1882. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1607 

others, citizens of C ainesville, and of Evennont Booth and others, citizens of Harrison County, in the State of Missouri, praying for the 

restorati<'n of fractional currency-severally to the Committee on 

Banking and Currency. By Mr. CARPENTER: The petition of citizens of Boone County, 

Iowa, asl! ing that the same privileges and encouragement be given 

to buildiD g railroad bridges across the Missouri River above Omaha as have h·~retofore been given below that city-to the Committee on 

Commerce. 

By Mr. DWIGHT: The petition of J. M. Stone and 38 others, 

<:itizens of Binghamton, New York, relative to the duty on manu- factured glass-to the Committee on Ways and.Means. 

By Mr. HEPBURN : The petifion of Samuel Johnson and 50 others, 

citizens of Iowa, praying for aid in the construction of bridges across the Missouri River in Iowa and Nebraska north of Omaha-to the 

Committee on Commerce. 

By Mr. HOGE : Papers relating to the claim of William M. Morrison-to the Committee on India.n Affairs. 

Also, the petition of Robert F. Tapp, for compensation for damages 

done his mills and lands by the erection of dam No.7 on the Monongahela River-to the Committee on Commerce. 

By Mr. JOYCE:. The petition of C. Benjamin and others, citizens 

of Pittsfield, Rutland County, Vermont, praying for the passage of 

the Edmunds bill for the suppression of polygamy-to the Committee 

on the Judiciary. . . Also, the petition ofP. T. Griffith, praying that he be granted an honorable discharge from the military service-to the Committee on Military .Affairs. 

By Mr. NEAL: The petition of Dr. Jonathan Morris and 10 others, 

physicians of the city of Ironton, in the State of Ohio, in favor of the 

establishment of a marine hospital at that place-to the Committee on Commerco. 

By Mr. O'NEILL: The resolution of the Tobacco Board of Trade 

of Philadelphia, requesting Congress either to abolish promptly the 

tax on tobacco and cigars or to pass resolutions to the effect that it 

is unwise and impolitic to tamper during the present Congress with 

the said tax--to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. J. S. ROBINSON: The petition of John Bonner and others, 

for the establishment of a daily mail route from Magnetic Springs to 

Delaware, in the State of Ohio-to the Committee on the Post-Office 

and Post-Roads. 

Also, papers relating to the pension claims of Charles B. and Eliza~ 

beth Smith and of Sarah I. Cameron-severally to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. STEELE: The petition of R: Strops and 60 others, praying 

for the establishment of a post-route from North Manchester to Seagro, in the State of Indiana-to the Committee on the Post-Office 

and Post-Roads. 

By Mr. VANCE: The letter ofW. 0. Harrelson, of North Carolina, 

relative to legislation on the subject of temperance-to the Committee on the Alcoholic Liquor Traffic. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 

SATURDAY, March 4, 1882. 

The House met at twelve o'clock m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. 

F. D. POWER. 

The Journal of yesterday wa.g read and approved. 

the parties thereto or order of the court, except as otherwise hereinafter provided. The clerk, marshal, and district attorney for said district of Kansas shall perform the duties pertaining to their offices respectively for said court, and the clerk and 

marshal shall appoirit a- deputy to reside and keep their offices at Wichita, who, in 

the absence of the principals, shall do and perform all the duties appertaining to 

their sa-id offices resP.ectively. But the city or county authorities shall provide a suitable building, Without expense to the United States, in which to hold said court, otherwise no court shall be held at said place. SEC. 2. That all that part of the Indian Territory lying north of the Canadian 

River and east of Texas and the one hundredth meridian not set apart and occu- pied by the Cherokee, Creek, and Seminole Indian tribes, shall, from and after the passa~e of this act, be annexed to and constitute a :part of the United States judi- cial diStrict of Kansas ; and the United States district courts at Wichita and Fort 

Scott, in the district of Kansas, shall have exclusive original jurisdiction of all 

offenses committed within the limits of the territory hereby annexed to said district 

of Kansas aga-inst any of the laws of the United States now or that may hereafter 

be operative therein. . SEC. 3. That all that portion of the Indian Territ<lry not annexed to the district 

ofxansas by this act~ and not set apart and occupied by the Cherokee. Creek. 

Choctaw, Chickasaw, and Seminole Indian tribes, shallJ from and after the pas- ~e of this act, be annexed to and constitute a part of tne United States judicial diStrict known as the northern district of Texas ; and the United States district 

court at Graham, in said northern di trict of Texas, shall have exclusive ori¢nal jurisdiction ofall offenses committe<! within the limits of the territory hereby an- nexed to said northern district of Texas against any of the laws of the United 

States now or that may hereafter be operative therein. SEc. 4.. That nothing contained in this act shall be construed to affect in any manner any action or proceeding now pending in the circuit or district court for 

the western district of Arkansas, nor the execution of any process relating thereto; nor shall anything in this act be construed to give to said district courts of Kan- sas or Texas, respectively, any greater jurisdiction in that part of said Indian 

TeiTitory so as aforesaid annexed, respectively, to said district of Kansas and said 

northern district of Texas than might heretofore have been lawfully exercised 

therein by the western district of .Arkansas; nor shall anything in this act con- tained be construed to viol"te or impa-ir in any respect any treaty provision what- ever. 

Mr. RYAN. The Committee on the Judiciary recommend an amendment to the first ection of the bill, to strike out the words at 

the end of the section, '' otherwise no court shall be held at said 

place." 

The amendment was agreed to. 

1\!r. ATKINS. Does this bill provide for a new judge Y 

¥r. RYAN. It provides for no new officer whatever. 

The bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed a.nd read a third 

time ; and it was accordingly read the third time and passed. 

Mr. RYAN moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill waa passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid ou the 

table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

MARY C. 1\IURRA.. Y. 

Mr. FLOWER. Mr. Speaker, I claim the indulgence of tho House 

for a moment. In the hour of our country's peril, when the old flag was trrunpled in tho dust and the Union was, we feared, about to bo 

dissevered, this Government called for men, and thousands of them, 

including Edward Murray, went to the field of battle. He fought" ~ravely through the war, was twice wounded at Snicker's Gap, once in the wrist-when, from loss of blood, he wa.g taken from the fieldand then shot through the belt, the ball penetrating the kidneys. 

He can no longer remind the country of its promise to make his wife 

and children the wards of the Government. His voice is hushed in 

d.eath. His widow bids m? ~sk you not for back pay but for a pensiOn to support her. She 1s m want, and I ask unanimous consent 

that the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar be disc~ged fro~ the further consideration of the bill (H. R. No. 3549) 

granting a pensiOn to Mary C. Murray, and that the bill be now con- sidered and passed. 

Mr. SPARKS. Why does not this applicant go to the Pension Office, 

like anybody else t 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN KANSAS. Mr. FLOWER. The claim has been presented there. I have read 

Mr. RYAN. I desire this morning to renew the request I made day the evidence thoroughly. The bill ha.g twice been reported favorabefore yesterday, that House bill No. 429, to provide for holding a bly in this House. 

term of the district court of the United States at Wichita, Kansas, Mr. SPARKS. It may be that the bill is right, but I do not know 

And for other purposes, be taken from the House Calendar and con- that the patriotic speech of the gentleman calls upon us for precipiaidered at this time. The objection which was then made has since tate action. There is a Pension Bureau where all these claims ought been withdrawn. to go under the liberal provisions of our pension laws. Why not go 

Mr. HOLMAN. Let the bill be read. there with this case, where the soldiers of my district equally meriMr. RYAN. I willstn.te to my friend that this bill wa.s read fully torious go with theirs' 

last Thursday morning; but if he desires it read again, I have no The SPEAKER. Doe the gentleman from Illinois object t If 

objection. there be no objection, the bill will be read. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I was not aware that this bill had been read. The bill was read, as follows: 

Mr. RY:tN. Yes; you called for the reading of it yourself, and it Be it enacted, &c., That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby au- was read 1n response to your own request. thorized and directed to place on the pension-roll from the date of Novembe~ 13 

Mr. HOLMAN. This is a bill which involves the jurisdiction of 1876,subjecttotheprovisionsandlimitationsofthepensionlaws, thenameofMarY 

certain portions of the Indian Territory 7 0. Murray, widow of Lieutenant-Colonel Edward Murray, late of the Fifth New 

Mr. RYAN. It is that bill. York Heavy Artillery. 

1\!r. HOLMAN. Inasmuch as the subject has been somewhat con- There being no objection, the Hou e procl)eded to consider the bill. 

sidered by members since the bill was read, I have no objection to The amendment reported by the Committee on Invalid Pensions to 

its being considered at this time. strike out the words "from the date of November 13, 1876," was 

There being no objection, the bill was taken from the House Cal- agr~ed • • 

endar for consideration. . The bill as am~nded was order~d to.be engrossed for a third r.eadThe bill was read as follows : mg; was accordingly read the third time, and pa.gsed. 

Be it eruu:ted. cl:c. Th~t there shall be one tennofthe United States distri t urt Mr. FLOWER moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was for the district' of Kansas held at Wichita in each year, on the first Mondayco:OSep- passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the 

tember, from and after thepassageofthisaet; but no cause action orproceedirig I table. 

shall be tried or considered in the court herein provided forucless by consent of a.ll The latter motion wa agreed to. 
1608 CONGRESSIONAL RECO~D-HOUSE. M.A.ROH 4, 

11AlmOR OF REFUGE, SAND BEACH, LAKE H~RON. 

Mr. TOWNSEND of Ohio. I ask unanimoUB consent that the Committee of the Whoie House on the state of the Union be discharged 

from the further consideration of the bill (H. R. No. 797) for the government and control of the harbor of refuge at Sand Beach, Lake 

Huron, Michigan, and th~t the ~ill be now consi~ered. This bill has 

received the careful coll8lderation of the Comnnttee on Commerce, 

who unanimously recommend its passag~.. A similaa: bill w~.s ~assed 

by this House in the last Congress, but failed to rece1ve action m the 

Senate. The Secretary of War and General Wright, as well as t~e 

Secretary of the Treasury, are very anxious for the pa-~:~sage of this 

bill. 

The bill was read, as follows : 

Be it enacted, cf:c. , That from and after the passage of this ~ct, ~nd until the com- pletion of the work of construction, the Secreta!Y of War 1s directed to. as~ume 

full control over the harbor of refuge on Lake Huron at Sand Bea(}h, Michi~an, 

now in course of construction by the United States Government, and ofthep1ers, breakwaters, docks, wharves, buildings, and other improvements .~de by the 

United States appertaining to said harbor of refuge,, and to facilitate the use thereof including the channels of and approaches to sa1d harbor of refuge, so far as may 'be necessary to the protection and use of said harbor a~d the improvements 

aforesaid· and said Secretary of War, for the purpose aforesru.d, l;lnd for the preservation ~f saitl harbor in the interests of commerce, shall pres~nbe such re~ tions not inconsistent with the laws of the United States respec~g the use or said 

ha.rbor and its channels, and the appro~h~s thereto, and re~pectingtheuseof~e 

piers, breakwaters, docks, wharves, buildings, and other Improvements of Said 

harbor, made by the United States, as he shaJl deem needful to fully protect a~d 

preserve the said harbor and its several channels and approaches, and the s8J.d 

piers breal..-wR.ters docks, wharves, buildings, and other improvements. Such ref!;· ulati~us shall be pfomul "'~ted by publication th.e!OOf for ten ~ay-s consecutively m one (}aily newspaper pufi'tished m e3;ch of the .cities of Detro1t, Pory :s;uron, Buffalo Cleveland and Chicago, and s8J.d regulations maybe changed m like manner fro~ time to ti~e. He shall also cause four copies of such regulations to be kept 

posted in conspicuous places on said piers and breakwaters. . Sxc. 2. That the Secretary of War shall appoin~, upon ~e recommenda.tio~ of 

the enaineer officer in charge of the work a custodian of said harbor and the rm· prove~ents aforesaid, who eduty i~ shall be to preserve and protect the same un- der the regulations made as afores8J.d by the Secretary of War, and to enforce the 

observance o. f said regulations, and to guard and preserve the property of the 

United States at said harbor of refuge. Said custodian shall alSo have power to direct and re!rulate the stationing and anchoring of steam-ve sels and water-craft 

in said harbor, and the mooring ~ereof at th~ piers •. breakwaters, docks, and 

wharves of said harbor, and the laym~ out and disc~argmg of cargoes and l;>allast 

in said harbor piers breakwaters, ann docks ; and 1t shall De the duty of Said cus- todian to repotl to the United States district attorney for the eastern district of 

Michigan all violations of this act and of the said re!rolations pr~scribed by the 

Secretary of \V ar ; and said custodian shall receive suCh compensation, not exceeding $150 per month as the Secretary of War may allow. 

SEC. 3. That it shall be the duty of all persons using or navigating said harbor, 

its channels and approaches, or using anY. of the piers, breakwaters, docks, "'_Vharves, or other improvements made by the Umted States, to observe the regulations prescribed by t.he Secretary of War as· aforesaid; and any perso~ wh<? shall :wiJlful!Y o.r negligently strand or sink any steam-vessel, boat, or craft m S8J.d harbor, or m the clia.nnels or approaches, or who shall ~y obstruct. or oppose the c~todian 

of said harbor in the enforcement of the reeulation.a aforesaa.d, or who shall willfully or nealigently, or by failure or neglect to Observe the regulations prescribed by the 

Secretary of War for the use thereof, obstruct or impair said harbor, or cause any impediment, injury, filling up, or shoalin"' therein, or shall deposit any earth, as~es, 

stone, ballast, or other sunstances in sai'a harbor, channel!!, or approaches ~n<!fug to obstruct or impair the navigation thereof, or who shall willfullyda;mage or liiJUre 

the piers breakwaters wharves, docks, or other improvements of said harbor made 

by the u;uted States, ~r who shall fail t:> obey and observe any of said prescribed 

regulations, shall be liabl!3 to a penal~ of not le~s than .50 '!lor more than$~, t.o be recovered by information or by action of debt m the district court of the Umted 

States for the eastern district of Michigan, with costs of suit, and shaU, in addition 

thereto be liable to the United States, or to any person aggrieved by such obstructions o~ injurie or unlawful acts or omission, in a civil action for all damages oc- (}asio~ed thereby or b;r. any of said unlawful acts, to said United States or such aggrieved person. And if such damage or injury to said harbor, channel!', approache;s, piers breakwaters, docks, wharves, and other property of the Umted States m said harbor of refuge be committed by any steamer, vessel, or water-c~, or by 

the master or person in charg': thereof, or if su~h master O! other person.m charge of such vessel shall willfully VIolate t.he regtllations aforesaid, the afores8J.d penalty 

of not less than $50 nor more than $500 shall be incurred, ~nd such vessel ~hall be 

liable for the penalty aforesaid, and may be :proceeded ag~m~t by way. of .lib.el for 

the recovery thereof in any court of the Umted States Within whose Junsdiction 

such vessel may be found. 

SEC. 4. That the Secretary of War may, in his discretion, purcha e or hire a steam launch or· tug, to be stationed at and used ~bout said ~3.!bor, und~r the 

direction of said custodian, for the purpose of enfbrcmg the proVISions of this act ; and such a sum as may be necessary, not exceeding $10,000, is hereby appro_Pria.ted for the purcha e or hire of said steam-launch ; and the expense of removmg and 

maintaining said launch or tug shall be paid out of the appropriation made for said 

harbor of refuge. SEC. b. That after the completion of said harbor by the United States Govern- ment the control shall be tran.sferred to the Secretary of the Treasury. 

There being no objection, the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union was discharged from the further consideration of the bill, and the House proceeded to co~sider t~e same. The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was ac- cordingly read the third time, and pa-ssed. 

Mr. 'l'OWNSEND, of Ohio, moved to reconsider t~e vote by w~ch 

the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to recoll8lder 

be laid on the table. 

'fhe latter motion was agreed to. 

TOBACCO TAX. 

Mr. SCALES. I ask unanimous consentto presentatthlstime for 

refe1·ence to the Committee on Ways and Means, and to be printed 

in the REcoRD without reading, a petition from the citizens of Milton, North Carolina,, and its vicinity, in regard to the tobacco tax. 

This is a matter of great importance to my constituents~ and I hope 

the Committee on Ways ~nd~eans, and ordered to beprintedin the 

REcoRD: 

Petition from citizens of Milton, North Carolina, and its vicinity, in regard to the 

tobacco tax. 

Po tlle hoTUWable the House of .Represtntatives · · of the United States in Congress auembled: 

We, th~ members of the tobacco trade of the town of Milton, State of North 

Carolina, do respectfully subm).t this our memorial to you, praying for a speedy 

settlement of the question now agitating the country relative to the tax on manu- factured toba.cco. 

Interna,l taxation has alway-s beei;t repellent to our free institutions and has been ever regarded as a burden to be borne· oilly so long as an extraordinary and press- ing emergency demands it. ~his tax on tobacco was inaugurated September 30, 1862, in the midst of a great and prolonged conflict. It waa then .simply a war measure. Twenty years have 

almost passed since ,its pa sage. During this time the tobacco industry has cheerfully- poured into our national Treasury $542,358,303.09. By this vast sum our national debt has been greatly reduced, and what is left of that debt has been or can be readily funded at a very low rate of interest, and thus furnish the best 

basis for our national currency. Our Treasury vaults are redundant with aoou- mulated wealth and peace is ev~here undisturbed. Such being the case, we respectfully ask, is it not time this great industry, which is relied on by rich and 

poor alike as a means of subsistence, were relieved of this ta.x burden, a burden 

that weighs heavily upon producers, manufacturers, dealers, and consumers. To this end, since the necessity for its continuance no longer exists, we unqualifiedly 

pray its total abolition. Conn,ected with this ta.x incubus j.s the 9.uestion of manu- fa(}turers' bonds, to which we respectfully solicit your attention. In interior 

towns, especially in the South where very little accumulated wealth exists, it is 

often next to impossible for men of tried inte~ty to give the bond requireQ. by the Government simply because so few of then nei_ghbors can justify to the re- quisite amount. Shorud you in your wisdom determme to reduce instead of abolishing the ' tax, we respectfully entreat that the bonds required be reduced in like 

pro:J?ortion. Your memoralists, however, heartily trust that you will aboli.ah the tax m its entirety. .And to this end they most humbly pray, &c. 

We would fuither pray that the license tax on leaf dealers be reduced to $5 

if it be not abolished. 

HATCHER & STAMPS, E.HUNTJ.. 

W. M. & u. WATKINS, 

H. W.HINES, F. H. HAMLETT, W. B. HATCHER, S. W.HUNT, 

W.M.LEWIS, G. H. FAUCETTE, 

•.r. W. FAUCETTE, 

J. L. STUTON, .ALLEN & OLIVER, R. M. OLIVER & CO., S. A. DONOHO, Ja., J. W. LE~a., 

H. D . LONGwjj;LL, 

JAMES PETERS, 

ROBERT FURGERSON, LEWIS WALKER, 

MARK McGEHEE, FARLEY .A. FERGUSON, R. E. JOHNSON, 

GLENN HUNT, 

THOMAS M. HAMLETT, WILLIAM R. WORSHAM, JR., 

E. B. UTTEN, R. L FEATHERSTQN, 

J. S. MOORE, 

W.H.OWEN, 

J. M. FRANCIS, 

N. L. WALKER, 

JOSEPH A. FOSTER, 

T. B. MITCHELL, 

J. E. POWELL, 

JOHN M. OLIVER, 

JAMES E. BARKER, 

JAMES M. WELLS, 

S. T. COVINGTON, 

ALEXANDER GUTHRIE, 

J. N. RAINEY, E.R.WILL~ 

R. C. YARBROUuH, 

C. S. WALTERS, NAT. HUNT 

J. w. LEWIS, 

R. L. WALKER. 

RETIREMENT OF TRADE-DOLLA.RS. 

Mr. SMITH, of Illinois. I ask unanimous consent to have taken 

from the House Calendar for present coUBideration the bill (H. R. 

No. 4671) for the retirement of trade-dollars from circulation. I 

think when the bill is read there will be no objection. 

The SPEAKER. The bill will be read. 

The Clerk proceeded to read the bill, but before the reading was concluded 

Mr. RANDALL said: While I fav€)r a part of this bill, perhaps all 

of it I feel it necessary to make objection to the consideration of so imp~rtant a bill at this time and in this way. 

AMENDMENT OF LA..."''D LAWS. 

:Mr. BRENTS. I ask unanimous consent to have taken from the 

House Calendar for present consideration the bill which I send to 

the desk. It is very short and its purpose is simply to correct a verbal inaccuracy in a law passed a year or two ago. 

The bill was rean, as follows : 

.A bill (H. R. No. 1934) amendatory of an act enti;tled ".An act for the relief of ce.r- tain settlers on the public lands, and to proVIde for the repayment of certam fees, purchase-money, and commissions paid on void entries of public lands, " 

approved June 16, 1880. 

Be it enacted d:c. That the words "heirs or 3.'lsigns, 11 at the end of the second 

section of the ~{lt eittitled " .An act for the relief of certain settlers on the public lands, and to provide for the repayment of certain fees, purchase-money, and com- missions paid on void entries of public lands, 11 approved June 16, 1880, are hereby 

stricken out and the words "personal representatives 11 inserted in their stead. 

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the present consideration 

of this bill T 

Mr. ROBINSON, of Massa.chUBetts. I do not think we ought to 

pass a measure of this chara.oter unless we know all about it. This 

may be a very important bill. . Mr. BRENTS. This bill has been unanimously reported by the 

Committee on Public Lands, having been introduced at the request 

of the Commissioner of the GeneraJ Land Office. It simply seeks to 

carry out the original purpose of the act of June 16, 1880. 

Several members called for the regul;u order. . . . The SPEAKER. The regular order is called for, which lB eqmvalent to an objection. CONFERENCE REPORT. 

there will be no objection. 

There being no objection, the following petition was Mr. HISCOCK. I desire to present a conference report on the 

referred to urgent deficiency bill. 

' 
1.882. CONGRESSIONAL ~EOORD-HOUSE. 1609 

The Clerk read as follows: 

The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the 

amendments of th·e Senate to the bill (H. R. No. 4221) to provide for certain of the most urgent deficiencies in the appropriations for the service of the Government 

for the fiscal year ending June 30, 18821 and for other purposes, having met, after 

full and free conference have agr~d to recommend, and do recommend, to their 

respective Houses as follows: 

That the Senate recede from its amendments numbered 1, 3, and 1.6. 

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

numbered 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 20, 21, 29, 30, 31, 34, 36, 38, 41, and 42, and agree to the same. Amendment-numbered 15: That the Honse recede from its disagreement to the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 15, and agree to the same~ with an amendment a-s follows: In lieu of the sw:n proposed insert "$3,000;" ann the Senate agree to the same. Amendment numbered 22: That the House recede from its disagreement to the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 22, and agree to the same, with an amendment 

a3 follows: In lieu of the sum proposed insert "$100,000 ;" and the Senate agree to the same. Amendments numbered 28, 32, 35, and 37 : That the House recede from its dis- a~eement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 28, and agree to the same Wlth an amendmen~ as follows: Transfer amendments numbered S2t 35, and 37, 

and.. insert the same m the order named as new paragraphs after am.ennnent num- be& 27, and insert as a new paragraph after amendment numbered 28 the following: 1 ' For contingent expenses of the Senate: 'Miscellaneous items,' the sum of $14,331.20, as follows;" and the Senate agree to the same. Amendment numbered 33: That the House recede from its disagreement to the 

amendment of the Senate numbered 33, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows: In lieu of ''six" in line 1 of the amendment insert ''seven,'' and in 

lieu of the sum named in line 5 of the amendment insert "$3, 780;" and the Senate 

agree to the same. FRANK IDSCOCK, GEO. M. ROBESON, 

s. s. cox, 

Managers on t1te part of the HOUBe. 

W. B. ALLISON, 

P. B. PLUMB, 

J 4-S. B. lJECK, 

Managers on the part of the Senate. 

Mr. RANDALL. Is there any increase in the items f 

Mr. HISCOCK. TheSenateinoreasedit$478,297.10. Theyrecede 

from that to the amonnt $220,000. The Honse recede as to 100,000 

and as to 56,000. Is there any other explanation the gentleman 

wantst 

Mr. RANDALL. I should like to know what is the increase of 

amonnt as the bill left the House 7 

Mr. HISCOCK. I have not the precise figures, but I think aboup 

$156.~7. 

The following is the statement accompanying the report of the 

committee of conference, under the rule: 

The managers on the part of the House of the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the urgent deficiency bill respectfully submit the re- quired detailed statement of the efl'ect of the foregoing report as t{) action on the 

several amendments; which will be, if the report IS adopted, as follows: - On the first amendment: To fix the sum to be appropriated for public printing at $400,000 as originally proVided in the bill. 

On the thW amendment: To fix the sum " for freight on bullion and coin" at $50,000, as originally provided. On the fourth, fifth, and sixth amendments: To fix the sum to be expended for 

"vaults and safes" at $20,000, to be expended equally at the Mint and at the subtreasury at San Francisco, California.. 

On the eighth amendment: To include the sum of $10,000 for repair and purchase of instruments to be used in the observation of the transit of Venus, December, 

1882, and to crea.te the Superintendent of the Nautical Almanac a member of .the 

Transtt of Venus Commission. 

On the ninth amendment: To exclude the sum of $100,000 for the Na.vy Depart- ment, for purchase of plates and materials for boilers, from the bill. 

On the tenth amendinent: To include the sum of $20,000 for mileage of officers 

of the Army when traveling under orders. 

ch~a~de~~~d::~<!:f~z~:aa.:iJt~~;~;~g~~ for subsistence, &c., of Apa.-

On the thirteenth amendment: To ~ppFopriate $50,000 for support and civilization of Arapahoes, Cheyennes, Kiowas, Comanches, Apaches, and Wichitalndians. 

On the fourteenth amendment: To exclude $3,000 for Indians in central super- intendency. On the fifteenth amendment: To fix the amount fot· Indians in the late central 

superintendency at $3,000. · On the sixteenth amendment: To exclude $5,000 for NavaJo Indians. 

On the seventeenth amendment : To include "schools for freedmen in the Indian 

Territory," in the clause providing $50,000 for support of schools. 

On the eighteenth amendment: To include pay of expert architects for work on additional accommodations for Library of Congress, $5,000. 

On the twentieth amendment: To authorize the use of an une~nded balance 

of the appropriations for the improvement of the Susquehanna. R1ver above and 

below Havre de Grace, in the construction of the channel and breakwaters of the 

fishing battery below Havre de Grace. • On the twenty-first amendment: To include the sum of $30,000 to expedite the 

work on the exhibition cases in the new building for the National Museum during the present fiscal year. On the twenty-second amendment: To fix the amount for additional clerk hire 

in post-offices at$100,000. 

On the twenty-eighth amendment: To include $7,000 for miscellaneous items for 

the Senate. 

