1058 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JANUARY 30, 

partisan feelina by his official station. In the calm seclusion of his 

closet where the poet ays the scales which weigh the actions of otl?-- ers ar~ held wHh unfeverislt hand, this judge has appended to this 

constitutional work a note in reO'ard to the subject which I am now discussing, under the clause of th~ Constitution guaranteeing a republican form of government to every State : 

The recent case of Louisiana demonstrates that there may be greater wrongs than even the wron!!ful refusal by Congress to reco!mize the leuitimate government of a State, and yet :fo speedy ancl effectual remedy be attaina.j}le. Sucn a.cti?n on the part of Con !!Tess woulcl at least be that of a proper authonty, and would rmply 

deliberation, an'Ci be supported by a presumption of due re_g~d f?r the pub~c go_od and for the supremacy of the law. But in _the cru:;e of Louuuana ~ 1873, an infenor 

Federal judge, without a shallow of aothonty, an_d consequently ill ~efiance of la;w, 

and for that reason supported by no presumption of correct motives, a;nd Wlth 

scarcely a pretense of obs rvin"' even the usual forms, by the process ?f his co.urt, 

aided by a military force, installe<;l in power a State government which h_e Sld~d with as against nval claimants, and in con.~equence of a pressure of busilless ill 

Congre s precluding pro~pt attention ~o the ca e by th~t body, has l!e~n enabl d to snstain this government ill v.ower until the pr el?-t time. Mr. Justice Stol1' has 

with reason predicted that "if a despo~c or monarchicalgov~~nt were establishecl 

in one State 1t wo~d bring on the rom of the whole repubhc. What governm,ent can be 'TTW'T'e despotur--

.And I call attention to this language particularly, for it bears on 

the precise point now under discussionwhat government can be more despotic than one elected _by an injttncti_on, an~ ClJ'!lr 

tinued in powe1· by a mil.itary force under the or~r of a J'!£Clge who, hav1ng no JUT~· 

diction is restrained by no law bttt ht'.s own arbitrary wtll ? For the facts of this unparalleled wrong we refer to reports made by the Judiciary Committee of the 

United States Senate, in February, 18~3. The ca e_reqoires no further C?mm~nt 

than it there receives. The dullest mmd cannot fa1l to see that the facility Wlth 

which the wron~ is committed, and the pos ible inrmediate advantage -which indivicluals may denve therefrom present constant temptations to its reJ>etition, and if suffered to pass once onreb.:U..ed, a precedent will be tacitly asserted which can· not fail to threaten constant danger to our libertie~, especially at t~ose very periods 

of high political excitement when pro~ence, caution, and the stncteRt regat:d.for the c-onstitution and the laws are most rmportant. What party, or what politic~ 

leader can at such times, be expected to pa,y scrupulous deference to the laws if a j udo-'e may ignore them with impunity 1 It was thought the climax of wrong had 

been 'reached when a local judge ill one of the States could seize upon the property of in(Uviduals and corporations through his injunctio~ and manda~s, aud pl~~er 

them through receivers; but he at lea.st was not acting wholly Wlthout Jlll'l ~ction and if ne seized property, he did not venture to go so far as to make the lib· 

ertiM of the people the subject of a receivership. 

1\fr. President, if I owe an apology to the Senate for the warmth 

of any expressions I haven eel to-d .. 'l>y, I refer, in mitigation, to this 

language of a judge whose blood was not stirred by the excitement 

of debate, and who has denounced the conduct of Jmlge Durell more severely than I have or can, because criticism is always more severe when free from passion and couched in the temperate l~tnguage which 

characterizes the bench. 

1\fr. President, I have done with this matter. I devoted to this investiO'ation several weeks in the committee last winter. I came here 

and ~tail night long until five o'clock in the morning, endeavoring 

and hoping to pass the bill_for a new election. I h~ve perf?rmed my 

duty. I will prepare and rntroduce to-morrow a bill oruermg a new 

election in the Stat.e of Louisiana. I thank yon, fr. Pre ident, and I thank the enate, for the patience 

and the attention with which you have heard me through remarks 

protntcted much longer than they would have been by the fact that 

I am suffering under great physical dep1·ession. Mr. MORTON addressed the Senate; and having spoken some time 

said: 

Mr. Pre ident1 I will not detain the Senate any longer to-night, but 

I have not finished. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. Do I understand that my friend from Indiana 

wishes to go on on Monday 'I 

Mr. MORTON. I have not concluded, I will say to my friend. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. I wish to move to take up the bankrupt bill, if 

there is no objection. Does the Senator wish to go on on Monday 

Mr. MORTON. I should like to continue a little while longer. 

Mr. THURMAN. Let us understand this matter. Do I understand 

that the Senator from Indiana has concluded his remarks~ 

Mr. MORTON. No, sir; I have not. 

[1\fr. MORTON's speech in full will be found in the A pp~nilix.] 

1\fr. EDMUNDS. In that ca e I move, or shnll in a moment move, 

that the Senate proceed to the considera.tion of executive business; 

but I give notice that as soon a.s my friend shall have concludeil., or as soon thereafter a.s it shall be the plea ure of the Senate, I shall ask 

to take up the bankrupt bill. I now move that the Senate proceed to 

the consideration of executive business. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate proceed d to the con- siderati-On of executive business. After fourteen minutes spent in 

executive session the doors were reopened, and (at fotu o'clock aud 

twenty-four minutes p.m.) the Senate adjourned. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 

FRIDAY, January 30, 1874. 

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

J. G. BUTLER, D. D. 

The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. 

HOURS .U.TD WAGES OF LABOR. 

Mr. MONROE. The Committee on Education and Labor instruct me to report back one or two matter. , without any discn ion or com- ment. The first is the petition of M. Spahn and other , r pre. nting 

the Bricklayers' A ociation of the District of Columbia, praying for 

relief in regard to the· number of hours of work ancl the wages of 

labor upon puLlic works of the United States. The Committee on Education and Labor have con idered this subject, and ask to be discharged from the further consideration of it, because they regard it as a matter for the executive r ather than for the legislative branch 

of the Government. It is rather a question of administration under 

the law than a que tion for this place. I move that the committee 

be discharged from the further consideration of the subject, and that 

the same be laid on the table. · The motion was agreed to. 

LIQUOR TRAFFIC. 

Mr. :MONROE. The Committee on Education and Labor also ask 

permission to report back to the House certain petitions prayin~ Congress to authorize a commission to inquire into the liquor traffic and 

it influence to produce pauperism and crime; and ask to be discharged 

from their further consideration, because petitions of this class and 

certain bills relating to the same subject have, by common con ent, 

been sent to the Committee on the Judiciary, where I uppose the 

subject properly belongs. I move that the committee be discharged 

from the further conSideration of the petitions, and that they be 

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. The motion was agreed to. 

BREAKWATER AT CLEVELAli.TD, OHIO. 

Mr. PARSONS. I ask unanimous consent to pre ent the memorial 

of the city council of Cleveland, Ohio, relative to tlte construction of a harbor of refuge at Cleveland, Ohio, and a resolution on the same subject of the Board of Trade of Cleveland. I desiJ:·e a few minutes, 

not exceeding fifteen, to explain the matter. 

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Ohio [Mr. P ARSO)l' ] asks 

that, by unanimous consent, he be allowed fifteen minutes to make some remarks on the subject of the memorial and resolution he hns presented. The Chair hears no objection. 

Mr. PARSONS. 1\fr. Speaker, I desire to call the special attention 

of the House to the resolutions I have hafl the 'honor to present for 

its con idera.tion. These resolutions were passed by the Board of 

Trade and city council of Cleveland, and rela.te to the pre ing neces- ity which exists for the building by the General Government of a harbor of refuge at orne point adjacent to or near that city. I am painfully aware, sir, that a grave duty is imposed upon us, as the Repre entatives of the people, at this time to watch with jealou care all demands made for the expenditure of the public moneys. 

And I am equally aware that it is the desire of this House to avoid as far a possible the voting for the construction of any new works 

of magnitude, which may call for a large expenditure of the public 

treasure. No man, I trust, sir~ upon this floor appreciates the situation of the country more keenly than myself, or will endeavor to 

the extent of bis ability to aid the Honse in all it legi lation with an eye single to the strictest economy and prudence, in every branch 

of the public service. But, sir, a long and somewhat varied experi- ence in public life has convinced me that there may be a too rigid 

economy that is not prudence, and an apparel).t saving that ends in 

lo , and often time in po iti ve disaster. It is with nations as with 

individuals-" There is that scattereth, and yet increa eth; and there 

is thnt withholdeth more than is meet, but it tendet.h to poverty." 

\Vhile for the moment there has come a time in the history of the 

country when it expenses are larger than its receipt , yet it does not 

follow, n.sthe gentleman from New York [Mr. Woon]ha tated, that 

tl1e nation is bankrupt, or that its credit is in any manner impaired. 

Nor does it follow that, Lecause of this temporary decrease of income, 

the public works are to be arr ted, the public bniMings permittefl to fall into decay, the public docks, piers, :.md wharves, built 

at enormous expense, to perish for needed repairs, or that our harbor 

and rivers are to be neglected, and the funds necessary for keeping 

them in proper order are to be withheld, or the great channels of 

trade and commerce of this mighty nation to be in any manner obstructed for the want of needful and proper expenditures. The com- merce of the country is its life; and whatever is absolutely necessary 

to aid, foster, encourage, and protect it must be clone. To permit it 

in any manner to languish or, become crippled will prove the mo t 

disastrous economy that was ever practiced by any people, and, iu 

the end, would produce the very poverty, bankruptcy, and ruin that 

every wise man seeks to prevent. 

During the last five years the administration of General Grant ha 

paid over four hundred millions of the public debt, a far greater um than the law required. If this enormous decrease of the public debt 

has be n made too rapidly, or in any manner beyond the nece sitie 

of the public intere t , we can, without detriment, top this policy by 

withholding taxation, until the material interests of the country will 

warrant its resumption. It is entirely practicable, and in my judgment wholly consistent with the wisest economy, and without imposing any aJ.ditional taxes upon the people, or inflation of the volume 

of the cunency, to provide by a temporary loan, for a year or two, 
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 1059 

or any necessary deficit in the current expenditures of the Govern- ent. This to me would seem a far wiser state ma.nship than to perf 

m 

IDl 't the real material interests of this country to suffer, by withholdg the needful means for the development of the wealth of the country, 

y neglecting·to provide for our rivers and harbors vital improvements 

d protection, by ne&lecting to sustain, foster, and encourage as far 

possible the magnificent inland commerce of the country, its pride nu source of national greatness. While the ships of our land vie 

'th those of other nations in bringing to our shores, and carrying 

broad to the brthest corners of the earth, the commerce of the world, 

he inland commerce of the country is by far the greatest in magnide, and year by year growing with such wonderfill rapidity, that it at this moment the gravest question we are called upon to meet, as 

egislators, how best to promote, protect, and provide for its vast and 

creasinJl demands. 

in 

b 

an 

as 

a 

W1 

a 

t 

tn 

is 

l 

in 

n 

With the vast extent of our country, interlaced all over with a 

et-work of railroads, with mighty seas called inland lakes, and rivrs flowing in almost every direction, capable of carrying almost · 'tless quantities of agricultural, mineraJ., and manufacturing comodities from ocean to ocean, and from the Saint Lawrence River 

e 

limi 

m 

to the Gnlf_of Mexico, yet the cry everywhere is for greater, broader, 

mpler, and cheaper means of transport; and to this appeal Congress a.nnot long tmn a deaf or indifferent ear. This country, though 

emporarily depressed, is the richest and most prosperous on which 

he ann shines. It has boundless resources, every variety of soil 

nd climate, vast and fertile fields rich in agricultural wealth, inexa.ustible mines of coal, iron, silver, copper, and gold ; manufacories producing yearly thousands of millions of dollars in value, a 

ommerce that whitens every sea and ocean and lake and river in 

he world; a prosperous and enlightened people, capable of proving 

o the worl~ which looks on in wonder, their capacity for self-govrnment, an the wisdom of a nation formed and carried on "for the 

eople and by the people." And yet it is this land of oms, in a time 

a 

c 

t 

t 

a 

h 

t 

c 

t 

t 

e 

p 

0 f profound peace, with no great standing army or navy, like Engancl, or France, or Prns ia, to absorb its wealth and curtail its indus-

·es, that at this moment is claimed to be unable to carry on its 

l 

tri 

y early expenditures for public improvements; that is asked to let its 

0 wn vessels lie haJf finished upon the stocks; its harbors and rivers 

t o be eriously impaired by neglect and want of proper c'll'e ; its 

g reat piers and whs.rves and docks, built at an enormous expense, 

o go surely to decay, and aU because in a. time of temporary depresion the expenses of the Government are for a moment beyond its 

t 

s 

a ctual income. To some minds this policy may seem economical, 

p rudent, and statesman-like; to me it seems short-sighted and dis- a strons. It is not true, in fact, that the money paid by the United States 

f or permanent improvements like those of the pulllic buildings, should 

b 

G 

p 

e counted as a part of the ordinary expenditures for carrying on the overnment of the country. These great buildings become a part and 

areal of the substantial property of the Government. They are 

B olid investments built for all time, and in most cases are at this moent worth their actual cost to the country, and in many ca es far 

eyond it. In my own city the United States does not own a single 

ieee of property that would not bring at public auction more than 

m 

b 

p 

i 

s 

w 

se 

p 

ts original cost. Hence, if the Government was compelled to sell a mall portion of its bonds for the completion of these buildings it 

ould simply add to its nominal indebtedness, but at the same time cure the full value of the debt in substantial and durable landed 

roperty. For these reasons I run opposed to the stoppage of work 

pon the great public buildings of the country, and believe it the 

ighest wisdom to complete them at the earliest practicable moment. n 

h 

E 

r 

v 

b 

t 

p 

specially at this time, when l abor can lle procured at a moderate 

ate, and so many families are suffering for employment, I would adocate, as far as practicable, the continuance of work upon the public 

uildings as the wisest economy, and in a-ccordance with the pracice of other countries when private demands are insufficient to emloy the substantial laboring men of the nation. 

With these views, Mr. Speaker, I address my elf to the immediate 

q nestion before me. 

L 

c 

w 

a 

n 

It will be admitted by all, that the great chain of lakes, of which 

ake Erie is one, forms at this time the most important means of 

ommnnication for the vast agricultural, mineral, and commercial 

eaJ.th which is annually transported between the eastern sea-board 

nd the g1·ea.t Northwestern States. On these inland seas there an- ually float more than thirty-four hundred vessels, valued at ~early 

25,000,000, and carrying a commerce vastly greater than the whole 

oreign commerce of the country. It is needless to add that if at 

ny future time the demands of the people of the Northwest and 

f 

a 

s outh for cheap transportation should be heeded by Cong1·ess, and a ater communication be opened from the Mississippi River to the 

tlantic coa~t, this commerce would be immensely increased, and w A 

t 

0 

t 

his noble chain of l akes would become the great national highway 

ver which our products would be cn,rried to supply the markets of 

he world. 

I do not intend to deta.in the Honse with any extended remarks n pon tills bra.nch of my subject, but would earnestly refer the House 

t 

~ 

m 

n 

o an exhansti ve report m.::tde last year to the House by Bon. 

Ir. CONGER, from the Committee on Commerce. That r eport is a 

asterly review of this whole subject of cheap transportation, its 

eeds and claims upon the country, and cites the action of the sev~ 

~ 

eral States, conventions, Legislatures, boards of trade, &c., which 

have taken action upon this subject. 

In reading that report, with its array of statistics and important 

facts, gathered with painstaking labor, the almost boundless resources and wealth of these States, whose marketable produce must 

find its way (if ever) to the sea-board over the great chain of l:1kes, 

will be abundantly realized. And it is upon one of the most important of these lakes, and near to one of the most growing and 

thriving cities of the country, that the resolutions just presented ask 

for special and needed legislation. 

I shall take the liberty of calling the attention of the Honse to a 

few important statistics connected with this subject. They tell their 

own story, and from them the House can gather the most important 

and valua.ble information. They have been repeatedly presented to Congress heretofore, in connection with the arguments used for the 

n ecessity of providing cheaper means of transport from the West to 

the Atlantic sea-board. 

Wheat products in bushels joT the yeaTs 1867 to 1871, inclusive. 

States. 1867. 1868. 1869. 1870. 1871. 

Ohio ........... 18,000,000 17,550,000 20,400,000 21,270,000 21,830,000 Indiana ........ 16,861,000 17,336,000 20,000,000 20,170, 000 21,560,000 K~n~cky ...... 2, 847,000 2, 850,000 5,.)00, 000 5,610, 000 5, 930,000 illinOIS ......... 28,000,000 28,500,000 29, 200, 000 27,115,000 24,740,000 

Mis ouri ...... . 4, 961,000 5, 357,000 .7,500, 000 6, 750,000 8, 050,000 

Kansas ........ 1, 250,000 2, 800,000 1, 537,000 2,343, 000 2, 577,300 

Nebraska. ...... 1, 000,000 ·1, 565,000 1, 000,000 1, 848,000 2, 032,000 

Dakota. ........ ···--··------ 100,000 130,000 178,000 200,000 

Iowa ........... 16,300,000 20,350,000 25,000,000 27,500,000 30,250,000 

Minnesota ..... 10,000, 000 14,500,000 19,000,000 20,290,000 22,319,000 

Wisconsin ..... 22,000,000 22,600,000 24,000,000 26,400,000 29,040,000 

Michigan ...... 15,250,000 16,012,000 16,800,000 18,480,000 20,328,000 

Total ........ 136, 969, 000 149, 520, 000 170, 067, 000 178, 154, 000 193, 876, 300 

Number of hogs for the sa1ne yeaTs. 

States. 1867. 1868. 1869. 1870. 1871. 

Ohio ........... 2, 139,991 2, 194,163 2, 694,170 2, 033,000 2, 266,000 

Kentucky ..... 1, 300,156 1,560,186 1, 955,000 1, 994,100 2, 193,510 Indiana ........ 2, 581,369 2, 007,195 2, 590,369 2, 349,000 2, 583,900 

illinois ........ 2, 181,734 2, 042,938 2, 160,0 0 3,363, 000 3,699, 300 

Missouri ....... 1, 741,154 2, 042,438 2, 300,000 2, 530,000 2, 783,000 

Kansas ........ 140, ()62 160,848 516,000 572,600 629,860 

Nebraska ...... 54,968 65,637 125,000 137,500 151,250 

Dakota ........ .............................. -----·------- 13,000 14,000 21, 100 

Iowa ........... 1, 748,853 1, 94 '059 2, 500,000 3, 100,000 3, 410,000 

Minnesota. ..... 150,795 158,732 187,230 205,953 226,546 

Wisconsin ..... 378,555 421,608 471,602 651,900 717,090 

Michigan ...... 418,342 441,608 443,357 517,400 509,140 

Total ........ 12,836,879 13,043,912 15;945, 108 17,468,453 19,887,6 6 

Oorn products in bushels joT the same yea1·s. 

