbitthorne, 

McPherson, Wilson of Md. 

Aldrich, 

Allison, 

Blair, 

Butler, 

Cheney, 

Cockl·ell, 

Conger, 

Manderson, 

VanWyck, 

Vest, 

NAYS-26. 

Dolph, 

Evarts, 

Farwell, 

Hawley, 

Hoar, 

Mahone, 

Mitchell of Oreg., 

Morrill, 

Payne, 

Pugh, 

Ransom, 

Riddleberger, 

Sabin, 

Saulsbury, 

.ABSENT-25. 

Brown, Harris, 1\faxey, 

Camden, Harrison, 1\Iiller, 

Chace, Ingalls, l\Iitchell of Pa., 

Colquitt, Jones of Florida, 1\lorgn.n, 

Dawes, Jones ofNevada, Palmer, 

Edmunds, Kenna, Platt, 

Gibson, Mcl\Iillan, Plumb, 

Sawyer, 

Spooner, 

Teller, 

Williams, 

Wilson of Iowa. 

Sewell, 

Sherman, 

Stanford, 

Vance. 

So the amendment to the amendment was rejected. 

Mr. SAULSBURY. I desire now, if it is in order, to offer an amendment as a substitute for ihe whole bill as amended. Is that in order? 

The PRESIDING OF.FICER. It is not in order now, in the opinjon of the Chair. The amendment would be in order as a substitute 

for the amendment reported by the committee, but a substitute for the 

whole bill is not now in order in the opinion of the Chair. The Chair 

will state to the Senator from Delaware that the pending question is 

on the amendment proposed by the Judiciary Committee. To that, 

if the Senator from Delaware desires, he can offer a substitute. 

' 
/ 

l 

1887. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 1347 

· Mr. SAULSBURY. Then I wili offer my amendment as a snbsti-1 Mr. HALE. It does not prevent railroads which have received Govtu te for the amendment of the Judiciary Committee. That is in order. ernmen t benefactions from employing counsel outside of the courts, 

Mr. HAWLEY. I ask for information. Does not the amendment where they have private litigation for a certain time or for a specified 

offered by my colleague [Mr. PLATT], similarly in the nature of a sub- object even, although the Government may be interested. As I unstitute, precede the amendment of the Senator from Delaware? derstand it it only applies to the relation where a. counsel is engaged, 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair has not been advised of for instance, by the year at a. regular salary, but it would not prevent 

any such amendment. a company from employing a member of Congress as an attorney for a 

:Mr. HAWLEY. I ask that the clerks may inform the Chair. specific purpose, even if that purpose involved him in relations to the 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment of the Senator's col- Government or in the relation of defending the railroad where it had a 

league has not been formally offered, the Chair is advised. suit with the Government. 

Mr. HOA.R. The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. PLATT] gave notice Mr. SAULSBURY. I understand the amendment to prohibit a 

th_at he would offer it at the proper time. member of Congress first from assuming the relation of general counseL 

Mr. HAWLEY. I give notice that I shall offer it at the first oppor- I understand that the amendment further would prohibit any member 

tunity. I thought he had offered it. of Congress from acting as special counsel in any particular case where 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It has not been offered. the Government of the United States was a party to the suit or interJI.1r. HAWLEY. It has been printed. estedin the result of the snit. That is my understanding of the amendThePRESIDINGOFFICER. Theamendmentproposed by the Sen- ment. 

ator from Delaware [1\.fr. SAULSBURY], intended as a substitute for the Mr. HALE. Where does the Senator find that provision? It is 

amendment reported from the Judiciary Committee, will be stated. not in the printed amendment as I have it. 

Mr. DOLPH. First let the amendment of the committee as it now Mr. SAULS.BURY. The first clause in the substitute which I have 

stands be read. offered is an inhibition against the em ploy men t of a member of Congress 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment of the Judiciary as general counsel or attorney for railroads of a particular class. 

Committee will be read. The proviso as printed reads: 

Several SEN A TORS. It has not been amended. 

Mr. DOLPH. If it has not been amended I do not care to have it 

read. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It has not been amended. The 

That t-his act shall not be construed to prevent members of either House of 

Congress from appearing as counsel in suits by or against such railroad com- panies in the State or Federal courts when the United States is not a party or interested in the result of said suits. 

amendment proposed to it was voted uown. 1.1r. HA.LE. That takes care of the private litigation of companies, 

Mr. BECK. Do I understand the Chair to say that it has not been and allows the attorney to appear. Where in the amendment as amended? printed is the provision which prohibits members of Congress from apThe PRESIDING OFFICER. The only amendment to it that has pearing as attorneys and counsel for raifroad companies in special cases 

been offered since the present occnpant of the chair has been in the where theGovernment is interested, unless the amendment of the Senchair was the amendment of the Senator from Florida [Mr. CALL], ator contains something more than there is in the printed text? 

which was voted down by a majority of 1 vote. Mr. SAULSBURY. I have a.dded an additional clause, which is in 

Mr. BECK. I understood that the amendment offered by the Sen- manuscript: 

ator from Massachusetts [Mr. HOAR] was adopt-ed. Or where the subject-matter of any such suit is pending before Congress, or The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair will state to the Senator such member of Congress has reasonable ground to believe the subject will come from Kentucky that that was not an amendment to the amendment of before Congress for its action. 

the Judiciary Committee. 1\'lr. HALE. I do not find that in the printed amendment. 

Mr. BECK. What was it? Mr. SAULSBURY. No; I added it at the suggestion of the Senator 

The PRESIDING OFFICER It was an amendment to the original from Wisconsin [Mr. SPOONER] after the amendment was printed. 

text, and was agree(l to. The amendment now proposed by the Sen- I wish to state in reference to the amendment that the inhibition of 

a tor from Delaware [Mr. SAULSBURY] will be read. the employment of general counsel differs from the original bill or from 

The CHIEF CLERK. In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by any amendment which has been offered to the bill in this particular, 

the Committee on the Judiciary, it is moved to insert: that it does not undertake to define the crime; it does not undertake 

That it shall be unlawful for any member of Congress to accept employment to prescribe any punishment, but follows the course which was pur- . as general counsel or attorney, or receive payment for services as such general sued in reference to appearances befor~ the Court of Claims, and is a counsel or attorney, from any railroad company, or from any officer or agent · h'b't' f ch 1 t It d t d tak t "d thereof, which obtained its chart-er or any grant of land or pecuniary aid from mere In 1 1 lOll 0 su emp oymen · oes no un er e 0 prov1 e the United States: PrO'Vided, That this act shall not be construed to prevent any punishment for the crime; it leaves that to be dealt with, on the 

members of either House of Congress from appearing as counsel in suits by or idea that members of Congress, being law-makers, would faithfully obagainstsuchrailroadcompaniesintheStateorFederalcourts,whentheUnited tat te hi hth hadth 1 t d . Stat-es is not a party or interested in the result of said suits, or where the subject- serve a 8 U W C ey · emse ves ena-c e · matter of any such suit is pending before Congress, or such member of Congress There is nothing degrading to the Senate in such a proposition, and bas reasonable ground to believe the subject will come ·before Congress for its I have no doubt .that if my amendment should become the law no memaction. ber of Congress would assume the relation of general counsel for railJI.Ir. HALE. I should like the Senator from Delaware to explain to 

the Senate what he believes to be the legal effect or purport of the 

words '' general counsel?'' 

Mr. SAULSBURY. My understanding is that railroad companies 

are in the habit of employing and retaining counsel as their general 

counsel to serve them in such capacities as the interests of the railroad 

companies may require, at a fixed salary. That is the case at least in 

the section of the country in which I live, and I understand that it is 

the system pursued by railroad companies generally. I believe that 

relation to be inconsistent with the position of a •member of Congress, 

- but I do not believe that it is inconsistent with the duties which we 

owe as members of Congress to the Government for a Senator to appear 

in the courts in special cases where the Government is not interested, 

in private suits between parties, and I have sought to draw that distinction. 

There are general counsel engaged by roads who retain that position, 

and it is that relation which I believe to be inconsistent with the duties 

of a member of Congress, because, naturally, being employed for the 

purpose of looking out for the general interests of the corporation which 

has retained him, he may come in conflict with the duties which he 

owes here in questions that come before Congress relating to the particular road which had thus retained him. 

Mr. HALE. I think I see clearly now what the Senator has in view; 

but does not the proviso of the Senator's amendment in the terms take 

care of all case..<~ where railroads or corporations have suits in the courts 

with private parties in which the United States is not interested, and 

would it not be very easy under the term "general counsel" to evade 

the effect of the amendment and take away what the Senator desires? 

Mr. SAULSBURY. The relation of general counsel is inhibited by 

my amendment. 

Mr. HALE. Undoubtedly; but it goes no further. 

Mr. SAULSBURY. It goes no further. 

roads in any case or would appear in any case in a court where the interests of the Government were involved in any way. It would ba in 

harmony with the action that was had with reference to appearance!S in 

the Court of Claims, where there was a simple inhibition against members of Congress appearing in the court; and I believe that that is all 

the legislation we need. • 

Mr. HALE. If it j.s in order, I move to strike out in lines 4 a.ud 3 

the word "general" before "counsel," where it occurs in both lines. 

That would leave the first part of the amendment with a clear inhibi: 

tion against members of Congress accepting employment as attorney{] 

from· railroad companies. That of itself would be so complete that 

without the proviso following no member of Congress could be employed 

at all by these corporations, but with the proviso which follows, "That 

this act shall not be construed to prevent members of either House of 

Congress from appearing as counsel in suits by or against such railroad 

companies in the State or Federal courts, when the United States is not 

a party or interested in the result of said suits," the sweeping clause 

of the first part of the amendment will be so modified that members of 

Congress can appear in all that great domain of suits where the United 

States is not interested; and with t}ili} amendment I believe the object 

that should be sought for will b~ accomplished. • 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair will state to the Senator 

from 1\-Iaine that the amendment proposed by the Senator from Delaware is already an amendment in the second degree. 

Mr. SAULSBURY. I accept the amendment of the Senator from 

Maine. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is accepted. 

Mr. BECK. Let the amendment be read as modified. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment of the Senator from 

Delaware proposed as a substitute for the amendment reported from 

the Judiciary Committee will be read as modified on the suggestion of 

the Senator from Maine. 
1348 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUAHY 4, 

The CHIEF CLERir. In line 4 and in line 5 of the matter proposed 

to be inserted, strike out the word "general;,' so as to read: 

That it shall be unlawful for any member of Congress to accept employment RS counsel or at~rney, or receive payment for services as such counsel or attor- n~y,fr~m any railroad company, or from any officer or agent thereof which ob- tame_d Its charter ?r any grant of land or pecuniary aid from the United States: Provided, That Uus act shall not be construed to prevent members of either House of Co~grc:: s from appearing as counsel in suits by or against such rail- road co~pames ill ~he State or Federal courts, when the United States is not a party o~ ~terest~d m the result of said suits, or where the subject-matter of any such smt IS pending before Congress, or such member of Congress has reasona- ble ground to believe the subject will come before Congress for its action. 

_l'Yir. HALE. I suggest to tb~ Senator from Delaware that he modify 

hiS amendment further by leaVIng out the words which are in manuscript and not in the printed text. It seems to me it is very clear and 

pithy as left in the printed text as now amended and covers every 

ground that it should be sought to cover. ' 

Mr. SAULSBUR~. That is my own impression. I put in those 

words at the suggestwnoftheSenator from Wisconsin [Mr. SPOONER]. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Delaware further modifY his amendment? 

Mr. SAULSBURY. I will omit the part in manuscript from the 

amendment. 

Mr; COKE. How does the amendment now stand? 

-- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment offered by the Senator from Delaware as now modified will be read. 

The CHIEF CLERK. From the matter proposed to be inserted strike 

out the words: · 

Or where the subject-matter of any such suit is pending before Congress, or such member of Congress has reasonable ground to believe the subject will come before Congress for its action. 

Mr. HALE. I understand the Senator from Delaware withdraws 

that part of the amendment. · 

Mr. ·SAULSBURY. Yes; the manuscript part which bas just been 

read. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment of the Senator from 

Delaware to the amendment of the Judiciary Committee will be so 

modified. . 

.Mr. HOAR. There seems to be still a misunderstanding in the Chamber .among some ~~nato~ wi_tb who~ I have conversed, regarding the 

parliamentary poSltion of thiS question. I desire to ask the Chair if 

this bet~~ posit.ion of the q_uestion: The ~enator from Kentucky moved as an or1gmal bill A, to wbJCh the Committee on the Judiciary proposed 

a substitute B. The original bill A was amended by the amendment 

which I reported. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. 

Mr. HOAR. Then to the substitute B, the Senator from Delaware 

moves his amendment as a substitute by striking out and inserting. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is the situation. 

Mr. HOAR. If the amendment of the Senator from Delaware be 

adopted,-then the further question will be whether the substitute B 

(which is the amendment of the Senator from Delaware, if that be 

adopted) shall be substituted for the original bill as it has been 

amended. . · 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct. 

Mr. HALE. Now, let us have the amendment of the Senator from 

Delaware fixed as be desires it before we vote upon it. I understand 

that he modifies it by striking out the last clause, which is in written 

words and not in print. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware will ad-

-vise the Secretary as to the precise character of his amendment. 

Mr. SAULSBURY. The p;ecisecharacterofmy amendment is now 

as it was printed, except as it waB modified Oil' the suggestion of the 

.Senator from Maine [Mr. HALE], by striking on t the word 11 general '' 

before "counsel," in lines· 4 and 5. 

Mr. HALE. That is it. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the 

substitute propos~d by the Senator from Delaware. 

Mr. HAWLEY. I wish to know w hetber the proposition of the Senator from Delaware is not still amendable? 

Mr. RANSOM. Certainly. 

Mr. HAWLEY. My only doubt is whether the amendment I propose to offer w?uld be an amendment ~ the third degree. I wish to 

call the attention of the Senate to the amendment submitted by my 

colleague [Mr. PLAIT], which has been printed, and is, I suppose, upon 

Senators' tables. I suggest that we strike out all after the words '

1 member of,'' in _the third line of the pending amendment- . 

That it shall be unlawful for any member ofAnd insert my colleague's amendment; so as to read: 

That it shall be unlawful for any member of either House of Congress to aC" cept e~ployme~~ as attom~y-at-law, or receive compensation for services ren- dered, ill oppositiOn t-o the mterests of the United States in any suit action or ?ther matter in the result of which the United States i~ directly or' indire~tly ~terested, or in. respect of which any question is pending before Congress, or 

Co~e:res~t !~;t~sk~:. member has reasonable cause to believe legislation b~ 

SEC. ~- That any person who viola~es the pr?visi?ns of this act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and m~y be purushed by Imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by fine not exceedmg $500, or by both, in the discretion of the court. 

The essence of the amendment proposed by my colleague is this: It 

makes no reference to land-grant roads or anv other roads but forbids 

-a member of either House of Congress to bew retained in ~pposition to 

the interests of the '£!nited States in any matter of controversy before 

the courts of the Umted States. It covers the whole question once for 

all, and enc:ls the discussion. I move that as an amendment to the 

amendment offered by the Senator from Delaware. 

Mr. SAULSBURY.- In the first place, I am opposed to that amendment, and perhaps I can afford, as well as any other member of the 

Senate, to oppose it. I have never been retained by a railroad company 

in any suit which such company have ever had. It bas been my fortune to fight the railroad companies in my own State, not only in the 

State courts bnt in the circuit court of the United States and in the 

Supreme Court of the United States. So I can afford now never having been employed as a railroad attorney, to sa.y that I 'believe the 

amendment of the Senator from Connecticut would do great injustice 

to the profession by ~xcluding them from legitimate practice. 

I am opposed to the amendment of the Senator from Connecticut on 

another ground. It undertakes, aB the original bill does aud as every 

amendment.which has. been offered does, except my o;n, to define, 

and. to pumsh as a cnme, employment of members by railroad compan.tes. To ~hat I am OPJ?OSed. rr:be mere inhibition, without desjgnatm~ !hat It shall be ~ttbe_r a misdemeanor or a felony, or without 

prescnbmg a penalty of ImpriSonment or a fine will be more consistent, as I think, with the character of legislator~ dealing with them-

~elves, who will obey an inhibition of law just as readily as they would 

if the penalty of the penitentiary, of the jail, or of a fine, was imposed 

upon them. 

I am opposed to it on all these grounds . 

. Mr. HAWLEY. The Senator's objection goes only to the second sectiOn of the amendment proposed by my colleague, the punitive section. 