On the twenty-ninth amendment: To include pay to D. F. Murphy for reporting debates of the special session of the Senate, $2,500. 

On the thirtieth amendment: To include pay to the clerk of the superintendent of the Senate document-room, $720. 

On the thirty-first amendment: To include pay of assistant clerk to the Senate 

Committee on Pensions, $520. 

On the thirty-second amendment: To include pay t{) the telephone operator of 

the Senate, $720. 

On the thirty-third amendment: To pay messengers of the Senate, $3,780. 

On the thirtY-fourth amendment: To include payment to heirs of recently deceased officers and employes of the Senate, $4,459.20. · On the thirty-fifth amendment: To include payment of the expenses attending ~e funeral arrangements by the Senate of the Lite Preaident and of the late SeWL- tor Burnside, $6,000. · . On the thirty-sixth ame~c4Dent: To include payment of cert-ain clerks t{) comI 

mittoos of the Senate during the period frqm the 5th to the 18th of March last, 

$2,268. 

On the thirty-seventh amendment: To include pay for folding speeches in theSenate $500 ; and fix the rate of pay for folding speeches. · On the thirty-eighth amendment: To inclride pa.y to Richard S. Murphy forservices aa clerk to the Committee o~ F,0reign Reliiti,ons, $84. 

On the forty-first amendment: To include $2,000 for C10ntingent expenses of theexecutive office. 

On the forty-second amendment: To authorize the Secreta.ry of War to par out of the contingent fund for the office of the Surgeon-General rent for the portion of 

the building on the corner of F and Tenth streets occupied by a part of the force· of said office. 

FRANK IDSCOCK.. 

The conference report was adopted. 

Mr. ffiSCOCK moved to reconsider the vote by which the confer- ence report was adopted; and also moved that the motion to recon- sider be laid on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

Mr. HUMPHREY. I object to any more grants of unanimous con- sent, as we have not had a morning hour for some time. 

The SPEAKER. H there be no objection the Chair will lay before the Honse at this time some executive communications. 

There was no objection. 

EASTERN CHEROKEE INDIANS. 

The SPEAKER laid before the Holl.St) the following message from 

the President; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed: 

To the Senate and House of Representatives: 

I transmit herewith a communication from the Secretary of the Interior, da.t.ed 

the 2d instant, with accompanying palJers, submitting an estimate of appropria- tions for the payment of expenses of removal of certain Eastern Cherokee Indians to the Indian Territory. 

The subject is -presented for the considemtion of CclfE~T-ER A. ARTHUR. 

EXECUTIVE MANSION, March 3, 1882. 

FORT SELDEN. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the House the following meE~sagefrom the President ; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed : 

To the Senate a:ul HOUBe of .Representatives: 

I transmit herewith for the considemtion of Congress a communication from theSecretary of War, transmitting plans and estimates for the large military post pro- posed to be constructed at Fort Selden, New Mexico. 

CHESTER A. ARTHUR. EXECUTIVE MANBION, March 3, 1882. 

ENCROACHMENT 0~ CHICAGO HA.RBOR. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the Honse a letter from the Secretary of War, transmitting, in compliance with a resolution of the 

House of February 13, a report from the Chief of Engineers relative 

to the matter of encroachment upon the harbor of Chicago, Illinois; 

which, on motion of Mr. DAVIS, of Illinois, was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and ordered to be printed. 

IMPROVEMENT AT ME~ASHA, WISCO~SIN. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the House a communication from 

the Secretary of W ar1 in response to Honse resolution of February 10, 

188'2, in relation to the· dam maintained as a part of the Government 

works on the Fox and Wisconsin Rivers, made at Mena.sha, Wisconsin; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce, and ordered 

to be printed. 

STEAMERS SAILING UNDER ENGLISH FLAG. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the Honse a letter from the Secretary of the Treasury, in response to House resolution of February 23, 

in relation to certain vessels, said to be ~teamers, sailing under the 

English flag with American certificates, among them the steamer 

Bahama, lately lost ; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce, and ordered to be printed. 

JOSEPH L. STEVENS. 

Mr. RANDALL. I demand the regular order of business. 

The SPEAKER.. The regular order of business being demanded, 

the House resnmes the consideration of the bill (H. R. No. 1014) for 

the relief of Joseph L. Stevens, reported from the Committee of the 

Whole Honse on the Private Calendar, with the recommendation that 

it do pass, and on the passage of which the yeas and nays have been 

ordered. 

The question was taken; and there were-yeas 100, nays 66, not 

voting 126 ; as follows : 

Aldrich, 

Anderson, 

Bayne, 

Beach, 

Bingham, Brewer, 

Briggs, 

Browne, 

Brumm, 

Burrows, Julius C. 

Burrows, Jos. H. 

Calkins, 

Camp, 

Campbell, Candler, 

YEAS-100. 

Carlisle, 

Chace, 

Covington, Cullen, 

Cutts, \ 

DaNis, George R. 

Dawes, 

Deering, 

DeMotte, 

Dibble, 

Dingley, 

Dw:iDell, 

Dwight. 

Errett, 

Ford, 

George, Grout, 

Guenther.J 

Hammonn, John 

Haskell, 

Hawk, 

Hazelton, 

Hepburn, 

Hiscock, 

Horr, 

Hubbs, 

Humphrey, 

Jones, George W . Jones, Phineas 

Kelley, 

Ketcham, 

Lewis, 

Lord, 

Mason, 

McCoid, 

McCook, 

McKinley, 

McLa-ne, 

Moore, 

Morse, 

Moulton, 

Neal, 

Norcross, 

Orth, 

Pierce, 
1610 - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-· 'HOUSE. MABen 4, 

.Pound, Robinson, .Tames S. ~J!?~ Wait, Ray, Russell, · , Walker, "Reed, Shallenberger, Townsend, Amos Webber, Rice, William ,V. Skinner Tyler, West, 

Rich, Smith, A. Herr Updegraff, .r. T. Whitthorne, R~chardson, D.P. Smith,J'. Hyatt Upde~ Thomas W~, Chas. G. 

Richardson, Jno. S. Spooner, Valentine; Willis, Ritchie, Steele, Vance, Willits, 

"Robeson, Stone, Van Voorhis, Wilson, 

"R{)binson, Geo. D. Strait, Wadsworth, Young. 

NAYS-66. 

Armfield, 

Atkins, 

Beltzhoover, 

Berry, 

Black, Blanchard, Blount, Braug, Buc~an, Buckner, 

Cabell, 

Caldwell, 

Chalmers, Clardy, 

Clark, 

Clements, Converse, 

Cook, Hammond, N.J. 

Cox. Samuel S. Hardenbergh, Cox, William R. Hardy, Cravens, Hatch, 

Culberson, Herbert, 

Davish. Lowndes H. Hewitt, Abram S. 

Dibre , Hewitt, G. W. 

Dowd, Holman, · Dugrow, Hooker, 

Evins, Jones, James K. 

Farwell, Sewell S. Latham, Finley, :Matson, Flower, Miller, 

Forney, Mosgrove, Fulkerson, Muldrow, Geddes, Nolan, Gunter, Oates, 

NOT VOTING-126. 

Aiken, Fisher, 

Allen, Frost, Atherton, Garrison, 

Barbour, Gibson, 

Barr, Godshalk, Belford, Hall, 

Belmont, Harmer 

Blackburn, Harris, Benj. W. 

Bland, Harris, Henry S. 

Bliss, Haseltine, 

Bowman, Heilman, Buck, Henderson, Butterworth, Herndon, 

Cannon, Hill 

Carpenter, Hoblltzell, Cassidy, Hoge, Caswell, Honk, 

Chapman, House, 

Cobb, Hubbell, 

Colerick, Hutchins, Cornell, Jacobs, 

Crapo, Jadwin, 

Crowley, Jorgensen, Curtin, Joyce, Darrell, Kasson, Davidson, Kenna, 

Deuster, King, Dezendorf, Klotz, Dunn, Knott, Ellis, Lacey, Ermentrout, Ladd, 

Farwell, Chas. B. Leedom, 

So the bill was passed. 

LeFevre, 

Lindsey, 

Manning, Marsh, 

Martin 

McCI~. 

McKenzie, McMillin 

Miles, ' 