States. 1867. 1 68. 1869. 1870. 1871. 

Ohio ........... 64,000,000 74,000,000 83,000,000 87,751,000 96, 526,100 Kentucky ...... 46,550,000 58,187,000 51, 500, 000 63,345,000 69,679,500 Indiana .. ...... 80,000,000 90, 83-2, 000 100, 000, 000 113, 150, 000 124, 465, 000 

illinois . ........ 109, 000, 000 134, 333, 000 123, 500, 000 201,37 '000 2'21, 515, 00 

Missouri ....... 50,437,000 60,967, 000 80,500,000 94,990,000 104, 489, 000 

Kansas ......... 8, 150,000 8, 487,000 24,500,000 26,950,000 29,645,000 Nebra-ska ...... 2, 325,000 .3, 185,000 6, 750,000 7, 425,000 8,167,500 Dakota ......... 70,000 103,000 130,000 145,000 178,000 

Iowa ......... . . 53, 3.13, 000 65,339,000 85,270,000 93,797,000 125, 062, 660 

Minnesota .. .... 4, 500,000 '255, 000 14,230,000 15,653,000 17,218,300 Wisconsin ... . .. 9, 885,000 12,565,000 16,1 0, 000 19,995,000 21,994,500 Michigan ...... 15,118,000 18,815,000 21,870,000 24,057,000 26,462,700 

Total ....... 443, 368, 000 535, 038, 000 607, 430, 000 74 '636, 000 919,34 '060 

Nom.-It is estimated by the best and most reliable authorities on this subject. tilltt the corn cro:p of these States was at lea t one-fourth greater in 1872 than in 

1871, or any preVIous year. If that be n. correct estimate, and of tho,t there can be but little, if any, donbt, it amonnted to the enormons aggregate of 1,349,285,175 bushels. -- NumlJ r of catae for those years. 

States. 1867. 1868. 1869. 1 70. 1871. 

Ohio ............ 1, 415,000 1, 4!)6, 750 1, 415,866 1, 535,100 1, 688,610 Kentucky ...... 4!l1, 048 479,303 629,500 627,600 690,360 Indiana ........ 892,000 906, 000 1, 000,000 1,185, 500 1, 304,050 illinois ......... 1, 395,000 1, 457,000 1, 535 000 1, 907, 400 2, 098,140 Missouri .. ...... 843,097 999, 491 1, 306,000 1, 376, 000 1, 513,600 

Kan a-s ....... .. 235,860 2.>4,000 274,572 507,600 558,360 

Nebraska ....... 114,011 142,762 161,300 177,435 195.180 

Iowa ........... 1, 013, 8!)4 1,103,503 1,162 000 1, 280,200 1, 408,220 M.inne ota. ...... 349,000 318,241 334,400 382,500 420,750 Wisconsin ..... . 353,601 794,158 813,800 895,080 984,588 

Dakota ...... ... -·---- -- ----- ---·-------- 81,711 89,882 9 . 870 Michigan ....... 604,837 651,761 602,837 TI5, 400 786,940 --------------------- Tot:JJ. ....... 8, 207,348 9, 991,969 9,3"..3, 986 10,679,697 11,745,668 
,. 

1060 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JANUARY 30, 

Number of sheep for the ~ame years. 

---------~-------.-------,-------.-------.-------

States. 1867. 1868 • . 

Ohio .. ... _.". . . . . 6, 730, 126 6, 300, 000 Kentucky ___ . _: 895, 865 868, 989 

~~r:-_-_·_~:_-::~ ~:~~:!~~ ~~~:~~~ Mis onri .. _ . . . . . 1, 377, 54 7 1, 584, 179 

Kansas . . _. . . . . . 76, 342 107, 896 

N ebra.ska.. _ . . . . . 22, 059 28, 078 

Dakota ......... . -- -- ... ---- .. ---· .. . · -·- · - Iowa. _____ .. _. .. 2, 591, 379 2, 332, 241 

Minnesota .. _... 129, 010 134, 170 

Wisconsin ...... 1, 880,758 1, 749,104 

Michigan....... 3, 948,191 3, 553,371 

TotaL._... . 23, 269, 884 21, 661, 512 

1869. 

7, 160,252 

942,000 

3, 141,582 

3, 092, 288 

2, 300, 000 120,000 

.35, 030 

10,120 

2, 850,517 

162.220 

2, 012, 412 

4, 343,011 

26,169,532 

WHEAT PRODUCT IN 1870 AND 1871. 

1870. 

8, 876, Z77 904, 300 

3, 200,000 

3, 401, 505 

2, 500,000 

115,000 

42,290 

12,230 

2, 293,100 

180,259 

2, 810,320 

4, 701,000 

29,036,281 

1871. 

9, 763,904 994,730 

3, 280,000 

3, 741,655 

2, 800,000 

130,000 

51,430 

15,471 

2, 563,124 

210, 030 2, 910,029 

4, 981,263 

31,441,736 

From the fore..,.oing statistics, compiled from the agricultural reports at Washington State agricultural reports, and other equally reliable sources we find that 

in those twelve States the wheat product for 1870 wa.s 178,154,000 bushels, while all 

other portions of the Union, including the Pacific States, produced only abont 67 730,700. In 1871 the wheat crop of these States amonnted to 193,876,:l00 bushels, 

aii the other portions of the conntry producing about 78,530~000 bush.cls. In other 

words those States two-thirds of which are not · one·sixtn developed, produced more than two-thirds of the entire wheat crop of the whole conn try. In 1872 the 

wheat crop of those States amonnted to about 2-25,000,000 bushels. In aJl other st~tes, to 86,383,000 bushels. 

CORN CROP FOR THE YEARS 1870 AND 1871. 

In 1870 the entire corn crop of the whole conn try amonnted to 1,094,255,000 bu hels of which those States produced 748,636,000 bushels. In 1871 the whole corn crop of the conntry was 1,203,680,500 bushels, of which those twelve St..'l.tes pro- duced 919 323 060 bushel<J, leaving but 284,457,440 bushels for all the ba.lance of the conntry. 'In l872 those States produced about 1,349,285175 bushels, and that, too, 

when several of them are not and never can be adapted to corn-raising-especially Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota-and while two others, to wit, Dakota and 

Nebraska, are hardly developed at all. 

In a report from the Committee on Commerce, made to thi House 

in Februa-ry, 1873, by Mr. NEGLEY, he gives the estima.tes of the aggregate products of those States for 1872, which are substantially correct, 

and their probable products in 1880, simply at an increase of 10 per cent. annually, as follows : 

Estimate of aggregate prodtwts and value of said States for the year 1872, based upon the repO'l'ts of the Agricultural Bureau. 

Wheat, 225,844,800 bnshel.s, at 50 cents per busheL ........... _ .. ___ . $1 1~. 92-2, 400 Corn, 1 021,937,476 bushels, at 25 cents per bushel. .. __ .. . _ ... _ .. _._._ 255, 484, 369 

Hogs, 22,660,040 head, at $5 each ...... ____ ......... _. __ .-·-. _ . . _·-·-. 113, 300,200 

Cattle, 13,362,492 head, at 10 each . . _ ....... _ ... ______ ._ . .. _ ... _ ... _. 133, 624,920 

Sheep, 35,146,407 head, at 1.50 each ... _. __ .. _-- ... _ .... __ ..... _...... 52,719, 61~ 

Wool, 70,292,814 pounds, at 40 cents per ponnd. ___ . _. __ . . _ .... __ .. __ . 28, 117, 125 

Aggregate va.lne ....•....... _ .. _ ... _ ....... ............ __ .. --· 706,168,624 

Estimate of aggregate products tl!..,"''eo..f in 1880, at 10 per cent. increase per annum. 

"'Wheat, 484,794,850 bushels, at 50 cents per bushel. .. ......... _....... $'242, 397, 425 Corn, 2.892,329,851 bushels, at 25 cents per busheL __ ._ ...... . _ .. _.... 723, 082, 46:l Hogs, 46,894,113 head, at $5 each._. __ ....... _ ..... _ . . .... _ ...... _. _.. 234, 470, 565 

Cattle, 38,912,764 head, at 10 each. _ ... __ . . __ .. --· .. ·--- ... __ .. _____ . 389, 127,640 

Sheep, 74,149,492 head, at 1.50 each . __ . __ . __ .. . ....... ___ . ___ ....... 111,224,238 

Wool, 110,450,787 ponnds, at 40 cents per ponnd. ... .. .......... ...... 44,180,314 

Aggregate va.lne ...............•••..•......................... 1, 744,482,677 

Or enough almost in value to pay the national debt in a single year. · It is of course conceded that only a small portion of these products 

find their way o_ver the highway of the lakes to an eastern market; 

yet the annual amount in value of the commerce of the lakes aggregates the enormons sum of over $1,000,000,000. 

The length of Lake Superior is 390 miles, while its greatest breadth 

is 1 0 miles ; Lake Michigan, 345- by 84 miles; Lake Huron, 270 by 

105 miles ; Lake Erie, 250 by 60 miles; and the distance from Chicago . to Buffalo is 1,020 miles. It is- from the city of Chicago t hat the great. shipment of cereals is mostly made, while the va t quantities of iron 

and copper oro, lumber, &c., are brought from all points on the upper lakes. 

But whatever may be the amount of the magniticent commerce of the 

lakes, either eastward to Bnffalo, or westward as far as Toledo or Detroit, it all passes by the point where the harbor of refuge contemplated by these resolutions is asked to be built. And as a proof of 

the vital necessity of snch a work, I desire to call the attention of 

Congress to the fact that, after leaving the Put-in-Bay Isla.ncls, there 

is not a natural harbor or artificial bftrbor of any kind which will 

accoiillllodate the vessels of larger dr:tnght from Detroit to the city 

of Buffalo. The harbor at Cleveland, as these resolutions state, is 

narrow, difficult of entry, and to the largest class of vessels ·entirely 

clo eel. It is but two hundred feet wide at its mouth, and vessels can have no protection from violent storm~ until they pass within the 

limits guarded by the Government pier. So hazardous and so dangerous to vessels is this passage, owing to the natural defects of tbe 

harbor, that all prudent seamen avoid it, ancl weather the storm as they hest can by remaining out in the open lake rather than court 

almost certain destmction by seeking refuge within the pier. It"is no uncommon occurrence to see vessels endeavorin~ to make the harbor in rough weather, in broad daylight, strike tne pier and dash 

themselves to pieces against its granite sides. I have seen a noble 

Bteamer, costing more than $100,000, ably manned and under the 

~ommand of one of the most experienced commandel's upon the lake, m the OJ?en sunlight, and undel' full steam, strive in a violent gale to 

enter this harbol'. But, sil', of what avail was hel' il'on and oak, the 

power of her engines, or the skill of her mastel', agrun t the resistless power which bol'e her to certain destruction f In sight of and almos~ within speaking distance of her own dock the mighty waves and still stronger winds s ized her in theil' tenible grasp, and dashed 

her a helples , en hed, and broken mass against the rocky bulwark 

built for her protection. 

But, sir, the sum paid during the last ten years for insurance upon 

vessels and cargoes upon the lakes alone, amounting to $22,849,ti40, 

tells a fearful story of the dangers and hazards attending navigation 

upon these great seas, and calls loudly upon Congress to do all in its 

power to save such a splendid pl'Operty from loss and destruction. In 

ten years it will be seen that almost the total value of all the vessel 

property at this moment owned upon the lakes has been lost by 

shipwreck; and it is well known that a large proportion of it would 

have been saved had this harbor of refuge we now de il'e to be built 

been in existence. Add to this great ruin of property the priceless 

value of human lives lost, amounting- to more than one hundred 

persons annually, and the total loss of life and property becomes truly appalling. · 

That Cleveland is the best and most natural point between Detroit 

and Buffalo for a harbor of refuge is conceded by all, aside from the 

fact that a vast amount of the commerce of the lake goes diJ.·ectly to 

that city. 

By examining a chart of Lake Erie, lt will be seen that there is 

not a harbor of any kind between Buffalo at the east, and Point au Pelee at the northwe t of Lake Erie, saving Kelly's Island, at 

nearly its northwest corner. The Buffalo breakw::ttel' i a noble work, 

though not yet completed, and vessels of any draught of water can run behind it . in the wor t weather and find perfect pl'otection. 

Kelly's Island and Point au Pelee are natural harbors. There is 

also a poor harbor at· Erie, behind the peninsula, that is sometimes 

sought by vessels in passing in rough weather. There is also a harbor 

at Long Point, and another about sixty-five miles west of Buffalo, on the Canada shore. The harbors at Ashtabula, Conneaut, and Fail'port, 

east of Cleveland, and Huron and Black River, on the American shore, 

west, can none of them accommodate the larger class of ves el trading between Buffalo and Lake Superior ports laden with grain and 

iron ore, or the still larger class of vessels which come from the ports 

of Lake 1\.fichigan to those of Lake Erie. Nearly all of these latest 

built vessels, costing for ailing-crafts from $50,000 to $60,000 each, 

and for steamers, from 90,000 to 160,000, and carrying from twelv-e 

to sixteen hundred tons burden, draw from thil'teen to fourteen and a h alf feet of water. 

A prominent citizen of Cleveland, who has spent most of his life 

upon the lakes, writes me that if the Government would constnlCt one or two harbors of refuO'e, in addition to those now being built 

upon the lakes, where vessels drawing from eighteen to nineteen feet 

of water could run with safety, and ca.pable of carrying from thil'tyfive hundred to four thousand tons, it would do more to solve the 

problem of cheap transportation than almost any one measure that 

could be adopted. 

That we do not overestimate the importance of Cleveland as the 

next point west of Buffalo demanding a breakwater or harbor of 

refuge, I desire to call the attention of the Hou e to the growth of 

that city, and al o the extent of its imports and exports during the 

last ten years. While it is conceded to be one of the most beautiful 

cities of the world, I may be pArdoned if I add that at this time it is, 

for its population, one of the richest, as well as most pro. perous, in 

the entil'e country. 

In the year 1800 the population of Cleveland consi ted of 7 per- sons ; in 1810, of 57 ; in 1820, about 150 ; in 1 30, 1,075; in 1 40, 7,648; 

in 1850, 20,984; in 1860, 43, 38; in 1870, over 100,000; in 1874, about 

140,000. Shoulu it continue to increase in the same ratio until 1880, 

it is computed that the city will have a population of 262,000 souls . From the tables herewith presented, compiled with great care b. 

Collector Watmough, it will be seen that the number of vessels entering and clearing the Cleveland harbor tluring the last ten years num- ber over eighty-one thou and. The value of cargoes entered during 

the same period amounts to the enormous sum of $730,274,017, and the 

value of cargoes cleared to the sum of $664.,405,041, making a total 

value of about $1,400,000,000. The aggregate amount of duties collected at the same time at this custom-house is $1,22!>,491. I m2.~T 

add, although the exact £gures are not before me, that there was collected and paid into the Treasury of the United States by the Cleve- land district as taxes, during the first four years of the internal-reve- nue law, and wliile I was collector, the sum of about ,000,000; while 

over 3,000,000 in value of petroleum was shipped in bond, to be re- turned in gold or its equivalent to the country. 

Statement of the numbe-r of vessels,' tonnage, &e., entered and elearPd a-t the port of Oleveland during the last ten years, namely .from 1864 to 1S74. 

Year. Number Number Tonna!!:e Tonnage Value of r.ar- Value of c:1rentered. cleared. entereu. clearetl. · goes-entor d. goes clo~r d. 

---

1864. ·-· 2, 988 3, 060 99 • 6!)8 1, 068, 34!) 07,904,567 $1 05, 011. 66!l 1865 .. . . 3, 499 3, 377 1, 205,435 1, 125,176 117,580,984 76, !\72.137 1866. -- · 3, 859 3, 948 1, 390, 360 1, 437,414 119, 656, 544 75,353, 47 1867 .... 4, 909 4, 946 1, 540,501 1, 530,474 100, 819, 701 75, 116,926 
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 1061 

StatMne-nt of the number of vessels, tonnage, dlc.-Continued. 

Year. Number Number ~~itt~ ~r=a~ Value of car- Value of carentered. cleared. goes entered. goes cleared. 

1868 .... 3, 996 4,093 1, 399,214 1, 404,477 86,390.779 78,493,487 

1869.- -· 5, 286 4, 953 1, 681,095 1, 755,514 76,968.207 70,229,802 

1870* ... 4,092 4,172 1, 218,127 1, 294, 484 35,230, 776 53,571, 4 8 

1871. ... 4, 552 4,123 1, 209,121 1,117, 617 42, J50, 875 59, 816,699 

1872 .... 3, 672 3, 688 1,125,129 1, 050,940 21,105,147 37,149; 494 

1873 .... 4,351 4, 305 1,281, 541 1, 253,300 22,066, 437 33, 089 .• 492 

---------- Totals .. 41,204 40,665 13,049,221 13,037,745 730,274,017 664, 405, 041 

* Durinu the year 1870 the regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury were so modified as to make it unnecessn.ry for ves els makin!?i Cleveland an intermediate port to report and clear; hence the apparent falling off m busines at and after that date- but from information obtained from the various marint} transportation com- panies, and other source , it can be. shown th~t the general COJ:?lDerce of the port has increased from year to year durmg the period covered by this statement. 

Statement of amou:nt of coal, iron and C02Jper ore, received, togethe1· with the aggregate o.f duties collected, at the port of Oleveland, during the last ten years, namely, from 1864 to 1874. 

Year. Coal. I Iron ore. Copper ore. Duti.es. 