S.uppose we omit that. Omitting that, the prohibition in the first sec~ 

twn the Senator do~ not criticise at all. It simply forbids members 

of Congres~ from bemg emploY:ed against the United States, in oppositiOn to the rnter~f-:s of the Umted States, in any legal. matter. As to 

whether the puruttve clause should be there or not, that I consider, aB 

the Senator from Delaware does, a matter of indifference. That is to 

say, it is. q,u~te ~ well.it should be. omitted. I agree with him that 

the prohtbttion 1s suffiCient, but I thmk the general prohibition against 

employment in opposition to the. interests of the United States is a just 

one. Mr. HOAR. I wish to call the attention of the Senator from Delaware to two things, which are mere matters of phraseoloO'y and not of 

intent. In the first place, he prohibits the employment~ counsel or 

attorney by general language. Then be provides that the act shall not 

be construed to prevent members of either House of ConO'ress from appearing as counsel in suits in the State or Federal cour~· but he does 

~ot, I suppose, mean to prohibit them from giving opinions, dra.wing 

rnstruments, and to be consul ted as chamber counsel in matters in which 

the United States has no interest. 

Mr. SAULSBURY. It is applied to a distinctive class of counsel· 

that is, to the general attorneys who are conferred with in reference t~ everything connected with the interests of the company. 

. .11~r. H~A~. But m~ friend does not take my point. I am not critlCtsmg hts Object, assummg that to be all right, but I am askinO' whether 

~is laugua~e ~ffects his object. The Senator prohibits all employment rn the hegmmng. Then he makes an exception of what he considers 

i~n?~ent or harm!~, but he has ?nly excepted from the general pro- htbt~IOn the ~ppearm~ as counsel m suits in court. He ought to add 

!'<> his ~x.ceptwn the ~1gh_t to be employed not in court; that is, in ¢-vmg oprnwns or drawmg rnstruments where it does not affect the United 

States at all. 

Mr. SAULSBURY. I think I would prefer my amendment in the 

form it is in. . 

Mr. HOAR. Let me call my friend's attention to another point. 

He bas prohibited the accepting of compensation in all cases. He has 

come in and said, "You may act as counsel in a certain case," but be 

does not allow the counsel to be compensated for that service. I think 

the Senator will see that the last part of his amendment will have to 

be redrawn a little to carry out what he desires. 

l\£r. SAULSBURY. I do not think so. :Mr. HOAR. Does the Senator meau to allow the person only to 

appear without compensation? 

Mr. SAULSBURY. No, sir. 

Mr. HOAR. That is what the Senator says by his amendment. He 

says the attorney who 1s a member of Congress shall not have any 

compensation for anything, but he may appear in a suit in a State 

court. 

Mr. SAULSBURY. I do not think that construction can be put 

upon it. 

Mr. HOAR. That is what you say by the amendment. 

M:r. SAULSBURY. I do not think that is a fair construction of it. 

Mr. HOAR. Then why not make it right? The Senator provides 

that they shall not be employed as counsel at all. Then he makes his 

exception for the appearing in court in suits. Why shall not Mr. 

Thurman, of Ohio, being a member of the Senate, give an opinion tu 
1887. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 1349 

a railroad company as to the effect of a certain lease with another railroad company, and be paid $50 or $100 for it, in vacation; or why shall 

not Mr. Thurman, of Ohio, being a member of the Senate, draw a lease or a. contract between two railroad companies, with which the 

United States has nothing to do? The Senator prohibits that . . Mr. SAULSBURY. I did that designedly, because whatever we may think about it there is, perhaps, a prejudice in the popular mind 

that the Congress of the United States is being filled up to a certain 

extent by gentlemen connected with the large railroad corporations. 

That may be true, or it may not be true; but, admitting that it is not 

true in fact, nevertheless that opinion is extant in the land and we owe it to. ourselves to extricate ourselves from any supposed htfluences 

of that kmd. An honest prejudice, although it may be only a prejudice, is entitled to respect; and, while I may not at all times yield to 

such a prejudice when we can so far adjust ourselves to the prejudice as to wipe out any stigma upon Congress, I believe we owe it to our- selves to do it. 

My object in the amendment was that the only service which a mem- !>er of Congress should perform for a railroad company should be to go ~to ~he courts openly and above board, to argue the questions in litigatiOn m open court, because if you permit them to sit in their offices 

and act as private counsel you have no restraint over them whatever; 

but when they are exposed to public view, and their services are known 

to the public, then it will be understood. 

I think the amendment suggested by the Senator from Massachusetts 

would virtually annul all the previous provisions of the amendment 

I propose. Therefore, for myself: I prefer to abide by that amendment. 

Mr. CULLOM. I should like to make an inquiry. 

Mr. HOAR. .Allow me to move an amendment. After the word 

'' courts,'' in line 11 of the amendnient of the Senator from Delaware, 

I propose to insert '' and receiving compe!lSa tion for the same.'' That 

would make the proviso read: 

That this act shall not be construed to prevent members of either House of O?n~ress from appearing a.s counsel in suits by or against such railroad compa- mes m the State or Federal courts, and receiving compensation for the same when the United States is not a party or interested in the result of said suits. ' 

That makes it clear. 

Mr. SAULSBURY. I will accept that amendment. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER . . The Senator from Delaware accepts 

the modification. The question is on the amendment proposed by the 

Senator from Delaware as modified. 

Mr. HAWLEY. I beg pardon; the question is on the amendment 

which I offered. 

Mr. CULLOM. That is e~tly what I desired to inquire. 

Mr. HOAR. I wish to move an amendment to the amendment of the 

Senator from Delaware. I desire to perfect the Senator's amendment. 

Mr. HAWLEY. I shall withdraw my colleague's amendment for the 

present. 

Mr. HOAR. I propose to substitute for the word "appearing " in 

line 10 of the amendment of the Senator from Delaware, the word l, acting," and to strike out the words: 

In suits by or against such railroad companies iu the State or Federal courts; 

So as to read: 

From acting as counsel and receiving compensation for the same when the 

United States is not a party or interested in the result. 

I will say "in the subject-matter"-

of said suits. 

The PRFEIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Delaware ac- cept the amendment suggested by the Senator from Massachusetts? 

.Mr. SAULSBURY. The effect of that modification would be to permit every member of Congress who is a lawyer to sit in his office and 

to act as counsel and to give opinions outside of the courts. There is 

not any business for the railroad companies--

Mr. HOAR. If the SenatOr will allow me, I shall not press the 

amendment against_ his judgment. He has framed his amendment to 

suit himself, and I shall not embarrass action upon it. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment suggested by the Senator from Massachusetts to the amendment of the Senator from Dela- ware is withdrawn. 

Mr. HOAR. I withdraw the last amendment. Th€' first one the 

Senator from Delaware a-ccepts. . The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the 

amendment of the Senator from Delaware as modified. 

Mr. BECK. Let it be read as it has been patched up. 

Mr. CULLOM. I suppose the first vote will be on the amendment 

offered by tbe·Senator from Connecticut. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut withdrew his amendment. The amendment as finally submitted by the 

Senator from Delaware will be read. • 

The CHIEF CLERK. In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by 

the Committee on the Judiciary, it is moved to insert: 

_j.'hat it shall be unlawful for any .member of Congress to accept employment as counsel or att<?rney, or receive payment for ~ervices as such counsel or attor- n~y,fr~m any railroad company,or from any officer or agent thereof, which obtamed Its charter or any grant of land or pecuniary aid from the United States· 

Provided, That this act shall-not be construed to prevent members of eitbe; House of Congress from appearing as counsel in suits by or against such railroad companies in the State or Federal courts, and receiving compensation for 

the same, when the United States is nota party or interested in the result of said 

suits. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the 

amendment moved by the Senator from Delaware [Mr. SAULSBURY] 

which has just been read, and which is proposed as a substitute for the 

amendment reported from the Committee on the Judiciary. 

Mr. BUTLER. I ask for the yeas and nays. 

The yeas and nays were ordered. 

Mr. BECK. Mr. President, I do not propose to inflict a speech upon 

the Senate. The amendment of the Senator from Delaware, if it should 

finally become a law, would be a little bit better than nothing; but it 

is so near nothing that it is hardly worth while for the Senate to take 

time about it. It allows any Senator or Representative in Congress to 

b_e counsel in all the great suits of the railroad companies. They may 

s1t here with $100,000 of the money of the Union Pacific, the Central 

:Pacific, the Northern Pacific, or any of the great-land-grant roads of 

the country, in their pockets, and because they have received no fee in 

a particular matter which Congress is considering, notwithstanding they 

have received fees and have been employed for the purpose (without 

their knowledge and consent perhaps) of standing by as the counsel for 

the company in every other case, they are to be regarded as disinterested men ! That is the meaning of the amendment. 

When 1 introduced the bill first, I meant to strike at a great evil_, 

and I limited it carefully so as not to interfere with the general em- ployment of lawyers beyond their employment by those corporations 

and persons who had great and important interests before the Congress 

of the United States. The language of my bill was as follows: 

That it shall be unlawful for any member of either House of Congress to ac- cept eiD:ployment as attorney-at-law, or payment for services of any kind, from 

any railroad company, or any officer or agent thereof, which obtained its 

charter, or any grant of lands, or pecuniary aid from the United States. 

And then a penalty was affixed for members so doing. I showed that 

the reason why I desired such a law to pass was that we have over $100,000,000 to-day in controversy with the great Pacific roads for money 

that we advanced to them to aid them. Empires of land are in controversy now between the people of the United States and those companies; and we are dealing with them in Congress. The Judiciary Com· 

mittee were sitting yesterday all day, I understand, seeking to devise 

ways and means as to how we could best settle with these great railroad companies in regard to the moneys which we have advanced to 

them, and to-morrow that question may be precipitated upon us. Again, the great railroad companies agreed to carry our mails upon 

such tenns as we might prescribe. They agreed to carry our soldiers 

and our munitions of war upon terms that Congress should prescribe, or to carry them free, according to my construction of the law. The 

object of the bill I introduced was to say to members of Congress who were in theii employ on any pretext whatever, \\rhether they had been 

sought for because they were members of Congress, either in the other 

Honse or the Senate, and employed in snits with other railroad com.:. panies or other people, and paid fees ten times out of proportion to what 

their services were expected to be in order to secure their friendship 

here, that they should not take those fees or occupy such relations with 

those railroads when great controversies were pending between the people of the United States and the railroad companies. 

Now with a great show of fairness the Senator from Delaware [~fr. 

SAULSBURY], as fair a man as there is in the Senate, bas been induced to believe that it is a hardship upon lawyers serving in Congress 

to prevent them from taking fees from such corpora~ons except in cases where they are in controversy with the United States in particular 

suits; and every enemy of my bill, everyman who is seeking to defeat 

it by direct or indirect means, is amending and adding to and supplementing and lauding the position taken by the Senator from Delaware, who is himself, I believe, friendly to the purpose I have in view; 

but be bas been made to believe that the measure was too harsh. I 

say he is apparently friendly to the bill, and I mean it with perfect 

respect. He has given the highest evidence that he is friendly to it. 

When the bill was first introduced and laid upon the tables of Senators 

for a week, and the question came on its reference to the Judiciary 

Committee, and then again on its final passage, a bill of five lines, that no man could misunderstand, on the yeas and nays one of the 37 votes 

for the bill was that of the Senator from Delaware. I desire to have 

that record of last year read again and made part of the RECORD of to. 

day's proceedings, with the yeas and nays, so a.s to show how gentle- men are changing now from their position then. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The matter sent to the desk by the 

Senator from Kentucky will be read. · The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

RAILROAD ATTORNEYS. 

Mr. BECK. I gave notice on 1\Ionday that after the close of the morning busi- ness to-day I should ask the Senate to tnke a vote upon Senate bill 2578. I move to take it up for that purpose. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Kentucky moves that the Sen- ate proceed to the consideration of the bill (S. 2578) to prohibit members of Congress from acting a.s attorneys or employes for railroad companies holding 

charters or having received grant of lands or pecuniary aid from the United · States. 

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate, as in Committee r the Whole, 

proceeded to consider the bill. 
1350 ·CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY 4, 

Mr. ~fARo "E. I hope it will be the pleasure of the Senate to take up the a_."Ti- culturnl appropriation bill at or before 2 o'clock. Mr. BECK. The bill I have called up will take but a moment, I hope. I have not a word to say about it. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The bill will be read at length. The Chief Clerk read the bill, as follows: "Be it enacted, &c., That it shall be unlawful for any member of either House of Congress to accept emplo;yment as attorney-at-law, or payment for services of any kind, from any railroad company, or any officer or agent thereof, which obtaiued its charter, or any grant of lauds, or pecuniary aid from the United States; and any person who violates this provision shall be guilty of a misde- meanor, and, on conviction, be fined in any sum not exceeding $5,000, and im- prisonment not more than one year, in the discretion of the court." Mt. EDMUNDs. Has tha t bill ever b e en referred? The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It has not been referred. 1\Ir. EDMUNDS. I move that it be referred to the Committee on the .Judiciary. M.r. B ECK. I think it h a d better be voted down than go there. I ask for the yeas and nays. Mr. EDMUNDS. Then I withdraw that motion and move to refer the bill to the Committee on Finance. Mr. BECK. A reference to any committee amounts to a defeat of the bill. l\lr. EDMUNDS. Then we will take it on the motion to refer to the Committee on the .Judiciary. 

l\lr. BECK called for the yeas and nays, and they were ordered. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The motion is to refer the bill to the Committee on the .Judiciary. The Secretary proceeded to call the rolL 1\lr. VANCE (when his name was called). I am paired with the Senator from Michigan ()fr. PALMER]. If he were present I should vote " nay." 

1\lr. \V ALTHALL (when his name was called). I am paired with the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. SPOONER]. If he were present I should vote" 11ay." The roll-call was concluded. Mr. CAMDEN. I am paired with the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. PLATT]. 

1\lr. KENNA. I run paired with the Senator from Minnesota [Mr. SABINj. The result was announced-yeas 21, nays 24; as follows: 

Allison, 

Blair; Cameron, 

Chace, 

Cullom; Dawes, 

Edmunds, 

Evarts, 

Frye, 

Halt-, 

Hawley, 

Hoar, 

YE.A.s-21. 

McMillan, 

Mahone, 

Miller, 

1\litchell of Oreg., 

Morrill, 

Sawyer, 

N.A.Ys-24. 

Sewell, 

Sherman, 

Teller. 

Beck, 

Berry, 

Brown, 

Butler, 

Call, 

Cockrell, 

Coke, 

Colquitt, 

Eustis, 

George, 

Harris, 

Harrison, 

Jones of Arkansas, Riddleberger, 

McPherson, Saulsbury, 

1\laxey, Vest, 

Payne-, Whitthorne, 

Pugh, Wilson of Iowa. Ransom, Wilson of 1\Id. 

ABSENT-3L 

Aldrich, Gorman, Logan, 

Blackburn, Gray, Manderson, 

Bowen, Hampton, Mitchell of Pa., 

Camden, Hearst, :!\-!organ, 

Conger, Ingalls, Palmer, 

Dolph, .Tones of Florida, Pike, 

Fair, Jones of Nevada, Platt, 

Gibson, Kenna, Plumb, 

Sabin, 

Spooner. 

Stanford, 

Vance, 

VanWyck, 

Voorhees, 

Walthall, 

So .the motion to refer was not agreed to. v 

The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, ordered to be en- ~rossed for a third reading, and read the third time. The PRESIDENT pro tempo're. Shall the bill pass? Mr. HALE. I ask for the yeas and nays on the passage of the bill. The yeas and nays were ordered; and the Secretary proceeded to call the 

roll. • l\ir. CHACE (when Mr. ALDRICH's name was called). I wish to announce that ·my colleague [Mr. ALDRICHj is paired with the Senator from Louisiana [Mr. 

GIBSON]. Mr. MAXEY (when his name was called). I am paired with the Senator from :Michigan [Mr. CoNGER] on political questions, but as I presume he would vote for this bill if here, I vote " yea." Mr. MILLER (when his name was called). I have just been asked to pair with the Senator from South Carolina [1\lr. HAM:PToN]. If he were here,! should vote "yea." Mr. VANCE (when his name was called). I am paired with the Senator from Michigan [1\lr. PALMER]. If be were present, I should vote" yea." 

l\1. ·wALTHALL (when his name was called). I am paired with the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. SPOONER]. If he were present, I should vote "yea." The roll-call was concluded. 1\I. BUTLER. I am quite sure my colleague [Mr. HAMPTON], if he were present, would vote "yea. " on this question. So if the Senator from New York desires to vote, he can cast his vote. Mr. MILLER. Then I vote" yea." Mr. KENNA. I announce again that I run paired with the Senator from Minne- sota [l'llr. SABIN]. If he were present, I should vote" yea." Mr. BECK. MY.: colleague [Mr. BLACKBURN] is absent, p a ired wiLh the Senator from Nebraska Llli. MANDERSoN], who is also absent, both under the orders of the Senate. My colle ag ue, if present, would vote "yea." 