Mills, 

Money, Morey, 

MOIT180n, 

Murch 

Mutchler, O'Neill, 

Pacheco, 

~~~r Paul, 

Payson, Pettibone, Phelps, 

Presoott, Randa.ll, Ranney, 

Rice, John B. 

Robertson 

Robinson, 'wm. E. 

Rosecrans, 

Ross, 

Ryan, 

Peelle, Phister, 

Reagan 

Rice, Theron M. 

Scales, 

Simonton, Singleton, Jas. W. 

Sparks, 

Springer, 

Stockslager, Turner, Henry G. 

Turner, Oscar 

Upson, Warner, Wise, Morgan R. 

Scoville, Scranton, Shackelford, Shelley, Sherwin, 

Shultz, Singlet{)n, Otho R. 

Smith, Dietrich C. Spauldin~, 

Speer, 

Stephens, Talbott, Thomas, 

Thompson, P. B. 

Thompson, Wm. G. 

Townshend, R. W. 

Tucker, 

Urner, VanAernam, VanHorn, 

Ward. 

Washburn, Watson, 

Wellborn, Wheeler, White, 

Williams, Thomas 

Wiset GeorgeD. Wooa, Belijamin 

Wood, Walt.er A. 

During the roll-call the following pairs were announced from the 

Clerk's desk: 

Mr. DARRELL with Mr. ROBERTSON. 

Mr. ATHERTON with Mr. MOREY. 

Mr. SCRANTON with Mr. FROST. 

Mr. WHITE with Mr. McKENZIE. 

Mr. LADD with Mr. JOYCE. 

Mr. PIERCE with Mr. MATSON. 

Mr. BUCK with Mr. STEPHENS. 

Mr. MCMILLIN with Mr. PETTIBONE. 

Mr. THOMPSON, of Kentucky, with Mr. SHERWIN. 

Mr. WILLIAMS, of Alabama, with Mr. RYAN. 

Mr. HERBERT with Mr. CA.li."'NOY. 

Mr. BOWMAN with :Mr. ALLEN. 

Mr. GODSHALK with Mr. DUNN. 

Mr. LEEDOM with Mr. SHULTZ. 

Mr. HEILMAN with Mr. ERMENTROUT. 

Mr. PAYSON with Mr. TOWNSHEli."'D of lllinois. 

Mr. MARTIN with Mr. JADWIN. 

Mr. WHITTHORNE with Mr. Home 

Mr. CRAPO with Mr. ROBINSON of New YorK. 

:Mr. THOMPSON, of Iowa, with Mr. MILLS. • Mr. SHELLEY with Mr. FARWELL of lllinois. 

Mr. TALBOTT with Mr. HARMER. 

Mr. BARR with :Mr. CASSIDY. 

Mr. HARRis, of Massachusetts, with Mr. HARRIS, of New Jersey. 

Mr. WATSON with Mr. 1\IUTCHJ.ER. 

Mr. DEZENDORF with Mr. GARRISON. 

11-fr. CARLISLE with Mr. MILES. 

Mr. RANDALL with Mr. O'NEILL. 

Mr. HUBBELL with Mr. BLACKBURN. 

Mr. RYAN with Mr. MANNING. 

Mr . .AIKEN with Mr. WARD. 

The result of the vote was announced as above stated. Mr. RAY moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the 

table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, with a view to proceeding with the further consideration of the consular and diplomatic appropriation bill, I move to dispense with the morning hour 

for the call of committees, as the committees were called on yesterday. 

The motion was agreed to, two-thirds ha vin~ voted in favor thereof. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. Before movmg to go into Committee of the Whole, I yield to the gentlemen wlio desire to submit 

reports from committees. 

CONTESTED ELECTION CASE-SMITH VS. ROBERTSON. 

Mr. MILLER, from the Committee on Elections, submitted the following report in the case of Alexander Smith vs. E. W. Robertson, 

contestee, in the sixth Louisiana district: 

Resolved, That the oontest of Alexander Smith vs. E. W. Robertson, sixth Louisi- ana district, be dismissed without prejudice. 

The resolution was agreed to. · 

Mr. MILLER moved to reconsider the vote by which the resolution was agreed to; and also moved that the motion to I'econsider 

be laid on the table. • The latter Iflotion was agreed to. 

AMENDMENT OF REVISED STATUTES. 

?lfr. HUMPHREY, by unanimous consent, from the Committee on the Judiciary, reported back the bill (H. R. No. 14) to amend section 

No. 688, Revised Statutes of the United States; which was referred 

to the House Calendar, and the accompanying report ordered to be 

printed. 

MARY BEASLEY. 

Mr. KELLEY, from the Committee on Ways and Means, r eported 

back the petition of Mary Beasley (by James E. Beasley) with the 

recommendation that said committee be discharged from the further 

consideration of this petition, and that the same be referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary. 

The recommendation was agreed to. 

ADDITIOYAL INSPECTION DISTRICT. 

Mr. NEAL. I ask unanimous consent to take from the House Calendar the bill (H. R. No. 3831) to create a district for the inspection 

of hulls and boilers of steam-vessels, and put it upon its passage. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I must object to yielding the floor 

for such purpose. 

Mr. NEAL. This is merely a local bill, and will take but a few 

moments to dispose of. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I have no objection to yielding the 

:floor for the introduction of reports, but I must object to yielding 

for the purpose of taking up bills by unanimous consent. 

CLAIMS FOR HORSES AND EQUIPMENTS. 

Mr. SPOONER, by unanimous consent, from the Committee on Military Affairs, reported back the bill (H. R. No. 419) to extend the 

time for filing claims for horses and equipments lost by officers and 

enlisted men, and for other purposes, with the recommendation that 

the Committee on Military Affairs be discharged from the further 

consideration of the same, and that said bill be referred to the Committee on War Claims. 

The recommendation was agreed to. 

WILLIAM F. GROUli."'DS. 

Mr. MASON, by unanimous consent, from the Committee on Indian 

Affairs, reported back the bill (H. R. No. 2824) for the reliefofWilliam F. Grounds, with amendments; which was referred to the Commi\tee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the 

accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

BREVET COMMISSIONS. 

Mr. STEELE, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. No. 

4788) authorizing brevet commissions to commissioned officers for 

distinguished conduct in engagements with or in campaigns against 

hostile Indians; which wars read a first and second time, referred to 

the Committee on Military Affairs, and ordered to be printed. 

ADULTERATED J;'OOD AJI.'D DRUGS. 

Mr. HORR, by unanimous consent, from the Committee on Commerce, reported, as a. substitute for House bill No. 1080, a bill (H. 

R. No. 4789) to prevent the adulteration of food or drugs; which was read a first and second time, referred to the House Calendar, and, with t he accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

FORT S:\IITH 1\IILITARY RESERVATION. 

.Mr. CRAVENS, by unanimous consent, from the Committee on t h e 

Public Lands, r eported back with amendments the bill (H. R. No. 

44) donating a part of the abandoned military reservation of Fort 

Smith, Arkansas, to the city of Fort Smith, for the use and benefit 

of free public schools therein, and for other purposes; which was re- ferred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, an d, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE. 

By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted to Mr. SHER- WIN, to include the 14th instant, on account of important business. 
1882. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1611 

CONSULAR AND DIPLOl\UTIC APPROPRIATION BILL. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michi~an. If there be no other gentleman ·present who desires to subilllt a. report, I now move that the House 

resolve itself into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the 

Union for the further consideration of the consular and diplomatic 

appropriation bill. 

Mr. SPRINGER. I desire to ask the gentlema.n from Michiga.n if 

he would not be willing to extend the time for discussion one hour 

longerf 

.Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I cannot do that. The debate has 

been limited, and one hour remains. 

:Mr. SPRINGER. Then I move to reconsider the vote by which 

.the debate was limited, with a view to increase the time one hour 

longer. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. And I move to lay that motion on the table. 

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. 

The SPEAKER. Th~ question recurs on the motion of the gentle- man from Michigan, that the House resolve itself in Committee of 

the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the consular and diplomatic appropriation bill. 

The motion was agreed to. 

The House accordingly resolved itself into Committee of the Whole 

House on the state of the Union, 1\fr. RICE, of Massachusetts, in the 

chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. By order of the House all general debate on the pending bill has been limited to one hour. 

1\fr. ROBESON rose. Mr. SPRINGER. Will the gentleman from New Jersey yield to me that I may have an amendment read which I desire to offer at 

the proper time f 

1\Ir. ROBESON. I have no objection if it does not come out of my 

time. I yield twenty-five minutes of my time to my colleague on the committee from New York, [Mr. HISCOCK.] 

1\fr. ATKINS. I think the gentlemanfrom New York and the gentleman from New Jersey might .consent to have the amendment of 

t:pe gentleman from illinois read. 

1\fr. ROBESON. I do not object if it does not come out of my time. 

The CHAIRMAN. The amendment may be read now by unani- mous consent. Is there objection f 

:Mr. HISCOCK. I understand it is not formally qffered, but is 

simply read for information. 

The CHAIRMAN. It is merely sent up to be readforinformation. 

Mr. SPRINGER. I give notice that at the proper time I will offer 

the amendment which I ask the Clerk to read. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Amend by striking ont all the bill printed on page 2 and by inserting in lien 

thereof the following substitute for the various paragraphs on said :page: '' For salaries of envoys extraordinary and ministers plenipotentiary to Brazil, 

Mexko, Chili/ Japan, Chma, Turkey, and the Netherlands./ at $12,000 each, $84,000. 

.And hereafter the minister accredited to Germany shall alSo be accredited to Anatria; the minister accredited to Rnssiashall also be accredited to Ronmania, Servia, 

:and Greece; the ministel' accredited to France shall also be accredited to Spain, Italy, Switzerland, and Portugal; the minister accredited to Brazil shall also be 

a.ocredited to the Argentine Republic, UrngnaJ, and Para~y; the minister ac- credited to Mexico shall also be accredited to Guatemala, liosta Rica, Honduras, 

Salvadol' and Nicaragua ; the minister accredited to Chili shall also be accredited to Peru, Bolivia, Venezuela, and the United St.atesof Colombia; "the minister ac- creditRd to Turkey shall also be accredited to Persia, and the minister accredited to theN etherland.S shall also be accredited to Belgium, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark. The President ma_y desiptate t.he consul or consul-general residing in any -of the counti.ies mentioned in this paragraph to act as tbecliarges d'affaires where 

their respective consulates are located, bnt no additional compensation shall be 

allowed for this service, except as herein specially provided. " For ministers resident and consnlc;-general to the Hawaiian Isl:mds, Liberia 

-and Hayti, at $5,000 ea()h, $15,000." ' 

Mr. HISCOCK. 1\Ir. Chairman, my colleague from New York, [Mr. 

HE\VITT,] in the rema,rks which he submitted to the committee when 

this bill was last under consideration, might leave it to be supposed 

that in two important particulars the Committee on Appropriations 

had been remiss in its duty, and that this House would be remiss in 

its duty if certain amendments to the pending bill were not adopted. 

He chose, Mr. Chairman, to address remarks to the committee which 

would indicate that it was proper we should incorporate into this 

bm certain provisions which would more amply protect the naturalized citizens of the United States. I, sir, for one favor extending to t~e naturalized o~tizen, bot~ !l't ho.me all;d abroad, all of the protectwn that the native-born Citizen IS entitled to, and cannot permit his r emarks to go unchallenged. 

. ~have remarked before now tha~ whenever the Democratic party IS m danger, or whenever any particular member of the Democratic 

party is in danger, the echoes are awakened with the cry the Republi- can party_ is .remiss i.n protectin&" its naturalized citizens. And I 

suppose, sir, m that line the gentleman from New Yor~ has revived 

in this House the history of the le[islation referred to by the gentle-

~an fro!Jl In~ana, [M.r. 0RTH.] tlec~use there is some such danger 

nnpendmg mtherto hlB party or to himself, he has chosen to revive 

history, and to give "his genial friend, MI.·. ROBINSO~," the credit of the_leg~sla ion which has been ha~ upon this subject, and which I 

mamtam should all pass to the credit of the Republican party. . The gentleman has described the scenes in the Fortieth Congress by which the country might be led to believe that it was through scenes of disorder and tumult my colleague from New York [Mr. RoBINSON] was enabled to offer the resolution which he did, and the 

legislation which was had in that Congress was passed. 1\Ir. Chairman, a careful examination of the record will dissipate all of the 

illusions which the gentleman from New York has created, and will 

give the credit and the responsibility of that legislation to the Republican party, and to the Republican party alone; and it will strip 

from my colleague from New York [Mr. ROBINSON] whatever plumage he has chosen to decorate himself with on account of it. 

The first resolution which was introduced by him wa-s passed without division; was passed with')ut objection. As to the second reso- lution which was introduced by him, the gentlema.n from New York 

[Mr. HEWITT] tells us that the usual disorderly scenes followed; 

and we might suppose from his remarks that the disorder which 

occurred here recently when our colleague was before the House was but a re-enactment of what transpired in the Fortieth Congress. 

We are told by the gentleman from New York that the great leader 

of the Republican party at that time, Mr. Stevens, of Pennsylvania, 

objected, and that he was one of the men that pitted themselves 

against the gentleman from New York [Mr. ROBINSO~] on the passage 

of that resolution. Not so; I have before me the record upon that 

question, and I find 1\fr. Stevena, of Pennsylvania, said: 

I have no objection to the inqn]ry. I am verY mnch at a loss to know whether we can legitimately inquire into Irish trials taking place in another country. I 

understoOO. the gentleman from New York to speak of one and to say that the 

party was convicted without evidence. I do not understand how far this resolution goes. 

Further ou he says : 

It does not go quite as far as I thought it did. 

And the resolution was agreed to. Mr. Chairman, in that Congress there were thirty representatives of the Democratic party. 

'!'here may have been one or two more than that. They were in a weak minority, and the Committee on Foreign Affairs, headed by the 

gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Banks, and ably supported by 

his Republican associates in the House, formula.ted the law which was passed. And it was not passed amid scenes of disorder. It was recognized as just and proper legislation. It was the only legislation of the kind, so far as I have been able to ascertain, that was ever attempted by any political party. It established the same rights for 

naturalized citizens which were enjoyed by native-born citizens when 

abroad. And the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. ORTH] had a perfect 

right to maintain for himself and for his party the full credit for that 

legislation. 

I have believed for many years that this question of the rights of 

naturalized citizens was substantially settled by the war of 1812. 

The doctrine of the right of expatriation has been maintained in the same line by all of the Executives of the United States since then, so far as I know, and it was but an assertion of a. principle when this 

legislation wa-s had, except that it authorized the President of the 

United States to I{O to the very ver~e of war in protecting the rights 

of naturalized cit1zens when abroaa. Yet this statement of the history of the legislation of the Fortieth Congress and of the principles 

that were established by its bein.~ placed on the statute-books of this 

Government and of England called from the gentleman from Maryland [Mr.McL..u.'"E] the declaration that my colleague [Mr. HEWITT] . is a statesman who ranks with Marcy. I suppose that that remark was ma-de in all seriousness by the gentleman from Maryland. He 

certainly would not be facetious upon such a subject. 

Mr. 1\IcLANE. The gentleman from New York [Mr. HiscocK] has 

certainly misapprehended me. I made no comparison of anybody 

with Governor 1\Iarcy. 

Mr. HISCOCK. I understood the gentleman to make the comparison, a.nd I think he will find a comparison of that sort made by him 

in referring to the speech of the gentleman from New York, [Mr. HEWITT.] 

Mr. McLANE. Pardon me; I made but one reference to Governor 

Marcy, and that was not to compare him with anybody else, but to 

speak of him as one of the ablest statesmen of our day and generation. Ima.deno comparison of him with anybody else. I do not want 

to interrupt the gentleman from New York, [1\fr. HiscocK,] and I 

would not ha\e done so now had he not been mistaken in hls refer- ence to what I said. 

Mr. HISCOCK. Ithinkiamrightinwhatihavesaid, and that the RECORD will fortify my statement. But I will not consume my time in hunting up the record now to see whether I was correct or not, a it is of no great consequence. I desire to call the attention of my colleague from New York [Mr . HEWITT] to another part of his speech which I think is of more interest to the foreign vote which he represents in his Congre sional 

district than his attempt to hold up the Republican party as r emiss in its protection of our foreign-born citizens. I unuerstand he makes an attack upon the consular system of the United States, and it is to 

that branch of his argument I now propose to address myself for 

a few moments. I think that he must have forgotten, when he 

attacked the consular system of the United States and asserted that 

it should not be self-supporting, that he is branching out in the 

direction of absolute free trade and against any protection of our industries, in which the city of New York and his Congressional district are to-day largely interested. He forgets the fact that the 

city of New York to-day has one hundred thousand voters who are interested in (lifferent mechanical and man.ufacturing industries. 
1612 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. MARCH 4, 

There are in his district23,433 Germans, or people from the different 

states of Germany. And my purpose in calling attention to his 

remarks upon tills question is to point to the fact that he seeks to 

commend himself to the Democracy of the city of New York by the 

fallacious assertion that the Republican party is non-protective of 

the foreign element, and that ho would strike down all of the legislation that the Republican party is responsible for in the directiOn 

of protecting the industries of the country. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I have made no such assertion. 

Mr. HISCOCK. The gentleman says he has made no such asser- tion. I admit that he has made no such assertion. But I ask my 

colleague whether all the burdens that are imposed upon the importations to this country are not in the direction of protecting the 

industries ofthe United States7 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. Do you want an answerT 

Mr. HISCOCK. Yes. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I answer that they are not; they are obstructive of the industries of the United States. 

Mr. HISCOCK. And I say most emphatically that they are not 

obstructive of the industries of the United States. With great care we have built up a consular system, and we have in the collection 

of our revenues the principle of collecting ad valorem duties upon 

importe(l goods. The systeJ!l must be complex, and to some extent 

it must be cumbersome. And whenever we impose the cost of that 

system upon the goods which we import it is precisely of the same 

character of protection with the imposts that in th~ first instance we lay upon those goods. 

I will go further than that and say that in so far as this system is an obstruction to the importation of foreign commodities into our markets it is a protection to home industries. It is a protection to 

the one hundred thousand voters and to the two hundred and 

seventy-five thousand operatives and mechanics engaged in manu- facturing industries in the city of New York. 

The remarks of my collea~e were addressed to a certain extent to 

the cumbersome method w.nich has been established for the collection of those duties in the city of New York and in the United States. 

I would go with him hand in hand in any direction to make the system less cumbersome, only that it should not be made less accurate. 

And when the gentleman from NewYorkwill formulate here a system 

which1 after the establishing of the value of the goods that are importe<i and upon which an ad valorem tax is to be levied, shall be more accurate and less expensive and less restrictive, I will unite 

with .rum in the passage of such a measure through this House. 

Whenever he will formulate a plan here for the collection of duties 

in our ports of entry which will be less expensive and less cumber- some, while still as exact as the present system, and which will prevent evasiens of the law, I will uuite with him in support of that measure. But, Mr. Chairman, until the gentleman comes here with 

proof that the Democratic party in the past has been more ready and more active~ guaranteeing to the citizens of foreign birth the rights 

of native-born citizens, he should not a-ssail the Republican party 

upon its record in that respect, or seek to arouse race prejudices and 

passions. 

As to the other point, (and I do not propo e to read him a lecture or give him any advice, for he is my senior) while representing a great manufacturing city, concealing the real purpose he has in view, 

he should not seek to strike down the consular system of the Unite-d 

States or arouse antagonisms against it until he is able to present a better one; one which in the protection of the industries of the nation 

will have a better effect and be more economical. 

Mr. Chairman, certain gentleman upon the other side upon this 

question of the protection of our industries, are evasive in their 

speeches, in their policy, in their votes. Those who come here from 

certain districts of the South and from the West meet this question 

squarely and manfully-meet it in favor of free trade, and they dis- cuss it upon principle. Those whose districts are to the north or east give a nominal support to protection, but are insidious in their 

attacks upon the system. I do not know that this remark applies 

to the ~entlemanfromMaryland. I, sir, am unable to see how, when 

you reheve the commerce of the country of the weight and burden · of the consular system, you are not to that extent abating the protection which is ~iven to our industries. So much, sir, upon the two 

points made agarnst this bill by the gentleman from New York, and 

incidentally upon the point made by the gentleman from Maryland. 

One word iu reply to the suggestions made by the gentleman from 

Iowa., [Mr. KASSON.] I confess, Mr. Chairman, that I have some sympathy with the attacks which are made upon the diplomatic serv- ice of the United States. I believe in building up the consular system. I wouldnotstrike it down; I wouldnotstarve it; but I would 

strengthen it. The gentleman from Iowa has said, in defining the 

duties of these two services, that one is political and the other com- mercial. So far as I have been able to observe, I incline to regard 

the t>ne as social rather than political. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. ROBESON. I yield ten minutes to the gentlemanfi.·om Illinois, 

[Mr. SPRINGER.l 

Mr. SPRINGE-:R. Mr. Chairman, I desire to call the attention of 

the committee to the amendment which I caused to be read and 

which I desire to proposeasa.namendmenttothepara!ITaphsprinted on the second page of the bill. The proposition in brief provides 

for consolidating certain missions. It will, if adopted, require that 

the minister accredited to France sha.ll also be accredited to Italy, 

Switzerland, Spain, and Portugal; that the consul or consul-general 

resident at each of these capitals shall be a charge d'affaires. You 

will then have the minister residing at Paris and a charge d'affaires 

at each of the other capitals, with whom ~he minister oan commu- nicate upon all diplomatic matters. 

The mission to Germany will be consolidated with the mission to 

A~stria, the ~inister residip~ at Ber~ and the charge d'affaires at 

V1enna .. Thts ch~rge d'affarres. a~ Vwnna would c~mmunicate directly w1th the Illlm&ter at Berlin m regard to the diplomatic busi- ness of the United States in Austria-Hungary. In Russia the duties 

of the minister would be enlarged to embrace Roumania, Servia., and 

Greece. The amendment proposes to abolish the second-class mission at Bel~i~, the Netherlands, and Copenhagen and to make a first-class nnss1on at the Netherlands, which would have jUl"isdiction 

of the iliplomatic business at Belgium, the Netherlands, Sweden and 

Norway, and Denmark, the consuls residing at the capitals of these 

governments being charges d'affaires, as in the other cases. In recrard to the South American governments, the ministeT ac- credit~ to Brazil would be accredited also to the Argentine Republic 

and to Uruguay and Pamguay; the minister accredited to Chili 

would be accredited to Peru, Venezuela, Bolivia, and the United 

States of Colombia; and thE> minister accredited to Mexico would 

also be accredited to the states of Central America. 

The amemlme11t also abolishes as separate offices the positions of 

resident minister and consul-general at the Hawaiian Islands, and 

creates the single position of consul-general and resident minister at 

$5,000 a year. I see no necessity in this case of having a resident 

minister at $7,500 a year and a consul-general at 4,000 a year to 

reside in the little kingdom of the Hawaiian Islands, with a territory no larger than the State of Massachusetts, and having a population 

less than the population of Sangamon County, Illinois, the county 

in which I have the honor to reside. 

One consul-general, being also resident minister to the Hawaiian 

Islands, is all our trade there requires. It is true we have a treaty 

with that little government whlch relates principally to the importation of sugars free of duty, giving a lar~e monopoly to the perRon8 

engaged in its production, and which I nope will be abrogated a-s soon as we can do so under the provisions of that treaty. If these 

amendments are adopted it will reduce the expenditure on this bill a little over 100,000. There are some additional amendments, which 

will follow as a matter of course if these be adopted, which need not 

be mentioned, as they dispense with some supernumeraries who would 

be dropped by the adoption of preceding amendments. 

While I am in favor of consolidating the diplomatic missions, I am willing to go with the gentlemen on both sides of the House 

to the furthest extent in encouraging and establishincr proper remu- neration for consuls and consuls-general. The amen~ent. which I 

have proposed in regard to the missions was advocated by the honorable gentleman from Maryland, [Mr. llcLA.J.~E, J in the remarks he 

submitted on this bill when it was last under consideration. It does 

not and cannot affect our business relations with any of the governments of the world. As the honorable gentleman from New York, 

chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, [Mr. HiscocK,] has 

said, the business of the diplomate is prinpipally ocial, while that of 

the consul is commeTcial. I desire to encourage all commercial 

relations in every re pect, and we can be as friendly with these governments through a charge d'affaires as an envoy extraordinary and 

minister plenipotentiary or minister resident. 

In the remarks of my honorable friend from Tennessee [Mr. WHITTHOR~""E] a few days ago I think he gave undue importance 

to the relations of this Government with the South American states so far as trade is. concerned, and did not give sufficient importance 

t-o the relations of this Government with Europe. The exports of the 

United States must be in the very nature of the ca e agricultural, 

or, in other words, breadstuffs. We export breadstuffs to feed the 

people of Europe. In this respect the people of South America are our riv-als. We have no manufactured articles to export, to speak 

of, to foreign governments. Under our pTotective system we go upon 

the hypothesis that we are to manufacture enough only for ourselves 

and let the other governments of the world take care of their own interest in that respect. We look simply to the products of the soil, 

cotton, pork, corn, and wheat for the purpose of swelling our exports 

to European governments, and with these exports we get from them 

their manufactured articles and balances in gold and silver. 

I am, therefore, in favor of encouraging our consular relations with 

those governments, and in favor of reducing annoying and harassing 

fees which are imposed on American shlp-masters in every port by 

United States consuls, frequently in the shape of blackmail, always 

in the shape of extravagant fees and other exactions every time an American ship touches a foreign port. I would have these removed as far as possible. I do not take credit to ourselves that we get enough 

of these fees levied on American ships in foreign ports to pay the 

expense. of our consuls to these places: I am willing to pay their 

expense out of the Treasury of the United States to encourage, as far as we may, free communication with all the people of the world. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. Only one word. 

Mr. SPRINGER. Certainly. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I only wish to say this: that the 
. 

1882. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1613 

fees now charged by us for consular services are exactly the rate of 

fees charged by Great Britain for consular service. That change has 

been made by virtue of a request attached to the appropriation bill 

in 1880 to reduce the fees to the same standard adopted by Great 

Britain, which has been done, but nobody seems to know it, not even the ship-owners themselves. 

Mr. SPRINGER. I am glad to hear this announcement made by 

the gentleman from New York. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. It was in the consular regulations some twelve months ago, and is now in operation. There is no grievance of that sort left. 

Mr. SPRINGER. I am glad to hear that, but I know there have 

been great complaints made on that subject, as the gentleman is 

aware. :Mr. HEWITT, of New York. Certainly; that request the President has complied with. · . Mr. SPRINGER. So much has been accomplished, then, and we need not legislate further on that subject. I was led into this reflection by remarks made on this bill, a.nd not having been abroad 

recently, and therefore not having seen the operation of the system, 

I ma:v have been led into error. Mr. McLANE. It has not been done to the extent the gent~eman 

from New York states. 

Mr. SPRINGER. There have been petitions sent to this Congress on this subject, if I am not mistaken, which petitions complain in 

reference to these oppressive fees. And I am quite certain that there 

bas been no repeal of the three months' extra wages exacted for discharged seamen. Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I repeat what I have already said. 

Mr. McLANE. But not to the extent the gentleman has stated. 

Mr. HEWITT, ofNew York. Theconsularfeeshave been reduced 

to the standard of Great Britain. 

Mr. ROBESON. I yield for five minutes to my colleagfte on the 

committt\e, [Mr. Cox, of New York.] 

Mr. COX, of New York. I regret very much, Mr. Chairman, any 

party complexion should be given to a deb~te upon a mere diplomatic 

.appropriation bill. I regret also that any measure calculated as a general law to ameliorate our consular sys:tem in the interest of com- mercial interchange should be discussed on this bill when we shall 

ha..ve opportunities as well as members competent to give us a gen-

-eral system looking to that end. I welcome, however, any thought 

which may come from my colleague. We have had those suggestions 

before. Some of them have been turned into regulations. Some have 

been fixed in legislation, but there is, to my kri.owledge, ~reat neces- sity for some general plan, reinvigorating and reorganizmg our con- sular system. 

I am assttTed by gentlemen that there are plans for that purpose 

which have been sent to the State Department by experts. I tried 

by communication with the Department to infotmmyselfwithrespect 

to them, but failed, for reasons not now necessary to submit. 

I regret that the gentleman from Indiana, or any gentleman in this 

debate, should have thought it necessary to interject partisan matters 

into a discussion of this kind. 

I believe, Mr. Chairman, that the act of 1868, passed in the Thirtyninth Congress, was the product of the energy of both parties. I am frank to say this. I give General Banks full credit for introducing 

that measure from his committee1 whoever instigated it. I do not 

pluck one leaf from the laurel which should crown the brow of my 

.absent colleague [Mr. RoBINSON] in saying this. Where is the ne- .cessity in any discussion like this for recrimination or partisa~m f 

Why assert that in this regard one party has been more patriotic Than 

the other f Why quarrel as to the credit to be given to one side of 

the Houseratherthan the other f Only justice compels me to say that 

the gentleman from Indiana, whom I do not now see in his seat, a memberhpe:rhaps, of the old American party-and I would like to 

know w ether he was or not-I do not say the Know-nothing party, 

because that would not perhaps be acknowledged, but whether or not 

lle was a. member of the old American party--

Mr. ORTH. How much time will the gentleman give me to answer b.:is question f 

Mr. GOX, of New York. Yes, or no, will an~er. 

Mr. ORTH. How much time will the gentleman give met 

Mr. COX, of New York. Just as much time as you gave us the ,other day-none at all. 

Mr. ORTH. I gave you all the time you asked for. 

Mr. COX, ofNew York. Not in this debate. I have given away 

:all the time that I had. Now, although a. member of the committee, 

I have only :fiv.e min tes, and I want to use that little time my- "$}lf. 

But, Mr. Chairman, whether the gentleman from Indiana was a member of tbe American party or notil do not know, and I do not -care. I know that the naturalization aws of this country were sus- tained on the statute-books by the Democratic party. I know that 

the attempts to i!trike them down, to limit naturalization came from -our opponents. I know that party was indoctrinated with that Fed16ralism that J.e.fferson fought successfully. I know that there is no power given under heaven among men, in this Congress, to make a naturalized ~itizen believe otherwise. .Attd whenever that matter -comes up in Congress they will al'Ways find their first and foremost 

-champions upon this side; and after some time, and after hearing 

from their constituents, we always have a very re pectable following 

from the other side. 

But I will say to gentlemen that they did not go far enough in 

their researches and debate. My colleague from New York [Mr. 

HEWITT] got on the right track, but did not pursue it. I did not mean to drop into poetry. [Laughter.] But, Mr. Chairmal!? if he 