Tons. Tons. Tons. 1864 ..••••.•••••.•••••.•••••.•.•. 5,526 135,854 4,414 $2-2,267 

1 65 ..••••..••••.•••.•.•••••••... 4, 935 191,296 4, 823 43,422 1866 ..••••..•.••••••.•••...••.... 7,114 185,154 4,558 127,523 1867 ..••••••••••••••••.••.•••••.. 7,473 278,636 5, 243 104,919 1868 .•••.•.•.•••..•..•........... 13,665 289, 149 1,558 95,906 

11:!69 ..••••... •• •••••.••.••....... 9, 636 361,337 1,539 116,865 1870 . .••.••••••....•..•.•.••.... . 10,590 581,461 845 148,131 1871 . ..••....•.•...••••••..••.•.. 8,432 395,721 1, 067 159,584 

1 72 ...•...••..••..•......••••.•. 6,137 622,059 477 244,701 1873 .•.•.••••••••••..••.••••.••.. 1,806 689,440 256 166,173 

Totals .••••••.••••••••••..•.. 75,314 I 3, 730,107 24,780 1, 229,491 

Statement of amount of coal exported from the port of Oleveland during the last ten years, narnely,from 1864 to 1874. 

1864 --···-·····-······---·········-············--··---·-----····-·····-·· 1865 ... .. . ......•.••....•...•...•....•.•....•......... : •..•. ----·· ···-··-

1 66 .. .. ······ · ······-·-·······-····--··-···· ·-··--·------------ -- -·-· --- 1867 __________ : •...••.. ••..••.•...•..........•.• --··------····----··-· --· 1868 ....••••••.•......•..••.•............•..••.•......•.................. 1869 . .•..••.•.•.••.•••••....•.... . .••..•....•..•.... .......•..... -------· 

1870--- ·-- .. -·-· ----· ··--···---· ..•. •• ··-···--····.--·- --·-- ---. ·---- ---- 1871 ....•.•..••••••••.••••.....•.........•........ -..•..••.. --· ····-------

1872 ·-····. --·-- •.. -. ·---·--------- -----. ·---- --- ·- -··-- -- -·--·-- --·- --·· 1873 ···················--------------··--··-··············---·······-···-

Tons. 

229,640 

24 1028 288,841 

32'2, 247 383,438 

470,176 

447,390 

547,701 

638,917 

854, 62 

TotaL •••.•••..•. .••• ••.•. ..•...•.• · ....•..••......•••••...... -- ...•.. 4, 431,240 

This statement does not include the coal taken on board by steaJD. 

craft touching at Cleveland for the purpose of coaling. The records of 

the custom-house do not show this item, but as Cleveland is the principal city in the Northwest for the trade in bituminous coal, the 

amount so exported would largely increase the tota,l of the above 

exhibit. 

That the House may see that Cleveland has not in any sense been a burden to the General Government, or asked for appropriations 

above those of her ·neighbor citie , I give the entire amounts ex- pended by the Government since its origin for the improvement of 

sundry harbors upon the lakes. I take these figures from the office 

of the Secretary of War. For Buffalo, there has been expended 

$965,043; for Erie, $426,217; · for Cleveland..z $311,381; for Detroit, 

(Saint ClajrFbt ,) 625,560,andforChicago,;n;865,105 ; with the breakwaters at Buffalo and Chicago in process of erection. 

I believe that a careful review of the statistics presented must 

compel the conclusion that additional legislation is ab olutely demanded of Congress to protect and foster the magnificent commerce of the lakes, hat an additional harbor of refuge is needed upon 

Lake Erie, a,nd that Cleveland is the point above all ot hers w4ere it 

should b built. The work i in no sense a local one, but one of great 

national importance; especially required by the people of the Ea-st 

and West, whose property is annually destroye~ and whose seamen are needlessly sacrificed for the want of it. Should the trade have 

already reached its maximum, the nece sity of building a harbor of 

refuge at Cleveland would have been demonstrated as a measure of 

wise and practical economy. But, sir, a every man upon this floor r alizes, that trade is in its infancy. It is destined to become the 

wonder of mankind. Sir, give us harbors for our ve cls, and water 

communication from the Mi sissippi to the sea-board, and in a few 

years the mighty West will pour forth a flood of wea~th that shall 

put to shame the fairy-tales of .Aladdin, the streams whereof shall 

make glad the nations of the earth. 

ORDER OF BU !NESS. 

Mr. WHEELER. I demand the regular order. 

The SPEAKER. The regular order being demanded, the morning 

hour begins at twenty-eight minutes past twelve o'clock, and report 

from committees of a private nature are in order. 

Jl{r. WHEELER. - !raise the question of consideration, with a view 

to moving that the House resolve it elf into Committee of the Whole 

to resume the consideration of the Army appropriation bill. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair must appeal t o the gentleman fromNew 

York not to disturb the morning hour. The morning hour ought to 

be maintained. Immediately at the close of it the gentleman from 

New York will be. recognized for a motion to go into Committee of 

the Whole House on the state of the Union. But this is the only 

chance of committees being called for private reports, and shoulfi not 

be taken from them. 

NORTH BERWICK NATIONAL BANK. 

Jrlr. :MAYNARD. I am instructed by the Committee on Banking 

and Currency to report back, with the recommendation that it do not 

pa-ss, the bill (H. R. No. 121) authorizing the ecretary of the Treasury to issue new national-bank notes to the North Berwick National 

Bank for mutilated bank-notes burned in mails, &c. 

I uesire to say that there is a general provision of law covering this case. 

Mr. RANDALL. That is not a private bill. 

The SPEAKER. The point having been r aised, the Chair begs to 

say he does not think that this is a private bill. 

Mr. MAYNARD. It is a, bill to refund some eighty or one hundred 

dollars alleged to be lost. 

The SPEAKER. To a banking institution 1 ~Ir. MAYNARD. Yes, sir. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair does not think thu,t thu,t would be a private bill. But as it is an adverse report, the ChaiT does not suppose 

that there would be any objection to allowing it to go u_pon the 

table. 

There being no objection, the committee wa discharged from the 

further consideration of the bill, a,nd the same was lrud upon the 

table. CORRECTION. 

Mr. MAYNARD. I desire permission of the House to make a. simple 

correction in the RECORD, not as a matter of privilege or a-s a matter 

of ri~ht, but simply as information on a point on which gentlemen 

may De misled. In the second proviso of the third section of the bill 

which I reported yesterday the words, as printed in the REcoRD, are: 

That the entire amount of notes outstanding and in circulation at any one time shall not exceed the sum of 400,000,000, now authorized by existing laws. . 

It ought to read, as it is in the bill, thus: "the amount of United 

States notes." The words "United States" have been left out. 

RICHARD H. DUTTON. 

Mr. H.A WLEY, of lllinois. I am instructed by. the Committee on Claims to report back the bill (H. R. No. 21) for the relief of Richa,rd 

H. Dutton, postmaster at Cavendish, Vermont, with a substitute. I move that the bill a.nd substitute (H. R. No. 1574) be referred to the 

Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar. 

The motion was agreed to. 

RICHARD H. SWIFT. 

Mr. H.A WLEY, of illinois, from the sa,me committee, reported back, 

with the recommendation that it do pass, the bill (H. R. No.1575) for 

the relief of Richa,rd H. Swift; which was referred to the Committee 

of the Whole on the Private Cruenda,r, and, with the accompanying 

report, ordered to be printed. 

REVES B. FULLER. 

Mr. H.A WLEY, of Dlinois, from the same committee, reported back, 

with the recommenda,tion thu,t it do pass, the bill (H. R. No.1576) for 

the relief of Reve B. Fuller, of Wilton, Ma,ine; which was referred 

to the Committee of the Whole on the Private Cruendar, an~ with 

the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

Mr. H.A vVLEY, of Illinois. Are all favomble reports ordered to be 

printed, as well as adverse reports' 

The SPEAKER. Favorable reports a,re not ruways ordered to be 

printed. 

Mr. H.A. WLEY, of Illinois. Then I ask thu,t all reports from the 

Committee on Claims, whether favorable or adverse, be printed. 

The SPEAKER. Adverse reports are always printed, because they are valuable as precedents. 

SUSAN L. GALLOWAY. 

lllr. DUNNELL1 fTom the sa,me committee, reported back, with the 

recommendation that it do pass, the bill (H. R. No. 1577)for the relief 

of Susan L. Galloway; which wa referred to the Committee of the 

Whole on the Private Calendar, and, with the a-ccompanying report, 

ordoreu to be printed. 

llEIR OF MARTIN KALBFLEISCH. 

Mi·. DUNNELL also from the same committee, reported a bill (H. R. No. 1578) for the relief of Martin Kalbfleisch's heirs; which was read a first and. econcl time, referred to the Committee of the \Vhole on the Private Calendar, and, with th e accompanying report, orclerect 

to ~e printed. · JOSEPH J. PETRI. 

- Mr. DUNNELL also, from the same committee, r eported a bill (H. 

R. No. 1579) for the relief of Joseph J. Petri; which was read a first 

and second time, referred to t he Committee of the Whole on the 

Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, Qrdered to be 

printed. 
,. 

1062 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JANUARY 30, 

HEIRS OF ASBURY DICKINS. 

Mr. LANSING, from the same committee, reported a bill (H. R. No. 

1580) for the relief of the heirs of Asbury Dickins; which wa.s read a :first and second time, referred to the Committee of the Whole on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to 

be printed. 

CENSUS-TAKERS OF 1860. 

Mr! BURROWS, from the same committee, reported back, with the 

recommendation that it do not pass, the bill (H. R. No. 295) t o authoriz-e the payment of the census-takers of 1860; and the same was laid on the table, and the accompanying report ordered to be printed. 

GEORGE S. WRIGHT. 

Mr. BURROWS also, from the same committee, reported a bill (H. 

R. No. 1581) for the relief of GeorgeS. Wright, administrator of the 

estate of John T. Wright, deceased; which was read a first and sec- ond time, referred to t he Committee of the Whole on the Private 

Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

JOHN K. MAYO. 

Mr. SMITH, of Ohio, from the same committee, reported back, with 

the recommendation that it do not pass, the bill (H. R. No. 512) for the 

relief of John K. Mayo, of New York; which was laid on the table, 

and the a{}companying report ordered to be printed. 

B. F. WEST & CO. 

Mr. SMITH, of Ohio, also, from the same committee, reported back, 

with the recommendation that it do not pass, the bill (H. R. No. 314) 

to reimburse B. F. West & Co., of Martin's Ferry, Ohio, for internal- revenue stamps stolen from the post-office at Cambridge, Ohio, on the 

night of May 4, 1871; which was laid on the table, and t.he accompanying report ordered to be printed. 

C. C. SP AIDS. 

Mr. MELLISH, from the Committee on War Claims, reported back, 

with the recommendation that it do pass, the bill (H. R. No.1582) for 

the relief of C. C. Spaids; 'Which was referred to the Committee of 

the Whole on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying re- port, ordered to be printed. · 

CHA..L~GE OF REFERENCE. 

On motion of Mr. LAWRENCE, the Committee on War Claims was discharged from the further consideration of the memorial of C. M. 

France, and an accompanying bill for his relief, and the memorial of 

Martha A. Ashburn; and the same were referred to the Committee on Claims. 

CHARLES J. M'KINNEY. 

Mr. KELLOGG, from the Committee on War Claims, reported a bill 

(H. R. No. 1583) for the relief of Ch:1rles J. McKinney, of Tennessee ; 

which was read a :first and second time, referred to the Committee of 

the Whole on the Private Calend..'tr, and, with the accompanying 

report, ordered to be printed. 

CONTAGIOUS AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES. 

Mr. BROMBERG, by 'Unanimous consent, from the Committee on Commerce, reported n, bill (H. R. No.1584) to prevent the importation 

of contagious and infectious diseases into the United States; which was read a :first and second time, ordered to be printed, and recom- mitted to the committee, not to be brought back by a motion to 

reconsider. -

HEIRS OF SETH LAMB. 

Mr. HARRIS, of Virginia, from the Committee on War Claims, 

reported a bill (H. R. No.1585) for the relief of the heirs of Seth Lamb; 

which was read a :first and second time, r eferred to the Committee of 

the Whole on the Private Calendar, and, with ·the accompanying 

report, ordered to be printed. 

INDIAN DEPREDATIONS IN OREGON AND CALIFORNIA. 

Mr. AVERILL, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, reported back 

the bill (H. R. No. 1586) to provide for ascertaining losses sustained 

l1y citizens of Southern Oregon and Northern California, by rea on of 

Indian depredations in 1872 and 1873; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole on the Private Calendar. 

REMOVAL OF INDIANS. 

Mr. GIDDINGS. I am instructed by the Committee on Indian Affairs to report back the bill (H. R. No. 175) for the removal of tho Alabama and Muscogee tribes of Indians from the States of Texas and 

Louisiana to the Creek Nation, in the Indian Territory, and to supply 

them for one year; and to move that it be referred to the Committee 

of the Whole on the Private Calendar. 

Mr. G. F. HOAR. Is that a private bill t 

The SPEAKER. It is not; and therefore not in order under this 

call. MARIE BARTON GREE m . 

Mr. NESMITH, from the Committee on Military Affairs, reported a-dversely upon a memorial of Marie Barton Greene, of Massachusetts, 

for relief; and moved that the committee be discharged from its 

further consideration, and that it be laid on the table. 

The motion was agreed to, 

WILLIAM H. PILKINTON. 

JYlr. COBURN, from the Committee on Military Affairs, reported 

back the bill (H. R. No. 1587) for the relief of William H. Pilkinton, 

late second lieutenant in Com:pany G, Fifth Regiment Indiana Volunteers; which was referred to the Committee of the Whoie on l!he Private Calendar, and t he report accompanying t h e same ordered to be 

printed. 

GE~"ERAL 0. 0. HOWARD. 

1\Ir. COBURN, from the Committee on Military Affairs, reported 

back, with a recommendation that the same do pass, j oint I'e olution 

H. R. No. 43, authorizing a special court of inquiry concerning General 0. 0. Howard. 

The question was upon ordering th e joint resolution to be engro d 

and read a third time. 

The joint resolut ion, which was read, authorizes and reque ts the 

President of the United States to convene a court of inquiry, to con- sist of not less-than five officers of the Army, whose duty it shall be, 

when so convened, to fully investigate all the charges against Brigc - dier-General 0. 0. Howard, contained in the communication of the 

Secretary of War to the Speaker of the Ron e, of date December 5, 

1873, and to report their opinion a well upon moral as upon technical 

and legal responsibility for such offenses, if any, as may be discovered. 

Mr. DUNNELL. Is that a private bill f 

The SPEAKER. The Chair thinks it is. The point ha-s been r ai ed 

conversationally, :.md some arguments have been brought forward on each side. Yet the Chair would decide that it is a private bill, and 

jn order under this call. 

Mr. FRYE. I desire to offer an amendment to t he joint re olution. 

1\Ir. COBURN. I cannot yield for an amendment, and call for the 

previous questjon. 

Mr. WOODFORD. I ask that the amendment be read for the information of the House. 

Mr. COBURN. I have no objection to that. 

Mr. FRYE. I desire to move to amend, by adding to the joint reso- lution the following: 

PrO'Vided, That tho accused may be allowed the same right of challenge as allow d 

by law in trials by court-martial. 

:Mr. YOUNG, of Georgia. The law gives him that right. 

Mr. FRYE. I believe that in court of inquiry there is no such 

thing a-s challenge, those court.s being simply to collect evidence and 

report it. 

1\Ir. YOUNG, of Georgia. I do not think there is any particul:1r 

harm in the amendment. 

Mr. COBURN. I cannot yield for the amenclmcnt. The President 

makes the appointment, :.md how could the right of challenge be 

allowed 

1\Ir. FRYE. If the law allows the ri~ht. of challenge now, it cer- t ainly can do no harm to add this amencLment. The question was upon seconding the previous question. 

Tellerswereord red; andl\Ir.COBURNandMr.FRYEwereappoint d. 

The House divided, and the tellers reported that there were-ayes 

7 4, noes 100. 

So the previous question was not seconded. 

1\Ir. FRYE. I now offer the amendment I have indicated. 1\Ir. SPEER. I would like to a k the gentleman from Maine to 

inform the House what is the right of the accused upon trials by 

courts-martial in re pect to challenge. 

Mr. HAWLEY, of Connecticut. The gentleman from Maine [Mr. 

FRYE] tells me that he has not the Army Regulations in his hand. I 

happen to have them, and if he has no objection I will answer the 

inquiry. 

1\lr. FRYE. Certainly. 

1\Ir. HAWLEY, of Connecticut. In reference to the organization 

of a court of inquiry, nothing i said about the ri~ht of challenge. As 

to courts-martial, article 77 in the Regulations ot Vva,r provides : 

When a member shall be challenged by a prisoner, he must state his cause of 

challenge, of which the court shall, after due deliberation, determine the relevancy or validity. and decide accordingly; and no challenge to more than one member at a time f6b,all be received by the court. 

I suppo e, if a member was challenged off, then the authority that 

appointed the court-martial would ubstitute another in his pia e. An analogous course would be taken in this case ; if General Howard 

should challenge off for favor a member of the comt of inquiry, the 

President would appoint another in his place. It is rather a delicate 

thing for him to do, for he must challenge and state why h e thinks a member would not give him that fair trial to which he is entitled. I 

beg leave to say. that this point was not specially brought to my attention before, but I am inclined to think on its pre entation now that 

it would be a fair thing to do. 

Mr. SPEER. Who determines upon the sufficiency of the cause f 

Mr. HAWLEY~ of Connecticut. The court of inquiry. 

Mr. SPEER. Is there any limit to the challenge for cause f 

Mr. HAWLEY, of Connecticut. I know of none, exC',ept that th re can be but one member at a time challenged for cause. If one should 

be challenged off, then of course the court would wait tmtil the Pre ident appointed another. Even if it should result in setting a ide the 

whole five :first appointed, there would be no injustice to the Government; and I think it is due to .General Howard. 
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 1063 

1\Ir. SPEER. :Must General Howard be tried by officers of equal 

r ank, or can the court"be composed of officers of lower grade "I . . Mr. HA. WLEY of Connection t. I have not read all these proVIsions; 

but I do not rec~ll any that covers that point. - Mr. ALBRIGHT. I refer the gentleman to article 71 of the .Articles 

of \Var. 