1\Ir. CAMDEN. I am paired with the Senator from Connecticut [1\lr. PLATT]. tfhe were present, I should vote" yea." Mr. Mcl\liLLAN. My colleague [Mr. SABIN] is a bsent from the city and is sick. If he were present, my impression is tha t he would vote " yea." 

1\Ir. KENNA. On tha t sta tement I vote" y ea." The res ult was announced-yeas 37, nays 11; as follows: 

Allison, 

Beck, 

Berry, 

Blair, 

Brown, 

Butler, 

Chace, 

Cock rell, Coke, Colquitt, 

Bowen, 

Cameron, ~ 

Dawesr, 

YEAS-37. 

Cullom, K e n na, Dolph, McMilla n, Eustis, l\IcPherson, 

Frye, Mahone, G eorge, Maxey, H ale, Miller, H a rris, Morrill, H arris on , P ayn e , H awley, Plumb, Jones of .Arkansas, Pugh, 

NAYS-11. 

Ransom, 

Saulsbury, 

Sherman, 

Vest, , Whitthorne, 

Wilson of Iowa, Wilson of 1\Id. 

Edmunds, 

Evarts, 

Hoar, 

Mitchell of Oreg. , Sewell, 

Riddleberger, Teller. Sawyer, 

ABSE!\"'T-28. 

Aldrich, Gorman, Blackburn, Gray, 

Call, Hampton, 

Camden, Hearst, 

Conger, Ingalls, 

Fair, .Tones of Florida, Gibson, .Tones of Nevada, 

So the bill was passed. 

Logan, 

1\Ianderson 

l\iitchell ofPa., 

Morgan, 

Palmer, 

Pike, 

Platt, 

Sabin, 

Spooner, 

Stanford, 

Vance, 

VanWyck, 

Voorhees, 

Walthall. 

Mr. BECK. Mr. President, before the final death of this bill, be- cause the amendment proposed by the Senator from Massachusests de· 

stroyed it-we all understand that-and the amendment of the Senator from Delaware is only intended to lay it a little bit more decently 

in the grave, I desire to say that I am content with the record made at 

the last session of Congress. 

Mr. KENNA. Before the election? 

1\Ir. BECK. I know nothing about before or after the election, but 

I am willing to stand upon the record then made by gentlemen who 

underetood fairly the purpose of the bill. I leave it to them to satisfy 

themselves w by they should now be willing to license every man in both 

Houses of Congress to be acting as an attorney for these great railroad 

corporations when on the first impulse the common instinct of almost 

the whole Senate went out in the expression .that it was not a proper 

thing to allow men to be in either body when they had the money of 

the corporations with whom they were dealing, as Congressmen, in their 

pockets under any pretense whatever. 

1\iy bill was taken away, however, on .a motion to reconsider, and was sent to the Committee on the Judiciary. The distinguished gen- tlemen of that committee conceded by their action that the subjectmatter was a proper one for us to consider, and that the bill was con- stitutional; and they reported what? They reported the following 

substitute for the bill which I had introduced, and which was referred 

to them: 

'Ihat it shall be unlawful for any member of either House of Congress to ac- cept employment as attorney-at-law, or payment for services of any kind, in 

opposition to the United States, in any case to which the United States may be a party or in which its interests mav be concerned; or from or against any rail- road company which obtained its charter, or any grant of lands, or pecuniary aid from the United States, when measures specially affecting the interests of such railroad are pending before Congress; or from or against any bank or cor- poration or other officer or agent thereof which obtained its charter or any pe- cuniary aid from the United States; or from or against any corporation o r com- pany, its officer or agent, engaged in the business of interstate commerce by land or water, or in the business of any interstate transportation, or in the transporta- tion ofUnitedStates mails; or from or against any corporation, company, firm, or person, or officer or agent thereof, engaged in the production, manufacture, or sale in the United States, or in the business of importing into the United States from any foreign country any article whatsoever upon the importation of which any customs duty is now levied, or shall at any time hereafter be levied; or from or against any manufacturer of any article on which an excise tax is now levied, or shall at any time hereafter be levied, by any act of Co»gress. Sxc. 2. That any person who violates the provisions of this act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and may be punished by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by fine not exceeding $500, or by both, in the discretion of the court. 

That was the deliberate act of the Judiciary Committee of this 

body. 

Mr. COKE. Of a. majority of that committee. 

Mr. BECK. Of course the minority dissented; but a majority con- stitutes a committee, parliamentarily speaking, and the distinguished 

gentlemen who are now talking about the bill that I introduced being 

unconstitutional, themselves, when required by a vote of the Senate 

to perfect the bill and to present a proper measure for its consideration, 

agreed not only that all which I had proposed was right in itself, but 

they added provision after provision to it and submitted to the Senate 

for approval as their substitute for it, what! have just read. To-day, 

when the Senator from Florida [Mr. CALL] moved an amendment to 

strike out all after the word ''Congress,'' in line 11 of the substitute, 

excluding from its provisions all those features which but for the high authority of the Judiciary Committee we should almost be led to 

believe were intended as a burlesque on legislation, on a. call of the 

yeas and nays those distinguished gen~lemen voted down the proposed 

amendment of the Senator from Florida, and by their vote on the call 

of the yeas and nays within the last half hour they tell the Senate and 

tell the world that they believe that all I have read is not only legiti- mate, but good and proper legislation, better than anything that I proposed, and they offer it to us as a substitute, and on the yeas and nays 

stand by it. I am willing to go before the country on the record of my 

bill and the substitute of the Judiciary Committee, and on t.he yeas and 

nays called to-day on the refusal to strike out the portions of it which 

I regard as a burlesque on all decent legislation, when the question was fairly presented on the amendment of the Senator from Florida, 

himself an opponent of the original measure. Mr. President, there is no disguising the fact that a portion of the 

Senate, of whom I am oife, believes, and believes in earnest, that when men ~ome members of either House of Congress- they should sever any relations they may have with the great land-grant railroads of this 

country who hold empires of our land and over one hundred millions 

of our money, who are under obligations to us in regard to our mails 

and the transportation of our troops and munitions of war. These 

gentlemen can not serve two masters; and when they take $5,000 a year to serve the people of the United States they must relinquish the 
1887. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 1351 

fees they are getting, under any pretense whatever, from the great cor- porations that have heretofore employed them. 

The amendment reported by the Senat.or from Massachusetts and 

the amendment proposed by the Senator from Delaware leave the door 

wide open for every member of either House of Congress who happens 

to be a lawyer (and I am told that there are sixty-five out of seventysix Senators who are lawyers) to have his pockets full of the money of 

these great railroad corporations under the pretense that members of 

Congress have been employed in suits with other roads, or suits with 

other people, or under any pretense whatever, so that they were not in 

direct litigation with the United States. I want to do something or to do nothing. The amendment p10posed by the Senator from Massachusetts has been already voted in, and the amendment of the Senator 

from Delaware means nothing and will deceive nobody, however honest some Senators may be in believing that it does something. No intelligent man ir:. the country will believe that it does, or that it can do 

anything; and some will be malicious enough to think that it was not 

intended that it should do anything. 

The amendment now offered by the Senator from Delaware being, as 

I regard it, absolutely worthless, I am willing to stand on the issue with 

the amendment of the Judiciary Committee, and I propose to -vote 

against the amendment of the Senator from Delaware, which does no real good, so as to see whether the Judiciary Committee itself will vote 

foritsownsubstitute. I desirethemembersofthemajority ofthatcommittee to have an opportunity by a yea-and-nay -vote to tell the country 

that that is good legislation, and I do not propose, as far as I can help 

it, by voting for a mild bread-pill, apparently an improvement upon 

theirs, especially as they refused to strike out the worst parts of it when 

the Senator from Florida moved to have it done, and stand by it all. I 

shall vote against the substitute of the Senator from Delaware, and if 

it is -voted down we shall then see whether the distinguished gentlemen of the Judiciary Committee will -vote for their own substitute when 

the chance is given them. 

I do not propose to argue this question elaborately. I want to come to a vote. I showed, when I argued this case before, that there was nothing new in this proposed legi.,lation. The Judiciary Committee 

admit, all the amendments admit, that it is a subject about which we can legislate. When I introduced the bill it was not, as has been intimated, to make a charge against anybody. I do not legislate in that 

way; nor do I make personal attacks upon men; but I have beard in 

the Senate language used by Senators to each other which makes it 

.important that we should take some steps to prevent that sort of crimination and recrimination, which tends to bring us into disrepute before 

the country. 

On the 28th of last May, within a day or two of the time when I introduced the original bil1, the Senator from Vermont [Mr. EDMUNDS], 

in speaking of the efforts that were made to -fmueit parts of the land 

grant of the Northern Pacific road, said: 

I wish to speak to the pending bill as illustrating the bill that has just passed away from the consideration of the Senate. I wish to call the attention of my brother Senators to the circumstance that a bill considered by a committee and reported by that committee, by a majority (I do not knowwhetheritwasunan- imous or not, probably not), wMch proposes to forfeit 200 miles or more of a land grant in the rich valley of the Columbia, in respect to whlch probably all Senators would agree that it ought to be forfeited-has been by a. yea-and-nay vote (if I may use such a phrase now) bedeviled, as if we were all employed by a railroad company to bedevil it, and do nothing at all by the propositions of amendments, and insisting upon considering them, that raise open and difficult and disturbing questions, which our former experience has shown are not likely to be decided in the six weeks that are probably yet left for the ad1on of Congress at this se.s$ion. 

A colloquy, as I gave it before, occurred between my friend from 

Mississippi [Mr. GEORGE] and the Senator from Oregon [Mr. DoLPH] of 

the same general character. The Senator from Mississippi said : 

I am willing to yield to any reasonable length, but I can not give way to hear all the apologies and all the reasonings, and everything of that sort of a railroad company. 

Mr. DoLPH. It is simply a question whether the Senator yields for me to finish my statement. Mr. GEORGE. I believe I will not. You can reply to me. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Mississippi declines to yield. Mr. GEoRGE. I have no doubt the Senator from Oregon as a lawyer has had a great deal of experience in reference to railroad companies whlch would in- terest the people of this country, but as I am just now going on with the people's side of the case I ask him to wait until I get through. 

So I have speeches made by other Senators intimating, twitting each 

other, perhaps not intending anything offensive, but suggesting to the country that we were acting in the interest of railroads ; and every once in a. while when a Legislature sends a man here the press of the 

country and the people of the country belie-ve that be is sent by 

railroad or other great influences to represent them and not to repre- sent the people. What I desire is, as long as I am in this body, to 

have it understood that no member can be interested for those great 

land-grant railroads in any way by taking fees from them in snits that 

they may have with anybody, or by taking their money on any pretense whatever when we are dealing with them, and that he must come 

here free from all embarrassment when he is acting on the question of 

land forfeitures, or what to do with the great amount of money we have loaned the railroads, or when we are arranging tocarryour mails, our troops, or our munitions of war, and that he shall be able to say 

to any slanderer anywhere, ''If you think I am an interested man go 

to the courts and prove it ; I hold myself ready to answer your charges. ' 1 

Mr. GEORGE. I desire to say that in the extract which the Senator 

from Kentucky quoted from the speech which I made last session I did 

not intend to impute to the Senator from Oregon [Mr. DoLPH] anything improper or any improper relation with any railroad company 

whatever. - Mr. BECK. I had no idea that the Senator from Mississippi was making any charges; but he will readily see that when the Senator 

from Vermont, the distinguished leader of this body and chairman of 

the Judiciary Committee, and the distinguished Senator from :M:ississjppi and others are talking in that way, it is better for us that we 

should have a law prohibiting us from having any connection with these 

railroad companies. · I have read twice during this debate the acts of Congress declaring 

that no member of ·either House shall prosecute any suit in the Court 

of Claims even for his most deserving constituent. Why ? Because 

it is inconsistent with the duty of a. member of eithel' House to take 

any parti"n a case in which the United States is concerned. I read laws 

showing that he can not even t:tke money from a man to obtain a con- tract or a place, or to appear before a court-martial or any other tribunal, because it is inconsistent with his positioh. In every contract 

that is made with the United States there bas t.o be a clause inserted 

that no member of either House is interested in it, and there is a whole 

line of legislation in the same direction as that now proposed. 

lli. President, if this case had not been argued so well by other Senators I might be tempted to go on. The Senator from Arkansas [Mr. 

BERRY] argued it the other day in a. way that commended his speech 

to the country. . I have not his speech before me; but the Senator from 

Maryland [Mr. WILSON] followed him, and in his speech, which no man has answered, and which no man can answer, he not only showed 

the policy, the propriety, but the absolute necessity oflegislation such 

as the bill I had the honor to offer proposes. 

If I heard correctly amidst the confusion the statement of the Senator from Delaware in the argument he made, he seemed willing that 

e\en no penalty should be attached for a violation of the proposed law. 

I believe I am correct in that; at least the Senator does not seem to 

dispute it. A law without a penalty, lea-ving it to the honor of men, 

has never been recognized in any of the legislation of this country. 

All the laws I quoted, in regard to contracts, in regard to the Court of 

Claims, &c., have their appropriate penalties, and some of them muca 

heavier than those I propose. 

But I was about to say that the Senator from Maryland [Mr. WILSON], in the speech which be made the other day, came up to my ideas 

of what ought to be done, and the reasons be gave were so conclusive 

to my mind that I do not care to repeat them, except by reading a few 

ex.tractsfrom his speech which I will adopt as my own. The Senator, 

after showing how we ought to preserve the purity of legislation, said: 

. It would be an invitation to a general system of robbery, peculation, fraud, and inefficiency if Congress had not the power to impose penalties upon its agents and fiduciaries commensurat-e with its powers and duties, and necessary to insure the right performance of the varied functions of government. And it would indeed be a strange anomaly if the legislative power could embrace all other repositories of the functions of government within its range of criminal legislation, but should be nerveless to take any step to repress grave offenses among its own constituent members-if it were armed with full energy to keep pure every streamlet of governmental agency, but were powerless to pass any act to protect from pollution the great fountain of political life right here in its own bodies. Nothing can be found in the language of the Constitution to war- rant so remarkable an assumptioD, and certainly there is nothing in the nature or reason of things to justify it. 

Again the distinguished Senator said: 

Momentous questions, involving ·the forfeitUl"e back to the people of un· earned grants of many millions of acres of land, and the claim of the Govern- ment for most valuable services which these corporations, by the terms of their charters, undertook to render to the Government, and also the settlement of immense sums of money claimed to be due from them to our 'I'reasury, are either of chronic standing or perpetually arising. 

* * * * * * * Gentlemen may refine as they will, and wax eloquent over the dignity of the legal profession, and denounce the attempt to invade the rights of the citi- zen to pursue his calling free from governmental control; but the people have d eep and abiding convictions that no member of Congress has any right to place himself in any such indelicate or compromising position. 

The Senator from Maryland is right. The voice of the country will 

respond to the honest impulses he has there given utterance to. As to 

not imposing any penalty as is suggested by the Senator from Delaware, 

the Senator from Maryland answered that position very well a little 

further on. He said: 

The Constitution even contemplates that the hightest may fall, and bas organ- ized a court of impeachment which can strip the ermine from the shoulders of your Chief-Justice or drive a President from the White House. There is no reason, either in the principles of human nature or in the light of our own or of any other people's experience, why we should assume (much less grow in- dignant at the contrary supposition) that members of Congress, even if they be lawyers, like the rest of mankind, may not be successfully assailed by temp- tation. I tis extremely right and judicious, then, to provide all reasonable safe- guards against the' possible lapse of legislators from the path of duty. To do this does not involve a charge against any man in either House of Congress. II; 

is only an assertion of a truth, which no one will deny, that to err is human and that human nature requires all the prop~ attainable to keep it from falling. 