had pursued it further he would have found that General urant's 

recommendations as to expatriation were attempted to be carried out 

in that Republican Congress. They were sent in the form of a long 

and elaborate bill to the. Committee on Foreign Affairs. They undertook, if possible, to regulate matters a-s to expatriation. 

Judge Ebenezer R. Hoar took charge of the bill, as the organ of 

the Administration. Its effect was in terms at least to perpetuate 

the mischiefs of the Bancroft treaty. The treaty was made by Republicans under Republican auspices, and confirmed by a Republican 

Senate. When that bill went to the Committee on Foreign Affa.irs I 

opposed it there, and successfully opposed it in this House in an elaborate speech to which I will simply refer, for I have not time to quote 

muc.h of it. On April 22, 1874-

[Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. ROBESON. I will be glad to yield three minutes more to the 

gentleman from New York. 

:Mr. COX, of New York. lam verymnchobliged to the gentleman. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I ask unanimous consent that the 

time of the gentleman from New York maybe extended five minutes 

longer. . There was no objection. 

Mr. COX, of New York. I will make some extracts to show that 

the doctrine maintained by the Democratic party in this House was the doctrine laid down, if you please, by Thomas J e.fferson, J a..tues 

Madison, William L. Marcy, Caleb Cushincr! Jeremiah S. Black and 

other publicists; and that doctrine was that expatriation includes 

not only emigration out of one's country but naturalization in the 

country adopted as a future residence. 

The bill of Judge Hoar undertook to expatriate men against their 

will. It did not limit expatriation to naturalization abroad. 

Why, sir, it would have made a native of Germany or Ireland naturalized here-after two years' residence in his native land-without 

any sign of giving up their naturalization or adoption in this coun- try, an alien with all the penalties of a citizen abroad. That bill, 

by the good sense of both sides of the House, was defeated. The mea-sure proposed by General Grant's representative on this floor, 

and indorsed by his Cabinet, failed, although it was nearly a party 

vote. 

Wlien the gentleman talks about the Irishman or the German he will 

find a record here consonant with the record of the Democratic party 

from the beginning of the Government in favor of the larcrest interpretation of citizenship to those who have been adopted and naturalized here. I a-sk the privilege of printing some extracts showing 

this fact, with a view hereafter to pursue what I then undertook to 

pursue, namely, the abrogation of the Bancroft treaty which so discriminated against our German fellow-citizens that they were, though 

born here, one of them notably born in Saint L~uis1 placed in the 

German army, in the "landwehr," and held nrmJ.y. No power 

sought to abrogate the treaty. The only exertion was the power of 

diplomacy, to which the. complaisant Bismarck yielded without yielding the principle. I pay my tribute to Bayard •.ray lor for his urgency on the German Government, whereby some of these citizens were released, notwithstanding the Bancroft treaty and the adherence of 

the German diplomates to the obsolete rules as to expatriation. 

After all, Mr. Chairman, your act of 1868 was not very much. Congress does not reclaim its citizens. Their tights a broad are by treaty. 

It is not one-sided municipal law, but international law, which is 

their regis. Some moral influence there may be in a statute, for 

which let due credit be given; but the power to rescue and enlarge our citizens, wron~fully imprisoned, or placed in the armies abroad, 

is a power which l.B diplomatic. It is the power of the Executive. 

Congress in placing the law of 1868 on the statute often encoura~ed 

and sought to strengthen, if they could, or to give their moral suas10p. or moral force to the act of the Executive. It was an urgent incentive to duty. This and this only. A. Democratic President, or a Secretary like :Marcy or Seward, did not require this force or suasion. 

Trace the action in this matter in the history of our Government and 

you will see, as in the Koszta case and other ca es I could name, that 

without an act of Congress the Executive rescued our citizens. It 

made their citizenship respected. It lifted our banner above them. 

It held them honored and respected. What occurred in tho Koszta 

case, and in other cases, did not depend at all on an act of Con~ress. 

Its vindication is in the law of nations. It was what Rufus Cnoate 

called the Democratic ''gay and festive defiance of foreign dictation)' 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

[Extracts of speech of S. S. Cox.] 

There ha-s been no more interesting collation of fads or array of principles on this subject than is found in that document. Whethertheyarecolorcil byJ.>eculiar 

event.<! or traditional hate of foreigners; whether they- mean party bias or mdividual interest, it is not for me to determine. But I would suggest fo gentlemen who are disposed to put questions that they can, perhaps, answer them more intelli· 

gently when we reach the minor debate arising on the different sections of the bill, and more especially aft-er reading that document. The <lnestions which the President propounded m the document referred to were d:i.r6cted from the Executive 

Mans1on, under date of August 6, 1873, and are as follows : "L The law-making power having declared that 'the right of expatriation is a. 
1614 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. MARcH 4,. 

natural and inherent ri"'ht of all people, indis.Pensable to the enjoyment of the 

right8 of life, liberty, an'a the pursuit of happmess,' (15 Sta~~ at Lru:g~, 223,) should the Executi>e refuse to give effect to an act of expatnation of a Citizen of 

the United States t . • • • 2. May a formal renunciation of United States Citizenship an <;I a. voluntary submission to the sovereignty of anotker power be regarded otherwiSe than a~ an a~t 

of expatriation 7 . . . f • 

1 3. Can an election of expatriation be shown or presumed by an acqiDSI tion o domicile in another country, with an avowed purpose not to return Y 1 • 4. Ought the Government to hold itself bound to extend its _pro~otionl and con- sequently exert its military and naval power for such protection, m favor of per· sons who have left its territories and who reside abroad, without an apparent 

intent to return to them, and who do not contribute to its support 7 

"5. "What should constitute evidence of the absence of an intent to return in snob 

ca~O: 'When a naturalized citizen of the United States returns tohisna.tiv~country and reffides there for a series of years, with no apparent purpose of returning, shall 

he be deemed to have expatriatecl himself, wheretheoa.seis not regulated by treaty t 11 7 . .Are the children born abroad of a person who has been a. citizen of the United 

States, but who has become a subject or citizen of ~nother power, or '!ho has expa- triated himself citizens of the United States, entitled to Its protectiOn f 

"8. Can a person who has formally renounced his allegiance to the UnitedSta~s and assumed the obligations of a citizen or subject of ~other power becom.e agam a citizen of the United States in any other way than m the manner proVIded by 

general laws t" . . . If Mr. Speaker, I should proceed to answer these quenes m detail, as t~e Cab.I· net did, I would onl~ repeat what is in type; and perhaps I '?3oD best obtain their 

best meaning and g~ve an added meaning to them by pursnmg my own method 

of discussion.' I do not deny that these question~ have been touched with great, though partial, skill by the gentlemen of the Cabmet. 

* * * * * * * 

One fuina is apparent in this discussion. It is this: that the common-law right, the old feud'al idea. that a. man who is "racy of the soil " is always a. citizen, has 

become more or les's obsolete. This is manifest by the progress of ci viliza.tion and 

international law, as well as by the laws of all countries, mclnding our own. ~o 

that now the question is not betweell; a. man who w~ I?orn here and one who 18 

naturalized here, for they are exactly m the same ~ndition, and so ~ar as our Gov- ernment and its faith are concerned we are committed to the doctrine that a nat- uralized citizen is in the same troth and plight as one born he1-e. We must love 

and comfort him the same, at home or abroad. His children are our children; his 

folk and kin are our folk and kin. Like Ruth, we will follow him irrespective of 

previous or other conditions. His citizenship is as immutable as if he had been 

born here for all purposes. When, when, when will the people who remember 

Columbus, Kosciusko, TieKalb, La Fayette, the gallant Germans 'l.Dd the gallant Irishmen. the MoMahons and the O'Donnells, the D}eD who make, fight, an<;l create peoples; when will they remember that they are smons of a stock whic~ emigrates, populates, fights, civilizes, and progresses 7 . 

* * * * * * * I have the responses of gentlemen connected with the German public press. I cannot send them to the Clerk's desk to be read, for they are in the tough Teutonic 

syllables, which Milton said never echoed the doctrines of slavery. TheY: are not understood in this Congress. The honorable Senator, Mr. Schurz, has given me their inner meaning. I accept his statement as that of an honest man. These extracts are from tne Stnats-Zeitnng of New York of April4, 1874, and also froma. 

German paper of the same title and date in Chicago, and from the German paper 

of Philadelphia of April6, 1874. They speak as if they werej~ous and fea,n:ul 

of this and similar bills· not because the German people would disf..'l.vor expatria- tion but because such 'bills seek rather to deter immigration and to make our citi~enship subject to odious and onerous restrictions; subject to a net-work of 

police. · 

* * * 

Although it may be true, as my honorable friend [Mr. E. R. Hoar] says, that e~­

ba.rrassments have arisen in our Department of State and to our Government m beinu called upon to protect men who haye bec.ome citizens here. and have ~terward' gone to their native land to Jllake difficulties, yet I do subnnt that we nnght 

well have these alleged embarrassment.~, ~nd m!>~e of th,em, rather than discourage immigration or throw a cloud over Amencan Citizenship. . What is such citizenship 9 To men and women, ay, to women and children, to persons of both sexes, it is their alL Many of them have tlrls and nothing more when they go abroad. Should we not guard it carefully 9 Sheuld we raise any presumption that, because they may have remained abroad for one or two or ~ore years, they do not therefore intend to return 7 Should we be overprompt to ra1se tlie pre- sumption that they have not the animus revertendi? Should we not be careful about 

the precise evidence required to indicate that intent 9 I might go on, sir, for some time ro show the Honse, in a. ~eneral way, that the 

whole drift of this bill is at variance with the fundanlentalideas of our republicanism as illustrated by those attractive forces which have brought men of all 

nations here to commingle with us in their and our varied independencies and industries. The old idea under the feudal system was glebre ascriptus. The idea was tkat a man was bound to the soil. n was a system that resembled the villanage in England. A man owed personal service to the lord of the soil, the samo as his master owed it to the king; and it was born with the child and only ended in the 

grave. It was from tlrls relation of lord and vassal, or rather of master and serv · ant that the system of passports took its origin. That system is alien to our fed~ral system of States, interdependent, with perfect comity among each and all. 

* * * "' .,. * * 

'No distinction was then made between native-born and naturalized citizens. 

Nor is an individual of the latter class excepted who may return to the country of 

his birth. The rights of e'Wh are broadly defined as being identically the same. The duty: of the President is made the same as to them. Now, sir, compare with this the following provision taken from the second section of the substitute under 

consideration: '

1 Thirdly the following persons shall be regarded as not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States; fourthly, naturalized citizens of the United States who 

may by the ternls of any treaty be regarded as having resumed their original na- tionality or who, on returning io their native country, may be convicted of offenses 

aaainst the laws of that country committed prior to their arrival in the United 

s'futes; fifthly, a natnml~~ citizen of the United S~tes becoming domicil~ in the 

country of his or her natiVIty, unless when otherWISe regulated oy treaty. 

What is the meaning of that'! It is an offense in Germany for a man to desert 

from the military sel"Vlce. Such a horrible crime is, of course, committed before 

he leaves Germany. The man may have become a citizen of this country:. He re- nomlces and abjures all allegianceii &c. ; when he goes back he becomes denationalize(l by the provisions of this bi , if I understanil it rightly. If so, this bill is a. w-oss and gl:uing ou~ge. In S?me parts of Ge~any, I be~eve, citizens are some- tames regarded as havmg committed an offense if they enngrate. Mr. ELDREDGE. Yes; the very act of emigration is a crime. 

Mr. Cox. The very act of emigration, as my friend well says, is an offense by Jaw. When they retunt to their native country they lose all the benefits of natu- ralization lleCIHl.Se of that very ofl'ense. .And this in this nineteenth century! .And 

this when Geimany (lomina.tes Europe ! 

* * * * 

Is not the inference pardonable that the sole purpose of this bill is to curtail 

the rights of naturalized citizens tarrying abroad 1 Can such an inference be hid 

by the addition of a few general clauses 1 What need is there for such legislation 7 

Judge Black, than whom no better interpreter of international law ever acted as Attorney-General of the United States, expressed himself in an official opinion 

with equal clearness in defining the meaning of naturalization. " In its popubr 

etymological and legal sense," he wrote, "It (naturalization) signifies the act of aaoptin~ a. foreigner and clothing him with all the ptivileges of a. native citizen or sub.iect. ' .And this very same construction was adopted by a royal commission 

in England, which had for its chief the Earl of Clarendon, and among it mem- bers snob eminent authorities and writers as Sir R. J. Phillimore, Baron Bramwell, Sir John Karslake, Sir Roundell Palmer, and Mr. Vernon Harcourt, (late so- licitor-general of" England, and better known here as "Historicus.") This com- mission examined the whole subject thoroughly, and concluded to abandon the 

old common-law rnle of perpetual allegiance. ft adopted the American doctrine as eminently in accordance with the enlarged freedom of the age, and applicable also to Great Britain hereafter. Their recommendation was sub equently approved and confirmed b'll:'arliament in the passage of the naturalization act of 

1870, the sixth section o which reads : "Any British subject who has at any time before, or may at any time after thepassing of this act, when in any foreigii state and not under any disability, volunta· 

rily become naturalized in such state, shall from and after the time of his so having become naturalized in such foreign state be deemed to have ceased to be a British 

subject and be regarded as an alien." 

Mr. Speaker, you will observe from this that it is preciselyth:l ground taken by 

Secretary Cass and Attorne~·General Bllwk, to wit, that naturalization inve ts the 

foreirner with complete citizenship the same as birth, and that as to all other coun~ies, even that of his nativity. Can the United States afford to be less liberal 

than Great Britain, can we be less liberal than Great Britain, which regards a British subject naturalized here as an alien thereafter within its territoJ·ies l Why should Congress, then, make a. distinction between these two classes of citizens as if the rights of the one were not the same but less than those of the other I Tbis 

is done most unequivocally by the langna~e of the fifth clause of the third subdivision of section two of the substitute I nave quoted, that a naturalized citizen 

becoming domiciled in the country of his nativity-which by section 3 means a con- tinuous residence of two years-shall cease to be under the protection of the United 

States, be arbitrarily deprived of his rights acquired by naturalization, and abandoned to the very power all allegiance to which he had under oath renounced in 

accordance with the laws of the United States. 

·No native citizen can possibly be exposed to any such d.ifficnltie , donuts, and 

entanp:lemenLs ; although under the bill now pending even he may often be unrea- sonably vexed and harassed. Why not place or rather leave the naturalized citi- zen upon the same footing as originally intended, as lucidly expressed by Cass and 

Black, tardily adopted by England, and authoritatively confirmed by act of Conp:ress in 1868 9 Why change it now in 1874 9 Has any new light dawned upon Olll' 

Federal Legislatur~the great Sanhedrinl of thirty-seven States-that makes it 

desirable to enter now upon such a. retro~e movement 1 I believe I can discern 

far across the Atlantic the tnie source of this intended reactionary legislation. The Bancroft treaty with the North German Confederation, concluded in 1868, 

does now apply to all the states comprised within the limits of the newly-consti- tuted German 'Empire, including Alsace and the annexed portion of Lorraine. A 

native of any part of that country, being naturalized here, is by t.be terms of that 

treaty reincorporated in among the subjects of the emperor after a residence anY· 

where in Germany, though hundreds of miles away from the place of his birth, 

for even a day over two years. He may be a. native of Bavaria; and if, after his 

naturalization in the United States, he enters into business relations at. Hamburg or Bremen, a residence of two years in either of these cities, far rr ~ . .e from the 

country of his nativity, or elsewhere wit.hin the empire makes him a subject of 

the emperor, of whom he never was a so bject before, and divests him of the char- acter of an American citizen without his consent, and possibly against his wilL 

And it need occasion no surprise were it to appear that tlrls very bill has bee11 

suggested in the interest of that p~licy which seeks by every ~e:l?s to. ren~er 

emigration from Germany to the UruteO. States, and the naturalization of native 

Germans as American citizens, less desirable and popular in the country unde:r 

its sw~~oy. 

That Bancroft treaty might be termed a convention to impede German immigration to this country, and the bill before the House, begotten in the spirit of 

that and oth.er s~ar treatie~, could appropriately be entitled ".An .act to discourage immigration to the Uruted States." For myself, and representing a hundred thousand Germans, I do desire to bring the kith and kin-all the gooa folk of 

Germany to tlrls land, to meet and kiss their k;ith and kin here. 9nr race so needs 

replenishing; and are not the Germans so thrifty, good, and prolific 7 Who could 

help us better' 

* * * * * * 

Con !!Tess should adhere to the doctrine which prevailed before the advent of the 

impolitic and injudicious Bancroft treaty, after which all the subsequent treaties on the subject seem to be modeled. Aainitting, as it is but just to admit, that 

every man has a. natural ri&ht to expatriate himself, it mnst be borne in mind that, 

in the terse language of Jna.&e J. S. Black, "e~atria.tiou" includes not only emigration out of one's country, out naturalization m the country adopt-ed as a futuro 

residence. Hence I incline to a principle totally at variance with this bill, and I 

consider it a principle distinctly and truly American that no mere residence a broafl:, 

however protracted and wherever it may be, can divest one of the rights and cor- relative duties of American citizenship or relieve our Government of its o~ligation 

to protect the citizen except by his own free will expressed by becommg fully natnmlized. 

Mr. ROBESON. The debate upon this bill has taken a range some- what wider than was anticipated when we entered upon it, and therefore I have been willing, so far n.s I control it, to be liberal in dispensing time to the representatives of all opinions. 

In this discussion the Irish question seems to have come to the surface, and the position has be~n gr~vely advanc~ by gentlemen on the other side of the House, With VIolent assumption and loud declamation that the interests of freedom in thqught and action are represe~ted by ouly struggling Irishmen, and tliat the great principles 

of freedom have found their consistent and effective defenders in the 

DemQcratic party. 

Mr. Chairman, it has been the custom of impostors,. since the world 

began, to declare so~e great and ~que~:~tioned principle, and under 

its cover to seek belief for the falsities they would propagate. Thus 

it was that Mahomet proclaimed the great principle ~f the universe 

in the existence of one only true God; but added to 1t the falsehood 

that Mahomet was his prophet. .And thus it is that the ad captandum ora tors and speechmakers of the other side of this House endeavor 

to catch the ear of the country, by loudly proclaiming .the great and 

unquestioned principle of freedom, progress, and the rights of mant 
1882. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE. 1615 

to the end that they may induce belief to the monstrous assumption 

that the modern Democracy of this country hav~ been or are its 

champions and defenders. The member from New York told us that 

it was the treaty of Ghent that practically established the principle 

of free citizenship. The assumption admits of grave question · but 

admitting its truth, who made the treaty of Ghentf Who wasJona.-

than Russell f Who was John Quincy Adams f Who were James 

Bayanl and Henry Clay T 

Mr. McLANE. They were Democrats. 

Mr. ROBESON. Henry Clay or John Quincy Adams a modern 

Democrat! God aave the mark! The gentleman knows and I know- what they were, and that neither they, ner Mr. Russell nor Mr. 

Bayard, had any association, either in principles or action, with the 

ideas or the conduct of the Democratic par~, and, least of all, with 

that party which now caJls itself Democratic. 

Mr. McLANE. The gentleman from New Jersey knows that John 

Quincy Adams was a Democrat or a Republican, as that party was then called, and so was Mr. Clay. 

Mr. ROBESON. DidJ ohn Quincy Adams represent modern Democracy when day after day on this :floor he attempted to a-ssort the 

right of petition in behalf of the freedom of labor and wa£ constantly 

and violently denied that right by the modern Democracy f Sir, he 

lived the staunchest opponent of that miscalled party, and died on this :floor the bravest denouncer of its character and conduct. 

Mr. McLANE. He was the candidate of the Republican or Democratic party in 1824, that is, he was voted for in their caucus and supported by the masses of that party. 

Mr. SPARKS. And all his descendants are Democrats to this day. 

Mr. ROBESON. And Henry Clay is also claimed a£ a Democrat. 

Then what was James K. Polk when Hemy Clay was candidate of 

the old Whig party and Mr. Polk of the Democratic party T To claim 

Mr. Clay is an assumption of the same kind, and not more violent than 

these other pretenses. They will bo claiming Grant as a Democrat 

next. 

Mr. McLANE. Yes, yes. 

Mr. ROBESON. And yet he fought the principles of the modern 

Democracy, and the men who maintained them, on a hundred fields 

made glorious with the blood of our best and bravest. 

Mr. HAZELTON. They will be claiming yon before you know it. 

Mr. ROBESON. Of course, if it will serve their purpose. For I 

have done more in the pa£t for the cause-of true democracy than any 

of them, and am ready_now to go as far as the boldest of them dare 

go to maintain and carry out free principles. Now, Mr. Chairman, 

I declare that it is the right and duty of this Government to see to 

it, that our citizens, native or naturalized, 3.l"6 protected in every right 

which belongs to them in foreign countries; that this right and duty 

extends, not only to our citizens, but to all others who have acquired a domicile here and settled themselves under the protection of our laws. I admit that the right of civilized trial and the right of speedy 

trial are of those great rights which were secured on the field of 

Runnymede and were crystallized into substantial form among the 

principles of Magna Charta. 

The habeas wrpus is the great safeguard of these rights wherever 

the forms of English law are recognized and pursued; and I do not 

hesitate to say, that in every case wheretheA.merican citizen or the 

American domiciled resident is charged with crime, it is the duty of our Government to see that speedy trial is not denied to him, wher- ever he is, in whatever country, under whatever government; and 

to see to it also, that it is not denied by any specious form of process 

for delay; that the rights, secured to him by the great writ of freedom, under our law, are not denied to him wherever organized civil 

government exists. But the measure of the right which remains to 

the man, who has forsaken his residence in this country, voluntarily 

resigning the guarantees of our laws and the protection of our flag, 

and has adopted a domicile in another country, has trusted himself 

to t.he safeguards of other laws and relied on the protection which 

another government gives to its citizens, presents a question far more difficult; yet even there I am ready to go as far as the farthest, 

and insist that in the cause of humanity1 in the cause of progressive 

human freedom, this much of the principles embodied in that code 

of organized liberty which we call the "common law" shall still 

apply to .him wherever he is. International law, like the common law, is a progressive science, and ought to and does, adapt itself to 

the changing conditions of men and the changing relations of nations. 

Its flexible but consistent code must expand to the enlarging meas- ure of human freedom, and the spirit of advancing civilization ought 

to demand and secure, a£ one of its inherent guarantees, for every man wherever he is, with whatever he is charged, a speedy trial, a true deliverance, and a civilized punishment. This much is demanded 

by the spirit of the age, and for its accomplishment I will unite with 

auy party and strike hands with any honest man. ~Ir. COX1 of New York. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him 

a question 'f 

Mr. ROBESON. Yes, sir. 

:Mr. COX, of .New York. The gentleman from New Jersey was a member of Grant's Cabinet, and perhaps he will remember what was embodied in the roes age as to expatriation. He will perhaps remem- ber the bill of Judge Ebenezer R. Hoar came from that Cabinet. Does 

he so remember' 

Mr. ROBESON. I do not so remember. But I do remember that 

this treaty of 1870, and all those treaties which organized into the 

forms of international law the riahts of foreign-born citizens, here 

and elsewhere, to the protection of' our country's power, did originate 

in the Cabinet of General Grant, of which I was an humble member, 

and were placed upon the treaty-book under his auspices and with a Republican Senate of nearly two-thirds majority. [Applause on theRepublican side.] 

Mr. COX, of New York. Does not the gentleman know--

Mr. ROBESON: I will read from that treaty. 

Mr. COX, of New York. The gentleman has not answered my 

question yet. 

Mr. ROBESON. I said that I did not know that Judge Hoar's bill, 

which was not passed, though Con gross was Republican at ~he time, 

origin.nted in any movement in that Cabinet. 

J\.Ir. COX, of New York. Do you approve his bill f 

Mr. ROBESON. I have no time now to answer hypothetical questions, nor to submit myself to the gentleman's political catechism. 

I do not now even recall the special provisions of that bill, but I 

have just declared my views broadly and freely. The gentleman can find his answer there. 

.Mr. COX, of New York. Do you approve the Bancroft treaty f 

.Mr. ROBESON. The Bancroft treaty, good or bad, is not to be 

charged to us. Mr. Bancroft was born and has lived and is now a Democrat of the old school. He was appointedminister to England 

by Prosidcnt Polk; he was appointed minister to Berlin by Andrew 

Johnson. He represented then, and represents now, in his principles and in his writings, the very ideas of modern Democracy which 

the gentleman himself professes. 

Mr. COX, of New York. Do you approve of his treaty! That is 

the point. 

Mr. HAZELTON, (in his seat.) Never mind about that. 

Mr. COX, of New York. But I do mind. 

.Mr. HAZELTON. Let him have the floor. 

Mr. COX, of New York, (to Mr. HAzELTON.) I am not talking to 

you. I got the privilege of the gentleman from New Jersey. 

Mr. HAZELTON, (to Mr. ROBESON.) Did you yield f 

Mr. ROBESON. I always yield to a question from the gentleman 

from New York. · • Mr. COX, of New York. I do not think it is very polite for any 

gentleman to sit in his seat and instruct the gentleman from New 

Jersey as to his courtesy. 

Mr. HAZELTON. I am not instructing him; he does not need 

any instructions. Yon have no right to talk while he is talking. 

1\fr. COX, of New York. I have a right to ask a question of my 

colleague on the Committee on Appropriations, when he yields, without your consent. 

J\.Ir. ROBESON. If my friend will permit me, I have now an- swered--

Mr. COX, of New York. I do not understand that th~ gentleman 

ha-s answered my question. 

Mr. ROBESON.. I did not take the floor to answer all conceivable 

questions about my own belief, or about the laws and treaties of this 

country. I simply took the floor to declare broadly my own principles 

and those of my party, and in them the gentleman will find his answer. But, to resume Mr. Chairman, the Irish cause, like many another ~ood cause, ha.s iost much by the weakness of its leaders and the 

mcoru;istency of its advocates. Who fails to see the folly of con- stantly making lar~e demands upon diplomacy and power, and with 

the next breath, Without reason and without inforDiation, declaiming loudly against delay, because time and distance a.re not both 

annihilated to meet their impatience f "I know," said a philosophic 

statesman, "that a generous and Utopian disposition would have all 

things changed and all the various elements let loose in the world 

without control. But a real statesman and a true politician endeavors. 

to deal as best he may with circumstances as he finds them." 

No, sir; a disposition to preserve and an !Lbility to improve, these 

make a statesman; all else is vulgar in conception and perilous in 

action. I say that the interests of freedom and of free labor, Irish,. or German, or American, must look for their protection in the future, as they have in the past, to the Republican party; to that party, and: 

to that party only, which cherishes in its principles and illustratesby its actions a deep and unselfish sympathy with man, [applause;] 

which has, and exhibits, an abiding faith in the truth of the great principles of equity and justice and a deep conviction of their power and: 

efficacy when applied not only to the conduct of men, but to the direction of political affairs-not to that party which in the years of its 

dominion and of its insolent revolt, held labor in chains and degraded 

it by association with slavery; but to that party which has sanctified 

it with the blood of martyrs, inspired it with ambition1 enriched it 

with power, and ennobled it by the willing industry oftree men. Mr. BUTTERWORTH. You have not read from the treaty yet. 

Mr. ROBESON. I was, indeed, about to read from the treaty, but 

my friend from New York [Mr. Cox] has led me along the seductiveways of general debateMr. COX, of New York. Yon have not answered my question yet. 

Mr. ROBESON. The gentleman will have had all his questions. answered if he has listened. I would now like to read one clause. from the treaty of 1870; this is the clause: 

British subJects who have become or shall become, and are na.tura.lized according to the laws ~thin the United States of America. as citizens thereof, shall, subjecli·. 
1616 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. MARCH 4, 

-to the provisions of article 2, be held by Great Britain to be in all respects and for . aU purposes citizens of the United States, and shall be treated as such by Great 

Britain. 

Who wrote that chapter efliberty on the statute-bookY It was the 

Republican party, which we represent to-day, though we were told 

the other day, and am reminded to-day, that the gentleman from 

New York LMr. ROBINSON] did it. He ha-d nothing mor~ to do with 

it than any other man who snouted for freedom while he voted for 

;alavery. But let that pass, for I desire now to come to the discussion of the bill that is directly before us. The only material changes 

in principle made by the bill I will state generally without detaining ·the committee. 

We recognize that our ci~ation, that the growt~ of our great- ness is founded on labor and Its results developed mto trade and 

comkerce-that it does not rest on the old organizations of society nor conventions and forms of other days. We have endeavored to 

oring diplomatic representation abroad in some degree, as far as we thought it safe to venture now, into harmony with our consular sys-

-tem there. We have recognized that the only practical business 

which our diplomatists have abroad, which supports the interests .and accords with the sympathies of our people, arises out of our com-

.mercial relations. 

We have therefore sought to build up our consular s~stem by 

associating it-with our diplomatic system. We have proVIded that 

the consuls-uene.ral at certain important points shall be so attached 

to our legati~ns that they shall be respectable in the eyes of the com- munity in which they live; that they shall not be counted out be- cause their duties pertain to trade and commerce, but that they shall 

have the status and the privileges of gentlemen, at least to the same extent that these are accorded to the secretaries and attaches of 

the legation. That they shall have the right of presenting. their 

business directly, whenever it is necessary, througJ;t the legation. to 

which they are attached, to the government to which that legation 

is accredited. 

All the real business of ministers in these times grows out of the 

duties and relations of our· consular service. The two classes of 

officers are branches of the same system; they belong to the same great organization; and they sho11ld be brought together to act in 

harmony and not dissevered, so that instead of having a correspond- ence between our consul-general and our minister, then ~hrongh 

our minister with a foreign government, then from the foreign government back to our minister, then back from our minister to our State Department, then from our State Department to our consul, 

they should be able to communicate freely and act together. Our 

advance here is only a small step, but we must step cautiously at 