1\Ir. HA. WLEY of Connecticut. I have just r ead article 71. The 

question asked by the gentleman from Pennsylvania [ Ir. SPEER] is 

whether any member of the court may be of lower rank than the officer 

upon trial. . . l\Ir. YOUNG, of Georgia. I would like to have read all the proVU?-

ions upon the subject of the e court . The gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. IlA.WLEY] ha read only one paragraph. The ninety-first 

.Article of War explains everything. 1\Ir. HAWLEY, of Com1ecticut. I read from article 91: 

In cases where the general or comma.n_ding officer ~yor~er a.co~t of in9.uiry to examine into the nature of any transaction, accusation, or 1mp.utation agamst ~y 

officer or soldier, the said court ahall consist of one or more officers, not exceeding 

thr eWe thought that a court consj ting of three members would not be 

Jurge enough; therefore, in our resolution, we have provided for fiveand a. judge-advocate, or other suitable person, as a. recorder, to r~duce the pro- ceedings and evidence t~ writing; all of whom shall be sworn to a. fru.thful perform- ance of their duty_ This com·t sha.ll have the same power to s~on wit;uess~s- as a court-martial, and to examine tJ;tem on oath- But they shall ~ot g~ve tb~rr opnnon on the merits of the case, excepting they shall be thereto spemally req~ed. 

Our resolution requ:lres this court to give an opinion upon the moral, 

technical, and legal responsibility of this officer. 

The parties :.wcuaed shall also be permitted to cross-examine and interrogate the 

witnesses, so as to investigate fully the circumstances in the question. The proceeilings of a. court of inquiry must be authenticated by the signature of 

the recorder anu the pre ident, and delivered to the commanding o~cer, aml the said proceedings may be admittl"..d as eviucnce by a court-marual m cases not capital or extending to the dismission of an officer, provided thJ.t the circumstances are such that oral t estimony cannot be obtained, Bu~ a courts of _inquiry may be perverted to dishonorable purpo es, and •may be conSldered as engutes of destruction to military merit, in the hands of weak and envious commanu..tnts, they ar hereby prohibl.ted, unless directed by the President of the United St..'ttes, or demanued by the accused. 

1\Ir. SPEER. Will not the court provided for by this resolution 

have authority only to inquire and report, not to try and convict? 

If this is so, there is not the same reason for the right of challenge in 

this ca e as in the case of an ordinary trial by court-martial. ~Ir. HA. WLEY, of Connecticut. These questions ought to be answered rather by the chairman of the committee than by myself. I 

merely rose to answer a special inquiry, because I held the book in 

my hand. 

Mr. SPEER. Then I direct my inquiry to the chairman of the 

committee. • Mr. HA. WLEY, of Connecticut. Perhaps I m<l.Y be perrojtted to answer upon this point as well as I may, and the chairman of the 

committee can afterwards add anything he may deem proper. It is 

of very little consequence to General Howard, in one view of the 

case, whether this court shall dismiss him from the .Army or shall not 

dismiss him. The essential thin~ to him with r f renee to his standing in the .Army or his standing m the world is the judgment of this 

court upon his moral and professional respon ibility in this matter. 

lienee I think it a fair thing to give him a right to challenge. 1\Ir. SPEER. I now direct my mquiry to the chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs, [1\ir. COBUR..~.] 

Mr. COBURN. What is the inquiry Y 

Mr. SPEER. Whether the court of inquiry provided for by this 

joint resolution will have the power to try and convict, or only to 

inquire and report' Mr. COBURN. The only power th.ey would have under the .Army 

Regulations would be to inquire and report te timony. If the order 

convening the court required them to give an opinion, they would 

have to do so, in addition to reporting the testimony. This resolution 

requires the court of inquiry to inquire and report: they a1·e not to 

make any finding; they are merely to report an opinion as to the 

responsibility of this officer, not only technically and legally, but 

morally ; but they are to make no finiling aside from this e.x.pres ion 

of a,n opinion. Ordinarily a court of inquiry would only report the 

evidence, just like a comrojssioner to take depo itions. 

1\ir. SPEER. The report will be made to the President ~Ir. COBURN. The report will be made to the President, of course, 

as the authority convening the court. 1\ir. FRYE. I understand, :Mr. Speaker, ar:.d the House must also 

have understood, from the reading of the joint resolution reported 

by the Committee on Military Affa,irs, that this court of inquiry di:fters 

entirely from an ordinary military court of inquiry. If the resolution be pa eel, this court will be instructed to make a finding not 

only as to the technical or legal responsibility, but also as to the moral 

I'e ponsibility of General Howard. It is to have n earl,y all the latitude of a court-martial. The reputation of General Howard being 

involved in the finding of this court of inquiry, the amendment I 

submit to the House asks only that he shall have the same right of 

challenge that is allowed to the accused in cases tried before court - martial. This is a right of challenge for cause only, not a peremptory challenge. In no State of the Union, so far as I know, is a man charged with crime, as General Howard is charged here, put upon 

trial without being allowed the right of challenge for cause and in 

most States a peremptory challenge is also allowed. ' 

Now, sir, th~ friends of General Howard, of whom I count myself one-a fum frmnd, upon whom he can rely always until convicted by a fair and impartial tribunal- the friends of General Howard them- selves ask for a court ·of inquiry. But they want it to be fair; they 

want it to be righteous; they want it to be just, and they will insist 

upon this; they will be content with nothing less. 

I have known General Howard, sir, always, be having _been born in 

the county adjoining my own. I h ave known him in nis school-boy 

days. H e was a cla s-mate of mine in the college where we received our education. I have known him intimately, I have known him well. I was on Meridian Hill when he marched with his regiment through 

the storm to the protection of the country. I was with him shortly 

:llter his arm was lost, before the wound was healed; we were together 

fighting on the stump to raise troops, he in sickne sand weakness of 

body, but with a spirit undaunted, full of faith. I was with him 

after the war was over, and I followed him in history all through the war. I know him well; and I say, sir, that from childhood up till 

to-day I ha,ve never known a flaw, a, stain, a shadow, upon the Christian chara-cter of Oliver 0. Howard. In his boyhood he was bright, 

and honest, and pure. In his college life he put me to shame a<Yain 

and again by the pure and noble life he led. In the .Army-a.nd there 

lies the secret-his life, his every-day walk, was a constant reminder and reproach to hundreds of .Army officers who bad charge of the 

destinies of our soldiers. Since the war has been over I have not 

known a single stain, and I do not believe there is a single stai.U, that 

any court of inquiry or any court-martial, fairly constituted, can fasten npon him. I stake my life, my reputation- all that I hold clear 

in life-upon the finding of an honestly-constituted court-martial or 

court of inquiry. 

Sir, the friends of General Howard do not shrink from this inquiry, 

neither does General Howard himself. To show you that I am speaking 

words of soberness and truth, I ask the Clerk to read the following co::nm~cation which I have r eceived from General Howard; and 

when It bas been r ead before the House, Itru ttbereissufficientfair- ness here, in the trial of o noble a man as history bas written General 

Howard to be, and a sufficient sense of justice, to give him the same rights that every accused man is entitled to by the laws of the land. 

The Clerk read as follows : 

WASHDIGTON, D ISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, January 21, 1874. 

DEAR SIR: As yon repre ent the diRtrictwhereiwas born, and where I lived until 

I became connecteu with the Army of the United States, I feel at liberty to ask a favor of you. Should the report of the Committee upon Military A..ffil,irs recommend the appoint. ment by the President of a military court to investigate the charges made against me by the honorable Secretarv of War, and al o to determine whether or not my official 

administration of financial affairs has been either legally or morally wrong, I would 

like to have you say, that knowing my own innocence of any conscious wrong act or violation of law, and desirorui of having my military and personal character established at the earliest possible moment, J. am ready and willing to commit myself at once to the judgment of such a court. At the same time, I hope that the court may not be appointed or its proceedings reviewed by the honorable Secretary of War, since he has made the charges against me ; and I would like, for obvious reasons, the privilege of .challenge as in ordinary courts-martial. The objections hitherto made by me to a militai-y court do n~t apply to one constituted as I have indicated as likely to be r eported by the com- nnttee. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

0 . 0 . HOWARD. Ron. WILLIAM P. FRYE, M. 0. 

1\Ir. COBURN. What is the date of that 

::hfr. FRYE. January 21, 1874. 

Mr. YOUNG, of Georgia. I desire to ask the gentleman from Mn,ino 

[Mr. FRYE] a questjon. 

1\ir. FRYE. I will hear the gentleman's question. ~1r. YOUNG, of Georgia. I should judge from the remarks of the 

gentleman from Maine tha,t he has some reason to suppose that the 

President of the United States is prejudiced against General Howard, 

and is prepared to appoint a court to convict him. ~Ir. FRYE. I unclerstood the gentleman desired to ask a, question. 1\Ir. YOUNG, of Georgia. Very well. Ha the gentleman any in- formation or reason to believe that the President is prejudiced against 

General Howard, or that he will appoint a court prejudiced against 

GeneraJ. Howard, and prepared to enter upon their dutie in prejudice 

against him t ~Ir. FRYE. The question is entirely unnecessary. I have given no intimation of anything of the kind. On the contrary, both General Howard, and I as a friend of GeneraJ. Howard, have unlimited 

confidence in the President of the United States. But, sir, the Pres- ident cannot know men's heurls. He cannot know the jealousies that 

have arisen or the rivalries that have sprung up so well as the ac- cused him elf. I intended no reflection upon the President or upon 

any officer of the Al·m by the remarks which I made. 

I yield eight minutes tothe gentleman from New York, [ 1r. WooD.] 

Ir. WOOD. Mr. Speaker, would· it be in order to offer a substitute for the r esolution r eported by th e committee' 

The SPEAKER. The position of the resolution is, that the House 

having r efuserl to second the previous question, enable the gentle- man from Maine t o offer his amendment. The gentleman from .!)fame 

is now on the floor, and while he occupies the floor no amendment can be offered without his consent. The gentleman will say whether 
,.. 

1064 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JANUARY 30," 

he yields to the gentleman fro~ New York for an amendment in the 

nature of a substitute. 

Mr. FRYE. I do not. 

Mr. YOUNG, of Georgia. May not the substitute proposed by the 

gentleman from New York be read f 

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from New York is at liberty to 

make it part of his remarks. 

Mr. WOOD. I will refer to what I desire to accomplish by it. 

My relations to the origin of these charges against General Howard 

compel me at this time, inasmuch as the gentleman from Maine has 

gone away from the 'immediate question for the purpose of referring 

to the question of guilt, to address some remarks to the House. H.:t.d 

he not done so I should have kept my seat and offered no remarks to 

the House; although I am not in favor of the resolution as presented 

by the committee, because, in my judgment, it is very far short of the 

action that is required at the present moment. 

I desire to say that, so far as General Howard is concerned, I have no unkind feelings toward him. To me, personally, he is a ~>tranger. 

He has never injured me so far as I know, and anything I may have 

done in reference to the chMges made against him has been done 

simply, sifi:gly,- and purely in the discharge of what I deem to be my 

duty as a member of this House. I need not, sir, refer to the origin 

of these charges made by myself on this floor. They were fif-teen in 

number, comprehending not only everything that is now communicated by the Secretary of War, who has renewed those charges, but 

going very far outside of that, and reaching moral guilt of the highest turpitude. Those charges were referred to a committee of this 

House. That committee investigated them to a Jjmited extent, and 

made their report to this House. The result we all know, and it is 

not necessary to refer to the fact that the House did exonerate General Howard from the charges I made against him, entirely exoner- ating him and presenting him to the people of the United States as an injured man, and as a pure, good man, and Christian statesman 

and soldier. Sir, let that pass. General Howard said then, as he 

says now, to the gentleman from Maine, [Mr. FRYE,] "I am r eady, 

and desire inquiry;" and after quibbling and avoiding, during that 

investigation, every possible inquiry that could be made; after inducing witnesses to absent themselves from the court-room by threats, 

by coaxing, by efforts to intimidate, and the other means used in 

courts of justice to prevent the truth from coming out, yet he told us and he told the world he was ready for inquiry. .And, again, when 

the Secretary of War :first called on him to answer as to certain 

accounts growing out of the closing up of the Freedmen's Bureau, 

he said, "I am ready for inquiry;" but down to this hour he has 

always avoided inquiry, and he will yet prevaricate and evade and 

interpose every technical objection to avoid, if he can, :final inquiry 

and :final punishment. 

Now, sir, this resolution, allow me to say, as it comes from the com- mittee, is directly in the line of avoidance of inquiry. These gentle- men know, as well as we all know, that under existing law a court of 

inquiry cannot be convened; that it cannot be done until that existing law shall be altered, amended, or abolished. A court of inquiry 

must consist of three members; andsuchacourtof inquiry can, under 

ordinary circumstances, be called by the President of the United 

States, without the intervention of Congress, under existing law; and 

the only reason why that course has not been adopted is, that there 

has been some doubt in the mind of the Secretary of War whether the 

circumstances out of which these charges arise, having occurred long 

sincez g.ud not within the time within which such inquiry could be 

had, he had the power to institute such court. 

Now, we all know that if we pass this resolution it must go to the 

Senate for concurrence and there must be delay, whereas a simple 

House resolution, calling upon the President of the United States to 

institute a court of inquiry in the case, is all that is required, if gentlemen really desire that General Howard should h ave an opportunity to meet these charges. I hold in my hand a resolution which 

I desire to offer as a substitute for the resolution reported by the 

Military Committee, and which I will read as a portion of my re- marks. It is as follows: 

Resol1;ed, That the President be r equested to convene a. court of inl].uiry into the 

charges made against General 0. 0 . Howard by the Secretary of War, a.nO. General 

Vincent, and .A.djuta.nt-Genera.l Townsend. 

It is not necessary to make it a joint resolution, which would be 

subject to long delay in the Senate, where it might :finally be submerged in the nece sity of hasty legislation, growing out of the closing of the session. The resolution of the committee is exactly in the 

line that General Howard has pursued. He stands b efore the world as an innocent man desiring investigation, but he interposes to prevent by every available means the possibility of an investigation. I 

hope th'1t the gentleman from Maine [Mr. FRYE] will allow me to test 

the sense of the House upon my resolution as a substitute for that 

reported by the Committee on Military Affairs. 

Mr. FRYE. I decline to yield fur that purpose. 

Mr. WOOD. I desire to inquire whether, if the gentleman from 

Indiana, [:Mr. COBURN,] the chairman of the Committee on Military 

Affairs, consents to my offering this amendment, the gentleman from 

Maine can prevent itf 

The SPEAKER. The attitude of the case is this: The House re- fused to second the demand for the previous question on the resolution 

reported from the committee by the opposition of the gentleman from 

Maine, [Mr. FRYE,] who desired to offer his amendment. That, under 

the rules of the House, gives him a right to the floor to offer his amen_dment and also a right to test the sense of the House whether 

the previous question shall be seconded. When he shall move the 

previous question, if the House shall decline to second it, it will be 

the duty of the Chair to recognize the gentleman from New York to 

try his substitute. The whole matter is within the control of a majority of the House. 

Mr. FRYE. I now yield five minutes to the gentleman from New York, [Mr. vVOODFORD.] 

Mr. \VOODFORD. 1\-Ir. Speaker, it is now nearly thirteen ears since a regiment from Maine, under. the command of then Colonel 

Oliver 0. Howard, marched through the city of New York, on its way 

to the front. Bythe courtesyofthecitizensof Maine resident in New 

York I was permitted at that time, in their behalf, to present the standard which the regiment bore, and which it brought home all shotriddled and honored. We then pledged to those men, and we pledget! 

to their colonel, that we would stand by them in the struggle on which they entered. Years passed, and he who wa one of the early 

colonels of the war was permitted, -under Providence, to become a leader in that movement which placed the musket in the hands of the 

slave, and lifted the downtrodden black man up to the full stature of 

manhood and American citizenship. You and I know how slander 

and the shaft of venom have followed Oliver 0. Howard from that 

time until now. You and I, Mr. Speaker, have heard even this morn- ing that the suggestions of Christian statesmanship and of the Christian soldier are sneeringly and tauntingly urged upon this floor. Sir, 

if Christian statesmanship has suffered wrong, o much the worse for 

those who have used the name of the Master to cover crime. If Christian soldiership has suffered wrong, so much the worse for those who 

have used the sacred name to shield cowardice or conceal crime. But 

there never was an hour when sincere and earnest Christian statesmanship and Christian manhood were so needed in this cotmtry and on this floor as to-day. 

It is known by all that the tatute of limitation had practically run against many of the offenses which are ch..'U'ged upon Oliver 0. Howard. You and I also know that he, of his own generosity, has waivecl 

all his claim on that ground and submitted the entire case. You and 

I know that courts of inquiry are generally directed to ascertaining 

legal guilt. But this resolution which has been here introduced re- quires this court of inquiry "to report their opinion as well upon 

moral as upon technical and legal responsibility." This inquiry is to 

go to the very root and essence of the whole matter. And there is 

not a gentleman on this floor but knows that the :finding of this 

court will be the ultimate judgment of large masses of the people of 

this country. 

There is no friend of General Howard who holds him so dear that 

he would shield him if wrong. All that we insist upon is, that in a case that will involve the trial of some political qttestions, which will arouse some jealou ies of r ace and of section, there shall be an impartial 

court and an ab olute investigation, in order that justice ma. be done 

between Oliver 0. Howard and his accusers. We plead for simplejnstice; we ask for no delay. 

If my memory serves me right, some sixty-three days were occu- pied in the investigation before the committee which bad under con- sideration the resolutions and the accu ations presented by the honorable gentleman from New York, [Mr. WooD.] If my memory serves me right, the honorable gentleman from New York occupied sixty of 

those days, and the a-ccused, General Howard, occupied thr e of the 

sixty-three days. The committee confoimded the accuser and cleared 

the accu ed. Simple justice is all that we ask. That justice the 

nation demands for one who has borne an honored name, and whoso 

fame is part and parcel of the heritage of the whole land. 

Mr. FRYE. I now yield for ten minutes to the gentleman from 

Indiana, [Mr. COBUR..~,] the chairman of the Committee on Military 

Affairs. 

:Mr. COBURN. It may be well that the minds of the Honse shall 

be cleared a little after the declamation we have heard in r elation to 

the character and services of General Howard. No man goes before me in re pect personally for General Howard and for his services or his character. But what earthly reason there can now be for discussing his character or his services or his merits, as a soldier and citizen, 

I, as a member of the republican party and a radical republican, 

having always boen one~ cannot see. What he was, what he is, 

what is his history, his renown, is aside from the question before the 

House. 

We are here now to settle the simple question as to whether the 

President shall have power, unlimited by this resolution, to appoint 

the court of inquiry, or whether General Howard shall have given 

him, in express terms and in an unprecedented way, the right to 

challenge such persons as he de ires. That is all there i& in it. I 

have cmi:fidence that the President will, judiciously and fairly and 

honestly-I will say further than that, tl;tat he will kindly-appoint a court in this matter; and that whatever may be the right of the 

accused generally to challenge members of the court is not affected 

by an omission in this resolution. 