Further on the Senator from Uaryland said: 

It has been further strenuously argued that Congress has no power to pass this bill, because it would be an assertion of a power to regulate the right of an at- torney of a State court to practice law in snch court-the power to impose such restrictions upon a practitioner in a United States court being conceded, so fa.r 
1352 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-_ SENATE. FEBRUARY 4, 

as this particnlar view is concerned. Some supporters of the general scope and purpose of this bill, as it originally stood, recognize this distinction, and would 

limit the bill to lawyers practicing in Federal courts. With all deference to the 

views of these eminent lawyers, I have no difficulty in going to the full extent of the legislation originally p1·oposed by the Senator from Kentucky. I hold 

that we are not claiming the power to regulate or controlRtatelawson this subject. We are simply regulating the conduct of members of Congress in reference to the discharge of their duties as such. When a man comes here, if he be a lawyer, in everything relating to or bearing upon the discharge of his duty on this floor his character as a lawyer is or should be merged in his character as a Senator. His duties to the public are or should be paramount to any duties 

owed to a citizen or to a corporation. 

• * * * • * * .And right here, sir, appears to rest the full and complete answer to the amend- ment proposed by the Judiciary Committee, which seeks to discredit the bill 

before us by professing to carry it out to its logical consequences. Becau:re it 

might be childish to attempt to prevent a member of Congress from allowing 

himself to be retained by a man or a corporation with some much less important interest opposed to the Government, it is highly illogical to argue that no case can arise in which interests can be so powerful, so aggressive, and so seductive as not only to render it unseemly and impolitic, but actually dangerous to leg- islative rectitude, to allow members of Congress to be retained as attorneys in 

their behalf. The science of government is not only the science of the attainable, 

but also of the expedient. Legislation in one class of the cases supposed may well be highly expedient and necessary, while in the other its utter needless- ness would only render it ridiculous. ·or the one class is the wholesome legislation proposed by the Senator from Kentucky in this bill as it originally stood; 

of the other, with all due respect to the committee, is their amendment. 

* * * * • • • 

Surely, these great corporations· can find multitudes of able counsel to pros- ecute their claims against the Government without seeking to impress into their 

service members of Congress, who were sent here, above all things, to protect 

the rights of the people, and whose employment by such corporations will be surely suspected to have been often sought simply because they do sustain that very relation to the States or to the people. II, then, members of Congress do not desire such employment, and do not intend to accept it, and if the moral sense of the people demands that they should not do so, and if to accept it would 

tend to bring Congress into disrepute, why not pass the law as originally pro- posed, satisfy the public demand, and dispel any cloud of suspicion which a con- trary course will be sure to gather around us? 

• • * • * * * 

That profession, we must remember, is the only one whose members bold 

themselves out to the world as prepared to undertake the business of clients for 

pecuniary considerations, and who bind themselves by oaths to faithfully prose- cute such business when intrusted to them. Let us recall another fact developed by this discussion, that, out of seventy-six members of this body, sixty-five are lawyers. lithe outcome of this debate should be an approval of the position 

that it is becoming and proper for a Senator who is a lawyer to become a re- tained counsel for a land-grant railroad, each one of these sixty-five lawyers will 

be at liberty, with the expressed approval of tlie Senate, to accept a retainer by .. t.hese railroads. 

Thus, 85 per cent. of the Senate's members might, with the Senate's approval, be subject to whateYer bias such retainer might generate when here called upon t0 decide questions ofthe highest importance (though in precisely opposite directions) both to their clients and to the people. 

So I might read other extracts as conclusively in favor of the proposition that I maintain. 

Now, Mr. President, all I have to say is, let us take a fair vote on the bill as presented, as voted upon once by the Senate, as passed on a call of the yeas and nays by a vote of 37 to 11. Do not let us have any 

evasion upon that question or any doubt as to where we stand. If Senators have changed their minds and desire to vote against it now, let 

them do so, but do not let us go before the country and assume that we are doing something that is equivalent to it, or that we are making some substitute that will answer every purpose and reach every evil, 

when the fact is that every substitute proposed and every suggestion 

made in the direction of a substitute, whether by the Judiciary Committee or by any amendment offered, meant either to make the bill so ridiculous that nobody could vote for it, or to leave untouched all the 

evils which the bill sought to remedy. 

These evils will not be remedied so long·as members of both Houses 

of Congress can be attorneys for the railroads in all their suits, so long as they can be employed under all sorts of pretens~, and receive heavy 

fees, whether the railroads want their services or not, or whether they 

employ them merely because they think it best to keep them as their 

agents and under their control, or from whatever motive the railroad 

companies act. There are a thousand ways in which they can make a man believe that they need his services when they want him as their 

friend in the Congress of the United States, not paying for what he does 

in Congress, not bribing him directly for his vote, but keeping him in 

their employ for everything else. All the amendments allow that to 

be done, and as long as that is allowed we migh~ as well have no law 

at all seeking to control or curtail the relations which exist between 

the great land-grant railroans and members of Congress whom they 

desire to keep under their control. 

ltlr. SAULSBURY. I had not intended to say anything in advocacy 

of the amendment I offered, but to content myself simply with an ex- planation of the provision I proposed as a substitute for the bill of the 

Senator from Kentucky, and to answer such inquiries as were made of me in reference to what was the import of the measure. But I can not 

now let the remarks which have just been made by the Senator from 

Kentucky in denunciation of the amendment which I have proposed 

and in advocacy of the bill which he himself proposed, pass unnoticed. 

I am willing to concede to the. Senator from Kentucky a monopoly of all the talent and all the virtue that there is in this body, for he cer- tainly assumes it himself, and I shall not controvert his position with 

him; but I think it a little ungenerous that that Senator should rise in 

his place and denounce other gentlemen who see proper to diffe-r with 

him in reference to a question pending in the Senate. The tendency 

of his remarks was to show that because we had upon a.n impulse of the 

moment voted for his bill, any change of view which any of us might 

express was a change of view that was not an honest one. Mr. BECK. Oh, I can not submit to that. I have neither so claimed nor have I charged any member, nor have I suggested that as the reason for any change of view. I deny it. 

Mr. SAULSBURY. The Senator from Kentucky said in reference 

to my amendment that the Senator from Delaware had voted for his 

bill but had been induced-" induced "-to change his opinion. I 

should like to know what is the meaning of the word "induced," as applied by the Senator from Kentucky. If that Senator--

Mr. BECK. Ob, Mr. PresidentMr. SAULSBURY. If he attempts to cast any imputation upon the 

action of myself--

Mr. BECK. Now, Mr. President- . Mr. SAULSBURY. Or any otberSenator--

Mr. BECK. Allow me to ask, does not the Senator from Delaware 

know that I said there was no man whose integrity was higher or who was more above suspicion than he? ~1r. SAULSBURY. Then I caution the Senator to be more guarded 

in expressions which he uses in debate w ben referring to myself. Mr. BECK. I will let my remarks go into the RECORD without 

looking at them, and if the Senator finds a word in them that looks a8 

though any improper motives were attributed to him or to any other 

gentleman here, by a remark I made in the Senate, I shall rise to-mor- row when I see it and apologize tor it. 

Mr. SAULSBURY. I do not ask the Senator to apologize for anything he said. I know he used the expression that I had been induced 

to offer this amendment. Such imputations, conveyed in language of 

that kind, I resent here or anywhere else, whenever the Senator from 

Kentucky may feel disposed to call me to account for anything I say 

in reply to him. Such an imputation was unworthy of the Senator; it was unworthy ofthe Senate; and I stand here now and say that what- ever may be his virtue, whatever may be his purity, he is not the su- perior of other Senators in this body in those regards. I have followed 

that Senator frequently, but I can not sit here, and simply because an honest difference of opinion exists between him and myself or between 

him and other Senators, tolerate expressions calculated to cast reflection upon men as honorable and as worthy as he is himself. 

I did not vote for the Senator's bill. I believed at the time that it was right. Subsequent reflection convinced me that it went too far. 

Subsequent reflection convinced me, in the first place, that the provision which made the employment of members of Congress by railroads a misdemeanor punishable by fine and imprisonment was wrong; 

and in turning to the a-ct which inhibited the employment of members 

of C-ongress in the Court of Claims I found that no such penalty was attached, that it was simply an inhibition. In drawing my amendment I followed that provision which is simply an inhibition against 

the employment of members of Congress in the Court of Claims. That was one provision which I thought was wrong. 

Another provision which I thought was wrong in his bill proposed 

to inhibit the employme.=tt of members of Congress as counsel in open 

court where the Government of the United States was not concerned. 

So far as my amendment p;oes, no member of Congress can take em- ployment and give advice even in reference to any matter which is not 

pending in court. His services for a railroad company must be such 

that they must be open beforetheworld. It prohibits him from being 

attorney or counsel except as is provided for in the amendment, that 

he may appear in suits in court and receive compensation for such ser- vices. 

I had not intended to say anything in advocacy of my amendinent. 

I believe it is right, and I believe it goes as far as any provision of law 

ought to go. It prohibits a member of Congress from acting as attorney or counsel for railroads that have received a land grant or aid of any 

character from the Government, wit~ the exception contained in the 

proviso that in suits in courts where the United States is not interested 

he may appear and receive compensation. I hold ·that under the provisions of that amendment no memberofCongress can give advice and 

receive compensation for it upon any subject except.in connection with 

the suits pending in courts. In all other respects he is excluded from 

appearing for these land-grant railroads or from rendering them any as- sistance whatever. 

But I was not in favor of the provision which denounced it as a misdemeanor and punishable with fine and imprisonment because, in the 

first place, that is unnecessary. Whenever such a law is passed here I 

have no doubt that it will be observed by every member.. of Congress, 

just as the provision in respect to practicing in the Court of Claims has 

been faithfully observed ever since it was enacted, although without a single provision designating it a crime or providing any punishment for 

a disobedience of the law. I understand that to be the case with refer- ence to practicing iD. the Court of Claims. 

This is all I desire to say, and I am very sorry that the remarka of 

the Senator from Kentucky have caused me to say this much, but I 

could not sit by and hear motives impugned, and especially hear language imputed, that conveys to the world the idea that a Senator has 

been approached by some pexson with ·a view to tender him a fee for his 

services in connection with this bill. 

Mr. BECK. Mr. President, I do not propose to answer the ill-natured 
I 

J 

1887. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE: 1353 

and unjust remarks of the Senator from Delaware. The RECORD will 

show that he has raised a storm about nothing, and that is a mild way 

to put it. I have only to say that I am willing when he tells me that 

I am not the peer of other Senators--

Mr. SAULSBURY. I beg pardon; it was a lap~us lingum if I said so. Mr. BECK. When he tells me that I am not the peer of other Senators here, I will leave it to the country either on the record or anywhere else. 

Mr. SAULSBURY. I want to say to the Senator that it was a laps-us 

lingum if I used that word. I did not intend to say that he was not 

the peer, but that he was not the superior, as he-- - Mr. BECK. I never claimed to be superior to any other Senator, 

but I am the peer of the Senator from Delaware or anybody else in this 

Chamber. · 

?t1r. ALDRICH. I move an amendment to the amendment of the 

Senator from Delaware. It is simply a renewal of the amendment of 

the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. PLATT]. I desire to test the sense of the Senate upon the proposition. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Rhode Island 

offers an amendment to the pending amendment. It will be read. 

The CHIEF CLERK. It is proposed to strike out all after the word 

"member," in the third line of the amendment now pending, and to 

insert: 

Of either House of Congress to accept employment as attorney-at-law, or re- ceive compensation for services rendered, in opposition to the interests of the United States, in any suit, action, or other matter in the result of which the United States is directly or indirectly interested, or in respect of which any question is pending before Congress, or in respect of which such member has reasonable cause to beHeve legislation by Congress may be asked. . SEc. 2. That any person who violates the provisions of this act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and may be punished by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by a ~e not exceeding $500, or by both, in the discretion of the co~rt. 

· So as to read: 

That it shall be unlawful for any member of either House of Co~gress to accept. employment, &c. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on this amendment 

to the amendment offered by the Senator from Delaware. 

Mr. ALDRICH. I ask for the yeas and nays. 

The yeas and nays were ordered. 

Mr. ALDRICH. I will strike out the penalty clause, and let that come in subsequently. I modify the amendment by striking out the 

second section. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The amendment will be read as 

modified. 

The CHIEF CLERK. In line 3 of the pending amendment it is proposed to strike on t aU after the word '' member,'' and to insert in lieu 

thereof: 

Of either House of Congress to accept employment as attorney-at-law, or re- ceive compensation for service.s rendered, in opposition to the interests of the United States, in any suit, a-ction, or other matter in the result of which the United States is directly or indirectly interested, or in respect of which any question is pending before Congress, or in respect of which such member bas reasonable cause to believe legislation by Congress may be asked. 

Mr. GEORGE I should like to have read the language that is 

stricken out. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The amendment of the Senator from 

Delaware is the original text. It will be read. 

Mr. GEORGE. I want only the part stricken out read. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The amendment proposed by the 

Senator from Rhode Island strikes out substantially the whole of the 

amendment of the Senator from Delaware and inserts what has been 

read. Does the Senator from Mississippi desire the amendment of the 

Senator from Delaware to be read? 

Mr. GEORGE. No, sir; I have it here now. Mr. SAULSBURY. Is this the amendment of the Senator from 

Rhode Island? 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It is. 

The Secretary proceeded to call the roll. 

Mr. BUTLER. There is so much confusion that it is impossible to 

hear what is going on in the Senate Chamber. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair will cause business to be 

suspended until order is restored, and have read both the amendment 

of the Senator from Delaware and the amendment of the Senator from 

Rhode Island, which is offered subst..'l.ntially as a substitute. 

The amendments were read. 

Mr. HAWLEY. Senators will understand that this is substantially the amendment offered by my colleague [Mr. PLATT], which was printed and laid on the desks of Senators. 

Mr. HOAR. Does th~ phrase "in opposition to the interests of the 

United States" run all through the amendment? 

Mr. ALDRICH. I understand it so. Mr. HOAR. What does the Senator mean bythephraseprohibiting 

the acting as counsel in any case in regard to which legislation may 

possibly be asked? It is hardly to be conceived that counsel can ever 

act in a matter in which the interpretation or construction of a national 

statute is involved, or in which the law as administered in the national 

courts is to beadminister~d, in regard to which there may not here- after be legislation invoked. 

Mr. ALDRICH. It seems to me very clearly that the words "in 

opposition to the interests of the United States" apply to and limit the 

whole clause. 

Mr. HOAR. Very well. 

The PRESIDENT pro temp01·e. The roll-call will be resumed. 

Mr. GEORGE. Before the roll-call, Ishouldliketoaskwhether the 

word " general " has been stricken out before "counsel" in the amendment of the Senator from Delaware [Mr. SAULSBURY]? 

SeveralBENATORS. Yes, that word is stricken out. 

Mr. BECK. I desire to ask whether if this amendment as amended 

be adopted, it will be a substitute for the amendment reported by the 

Judiciary Committee? 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The amendment is to the amendment of the Senator from Delaware. If this amendment be adopted, 

it will take the place of the amendment of the Senator from Delaware, 

and the question will t4en recur on the adoption of that amendment. 

Mr: HALE. · If this amendment is rejected, the question will then 

be on the amendment of the Senator from Delaware. 

The PRESIDENT pro t~mp01·e. Yes. The roll-call will proceed. 

The Secretary resumed the call of the roll. 

Mr. DAWES (when his name was called). I am paired with the absent Senator from Texas [Mr. MAXEY]. 

Mr. MORRILL (when his name was called). My colleague [Mr. 

EDMUNDS] is paired on this question and all others in relation to this 

bill with the Senator from Tennessee [Mr. HARRIS]. 

Mr. PALMER (when his name was called). On this question I am paired with the Senator from North Carolina [Mr. VANCE]. If he were here I should vote " yea." 

The roll-call was concluded. 

?tir. RANSOM. I desire the attention of the Senator from Michigan 

[Mr. PALMER], who is paired with my colleague [Mr. V .ANCE] on this 

bill. My colleague instructs me to say that he would vote all the time 

with the Senator from Kentucky [Mr. BECK], and I observed that the 

Senator from Michigan said he would vote " yea." My colleague 

would vote '' yea '' if he were here. 

Mr. PALMER. I did not know how the Senator's colleague would 

vote. I thought it incumbent on me to announce the pair. 

Mr. PLUMB. On this question I am paired with the Senawr from 

Georgia [Mr. BROWN]. 

fu. KENNA. I am paired, as I have already announced, on all 

questions with the Senator from New York [Mr. MILLER]. If not 

paired, on this proposition I sho"dld vote "yea." 

Mr. COKE. My colleague [Mr. MAXEY] is paired on all questions 

with the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. DAWES]. · If he were here, 

my colleague would vote ''yea" on this amendment. 

Mr. KENNA. I wish to announce that my colleague [Mr. CAMDEN] is paired with the Senator from California [Mr. STANFORD]. 

Mr. COCKRELL. I am paired for the evening with the Senator 

from Connecticut [Mr. PLATT]. I believe this·is his amendment. I 

understand it is the same as the one offered by him. 