first. It tends at least to bring these two systems into better accord, 

at least to put them under one head, to have them transact their 

business under one roof, to maintain but one organization, to have one policy, 9ne measure of efficiency, with the hope that both offices 

will be raised to a higher standard and both services improwed, 

that the country may have at the same time better conducted service 

and better paid officers, at a less expense, to the mutual advantage 

of the Government and of its servants. 

The CHAIRMAN. The time limited for general debate has ex- pired. The Clerk will proceed to read the bill by paragraphs for .amendment. 

The Clerk read as follows·: Be it enacted, cfc., That the following SUJD.S be, and they are hereby, appropri-

.ated for the service of the fiscal year ending June 30, 1883, out of any money in 

the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the objects hereinafter expressed, 

namely: For · f ~ rdin d · · te 1 "t· ti to G t salanes o0 envoys eAw.ao ary an IIllDl8 rs p erupo en ary rea Britain, France, Gel"IDJUly, and Russia, at $17,500 each, $70,000. 

Mr. COX, <Of New York. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out the 

'last word of the clause just read, for the purpose of replyin~ to the 

gentleman from New .Jersey, [Mr. RoBESON;] I shall do so With perfect respect fur him and for his magnificent opinions, generalizations, 

and rh~toric. The gentleman did not answer the question which I roposed. Although he made a very proper eulogy of Mr. Bancroft, e failed to defend that treaty. Although the gentleman was a mem- e:r of General Grant'-s Cabinet, and although he remembers that this 

matter of expatriation came up in that Cabinet, and although he must 

have known at the time (thoughhemayhavesinceforgottenit) that . .Judge Hoar was representing General Grant in that bill, he does not now dare to defend the provisions of the Bancroft treaty. The great 

body of German people, and the intelligent men on tlle other side of 

the House representing German constituencies who have been in-

-structed by them, must favor giving the notice required by that 

treaty for its abrogation. It requires a notice of one year. Titat 

has never yet been done, although the treaty is as obsolete in this 

locomotive and emigrating age as the feudel system. 

What was the effect of that treaty f It ~ave away the rights of 

-ournaturalizedcitizens; itgaveawaytheirnght~withoutconsulting 

them and without their voluntary consent. One clause of the bill 

referred to provides that a citizen of the United States, even one born 

here, who happened to be in Germany, and remained there over two 

years without reporting to a consul, was to be deprived, against his 

own conseu t, of his citizenship among us. This was the way that side 

attempted to denationalize and expatriate our unwilling citizens. 

The Republican aide of the House tried in that Congress, as I shall .show, to cr~staJlize that monstrous anomaly into legislation, even 

while our German fellow-citizens were harassed all throu~h Fatherland by reclamations of army service and government oolirrations. 

They were thrust into the army and held in subjection to the laws 

of Germany, though they may never have been expatriated, and 

though they may have been born here. Look at the debates, and 

you will see the instances cited. Ah! how the cunning gentleman 

from New Jersey avoided answering my question. 

What did that Republican treaty and law doT I will give it to 

you in a very few words. The effect of the Bancroft treaty was that a native of any part of Germany, though naturalized here was by 

the terms of that treaty incorporated among the subjects oftbe em- peror after residence for a day over two years anywhere in Germany. He miuht be a native of Bavaria or a native of this country, or if 

born abroad he might after his naturalization in the United States 

have entered into business relations· at Bremen or Hamburg or Frankfort and resided there for two years far remote from the country of 

his nativity, and even though he went there simply as a student or in the pursuit of health, yet by the terms of that treaty he wasmade a subject of the emperor of whom he was never a subject before. 

The gentleman from New Jersey, therefore, was singularly .adroit in 

not answering thie question that comes home to our German fellowcitizens. Yet h~ would, or those on his· Bide would, boast of their 

loyalty to the adopted citizen. Why, England did better by us in 

her treaty than Germany as to expatriation, better by her Parliament in the law it made. But because England did adopt that 

mutual principle we had so long contended for we have a right to 

demand its enforcement in behalf of citizens here naturalized who were born in Ireland under the English flag. The relations we bear 

to England by tre~ are fair, her conduct otherwise. Our treaty 

with Germany was not mutual or fair, but her conduct in releasing our citizens was ·much better than her treaty. 

As to the matter of the sympathy of the gentleman from New Jersey with the Irish-born citizens, let their land leagues who have 

denounced him recently speak for themselves ; I do not speak for 

them. They know their friends. The impression made throughout 

the country by the gentleman's relation to these debates is exactly as I have stated. The old incarnate federal deviltry and hatred of forei~ers of the time of John Adams, illustrated in the alien laws, 

surVIves. From that time every party opposed to the Democratic 

pa.rty in this country has been federal in its jealousy, opposition, and 

pe:rsecution of foreign-born citizens. Such parties have shown a vindictive dispositi,on to restrict the right of naturalization fully 

accorded by the Constitution and the laws. Our records are full of 

these proscriptive policies of our antagonists. They took shape 

in attempts to take from State tribunals the right to naturalize, to 

restrain suffrage, to prolong the time of probation of the immigrant 

and modes of religious bigotry and persecution. 

I say therefore, and I .speak it boldly as one familiar with federal 

and democratic history, that when any man on the other side impeaches this side of the Honse as being in any way recreant in devotion to the naturalized citizen in all the length and breadth of his 

rights and privileges, or when any member thus derogates from our well-earned fame and arrogates to himself and his party any such 

special devotion, he falsifies history. He will be convicted for it 

before the intelligen-t people of this country. [Applause on the 

Democratic side.] · I did not wish to extend this debate int-o the five-minute discussion. I gave up freely to ot.hers· the hour to which I wa-s entitled, 

and therefore had no cha11.ce for reply; but having been associated 

with this legislation as to German and Irish adopted citizens, having 

defeated the Republican attempt to denationalize our German fellowcitizens abroad, having stood by the Irishmen here as a faithful representath·e, having by my exertions almost alone-not in the Thirtyninth or Fortieth Congress, for I was not here then-but having, 

with the aid of .a few good men on the other side of the House, suc- ceeded in having the prison dool"8 opened for our citizens in Ireland 

who had fought under ou:r flag, I could not say less, and I might say more. [Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. ROBESON. :Mr. Chairman, I would only again remind my 

friend, and if need be, the country, that the rights of no people are to be maintained or advanced by mere declamation upon the floor of 

Congress. They have rights; but if they are to be eiil"orced they must 

first be organized in the forms of l::Lw, so that they can be enforced 

by organized executive action. I say again that the treaty of Ghent was made by men who did not represent the principles and never consented to, assisted in, or were associated with the party of modern · Democracy. I say that from that time to 11:!70, duri~~ the forty or more years the Democratic party held sway here in washington at 

both ends of the Capitol, those principles were never embodied either 

in legislation on the statute-book, or in ordinances in the form of 

treaties, and that it remained for the Republican administration of 

General Grant to organize them, and place them forever on the 

statute-book as authorized, authoritative, and effective expression of those great principles of freedom and the rights of man on which 

the Republican party is founded. . I need not remind the country that the great battles of cirilization are not achieved by the small boys who put feathers in their caps 

and march ahead of the music, or by the half-hearted or 1nkewarm, 

who cry out but do not follow, but by the gteat column of stalwart 
t 

. 

·1882. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1617 

soldiers, who march steadily forward, and capture success bJ: ~he 

vigor of their attack, or overwhelm and trample down opposJtion 

by their steady and determined advance. It matters little what 

leagues or associations may say. The intelligence of the people will 

not be deceived. The country will understand the force of the 

remark made by Mr. Burke, on an occasion and in regard to a pretense not dissimilar to the present. "Gentlemen," said he, "must 

not suppose that the grasshopper that chirps upon the bough is the 

only occupant of the field where a thousand noble cattle cbew the 

cud and are silent." [Laughter and applause.] 

Mr. BRAGG. I desire to ask the gentleman from New Jersey a 

question. . Mr. COX, of New York. I withdraw my amendment. 

Mr. BRAGG. I renew it. I desire to make an inquiry of the gentleman from New Jersey, as to whether it was the stalwart column of 

three hundred and six he referred to as accomplishing such wonders 

in all time to comeT [Laughter.] 

[Cries of "Read."] 

The CHAIRMAN. If there be no objection, the Clerk will read 

the amendment. 

The Clerk read as follows : 

The amendment is to strike out lines 12 to 15, inclusive 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I move, in line 13, after "Brazil," 

to insert the words "and Paraguay," and I will explain briefly the 

necessity for that amendment. We have a charge d'affaires at Paraguay and Uruguay at a salary of $5,000. We have attached Uruguay to the Argentine Republic and Paraguay to Brazil. I desire to 

read a single paragraph in regard to Uruguay, that the committee 

may jud~e of its importance and say whether our minister to Brazil 

cannot discharge our diplomatic duties with that government: 

Uruguay, a republic of South America-area, 70,000 square miles; population, 1877 440,000, (estimated)-i.s governed by a president, a ministry of four cabinet 

officers, and a legislature composed of thirteen senators and forty re1?resentatives. 

The revenue in 1878 was $10,406,840, three-fourths of which was rrom customs duties; the expenditures, $10,090,260, nearly one-half of which was for the army and navy. The public debt in 1877 was $47,611,486. Paper money to the amount of $6 000,000 was no longer current in commerce, though received by the govern- ment. Payment of interest on the debt has been lately resumed. 

The imports in 1877 were $14,200,000, and the exports $17,492,159 in 1879. 

The army consists of 2,261 men ; 225 miles of railway are in operation, and 730 

miles of telegraph. There are 144 post-offices. Letters mailed in 1877, 1,04;876. 

Capital, Montevideo; population, 1877, 91,167. About half the prope~ or the 

republic belongs to foreigners, principally Spaniards, Italians, and Brazilians. 

That is in regard to Uruguay. I desire now to read a word in -regard to Paraguay showing why it is united with Brazil. We unite 

Paraguay with Brazil in diplomatic relations because it virtually 

belongs to that country. It is under the same domination. 

Paraguay, an illla.nd republic ofsouth America-area 57,303 square miles, popu- lation in 1876, 293,884-is a countrw without cines, and almost without civilization. 

The language spoken is chiefly tliat of the Indians mixed with a little Spanish. The country achieved independence in 1811, and was ruled by the dictator, Dr. 

Francia, for twenty-nine years, during which no foreigners were allowed to enter or leave Par3;~Y· Since 1870 the government, thougb nominally republican, has 

been under tne control of Brazil. The country is liOpelessly msolvent, owing $2-36,000,000 to Brazil and the other allies as a legacy of the war, $9,0~JOOOto Great 

Britain and $2,100,000 domestic debt, amountin~ altoaether to more tnan the total 

value Of the country, real and personal. Revenuem 187S, $295,567; expenses $228,630, 

besides interest and army. The import.'! in 1876, $657,466, and theex:ports$392,887. The army embraces 2,000 men, mostly now discha.rged to relieve th.e treasury of 

expense. The only railway in Paraguay is one of l'orty-five mile&, and the only 

telegraph is of the same length. 

We ihink under the circumstances whatever diplomatic relations we have with that country can be discharged by our minister to Brazil. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. LORD. Mr. Chairman, in the remarks I shall submit relating 

to the bill pending before the committee I shall make no reference to 

party politics, and I hope I shall not be ruled out of order on that 

account. [Laughter.] . · In the consideration of the bill before the House I object to the 

lines in parenthesis on page 4, lines 78 and 79, because in addition to 

the implication that the duties of the consul-general are very light, or else that the secretary of legation has notbing to do, (an implication that is more than sustained by a remark from the gentleman 

from New Jersey as to another officer referred to in the bill,) it involves, as I regard it, a damage to the consular service, in a great capital 

like Vienna, ifno~a general damage. I am aware that the committee did not so intend it, and that it is, on the contrary the desire of 

the committee to elevate the service at all points; and their idea is 

that to make a consul-general a secretary of legation is to elevate him 

jn position. I shall not have time here to discuss the eligibility of 

"the two positions with respect to each other. If there is need of a consul-general at Vienna I would have him maintained as snelL If 

there i'S no need of one, or of but such fractional part of a man's time as a secretary of legation might have left, then I would place an officer there of lower consular rank and provide for him accordinooly. 

If there is no more need of a secretary of legation at Vienna than 

for such portion of time as a con!lll-general may have left after the 

diw;:harge of his consular duties, then the need of a secretary oi lega.-

tio"ll can be scarcely appreciable. The consul-general is at the head 

of his department of service. If he were in the line of promotion, 

the next advance would as a rule carry him into the diplomatic 

service as a minister or charge d'affaires. 

A member of this House within the last two or three years, who 

had previously had experience in the cons1.llar service, was tendered 

XIII- 102 

by the President then in office the consul-generalship at Vienna. 

Had he been persuaded against his judgment; to accept the duty, and 

had found himself soon after called upon by a law of Conhrress such as now pending in this bill to report himself to the minister either a-s coachman or clerk, or secretary to the legation, he would not have 

regarded it as a promotion. 

Men accept consul-generalships as eligible who would not accept 

secretaryships of legation; and the reverse of this may be also true, 

in some cases. I apprehend that the consuls-ooeneral at Berlin, London, or Paris would not be pleased to have their offices merged in 

those of the secretaries of legatious. · The consular service is a useful, hard-working, and honorable 

service. Its efficiency has been greatly augmented within the last 

'twenty years. Immediately prior to that trme its expenses in excess of fees were about 750,000 per year, and the whole amount was paid 

out of the Treasury of the United States. Now its expenses are about 

$1,200,000, which is wholly paid from the fees c;tollected by consuls, 

leaving a surplus which has sometimes reached $140,000 in a year. 

The improved service, beside paying its way in this manner, has 

been declared by men of good judgment, in debate in both Houses of 

Congress, by its close attention to the verification of invoices, for 

which these fees are mainly collected, to afford protection to the rev- enues of the country in rescuing from fraud $10,000,000 to $20,000,000 

perannum. · 

Prior to 1862 very few invoices of merchandise exported from foreign countries to the United States were ever subjected to consular 

supervision. A series ofletters at that time, addressed to the various 

collectors of customs in all the principal cities of· the United States 

by a consul then in service, developed the fact that not one invoice 

in three hundred had on it the consular verification, and it was also 

disclosed that t.he invoices were not always the real evidence, or reaJ. instrument, on which was transacted the purchase and sale of 

the property. There was a general law requiring the verification of 

invoices, and a consular fee collected for it, I think, of the same amount as that now collected for invoices in triplicate; but thelaw was subject to several exceptions, as, for instance, if the goods were sent out to this country to be sold on commission, or if they were shipped by a manufacturer to be sold for his account, or if they were l'l.Ot duti~ble goods, then the consular certificate was not required, 

and under these exceptions the majority of foreign merchants man- aged to avoid the consular office entirely. 

In 186'2 a law was passed making it incflmbent upon shippers to 

have attached to all invoioes, without any exception, the consular 

verification, and that in the ~onsul's judgment the prices were honest 

and fair ; this wa-s supplemented by the oath of the shipper that the 

invoice presented was the actual instrument of sale, according to 

the market value of the article. This placed the seller on record 

under oath against himself in case a fraud was afterward disclosed~ 

regard to that transaction. And this it is that has been, I have no 

doubt rightfully, asserted to be worth from 10,000,000 to 20,000,000 

per annum to the revenue. This, too, it is that has made the con- sular service self-sustaining. In one office of which I had knowledge, where the annual fees had never exceeded $800, they sprung 

np the first year to $'25,000 and more, which the officer paid into the 

Treasury of the United States. 

I note fully all that the gentleman from Ne" York [Mr. HEWITT] 

ha-s to say of what he supposed to~the fallacy of this idea of'' selfsustaining," and I credit him with disclosing a carefully acquired · knowledge of consular administration, which would almost suggest 

the idea that he had been himself in the consular service, however 

equivocal he may consider th& compliment, in the light of what I 

shall presently have to say concerning some remark&, that fell from 

the gentleman from Maryland, [Mr. McLANE.] 

It is quite true that the consular system is self-sustaining by a fdrm of taxation, but it is self-sustaining somewhat in the same way 

that a mill is self-sustaining that takes toll for grinding the corn that comes to it, rather than by levying a tax upon the coiil.lllunity by 

which it is supported. 

The consular system is supported by those who go ~he consular 

offices for consular services. It presses upon the sailor, feelingly 

referred to by the gentleman from New Yor~1 but very sli~htly. The 

sailor highly prizes the consul; always callS him council, and uniformly applies to him for advice when he is in trouble in a foreign 

port, a co.lldition for which he has a proclivity almost controlling. 

The consUlar service is no disadvantage to him, and this very bill 

provides the sum of $70,500 to be expended for his relief in foreign 

countries. Nor does the tax fall on shippintwith any appreciable 

force. The bulk of it is collected on the invoiCeS of merchandise, on which it does not amount to the one-hundredth part of 1 per cent. in 

the average. 

The objection suggested that the exposure of invoices to the keeping 

of the consul had sometimes caused merchants to fear the disclosure 

of their secrets of trade, has probably led 'to such results in but very 

few instances. I have never heard of one. Doubtless there have been 

such breaches of confidence, but in very rare oases. Merchants have 

to expose their business to telegraph operators, but violations of trust 

are not frequent. · The gentleman from Maryland, fMr. McLANE,] usually so considerate, and never, I am sure, intentionally unkind, has without his 

habitual reflection permitted himself to animadvert upon the per-
1618 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 

sonnel of the consular and diplomatic service. I am confident that 

his remarks cannot commend themselves to his more deliberate con- sideration. 

When he proceeded to characterize the forei~ service as composed, or largely composed, of men who are so worthless at home as to be 

called poor devils, and so utterly without repute that it would be 

disgraceful to employ them at home in a service which he pauses to 

characterize as debased and degraded, and then waits to admireth~ 

fitness of those words, I cannot think that with deliberate candor 

he applied his judgment to his expressions. 

There is an oriental proverb something lilm this : " There are three thin~s which in going make no return-the sped arrow, the spoken 

wora, and the lost opportunity." The gentleman from Maryland's. 

words, like sped arrows, wounding arrows, have sped beyond recall. 

They are these: 

No, Mr. Chairman, we might as well look thi<J subject in the faoo fah-ly. 

This foreign service of ours is more-well, the word comes, an<l the word fits- more debased and more de_graded than our own home service, and that is saying much. It has become the role that a. poor devil who is not able to pension himself on the home department begs a forei_gn consulship. If he is without repute, and so much without repute that he worua discredit a department of the Government at home, then he gets an appointment to re.yresent us at a foreign government. 

The words quoted are now -spread upon the public journals, and 

preserved in the archives of the nation. It remains only to us to 

place beside them sentiments of contrary import, in the hope that 

they may more extensively command the assent of o~ cohntrymen. 

The gentleman upon whose remarks I am commentmg appeared, 

after the utteranc'e of the words quoted, to remember the except~ons 

usuallyimposecl upon gentlemen as to present company, and observing near him the gentleman from Iowa, lately returned from foreign .service at Vienna, at once generously excepted him from the sweeping tenor of his statement, and thus emphasized his general rule. . There were other members present who had been in foreign service, 

including the gentleman himself, and one from Indiana, and still 

others who were not indulged to share with the gentleman from 

Iowa in this, in the parlance of railway traffic, "discriminating 

rate." 

But I desire, Mr. Chairman, to interpose my objections also to the 

gentleman's estimate of the home service of the United States. Are 

gentlemen on this floor willing to spread on the records without dissent" the statement that the foreign and home service of the United 

States are correctly described as only differing from each other in 

disgrace by the single degree of difference noted between degradation ancl debasement, each service conducted by poor devils, the 

foreign being just perceptibly below the domestic f 

Some engaged in the consular and diplomatic service were mem- bers of Congress before they went abroad. Some became members 

of Congress after their return from forei~n service, and some were members of Congress both before and atter service in consular or diplomatic character. I use the word character purposely, because as the character, on the theory of the gentleman from Maryland, is 

but a comparison of degrees of degradation between the home and 

foreign services, so it would seem that when the two services are thus interwoven and entered into alternatively by the same persons 

that the uniformity of adverse qualification designated by the gentleman must be maintained with comparative ease by those who, 

in exemplary worthlessness, have the gift of continuance. 

But, Mr. Chairman, quite enough of this. We maintain that the 

service is not debased and ~e~raded. The whole public business of 

the Government of the Uniwa. States is committed to its home serv- ice and its foreign service. The conduct of the businessismoresuccessful than the conduct of any national business since the world was made; and just in proportion to that avera~e success is the average 

merit of those to whom the affairs of the nation have been intrusted. 

The consuls, as a class, are exemplary in all their duties. From their 

industrious and painstaking reports there is added month by month 

to the literature of commerce contributions of great value to the 

merchants, manufacturers, and a~~iculturists of our country. These 

consular officers are distributed au over the earth; the majority of 

them so poorly paid that they are always subject to discomfort and 

very often to mortification. As the representatives of a great and 

wealthy people they are in numerous instances tendered attentions 

and ho pitalities which they cannot accept, because they cannot 

reciprocate on account of the poverty of their reward. Meantime, 

under their instructions, the myriad-handed mechanism in our great 

manufacturing towns, where you feel the pulsations of machinery 

under your feet as you walk the streets, is sending out across all the 

great waters and through all the arteries and channels of trade the 

product of our industry, the proceeds of which return to us on each 

refluent wave of the swelling seas in veins of silver and of gold. 

[During the delivery of the foregoing remarks Mr. HORR and Mr. 

ROBESON successively tookshe floor, and yielded their time to Mr. 

LORD.] 

Mr. ATKINS. I shall not object to the gentleman from Michigan :::ontinuing his remarks until he concludes, but I shall object here-

:llter to extending the time of any gentleman. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I hope we will now have a vote 

upon the pending amendment. 

Mr. HORR. I withdraw the pro for-ma amendment. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the amendment su'b~ mitted by the gentleman from MichigaB. · The Clerk read a-s follows: 

.Afte~ the word 11 Brazil," in line 13, insert the words 1

' and Paraguay." 

The amendment was agreed to. 

The Clerk read as follows : 

For salaries of envoys extraorclinary and miniElters pleni}lOtentiary, as follows ~ 

To Chili and Peru, at $10,000 each; t.o Turkey, $7,500; in all, $27,500. 

Mr. DAWES. I desire to offer an amendment, whieh I send to thedesk. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

In line 19, after the word "dollars," insert the words " and the minister to. Turkey shall also be accredited to Persia.." 

lli. DAWES. Mr. Chairman, Persia is one of the oldest, and was, 

at one time, the most powerful nationality upon earth. The United 

States is to-day the youngest and most powerful, and between these 

two nationalities no diplomatic relations exist. But the necessity for 

such diplomatic relations arises not from any sentiment but from 

that duty which has been so eloquently dwelt upon on this floor, the 

duty of the United States Government to protect American citizens 

within the limits of that nationality, as within the limits of all 

others. . Persia has become effete, superannuated, and insignificant among 

the powers of the earth, because of the bli~hting influence of Mohammedanism. The young and vigorous vhristian civilization of 

America has stretched out an arm to lift that nation from its moral 

degradation. Forty years ago an American mission, the first Christian mission in that country, was established by Americans. 

Mr. HISCOCK. Will the gentleman yield to me for a question t 

Mr. DAWES. Certainly. 

Mr. IDSCOCK. Have we any treaty relations with Persia T 

Mr. DAWES. I am not able to answer the gentleman's question. 

Mr. IDSCOCK. Is there in existence any treaty with Persia 7 

Mr. DAWES. I do not know. 

lli. HISCOCK. Why should we send a minister there if we have no treatyY 

Mr. DAWES. If the gentleman will allow me to conclude my 

remarks, and not occupy my time, I will make it clear before I finish 

what necessity there is for esta.bli hing diplomatic relations between 

the two countries. · That is the very point I desire to make in this 

connection. 

This mission was established forty years ago, and to-day there are American citizens located all through Persia, laboring for the ad vance- ment of civilization and Christianity in that country. Twenty American citizens, ladies and gentlemen, are located at a point in the 

interior of that country at one of these missions. 

These people were just outside of the city of Oroomiah. This city 

of Oroomiah lies near the adjoining province of Koordistan, a mounta.inous region controlled by a powerful sheik of the nationality o:f 

Koords1 nominally a subject of Turkey, who, in the war with Russia, 

with 1lls half-savage warriors, battled for the Turkish government 

and got back home to his mountain fastnesses with the MartiniHenry rifles in the hands of his warriors, and with the spirit of war- and conque t inflamed in his soul. Suddellly the sheik came down 

upon Persia with an army of 20,000 men, and at once assaulted the 

city of Oroomiah, and surrounded the mission station from which 

floated the stars and stripes and the banner of England. This sav- age chieftain respected those emblems and protected our citizens. 

He showed deference to our remote but powerful nationality, of which 

he had heard, but of which he had little knowledge. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I desire to say, in reference to the 

amendment proposed by the gentleman from Ohio, that, whether it 

is material or otherwise, I think we have gone quite far enough in 

the direction he proposes ; and such a measure demands more care- ful consideration than can be given to it by the committee. There- are objections,however, to this amendment which should not be lost 

sight of. In the first place we have no treaty relations-! believe- none whatever-with Persia ; and in addition to that Persia sends. no representative to this Government. I hope the amendment will 

not be adopted. 

Mr. DAWES. I withdraw the amendment. 

Mr. ORTH. I renew the amendment, and yield my time to thegentleman from Ohio. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. :Mr. Chairman, I desire to raise the 

point of order that no gentleman can take the floor in the committee 

and yield to another, for the reason, if this is adinissible, a member 

who could secure time thus yielded to him might occupy the floor 

indefinitely. 

Mr. DAWES. I shall occupy the floor but for a brief time. This is. an important matter. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I am only anxious to proceed with 

the bill. 

Mr. ATKINS. I gave notice that I should object to gentlemen yielding th~ floor in this manner. We nevet can get thi-ough the 

bill in tills way. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from· Ohio [lfr. DAWES] withdrew his amendment, and the gentleman from Ir.diana [Mr. OnTHl 
1882. OONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1619 

renewed it, as he had a right to do, and yielded his time to the gentleman from Ohio. 

Mr. ATKINS. I make the point of order that that cannot be done 

if any other gentleman claims the :floor. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair overrules the point of order. 

Mr. DAWES. When this information was received by the friends 

of the missionaries they appealed to this Government. The Secretary of State replied that this Government had no diplomatic relations with Persia and that it was no.t in the power of this Government tofrotect American citizens there in peril, but that the kindly 

offices o the British Government would be invoked. They were invoked. A telegram was sent to London and the British Government 

telegraphed to Teheran, the capital of Persia. The Persian GoTernment acted promptly. Couriers were sent to the seat of war and the 

intervention was just in time to save the missionaries, because this 

sheik had incited the war, as aTe incited most wars of the East, in 

the name of a religious and fanatical issue, on the part of one sect 

of the Mohammedan Church against another. The Persians accused 

the missionaries of complicity with the sheik because they were . Christians, and unmolested by him, and at the very moment when 

the missionaries fell within the power of the Persian authorities this 

intervention arrived and saved them from the extremest peril. Thus, 

through the intervention of England, for the first time in the history 

of Persia, that nationality was ready and willing to protect Ameri- can citizens. But shall the United States continue to invoke England 

for power to discharge her duty of protecting her own citizens t 

It is for these reasons I have. desired to bring the subject before 

this Hou e. I do not care what form the le~islation takes. The neces- sity for such direct diplomatic relations With that nationality as will 

assert the power and dignity, and discharge the duty of this Government for the protection of American citizens there, as well a~ in Ireland and elsewhere, is manifest, and I regard the duty to establish 

them a imperative. 

Mr. ORTH. I withdraw the amendment. 

l\Ir. SPRINGER. I will offer the substitute which I have sent to 

t he desk, when the Clerk in reading reaches the bottom of the page. 

Tho Clerk read the following: 

For ministers resident at Belgium and Netherlands, Sweden and Norw~y and 

Denmark, Hawaiian Islands, Argentine Republic, and the United States of Oolom· 

bia., at $7,500 each, $37,500. 

Mr. BURROWS, of .Michigan. I am directed by the Committee on Appropriations to offer the amendment which I send to the desk. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

On page 2,line 22, after theword 11 Republic," insert the words" and Uruguay." 

The amendment was agreed to. 

Mr. SPRINGER. I now offer my amendment, which I ask the 

Clerk to read. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Amend by striking out all of the bill printed on page 2 as amended, namely, the following : " For salaries of envoys extraordinary and ministers plenipotentiary to Spain, Austria, Italy, Brazil, Me:rico, Japan, and China, at $12 000 each, $84,000. 11 For salaries of envoys extraordinary and ministers :plenipotentiary, as follows: 

To Chili and Peru, at $10,000 each; to Turkey, $7,500 · m aJl, $27,500. 1 1 For ministers resident at Belgium and NetherLwds, Sweden and Norway and 

Denmark, Hawaiian Islands, Argentine Republic and Uruguay, and the Unit-ed 

States of Colombia, at $7,500 each, $37 500. 11 For ministers resident and cons~-general at Bolivia and Venezuela, at $5,000 

each, $10,000. " For minister resident Mcredited to Guatemala, Costa Rica, Honduras, Salvador, and. Nicaragua, to reside at the place that the President ma.y select in either 