What relation does the President bear to General Howard T A com- panion in arms; a man whose fame is common with his in all the 

transactions of which Howard or the republicans of this country are proud. His glory is inseparable from the glory of General Howard. 
1874 . . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 1065 

.And his management of the Freedmen's Bureau, as the executive offi- cer of the .United States-for the President of the United States had 

the management of the Freedmen's Bureau, as had General Howard, 

in a general sense-his management of the Freedmen's Bureau was identified at every step of its progress with the management of GeneraJ. Howard, and if he is to be condemned, the President is to be 

condemned side by side with him; thatis inevitable. And if disgrace 

is to be brought upon General Howard and upon the republican party 

by his management of the Freedmen's Bureau, it attaches to the 

very man who is to constitute this commis ion. 

Why, then, all this declamation about what General Howard has 

done T Why this demand of this House that ' the fair thing shall be 

done· 11 that "justice shall be done ¥" 

who proposes to do anything unfair'l Who proposes to do anything unkind f Who proposes to do anything unjust f Who proposes to do anything unreasonable f Why •should there be clamor 

here to-day for kind and just and reasonable action The resolution now before the House comes from men who are friendly to General 

Howard; ancl as the letter dated the 21st instant has been read, I will 

tell the House something of a more recent date that· has been com- municated from General Howard. No longer ago than yesterday, as I sat in this eat, with the joint resolution in my hand, I had a con- versation with him upon this very matter; and he told me that the 

resolution suited him-that it might be pa sed without objection. He 

told me that he would go to the gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. 

BUTLER,] who some days ago suggested an amendment that a majority of the court should consist of officers who had been in command 

of colored troops, that he would tell the gentlern.ln from Massachusetts he did not desire an amendment of that kind; that he waswilling the resolution should be passed by the House in the form agreed on by the committee. 

Now, if the friends of General Howard-his special, self-constituted 

friends-desire to do more for him than he asks for himself, in Heaven's 

name, let it be done. I -count myself also among his friends. But 

for the fact that that letter wa read at the Clerk's desk I would not 

have repeated in the presence of this House what was said by him to me in relation to this matter. But I feel that any action of the 

House to-day limiting the po·wer of the President in making these 

appointments, by allowing to the a-ccused the right of challenge, would 

be an imputation upon the President himself. While I believe the 

proposition has not been oft'ered in any such spirit-fa,r be it from me to say that the gentleman from Maine [Mr. FRYE] or any other gentleman who favor this proposition intended anything of that kin<}.-

the adoption of such a provision would, in the opinion of the thinking men throughout the country, be construed as an expression of lack 

of confidence m the President of the United States-in his fairness, 

his sense of justice, his kindly feeling toward one of the most distinguished men that served in our Army during the war. It is a use- less provision at best, containinS what is found nowhere else in the 

laws authorizing courts of inqrury. 

As to my own position in this matter, I will say (because it is all 

about to be made public) that I am one of those who have been in 

favor of this body making the investigation, instead of havingit made 

by a court of inquiry. While I am not among·those who have thought 

the latter the most advisable tribunaJ., I say if we must have a court 

of inquiry, if we must submit this matter to military men, who ought, 

in my judgment, never to have had jurisdiction of it, let us trust the 

President of the United States in m~g the appointment of the court; 

let us repo e some confidence in him ; let us not expressly threaten him 

with challenges in advance. If any gentleman has any apprehension that 

the Secretary of War may have undue influence in the appointments, 

let me say that I have the best authority in the world for stating that 

the Secretary of War will have nothing whatever to do with the appointment of this commission, the conduct of the investigation, or the report that the court may make. The court will be solely under 

the direction of the President. I have confidence in him; I desire to 

intrust him with the responsibility in this matter. I insist tha,t the 

resolution ought to be pa sed as reported, without threat, wa,rning, or caution again:st the President. 

Mr. FRYE. I now yield three minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. BUTLER.] 

Mr. SPEER. Will the gentleman from Maine [Mr. FRYE] allow me to have an amendment read f 

Mr. FRYE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. SPEER. I think the amendment I send to the Clerk's desk will 

obviate the objection to the amendment of the gentleman from Maine. 

The Clerk read as follows : 

Provided, That when a challenge shall be made, its snfficiency shall be determined 

by the President, upon the reasons publicly assign d by the aooused. 

~ir. SPEER. This amendment will. allow the President, instead of 

the court, to determine the sufficiency of the challenge. 

Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I would not trouble the House on this question but for the fact that in going about the House I 

have heard gentlemen say that this is like an inquiry by a grand 

jury, and I have been asked more than once whether in the courts 

of the United States there is a right of challenge as regard£! a grand 

jru·y. Upon that point, I wish to say that in the most important case that ever came before a court of the United States-the case of 

Aaron Burr upon trial for treason at Richmond, where Chief Justice 

Marshall }?resided in person-this question was de bated. After the 

argument the district attorney admitted the right of challenge a.t common law; the court decided that ,the accused should have the 

right; and he did challenge two of the grand jurors. Since this 

question arose, I have sent forthe book and have refreshed my mem- ory a~ to the facts. 

I want to say further that I do not regard the amendment of the gentleman from Maine [:Mr. FRYE] as an imputation upon the 

President, any more than I would look upon a challenge of a granrl. 

juror as an imputation upon the marshal who had the right of 

selection. He may have selected men generally regard d by him 

aB "good and true men;" yet it may turn out that in theca e of some particular juror there may be some personal partiality or enmity, or, as happened in one case in my own State, one of the grand jru·or 

may have been formerly convicted of crime-a fact unknown to the 

officers of the court until brought out by strict inquiry on the part 

of the accused. Under the e circum tances I do not look upon this as implicating the President or bringing any distrust upon him. 

Now let me say, what is due to my friend, the chairman of the 

Committee on :Military Affairs, as well as to General Howard, that 

General Howard came to me and said that he diu not desire that I 

should press my amenclment to the resolution, that three officers of 

the colored troops shall sit upon the court of inquiry; that he was satisfied with the resolution; that he had no doubt the Pre ident 

would do right. But while I could ea ily see that he was perfectly 

satisfied that it would not be proper, courteous, modest, or in good 

taBt-e for him to object to any tribunal that his superior officer, the 

President of the United States, might choose, and while he felt a delicacy, undoubtedly, in asking to have this provision put in, as I 

should had I been in his place1 still the question is not one for 

General Howard or for the Pre 1dent, but it is a question of precedent in the administration of public justice. Thi court of inquiry 

makes an indictment; nay, further, it makes a decision; ancl all that 

anybody P ks is that it shall be a fair tribtmal. And I know that 

the chairman of the Committee on l\filitary Affairs, if the matter had 

been brought to his attention before he reported there olution, would 

have seen no objection to it; and he now feels that he is treated a little unkindly in being thought to be opposed to General Howard, 

ancl unfriendly to him. But is there really any objection to this proposition If it should so turn out that one of the officers innocently and properly elected 

by the President had cause of personal grievance against General 

Howard, would anybody desire that he should be tried by his per- sonal enemy Y But we can suppose a case of one who had stated an adverse opinion. If he should know that an officer-which the PI·esident might not know-had said, "I believe General Howard to be 

guilty; all the evidence in the world would not convince me of his 

innocence;" would you desire him to be tried by such an officer Y Yet 

the officer might be a very honorable man. Take General Hooker. 

If one might believe the newspapers, which I do not always believeif the President believed he had already expressed in public the opinion which he is said to have expressed, of course he would not choose 

him. Suppose some other officer had expressed the same opinion privately, would the chairman of the l\lilitary Committee or anybody 

else, friend or enemy of General Howartl, desire he hould be tried by an officer so circumstanced Clearly not. This only gives a right of 

challenge for cause, to be decided by the remaining unchttllenged portion of the court. 

Mr. HAWLEY, of Illinois. If an hour is allowed after the seconding of the previous question, I should like to have a portion of it. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Indiana [Mr. COBURN] would 

be entitled to the hour. Mr. COBURN. I desire that some other gentlemen should ha.ve the 

opportunity of expressing their views. I yielcl to the gentleman from 

illinois, [Mr. HAWLEY,] if the Chair accords me the floor. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair h2.8 no discretion in the matter. 

Mr. COBURN. The gentleman from Illinois may have five or ten 

minutes. 

Mr. HAWLEY, of Illinois. I hope the gentleman from New York 

[Mr. WHEELER] will not manife t too much impatience. Certainly 

any debate on this matter was not precipitated on this House by the 

Committee on Military Affairs. There waB no disposition whatever 

shown by that committee, or any member of it, to discuss this joint 

resolution. But it seems to me, from the discussjon which has taken 

place here this morning, that it is sought by some to lead the House 

and the country to suppose that the Militl1I'y Committee, or some portion of it, is not friendly to General Howard. Now, I believe I may 

say that as far as I know, and I think I am now in a position to know 

the sentiments of all the members of the committee, since this question bas been under discus ion there is not a member of that committee who is unfi.iendly to General Howard, or would see any injustice 

done to him. 

The chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs stated that if he 

had had his own way he would have had this inve tigation conducted 

by a committee of this House. I woulcl have opposed that. I am in 

favor of this resolution with the amendment proposed by the gentle- man from Maine ; and I think if General Howard had suggested to t-he 

committee that he desired such a provision to be placed in the l'esolution there is not a man upon that committee who would ha.ve opposed it. It never occniTed to me, and I think it never occurred to any gentleman upon the committee; but when it is suggested I see the pro-
1066 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JANUARY 30, 

priety of it and think it should be adol?ted. And I am su~e a n:a- jority of the committee, so far as I can JUC!-ge from the way rn which 

the majority of the members of the committee ha,ve expressed th~mselve are in favor of the amendment of the gentleman from Marne. No~ the case, in my judgment, occupies a very differ ~t po_sition from 

that of ordinarv cases that lllaY come before courts of rnqmry. There are special considerations applicable to this ca e. It is a very important one. It has attracted very wide notice throughout the country. 

Everybody in the countr-y is interested in it. General Howard ha 

h andled-he and his subordinates- millions of money, and everybody 

is lookina now to the inquiry which shall be conducted in regard 

to it, parlicularly after what the Secretary of War has said tn his letter to Congre ·. It appeared to the Com~ttee on Military Affairs that he shoylld "J:le 

tried by his peers ; that b erng an officer: of the .Aimy. v_ery high m 

authority and command, he sh(;mld be tned as other military office_rs 

are tried, by those whose verdict, after they shall have rend~red I~, 

will carry weight one way or the other. If the case should be mvestigated by Congress again there may be a ~ea,t dea~ of dissatisfaction 

with the result, let Congre . or h~ comJ:?Ittee dec~de ~m~ way or the other· but if he shall subffilt to bemg tried, as he IS willing to do, by 

his p~ers, having five .Aimy officers to try ~' he can go with co~­ dence before tha,t tribunal, and the country will look upon the deCision of that tribunal as a settlement of the questions involved. 

I do not hesitate to say, sir, that I am a friend of General Howard. 

1 wish to see him have a fair trial, and I would be as unwilling and 

reluctant as any man in the world to see him put before a tribunal 

that would not do him justice; but aiter a ca,reful consideration of 

the question, I have come. t~ the con.clusion, as a majority of the c_?mmittee have done, that this IS the fairest and best wa,y of proceeding, 

and the only necessity for this joint resolution is tha,t it _is prop~sed 

to increa, e the number of the court from three to five, which, I think, 

is very wise and pruden~, a-?-d which I hope Congress ~ill adopt. As 

I said before, I am heartily m favor of there olut10n, Wlth the amendment of the gentleman from :Maine, [:Mr. FRYE.] :Mr. FRYE. I yield now for ten minutes to the gentlema,n from 

Iowa, [Mr. DONNA.i.~.] _ Mr. DONNAN. :Mr. Speaker, no man in this House is more heartily 

pleasecl than myself to listen to the laudations of General 0. 0. Howard. No man in this country who reads its history for centuries to come will forget his memory. But the question now is whether we .,hall go into an exa,mination reilltive to certain chn,rges which have 

been preferred against him, or whether we shall refer thecae to a court of inquiry of his peers in the organization in which h e serves. It ha,g been intima,ted here tha,t he stands charged before his 

country by the Secretary of War. I ask the members of this House 

to consider for a, moment how this matter ha,ppened to come before 

the committee of which I am a member. It is now three years since 

there were charges made against this officer for his conduct in the 

Freedmen's Bureau. An investigating committee of Congre s exam- ined tho e charges and exculpated him. What was the result \Vas 

the country sat.isfied t Were the members of the opposition in this 

House satisfied Y On the contrary, in the very next Congre we found similar charges preferred by members of the oppo ition here, 

aud a dema,nd for further investigation. The matter pa sed over during the last Congress, and scarcely had we been seated in the 

present Con!!Te s before like charges were aga,in preferred by a member of tY.is body, and a demand made· that the House should go 

into another investigation with reference to them, or that a court of 

inquiry should be ordered to try him. Now, it was because the last 

Congre s preferred additional charges against this officer that the 

Secretary of War felt it to be his duty, in response to the action of 

Congress and in response to complaints that were being made, to 

submit the question to Congress for its consideration. General Howard, in his recent letter which was published to the country about a month ago, intim..<ttes that the Secretary of War is the person who 

stands charging him with crime before the country. Not at all. No man who listened to the kind sentiments expressed toward this officer 

by the Secretary of War before the Committee on l\lilitary Affairs would for one moment doubt that the kindest possible relations exist 

between the two. But the Secretary of War like my elf, and I hope like every other member on the floor, feels not only confidence in 

General Howard, but a sincere wish in the dept h of his heart that this ma-tter may be fully investigated, and General Howard not only ex- onerated but fully exculpated before the House and the country. 

A word now as to the action of the committee. After mature delibemtion it was decided by the committee that, with the amount of 

busine on its hands, and in view of the fact that a former committee 

had gone through an investigation there ult of which proved un atisfactory and had only resulted in producing additional charge , if 

the committee should undertake the inve tigation and exculpate Geneml Howard, char~es would still be made by the minority on this 

floor and the minonty in the Qountry that there had only yet been a whitewashing r eport. It was believed by the Committee on Military A:ffaii -and I believe I may ay that every member of that commit- tee is extremely friendly to General Howa~d, and hopes his character 

may stand unblemished before the country; it was believed that in 

justice to him, in justice to the country, in justice to the Christian 

Church, who demand that no member of its organization, tanding 

in a position of high influence and responsibility, shall stand accused 

of charg~s of misconduct be~ore th~ worlc"!- with~mt _having an absolut?lY fair, but at the ~arne time thorough rnvest1gat10n; I say it was believed by the committee best to recommend the appointment of a court of inquiry, who should ift these charaes to the bottom. At the sugg~tion of the officer against whom &e charges are made the 

committee agreed to authonze the court to examine into any c~ges 

of moral misconduct, a well as technical official mi conduct. Af3 to the amenclment which ~as been offered by the gentleman from 

l'lfarne, [Mr. FRYE,] I would like to ask him whether it is ofl"ered at 

t he request of General Howard I do not under tand it to be asked 

in the letter which ha been rea.cl. Thi officer stated to the com- mittee that he was en irely atisfied with their recomm ndations. I 

have only this objection to the amendment offered: it was u~'"rrested 

bY: the gentleman from Maine [Mr. FRYE] that it wns an unh~~rcl-of tJ;W?.g tn~t there ho~ld be a court of inquiry appointed wit hout 

~1vrng ~his officer the gh~ to c~a;llenge,. b caus~ this conrt of inquiry 

1s. r~qmred to report t~eu opi~on. Str, th at IS provided for in the 

nnhtary law. Ever smce military law was established in till 

cm_lllt;ry, courts of inq~y may, at the ~ngg<;s~on of the officer ap- polll~g them, be reqrure_d to re.~ ort theu oprmons upon any question 

snbffiltted to them. _This case does_ not_ tancl upon any different 

ground from any ordinary court of rnqmry. ·The only difference is that it is to be compo ed Of five instead of three officers. 

In my judgment it is unwise for the friemls of General Howard to 

ask that he be made an exception to the rule applyina to other offi- cers of the Aimy ; to ask that he shall have the right of challenge 

which no other officer of the Aimy is permitted to clemand in his own 

behalf; to ask that he shall be permitted to challenge a court of inquiry to investigate facts. I believe that it is for General Howard's 

interest, th~t it IS be t for his cha;ract~r, if he shall be exculpated, as I hope he will be, that no court of mqrury shall b summoned differinrr 

in any r~gard from one re~ularly app?intetl by military authority. 0 

For this reason I .~ope tne Ho~se will not change the re olution as reported by the Military Committee ; that they will not make the 

ca e of General Howard an exceptional ca e; that they will show to 

the country that they are willing and desirous to place themselves 

where General Howard himself says he wants them to place t.hemscl ve · in favor of an investigation before a comt organized by the President' 

who, as the chairman of the committee says, will deal justly fairly' 

and honestly in the organization of this court. ' ' 

I doubt whether yon can find an officer in the nitecl States Army 

but what would prefer to be tried by hi peers rather than in any other manner. And I think if you were to ask the general officers of 

t he Army if they wished to be made exceptions to the general rule 

applicable to a court of inl]_uiry, they would ay they wi bed to stand 

precisely in the arne position in which officers of the Army are com- pelled to stand when their conduct is undergoing inve tigation. I hope this amendment will not be adopted. I believe a court of 

inquiry of five officers, summoned by the Pre ident, declared by 

General Howard him elf to be satisfactory to him, will do him substantial justice. And there is no man hero; there is no man who ever attended college with him, or ever served under him, or is nearest to 

him in friendship, who will r ejoice more heartily than m self if that 

court of inquiry shall ab olutely exculpate rum from all blame in this matter. 

l\fr. COBURN. I now yield to the gentleman from Tennessee, [l\fr. THOR...~URGH.] 

l\!r. THORNBURGH. I am one of the members of the Committee on l\Iilitary Affairs of this House who believe that thut committee is 

the proper tribunal to investigate this whole matter. Gmve and eri- ous charges have b.een made against Gen.eral Howard by the Secretary 

of War. The dutie upon which General Howard was enga.credat the 

time the public moneys are said to have been squandered0weTe not 

purely ?f a militar;y: chara_cter. Under a special law of Congre she was assigned to duties whwh were, to say the least of them, of a civil as well as a military character. 