Mr. ALDRICH and Mr. HAWLEY. Yes. 

Mr. COCKRELL. I will, therefore, for him, vote "yea." 

Mr. McPHERSON. I am paired with my colleague [Mr. SEWELL]. 

I do not know how he would vote on this amendment, and, therefore, 

I shall withhold my vote. If he were present I should vote "yea." 

Mr. PALMER. I did not at the time comprehend the tenor of the 

remarks made by the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. RANSOM] 

in respect to his colleague [Mr. V .L~CE]. He says that his colleague 

would vote "yea" if he were here. If he takes the responsibility, I 

shall vote "yea." ' 

M:r. RANSOM. Yes, sir; that is all right. 

Mr. COLQUITT. I am paired with the Senator from Rhode Island 

[Mr. CHACE]. I understand he would vote for the amendment if 

present. I therefore vote "yea." 

The result was announced-yeas 27, nays 27; as follows: 

Aldrich, 

Allison, 

Beck, 

Blair, 

Cheney, 

Cockrell, 

Colquitt, 

Berry, 

Blackburn, 

Bowen, 

Butler, 

Call, 

Cameron, 

Coke, 

Conger, 

Cullom, 

Dolph, 

Eustis, 

Farwell, 

George, 

Gorman, 

YEAS-27. 

Hawley, 

Hoar, 

Manderson, 

Mitchell of Pa., 

Morrill, 

Palmer, 

Sawyer, 

NAYS-27. 

Evarts, Jones of Nevada, 

Fair, McMillan, 

Frye, Mahone, 

Gray, 1\Iikbell of Oreg., 

Hale, Payne, 

Hampton, Pugh, Jonesof Arkansas, Ransom, 

ABSENT-22. 

Brown, Harris, :1\Iaxey, 

Camden, Harrison, Miller, 

Chace, Ingalls, l\Iorgan, 

Dawes, Jonesof Florida, Platt, 

Edmunds, Kenna, Plumb, 

Gibson, McPherson, Riddleberger,, 

Spooner, 

VanWyck, 

Voorhees, 

Walthall, 

Whittborne, 

Wilson of Iowa. 

Saulsbury, 

Sherman, 

Teller, 

Vest, 

Williams, 

Wilson of Md. 

Sabin, 

Sewell, 

Stanford, 

Vance. 

So the amendment to the amendment was not agreed to. 
1354 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY 4, 

r The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question recurs on the amendment proposed by the Senator from Delaware [Mr. SAULSBURY], on which the yeas and nays have been ordered. 

111r. DOLPH. Let the amendment be read as it now stands. 

Mr. :BECK. There is so much confusion that it is difficult to understand what is being said. This is a substitute for the committee's substitute: and if this is adopted we do not have a vote on the committee's substitute at all, as I understand. 

Mr. HOAR. What is the matter to be amended by the proposition now pending? 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The amendment is to the substitute 

reported by the Committee on the Judiciary, the original text having 

already boon amended on motion of the Senator from Massachusetts. The question will finally recur on the adoption of the amendment to 

that proposition as amended. 

Mr. BECK. But if this is voted in, there will be no vote on the 

amendment of the Committee on the Judiciary. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The amendment reported by the 

Committee on the Judiciary will be superseded by the amendment of 

the Senator from Delaware. · Mr. CULLOM. But there will be a vote on the Senator's original 

bill as amended. · llir. BECK. No, sir; oh, no. I desire a fair vote on the amendment 

of the Committee on the Judiciary. I do not want any avoidance of 

that if I can help it. 

Mr. CULLOM. I rise to a parliamentary inquiry. 'Even if this 

amendmentoftheSenator from Delawareis adopted, shall we not finally 

have an opporttmity of voting upon the original bill of the Senator 

from Kentucky a.'l amended by the amendment of the Senator from 

Massachusetts to-day ? 

Several SENATORS. Undoubtedly. 

Mr. BECK. Of course, but there is nothing left of the original bill. 

(Laughter.] 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Secretary will call the roll on the amendment of the Senator from Delaware [Mr. SAULSBURY]. 

The Secretary proceeded to caU the roll. 

Mr. McPHERSON (when his name was called). On this question 

I am paired with my colleague [Mr. SEWELL]. If he were present, 

he would vote "yea" and I should vote "nay." 

Mr. PLUMB (when his name was called). On this question I am paired with the Senator from Georgia [Mr. BROWN]. If he were present, I should vote ''nay.'' • The roll-caJl was concluded. 

Mr. PALMER. I am paired with the Senator from North Carolina 

[Mr. V ANGE]. I understand he would vote "nay" if he were here, 

and I should vote '' yea.'' 

The result was announced-yeas 26, nays 27; as, follows: 

Allison, 

Bowen, 

Butler, 

Call, 

Cameron, 

Evart-s, 

Frye, 

YEAS-26. 

Gray, 

Hale, 

Hawley, 

Hoar, 

..Tones of Nevada, 

l't1cl'tiillan. 

1\:lahone, · 

1\:litchell of Oreg., 

Mitchell of Pa., 

1\:lorrill, 

Payne, 

Pugh, 

Ransom, 

Riddle berger, 

NAYS-27. 

Saulsbury, 

Sawyer, 

Sherman, 

Teller, 

Williams, 

Aldrich, 

Beck, 

Berry, 

Blackburn, 

Blair, 

Cheney, 

·coke, 

Colquitt, 

Conger, 

Cullom, 

Dolph, 

Eustis, 

Fair, 

Farwell, 

George, Vest, 

Gorman, Voorhees, 

Hampton, Walthall, Jones of AI·kansas, 'Vhitthorne, 

Manderson, '\Vilson of Iowa, 

Spooner, Wilson of Md. 

VanWyck, 

ABSENT-23. 

Brown, Gibson, McPherson, 

Camden, Harris, 1\:la.xey, Chace, Harrison, Miller, 

Cockrell, Ingalls, :Morgan, 

Dawes, .Jones of Florida, Palmer, 

Edmunds, Kenna, Platt, 

, So the amendment was rejected. 

Plumb, 

Sabin, 

Sewell, 

Stanford, 

Vance. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question recurs on the adoption 

of the amendment reported by the Committee on the Judiciary aB a substitute for the original bill as amended on the motion of the Senator 

from Massachusetts. Mr. CULLOU. I desire to inquire whether, if that is voted down, we spall then have a vote on the text of the original bill as amended 

by the motion of the Senator from Massachusetts? 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Certainly. 

Mr. CULLOM. That is what I wanted to know. 

Mr. ALDRICH. I desire to make a parliamentary inquiry. I ask 

whether when the bill gets into the Senate it will then be in order for me to offer the amendment which I offered in Committee of the Whole as a substitute for the whole bill? 

The PRESIDENT pro t~mpore. Unquestionably. 

Mr. GEORGE. If this amendment is voted down, willit be in order · then to offer a substitute in place of the bill as amended? 

The PRESIDEN'£ pro tempore. It will in the Senate. The question is on the amendment reported from the Committee on the Judiciary. 

Mr. :BECK called for the yeas and nays, and they were ordered. 

The Secretary proceeded to call the roll. 

Mr. PALJ\IER (when his name was called). If the Senator .from 

North Carolina [Mr. V A.NCE] were here I should vote "nay." 

Mr. PLUMB (when his name was called). I am paired with the 

Senator from Georgia [Mr. BROWN]. Ifhewere present !should vote 

"nay." 

The roll-call was concluded. 

111r. RANSOM. If my colleague (Mr. VANCE] were here he would 

vote '' nav." 

1\!r. OOC:KRELL. I am paired with the Senator from Connecticut 

[Mr. PLATT], as before announced. If he were present he would vote 

"nay;" and I, therefore, vote "nay." 

Mr. McPHERSON. I am paired with my colleague [1\-Ir. SEWELL]; 

but I am informed that if present he would vote ''nay;" and therefore 

I vote "nay. n 

· The result was announced-yeas 0, nays 55; as follows: 

YEA.S--Q. 

NAYS-55. 

Aldrich, 

Allison, 

Beck 

Berry, 

Blackburn, 

Blair, 

Bowen, 

Butler, 

Call, 

Cameron, 

Cheney, 

Cockrell, 

Coke 

colquitt, 

Conger, 

Cullom, 

Dawes, 

Dolph, 

Eustis, 

Evarts, 

Fair, 

Farwell,., 

Frye, 

George, 

Gorman, 

Gray, 

Hale, 

Hampton, 

Hawley, Saulsbury, 

Hoar, Sawyer, Jones of .Arkansas, Sherman, 

1\{cMillan, Spooner, 

:McPherson, Teller, 

Mahone, VanWyck, 

Manderson, Vest, 

Mitchell of Oreg., Voorhees, 

Mitchell of Pa., Walthall, 

Morrill, Whitthorne, 

Payne, Williams, 

Pugh., Wilson of Iowa, 

Ranso:m, 'Vilson of Md. 

Riddleberger, 

ABSEl't"'T-21. 

Brown, Harrison, 

Camden, Ingalls, 

Chace, .Jones of Florida, 

Edmunds, .Jones of Neyada, 

Gibson, Kenna, 

Harris, 1\l:axey, 

So the amendment was rejected. 

Miller, 

1\:lorgan, 

Palmer, 

Platt, 

Plumb, 

Sabin, 

Sewell, 

Stanford, 

Vance. 

Mr. COKE. The Senate has just taken a vote upon the amendment 

reported by the majority of the Judiciary Committee, andittranspires 

that not a single vote is recorded in favor of the report. 

Mr. BECK. That is a good record. 

Mr. COKE. Not a single vote is recorded in favor of the majority 

report of the Judiciary Committee upon this bill. 

Mr. COCKRELL. Will the Senator permit me to ask him if that 

distinguished committee made a written report? 

Mr. COKE. It did not. 

Ur. COCKRELL. I should like to hear the report read if the com~ 

mittee made one. · 

:Mr. COKE. There were two reports made from that committee, one by the majority and the other by the minority. 

Mr. GEORGE. Who are the minoritv? 

Mr. COKE. The minority of that committee instructed me to report 

the following as a substitute for the committee's bill. I offer it now as a substitute for the orjginal bill as amended, jf it is in order to do 

so; and I will remark that this substitute differs from the bill as orjginally introduced by the Senator from Kentucky only in this: in line 

4, after the words "either House of Congress," is inserted "or any 

civil officer of the United States;" so as to make it read: 

That it shall be unlawful for any member;of either House of Congress, or any civil officer of the United States, to accept employment, &c. 

I ask that the amendment I offer be read, and that it be adopted. 

The PRESIDENT p1·o tempore. The Senator from Texas submits an amendment in the nature of a substitute, which will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

That it shall be unlawful for any member of either House of Congress, or any civil officer of the United States, to accept employment as attorney-at-law, or payment for services of any kind, or any gratuity whatever, from any railroad company, or any officer or agent thereof, which obtained its charter, or any grant of lands, or pecuniary aid from the United States; and any person who 

violates this provision shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on conviction, be 

fined in auy sum not exceeding $5,000, and imprisoned not more than one year, in the discretion of the court. 

Mr. HALE. Now let us have read the original proposition aB amended 

by the Senator from Massachusetts, which is antagonized by this. 

Ur. HOAR. Is it in order to move to amend this proposed substitute before the vote is taken on it? 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair is of opinion that it is, because it embraces other things. 

Mr. HOAR. Then I move to add to it the following: 

No member of either House of Congress shall, after the expiration of six 

months from the passage of this bill, own or be interested in any real estate in 

the District of Columbia, except such as he may occupy for his own residence. 

Any violation of this provision shall be punished by fine not exceeding ~5,000 

and imprisonment not exceeding one year. 

Mr. BECK. Let us have the yeas and nays on that. 

1\Ir. HOAR. Certainly; let us have the yeas and nays. 
II 

1887. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. "1355 

The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded to call 

the roll. · 

Mr. COCKRELL (when his name was called). I am paired with 

the Senator from Connecticut [.Mr. PLATT]. I do not know how he 

would vote if he were present. 

to get a vote on that proposition it has been defeated by amendmeni:B, 

by substitutes, and by all the devices and tactics of parliamentary law. 

The people demand just such a bill as the Senator from Kentucky introduced; the country clamors for it, and this Senate is standing in the 

way of its enactment. The people believe that the enactment of such 

Air. HAWLEY. He would vote "nay." a law is necessary to protect the purity of their National Legislature; 

lli. COCKRELL. I should vote "yea" if at liberty. He would they believe that the great power of the railroad corporations is sapping 

not vote as I would. and mining the purity of this Government, and especially of its legisThe PRESIDENT pro tempore. 

understood. Does he vote ? 

The Senator from Missouri is not lative branch. They have asked in every mode in which they can give 

Mr. COCKRELL. No; I say I would vote "yea" if I were not 

paired with the gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. PLATT]. :Mr. DAWES (wheu his name was called). I am paired with the absent Senator from Texas [Mr. MAXEY]. If he were present, I should 

vote ''yea.'' :Mr. PLUMB (when his name was called). On this question I am paired with the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. BROWN]. 

The roll-call was concluded. 

Mr. KENNA. I have already announced that I am paired on all 

questions with the Senator from New York [.Mr. MILLER]. On this 

particular question, if not paired, I should vote •' nay.'' 

I believe also the Senator from California [Mr. ST.ll.TFORD] has announced his pair with my colleague [Mr. CAMDEN]. 

expression to their opinions, through the public press, through their 

Representatives, in every way, that legislation be enacted which shall 

prevent their representatives, sent here to represent them, from. being 

corrupted and lured away to the support of schemes not approved by 

them. 

We ask no advantage; weseek nothing but a direct, sqnarev-ote upon 

the proposition. If we are beaten on that we are done. But we have 

tried every way to get a vote upon the proposition, and· every time_ 

when it seems we are about to get a vote some gentleman gets up and 

offers an amendment which diverts the attention of the Senate to some- thing else than a vote on the direct question. I hope the amendment 

will be voted down, so that we may hav-e a vote on the main question 

presented by the bill of the minority. 

Mr. HOAR. Mr. President, there never was a bill of anyimportance 

The result was announced-yeas 6, nays 46; as follows: passed in Congress in which the Senate did not, if it saw fit, exercise 

Butler, 

Hale, 

Aldrich, 

Allison, 

Beck, 

Berry, 

Blackburn, 

Blair, 

Call, 

Cameron, 

Cheney, 

Coke, 

Colquitt, 

C<>nger, 

Hoar, 

Payne, 

Cullom, 

Dolph, 

Eustis, 

Evarts, 

Fair, 

Farwell, 

Frye, 

George, 

Gorman, 

Gray, 

Hampton, 

Hawley, 

YE.A.S-6. 

Pugh, Teller. 

NAYS-46. 

.Jones of Arkansas, Sherman, .Jones of Nevada, Spooner, 

McMillan, VanWyck, 

McPherson, Vest, 

l\Ianderson, Voorhees, Mitchell of Oreg., Walthall, Mitchell of Pa., Whitthorne, 

l\Iorrill. Williams, 

Ransom, Wilson of Iowa. 

• its privilege of amendment. The Senator demands one method of 

dealing with this question, a gross, unconstitutional, awkward, crude, 

ill-drawn, ill-considered, ill-conceived scheme, which is not only an insult to the Senate, but is an insult to the American people who elect 

the Senate, who honor the Senate, who know the individual men who are the members of this body, and know that to their purity and sense of honor and character the country may safely look. That bill is not 

the outcome of any popular or public demand. It comes from the 

fears of men who think their characters are not strong enough to stand 

up against the anonymous articles put by blackmailers and stock-jobRiddleberger, Wilson ofMd. Saulsbury, 

Sawyer, 

.ABSENT-24. 

Bowen, Edmunds, Kenna, Platt, 

Brown, Gibson, Mahone, Plumb, 

Camden, Harris, Maxey, Sabin, 

Chace, Harrison, Miller, Sewell. Cockrell, Ingalls, Morgan, Stanford, Dawes, .Jones of Florida, Palmer, Vance. 

So the amendment to the amendment was rejected. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question recrus on the amendment proposed by the Senator from Texas [Mr. CoKE]. 

11r. COKE. I was asked a question by the Senator from Mississippi 

(:1\fr. GEORGE] when I was up before, which, inadvertently, I did not 

answer, as to who constituted the minority of the Judiciary Committee. I will state now that minority was composed of the Senator 

from Mississippi [Mr. GEORGE], the Senator from Missouri [Mr. VEST], 

the Senator from Iowa [1\Ir. WILSON], and myseli. 