of the states named, $10,000. 1 1 For ministers resident and constils-general to Liberia, Hayti, Switzerland, and 

Portugal, at $5,000 each, $20,000. " For minister resident and consul-general to Roumania, Servia, and Greece, 

$5,500." 

And insert in lieu thereof the following substitute for the various pamgraphs on said paae: " :for sai~es of envo;ys extraordinary and ministers plenipotentiary to Brazil, 

Menco, Chili, Japan, China, Turkey, and the Netherlands, at ~12,000 each~ $84,000. 

And hereafter the minister accredited to Germany shall also be Mcreditea to Austria; the minister accredited to Russia shall also be Mcredited to Roumania, Ser- ~a~ and Greece; the minister accredited to France shall also be accredited to Spain, Italy, Switzerland1 and Portugal ; the minister accredited to Brazil shall also be 

Mcredited to the Ar~~!ine Republic, Uruguay, and Paraguay; the minister ac· credited to Mexico snau also be accredited to Guatemala, Costa Ric.'~>, Honduras 

Salvador, and Nicaragua.; the minister accredited to Chili shall aJ.so be accredited to Peru~ Bolivia, Venezuela, and the United States of Colombia; the minister ac- creditea to Turkey shall also be accredited to Persia, and the minister accredited to the Netherlands shall also be accredited to Belgium, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark. The President may desi!Pillte the consul or consul-ueneral residing in any of the countries mentioned in this paragraph to act as the cYUITg~s d'affaires where 

their respective consulates are located, but no additional compensation shall be 

allowed for this service, except as herein specially provided. 11 For ministers resident and consuls-general to the Ha aiian I.sland.s, Liberia, 

and Hayti, at $5,000 each, $15,000." 

Mr. ROBESON. Points of order on that amendment are reserved. 

Mr. SPRINGER. If points of order are to be made, they might as well be made now and decided. 

Mr. COX; of New York. I desire to ask the gentleman from Illinois a question. Does his amendment decrease expenditures f 

Mr. SPRINGER. Yes, sir; over 100,000. 

Mr. BLOUNT. It does not change any law anyhow. 

Mr. SPRINGER. I yield the five minutes I am entitled to in support of the amendment to the gentleman from Maryland, [Mr. McLANE.] But if the point of order is made, let us understand what 

it is. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair does not understand the point of 

order is made. 

:Mr. ROBESON. Let it go. 

Mr. McLANE. I desire to support the amendment of the gentle- man from Illinois, which, as I understand it, covers substantially 

the ground I endeavored to occupy in. the debate the day before 

yesterday. The amendment of the gentleman from Illinois follows more closely the bill from the committee than I was myself disposed to 

do. I would prefer the appropriation for four principal missions, 

leaving the President of the United States free to exercise his con- stitutional power to accredit the four ministers to any country where 

in his best judgment he chose to send them. I did not myself feel 

that it was the duty of Congre s to provide any special appropriation if we were to have a reorganization. But as the President has 

the right to send a foreign minister where he pleases with or without 

ah appropriation, and as the proposition made by me to conftne the 

appropriation to four principal missions has been somewhat radical, 

I accept cheerfully the modification sug~ested by the gentleman 

from Dlinois, as I should accept very cheerfully the reform proposed 

by the Committee on Appropriations if I were limited to that reform 

in my choice. 

I am not going to press, and did not mean in the remarks which I 

submitted the day before yesterday to press, any radical view of this 

question. I believe that the President ~ould conduct the diplomatic 

work of this country in Europe with four ministers, as I trunk he 

could with one for Central America, one for Mexico, and two for South 

America. I do not at all retreat from that opinio~ when I acGept the 

amendment of the gentleman from Illinois or the modification proposed by the eomm1ttee. 

I desire to say only ·a word in reference to some remarks made by 

the honorable gentleman from Michig::m, [:Mr. LORD.) He does me some injuatice when he treats the observations I made day before 

yesterday as so general in their character as he has chosen to represent them in his criticism. · 

:My remark about the poor devil who took a consulate when he 

could not get a home office was not all intended to convey, ~nd did 

not convey, the very general meaning which he has given to it. I do 

not qualify it at all, nowever, a.s I made it. A moment's reflection 

will suggest to him that it does not bear upon one set of officers or upon one administration more than upon another. 

I spoke of it as a source of re~ret, and very general on this :floor, 

that our home service and our foreign service should have become so inferior to what it o~ghtto be and to what it has been. If I used _ the term "poor devil" I could give him abundant illustrations of 

its real rather than its figurative force. In fact, I forbear to give 

him one that rises to my lips, and that was accompanied with such res~ts as excited the horror and the disgust of the country. 

But, if I .I? ass that and treat his critici.Sm as serious, I could Tefer 

him to an illustration within the last week where a distinO"uished man sought through the action of his friends to be placed at the bead 

of a Department of the Government, was condemned as unfit for it, 

and in the same connection, and contemporaneous in point of time, was nominated to one of the principal foreign missions Oftbe eountl.-y: This is the practice which I condemned as general in our day and 

generation, and which I did not allege against any.party in partic- ulU.:z.. and the effect of which is to discredit our foreign service. 

[Here the hammer fell.) 

Mr. ffiSCOCK. I do not suppose, Mr. Chairman, that it is ex- pected that we on this side of the House will consn.me the time of 

the Committee oftbe Whole in a defense of the.appoi:p.tments made 

for service abroad. I think that criticisms from the other side upon 

those appointments, when there is no time to defend or reply; are entirely out of order, out of place, and uncalled for. I say that distinctly, recognizing precisely to whom and at whom ·the gentleman 

from Maryland [1r1r. McLANE] points his remarks. 

I believe that this debate should not be allowed to run in the 

direction of challenging the qualifications or the pt:opriety of the 

appointment of any .man to any place. And I do not think< and I 

say it with all 'deference to the gentleman from Marylana., [Mr. 

McLANE,] that it is in good t.a te. The gentleman a.p'pointed to a distinguished post abroad has his friends and his champions. But 

be should not be dragged into this arena of debate and subje'cted to 

criticisms when the months of his friends and of his t}h.ampions are substantially closed. So much for that. 

A single word in reference to the pending amendm~nt. The Committee on Appropriations sympathize to a certain extent with the 

views of the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. McL'ANE] and of my 

colleague, and they have taken a step in that directio.h for the purpose of pointing the mind of the Administration to the subject. 

I apprehend, however, that there is no man upon the other side of 

the House who will say that it is proper, without the gra.vest consideration being given to the subject, to introduce the radical reforms 

projected by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. S:PRmGER] in his 

amendment ; and I am glad to see that the gentleman from ;Maryland 

[Mr. McLA.NE] draws back when he confronts the Ulnsttation of the 

argument which he made. The other side of the Honge has had the 

control of legislation, certainly of this House, for. thiee or four suc- cessive Congresses and may have taken steps in the dire-ction that we have, but they did not deem it wise to inaufura.te anv 81lch radical changes as have been indicated here. As have said, the only 
' 1620 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. MARCH 4, 

:purpose t.hat the Committee on Appropriations had in view was to 

ca.ll the attention of the Administration to this reform, if it be one; 

and when we can be possessed of its views, to give the subject the 

consideration which it demands. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. HEWITT'· of New Yor~. I m~ve to .amend the pe?ding amen.dment so as to g1ve the ·President diScretiOn to consolidate th~ ~ssions as proposed by the amendment of the gentleman from IllinoiS, 

[Mr. SPRINGER.] That I believe will meet the views of gentlemen 

on both sides. 

My colleague !rom N~w York [Mr. HISC~CK] c?mPl.ains tha;t the 

discussion of thu1 mornmg has taken a partiSan direction. If It has 

done so it is entirely due to him. He himself took the floor and began 

hfs rem'arks by asserting that in the remarks which I had delivered 

to the House I claimed that the legislation of 1868 was Democratic 

legislation. He did that with the RECORD lying before him, from 

which I will read an extract in regard to that legislation. I said : 

It was in fact, not a party: measure, and the best men on both sides contributed 

to ita sucOOss; but so far aa1t waa opposed it was opposed only by Republicans. 

Now, was it possible to put in words a more express disclaimer that 

this measure was party legislation f And yet my coll~ague con~umed 

ten minutes in attacking me on the ground that I clarmed that It was a party mea-sure. He went further, and said that I was an enemy 

t>f the collSular systom. He .said that with the RECORD lying before 

him, in which were these words: 

The cost of the consular service of Great Britain is about one million three hun· 

dred thousand dollars per annum. They maintain no consuls in interior towna, 

but they have consuls in every port where the British flag floats. I advocate the same system. I would strengthen the consnl.ar system all over the world in ports of entry; I would J>a.y an a.clequate compensation for men competent to perform the duties subjected f.o preliminary examination, and I would let the charge fall 

upon the whole cohn try, and not place a positive obstruction in the way of its 

general commerce. 

I ask my colleague whether he could coin any language more calcula\ed to bring the attention of this House to the necessity and importance of sustaining the consular service of the country f I go 

further, and gentlemen on this side of the House will bear me witness 

when I say it, and say that when in the Forty-fourth Congress radical changes-reforms as they were thought to be-were proposed by 

my own party associates, I stood alone on the floor of this House to 

protect the consular system from what I considered would be destructive measures of legislation. My associates had the good sense to adopt most of the suggestiollS which I made. The consular system was from that hour improved; and the very reports referred to in 

this debate were suggested in the first speech I ever delivered on the 

floor ofthi's House on the subject of foreign relatiollS. 

Mr. HISCOCK. Mr. Chairman, I most respectfully insist that I 

did not introduce this partis~n discussion into this debate; and I 

most respectfully insist that it was introduced by my colleague from 

New York, [Mr. HEWITT,] who has .just taken his seat. I insist, 

}.lr. Chairman, that a careful perusal of his speech will show it an attempt to glorify the Democratic party as the champions of the 

rights of the adopted citizens of the nation. . Mr. HEWITT, of New York. And I repeat it now. Mr. HISCOCK. And I insist on the other hand that until the 

Republican party took control of the administration of this Government the rights of our adopted citizens were neglected in our treaty 

obligatiollS, and that we had no legislation for the protection of 

those rights. Labor was not ennobled by the gentlemen on the 

other side, but was debased. The Jj.val of the labor that came to us from abroad was disposed of in the -nave-pens, even in the District of 

Columbia. The great power that controlled the Government under. Democratic administration was not zealous for free labor, and did ' 

:pot legislate in that direction. 

Jrfy colleague has said that it was not partisan legislation that was had in t}le Fortieth Congress. I illSist that the Repub\i,can party 

is responsible fQr that legislation; it is our legislation; it is to our credit afill our glory. Imagine a Democratic Con~ress with a mem- . bership of one hundred and fifty Democrats and thirty Republicans 

yielding to those thirty the credit of the laws placed on the statutebook by that Gongress. · I saw in the House a little while aO'o the distinguished gentleman 

from Massachusetts who substantiafiy formulated the law referred 

to. Why, sir, he belonged once to the Native-Ameri~an party; yet 

tecognizing the right of our anopted citizellS to all thej?rivileges ac- corded to native-born citizellS, he sought and procured the necessary 

legislation to guarantee those rights. 

Mr. McLANE obtained the floor. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I withdraw my pro jornta amendment. 

Mr. McLANE. I m~ to amend by striking out the word ''J apau." 

I wish merely to say a word in reply to the honorable gentleman from 

New Yor'J4 [Mr. HiscocK.] I shall at all times be reany to accept 

his counsel, and I was about to say his training, but he will excuse me if I tell him it does not lie with him to reflect upon my political course. .I have1 in fact, taken no part in the political aspects of this 

debate. My remarks on the day before yesterday referred to the 

service at home or abroad, having no reference to either party, a I 

expressly .stated. Throughout that debate I did not indulge in partisan o.r political allusions; but to-day, when the honorable gentle-

-

man from Michigan [Mr. LORD] gave to this discussion a partisan 

character which I would not have felt disposed to give it, I could not 

refrain from making the allusions I did. There were, perhaps, allusions made in the debate of day before yesterday; but if there were they had express reference to the value of the diplomatic service. I 

do not feel at all that I was taking any liberty with the committee 

in making those allusions, though perhaps tbe time is more valuable 

than the speech. 

1\lr. LORD. Will the gentleman allow me one question ! Did I 

understand the gentleman just now to refer to a distinguished gentleman just appointed to go abroad as an illustratioJt of his poordevil theory 7 

Mr. McLANE. I cannot permit the gentleman to make me more personal than I choose to be, indeed I do not want to be personal at 

all. The gentleman from Michigan may make his own application. 

I am dealing with a system. I know very well that, like my honorable friend from New York, the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, he will have no difficulty in making his application. 

But I was about saying in the minute that is left me that we are at 

perfect liberty upon this bill to introduce partisan views, though I 

have not. But when the honorable gentleman from New York who, 

if he did not introduce it, followed keenly in the scent, and was not 

far behind either of the honorable gentlemen on that side of the 

House who gave us on the day before yesterday a political chapter, 

denounced this side of the House, denounced the Democratic party 

at large a.s never having been distinguished in the history of this 

country for the championship of the rights of the naturalized citizen, such an allegation so unfounded, so much at war with the political record of tbe country, might well have excited the indignant 

denial of every man on this side of the House. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

1\ir. WILLIAMS, of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I do not think I can reply in five minutes to all the speeches of the last two days. I 

wish I had the ability and could. I thought to say something on the bill; but I feel sure that would be out of fashion, and possibly 

out of order. 

Now, as to this Irish question. If the Democratic party are not 

the friends of the Irish they certainly ought to be, for the Irish have 

stood by them; and there have been times when they would have 

been seriously embarrassed and their ranks sadly thinned but for their 

Irish friends. A very bright Irishman once said to me: ''Would you 

like to have me tell you what an Irishman's politics are!" •I replied 

that I should indeed. "Well," said he, "be jabers, they're opposed 

to any government they are under." And we both enjoyed the jok~. 

But I would supplement it by the further statement that some of the 

brightest intellects of the world and some of the most gallant de- fenders of our flag and country have been Irishmen; and as they 

have made common cause with us, so would I make common cause with them in protecting their every right, regardless of their political affiliatiollS. And what I can say for myself I can most safely 

say for this side of the House. 

But, Mr. Chairman, I doubt if we can settle the next Pre!iidency, 

the war in Ireland, the division of parties in New York, or the history of the rebellion in Indiana or elsewhere on thiS bill. Nor do I 

believe that those issues which will come 1Jo the front and ass8rt 

themselves in due time will be much affected by what we may say 

here, though the debate has been both able and interesting. Great 

political issues are the outgrowth of great political forces. 

The Committee on Foreign Affairs, and I rose chiefly to say this, 

have been anxiously and I think diligently searching for facts and 

official information for the purpose of responding in good faith to 

the instructions and the resolution of this House. This cannot be 

done in a minute, and when it is done it should be founded on fact 

and not on theory or denunciation. So soon a.s the information 

called for can be obtained it will be the duty, as it will be the pride 

ofthat ~ommitte.e to bring before the House whatever of fact it may 

dbtaili for its considerate and practical action. If cases be found 

requiring dignified and decorous but decided action in Congress, we shall then be able to determine who are the true friends of th~ imprisoned American citizen abroad. I care not where he was bOI'n or what 

his politics may be. Be he American, lrisll, English, German, or Scandinavian born; be he white or black; be he Democrat or Republican; b~ he Protestant or Catholic, Jew or Gentile, it matters not if a bona fide American citizen, incarcerated for no crime ·and no adequate cause, and denied a speedy hearing un4er the forms of law, 

then let the demand go with such dignity and decorum as should 

command respect; and then, if unheeded, let every power of this Government be invoked to open.his prison doors and bid him stand forth a free man. [Applause.] But :first let us ascertain the fac\s in an 

official and authentic form,. and then act in view of them. 

[Here the hammer fell.) 

1\ir. COX, of New York. 1\ir. Chairman, I will talk appropriately 

to this present amendment after con~atulating the g(>ntleman from 

Wisconsin [Mr. "\VILLIA1t1S] that he IS about t2 obey from his com- mittee instructions of this House which I had~he honor to pass for 

his instruction. [Laughter.] 

Mr. Chairman, the gentleman on my left from Illinois [Mr. 

SPRINGER] proposes an amendment. To this I will speak. He would 

combine certain of these embassies. He differs from the committee 

in more combinatiollS and at less cost. That is very well if the com-
1882. . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-. HOUSE. 

binations were not rather confusedly made and if it were not in ad- vance of practic.al and present sentiment. · On this floor, years and years ago, I have urged that the time would come when, by harnessing the forces of nature through steam and 

telegraph, we might bend of most of this diplomacy. I have said 

it again and agam, in elaborate speeches; I said it to .sodden ears who heeded not. :My colleagnefromNewYork [:Mr. HEWITT] after- ward, when he became a member of this House, made research and 

speeches in the same direction. . :My distinguished friend from Pennsylvania, LMr. CURT~,] who 

has honored our country at a foreign court, intimated the other day 

that he hoped the time would come for a. happy riddance of the inutilities, forms, and fooleries of diplomatic etiquette and ostentation. 

I wish the world were ripe and ready for it now. Looking at the 

recerds of the English Parliament, I see thatthis sentimentisgrowing there, and that some practice has obtained to that end. In so far as such improvement has been made, it is to be noted for our instruction. Treaties are negotiated at home offices, and without the 

g,id of embassies or ministers, in great emergencies, a at Washington and Berlin. Our recent fishing troubles were settled here in 

Washington without the intervention of our minister at St. James. 

Our telegraph expenses at the State Department will show how much 

is done now by the quick intellil7ence of the cable. In many places, 

by consolidating the various embassies under one head, through the 

aid of the telegraph all{l prompt travel, much more might be accom- plished. All thi , sir, I have urged and I concede. 

Our committee, :Mr. Chairman, in moving in this direction are pursuing by this bill the thought of my friend from Pennsylvania 

[:Mr. CURTIN] and my colleague from New York, [Mr. HEWITT;] 

t hey are pursuing the thought, though not completely, of the gentle- man from Illinois, [Mr. SPRINGER,] and of members of the last Congress and of the Congress before that, when we consolidated these 

Central Ame1ican missions into one. For the benefit of the service, as well as in the line of economy, we have still pursued this idea in 

the present bill. We are combining Holland with Belgium, and 

making the Scandinavian nations, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden one in our representation. We have attempted it somewhat in South 

America. We might go further and adopt the plan of my friend 

from Illinois, [Mr. SPRL.~GER,] but let us do it more heedfully than 

in his proposition, for that is subject to much criticism; let it be 

done, if you please, after advice by the Secretary of State and after examining all our relations of comity and commerce. In this bill provision is made for every proper representation of our GoveTiliDent abroad. We have economized on ministers to the 

amount of orne fifteen thousand dollars. Most of this we add to the 

efficiency of the consular service. Moreover we have on the whole 

cut down from last year some eleven thousand one hundred and 

twenty-five dollars. This bill is, therefore, ample for all our diplomatic and commercial work, and it is ample in so far as economy is 

concerned. It takes from the ornamental minister to gi.ve it to the 

useful consul. 

In these five minutes I cannot discuss the matter raised by my colleague [Mr. HEWITT] as to the improvement of our consular system as to the invoices, fees, and the ad valorem and other methods of 

advancing trade abroad. 

Let my colleague come before Congress with a general bill. Let us raise, if you please, a committee to study in and out of the State 

Department, whose archives are full of instruction as to our com- mercial and consular regulations abroad, and I venture to say that 

much legislative amelioration would result. For one, I am willing 

to undertake my part in the work, and I welcome my colleague, who 

is a business man and who knows what it is to import under present 

conditions. His experience and his ability would be indispensable 

in perfectin~ that work. It is no place on an appropriation bill to 

enter into tnat discussion or legislation. We are now limited by 

rules of order from considering it. Let ~ then go ruong with the 

bill and close it before Sunday comes. [Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. Let us have a vote. 

Mr. COX, of New York. I will withdraw my pro forma amendment. 

Mr. SPRINGER. I move to strike out the words "Hawaiian 

Islands," as I desire to say a word in reference to this amendment. 

The gentleman from New York [Mr. HiscocK] asked why the Dem- ocratic party did not cut down these missions when we had control 

of the House during the Forty-fourth, Forty-fifth, and Forty-sixth 

Congresses. I refer the gentleman to the fact that we did abolish 

the mission to Greece, where our minister was not engaged in any 

other occupation, that we could ascertain, than in waltzing with the 

Queen; and we consolidated several missions in South Amen ca. And 

I have never yet heard a word, or a single complaint, that any one single interest of the United States has been jeopardized., or in any 

wise injured, by abolishing the mission to Greece and consolidating 

the South American missions. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, that work havjng resulted so f'a.vorably to 

the interests of this Govf\rnment, and no detriment having resulted 

in any direction, I propose to commend that policy to the gentlemen who now control the majority side of the House; and say to them 

also that these missions were not abolished or consolidated up r 

that time, by the advice or suggestions of the State Department. 

The only suggestions in that connection came from this House. 

Mr. COX, of New York. I will sayto the gentleman from Illinois 

that we did not act under the advice of the State Department at all 

in this matter. ' 

Mr. SPRINGER. I am not referring to the gentleman from New 

York nor do I mean to criticise his action; but the chairman of the 

Committee on Appropriations has stated that we must wait until the 

State Department advises this action. Now, I say that we did not 

wait when we had control of the House in the past, but went on and abolished this mission to which I have referred, and consolidated 

others, and no gentleman can refer to one single instance where 

there has been any detriment to any one single interest of the Government in consequence of that change. I wit.hdrawthe amendment. 

Mr. BLOUNT. I renew the amendment, Mr. Chairman. I entirely concur with the disposition of the gentleman from Illinois, who has 

just spoken, in reference to these matters. · We have had this same question under discussion for three Congresses, and I have never yet 

heard any gentleman on this floor suggest any practical service that we have obtained from our foreign diplomates that would justify the 

continuance of the great body of them. I have no doubt but· what 

the service would be benefited by the adoption of the amendment 

proposed by the gentleman from Illinois. There is no need for their 

continuance in the present condition of our Government. 

In the origin of our Government, when this system of foreign serv- ice was first under consideration in Congress, the deuates of that 

period will show that the great minds that then dominated in these 

two Houses then contemplated that this was not to be a permanent 

fixture upon the country. In our infancy, our feebleness, our com- plications with foreign powers, and in our very struggle for exist- ence itself,· it was well that we should have at these foreign courts men to look to and consider our interests and represent us among the 

nations of the world. But with the present facilities for communication between the different nations of the earth, with the absolute assurance not only of national existence, but with a standing in th6 

world scarcely equaled, and certainly not surpassed, by a,ny other 

country, I am unable to understand why we should continue this 

service. The gentleman from New York tells us what England has 

done, and of reforn1s that are in progress in that country. But, Mr. 

Chairman, do we stand as England, or France, or Russia, or Germany, with all their complicated questions, not only requt\_i~g diplomatic intercourse abroad, but standing armies at home on \Q.e watch 

for any encroachment upon their interests or territory f ~o, sir, we are perfectly free from all that. We stand aloof from all such com- plications. We have our well-defin d status among the family of 

nations. We are free from complicating entanglements, and ther6 

is little reason for continuing this service to the extent we have in the 

past. 

I trust we shall have no fear in adopting the amendment, and go 

forward in the new line of policy that commends itself to om judgment. There is no reason why it should not be done, and I have 

never, in defense of this system, heard it even suggested by any 

gentleman that anything of great importance has been done by our diplomatic agents. The Government in all such cases has been acting directly; and therefore there is no reason fbr continuing the system. I withdraw the amendment. 

Mr. WILLIAMS, of Wisconsin:' I move to strike out the last wonl. 

I dislike very much, Mr. Chairman, to trespass on t~ time of the 

committee when I know they are so anxious, as I am myself, to proceed with the public business; but what I desire to submit is pertinent in connection with what has just been said in reference to the 

mission to Greece by the gentleman from Illinois. I desire to put in 

the REcoRD at the close, and as a part of my remarks, a. communication from the Secretary of State in reference to the abolishment of 

that very mission, and the necessity for its restoration. 

:Mr. SPRINGER. It was put in yesterday. 

Mr. WILLIAMS, of Wisconsin. That was in reference to Antigua. 

This communication and documents accompanying it refer to that 

portion of the President's message recommending its re-establishment and the practical necessity therefor. Now, in regard to our diplomatic and consular system, it is as much a system of the Government as the Army and theNavyare. And I agree with the gentle- man from New York [Mr. Cox] that it is a hazardous experiment to 

try to reorganize this system piecemeal on an appropriation bill. 

Some say: "Let us abolish it altogether. It brings no money; it is a useless and costly bauble; steam and telegraph have rendered it 

obsolete." Sir, until steam and telegraphs can do away with the 

necessity of business men transactin~ business at the national capital, sending agents here, known and Imowing others, you will never do away with your diplomatic and consular system. You may talk 

about it, but it will never be done. 

The officers of your Army and Navy bring little revenue in time of 

peace, but in an emergency their knowledge and skill may save more to the GoveTiliDent in a day than it costs to maintain them for a generation. I do not mean that our diplomatic corps are drilled and 

trained in their calling, but frequently, being on the spot; able to 

speak face to face, they are able to so shape negotiations as to save two nations from being plunged int.o war, ancl this may be after long periodiS of inaction and apparent uselessness. Then, I fancy, that like 
1622 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE. ·MARcH 4, 

mem,bers here, they all find more on their hands than th.e people 

realize. . But·what I wanted principally to remind the committee of again waa that the State Department informs us, by the communication 

it printed in our RECORD yesterday, that that Department is diligently laboring to ascertain wherein this system can be reorganized 

and improved, and they appeal to Congress to give them time to com- plete that investigation and submit suggestions. We cannot, and we ought not, to desire to abolish this system. Then it should be 

improved upon the best information obtainable and after careful 

consideratio:r,.. We speak of ~team and electricity superseding th& 

personal presence of the diplomate. Does any business man, transacting· business at th.ls oapital or elsewhere, rely on the mail and 

telegraph, or does he secure the pr~ence of some one with whom he can communicate Y It: inclividuals require this, nations require it 

all the more. It requires the presence of those known to others, but 

known by them as\vell. The idea of envoys and ministers plenipotentiary riding the circuit of the European capitals waa answered 

yesterday by the suggestion of the gentleman from Iowa lMr. KASso:N] that they were unknown in those other capitals. It requires 

acq naintance, a~ dress, and social and business status to accomplish 

much in diplomacy; and while we would have onr ministers and 

consuls pander not one iota to the frivolities of aristocratic imperialisms, we would have them respect the manners and customs of the 

people and governments to whom they are accredited. While they 

maintain the dignity of true democracy and command the respect of 

all in return, I would send them forth so equipped as to be able to 

do this. 

Why, sir, take the republics of Chili and Peru in their recent 

troubles. Look into the correspondence just published and see how 

important it was for those governments to ha,ve representatives personally present at Washington to inform our Government, correct 

rumors, and maintain the cause of each as each claimed it. Could 

they do that by steamship or telegraphY And if these smaller republics can afford this, shall we first proclaim that onr great Republic is 

about to take an advance step among the nations of the earth and 

then declare that she is really too poor to keep up diplomatic relatioUB with her neighbors 7 · I hope we shall not in any ha-sty manner distnrb the well-established system of our foreign representati<m, but that we shall diligently examine and carefully promote its efficiency wherever we can. The following are the communications referred to: 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, 

Washington, Feb1"Uary 28, 1882. 

Sm: Referring to a clause on page 9 of the President's message of December 6 last, touching the restoration of the mission to Greece, I have the honor to inclose ·a copy of a letter from the consul-general of that country at New York, giving an expression of the satisfaction whicn this clause had afforded to the Greek Govern- ment. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, 

FREDK. T. FRELINGHUYSE~. 

Hon. C. G. WILLIAMl:l, 

Chairman Oommitiee on Foreign Affairs, 

House of .Representa~ivea. 

Inclosure: Mr. Botassi. to Mr. Frelinghuysen, February 17, 1882. 

CONSULATE-GENERAL OF GREECE, 

New York, 5-17 February, 1882. 

Sm: His maJesty's government has read with great pleasure that passage in 

the President's message to Con~ss by which his excellency recommends to that 

body the re-establishment of the United States legation to Athens, Greece. 

Bvadispatchdated Athens, January 5, (old style,) just received, lam instructed 

by Mr. Coumoundouros, prime minister and minister of foreign affairs, to express officially to your excellency the satisfaction with which the Greek fiovernment 

would see this recommendation of his excellency the President of the United 

States realized. 

In compl)ing t!u!,s with the order receive<l, I beg your excellency t-o communi- cate this desire of the Greek Government to the proper committee of Congress, and to be good enough to let me know in due time the decision which has been taken 

in the premises. I ne&l not enmnerate to you excellency the many a<lvantages which the re-es- tablishment of the American mission to Athens wouid offer for the benefit of both 