The Committee on Military .A:tfai:rs is compo eel of gentlemen who 

have not only had some experience in military matters and military 

law, but gentlemen who have been engaged in the practice of th prof ion of law, and who are familiar with investigating subj ects 

of this character. I earnestly desire a full, fair, and thorough in yestigation of this whole matter, with men of both political partie to 

make that examination, a committee acquaintecl with military law, and men who have made t h study and pr~ctic~ of law the profes ion of 

their lives. With such ruon I think we can h ave a full, fair, and thorough investigation, with suoh a report upon the facts a will do General Howard justice ancl atisfy the count:J;y that Congre ha done 

it duty in regard to t.be charges again t him. I would be glad to ··ee till whole ubject referretl back to the committee, with instructions 

to inve tigate it and report to the Hous . · 

I cannot now, in the pre ent attitude of the que tion l>efore t he 

Hou e, enter a motion I de ire to submit. But if this amendment 

should u e :voted down and the gentleman from Indiana, the chair- m.an of the committee, [Mr. COBURN,] will yiell the floor to me, I will 

then move that this whole question be recommitted to the Committee on Military Affairs, to full investigate and r eport upon all matters involved: 

:Mr. COBURN. I now yield to the gentleman from Connecticut 

[Mr. HAWLEY] for fiv minutes. 

Mr. HAWLEY, of Coll.J;leoticut. !shall trouble the House for as briel 

/ 

• 
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 1067 

n.period as possible. I propose notto begin by saying whether I am a special friend of General Howard or not, for that is not the question. 

I propose not to begin by a. eulogy upon his brilliant military services, 

for that is not the question. I am anxious for two things: first, that 

he shall have a thorough trial; and, next, that there shall be a com- plete and unlimited investigation of the whole range of charges submitted by the Secretary of War, in justice to him, in justice to the 

country, and injustice to the House of Representatives. That is all 

that I shall speak to. 

It wa first proposed that there should be an investigation by the 

Committee on Military Affairs. At the fil'st blush I thought favorably of that proposition. But it afterward occurred to me, and it is now my conviction, that it is best not to have the investigation con- ducted by that committee. Why 'f I do not distrust the ability or the fairne s of that tribunal. For myself individually I should be 

willing to be tried by the Committee on Military Affairs; and I doubt 

not General Howard would be. But I do not care, so far as this ca e is concerned, whether be would or would not. That committee is compo ed, with a single exception, of men who have served 

in the Army on one side or the other; and hichever side they may 

have fought upon, I would trust them to decide honestly this case, 

according to the standard of profe sional honor as recognized in every 

army that I know anything about. 

But what would be the result if that committee should try the case' 

Suppo e the committee should acquit the accused entirely General 

Howard's case would be as unsettled as it is now. A large portion of 

the country would turn upon us with the reproach that the tribunal ma.king the examination was simply a "whitewashing" committee 

of political partisans. Now, while ordinarily, in the performance of 

what seems to be duty, I prefer to go on and do my duty scorning 

such ch::trges, I think it really better for General Howard, and the 

Army, and the committee, and the House, that we should now fix upon 

such a tribunal that nobody can have an excuse for 1inding fault with 

its verclict. We propose therefore to remit the whole case of General 

Howard to the President, the proper authority in all such ca es, that 

he may appoint a court of inquiry, as provided for in the Army Regulations. 

It is true we make some little deviation from the ordinary method 

of conducting courts of inquiry. In the first place, however, we do 

not limit the investigation in any way. We give to General Howard 

and the Government a wider field of inq_uiry than there would bo 

under an ordinary court-martial. Before ncb a tribunal the investigation is usually confined to an examination of direct charges and 

specifications. In this resolution we authorize the court of inquiry 

to take the whole body of evidence and charges submitted by the Secretary of War, and make a general examination. It seems to me that this ought to be satisfactory to everybody, whether a friend or an enemy of General Howard. Whatever may be the belief of any man in the justice or the injustice of this case, it must be conceded 

that there can be nothing fairer than this unlimited investigation. 

It bas also been thought proper by the committee that in this ex- ceptional case the court should consist of five officers rather than 

three. Does not this proposition commend itself to the unprejudiced 

judgment of every member of this House Y Is not the court likely 

to be a fairer, more satisfactory tribunal, if it be composed of five 

experienced Army officers than if it should consist of only three t I 

think that clearly the resolution is right in this respect. 

Then, as to the right of challenge. The gentleman from Ma-ssachusett , [Mr. BUTLER,] and other gentlemen whose opinions on questions of law are entitled to ~reat re pect, have shown that there is a right of challenge even in tho ca e of an ordinary grand jury. Indeed, I cannot suppose that there can be any legal tribunal, final or preparatory, that cannot be reached by some sort of challenge for 

favor. Indeed, many able lawyern would bold (and I have the opinion of one ncb who sits near me) that the right of challenge pertains even to a court of inquiry, because members of the court take 

this oath: 

You shall well and truly examine and in!lniro, according to your evidence, into 

the matter now before you, without partiality, favor, affection, prejudice, or hope 

of reward. So help you God. 

Now, suppose a person on trial before such a court should know perfectly well that some member of the court, appointed in good faith by 

the commanding officer, bad expres ed a decided opinion or had a prejudice against the accused, would there not be, even in a court of 

inquiry, the right of challenge 'I I am inclined to think tl:ere would 

be; and though I do not know the precedent , there are lawy~rs around me who I think would compel a court of inquiry in such a case, under 

the law as it now stands~ to admit the right of challenge. Buli as the 

right is not entirely certain, why should we not assure it in this case 

by a specific provision 

But there is an additional reason for giving that right in this ca e. We propose to give this court of inquiry a w1der scope than it would 

have ordinarily under the law. The ordinary provision is that "they 

shall not give their opinion on the merits of the case excepting they 

shall be thereto specially required." We propose to require that 

this court shall express an opinion, not alone upon the le~al or pecuniary responsibility of General Howa.rd for any squandenng of public money that may have occuned in the management of the Freedmen's Bureau, but also upon his moral guilt. We provide that his 

':Hhole standing as ~ man, as a. solQ.ier, and as an accounting officer, 

shall be investigated; and we propose that this investigation shall 

be conducted by five regular Army officers. 

One word as to the reflection which this amendment is supposed 

to imply upon the President of the United States. I shall not say 

whether or not I know anything of the President's opinions upon this 

matter from any conversations with him; but I have the same unlimited confidence ·as the gentleman from Maine, [Mr. FRYE,] that tho 

President of the United State , knowinll' this officer and having a high 

regard at the same time for the profe ional honor and integrity of 

the Army, will hold the scales evenly, and will, so far a it may be 

within his power, appoint a fair court. But he may not know everything in regard to the character or opinions of the men whom heappoints; and it seems to ine perfectly right that the' accused if he 

knows something upon this point that the President do s not know, 

should be allowed to specify it as a ground for challenge; for be can only challenge for favor. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. COBURN. I yield five minute to the gen~leman from Mississippi, [Mr. LAMAR.] 

l\ir. LAMAR. I shall not need more than a moment or t.wo to state 

the reason which controls my vote on this amendment. I am not the 

friend of General Howard, nor am I conscious of being in any en e his foe. By no act, nor vote, nor wish of mine will the luster of his 

fame, eithercivilormilitary, be everwa.ntonlytarnished. With regard 

to his guilt or innocence of the offenses charged upon him I have no opinion except the general inclination of my mind to di credit 

charges made against men occupying hi~h and responsible stations. But I would respectfully submit that wnf'n snch charges a.re made, 

emanating a the e do from a source o exalted, it is far !Jetter for his reputation that such accusations should be met by a calm, ereue, 

and dignified demand for a prompt and public trial rather than by 

rhetorical laudations on the part of his friends of his pa t career. Now, sir, with regard to this amendment. My opinion is, that a party 

accused before a military court of inquiry bas the right to challPnge 

amemberof.that court for cause. The military law in this country aml 

in England is subordinate to the civil andmunicipallaw ·. The <Teneral 

principles of jurisprudence are supreme, and the soldier do s not .lose his rights a a citizen. The right of an accused to challenge for cause any member of a tribunal before whom he is brought for triaJ is a right 

inherent in the principles of public law, peculiar to no one country, but 

of universal application to criminal trials and investigations whether 

preliminary or final. No r egulation or Sl)ecial statute has been cited 

subversive of this right. 

But, sir, if this principle of common and public law has been super- seded by any special regulation or en tom obtaining in the conduct 

of the e preliminary military trials, I think there should be no d part- ure from that regulation in the proposed inquiry. Arbitrary, nnjrrst, 

and harsh as such a rule (if it exist) must be, if it is the law General 

Howard should not be specially exempted from its operation. Any 

attempt made by his friends to vary his trial from the regular and 

established procedure will subject the accused and the proceecling 

alike to grave misconstruction, and will break the value aud force of 

that acquittal and vindication which have been so confidently predicted by his eulogists in this debate. 

However elevated in position, or brilliant in his career, or useful in 

his services to his country, he ought not to be placed above the law; nor should the stringency of its rule be relaxed for his benefit. 

Opposed, therefore, to an~ special legislation-any special favorI shall vote against this amendment; believing, however, that as a general principle the right of challenge attaches to an aeon ed in 

these trials, e pecially in view of the fact that no rule or pecial 

provision forbidding or depriving him of such a right bas been produced in this discussion. 

Mr. COBURN. I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. TOWNSEND.] 

Mr. TO\VNSEND. Mr. Speaker I would not have participated in ·this debate bad it not been for a remark made by the gentleman from 

New York, [Mr. WooD,] that though an investigation had been made some time ago by a committee of this House, of which I was a mem- ber, that investigation was only a limited one. My own self-resp ct 

and the justice that is clue to the remainder of .the committee, the 

greater portion of whom have pa sed away from this House, require me to say that the charges which have been made by the gentleman 

from New York, charging a limited investigation, or any limitation on the part of anybody connected with that investigation, are not 

f01mded in fact. 

The committee appointed on that occasion to listen and adjudge 

upon the fifteen counts in the indictment of the gentJemanfromNew 

York a{f.linst General Howard, sat with great patience for sixty-three 

days, as has already been stated to the House by the gentleman's colleague from the city of Brooklyn. There was given to the gentleman 

from New York who preferred tb se charges the greatest power of 

the Government so as to secure the largest liberty of investi~ation. 

It conferred upon him all the aut.bority that t:i\is House coulct give. 

It gave him the ervicesof the Sergeant-at-Arms. It is ned ubpcenas, 

and enabled him to range the country from one end to the other. He 

had everything in the way of an opportunity for a varied and ex- tended inve tigation that any accus r could require. He summoned 

witnesses wherever he thought proper. He brought them before that 

committee, and for sixty long days, earnestly, carefully, faithfully, 
1068 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JANUARY 30, 

fairly, and patiently, we listened to the accusations and the testimonv 

that he chose to bring forward again t General Howard. v 

In replying to the accusations and the testimony that were offered 

against him General Howard occupied but three days. In that brief 

period of time we beard his testimony. We allowed, also, the counsel 

whom his accuser produced there to argue the case; we beard the ar- gument upon the other side; and after full and faithful con ideration we came to the conclusion that General Howard wa not guilty of the 

charges that were preferred against him. , Eight out of ten of that 

committee decided that the charge ma<le bad entirely failed, and they 

authorized me to lay before the House this resolution, which, by a vote of the House of 134 yeas to 52 nays, was adopted. I a k the 

lerk to read the resolution. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

March 2, 1871, Mr. TOWNSEND moved to suspend the rules and pa<>s the followino- re olution of the Committee on Education and Labor, namely: &Solved, That the policy pursued by the United States toward four and a half 

million<> of its people suddenly enfranchised by the events of a great civil war, in s eking to provide for their education, to r ender them independent and self-supporting, and in extending to them civil and political equality, is a source of just national pride; and that the House hereby acquits Major-General Oliver 0. Howard of the groundless and causeless charges lately preferred against him, and does 

her eby declare and record its judgment that, in successfully organizing and administering with fidelity, integrity, and ability, the Freedmen's ~ureau, which has contributed so much to the accomplishment of the first two of these great ends, he 

is deserving of the gratitude of the American people. 

:Mr. TOWNSEND. I have called ·for the reading of that resolution to show that in the estimation of a committee of this House the 

charges that were then made by the gentleman from New York were "grounclle s and causeless," and that General Howard was entirely 

acquitted from them, and to redeem the committee from the accusa- tion that seems to have been made by the gentleman from New York, 

whether intentionally or not, of having endeavored to screen General 

Howa1·d, or of having acted unfaithfully toward the House in making 

the investigation. They made it, as I said before, patiently and care- fully and t horoughly, and arrived at the results which are contained 

in the resolution; and the House, after having all the testimony before it for' twenty days or more, came to the conclusions that are embodied in that resolution, and passed it by the vote I have already 

stated. 

Having vindicated the committee from what I considered the tiDfounded charges of the gentleman from New York, I give back the 

floor to the gentleman from Indiana. 

Mr. WOOD. I ask the gentleman from Indiana to yield me five 

minutes. 

:Mr. COBURN. I have agreed to yield just now to the gentleman 

from Pennsylvania, [Mr . .ALBRIGHT.] 

Mr. ALBRIGHT. When in the eaJ.'ly part of this session the com- munication from the Secretary of War and the accompanying documents were presented to the House, I believed it was proper and right 

for the Committee on MiHtaJ.·y Affairs to investigate this matter. I 

believe now it would be better to have the Committee on :Military 

.Affairs do this, because they have all the power that n, court of inquiry could have, and more too; because whatever findings they ar- rive at can be accompanied with such r ecommendations to Congress as may be deemed proper to legislate upon. Now, a military court of 

inquiry can do nothing of the sort. lt has no power beyond its findings, and its findings must be simply in the form of recommendations. 

But since the committee haa determined that this matter shall be re- ferred to a court of inquiry, I do not feel disposed to resist it. I do 

not, however, see any objection to what is proposed by the gentleman • from Maine, [Mr. FRYE,] because, by the .Articles of War, there is spe- cin,l provision made for courts-martial, and also for courts of inquiry, 

and the law which is applicable to one is not applicable to the other. 

The manner in which courts-martial are organized and constituted 

cliffers from that in which courts of inquiry are constituted under 

the law which prevails. A court of inquiry must be organized and 

provided for by the President of the United States, if he see proper, or when demanded by the accused. A military officer, ordinarily, can- not organize a court of inquiry; it must be done by the Pre ident, or upon the demand of the accused. Now, in all trials where a man is 

accused of a crime he baa a right to challenge. This is really not 

such a case as comes properly before a military tribunal, and it re- quires special legislation to brin~ it there. It is true, in my judgment, as haa been remarked by otner gentlemen who have addre ed 

the House, that the men who might be named by the President to constitute this court might be men who would be prejudiced against 

General Howard, and yet the President not know that fact. It must 

be observed, however, that the challenge of General Howard would not be conclusive; because, while he may challenge, he mlil t challenge for cause, and the sufficiency of that cause must be determined 

by the court itself. I refer gentlemen to the seventy-first .Article of 

·war, which relates to this subject, and is in these words: 

When a. member shall be challl'nged by a. pri oner, he must state his cause of 

challenge, of which the court shall, after due deliberation, determine the e~ancy 

or validity, and decide accordingly; and no challenge to more than one member at a time shaJl be received by the court. 

Now that is the law which relates to courts-martial, and it is the 

law which it is proposed to make effectual for this court of inquiry. 

\Vhat objection can there be to it 7 It is said that it will be an imputation on the President. I cannot see in what sense it will be a reflection on him, hecause it is simply a provision designed to protect 

the rights of a man who is presumed t o be innocent until he is found 

guilty by the tribunal that is to try him. 

Now, sir, like t~e.gentle~an from Connecticut, [Mr. HAWLEY,] I do 

not feel that thiS I S the time or place to e:x;press our laudations of 

General Howard, or to say how much we admire him for having fourrht 

for his country, and for what he has done more recently. The q~estioJ?- is whether Gene~al H?warcl is guil~ of th cha1·ges and accu- sations. And there IS this other questwn, what court or tribunal 

shall try hi_m? I say~ ~herefore, that ~ a.I? !-n fn,v_or of having General 

Howa1·d tried by a m1litary court of mqmry, With the rio-ht to challenge any of his triers for cau e. 0 

Mr. COBUR~. I now yield for a few moments t o the o-entleman 

from Georgia [Mr. YOUNG.] 0 

Mr. YOUNG, of Georgia. Th re is nothing in this amendment x- cept that_ it is_ an _imputation upon the ?resident and the Army. ' No 

court of mqmry m the world ver demed the right of an accu d to 

challeng~ one. of ~ts mem.bers. I ~ave erved upon many of them. A 

court of mqmry IS the highest tribunal known to military jru·isprudence. ~t has ~ower far .b yond that of a court-martial,.excepting 

to prescnbe purushment ; 1t has power that a court-martial doe not 

p~s. ess, in pro~uring ~estimony, a!ld there is no court of inquiry, no military authonty which ever derued any accused before it the rio-ht 

to challenge one of its members. In order to prove this I have s~co the beginning of this disc~ion, sent a dispatch to the War D~pa.rt­ ment, and have received the answer, which I send to the Clerk's desk 

and de ire to have read. ' 

The Clerk r ead as follows: 

WAR DEP ARTiffi~T, Washington, D. 0., January 30, 1074. 

Hon. P.M. B. YOUNG, House of Representatives: 

. Secretary- at Cabinet. It is ld by all the authorities f.? be an e t.'lblished prin- Ciple that the accused has the nght to challenge members m a court of inquiry. 

H. T. CROSBY, Ohief Olerk, 

(For Secretary.) 

Mr. BUTLER, of :Massachusetts. Will the gentleiP.an allow m to 

a k him a question . :Mr. YOUNG, of Georgia. With pleasure. :Mr. BUTLER, of Ma sacbusetts. What harm is there in puttiug 

this in and making it certain · 1\fr. YOUNG, of Georgia. What harm would there be in puttino- in an amendment that would require the President to appoint an kpartial court Y 

Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I do not think it would do auy 

harm. 1\Ir. YOUNG, of Georgia. I think it would do considerable harm· 

it would be a reflection on the Chief Magistrate of the nation. Th' 

right of challenge in a court of inquiry has alway , I repeat be n regarded as the prerogative of the accused. Courts of inquiry do not 

partake of the prosecuting features of courts-martial. They have even b~on regarded as a means of defense again t unjust accusatiou 

irom parties who are prejuiliced. None of the ftmctions of courts of 

inquiry are in the intere ts of the prosecution, but all of them aJ.'O on the side of injured innocence; and hence I say it is ab urd to hold 

that the accused can in any way be deprived of his undeniable right 

to challenge any member of a court of inquiry; in fact I am sure no officer of the Army would serve upon a court of inquiry when the 

accused objected to him, no matter whether the objection was held 

valid or not by the court. 