Mr. HOAR. I move to amend the amendment just offered by striking out all after the words ''attorney-at-law,'' in line 3, and inserting 

what follows the words "attorney-at-law 11 in line 4 of the amendment which I formerly proposed. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Massachusetts 

submits an amendment, which will be read. 

Mr. BUTLER. Pending the consideration of that amendment I 

move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of executive busi- ness. ["No!" "No!"] 

The PRESIDENT Pf'O tempore. The Senator from South Carolina moves that the Senate proceed to the consideration of executive busi- ness. The motion was not agreed to. 

The PRESIDENT pro tmnpm·e. The amendment proposed by the 

Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. HOAR] to the amendment of the 

Senator from Texas [Mr. COKE] will be read. 

The CHIEF CLERK. It is proposed to strike out all after "attorney- ,at-law, 11 in line 5 of the amendment, and in lien of the words stricken 

out to insert: 

Or payment for services of any kind, in opposition to the United States, in any case to which the United States may be a party or in which its interests may be concerned,orfromanyrailroadcompanywhichobtaineditscharter,oranygrant of lands, or pecuniary aid from the United States, if such member shall have reasonable cause to believe that measur3s specially affecting the interests of such roilroad are pending before C<>ngress, or are about to be so pending during his term of office. · .Any person who violates the provision of this act shall be guilty of a misde- meanor, and may be punished by imprisonment not exceeding one year or by fine not exceeding $'500, or by both, in the discretion of the court. ' 

Mr. HOAR. That is in substance what the Senate has already 

adopted by a decided majority on a call of the yeas and nays. 

Mr. COKE. I hope that amendment will not be agreed to. It has 

been sought in vain here to get a direct, square vote upon the leading 

proposition in the bill of the Senator from Kentucky. This amendment contains that proposition. Every time that it has been sought 

bers in irresponsible newspapers. _ That is what the Senator from Texas calls "the people." The will 

of the people of the United States is found enacted in its Constitution, 

which the fathers framed and which the sons observe and honor. The 

will of the people of the United States in matters of legislation is found 

in the laws which its Representatives and its Senators and its President write upon its statute-books. And that man knows very little of 

the Coru;titution who talks about any other will of the people than that 

which the people in the constitutional method enact into law. 

It is a very strange claim for Senators to get up here and undertake 

to cast dishonor upon the body to which they belong and to claim that 

they have a right which belongs to no other member of the body, that 

the measures w hieh they draught and propose shall be voted on without 

amendment, without the opportunity to amend. · If the Senate like 

better the proposition which I have drawn, which enacts that if any 

member of either House shall hereafter act as the counsel for any railroad in opposition to the interests of the United States, or shall hereafter act as counsel for any railroad which expects legislation, or concerning whose interests there is likely to be legislation, or concerning 

whose interests there is legislation pending, he shall be punished, it will 

vote for my amendment. · Any member of the Senate who is of opinion that a member of the 

House of Representatives in a Western State'lrtay in the vacation lawfully and honorably practice his profession, and in the practice of that 

profession may draw a lease between two railroads, or may give an opinion as to their right to cross the street of a city, or to a patent in a Pullman car, without being dishonored and disgraced, that Senator 

will vote for my proposition. But any Senator who thinks such tlrings 

ought to be branded as crimes will vote with the Senator from Texas. 

That Senator's speech comes with singular grace from a neighborhood which refuses to strike at the practice of speculating in real estate in the District of Columbia, and of enriching men by acquiring 

property whose value is enhanced speedily by its relief from taxes by 

Congressional legislation, by laying out sewers and streets. That is 

the one thing, if there is a: danger in this country to the purity of the 

Senate and the House of Representatives, in which the danger lies. In 

my judgment, against that we are safe by the integrity of the individual Senators. 

Mr. COKE. Does the Senator mean to charge me with being interested in real estate in this District? 

:Mr. HOAR. I do not. I made no charge against anybody. 

Mr. COKE. I have no interest in real estate here. 

Mr. HOAR. But I say if we were to legislate in this direction that 

is the first legislation to which we should resort. I have heard about 

enough of this arrogant, insulting, domineering style of an attempt to 

frighten Senators from what they consider their duty, their sense of 

honor, and what they consider is demanded by respect for themse!Yes 

and regard for the interests of the country. 

Mr. GEORGE. Mr. President, I do not want to scare anybody, and 

I do not suppose I could if I were to try [laughter], and 1 do not want 

to be scared myself if I can help it; but I want to make one remark 

about this amendment of the Senator from Aiassachusetia. 
1356 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY 4, 

The Senator from Texas moved as a substitute for the bill as amended on the motion of the Senator from Massachusetts the report of the 

minority of the Judiciary Committee, and we have this very extraordinary parliamentary proceeding, that the very thing to which the Senator from Texas offered his amendment as a substitute is brought out 

and offered as a. substitute to the amendment offered by the Senator 

from Texas. He moved to amend the bill as amended on the motion of 

the Senator from Massachusetts, and his motion is met by a. motion to 

amend his amendment by substituting_the very thing complained of and 

to which it is offered. Now, sir, that is a. very extraordinary spectacle, 

I .think. I do not know that it is subject to a point of order; but at 

least we stand in relation to that in this way. The Senator from Texas moves to strike outMr. HOAR. Will the Senator pardon me? Is not the Senator's 

amendment exactly that thing? 

Mr. GEORGE. No, sir. 

Mr. HOAR. The Senate has practically substituted my amendment 

for the original bill, and that will be the proposition when we go into 

the Senate. The original bill is modified by my amendment. Then 

the Senator from Texas comes in and takes the original bill with a. mere triiling and verbal alteration, and moves to amend it by that. Then 

I do to him exactly what he did to us; nothing more, nothing less. 

Mr. GEORGE. The Senator from Massachusetts is in error, and in 

very serious error, in relation to the amendment offered by the Senator 

from Texas. It is not llo mere verbal amendment. It is avery important amendment, and an amendment which the minority of the Judiciary Committee instructed him to offer. 

Mr. HOAR. If the Senator will pardon me, the Senator from Texas 

advocated his amendment by saying that he did it because he wanted 

to get a square vote on the original bill. 

Mr. GEORGE. Well, sir, what he did was this: The original bill 

offered by the Senator from Kentucky applied only to members of Congress. The substitute offered by the Senator from Texas applies to 

every civil officer in the United States. The proposition of the Senator from Kentucky prohibited only the receiving of fees from railroad 

corppanies. The amendment offered by the Senator from Texas prohibits not ohly that, but the receiving of any gratuity whatever from 

railroad companies-a. very important amendment. 

Mr. HOAR. Will my honorable friend allow me to put him a question? 

Mr. GEORGE. Certainly I will. 

Mr: HOAR. If he is right,. then what earthly reason is there that 

that should not be amended like anything else, if the Senate choose to 

do so? 

Mr. GEORGE. The point I make is this, that when the Senator 

from Texas offers this substitute in place of the original bill as amended on the motion of the Senator from Massachusetts, be is met by a sort 

of cross-action; he is met by a motion to substitute the original bill as amended by the Senator from Massachusetts for the substitute offered 

by the Senator from Texas. The only effect-! want that distinctly 

understood-in changing the mode of voting is to prevent that which 

the Senator from Texas said ought to be done, to prevent a square, fair 

vote on the proposition submitted by the Senator from Kentucky. 

The PRESIDENT pro te-mpore. The question is on the amendment 

proposed by the Senator from Uassachusetts to the amendment of the 

Senator from Texas. 

Mr. EVARTS. Mr. President, if a vote is to be taken which is to 

advance toward the stage of final enactment the bill as proposed by the 

Senator from Texas in the name of the minority of the Judiciary Committee, we shall now at this late stage of this transaction be for the 

first time considering and voting on the question whether every civil 

officer of the United States of .America all over this country shall be 

precluded from practicing law in the current and every-day business 

of his profession. 

The motive here is that it corrupts legislation to permit attorneys to 

practice if they are members of these Houses. What becomes of the 

proposition of precluding every civil officer of the United States having nothing to do with legislation and nothing to do with corruption, 

from practicing law in his own neighborhood? At this last stage we are for the first time to throw into ridicule the whole proposition of the 

matter which has rested on this danger of corruption in the two 

Houses of Congress, and now it is transferred with one swoop, without a word of debate, over the common and every-day pursuits of every 

civil officer in his neighborhood and in matters that do not corrupt 

him, or his office, or the two Houses of Congress. 

Mr. GEORGE. Now, Mr. President, the answer to that is this: The 

original proposition submitted by the Senator from Kentucky is retained in this substitute offered by the Senator from Texas. It only 

goes further. It does not prohibit, however, as the Senator from New 

York says, every civil officer of the United States from practicing Jaw; 

it only prohibits him, a servant of the Government, 1·eceiving a salary 

from the Treasury of the Government, from tuxning his services in favor 

of railroads who have an intere.c;t adverse to the Government in the 

legislation of the country. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on the amendment 

of the Senator from Massachust!tts [l\Ir. HOAR] to the amendment of 

the Senator from Texas [Mr. CoKE], upon which the yeas-and nays have 

been demanded. · The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded to call 

the roll. 

Mr. COLQUITT (when his named was called). I am paired with the 

Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. CHACE]. 

Ur. McPHERSON (when his name was called). I am paired with 

my colleague [Mr. SEWELL]. If he were present, I should vote" nay." 

.Mr. PLUMB (when his name was called). On this question I am paired with the Senator from Georgia [Mr. BROWN]. If he were 

present, I should vote "nay." · Mr. STANFORD (when his name was called). My pair with the 

Senator from West Virginia. [Mr. CAMDEN] has been transferred to the 

Senator from Minnesota [Mr. SABIN]. I therefore vote "yea." 

. The roll-call was concluded. 

Mr. McMILLAN. My colleague [Mr. SABIN] bas been called from 

the chamber for this afternoon, and is paired with the Senator from 

West Virginia [Mr. CAMDEN]. 

Mr. DAWES. I am paired on this vote with the Senator from Texas 

[Mr. MAXEY], or I should vote ''yea." 

Mr. COCKRELL. I am paired wilh the Senator from Connecticut 

[Mr. PLATI], who, if present, would vote "yea;" and I should vote 

"nay." 

The result was announced-yeas 32, nays 21; as follows: 

Aldrich, 

Allison, 

Blair, 

Bowen, 

Call, 

Cameron, 

Cheney, 

Conger, 

Beck, 

Beny, 

Blackburn, 

Butler, 

Coke 

Dolph, 

Cullom, 

Evarts, 

Farwell, 

Frye, 

Gray, 

Hale, 

Hawley, 

Hoar, · 

YEAS-32. 

.Jones of Nevada, McMillan, 

Mahone, 

Manderson, 

Mitchell of Oreg., Mitchell of Pa.., Morrill, 

Pugh, 

NAYS-2L 

Eustis, Payne, Fair, Ransom, George, VanWyck, Gorman, Vest, Hampton, Voorhees, .Jones of At·kansas, 'Valthall, 

ABSENT-23. 

Brown, Edmunds, Kenna, Camden, Gibson, McPherson, Chace, Harris, Maxey, Cockrell, Harrison, Miller, Colquitt, Ingalls, Morgan, Dawes, .Jones of Florida, Palmer, 

Riddleberger, 

Saulsbury, 

Sawyer, 

Sherman, 

Spooner, 

Stanford, 

Teller, 

Williams. 

Whitthorne, 

Wilson of Iowa, Wilson of Md. 

Platt, 

Plumb, 

Sabin, 

Sewell, 

Vance. 

So the amendment to the amendment was agreed to. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question recurs on the amendment as amended. 

Mr. BECK. Is this now the substitute, as amended? 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. ' It is. 

The amendment, as amended, was agreed to. 

The bill was reported to the Senate as amended. 

Mr. COKE. Let the bill be read as amended. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempm·e. The bill will be read at length as amended. · 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

That it shall be unlawful-for any member of either House of Congress, or any civil officer of the United States, to accept employment as attorney-at-law, or payment for services of any kind in opposition to the United States, in any case to which the United States may be a pa1·ty or in which its interests may be con- cerned, or from any railroad company which obtained its charter or any grant of lands or pecuniary aid from the Unih d States, if such member shall have 

reasonable cause to believe that measures specially affecting the interests of 

such railroad are pending before Congress or are about to be so pending during his term of office. 

Any person who violates the provisions of this ad shall be guilty of o. misdemeanor,and may be punished by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by fine not exceeding $500, or by both, in the discretion of the court. 

Mr. HOAR. I move further t-o amend by striking out the words 

"or any civil officer of the United States." 

Mr. BUTLER. Is the bill in the Senate or in Committ.ee of the 

Whole? 

The PRESIDENT pro tempm·e. In the Senate. The Senator from 

Massachusetts moves to amend the amendment by striking out, in line 

4, the words: 

Or any civil officer of the United States. 

The amendment to the amendment was agreed to. _ Mr. BUTLER. I offer an amendment as a substitute· for the bill as 

amended. 

The PRESID;ENT pro tempore. The proposed amendment will be 

read. 

The CHIEF CLERK. It is proposed to strike out all after the enacting clause and insert: 

That it sho.U be unlawful for any member of Congress to accept employment as general counsel or att.orney, or receive payment for services as such general counsel or attorney, from any railroad company, or from any officer or agent thereof, which obtained its charter or any grant of land or pecuniary aid from the United States: Provided, That this act shall not be construed to prevent members of either House of Congress from appearing as counsel in suits by or against such railroad companies in the State or Federal courts when the Unit eel 

States is not a party or interested in the result of said suits. 
- ... 

1887. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 1357 

Ur. BUTLER. Before that is submitted I will strike out the word 

'' general'' in line 4 and also in line 5. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The ·Senator can so modify his 

amendment. 

Mr. BUTLER. On the amendment as modified I ask for the yeas 

and nays. 

Mr. BECK. I move to amend the substitute by striking out all after 

the first five words, "That it shall be unlawful," and inserting the original bill, leaving out the five words. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore The Senator from Kentucky moves 

an amendment to the amendment, which will be read. 

The CHIEF CLEIDL It is proposed to strike out all after the word 

"unlawful," in line 3, and to insert: 

For any member of either House of Congress to accept employment as at- torney-at-law, or payment for services of any kind, from any railroad company, or any officer or agent thereof, which obtained its charter, or any grantoflands, or pecuniary aid from the United States; and any person who violates this 

provision shall be guilty of a. misdemeanor, and, on conviction, be fined in any sum not exceeding lf9,000, and imprisoned not more than one year, in the discretion of the court. 

Mr. BECK. I demand the yeas and nays on that amendment. 

Mr. HOAR. I rise to a question of order. That, I understand, is 

the original bill. The original bill is still the question before the Senate. The Committee of the Whole · has merely reported a proposed 

amendment. It is not in ordertomovetoamend thatproposedamendment by substituting the thing which it is proposed as an amendment 

to. I avoided that difficulty in the amendment I offered a little while 

ago by beginning half-a-dozen lines down and inserting only a part of 

the proposed amendment. This is clearly out of order. What the 

Senator moves, in other words, is the question pending before the Senate, "Shall the bill pass'?" On that question a certain amendment is 

proposed. Then the Senator moves to substitute the bill for the amendment. It is simply turning around the very question which is before 

the Senate already. 

The PRESIDENT pro te-mpore. The Chair is of the opinion that the 

original bill has been reported to the Senate with an amendment in 

the nature of a ·substitute. 

Mr. HOAR. Proposed. · The PRESIDENT pro tempore. A proposed amendment in the nature 

of a substitute. That amendment is amendable in the second degree, 

and the proposition standing by itself is open to amendment. The 

Chair, therefore, with due deference to the Senator from Massachusetts, 

is of the opinion that the Senator from South Carolina having proposed an amendment, that amendment is amendable. Either the original 

bill or the amendment proposed can be amended. The Chair, therefore, 

thinks the amendment of the Senator from Kentucky is in order. 

Mr. HOAR. I think the Chair does not get my point. My point is 

not that it is not amendable in a degree, but it is not amendable by simply proposing to substitute for it the original bill. The action of the 

Committee of the Whole, if the Chair will pardon me, bas had no effect as yet on the original bill. It is nothing more than a proposition of the 

.Judici:fi'y Committee or any other committee of the Senate. It proposes amendments for the Senate. The bill is pending in the Senate, 

and the Committee of the Whole has proposed an amendment to it 

which has got to be acted upon, as the Chair sees. Now, the Senator 

from Kentucky proposes to substitute for that amendment t.he original 

bill in totidem verbis. My proposition is, not that the amendment is not 

amendable, for I concede that it is, but that it is not in order to move to amend it by precisely the same bill which it is an amendment to. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair understands the point of 

order, and will ask the Senator from Kentucky whether the amendment proposed by him is in the same words as the original bill? 