countries. A larger number of American citizens visit Greece now than ever befoce, owin~ to increased communication by steam. Some American machinery begins to find it.'l way to Greece by the direct line of steamers from this port to Naples, Italy, while the e::..}>ortof AJnerican refined petroleum to Greek ports takes 

larp;er proportions every year. A.n American legation at Athens would ~eatly 

facilitate this bnsiness intercourse, while it would be the means to maintam and increa~e the friemliy relations haJ?pily e:risting between the two countries. 

I remain. with the highest consideration, sir, 

Yo·ur excellency's most obedient servant, 

Hon. F. T. FRELINGHUYSEN, 

Sect"et.ary of State, Washington, D. 0. 

D. M. BOTASSI, Consul-General of GTeece. 

The CH.A ffi"h!AN. 'I'he question is on the amendment offered by 

the gentleman from Illinois. 

Mr. SPRINGER. Let it be reported again. 

The CHAIRMAN. The la-st amendment proposed by the gentleman 

from illinois was a formal amendment, and waa withdrawn. The first 

amendment proposed by him :i.s now befor~ the committee. 

Mr. SPRINGER. Let it be read. 

Mr. BURRdWS, of Michigan. That is not necessary; it has been 

reported already two or three times. 

Mr. SPARKS. I ask that it be read again. Several gentlemen 

desire to have it again reported. 

The amendment was again read. 

The q_uestion being taken on Mr. SPRL.~rum's amendment, it waa not agreecl to. . The Clerk read the following paragraph: 

For charg6s d'affaires ad interim and diplomatic officers abroad, twenty thousand dollars. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I move to strike out the word "dollars." My object is to h ve inserted in the REcoRD a letter from W. 

J. Stillman, formerly consul-general at Athens. I do not. de ire to 

have it read; but as an antidote to the communication which I un- derstood the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs obtarned 

permission to have inserted in the RECORD, I desire that this shall go 

with it. 

'I'he CHAIR~IAN. The Chair hears no objection to the request of 

the gentleman from New York. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. Then I withdraw the amenclment. 

The letter referred to is as follows: 

A LETTER OF MR. W. J. STILLMAN. 

[Ftom the Evening Post.] 

!learn that the diplomatic appropriation bill proposes to re-establish the legation of the United States at Athens. As one of the Americans most conversant with 

the tate of the politics of Greece and the needs of Americans here, as well as with the relations of Greece with America, I beg to prote t, both as an American 

and as a friend of the progress of Greece, a!m.inst the re-enkyofthe United States 

into the diplomatic circles of Athens. Wehave no diplomatic interests here, and a legation is an utterly useless expenditure, from whi<Jh no ~ood can in any case result to us, and much in,jury is likely to result to Greece. The present condition 

of the kingdom is one of open and hardlyle_&"alstruggle between the king and the 

entire mass of lil>eral and the pro~essive ureeks-a. strugJde in which the very e:ristence of Greece as an indepenaent country is at stake, tlie king steadily, and 

without any re~ard to constitutional obligations, endeavoring to override the 

restraints of the charter, and playing absolutist antics whicla no other constitutional sovereign in Europe (if he, indee(l, can be counted such) would dare put in 

practice. 

In this strug$.le the diplomatic body i'l ·invariably, and perhaps (considerinp; 

that it is aecreaited to the king personally, and has little to do With any one but 

him) unavoi(lably, on the side of the king. In all cases, at any rate, the mini<~ters 

have sided with the kin~, and an American minister must do the same or be isolate<l in many ways, and m a manner not at all comfortable. Out of three Ameri- can ministers in G-reece, two have taken this position, and con idered themselves as peculiarly honored by the personal friendship of the soverei~PI , his adulators, and part of the train whose moral induence ha,'l always been agarnst the best part 

of the Greek people in their aspirations for good government. Nothing is so disheartening to them as to see a representative of tlie great Republic to which they look as the exemplar ofthe modern civic existence eiilisted, through its representative here, al!ainst them in their contest with the continual usurpation of their 

11overeign. They do not desire a minister from America here. I speak from 

knowledge of the most aulhoritative O.J?inions in Athens. They cannot hope or ex- pect that he would enroll himself on therrsidein the contest; which has been going on almost ever since the king came, and which mnst finish soon in the defeat of one or the other party to it, for its intensity increases every day, and they do not want to see him among their adversaries, as are all the ministers of the powers at Athens. 

Meanwhile we want a consul, as we do not hap.Pen to have an American representative in Greece; we want a gentleman, for his services will be mainly social, 

and it were better to have some one whose scholarship will do us credit and whose 

opportunities here will by and by return for the good of America. It ought to be a tradition with us to keep a Greek scholar at Athens, as it used to be to keep an artist consul at Rome. , I have not alluded to the other solid reason for not sending a minister to Greece, 

that Greece does not send a minister to Washington, nor will in any case be rep· resented there. This alone should prevent ns from renewing the legation which was originally established when Greece sent a minister to America during the 

Cretan struggle. We have no pretext for re-establishing it, and several for not doing so. 

ATHEXS, GREECE, January 24, 1882. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

For the consul at Liverpool, $6,000. 

W.J. S. 

Mr. CONVERSE. I offer the amendment which I send to the desk. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

At the end of line 86 add the following: "Provided, That hereafter no constllar fees shall be charged by any consul or commercial agent of the United States for services to American seamen or ship- owners, or for any certificate or manifest to vessels, or for merchandise shipped or 

to be shipped in vessels belonwng to citizens of the United States and carrying the flag of the United States. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I make the poiB.t of order on_ that 

amendment. 

The CHAIRlt!AN. The gentleman will state his point of order. 

Mr. CONVERSE. I ask the gentleman to withhold the point of 

order while I make a statement that will not occupy more than three or four minutes. 

Mr. BURROWS, ofMichigan. My point of order is that the amendment is new legislation, and does not retrench expenditnre. 

Mr. CONVERSE. I U.esire to be heard for a momen.t on the point 

of order. · Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I withhold the point of order for 

the present to allow the gentleman from Ohio to explain his amendment. 

Mr. HISCOCK. I will make the further point of order that the 

amendment is not germane to the clause under consideration. 'Mr. CONVERSE. I desire to call the attention of the committee 

(and I have offered this amendment for that purpose) to the subject of increasing the merchant marine. I hope the point of order may 

be withdrawn and a vote had on the amendment. I suppose the1·e 

i-s no difference of opinion on this floor as to the desirability of building up American shipping and restoring the prestige that this Republic once enjoyed by reason ofits merchant marine. In my judgment 

t11at desirable object cannot be obtained by giving large subsidies 
1882 .. ~NGRES~~ONAL REOO~-HOUSE. 

which may build up a smgl,e U:rw t~ the des~ruction of all the small 

craft or weaker lines that may be engaged in the business or on' the same route. But it must , be done _by .Illaking tb,~ ocean carrying 

business profitable. Hpw paJt j;hat .be ,dq:qe t Tp~t can be !lone, or assisted very much by g~tpng riq of the .nv.merous ;l.nd, j:n the aggr~­ gate, gr~at expenses tll&t tax .the shlppi:qg .interest.' As I am told, 

you cannot nov sl;lip merchandise that would be worth $1 from a foreign port without a manifest or certificate signed by an American 

consul or commercial agent of some kind~ for which he would charge one or two and up to five dollars. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. The value of the importa for which a certificate is required m~st exceed 100. 

Il1r. CONVERSE. That is not according to my information; but 

suppose it is 100. There is then a charge on every such shipment 

that is made. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. Which exceeds 100; otherwise not. 

Mr. CONVERSE. I desire to call the attention of the cominittee 

not· only to the subject of consular fees but to the fact that the shipping interest has been to a greatextenttaxedout of existence. You char~e by your laws to-day $4.80 as hospital dues for every sailor 

that lB employed upon an American vessel, that is at the rate of forty 

cents per month for each sailor; a thing unheard of in any country 

other than this. If we desire hospitals at our ports for the cure of 

sick or disabled sailors./ why not appropriate the mon~y from the com- mon treasury f No other industry is thus taxed for the support of its 

sick or disabled employ6s. Why should the ocean commerce be thus 

taxed any more than interstate commerce f Why should you not a.s well tax railroads fQr the support of their sick and maimed f Such 

taxation discourages our citizens from engaging in ocean commerce. Besides that you perinit American ve sels to be taxed as other property in local ports, which I could easily show to be unjust if my time was not limited. And in addition to that you have onerous charges 

-of pilotage in every port in the United States, amounting from $5 to 

$50 h. and those charges are made in all cases, even when the masters 

oft e vessels are themselves better pilots than any you have in your 

ports. And there are other charges besides this pilotage, local tax-

.ation, consular fees, and hospital dues. There is also the payment 

of the sailors three mo:nths' extra wages in foreign ports which has 

been brought to the attention of the House by my 4-iend from New 

York, [Mr. BELMONT,] by the introduction of .a. bill on that subject. 

These are the things that have assisted in dri >ing the American shipping from the ocean. Whenever it shall become profitable for Ameri- -can capital and American skill to sail American vessels they will . appear, and it will not be necessary to buy them 'abroad either. The 

!Ships will be built at home and be manped by American sailors. Only 

begin. the work pf making t)le business profitable by conceding these numerous small demands which in the aggregate amount to large :sums. In addition to the taxes, which I have enumerated, during the 

late war there were still other taxes. Not a single certificate or re- ·ceipt or paper of any sort could be signed without a. stamp upon it, 

.and nearly the wh.ole busine~s was con,ducted by a system of checks 

.and receipts. ' 

[Here the hammer fell. ] 

Mr. DUNNELL. I desire to say a. single word in reply to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. CONVERSE] wno has just taken his seat. 

The CHAIRMAN. A point of order has been made against his .amendment. 

Il1r. DUNNELL. I will not insist upon speaking if the committee 

desires t.ffx~~n with the bill. 

The C MAN. The Chair is inclined· to sustain the point of ·order. 

Mr. ATKINS. The gentleman from Ohio [Mr. CoNVERSE] did not ·discuss the point of order, and I think the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. DUNNELL] might be allowed to reply. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman can proceed by unanimous con- sent. 

Mr. DUNNELL. I will not occupy the attention of the committee 

for more than two or three minutes. I have not taken any part at .all in the discussion of this bill thus far. 

The gentleman from Ohio [Mr. CONVERSE] I think is a little mis- ·taken when he says that these consular fees and these minor charges 

made upon American shipping drove American commerce from the seas. The gentleman ought to remember that when the war broke •out American commerce had the respect of the world and the com- mand of all the seas. It was a source of revenue to us, while now it ·is true we are payin~ upwards of a hundred millions of dollars each .;rear to foreign ves els to carry our own produce abroad. 

While that is true, it is also true that we will not get back that -commerce by a simple repeal of the law providing for consular fees. 

Before the war, when our commerce was what it was, theprideofthe 

nation and the uoast of our Government, those same fees existed 

which exist now; the same restrictions which exist now existed then 

and have existed from the early days of the Republic. 

The old navigation laws that are nowin force were putin force in 

the early days of the Republic. I agree with the gentleman that those 

laws ought to be somewhat modified. I charge upon my friend from 

New York, sitting near me, [Mr. Cox,] that he, more than any other man on this floor, is responsible for the retention of the pilotage system against whiC}4 t4e ~e~t!e~~~ ft~nn Ohio [Mr. CONVERSE] so pertinently spoke. We ought to get rid of the ~ilota.ge system. And I 

agre'e with t4e gentleman from Ob.to, that many of these consular 

fees might ·be 4is.Pensed ·with. Bu-t they are··only a -drop in the 

bucket as compared with the :mighty causes that dre keeping Ameri- can commerce where it is. We must have more radicalle~lation 

before we will get back' our lost commerce. · Mr. COX, of New YorK. Mr. Chairman--

Mr. DUNNELL. Excuse me. The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentlem~n yield f 

Mr. DUNNELL. I do not yield just now. Mr. COX, of New York. The gentleman attacked me. Mr. DUNNELL. The gentleman from New York has spoken a number of times here, and I have spoken but this once. Il1r. COX, of New York. But not on that subject. ~1r. DUNNELL. So fertile is that gentleman in resources that he 

will easily get a chance to reply to me without me yielding to him. 

Mr. COX, of New York. I do not want to reply to the gentleman. 

I want to go on with the business'of the committee. [Laughter.] 

Mr. DUNNELL. Oh! 

Mr. COX, ofl'Yew York. The gentleman is speakin~ by my sufferance, for a point of order would cut him off. Yet he attacks me and 

does not give me a chance to reply. 

Mr. DUNNELL. I have said here and elsewhere that not only the 

Democratic party whichhadpowerhereforsix years, buttheRepnblican party which has had power here for so many years since the 

war, each of these two great parties is chargeable with dereliction of 

duty in that they have done so little for the restoration of American commerce. And we on this side of the Hou e, slightly in power now, 

if we hope to retain our power I trust will havo the brains and the 

bravery to meet this quel5tion of a depressed American commerce. [Here the hammer fell.] 

The CHAIRMAN. A point of order has been made against the _amendment of the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. CoNVERSE,] and the 

Chair sustains the point of order. 

The Clerk read the following: 

Class 2. At $3,500 per annum . CHINA. 

Foochow, Hankow, Canton, Amoy, Tien-Tsin, Chin-Kiang, Ningpo. 

PERU. 

Callao. UNITED STATES OF COLOMBIA.. 

Panama and Colon, {AspinwalL) Cla.ss 3. At $3,000 per annum. 

GREAT BRITAIN • 

Manchester, Gl38gow, Bradford, Demer&ra, Belfast. 

Mr. DUNNELL. I move to amend by inserting the word "Leith" 

after the word "Bradford.'1 · 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I make the point of order against 

that amendment that it changes existing law and increases expenditures. 

Il1r. DUNNELL. The point of the gentleman is not well made. 

The amendment does not change existing law. There is no law in 

existence which the amendment proposes to change . Mr. ATKINS. It makes a new law. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I withdraw the point of order. 

Mr. COX, of New York. I renew it on the gentleman, on account 

of his courtesy. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is inclined to sustain the point of 

order. 

Mr. HISCOCK. Before the Chair rules upon the point of order I 

desire to say a word. I do not believe that the amendment changes 

existing law at all; it only proposes to adjust salaries. The le~islation in this bill upon this subject is simply to provide for carrymg on our foreign and commercial intercourse. These offices are not 

salaried offices, but are provided for year by year. 

!l1r. COX, of New York. I withdraw tho point of order. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I renew it. After the remarks of 

the gentleman from New York, l~1r. HiscocK,] I believe that the 

amendment is not in order. Although there is no law establishing 

these offices, yet by putting this amertdment in the bill you will 

make a. new law. I think, therefore, it. is a change of law and an increase of expenditures. . Mr. BLOUNT. I do not think the point of order is well taken, 

and I trust the Chair has not definitely made up his mind upon it. 

The consular and diplomatic offices of this Government rest on a. different basis from any other offices. They do not rest upon the 

authority of statute law. The President of the United States can double the number of our.consuls or our diplomates, in virtue of the 

authority inherent in the Executive under the Constitution. The 

only hinderance in respect to the e appointments is as to the money 

to compensate the officers. From the beginning of the Government 

down we have simply provided money for this service. In the beginning the appropriation was a gross sum, with no designation at 

all by Congre s of the officers to be appointed, that matter lying entirely with the President. There has been for several years past a simple provision of law for salaries, and no more. There is no legislation to be found presuming to create these offices at all. My friend 

from Tennessee [Mr. ATKINSl a-sks me where are the appropriation bills f The appropriation bills do not create offices at all; they sim-

:pl! :provid~ money for the payment of the office~s at these difterent 
1624 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. MARcH 4, 

places. The President of the United States ~y fail to make the 

appointments provided for by this bill, or he may double them. This 

has been regarded as a part of his constitutional authority from the 

beginning of the Government down. 

Mr. ROBESON. As it will probably bke much longer to discuss 

this point of order than to decide the question presented by the 

amendment, I ask my friend from Michigan to withdraw the point. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I withdraw it, because I think we can in that way get through with the question more quickly. 

Mr. ATKINS. I renew the point. I take the ground, Mr. Chairman, that the amendment makes a new provision of law. This appropriation bill when enacted is a law; it is a guide to the President 

and binding upon him. The similar appropriation act now on the 

statute-book is binding upon the President; he has confermed to it; 

he has not varied from it in appointing ministers and consuls to foreign countries. I renew the point of order because. it is just as well 

that this question should be ruled upon here and now. It has been 

ruled upon time and a~in by dift'erent occupants of the chair. 

The CH.A.IRMA.N. Tne Chair has no doubt that this amendment 

proposes to make a new provision of law, and thereby to change ex- isting law. Therefore the Chair holds the point of order well taken. 

Mr. DUNNELL. I appeal from that decision of the Chair. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I understand the Chair to have 

ruled in ignorance of the fact that by existing law there is a consul 

at Leith, as appea~·s by the official register of the State Department, 

which I hold in my hand. This consulate was appropriated for in 

the last bill; it now exists; and this bill changes existing law, if 

there be any law on the subject. 

Mr. HASKELL. I desire to remind the Chair of an important 

point which ought to influence him in deciding a point of this sort. 

The rule states specifically that an amendment to be ruled out of 

order must change existing law. When a point of order is ma.de 

against a proposed amendment it becomes the duty Gf the person 

making the point to prove that the amendment does propose a change 

of existing law. He must produce the law; he must show the statute 

which the amendment, if adopted, will change. He must show that 

if adopted the amendment robs some officer of a discretion or changes some other existing law. Now in this case not only is it contended on this floor that there is no change of existing law, no statute 

a:fiected by the amendment, but it is asserted that by law the office now exists; and I insist that before a final decision be made some authority should be produced showing hQw the amendment changes 

existing law. 

.Mr. HOOKER. I rise to a point of order. I understand that the 

Chair has ruled three several times on this point. I hope the Committee of the Whole will not abide by the decision of the Chair. 

:Mr. HASKELL. .A.n appeal has been taken. 

The CH.A.IRM.A.N. The Chair wishes.. to state that in the ruling 

just made it was assumed that the amendment offered by the gentle- man from Minnesota was an addition to the existing law. Upon that 

assumption the ruling was based. .A.s the Chair understands, the 

burden of proof is upon the party making a point of order to show 

that it is well fotmded. If the statement made by the gentleman 

from New York [Mr. HEWI'IT] is correct-if this office does already 

exist-then the a~umption on which the Chair rested his ruling is 

incorrect, and he would revise his ruling. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. The Chair will allow me to say that 

in line 142 of this bill Leith appears as a consulate to be a:ppropriated for. The effect of the proposed amendment is simply to rncrease the salary. 

The CHAIRM.A.N. .A.s the Chair understands, the point of order is 

withdrawn ; and the question is upon the amendment offered by the 

gentleman from Minnesota, [Mr. DUNNELL.] 

The amendment was not agreed to; there bein~-ayes 36, noes !;3. 

Mr. DUNNELL. !move toinserttheword "Leith" aftertheword 

"Sheffield," in line 126; and! desire to make a single remark on the 

amendment. The point of order will not of course be made. The 

consul now at Leith receives the sum of 2,000. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I desire to make the point of order on this amendment. 

The CH.A.IRMAN. State it. 

Mr. HOLMAN. MypointisthatthischangesexistingL'tw. Leeds 

is enumerated among the consuls at a salary of $2,000. 

Mr. DUNNELL. My amendment is Leith, and not Leeds. 

Mr. HOLMAN. Ah! I withdraw my point of order. 

Mr. ATKINS. Does the gentleman propose to transpose Leith from 

line 142 to line 126; is that his purpose 7 

Mr. DUNNELL. It is. 

Mr. ATKINS. Then whynot st..1>te it sowemayknowwhatweare 

voting on Y · 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I reserve the point of order. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. That is an increase of 1,000. 

Mr. DUNNELL. I desire to say, Mr. Chairman, that the receipt of fees at Leith indicates an increase, a very decided increase in the 

business done at that port. Leith is a suburb of Edinburgh, and the 

eonsul is compelled to reside in the larger city, where residence is 

expensive. We have given to the consul at Demarara, where less 

business is done than at Leith, 3,000. We are now proposing to givo 

to the consul at Birmingham and other places, in lines 126 a.nd 127, 

where less business is done than at Leith, $2,500. I am therefore 

willing to compromise and make the amendment in the line of $'2,500 

salaries. 

The fees for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1&ro, were $1,194.08. 

The fees for the next fiscal year were 1, 656.23,almost enough to pay the 

entire salary of the consul at Leith; and I insist this, my sole amendment to this bill, is offered in the utmost good faith, and in the belief 

it is an a-ct of justice to the consul as well as to ·'the honor of the 

country, and to the benefit of its commerc~ [Cries of "Vote f "] 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. The gentleman from Minnesota has 

correctly stated the amount of fees collected by the consul at Leith. 

He compared him with the consul at Birmingham. At Birmingham 

last year the fees colleeted amounted to $5,602. 

Mr. DUNNELL. I had not the statistics before me at the time, 

and I said "or other places in that list." I will modify my statement, as I intended to do it at the time, I will say respectfully to 

the gentleman from New York. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I will say that I do not think in all 

the consulates receiving 2,500 a year any one is as low, or nearly a.s . low, as the consulate at Leith. 

The amendment wa.s rejected. 

The Clerk rea.d as follows : 

TURKISH DOMINlONB. 

Smyrna. 

Mr. COX, ofNew York. I move to a.ddafter ''Smyrna" tlteword 

''Jerusalem;" and I ask to have read a letter from the consul at 

that city. I will say to the Honse and the country I now lay this 

letter before them because I did not have it while our sub-committee wa-s acting on this matter, otherwise I think I should have asked 

them in deference to the work ·done at that consulate it might be 

placed at $500 greater than at present. ThiB gentleman is from Iowa, 

and gentlemen from that State will know Dim. His statement is 

entitled to be sprea.d upon the reoord. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Ul>~TED STATES CONSULATE FOR p .ALEBTNE, 

JeruBalem, November 5, 1881. 

DRAB Sm: I have, under date November 5, sent dispatch No. 119, with inclo- sure, to the State Department, with request that it be laid before the Committee on .Appropriations. The inclosure is a statement of the salaries and expenses of 

the severalcousulates at Jerusalem. The dispatch is a plea. for the United States 

consulate, with a view to its elevation of grade and improvement of its financial 

condition. 

The United States consulate has the lowest saL'UJ' of the nine consulates here, 

while its real importance and the amount oflaborreqnired and the responsibility sustained are more than of any consulate. 

There are about one hnndred and seventy resident .American citizens, who are under the government and protection of the consulate, and nearly or quite five 

hundred American travelers annually, every one of whom either personally or by his dragoJruUl, has demands upon the time and labors of the consul. 

If yon can consistently do anything to secure the proper presentation of this 

subject to the Committee on .Appropriations, it will be esteemed a. favor, and I 

shall be greatly your debtor. 

I remain, sir, yours, respectfully, J. G. WILSON. 

Hon. S. S. Cox. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michi~an. That is provided for in this bill at 

1,500, and the proposition IS to increase it to $2,500. 

Mr. COX, of New York. No; to make it $2,000. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. The fees at that place during the 

last fiscal year were 138. 

Mr. COX, of New York. I withdraw it here, and will renew it 

under 2,000 consulates. 

The Clerk read a-s follows : 

Portugal-Lisbon. 

1\Ir. BURROWS, of Michigan. I am instructed by the committee 

to move to strike those words out. At present we have a charg6 

d'affaires at 5,000 and a consul at 2,000. We have by this bill made 

the minister resident. at that port consul-general. We therefore 

propose to strike out these words. 

The CH.A.IRMAN. The question is on the amendment of the gentleman from Michigan. 

Mr. NEAL. Before that motion is put, I desire to offer the followina- as an addition to the clause as it now stands. 

The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman propose it as an amendment to perfect the text 7 

Mr. NEAL. Yes, sir. 

The CH.A.IRMAN. The Clerk will report the amendment. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

.After the word '' Lisbon" add, ''who shall also act as secretary of legation." 

1\Ir. NEAL. 1\Ir. Chairman, I should be very gla.d if the committee 

would listen to me for a moment while I give my reasons for offering 

this amendment .. 

The present minister resident, or charge d'affairs, at Lisbon is Mr. 

Benjamin Moran, who was for twenty-five years secretary of legation, and also minister, to the court of Great Britain. He is, as I 

state from personal knowledge, one of the most accomplished diplomates in tb,e service of the United States at this time. He has g1ven 

his life to the service. He is, as the gentleman from New York [Mr. 

HEWITI) perhaps will remember, and doubtless other gentlemen also, a confirmed invalid, not able to discharge the duties of consul if they 

shall he impo ed upon him. Now, I propose the consul shall be re- tained, and the duties of secretary of legation shall be added to thl) 

duties already discharged by that gentleman. It would be, in m~ 
I· 

. 

1882. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 

judgment, doing an act of gross injustice, and is an unwise economy, 

to strike at this officer and compel the minister to discharge the duties 

of both positions. 

Mr. Chairman, I had once the honor to be consul of the United 

States at Lisbon, and therefore I speak from personal knowledge when 

I say the court of Lisbon is one of the most ceremonious in the whole 

of Europe, and involves the necessity of maintaining there a consul 

and minister resident to keep up the di~ty that is attached neces- sarily to these officers as represented by 1oreign nations at that place. 

I would myself rather go back and strike out the provision for minister altogether, rather than degrade him to the rank of an ordinary 

consul, and expect him to perform the duties of his office in that 

capital. I trust the amendment which I have suggested will be 

a{]. opted. 

Now, sir, a word further in connection with this matter. The con- sulate at Lisbon paid, at the time that I was familiar with its duties, 

something like three hundred dollars, and the receipts now are, I 

understand, about one thousand dollars in round numbers. There 

is not another consul in the whole government of Portu~al. We have 

commercial agencies at other points. If you strike this out, as proposed in this bill, what will be the result f Why, when the minister 

is absent for two months in the year, as he has the right to be, under 

the orders of the State Department, the entire business will be left 

under the control of commercial agents, who are natives of that coun- try or, to a certain extent, subjects of Great Britain. Our commer- cial agent there is a Dane, who represents the Danish Government 

at that port. Now, you strike this out, and you impose unnecessary 

and unheard of labors upon the minister resident, a man who ought 

not to be burdened with them, and at the same time, when he is absent, as I have shown, you put the entire control of the affairs of this 

country in the hands of foreigners; in the hands of men who have no interest whatever in the welfare of the Government or people of 

the United States. 

Mr. ROBESON. Mr. Chairman, it is proper that I should say here 

that this committee directs none of its measures toward individual men. If the gentleman who is now representin~ us at Lisbon is un- fortunately unable to discharge the ordinary duties of his office I 

cannot help it. I will be pardoned also for saying, in a word, that 

this change is not anomalous or unusual in the history of the world. 

I find that it is customary among the nations of the earth to unite 

these consular duties with those of their higher diplomatic officers 

without degradation to diplomacy while greatly adding to the efficiency of the consular service. I find that Austria has a representative at Buenos Ayres who is minister resident and consul-general. 

Italy maintains a minister resident and consul-general at Morocco 

and charge d'affaires and consul-general at Mexico, Guatemala, Chili, 

Peru, and Uruguay. I find that Great Britain has four envoys extraordinary who ar~ also consuls-general in China, Japan, Persia, and 

Morocco, and seven ministers resident who are also consuls-general 

at Lima, Bogota, Quito1 Uruguay, San Diego, Central America, and 

Hayti, the last being charge d'affaires for the Dominican Republic, 

and one commissioner and consul-general to the Sandwich Islands. 

I find that even in those countries that put the highest appreciation 

upon their diplomatic service they have not thought it wa,s degraded 

by association with consular duties. 

The question being taken on Mr. NEAL's amendment to the amendment, it was not agreed to. 

The question being next taken on the amendment of Mr. BURROws, 

of Michigan, it was agreed to. 

Mr. HATCH. I move that the committee rise. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. Oh, no! there is nothing left but 

the formal part of the bill. 

Mr. HATCH. Very well; I withdraw the motion. 

The Clerk read the following under "cla-ss 5; at $2,000 per an- num." SWITZERLAND. 

:Basle, Zurich. 

llr. NEAL. I offer the amendment which I send to the desk. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

In line 162, after the word "Zurich," insert the words "St. Galle." 

Mr. NEAL. I wish to call the attention of the Committee on Appropriations, which seems to have been to an extraordinary degree 

economical in the preparation of this bill, to the extraordinary fact 

that while at Basle there are fees to the amount of 4,103, and at 

Zurich to the amount of $4,993, there are at St. Galle fees to the 

amount of $4,582. The committee propose to pay the consuls at 

Basle and Zurich $2,000 each, while the consul at St. Galle is permitted to collect and put into his own pocket the sum of $4,582. I 

ask them upon what principle they have made that distinction Y I ask 

them why St. Galle is so much more important a position than Ba-sle or Zurich Y. If economy is to rule, we should make these con.Suls doing a like amount of business similar as to the salaries they receive. 

Mr. BURROWSJ of Michi~an. What does the gentleman from 

Ohio mean by saymg that thiS consul puts that amount into his own 

pocket' 

Mr. NEAL. According to the report of the Fifth Auditor, here- ~eives all the fees he collects. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. Let us vote. 

Mr. NEAL. I did not hear the gentleman. Does he say it is notso' 

The question being taken on Mr. NEAL's amendment, there were- ayes 10, noes 45. 

So (further count not being called for) the amendment was not. agreed to. 

The Clerk read, under " class 5," the following : 

TURKISH DOMINIO~S. 

:Beirut. 

Mr. COX, of New York. I offer the following amendment: 

After the word ":Beirut" ins~ the word "Jerusalem." 

This amendment will add $500 io the salary of the consul at Jerusalem; that is all. 

The question being taken on the amendment, the Chairman stated. that in the opinion of the Chair the "noes" had it. 

Mr. COX, ofNew York. I do not call for a division. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I call for a division. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. That amendment increases the salary from 81,500 to $2,000. 

Mr. COX, of New York. I want to say one word, as the gentle- man from Indiana has called for a division. The population has. 