Mr. SHANKS. I will ask the gentleman whether a civil court feels ~t elf reflected on by the criminal at the bar challenging one of he 

JUTY 

:Mr. YOUNG, of Georgia. I consider the ca-ses very different. I 

hope the amendment will not be agreed to, becau e it is not nece - sary. I am sure that a com-t of inquiry would no more feel itself 

reflected upon, in the case of ·a challenge of one of its members, than would a civil court under like circumstances, for I ball always hold 

and maintain that the accu ed h as the arne right to challenge a member of a court of inquiry that he ha to challenge a member of a com·t-martial, or one of the jurors in a civil court. Therefore I oe no reason to ingraft this amendment on the re olution of the com- mitte , which it appears to me must be lookecl upon as an imputation 

upon the President and the .Army. Ir. HANKS. This is in the nature of a grand jmy. 

Mr. YOUNG, of Georgia. It goes far beyond a grand jmy. I r - peat that I hope the amendment will not be agreed to, because I a ure every member of the House that no court of inquiry will ev r deny to any accused the right to challenge one of its members. 

Mr. COBURN. I now yiP-ld five minutes to the gentleman from 

Pennsylvani a, [Mr. SPEER.] 

1\lr. SPEER. This surely is not the time to judge or prejudge 

General Howard. I make no assumption of hi guilt. I give him the 

benefit which every accused part.y is entitled to, of the presumption 

of innocence until he is legally proved guilty. But whether innoc nt or guilty, it is certainly in bad ta te, and injurious to General Howard him elf, at this stage to ha e t he accusations against him m t, 

not with evidence of his innocence but with the wildest rhapsodie over the achievements of his past life. It is an old and familiar trick 

with criminal pleaders, when they have no other defen e to make, to 

throw the gfi>od character of their clients into the jury-box. I admit 

that character is a fact to be considered; that when General Howard 
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 1069 

shall be put upon his trial, if that day shall ever an'ive, his character, 

his services to the country, faithful and meritorious as they have 

been, may all be proper subjects for the consideration of the comt 

which shall try him. But what have we to do here at this hom and 

at this stage of the proceedin<TS with those things¥ What have the 

star-spangled banner, the battle-fields of the South, the regiments 

marching and filing and counterfiling through the city of New York, 

with their flags tattered and torn borne at their head-what have all 

these to do with thi.s question, except to afford gentlemen an opportunity of indulging in fine specimens of spread-eagle oratory¥ All the e smely can do no good to General Howard. They seem to be resorted 

to to Jiivert the attention of the country from the char~es made and 

to darken the air with the dust of fulsome and hollow nattery. 

Now, what should General Howard ask 'f He should a.sk that to 

which he i.s entitled. Fir t, a fair court of inquiry; and, secondly, and 

above all things, he honld demand a thorough investigation. He, 

above all others, should desire a fair court and a thorough investigation; because the result of the work of any other court will do and can do him no good. If this thing i.s to be a whitewashing process, 

to bespatter him with eulo!ries of his past services, instead of being an honest, fair, impartial1 thorough, and incisive investigation into 

the facts of the accn ations made, then it would be better for him 

and his reputation that it never be made at all. 

If General Howard i.s innocent he should be the man asking for a court of inquiry. He should not have waited until t.be Secretary of 

War presented to this House accusations and charges against him. 

He should have come here himself, or he should have gone to the President, and asked for the means of vindicating his character a:tid reputation before the country and the world. 

Now a word upon the subject of challenge. I want this investigation to be fully and thoroughly made. But it seems to be a lit.tle 

singular and exceptional to put in a provision here that bas never been 

accorded to any other party accused under similar circumstances, allowing the accused tQ challenge and allowing the parties challenged to 

determine upon the suffi~iency of the challenge. I submitted an amendDientwbich thegentlema.nfromMaine [Mr. FRYE] wonldnotaliowto 

be considered :1 pending, to the effect that the President should judge 

of the sufficiency of the challenge upon reasons publicly assigned by 

the accused. That would put upon the accused the r esponsibility o.f as igning reasons that would stand the test of public scrutiny; and 

it would throw upon the President the responsibility of meeting those 

reasons, and of determining their sufficiency under the obligations 

of his high office. 

No honorable officer would sit in a court if the accnsed should challenge him, whether the can e for challenge were sufficient or insufficient. No honorable soldier would sit upon an investigation like this 

with his nsefulne s destroye<l before the investigation commenced. Because, if he were challenged for cause and were still to remain, even though the cause should be of the most frivolon.s character, the 

weight of his judgment and opinion would be destroyed by the charge 

that he was prejudiced. 

I understand that the universal practice in cases like this i.s to 

allow challenges for cane; and I know of no rea on for makiPg an exceptional and special provision in favor of General Howard. If 

the uniform rule is to be departed from in his ca e, then I submit that 

it would be proper to provide thatthe Secretary of War, having preferred the cbn.rges, should also have the right to challenge for cause, on the pn.rt of the Government. If it is deemed proper to protect tb.e 

accused from an inquiry possibly conducted by an unfriemliy court, 

it seems equally fair that the Government should have the power of 

seeming an honest investigation, by keeping off the court the special 

friends of General Howard. The danger is, not that the President 

will convene a comt compose{l of his enemies, but of his friends. And as the court, when convened, can only inquire and report, and not 

convict, this en.rly movement of the friends of the accused seems to 

show that he flutters even before he is shot. [Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. COBURN. I now yield to the gentleman from New York [Mr. 

WooD] for three minutes. Mr. WOOD. I would not again have troubled the Honse upon this 

question but for the remarks of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, [:Mr . . TOWNSEND.] I stated before, and I now repeat, that witnesse 'vere 

summoned to the door of that committee-mom to investigate the 

charges.against General Howard, that they were denied admission, 

and the committee refu.sed to entertain for a moment a request that 

they be brou_~ht into the committee-room to give testimony implicating General .tloward. I read now from page 48 of the report of the 

minority of the committee in that case, Report No. 122 of the Forty- · first Congress, second session : 

It was offered to be proved that in South Carolina. the a,'3Sistant commissioner, 

Scott, had been elected governor of that State by the corrupt use of rations, pro- visions, and transportations; that 38 an officer of the Bnreau, and having the con- trol of this property, he, by and with the knowledge and connivance of Howard, did use such property tO the extent of $300,000 for this purpose. The names of the wit- nesses, men of high chara-cter and members of the republican party, were handed to the committee and subprenM asked for them, by whom, it was stated by respectable persons, these facts could be substantiated. The majority of the committee 

refn ed to allow them to be summoned. 

Now, I say the less the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. TOWNSEND] says in behalf of his committee the better, because the subsequent a.ction of the Secretary of War, who cannot be suspected of 

any personal or partisan hostility to General Howard, has, in the course he has taken in presenting the accusation here, fully censmed that 

committee, and has shown that it was a whitewashing committee all 

through. Now, the :final resolution which the minority of the committee reported to this House was very much like the procceiling we are now taking. The minority of the committee aske<l the House to adopt 

this resolution : 

Resolved, That a copy of the testimony taken by the Committee on Education 

and Labor, in the investigation of the charges made by Hon. FER..'i'ANDO WooD, 

of New York, a:rainst Ma;1or-General Oliver 0. Howard, be referred to the Secretary of War, with directions to order a. conrt-martial for the trial of said Howard 

upon the charges so made. 

And every member of the republican party in this House at that time 

voted against the adoption of that resolution. If I had time ·within 

my three minutes to tell to this House the conduct of that committee, 

I think that no member of the committee would afterward dare to 

rise in his place here and attempt to vindicate its action. 

Mr. COBUR~. I yield five minutes to the gentleman from 1\Iassachusetts, [l\Ir. G. F. HoAR.] . l\Ir. G. F. HOAR. Mr. Speaker, the accu.satious which have been 

made by the Secretary of War against General Howard do not, so far as I understand them, relate to any of the matters which were investigated by a co~ttee of this House in a former Congress. 

Mr. ·wooD. I beg the gentleman's pardon. The matter in question here was embraced in those specifications. 

Mr. G. F. HO.AR. I repeat my general statement, that the specifications made before that committee did not cover the same charges as are now made by the Secretary of War. But in order to show the3 

character and spirit of the person who has made these chn.rges 

against General Howard and aga.inst the committee of which I was a member in the last Congress but one, I will simply state the f:;wt, 

which has been so strangely perverted and misstated in the s-peech 

of the gentleman from New York. That committee gave to the ac- cuser, who was represented by able counsel, sixty days in which to 

prosecute this inve tigation. At the end of that time the counsel 

whom he had employed (a g~ntleman who I will say condnctecl himself with great propriety before the committee ) was accu ed of a con- tempt of court in this District, and to escape the process of the court 

flecl into a nei<Thboring State. An application was made to the 

committee to delay their investigation in consequence of be absence 

of the counsel under tho e circumstances. Wi.shing to be perfectly 

fah·, although we considered the fact presented no sufficient cau e for 

delay, we asked at what time the investigation would be concluded 

provlcled the delay sought for were granted. The time wa fixed by 

the accuser himself, within which he bound himself to onclude his 

testimony if we would grant delay in consequence of the absence of 

his counsel. When that time arrived, we had reache<l so late a period 

in tl:).e session that we could give General Howard only three du.ys to answer thi.s evidence that had extended over sh.-ty days. After the 

expiration of that time, which had been fixed with the consent of the 

accuser, in view of the indulgence granted him by th~ committee he came in with an offer of further evidence relating to a tran action in · South Carolina, the investigation of which would nece arily have 

involved sending the whole inve tigation over to anoth r se ion of 

Congress. We refused permi sion to go into this a<lditional charge 

and to hear these new witnesses. 

Now, Mr. Speaker, Geneml Howard never pleaded a statute of limitations in his life in answer to any charge. I ask the Hou.se to mark the ·unfairness with which it is now sought to deal with the character of a brave officer, who has lost his right arm in the service of his country, 

and with the character of the associates on this floor of the gentleman 

from New York. I am willing to risk whatever reputation I have anywhere as a lawyer or as a public man, not on the colTectness of the 

conclusions which in this or any other case I may have reached, but on the fairness, and thoroughne , an<l imp"artiality with which we heard the charges of the gentleman from New York. 

Mr. WOOD. Mr. Speaker--

Air. COBURN. I yield thr e minutes to the gentleman from New 

York, [lli. Cox.] 

lli. WHEELER. Mr. Speaker, has not the hour of the gentleman 

from Indiana [Mr. Conuru ] expired 'J 

The SPEAKER. It is just about expiring. 

Mr. WOOD. Mr. Speaker--

Mr. WHEELER. I call for the regular order. The SPE.!U{ER. The gentleman from Indiana [Mr. COBURN] is entitled to the floor. 

Mr. COBURN. I yield three minutes to the gentleman from Now 

York, [Mr. Cox.l 

Mr. COX. If l: may be allowed, I will yield to my colleague, [:Mr. WOOD.] 

1\lr. WOOD. In reply to the gentleman from Ma sacbnsetts, [Mr. 

G. F. HoAR,] I desire to say that he is now, ashewa then, the friend, 

the conn el, the adviser, the defender, and the small legal trickster, 

engineering the case of General Howard. -

Mr. GARFIELD. I call the gt>.ntleman from New York to order. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair thinks the language used by the gen- tleman is not proper. 

.Mr. WOOD. Well, I will withdraw the word "trickster." 
1070 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JANUARY 30, 

Mr. GARFIELD. The gentleman having' been called to order, can- not proceed without the consent of the House. 

Mr. WOOD. I want to explain the action of the gentleman from 

Massachusetts. 

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Ohio [Mr. GARFIELD] has 

called the gentleman from New York to order; and it is not within 

the power of the Chair to allow him to proceed except by leave of 

the House. 

Mr. WOOD. Then, if I understand the Speaker correctly, I must 

get the consent of the House before I can proceed. 

The SPEAKER. That is the rule. 

Several MEMBERS. No objection. 

Mr. RANDALL. I move that the ~entleman be allowed to proceed 

in order, not withdrawing anything ne has said. 

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Pennsylvania moves that 

the gentleman from New York be allowed to proceed in order. 

:Mr. WHEELER. I rise to a point of order. Has not the hour 

to which the gentleman from Indiana was entitled expired f 

The SPEAKER. It is expiring just this moment. 

Mr. WHEELER. Then I call for the regular order. 

Mr. WOOD. I hope my colleague [Mr. 'VHEELER] will not interpose in this way. 

Mr. WHEELER. I call for the regular order. 

The SPEAKER. The hour allowed for debate. after the ordering 

of the main que tion ha expired; and the question will now be 

taken fiTst upon the amendment of the gentleman from Maine [rtfT. 

FRYE] to the resolution reported by the Committee on Military 

Affairs. 

The Clerk read the amendment, as follows: 

Add to the resolution the following : 

ProtJided, That the accused may be allowed the same right of challenge 88 is 

a.llowed by law in trials by court-martial. 

The question being taken -on agreeu;_g to the amendment, there 

were-ayes87, noes not counted.· _ 

:Mr. YOUNG, of Georgia. I call for the yeas and nays. 

The yeas and nays were ordered. 

Mr. MILLS. I ask that the amendment be again read. 

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Maine [Mr. FRYE] proposes 

to add tlte following provi o to the resolution reported by the com- mittee. 

The Clerk read as follows : 

PrO'IJided, That the accu ed may be allowed the eame right of challenge 88 is 

allowed by law in trials by court-martial. 

The question wa-s t aken; and it was decided in the affirmativeyeas 172, nays 64, not voting 52; a follows: 

YEAS-Messrs. Albert, Albright, Arthur, A~kins, Barnum, Barrer a, Bass, Biery, B:r-adley,Bromberg, Buffinton, llurchard, Burleigh, llurrows, Benjamin F. Butler, Roderick R. Butler, Cain, Cannon, Cessna, Amos Clark, .jr., Clayton, Clement."!, 

Clinton L. Cobb, Stephen A. Cobb1 Comingo, Conger, Corwin, Crocker, Crooke, Crutchfield, Curti"!, Danford, Dobbms. Duell, Dunnell, Eames, Elliott, Farwell, 

Field, Fort, Frye, GarfielU, Gunckel, Hagans, Eo.g'eneHale, RobertS. Hale, Har- mer, Benjamin W. Harris, Harrison. Havens, JohllB. Hawley,JosephR. Hawley, R ays, GerryW.Hazelton, JohnW. Hazelton, Hendee, ersey~~- RockwoodHoar, 

George F. Hoar, Holman Hooper, Hoskins, Houghton, Hubbeu, Hunter, Hurlbut, 

Hyde, Ka son, Kelley, Kellogg, K endall, Knapp, Lamport, Lansing:,, Lawrence., Lawson. Lofland, Lou hrid~re, Lowe, Lowndes, Lynch, Magee, Mars-ha:u, Maynard, 

McCrary, Alexander . McDill, James W. McDill, McJunkin, McNulta., Mellish, 

:Merriam, Mills, Mitchell, Monro , Moore, Morri on, Myers, egley, Niblack, Nunn, 

Orr, Orth, Packard, H osoa W. Parker, Isaac C. Parker, Parsons, P endleton, P erry, . Pike, James H . Platt, jr., Thomas C. Platt, Poland, Potter, Pratt, Pnrman, R~iney, 

Ransier, Rapier, Rawls, Rice, Richmond, Ellis H. Roberts, James C. Robinson, 

Ross, Rusk, Sawyer, Henry B. ayler, Scofield, Henry J. Scudder, Ses ions, Sheats, 

Sheluon, Sherwood, Small, A . Herr Smith, H. Boarillnan Smith. J. Ambler Smith, 

John Q. Smith, Suyder,Spra,I7Ue, Stanard, St. John, Stone, Stowell Strait, Straw· 

bridge, Taylor, Thoma , Thornbur"h, Todd, Townsend, Tyner, Waldron, Wallace, Jasper D. Ward, Marcus L. Ward. Wells, Wheeler, White, Whitehead, Whiteley, 

Whitthorne, Wilber, Charles W. Willard, George Willard, John M. S. Williams, 

William Williams, William B. Williams, James Wilson, J eremiah M. WilMn, 

Woodford, and Woodworth-172. 

NAYS--Messrs. Adams, .Ashe, Begole, Bell, Berry, Bland,Blount, Bowen, Brown, Buckner, CaJdwell, John B. Clark,jr., FreemanClarke, Clymer, Coburn, Cook, Coi- ton, Crittenden, Crossland, Crounse, Darrall, Alexander M. Davis, Donnan, Durham, Etlan, Eldredge, Giddings, Glover, Hamilton, Hancock, H enry R. Harris, Hatcher, Hereford, Herndon, Hunton, J ewett, Killinger, Lamar, Lami on, Leach, Martin, McLc.n.n, M.ill.iken, :real, Nesmith, O'Brien, Randall Read, &bbins, William R. 

Roberts, Sener, Smart, outhard, Speer, Stanrleford, Swann, Vance, Waddell, 

Whitehouse, Willie, Wolfe, Woou, John D. Young, and Pierce M. B. Young-64. NOT VOTING-Mes rs. Archer, Averill., Banning, Bat·ber, Barry, Beck, ~ri ht, 

Bundy, Cason, Cox, Creamer, JQhn J. Davis, Dawes, DeWitt, Foster, Freeman, 

Gooch, John T. Harris, Hathorn, Howe, Hynes, Lewis, Luttrell, Ma-cDougall. 

:McKee, Morey, Niles, 0 ' eill, P'lcker, P age, P elham, Phelps, PhillipsJ.. Pierce, 

Ray, James W. Robinson, Miltoll Sayler, John G. S humaker, L"!aac W. ;:,cudder, Shanks, Lazarus D. Shoemaker, los , George L. Smith, William A.. Smith. St-arkweather, Stephens, Storm, ypher, Tremain, Walls, Charles G. Williams, and 

l,)>hraim K. Wilson-52. 

So the amendment was agreed to. 