Mr. BECK. I desire to modify the amendment I offered by striking 

out "five thousand" in line 10, and inserting " three thousand," and 

striking out "one year " and inserting ''six months." 

Mr. HOAR. That answers my proposition. I withdraw my point 

of order on that modification. 

Mr. BECK. I am not very sure that the first four words are -the 

same, but I now modify it. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on the amendment 

of the Senator from Kentucky [Mr. BECK] to the amendment of the 

Senator from South Carolina [Mr. BUTLER]. 

Mr. BERRY and Mr. BECK called for the yeas and nays, and they were ordered. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. Will the Chair please state what is the amendment? 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It is substantially the original bill, 

with slight variations. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. That is en(>ugb. 

The Secretary prqceeded to call t~ roll. 

Mr. COLQUITT (when his naroewascalled). I am paired with the 

Senator from Rhode Island .fMr. CHACE]. If he were present, I should 

fote "yea." 

Mr. EDMUNDS (when his na.mo was called). I am paired with the 

Senator from Tennessee [Mr. HARRIS]. If he were present, I should 

vote with immeasurable contemvt both a2:ainst the amendment and 

the bill itself. 

Mr. BECK. The Senator from Tennessee [Mr. HARRIS], ifpresent, 

would vote '' yea." 

Mr. PLUMB (when his name was called). I am paired with the 

Senator from Georgia [Mr. BROWN]. If he were present, I should 

vote'' yea.'' 

Mr. McMILLAN (when Mr. SABIN's name was caned). My col· 

league [Mr. SABIN] is paired with the Senator from West Virginia 

[Mr. CAMDEN].1 If my colleague were here, he would vote "nay." 

The roll-call was concluded. 

Mr. McPHERSON. I am paired with my colleague [Mr. SEWELL]. 

If present, he would vote " nay," and I should vote " yea." · Mr. COCKRELL. I am paired with the Senator from Connecticut 

[Mr. PLATT], who is ab&ent on account of illness in his family. If 

present, he would vote "nay," and I should vote "yea." 

The result was announced-yeas 17, nays 36; .as follows: 

Beck, Berry, 

Blackburn, 

Coke, 

Dolph, 

Aldrich, 

Allison, 

Blair, 

Bowen, 

Butler, 

Call, 

Cameron, 

Cheney, 

Conger, 

YEA8-17. 

Eustis, VanWyck, Fair, Vest, 

George, Voorhees, 

Gorman, Walthall, Jones of A.rkansas, Whitthorne, 

Cullom, 

Evarts, 

Farwell, 

Frye, 

Gray, 

Hal~>, 

Hampton, 

Hawley, 

Hoar, 

NAYS-36. 

Jones of Nevada, 

McMillan, 

Mahone, 

Manderson, 

Mitchell of Oreg., 

Mitchell of Pa., 

Morrill, 

Payne, 

Pugh, 

.A.BSENT~23. 

Brown, Edmunds, Kenna, 

Camden, Gibson, McPherson, 

Chace, Harris, Maxey, Cockrell, Harrison, Miller, 

Colquitt, Ingalls, Morgan, 

Dawes, Jones of Florida, Palmer, 

Wilson of Iowa, 

Wilson of 1\Id. 

Ransom, . Riddleberger, 

Saulsbury, 

Sawyer, 

Sherman, 

Spooner, 

Stanford, 

Teller, 

Williams. 

Platt, 

Plumb, 

Sabin, 

SeweU, 

Vance. 

So the amendment to the amendment was rejected. 

The PRESIDENT pro temp01·e. The question recurs on the amend· 

ment proposed by the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. BuTLER]. 

Mr. ALDRICH. I move to strike outall after the word "member," 

in the t.hird line, and to insert the words: 

Of either House of Congress to acceptemployment as attorney-at-law,orre- ceive compensation for services rendered, in opposition to the interests of the 

United States, in any suit, action, or other matter in the result of which the 

United States is directly or indirectly interested, or in respect of which any 

question is pending before Congress, or in respect of which such member has 

reasonable cause to believe legislation by Congress may be ·asked. 

Jtfr. DAWES. I suppose it would be proper to defend a poor fellow 

indicted by the United States. 

M:r. ALDRICH. I think the Senator can not have paid proper at. 

tention to the reading of the amendment. 

Mr. DAWES. I think a trial under indictment would be a "pro· 

ceeding." 

The PRESIDENT pro temp01·e. The question is on the amendment 

of the Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. ALDRICH] to the amendment 

of the Senator from South Carolina [lli. BUTLER]. 

Mr. ALDRICH. I call for the yeas and nays. 

The yeas and nays were ordered and taken. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. I am paired with the Senator from Tennessee 

[Mr. HARRIS]. I do not know which way he would vote, and I do 

not know which way I should vote myself if at liberty to do so. The result was announced-yeas 10, nays 39; as follows: 

YEAS-10. 

Aldrich, 

Call, 

Cheney, 

Fair, 

Gray, 

Hampton, 

.Tones of Nevada, Wilson of Md. 

Pugh, 

Allison, 

Beck, 

Berry, 

Blackburn, 

Blair, · Butler, 

Cameron, 

Coke, 

Conger, 

Dolph, 

Whitthorne, 

NAYS--39. 

Eustis, McPherson, 

Evarts, !\!anderson, 

Fa.rw<lll, Mitchell of Oreg., 

Frye, Mitchell of Pa., 

George, Murrill, 

Gorman, Payne, 

Hale, Ransom, 

Hawley, . Riddleberger. 

Hoar, Saulsbury, 

.Tones of Arkanso.s,Sawyer, 

.A.BSENT-27. 

Bowen, Dawes, Kenna, 

Brown, Edmunds, 1t1cMilla.n, 

Camden, Gibson, Mahone, 

Chace, Harris, Maxey, 

Cockrell, Harrison, 1\liller, 

Colquitt, Ingalls, Morgan, 

Cullom, Jones of Florida., Palmer, 

Sherman, 

Spooner, 

Stanford, 

Teller, 

VanWyck, 

Vest, 

Voorhees, 

Walthall, 

Wilson of Iowa. 

Platt, 

Plumb, 

Sabin, 

Sewell, 

Vance, 

Williams. 

So the amendment to the amendment was rejected. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question recurs on the amend· 

ment proposed by the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. BUTLER]. 

Mr. BUTLER. I call for the yeas and nays. 

The yeas and nays were ordered. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. Let the amendment be read. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The amendment will be read. 
------~-----.:~-=-------- -----~__,...-....,...,.....,....--------~--~---~--

- 1358 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY 4, 

The CHIEF CLERK. It is proposed to strike out all after the enacting elapse and insert : 

That it shall be unlawful for any member of Congress to accept employment as counsel or attorney, or receive payment for services as such counsel or att?rney, from any railroad company, or from any office~ or a~ent thereof, w~tch 

obtained its charter or any grant of land or pecunmry atd from the Uruted 

States : Provided, That this ad shall not be construed to prevent members of 

either Holli!e of Congress from appearing as counsel in suits by or against such 

railroad companies in the State or Federal courts, when the l:rnited States is not a party or interested in the result of said suits. 

111r. DAWES. I should like to hear the original for which this is a 

substitute read. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The amendment reported by the 

Committee of the Whole will be read. 

The CHIEF CLERK. Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert--

Mr. DAWES. I want to know what this is a substitute for. 

1!Ir. BUTLER. That is going to be read now. 11-fr. DAWES. Now I understand. 

The PRESIDENT p1·o tempore. The yeas and nays have been ordered, and the Secretary :w-ID call the roll on the amendment of the 

Senator from South Carolina. 

The Secretary proceeded to call the roll. 

111r. HAMPTON (when 11Ir. COLQUITT'S name was called). The 

Senator from Georgia [Mr. CoLQUITT] is paired with the Senator from 

Rhode Island [~fr. CHACE]. 

Mr. DAWES (when his name was called). I am paired with the 

absent Senator from Texas [fu. U.A.XEY]. I do not know how he 

would vote if present, and I do not know exactly what the question is 

myself, and I will withhold my vote. 

Mr. EDMUNDS (when his name was called). I am paired with the 

Senator from Tennessee [Mr. HARRIS]. 

Mr. McPHERSON (when hisnamewascalled). lam paired with my 

colleague [lli. -SEWELI,). 

Mr. PLUMB (when his name was called). I am paired with the 

Senator from Georgia. [1\Ir. BROWN]. 

The roll-call was concluded and the result announced-yeas 22, nays 

27; as follows: 

Blackburn, 

Bowen, 

Butler, 

Call, 

Cameron, 

Conger, 

Aldrich, 

..A.llison, 

Beck, 

Berry, 

Blair, 

Cheney, 

Coke, 

Evarts, 

Fair, 

Gorman, 

Hampton, 

Hawley, 

YEAs-~. 

Mitchell of Oreg., Payne, 

Pugh, 

Jones of Nevada, 

Ransom, 

Riddleberger, 

Saulsbury, 

NA.Y8-27. 

Cullom, Mahone, 

Eustis, Manderson, 

Farwell, Mitchell of Pa., 

Frye, Morrill, 

George, Sherman, 

Hoar, Spooner, 

Jones of Arkansas, Stanford, 

.A.BSENT-27. 

Brown, . Edmunds, Jones of Florida, 

Camden, Gibson, Kenna, 

Chace, Gray, McMillan, 

Cockrell, Hale, :McPherson, 

Colquitt, Harris, Maxey, Dawes, Harrison, Miller, 

Dolph, Ingalls, Morgan, 

So the amendment of Mr. BUTLER was rejected. 

Sawyer, 

Teller, 

Vest, 

WilsonofMd. 

VanWyck, 

Voorhees, 

Walthall, 

Whitthorne, 

'Villiams, 

Wilson of Iowa. 

Palmer, 

Platt, 

Plumb, 

.Sabin, 

Sewell, 

Vance. 

The PRESIDENT pro t~mpore. The question recurs on the amendment reported from the Committee of the Whole. 

Mr. DOLPH. I have an amendment to offer that I understand is 

acceptable to the Senator from Massachusetts. If the amendment of 

the Senator from Massachusetts is now open to amendment before it is • voted upon in the Senate, I move to stri.E;e out. the words I have marked on the print I send to the desk, and I w1ll bnefly state my reasons. The prohibition contained in the last clause proceeds upon the proposition that it would be improper for a member of Congress to accept a retainer from a company when there was legislation pending in Congress or likely to be br~ught into Congress affecting the company .. If 

that is the case, there 1s no reason why that should be confined to railroad companies that received pecuniary aid from the Government. It 

ought to be generaL 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The amendment of the Senator from 

Oregon will be read. 

The CHIEF CLERK. In lines 8 and 9 it is proposed to strikeout the 

words ''which obtained its charter, or any grant of land, or pecuniary 

aid from the United Stat~;" so as to read: 

Or from any railroad company, if such member shall have reasonable cause to believe that measures specially affecting the interests of such railroad are pending before Congress or are about to be so pending during his term of office. 

Mr. DOLPH. Then I will ask to insert the word "company " instead of "railroad." 

Mr. HOAR. I do not know but that I was incautions in saying I 

would accept that. :Many members of the Senate suggest to me that 

this discl}SSion relates to our relation to the land-grant roads, and it is 

better to confine the legislation to that subject. 

Mr. DOLPH. I am glad of that suggestion. I have maintained my 

peace through the entire debate, but the bill, as I understand, is on a 

wrong theory. The words'' which obtained its charter, or any grant 

oflands,or pecuniary aid from the United States," embraces every railroad in every public land State. , The act of March 31 1875, grants to 

every railroad company organized under any State or Territory of the 

United States a right of way over the public lands of the United States, 

and the right to take materials from adjacent land for the construction 

of im road, simply by :filing its articles of incorporation and a statement of the organization of the company and a map of its location 

with the Secretary of the Interior. So then this language embraces 

every railroad in every public land State of the Union, but excepts 

every railroad in every other State of the Union. In other words, the 

Senator from Massachusetts, and the Senator from Vermont, and the 

Senator from New York, may appear under this bill for every railroad 

company in their States, for great railroad corporations having an interest in the question of interstate commerce, but the smallest road in 

any Western State or Territory of the Union is cutout by this provision. 

If it is right to say that a member of Congress sha'n not appear for a railroad company simply becau e there is legislation pending in regard 

to it, or there is likely to be such legislation, why does not that principle apply to every railroad company? Is it a sound proposition to say 

we will confine it to railroad companies that received a right of way from 

the Government, and will not apply it to other railroad companies that 

may have some actual positive interest in legislation? Thecompanies 

which received merely the right of way have no interest in legislation. 

The country will never undertake to forfeit or to deprive them of the 

right of way which has been granted under a general act. 

No question affecting the rightofwaycanever com.ebeforeCongress, 

and still they are included here, and great railroad companies having 

great and important interests in other matters of general legislation are excepted. Why is it not a proper thing to say that a member of 

Congress shall not take a 1·etainer from any railroad company that has a matter pending, like the interstate-commerce bill, in Congress, or when that member supposes there is going to be such a question pending in Congress? That is the reason I offer this amendment. It ought 

to be broader than it is, but I am seeking to enlarge the scope of the 

bill. 

The PRESIDENT p1·o t£mpore. The question is on the amendment 

of the Senator from Oregon. 

Mr. HOAR. I make no objection to it. . . 

1\lr. DOLPH. I understand the Senator withdraws his objection, 

and it may be made by general consent. 

The PRESIDENT pr{) tempore. The question is on the amendment 

of the Senator from Oregon [Mr. DOLPH]. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

Mr. DOLPH. Now I ask that the word "railroad," in line 11, be 

changed to "company." 

Mr. FRYE and others. No objection. 

The PRESIDENT pro tmnpo1·e. If there be no objection that change 

will be made. The question recurs on the amendment made as-in Com~ 

mittee of the Whole as amended. 

The amendment as amended was concurred in. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment 

and third reading of the bill. 

Mr. TELLER. I do not intend to vote for this bill, and I do not 

intend to keep the Senate here any length of time while I express my 

contempt of this proceeding. 

I have been a member of the United States Senate seven years, and 

I think I can appeal to every man who is present in this Chamber to 

bear me out in the statement I make that a more disgraceful scene has never occurred in the American Senate than I have seen here to-day. 

I have heard recriminations and condemnations heretofore, but I have never heard anything to compare with what I have heard here to-daycharges not directly made against members of this body, but charges 

made by innuendo in an unjustifiable manner. 

We are told by the Senator from Kentucky that we who are opposed 

to this class legislation are dishonest. 

Mr. BECK. That is not true; I state that distinctly. It is absolutely untrue. 

Mr. TELLER. In substance we are told that we want members of 

the Senate to have their pockets full of the money of the great corporations that come here for legislation; that we want Senators to have that 

money in their pockets, to corrupt and destroy their judgment. 

Mr. President, I have opposed this bill. I have opposed it openly 

without any personal interest in it. I have opposed it, and I stated on the floor of the Senate that I was not the attorney of any railroad in 

the world. I stated on the floor of the Senate that I had never been 

interested for any railroad in any question that could come before 

Congress, unless the question of interstate commerce might be considered. I have never been the attorney of any raihoad touching any matter that has come to Congress concerning their land grants. If I have ever been the attorney of a railroad company I have been the attorney 

simply for the transaction of an attorney's business in the courts, such as the trial of an assumpsit, or an ejectment, or a trespass case on the 

part of the railroad company. 
1887. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 1359 

The honorable Senator says that what I state jg untrue. I do not 

state that the honorable Senator said iri words that we were dishonest.. 

The honorable Senator's statement that this legislation was resisted 

because some Senators wanted to come into this body having the money 

in their pockets which was to control their judgment--

111r. BECK. That is equally untrue. I never said that. 

Mr. TELLER. If the Senator did not say it, my ears are of but 

little value, and I could have heard but imperfectly what he said today on that subject just before he was replied to by the Senator from 

Delaware. 

No, Mr. President, I do not think it is becoming in any member of 

this Senate to taunt his associates with a less degree. of honesty than 

he himself has. I for myself claim, as the Senator does, to be in moral 

worth his peer. He says no man is his superior. I claim that no man 

on this floor is my superior in that particular. I do not need any legislation to keep me honest. 

I do not need any legislation that shall keep me from doing that 

which the people whom I represent will believe affects my judgment. 