increased thereSeveral MEMBERS. We will vote for it. 

Mr. COX, of New York. All right; I can give reasons for it. 

The question being taken on the amendment, there were-ayes. 

37, noes 22. 

So (further count not bein~ called for) the amendment was adopted. 

The Clerk read the followmg under" class 6, at 1,500 per annum:'" 

GREAT BRITA.n<. 

Bristol; Newcastle; .A:nckland; Gibraltar; Cape Town ; Saint Helena; Charlottetown, (Prince Ed ward Island;) Port Stanley; Clifton; Pictou; Winnepeg;. 

Mah6; Kingston, (Canada;) Prescott; PortSarnia; Quebec; SaintJohn's, (Canada;) :Ba.rba.does; :Bermuda; Fort Erie; Goderich, (Canada. West~ Windsor,. (Canada \Vest;) Southampton; Ottawa.; Ceylon. 

· Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I offer the following amendment : 

At the end of line 183 insert ''Antigua.." 

This is recommended by the State Department. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

Mr. UPSON. I move that the committee rise. 

Mr. HISCOCK. Iappealtothegentleman towithholdthatmotion. Let us read the bill through. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. It will take only a few moments 

to complete it. 

Mr. UPSON. I withdraw the motion. 

The Clerk read the following under "class 6:" 

TURKISH DOlfiNIONS. 

Jerusalem. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I move that those two lines be 

stricken out, this consulship having been provided :for by the amendment of the gentleman from New York, [.Mr. Cox.] 

The motion to strike out the clause was agreed to. 

The Clerk read the following: 

For salaries and expenses of the United States and Spanish claims commission, 

namely: For commissioner, $3,000; ·for counsel, $3,000; for secretary, $900; for· messenger, $300 ; f01: translation, stationery, and other eontingent expenses, $750; making, in all, the sum of $7,950. 

Mr. SPRINGER. I want to ask the Conrmittee on Appropriations. 

when we are to get done with the expenses of this commission Y 

Mr. COX, of New York. This is paid for by Spain but has to be 

appropriated for by us. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. And the work will be completed this year. 

Mr. COX, of New York. It does not cost us anything. 

The Clerk read the following paragraph: 

For relief and protection of American seaman in foreign countries, $GO,OOO, or- so much thereof as may be necessary. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I offertheamendment which I send· to the desk. 

The Clerk read as follows : 

At the end of line 3ll add the followin~ : "And the consent of the United States 1shereby given to the imposition by any- State in the port.a whereof emigrant passengem are or may be landed, of a. tax: not exceeding $1 for each em.i~t so landed, and the money thus collected may be retained by the State i.mposmg such tax, and shall be applied solely to defray the expenses mcurred by the said State, under the laws thereof, for the care, relief,. or support of emigrants landed in the ports thereof." 

Mr. ATKINS. That is right. 

Mr. HE .. WITT, of New York. .Mr. Chairman, if no objection is: 

made to the amendment, I do not desire to speak in support of it. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I ask that the amendment may be 

again read. We could not hear it. 

Mr. McCOOK. Before the amendme:B.t is read a~ain I hope the 

committee will be in order, as it is an amendment of very great importance. 

The CHAIR.l\IAN. It will not be read until t.he committee come· to order. 

The amendment was again read. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I believe th~t amendment is subject to a point of 
1626 OONGRESSIO:N"AL RECORP~HOUSE. ' 

«>rder, It m~y be german~ .to. t.ll,e subject-matter of the bjp, but it 

has nothing to do with the question of expenditure. It is independ- ~nt legislation upon an, appropriation b1.1-l, 

Mr. HORR. I hope the gentleman from Indiana will with~w 

·the point of order. This same subject has been before .the Com,mit- ·tee on Commerce, and a bill has been reported unanimously to the 

House covering this same ide11:, and it is right. The gentleman from 

New York is simply in the line of humanity in offering this amendment, and I hope from this side of the House and from the other .no ·objection will be made to it. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I will be very glad if the gentleman from Mich-

!Gan [:Mr. HORR] will show how it comports with the duty of the 

united States to impose a tax on immigrants coming tQ our shores 

who are virtually invit-ed to come here. :Mr. COX, of New York . . I will answer my friend from Indiana by 

saying that efforts have been made in this House for the last six or .eight years, to pa some law by which this enormous immigration 

which comes to this country, half' a million a year, shall be cared 

:£or. It has been done heretofore by New York State. It has heen 

-exclusively done by its appropriation of its own money. Such an .appropriation is an unfair tax on a State which secures but a small 

'Share of the immigration. It will be borne no more. A small sum for this year, and that will end it. Chaos will come again, and Castle 

Garden and its great uses will be lost. The shark will agarin, as thirty 

years ago, prey on the defenseless immigrant. 

The Supreme Court of the United States deeided that as the capitation tax, or head money, fell under the head of commerce, the 

taxation imposed by the State of New York for this purpose wa un- constitutional and void. It should be a Federal exaction or not at all. 

Therefore, in order to maintain Castle Garden a.s the entrepot and 

guardian of the immigrant, in order to protect the poor, destitute 

.and sick who come to this country from abroad, and in order to re- -turn the paupers and criminals sent us, in order to prevent diseases 

:from being scattered over the whole country 'th their contagion, to 

-provide that which would otherwise be uncared for, we are com- J>elled to come to Congre s and seek :relief. Give us, if not this 

:measure, some system which will enable us to be self-protective, 

just and kind to these immigrants. 

There is no more simple or humane plan than that of my colleague, 

[Mr. HEWITT.] I confess that I have no hope of a more elaborate 

plan. On this occasion we may signaliz~ our sense of the duty we !()We to the great influx of the brawn and brain which comes to us by adoption of his amendment. I think there will be no more com- plaints, just or unjust, which emanate from the New York Legislature as to the dereliction of our New York Congressmen. 

I have seen such unreasonable complaints. As most ofthe efforts 

:have been made by myself, fruitlessly thus far, but faithfully always, 

I desire, Mr. Chairman, to repel the slanders of a New York mem- ber of the Legislature, which I see reported in the Herald. This 

.member of the Legislature is a Mr. Benedict. He has been greatly 

misinformed. To show his injustice to the delegation here, let me ·quote what he said in his carefully prepared remark<S: 

"It is not the great question of national immigration, but whether the State of 

New York shall continue to expend from her treasury $200,000 or more yearly to llllaintain a. vast steamship and railroad office for the benefit of foreign companies and corpor~tions, and mainly for o~er States, aud to repeive as charity patil)nt-s !the sick:, lame, bliud, and insane alien paupers who are shipJ?ed with f:!ystematic :regularity' and landed on our shores by the agents of steamship and ~ilroad com- panies to become a public charge on the State treasury or a b nrden on the several 

"COunties of the State." Mr. Benedict argued that a refusal by the Legislature to appropriate further moneys would compel Congress t~ take action, the expenses incident to immigration being clearly a pro;per charge on the whole country. He 

>Charged that the commissioners of immigration had failed to do their duty in urging Congressional action because it would couflict with their own interests, their ten- '0.1'6 of office being at stake. He charged a like remis ness on the part of New 

York's Senators and Representatives in Congress. 

In vindication of our labors here let me say, Mr. Chairman, tlJat it 

is gros ly untrue that "the commissioners of emigration failed to do 

their duty in urging Congre ional action, because it would conflict 

with their own interests, their tenure of office being at stake." As 

it seems to we, Mr. Chairman, the Representatives from this State, 

and the commissioners of emigration have done all that lay in their 

power to obtain national legislation. The failure is attributable in 

part to adverse action by gentlemen from: other States, who would 

not consider the gravity of the questions and the fairness of the 

requests of New York. l\Iy :report on this head is a carefully digested 

statement of the que tion, in all the le~gth and breadth of its emer- gencies and needs. 

To show the groundlessne s of this assemblyman's eharge let me refer to the history of the legislation here proposed. That hi tory 

is a.s follows: the Legislature of New York, on the 29th of April, 

1876, adopted a resolution directing the commissioners to bring to 

the notice of Congress the condition of the immigration laws arising 

out of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States declaring them unconstitutional. After consultation and correspondence 

with the boards of charities of other States a bill wa-s agreed on and 

intJ:oduced by myself in the House of Representatives on July 7, 1 76, 

(H. R. 3853.) On my motion, the memorial of the board was on the same day received and printed in the CONGRESSIO:'SAL RECORD. A 

similar bill was on same date introduced in the Senate by enator Conkling. The bill introduced by me was referred to the Committee on Commerce, and Commissioner QuiJ;tard, Lynch, aud Mauger 

appear~d before the committee and askedits pa~age. The bill was reporled with am,en~e~ts on Jal\uarY 1~, 1871, and .recommitted. 

On the 13th of December, 1878, arguments in its fayor were subpntted by mysel,f and the late Hon. ClarksQn N. Potter. Mr. Jack- ~on, the intellig~~t secr~tary of the board, was present at the hear- ~g, giving 118 aid and counsel out of his abundant experience. I 

urged, as earnestly fL8 possible, speedy i'Ction P:P. the measure. This 

bill was, -p.owever, n.Qt ;pa.ssep., but from no fanl~ ~ere or at Castle G~de,n. A second bill was prepared by the C8IDIDlSSloners, and with th~ memorial of the bo&I:d was prese:p.ted by me on the 2d day of December, 1879, and referred to the Committe~ on Foreign Affairs, of 

which I was chairman. The l,>ill was promptly reported back to the 

HollSe (December 17) with a favorable report. On February24, 1880, 

Mr. John E. Develin, counsel to the board, came here to urge the 

pa-ssage of the bill. The bill was consi(lered April 22, 1880. It was a night session, the only hearing I could get. I solicited my colleagues 

of both parties to aid me; they responded. Morton presented the case in a carefully prepared speech ; the RECORD will show it. 

Other members, including myself, urged wi tb all the earnestness we could command the passage of the bill, showip.g our helplessness 

under the de<!ision of the United States Supreme Court. Our arguments wore not answered. Sectional prejudice west and south was aroused, and we failed. The bill introduced was elaborate in its provisions and just to all the States. It was entitled a bill ''to regulate 

immigration." It was submitted to and approved bythe entireNew 

York delegation in the Forty-fifth Congress. It had the approval of 

the immigration commiBsjoners. 

I believe, sir, that the present mode suggested by my colleague, 

[Mr. HEWITT,] even if obnoxious to the point of order, if not the best 

possible, will answer equitably and humanely. I hope it will be presented in some shape and soon, as the matter is urgent and the object 

great. 

Mr. VAN VOORHIS. I desire to move an amendment to the amendment. 

:Mr. HORR. Is the point of order withdrawn t 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair understands that the point of order 

made by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HOLMAN] is still pending. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. Then let the point of order be 

decided. 

Mr. McCOOK. Is the Chair ~oin~.to decide the point of order now1 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will not decide it now, if any gentleman desires to be heard upon it. 

Mr. McCOOK. I desire to be heard a mi.nute or two, but not especially upon the point of order. I desire to say a few words in regard 

to what I believe to be the n,ecessity and the propriety for the immediate passage of just such an amendment as this. 

Mr. VAN VOORHIS. Let my amendment be read, and the gen- tleman can speak to the whole of it. 

Mr. McCOOK. ThegentlemanfromNewYork, my colleague, [Mr. 

Cox,] ha.s not exaggeratedin the slightest degree the facts that call 

for my col~eague'sLMr. HEWITT's] amendment. If gentlemen here 

had eve;r seen or obtained any knowledge whatever of the inJamous 

system which prevailed in the city of New York prior to the one which of late years has been in operation there, a system by which 

immigrants arriving there unfamiliar with our customs, a large 

majority of them unable to speak our language, became the prey of 

every shark and sharper in that great city, and then could see the manner in which they are now cared for and sent from that city all 

over the great West, (for not 1 per cent. of them stay in the city of 

New York,) their money and effects cared for, their persons properly 

looked after, I am .sure there would be no opposition to this ameD(lment. And there certainly should not be any oppo ition to this 

amendment, when I state, as my colleague has stated, that the whole 

burden and expense of caring for the 500,000 immigrants that annu- ally land in the port of New York will be thrown solely upon that 

State if it is not adopted. Yet New York does Rot appeal to the Congress of the United States for charity. Whenever the people of any 

section of this country have suffered from any great disaster, the 

first to whom appeals are made for assistance are the merchants and 

capitalists and people of New York, and never has there been such an appeal made to the people of that city which has not been fully 

and most generously met. It is not necessary for me now to refer to 

the many instances of that kind. 

We come here now simply asking for justice. Weak that the 

burden of caring for the 500,000 or 600,000 immigrants that yearly 

land at that port shall not be thrown on the State of New York 

alone. I do not believe that 5 per cent. of all the immigrants that 

land at the port of New York remain in that State. And I simply 

repeat myself when I say that it is for the benefit of the great and 

~owing States of the West that we of New York ask this action by 

congress; they will become citizens of those States, who will re- ceive the benefit of the amendment. 

Mr. HOUSE. I think it is apparent that we cannot get through 

with this bill this evening. 

:Mr. VAN VOORHIS. Let my amendment be read. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. We can complete this bill in a short 

time. 

Mr. HOUSE. It is no'V five o'clock. 

Mr. DUNNELL. Let the amendment of the gentleman from New 

York [Mr. HEWITT] be read again. 

' 
.. 

1882. CONGRESSIONAL ·RECORD-HOUSE. 1627 

Mr. ATKINS. I ask the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. BURROWS] 

to let the committee rise. 

Mr.· BURROWS, of Michigan. I think we can get through with 

this bill to-day. 

Mr. ATKINS. Yon cannot complete it to-night. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I move that the committee now r~e. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. Let us dispose of the point of order. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I will not (jbject to that. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York [Mr. HEWITr] 

,gubmits an amendment to the bill, upon which the gentleman from 

Indiana [Mr. HOLMAN] makes the point of order that it is not ger- mane to the snbject-matterofthe bill and does not upon its face reduce 

-existing expenditures. 

Mr. HOLMAN. And that it is independent legislation. 

The CHAIRMAN. And that it is independent legislation. The 

Chair recognizes the importance of the amendment. The committee 

have heard the remarks of gentlemen in regard to it, and the Chair 

needs to add nothing to what has been said. The Chair prefers that 

the point of order raised by the gentleman from Indiana shall be 

<l.ecided by the committee, and will therefore submit to the committee the question whether the point of order so raised shall be sus- tained or not. 

The question being taken on sustaining the point of order, there were-a~es 66, noes 42. 

:Mr. COXJ of New York. I call for tellers upon this question. 

Mr. MILLS. Imovethatthecommitteerise. [Cries of" Oh, no I"] 

Mr. ATKINS. Gentlemen on the other side will not make anything by refusing to allow the committee to rise. 

Mr. BURROWS, ofMichigan. Idonot "refuse" anything; butas 

business men we can just as well as not finish this bill in fifteen minutes. We do not ask that a vote be taken to-night on the passage 

oQf the bill, but simply that we may get it out of committee and order 

tlle previous question. 

The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the motion of the gentleman 

from Texas, [Mr. MILLs,] that the committee rise. 

Mr. ROBESON. We can finish thE> bill in five minutes. 

The question being taken on the motion of Mr.l\!ILLs, there were- ayes 49, noes 62. 

Mr. COBB. No quorum. 

The Clerk wa proceeding to read the next paragraph of the bill, 

when 

Mr. COBB said: Mr. Chairman, I insist that no quorum has voted. 

[Cries of "Too late I"] 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. A quorum is not necessary on the 

motion that the committee rise. 

Mr. COX, of New York. I would like to know what has become 

of my call for tellers on deciding the point of order. If gentlemen 

will agree to give us a vote in Honse, I will be content. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. There will be no objection. 

:Mr. BLOUNT. I object. 

1\fr. VAN VOORIDS. I object, unless my amendment can be read 

.and a vote taken on it. 

Mr. COBB. I want to make a parliamentary inquiry. When a vote is taken in committee, and the question of a quorum is raised, 

is it not necessary that the Chair shall order tellers, if no quorum has 

voted! 

The CHAIRMAN. It is not neeessary that a quorum should vote 

'<>n a motion that the committee rise. 

Mr. COBB. I understand that it is not necessary, unless the point .as to the ab ence of a quorum is made; but when it is made, I submit it then becomes the duty of the committee to decide the question 

by tellers. 

The CHAIRMAN. Not upon a motion that the committee rise. 

Mr. COBB. Well, I move that the committee now rise. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair desires to state that before the question was put on the motion of the gentleman from Texas, [Mr. 

MILLs,] the gentleman from New York [1\fr. Cox] had demanded 

tellers. Does the gentleman withdraw that demand¥ 

1\!r. COX, of New York. In this matter I would like to defer to 

my colleague, [l\Ir. HEWITr,] who introduced the amendment. 

Mr. HE"WITT, of New York. I would like to have tellers, but I 

(!Onfess frankly that I suppose the proposition is in truth subject to 

the point of order, and if gentlemen will make it I am not disposed 

to take up the time of the committee upon the question, but will 

try to bJtA<t,\t up in some other form hereafter. 

TheC MAN. Thegentlemanfromlndiana [Mr. COBB] moves that the committee rise. 

The question being taken, the motion wa declared not agreed to. 

Mr. COBB. I call for tellers. 

Tellers were not ordered. 

So the committee refused to rise. 

The Clerk resumed and concluded the reading of the bill. 

1\fr. BURROWS, of 1\Iichigan. I move that the committee rise 

and report the bill with the amendments to the House. 

The motion was agreed to. 

The committee accordingly rose; and the Speaker having re umed 

the chair, 1\Ir. RICE, of Massachusetts, reported that the Committee 

of the Whole House on the state of the Union, having had under 

consideration the bill (H. R. No. 3830) making appropriations for 

the consular and diplomatic service of the Government for the fiscal 

year ending June 30, 1883, and for other purposes, had directed him 

to report back the same with sundry amendments. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I demand the previous question on the bill and amend):nents. 

The previous question was ordered. 

1\Ir. BURROWS, of Michigan, moved to reconsider the vote by 

which the previous question was ordered; and also moved that the 

motion to reconsider be laid on the table. 

The latt-er motion was agreed to. 

The SPEAKER. If no separate vote be demanded, the question 

will be taken in gross upon the several amendments reported from 

the Committee of the Whole.· There was no objection. 

The amendments reported from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union were agreed to. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan, moved to reconsider the vote by 

which the amendments were agreed to; and also moved that the 

motion to reconsider be laid on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

The bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and read a third 

time, and was accordin~ly read the third time. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Mxchigan. I call for the previous question on the passage of the bill. · The previous question was ordered. . 1\fr. BURROWS, of Michigan, moved to reconsider the vote by 

which the previous question was o.rdered; and also moved that the 

motion to reconsider be laid on the table. 

The latter motion was a~eed to. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I now mo\e that the House adjourn. 

Mr. HISCOCK. Is it understood 'that the first business on next 

Monday will be the vote upon the passage of this bill 7 

The SPEAKER. That is undoubtedly the practice and the rule. 

PRIVATE CLAIMS. 

Mr. HOUSE, by unanimous consent, reported back with amendments, from tbe Committee on Civil Service Reform, the bill (H. R. 

No. 4467) fol' the judicial ascertainment of the facts in cases of private claims, and for other purposes i which was placed on the House 

Calendar, and ordered to be printed. with the amendments. 

LEWIS JOHNSON & CO. 

Mr. TUCKER1 by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. No. 

4790) for the relief of Lewis Johnson & Co.; which was read a first 

and second time, referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and 

ordered to be printed . . 

E.."'ffiOLLED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTION. 

Mr. ALDRICH, from the Committee on Enrolled Bills1 reported 

that they had examined and found truly enrolled a bill and joint 

resolution of the following titles; when the Speaker signed the same: . An act (H. R. No. 2192) to establish a port of delivery at Denver,. 

in the State of Colorade ; and · Joint resolution (H. R. No. 104) authorizing the printing of 2,500 

extra copies ef the report of the health officer of the District of 

Columbia. 

Mr. WARNER, from the same committee, reported that they had 

examined and found truly enrolled a bill (H. R. No. 3844) to establish 

post.-routes; when the Speaker signed the same. 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE. 

By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted in. the following cases: 

To Mr. BucK, untill\Iarch 9, on account of important business. 

To 1\fr. WILSO~, on Monday next, on account of the sickness of a relative. 

To Mr. CABELL, for three days from Monday next. 

To Mr. HOGE, until \Vednesday next, on account of important 

business. 

And then, on motion ofMr. BURROWS, of Michigan, (at five o'clock 

and eighteen minutes p. ~.,)the House adjourned. 

PETITIONS, ETC. 

The following memorials, petitions, and other papers were laid on the Clerk's desk, under the rule, and referred as follows: 

By Mr. ALDRICH: The remonstrance of the Merchants' Exchange 

of Saint Louis and the Chamber of Commerce of Pittsburgh against 

any change in the present genflral bridge law of the Ohio River-to 

the Committee on Commerce. 

By Mr. BAYNE: The resolution of the Tobacco Board of Trade of 

Philadelphia, requesting the prompt abolition of the tax on tobacco or the pa-ssage of a resolution that it is unwise and impolitic to tamper with said tax during the present Congress-to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

Also, the petition of ex-soldiers of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, for the early passage of the bill (H; R. No. 1440) for the eStablishment of a soldiers' home at Erie, Pennsylvania-to the Committee on Military Affairs. 

By Mr. BINGHAM: The resolutions of the Philadelphia Board of 

Marine Underwriters and the resolutions of the Board of TI·ade of 

Philadelphia,, urging the pa-ssage of a bill to increase the efficiency 

• 
1628 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. ·MARcH 6, 

of the United States Signal-Service Corps-severally to the same committee. 

Also, t.he petition of honorably discharged soldiers and sailors of 

the first Congressional district of Pennsylvania, urging the passage 

of the bill to establish a soldiers' home at Erie, Pennsylvania-to the 

same committee. • Also, the resolutions adopted at a meeting of citizens of Philadelphia, asking Congress to take some action in the nature of a protest against the treatment of the Jews of Russia-to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

Also, the resolutions of the Tobacco Board of Trade of Philadelphia, asking Congress to take prompt action in disposing of the question of abolishing the tax on tobacco and cigars-to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. BRIGGS: Memorial of Thomas H. Rogers and other soldiers 

who served during the late rebellion, requesting the passage of a law authorizing the payment of the balance of bounty due to themto the Select Committee on the Payment of Pensions, Bounty, and 

Back Pay. . By Mr. CARPENTER: The petition of citizens of Buena Vista 

County, Iowa, asking that the same privileges and encouragement 

be given to the building of railway bridges above Omaha a-s have 

heretofore been given below that city-to the Committee on Com- merce. By Mr. CLARDY: The resolutions of the Merchants' Exchange of 

Saint Louis, Missouri, approving the laws in relation to the building 

of bridges across the Ohio RiT"er, and protesting against any change or amendment of such laws-to th~ same committee. 

By lli. CURTIN: The petitiQn of citizell8 of Pennsylvania, praying for the l?assage of the bill to establish a soldiers'" home at Erie, 

Pennsylvama-to the Committee on Military Affairs. 

By Mr. ERRETT: The petitions of citizens of Allegheny County, 

andofPost199,GrandArmyoftheRepublic,ofTurtleCreek,Pennsylvania, praying for the passage of the bill (H. R. No. 1440) to establish a soldiers' home at Erie, Pennsylvania-to the same committee. 

Also, the report of the committee of the Chamber of Commerce of 

Saint Louis, Missouri, relative to building bridges over the Ohio 

River-to the Committee on Commerce. 

By Mr. GARRISON: The petition of certain citizens of Virginia, 

for dredging the mouth of Piscataway Creek-to the same committee. 

By Mr. GEORGE : The petitions of the Board of Trade of Portland, 

Oregon, of the fish packers and dealers of the Columbia River, Oregon, 

and of the Oregon and Washington "E'ish Propa~ating Company, relative to salmon hatching on the Clackamas River-severally to the 

Committee on Appropriations. 

Also, the petition of the Board of Trade of Portland, Oregon, in 

opposition to the adoption of the French metric system-to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

Also, the resolution of the Board of Trade of Portland, Oregon, 

against the forfeiture of the Northern Pa.cific Railroad grant-to the 

Committee on the Public Lands. 

By Mr. HARDENBERGH: The petition of Mary H. Noonan, widow 

of Cornelius Noonan, for compensation for rent and injury of dwellinghouse in New Orleans, Louisiana-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. HATCH: Memorial of the Merchants' Exchange of Saint 

Louis, :Missouri, relative to building bridges across the Ohio River 

and other navigable streams-to the Committee on Commerce. 

By Mr. HUTCHINS: The petition of 40 citizens of Yonkers, New 

York, for the repeal of the tax on bank deposits and the two-cent 

stamp on bank checks and drafts-to the Committee on Ways and 

Means. 

By Mr. LORD : The petition of 70 citizens of Michigan, for reduction of the tax on cigars-to the same committee. 

By Mr. MOORE: The petition of Thomas E. Meore, for compensa- tit~n for property taken and used by the United States Army during 

the late rebellion-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. NOLAN: Papers relating to the pension claim of John H. 

O'Brien, of Troy, New York-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. RAY: The petition of R. F. Carter and 30 others, praying 

for legislation to regulate charges for railway transportation-to the 

Committee on Commerce. 

Also, the resolution of citizens of Amherst, New Hampshire, ex- pressing their condemnation and abhorrence of polygamy, and urging the adoption of effective measures for its suppression-to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

By Mr. REED: The petition of A. H. Melleken, J. L. Skoefield, and 

others, citizens of Mew Brunswick, Maine, and other places, against 

the admission of Dakota-to the Committee on Territories. 

By Mr. D.P. RICHARDSON: The petition of citizens ofNewYork, 

for legislation for the suppression of polygamy-to the Committee 

on the Judiciary. By :Mr. RITCHIE: The petition of David Davis, of Toledo, Ohio, 

for compensation as quartermaster of the Forty-fifth Regiment, Ohio 

Volunteer Infantry, from May 1, 1863, to June 20, 1863-to the Committee on War Claims. 

ByMr.SHACKELFORD: ThepetitionofcitizensofOnslowCounty, 

North Carolina, praying for an appropriation to improve the navigation of the New River-to the Committee on Commerce. 

By Mr. SIMONTON: The petition ofW. H:Bryan, of Gibson County, 

r 

Tennessee, for compensation a-s scout and ~de in the United States 

service during ths late war-to the CoiDIDittee on W a.r Claims. 

By Mr. URNER: Pape:rs relating to the claims of Joseph E. Hill, 

of Maryland-to the Committee on Military Affairs. 

Also, the petition of the executive committee of the Maryland State 

Temperance Alliance, asking for a constitutional amendment to prohibit the manufacture, importation, and traffic in intoxicating liquor 

in the United States-to the Committee on the .Alcoholic Liquor 

Traffic. 

By Mr. VANCE: The petition of Julia A. Duncan, widow of J. G. 

Duncan, for relief-to the Committee on War Claims. 

Also, the petition of J. H. Queen, of North Carolina, for the estab-

-lishment of a post-route from Horning Creek to Gmdy Fork-to the 

Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads. 

By Mr. WALKER: The petition of James Haywood, Isaac Plank, 

JohnP. Blair, Daniel Mack, Captain W. F. Campbell, George H. Anderson, and others, citizens of Lycoming County, Pennsylvania., 

praying for the passage of the bill (H. R. No. 2'262) granting pensions 

to prisoners of war-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By 11-Ir. WEBBER: The petition of Samuel Stawell and 19 others, 

citizens of Michigan, for legislatio:a to regulate charges for railway 

transportation-to the Committee on Commerce. 

By Mr. WHEELER: The petition of citizens of Trinity, Morgan 

County, Alabama, for the relief of the destitute people of the mountain counties ofNm;th Alabama-to the Committee on Appropriations. 

By Mr. GEORGE D. WISE: The petition of Phillip Wellford and 

of W. H. Wesson, for relief-severally to the CommiHee on War 

Claims. 

Also, the petition of W. P. Barwell, asking that the value of cer- tain tobacco be refunded to him-to the Committee on Ways and 

Means. 

SENATE. 

MONDAY, March 6, 1882. 

Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. J. J. BULLOCK, D. D. 

The Journal of the proceedings of Friday last was read and approved. EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATION. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate a communication from the Secretary of War transmittin~, in response to a resolution of January 24, 1882, information relative to the cost of Indian wars durin a' the past ten years; which, on motion of 1\Ir. HoAR, was referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs, and ordered to be printed. 

PETITIO~S AND MEMORIALS. 

:Mr. MITCHELL presented the petition of Benjamin Clark and 

others, citizens of Bradford County, Pennsylvania., praying for ths 

passage of a bill granting pensions to late Union soldiers who were confined in so-called confederate prisons during the late war; which was referred to the Committee on Pensions. . He also presented the petition of E. A. Barnes and others, citizens 

of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, praying for the pas age of the McKinley bill, fixing the rate of duty on manufactures of iron; which was referred to the Committee on Finance. 

1\Ir. COKE presented a petition of citiz·ens of Lee County, Texas, 

praying for legislation regulating charges for railroad transportation; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce. 

Mr. HOAR presented the petition of A. Cordson, of Franklin County 

Florida, praying compensation for property destroyed by United 

States naval forces at Appalachicola, Florida; which wa-s referred 

to the Committee on Claims. 

:Mr. ALLISON. I present a joint resolution of the General Assembly of Iowa, praying Congress to provide for the construction of a. bridge at or near Omaha. I ask that it be printed in the RECORD 

and referred to the Committee on Commerce. 

The joint resolution was ordered to be printed in the RECORD and 

referred to the Committee on Commerce, a-s follows: 

Whereas the development of the northwest portion of our State will be greatly promoted by the construction of bridges over the Missouri River above Omaha. m aid of interstate trade and commerce by railroad: Therefore, Be it resolved by the Senate, (the Hot£se concurring,) That our Senators and Rep· 

resentatives in Congress be, and they are hereby, re9.uested to vote for and to use their active influence to procure appropriate legislation by Congress to authorizethe construction of railroad and highway bridges in aid of the above-mentioned 

object over said Missouri River, in Iowa, above Omaha, upon terma and with priv- ileges eqnal to those already granted by Congress for bridges at and below Omaha.. 

Resolved, That the secretary of state be, and is hereby, instructed to transmit a copy hereof to each of our Senators and Representatives in Congress. 

Approved March 2, 1882. 

STATE OF IowA, Ojfice Secretary of State: 

I, J. A. T. Hull, secreta.ry of state of the State of Iowa, hereby certify the foregoing to be a trne and correct copy of a concurrent resolution of the nineteenth 

General Assembly on file in this office. 

In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the great seal of 

the Statej at Des Moines, this 2d day of March, A. D. 1882. [SEAL. ' J. A. T. HULL, 

Secretary of State. 

1\Ir. MILLER, of California, presented a memorial of the board of