I rely upon my conscience and my sense of propriety to do that, and I 

have refrained since I have been a public officer from taking any fees 

from the cla.ss of people who could come here for legislation, not only 

the railroad companies but all other cla-sses of people who might have 

legislation here, where it might be said that it might bias my judgment. I have done this for the reason I stated here the other day, that 

in my judgment it is as essential that the people shall have faith in their 

representatives as to their honesty as it is that they shall be honest; 

and I do not propose myself by silence to have anybody say that I am 

resisting a public demand or n. public clamor. I only reply to the Senator from Texas, who says there is a public clamor for this kind of a law, 

that if there is it is because the people believe that their representatives are dishonest. Where is the remedy? Not in legislation; not in 

this kind of a movement; for the man who would take a fee from a railroad company for the purpose of doing its business and come into this 

Senate and be governed by that would take n. bribe from that company, and the company would much more readily approach him with 

a direct bribe than they would in that indirect way. 

I alluded the other day to the fact that the attacks made upon this 

Senate arose mainly from the assaults made in this Chamber, and I repeat it again. The Senator from Kentucky, whether he so intended 

or not, did arraign the whole opposition to this bill in terms more 

severe than I have heard used before in this body, and more severe, I 

think, than the ethics of the body justify. The Senator was perhaps 

in heat, but the heat goes out to the country. He alluded to the fact 

that on a former occasion a Senator had said we had juggled with the 

bill, and we juggled with the bill in such a manner as to make it appear that we were the attorneys of the railroad companies. That goes 

out to the country. He did not say that when that charge was made 

it was made against the very men who had been voting in favor of the 

forfeiting of a railroad grant. He voted as I did upon that occasion, 

and as a majorityoftbis Senate did, properly as I thought, properly as 

he thought, and yet he takes occasion to read it here to-day to go out 

to the country to be a charge against the Senate and against every 

member of this body who votes against thic;; bill. 

I do not propose to be intimidated in this body or anywhere else 

with reference to my votes. I vote according to my judgment, leaving 

the responsibility where it belongs, and I am not amenable or answerable to the Senator from Kentucky or anybody else for my vote. As 

high regard as I have for him I will not yield upon a question of that 

kind to his judgment or to that 'bfany other man. 

Mr. President, the bill has never been called for or demanded. Its 

introduction here was a mistake, in my judgment. It came in here in 

a hurry. The Senator has alluded over and over again to the fact that 

it had 37 votes. It did not have mine; it will not get it now; and if I 

vote solitary and alone, I will not be here to say that anybody who sits 

in this Chamber with me needs legislation of this character. 

Why, Mr. President, there is not 5 per cent. of the members of this 

Senate that has ever been the attorneys of land-grant railroads in any 

shape or manner. There is not 5 per cent. of them, if everything that 

has been said is true, who are so lacking in moral stamina that a fee 

in their pockets to do something entirely disconnected with the legislation pending would lead them to vote improperly. And yet the • whole Senate is arraigned, not only before the American people, but 

before the world, as guilty of offenses that would comrlgn a man under 

the common law of all the States to the penitentiary, and ought to preclude him from all decent society. 

It is to be supposed that an American Senator is a gentleman. It 

is to be supposed that he is a man of moral worth. It is to be supposed that he is a man of intellectual character to some extent at 

least, and that he does know, too, that be will enforce here the principles 

of honesty, morality, and justice. And I do not believe there bas ever 

been any cry anywhere by the people, nor even a vague fear, as the 

Senator from Arkansas said, as to the influence of these corporations 

upon the lawyers of this Senate. If I believed it, I should no longer 

regard a seat in this body as the highest acme of American ambition. 

I should say to every young man everywhere, l' Keep within the 

humbler spheres of life; walk lowly and not in high places," if the 

American people believe of their chief representatives in the greatest 

parliament-house in the world that they are a body of conspirators 

who need a law to bold them to the decencies of life. 

Mr. EVARTS. The matter which we are now to vote upon is, I suppose, to take the place of the bill that is to be passed upon and adopted 

or defeated. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. It has taken the place. The question is on passing the bill to a third reading. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The substitute has already been 

adopted. 

l\1r. EVARTS. Then the question is on the passage of the bill? 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on ordering the bill 

to be engrossed for a third reading. 

Mr. EVARTS. As it now reads, we have departed from the particular occasion or d.-'lJJger of t.he land-grant, or the incorporated property 

from the United States, in reference to the interests that were pending · 

or to be pending; and as it now reads it is to provide thus, so far as that 

is concerned, to accept employment as attorney at law from any railroad company, if such member shall have reasonable cause to fear that 

measures specially affecting the interests of such company are pending 

before Congress, or about to be so pending during his term of office. 

In a certain sense this amendment does relieve the legislation from 

the invidious distinction that was made, but it brings us in front of 

the very question whether we are to pass legislation that does make 

any discrimination at all when it observes the rules which are universally prevalent in the conscience and in the habit of the members 

of the Senate. 

I desire to point out that by the particular amendment now made we 

are brought back to a general consideration whether, so far as railroad 

companies are concerned, we should accept relations with matters in 

which there is or may be an interest. I should not desire to have the 

bill carry an implication that members of Congress were at liberty to 

enter into such relations in regard to banks and other corporations. I 

now make protest, and I should say all persons must make it, before 

they vote for such a bill as this. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on ordering the bill 

to be engrossed for a third reading. 

Mr. BECK. Let it be rec'l.d first. We do not know what it is. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The bill will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read the bill, as follows: 

That it shall be unlawful for any member of either House of Congress to ac- cept employment as attorney-at-law, or payment for services of any kind, in op- position to the United States in any case to which the United States may be a party, or in which its interest may be concerned, or from any railroad company, if such member shall have reasonable cause to believe that measures specially 

affecting the interests of snch company are pending before Congress, or are about to be so pending, during his term of office. 

Any person who violates the provisions of this act shall be guilty of a. misde· mean or, and may be punished by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by 

fine not exceeding $500, or by both, in the discretion of t.he court. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. Is it intended by the bill as it now stands to 

change tlie existing law, which does not now permit, as the AttorneyGeneral of the United States long ago reported to the President, a member of Congress, either a Senator or Representative, to accept a retainer 

from the United States? The fair implication of it is that it does; and 

I call attention to it because I have declined a good many retainers in 

favor of the United States lest I should be under the influence of the 

Departments, and I want to have it understood that this language, as 

it clearly does, repeals the law that now makes it improper for me to 

engage for the United States, and gives me leave to do so. It is the 

only favorable feature that I see in the bill. 

Mr. HOAR. I do not understand, from the Senator's own statement, 

that it is the law now existing that makes it improper for him to accept 

retainers from the United States, because he said his only reason for declining a great many was th~t he should be placed under the influence 

of the Departments--

Mr. EDMUNDS. That was my motive. 

Mr. HOAR. Whether there was a statute or not---

I\!r. EDMUNDS. The law provides that no member of Congress shall 

have any contract--

Mr. HOAR. I thought I bad the floor. 

1.1r. EDMUNDS. I beg the Senator's pardon . The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Massachusetts has 

the floor. 

Mr. HOAR. I will yield to the Senator with great pleasure. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. I thought you were asking me a question. 

Mr. HOAR. No, I did not. I thought you sat down. Certainly 

this bill does not affect, by any possibility of implication, the law which 

the Senator has alluded to, being a law on thest.'1tute-book as expounded 

by the law officer of the Government, which prohibits taking retainers 

for the United States. Now comes in a law in addition to the existing 

law and says you shall not take retainers against it in certain cases not 

prohibited before. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. I ought to reply to the Senat-or from J1,1assachusetts. 

The present state of the law, aside from the question of prosecuting 

claims against the United States, and so on, is that no member of 

I 
1360 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBR.U.ARY 4, 

Congress shall have any contract with the United States. A great 

many years ago, and under administrations which were much purer, 

if I am to suppose that my friend from Kentucky is.right, than this 

one is, and at times when Senators and Representatives were much 

pnrer than they are now, if I am to suppose his statement to be correct, a member of Congress was invilied by a Department to defend the interests of the ·United States in a cause pending in the State of Ohio, 

and the question whether he could be employed was referred to the 

then A-ttorney-General of the United States. He reported upon it, and 

said: "Here is this statute which says that no member of Congress shall 

be interested in any contract with the United States. Your retainer as an attorney for the United States to prosecute a crime against it in 

your district is a contract; you can not do it." So it has been followed 

evtrr since with one or two exceptions, which were rare. Now we come in with a lawwhich;by implication, as I think, repeals that. I do not 

object to it, because I am not in favor of this measure at all. It is a disgrace to the Senate, as I think, but the present form really improves, 

so far as self-interest goes, the status of the bar. 

The bill -was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, and was read the third time. 

The PRESIDENT prQ tempore. The question is, Shall the bill pass? 

Mr. BECK. I desire to have the yeas and nays on the passage of 

the bill. There is now nothing in the bill that I care about much, 

but the House of Representatives may put something in it, and I want 

to give them a chance by sending it to them. 

The yeas and nays were ordered; and the Secretary proceeded to call 

the roll. 

Mr. DAWES (when his name was called). Understanding that the 

Senator from Texas [Mr. MAXEY], who is absent, and with whom I am paired, would vote "yea," I shall vote "yea." . Mr. KENNA (when his name was called). I should vote "yea," 

but I am paired with-the Senator from New York [Mr. MILLER]. 

Mr. PALMER{when his name was called). I understand from the 

Senator from North Carolina [Mr. RANSOM] that if his colleague [Mr. 

V .ANCE] were here he would vote "yea." I have been paired with 

the Senator from North Carolina [Mr. V .ANCE] throughout the day on this question. I therefore vote 1 

• yea.'' 

The roll-call was concluded. 

Mr. PLUMB. On this question I am paired with the Senator from 

Georgia [Mr. BROWN]. If he were present, I should vote "yea." 

Mr. COKE. My colleague [Mr. MAXEY] is absent and is paired 

generally with the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. DAWES]. My 

coUeague would vote "yea" if he were present. 

Mr. EDMU'ij"DS. I am paired with the Senator from Tennessee 

[Mr. HARRIS]. Ifhe were present, I should vote "nay." 

Mr. COCKRE.LL. I am paired with the Senator from Connecticut 

[Mr. PLATT]. If he were present, he would vote "yea," and I should 

also vote 1 'yea.'' I therefore Tote. 

.1\fr. McMILLAN. My colleague [Mr. SABIN] is absent from the 

city, and is paired with the Senator from West Virginia [Mr. CAMDEN]. 

The result was announced-yeas 39, nays 14; as follows: 

Aldrich, 

.Allison, 

Beck, 

Berry 

.Blackburn, 

Blair, . Butler, 

Cheney, 

C-ockrell, 

Coke, 

Conger, 

Cullom, 

Dawes, 

Dolph, 

Eustis, 

Fair, 

Frye, 

George, 

Gorman, 

Hale, 

YE.AS--'39. 

Hawley, Spooner, 

Hoar, VanWyck, Jones of Arkansas, Vest, Jones of Nevada, Voorhees, 

Manderson, Walt-hall, 

Mitchell ofPa., Wbitthorne, 

Morrill, Williams, 

Palmer, Wilson of Iowa, 

Riddleberger, Wilson ofMd. 

Sherman, 

NAYs-14. 

Call, 

Cameron, 

Farwell, 

Gray, 

Hampton, Payne, 

McMillan, Pugh, 

Stanford, 

Teller. 

Mahone, Ransom, 

Mitchell of Oreg., Sawyer, 

.ABSENT-23. 

Bowen, Evarts, 

Brown, Gibson, 

Camden, Harris, 

Chace1 Harrison, 

Colquitt, Ingalls, Edmunds, Jones of Florida, 

Kenna, 

McPherson, 

Maxey, 

Miller, 

Morgan, 

Platt, 

Plumb, 

Sabin, 

Saulsbury, 

Sewell, 

Vance. 

So the bill was passed. 

On motion of Mr. HOAR, the title was amended so as to read: "A 

bill to prohibit members of Congress from acting as attorneys or em- ployes for railroad companies in certain cases.'' 

.ATLANTIC .AND PACIFIC SHIP-RAILWAY. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair lays before the Senate 

the special order. 

The CHIEF CLERK. A bill (S. 2288) to incorporate the Atlantic and 

Pacific Ship-Railway Company, and for other pnrposes. 

Mr. ALLISON. I move that the Senate adjourn. 

The motion was agreed to; and (at 6 o'clock and 10 minutes p.m.) 

the Senate adjourned until to-morrow, Saturday, February 5, at 12 

o'clock m. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 

FRIDAY, Feb'ruary 4, 1887. 

The House met at 12 o'clock m. Prayer by Rev. J. J. BULLOCK, D. 

D., of Washington city. 

The Journal of yesterday'~ proceedings was read and approved. 

VETO MESS.AGE--.ALEX.ANDER FALCONER. 

The SPEAKER laid before the House the following message from the 

President of the United States: 

To tM House of Representatives: 

I return without approval House bill numbered 6443, entitled "An act granting a pension to .Alexander Falconer." . This claimant filed his application for pension in 1879, alleging that in 1837, 

being then an enlisted man in the United States .Army, he received a gunshot 

'wound in ·his right leg below the knee, at the battle of Okeechobee Lake, Florida. 

The records disclose the fact that this soldier enlisted in 1834, and was almost 

continuously in the service and attached to the same company until 1846. It furthe.r appears that he is reported sick during the month iu which the battle was fought. The list of casualties does not contain his name among the 

wounded. 

He re-enlisted in 1846 and again in 1947, and was finally discharged in 18-!8. 

These latter enlistments were for service in the :Mexican war. His claim for pension was denied in 1885, on the ground that no disability ex· isted in a pensionable degree from the alleged gunshot wound in his leg. . It is perfectly clear that the only pretexts for giving this claimant a pension are military service, old age, and poverty. Inasmuch as be was a soldier in the Mexican war, his case is undoubtedly pro- vided for by a general law approved within the last few days. Under this bill the amounli_ to be paid him is fixed, while if the bill herewith 

returned were approved, the sum to be paid him would depend upon the determination of the Pension Bureau as to the extent of his disability as the result of 

his wound. .As that bureau has quite lately determined that there was no disability it is evident that this old soldier can better rely upon the general law re- ferred to. GROVER CLEVELAND • 

ExECUTIVE 1\IANSION, 

TVashingtO'TI, February 3, 1887. 

Mr. ELDREDGE. I move that this veto message, with the accom- panying bil1, be referred to the Committee on Pensions. 

The motion was agreed to. 

WILLI.Al\1 LYNCH. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the House the following messa.ge 

from the President of the United States: 

To the House of Representatives: 

I herewith return without approval House bill numbered 6132, entitled ".An act granting a pension to William Lynch." The claimant mentioned in this bill enlisted in the Fifth Regiment United 

States Infantry in 1849, and was discharged after a re-enlistment September 8, 

1859. He filed a claim for pension more than twenty-four years afterward, in .April, 

1884, claiming that he contracted rheumatism of the right hip and leg in the win- ter of 1857-'58, while serving in Utah. He admitted that he was not under treatment while in the service, and that he never consulted a physician in re- gard t-o his disability until he commenced proceedings for a pension. The evidence disclosed to me falls far short of establishing this claim for pension upon its merits. 

The application made to the Pension Bmeau is still pending and awaiting an- swer to inquiries made by the bureau in .January, 1886. I do not understand that the Congress intends to pass special acts in cases thus situated. · 

EXECUTIVE MANSION, 

Washington, Februar-y 3, 1887. 

GROVER CLEVELAND. 

Mr. ELDREDGE. Imovethatthismessage, with the accompanying 

bill, be referred to the Committee on Pensions . 

The motion was agreed to. 

STATUE OF LIBERTY LIGHT STATION. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the Honse a, letter from the Secretary 

of the Treasury, transmitting an estimate from the Light-House Board, 

and recommending the passage of an a-ct providing for a permanent 

plant for lighting the St.atue of Liberty light station, Bedloe's Island, 

New'York; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce, and 

ordered to be printed. · 

MILE.AGE OF ARMY OFFICERS. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the Honse a letter from the Secretary 

of the Treasury, transmitting an estimate from the Secretary of War of a deficiency in the appropriation for mileage of officers for the fiscal year 

ending June 30, 1887; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed. 

JOHN H. WEEKS. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the House a letter from the assistant 

clerk of the Court of Claims, transmitting a copy of the findings of fact 

by that court in the case of John H. Weeks against the United States; 

whicli was referred to the Committee on War Claims, and ordered to be 

printed. 

JAMm3 G. FIELD. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the House a letter from the assistant 

clerk of the Court of Claims, transmitting a copy of·the findings of fact 

by that court in the case of James G. Field, administrator, &c._, against 

the United States; which was referred to the Committee on War Claims1 

and ordered to be printed.