The joint resolution, as amended, was ordered to be en~os ed and 

read a third time; and being engrossed, it was accorili.D.gty read the 

third time. 

Mr. K.A.::)SON. I call the attention of the chairman of the Committee on 1\lilita.ry Affairs to a verbal correction necessary in the 

ninth line, where the words occur "contained in the communication 

of the Secretary of War to the Speaker of this House." This being a proposed enactment of Congress, instead of "this House/' it should 

be, "the House of Representatives." · Mr. COBURN. -That correction is proper. 

The SPEAKER. The verbal correction by the gentleman from Iowa 

will be made. 

The joint resolution was then passed. 

lli. COBURN moved to reconsider the vote by which the joint reso- lution was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be 

laid on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

~fT. WHEELER. I move that the House resolve itself into Committee of the Whole, to re ume the consideration of the Army appropriation bill. 

Mr. HAWLEY, of lllinois. I rose at the same time a the gentle- man from New York, desiJ:ing to move that the Hou e resolve itself 

into Committee of the Whole on the Private Calendar. And !submit 

that as a question of order my motion takes precedence. 

Mr. NEGLEY. I desire the gentleman having the floor to yield to me to have a bill printed and recommitted. 

MT. WHEELER. I decline to yield. 

Mr. MAYNARD. I would be slad to be permitted to submit a reso- lution, merely for reference to tne Printing Committee. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair asks the attention of the House to 

what the Clerk will read; 

The Clerk read.aa follows: 

A motion to go into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union 

may be enterta.med on private-bill day; but a motion to go into Committee of the 

Whole House takes precedence, unless, accordin$ to the gen raJ, though not universal, practice a special order is pending in the :rormer. 

The SPEAKER. The rulings have been both ways in re~ard to 

which motion should take precedence. But the Chair thinks, m view 

of the adoption of the recent rule, by which all bills of a private nature 

containinganyappropriationof propertyormoneyshould go to Committee of the Whole, cutting them off from the opportunity of being 

at once passed by the House, that it is the fair ruling to give the precedence on Friday to the motion to go into Committee of the Whole on the Priva.te Calendar. But it can make no po sible difference, 

because neitheT motion is debatable, and if one is negatived the other 

immediately comes up. 

The question being taken on the motion that the House resolve 

itself into Committee of the Whole on the Prj.vate Calendar, there 

wem-ayes 93, noes 52. 

So the motion was agreed to. 

The SPEAKER. The House is in the Committee of the Whole on 

the Private Calendar, and the ~entleman from P nnsylvania, Mr. 

CESSXA, will please take the cha1r. 

Mr. R.Al-.TDALL. Before the House goes into the Committee of the 

Whole, I move that the session of to-morrow b de oted to debate 

only. 

Objection was made. 

Mr. RANDALL. Then I move that when tho House :tdjomns today, it be to meet on Monday next. 

The SPEAKER. The gentleman's motion woulu not be in order, 

because the House is really in Committee of the \Vhole. Mr. RAl'fD.ALL. I do not see that the chairman of the Committee of the Whole is in the chair. [Laughter.] · The SPEAKER. The motion, neverthele s, h a been adopted. Bnt 

before the Speaker leaves the chair he will, if there is no objection, 

refer are olution submitted by the gentleman from Tennes ee, [ Ir. MAYNARD,] for the printing of three thou and xtra copies of the bill 

reported from the Committee on Banking and Cmren y. There olntion goes, unuer the law, to the Committee on Printing. 

The House then re olved itself into Committee of the Whole, ( Ir. 

CE SXA in the chair,) and proceeded to consider the lmsine son the 

Private Calendar. • APPROACHES TO THE HOU E. 

The fiTst business on the Calendar was the following resolution 

from the Committee on Public Buildings and G1·ounds, by 1\lr. PLATT, 

of Virginia: 

Resolved by tl!e HO'I.tSe of Representatives of the Unif,ed States of America, That tho 

architect of the Capitol extension be authorized and directed to mploy a man, at a salm'y of not exceedin~ sixty dollars per month, for the purpose of k eeping the 

approaches to the House m good order during the session of Congress. 

Mr. WILLARD, of Vermont. I understand that the Doorkeeper has detailed a portion of his force for this work. I move, tnerefore, 

that the resolution be laid aside to be rei orted to the House, with the 

recommendation that it be not adopted. 

1\!r. HOLMAN. I would inquire of the Chairman if this is objection day under the rule or not' 

The CHAIRMAN. The Speaker of the Hou e informs the Chair 

that this is not objection day. The Clerk will r ea.cl the rule upon the 

subject. 

The Clerk read the rule, as follows: 

129. On the :first and fourth Friday and Saturday of each month the Calendar of 

Private Bills shall be called over, (the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole 

Hov.se commencing the call where he left off the previous day,) and the bills to the 

passage of which no objection shall then be made shall be first considered and dis- posed of. But when a bill is again reached, after having been once objected to, the 

committee shall consider and dispose of the same, unless it shall again be objected to by at least five members. 

The CHAIRMAN. This being the> fifth Friday of the month, the 

Tnle does not apply. 
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 1071 

Mr. HOLMAN. What is the pending motion in reference to the 

resolution' 

The CHAIRMAN. That H be reported to the House adversely. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I hope that motion will be concurred in. 

The question was taken on tho motion of Mr. WILLARD, of Vermont, 

and it was agreed to. 

WILLIAM H. VESEY. 

The next business on the Calendar was the bill (H. R. No. 1400) for 

the relief of William H. Ve ey. Mr. SPEER. I think the Clerk has missed one bill-the bill (H. R. 

No. 604) for the relief of Robert N. McMillan, late collector of cus- toms and superintendent of lights for the district of Teche, in the 

State of Louisiana. 

Mr. BLAINE, (the Speaker.) I desire to state to the committee 

that that bill is on the Calendar by mistake. A bill for the relief of 

Robert N. McMillan was reported from two committees; being reported 

by one of the committees it passed, and being reported by another it was placed on the Calendar. It should be laid aside. ~!r. HAWLEY, of illinois. It was reported by the Committee on 

Claims and passed. 

'l'he bill was laid a icle. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will now read the pending bill. . The bill wa read. It ilirects the Secretary of the Treasury to pay 

to William H. Vesev, former consul of the United States at Havre, in 

}'ranee, the sum of '1,320.57, being the amount of his lo s in conse- quence of the failure, on March 27, 1857, of the house of Green & Co., 

American bankers, with whom he had depo itecl moneys belonging to 

the United States to the amount of $1,467.30, upon the assignment 

by said Ve ey to the nited States of his claim against said firm 

for the moneys so deposited. 

Mr. SPEER. Is there a report in that case' 

The C.S:AIRMAN. The Chair is informed that there is no report. 

1\!r. COX. I will state that I reported this bill from the Committee on Foreign Affairs. There is a report made to the Senate by ~!r. 

PRATT, of Indian."-, last year, and the case was also favorably reported on uy Mr. SUM1\'ER, of Mas achusetts, three years ago. I did not think 

it worth while to write out a new report, as in a letter from the State 

Department, dated January 13,1874, they sent me Mr. PRA.TI's report. 

The facts are stated there and are verified by one of the Auditors of 

the Treasury. This M:r. Vesey had $1,400 of Government money. He 

placed it in Green & Co.'s bank. They became insolvent, and, unlike many bankers, they paid 10 per cent. as clividend. One hundred and 

forty-odd dollars wore paid to this consul; 1,320 were paid uy our consul into the Trea nry, clo ing np his accounts. The truth is that 

be placed this money in that bank as the safest depository in Havre. Minister Wa hburne write that he could not have made it safer by 

keeping it in his own office. He lo t the money by the failure of the 

bank. It is aca eexll.ctlylike that of the postmaster forwhoserelief a bill was reported the ther day by some gentleman from Massachusetts. The Committee on Foreign Affairs were unaniinous in following the report of Senator PRATT and of Senator SUMNER, and con- cluded that this man ought to be reimbur ed for a loss occasioned by 

the failure of a bank. 

Mr. TOWNSEND. IIow much was it 7 

Mr. COX. A little over 1,300. I a k the Clerk to read the report 

of 1\!r. PRA'IT. 

The Clerk read as follows : 

The Committee on Claims, to whom was r eferred the memorial of William H. 

Ve ey, praying to be relieved of a certain loss sustained while consul at Havre, France, submit the followin 0' r eport : Mr. Veseyfs·csents the fo'llowing state of facts as the basis for the ri.'lief ask ed : On the 27 of March, 1857, he was consul of the United States at H avre, and 

h a1l been fa several years previously. During all this time he had been in the habit of depositing moo ys r ce~ved by him in his ?ffici~ capacity with the bankinrr-bouse of Green & Co., .Amen can bankers at P ans, Wlth a branch at Havre, for 

safe-keeping. On that day there r emained on depof<it in the bands of said firm the swn of $1,467.30 at the time they fai led and became insolvent. On settlement of 

their affairs Mr. Vesey h:H~ r eceiv d 10 per cent. of his deposit, or 8146.73, leaving a loss of 1,320.57. NotwiU1standin~ the failure, Mr. V~ ey paid the amount of his depoffi t into the Trea-sury of the U ruted States. He asks Congre s to refrmd him tho RUID of 1,3-20.57, and says he a_~ executed an assignment to tho United States of all his right, title, interest, anu claim to the moneys still due from Green & Co. 

The present millister to Fra!lce recommends the relief of :Mr. Vesev. 

The Secretary of the Treasul'y make no recommendation, but ailillits that Mt'. 

Vesey haspaidtheamountof the lo sinto the Treasury. · The chief clerk in the State Department pays a high compliment to Mr. Vesey as afait.hful officer, and says that full confidence may be placed in his tatemcnts. The Secretary of tate expr e es his confidence ip. Mr. Vesey's account of Iris 

lo , and say-s this gentleman was for many years ill the emplo.Y of the Govern- ment under 'his Department in several consulates, and enjoyed a hi~~ reputation for 

integrity, capacity, and the faithful di charge of all the duties of nis position. Tl:i.at the money was lo t by the failure of the banker ; that it was funds belong- ing to the United State , though standing to the credit of Mr. V sey; that it bas 

been made good to the nited States, are fact which the committee assume as es- tablished. The evidence is not before us showing the standing anu r eputed solvency of Green & Co. at the time of failure, though from the r eport made to this 

body on May 23, 18GO, by the Committee on Foreign Relations, it would seem there was satisfactory evidence before them that up to the date of their suspending p ay- ment the credit of Green & Co. was good, and their branch house at Havre r e(l'ardcd a· safe place for the deposit of moneys, better much than the keeping of them by Mr. 

Vesey either at the consulate or at his residence. Such is the testimony of Mr. Mason, at that time rnmister from this country to France. 

We think the evidence shows that the consul was not gnil ty of want of caution 

in making his deposita wit.h this banking-house, if he chose to commit public funds to the hands of others at all for safe-keepll:lg. The deposit, however, was at his risk. He was bound to account for all the oon· 

sular fees collected, and he confessed. his liability at law by promptly accounting 

for the money. Shall he or the G<lvernment be the loser¥ The committee are of opinion that Mr. 

Vesey should be relieved, and accordingly report a bill herewith, an<l recommeml 

its passage. 

Mr. COX. I move that the bill be laid aside, to be reported to the 

Honse with the recommendation that it dopa s. The motion was agreed to. 

MESSAGE FR<iM: THE SENA.TE. 

The committee rose informally, and the Speaker having resumed 

the chair, a message from the Senate, by 1\!r. SYMPSOY, one of its 

clerks, announced that the Senate had passed the resolution of the 

House, directing the Congressional Printer to furnish· to each Senator, Member of the House of Representatives, and Delegate twentyfour copies of the CoNGRESSIONAL RECORD, with amendments, in 

which he wa directed to ask the concurrence of the House. 

The Committee of the "Whole then resumed its session. 

PENELOPE T. HEALD. 

The next business on the Calendar was the bill (H. R. No. 1401) 

grantin~ a pension to Penelope T. Heald. 

The ·bill was read. It authorizes and directs the Secretary of the 

Interior to place on the pension-roll, subject to the provisions and 

limitations of the pension laws, the name of 1\Irs. Penelope T. Heald, 

widow of Henry H. Heald, captain of schooner Norman, and pay her a pension the same as if he was a master in the United States Navy, 

from and after the pa sage of this act. 

1\Ir. SPEER. I ask for the reading of the report in that case. The Clerk read the report, as follows : 

The Committee on Invalid P ensions, to whom was referred the petition of Mrs. P enelope T. Heald, for a pension, have considered the same, and submit the following report: 

Penelope T. Heald, applicant, is the widow of Henry H. Heald, who was captain 

of schooner Norman, which was in the employ of Government as transport, and 

while master of such vessel it was captured by the rebels on the coa t of Florida, 

burned, and the crew taken prisoners. While a prisoner, the captain died of starva- tion and disea e, as is alleged. Did not belong to the military or naval service. 

Widow asks pension same as if her husband hall been mustered into the service as master in the Navy; and the committee, considering the fact that the immediate 

voyage which resulted in the capture of the vessel was undertaken by orders from 

the commander of the military ; that the Government have considered them elves responsible, and have paid for the vessel ; and that said Heald was considered a pris- oner of war, are inclined to the o_pinion that he rendered 1mch service to his country as would entiUe his widow, now ill need, to a pension. They therefore recommend 

the passage of the accompanying bill. 

Mr. BUFFINTO~. This Captain Heald was a rc ident of my own city, and I would like to have the memorial in this case read. I can state from my own knowledge that I know the facts as stated in the 

memorial to be true. 

l\Ir. R SK. I hardly think that iB necessary. 

Mr. BUFFINTON. There is not the least question but what this 

captain was taken and held as prisoner of war, and died while so helU. 

1\fr. SPEER. I desire to make an inquiry. Was the person to 

whose widow this bill propo es to grant a pen ion in the employ of 

the Government or in the employ of a private party . Mr. BUFFINTON. He was in the employ of the Government. 

He was captain of the schooner Norman. The Government of the 

United States has paid the owners of the schooner for the lo s of the 

schooner; that I know of my own know ledge. 

Mr. SPEER. Was the schooner at the time under the control of 

the Government . Mr. BUFFINTON. It was. 1\Ir. RUSK. The schooner was taken by order of the commanding 

general to transport rations from one point to another. While transporting tho. e rations the schooner was captured and de troyed, the 

captain and crew were made prisoners, and the captain died while in 

prison. It was the strongest muster into the service that could be 

made; a muster by special order, forcing the man into the ervice, 

ancl depTiving him of his free will in the matter. 

Ir. SPEER. Has application been made to the Pension Department for a pension' 

1\fr. RUSK. Application has been made, but nuder the generalla\\ 

the name cannot be put on the pension-rolls. This captain was not 

mustered regularly, as it is t ermed; but he was put into tho service 

uy order of the commanding general, and not by mgular enlistment 

and muster. 

1\lr. HOLMAN. This bill, I believe, is without a preceuent. I do 

not mean that there is no precedent for such a bill being urought into 

the House, because during the last four or five years there have been 

many such bills introduced. But I mean that the House ha not here- tofore passecl any such bill as this, to give a pension to a civilian. 

The only CJnestion is, whether the House shoulu now ent r upon that 

policy. The policy heretofore has been to grant p nsions only t 

persons engaged in the military or naval ser ice of the nitetl tntes. 

I beliove I understand the history of this ca e. The ve . el was chartered by the Government as a transport. Mr. RUSK. It was not chartered by the Government. ·u was cizeJ 

by the Government and pres eel into the service. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I hope that portion of the evidence from the ])filitary Department will be read, showing the seizure of this vessel and 

its application to military purposes, because it would be a very extraordinary case, especially in that branch of the service. 
1072 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JANUARY 30, 

Mr. RUSK. I state for the benefit of the gentleman from Indiana 

that there have been several pensions granted to persons not mustered 

into the service of the United States. It has been the custom of this 

House to place upon the pension-rolls the widows of pilots of Government vessels who. were not mustered into service, but were em- ployed as pilots. 

Mr. HOLMAN. But this was not a Government vessel. Precedents are always set by just these extrem8 cases, where our sympathies are excited . Mr. RUSK. The Government paid for the vessel. 

Mr. HOLMAN. Certainly; the Government pays for every vessel 

that is chartered or pressed into the service and lost; that is all that was done in this case. Whether this vessel was chartered or pres ed 

into the service1 the persons on the vessel, the captain of the vessel 

and the crew, were not in military service and bound to remain there. 

~p-. RUSK. How can the gentleman get a man into the service any 

stronger than by force 7 

Mr. HOLMAN. The report does not say that he was put there by 

force. 

Mr. RUSK. Just read that report, if you please. 

Mr. BUFFINTON. The captain of this vessel protested against 

making this trip which he was ordered to make by the commanding 

officer. He protested in as stTong terms as it was possible for him to use. ' He was compelled to make it; was taken prisoner with all his 

crew; and but one of the crew and officers came out of prison alive. 

Mr. HAWLEY, of Illinois. Was he held as prisoner of war 7 

Mr. BUFI<'INTON. He was, and so acknowledged. 

Mr. HOLMAN. That was the case with many civilians in all portions of the country. If they were taken within t.he rebel lines they were held as prisoners of war by the rebel authorities until properly 

exchanged. But the point of objection is to the fact that we propose ' to grant a pension to a person who was not in any sense in the military or naval service. I think the Government should go to the ex- treme of grantin~. pensions to all men, or their widows, who were actually in the military service. That is necessary for the purpose of 

obtaining enlistments in the Army. If a soldier is satisfied that, should 

he be disabled or should he die and leave a widow and children, the 

Government will make provision for them to the extent that can be 

accomplished by a pension, there will be that-inducement for men to 

enter the service. . There seems to be nothing here to repel the as- sumption that this captain of this vessel was acting ordinarily as other 

captains a-cted. · J\.Ir. HAWLEY, of Illinois. The gentleman from Indiana has inquired whether application has been ma-de to the Pension Office for a pension in this ca e. I will ask him the further question if it is not 

true that every case that comes here for a pension is a case that has 

been 1·ejected at the Pension Office because it doe not come under the 

general pension law, and therefore requires a special act~ 

Mr. HOLMAN. 0, yes. 

Mr. HAWLEY, of illinois. Is it not true that a large number of 

the pension bills passed here are to cover ca es in which persons have r endered undoubted service as o1diers, sailors, or marines, but for some r eason or other were not regularly mustered in Y Here is a case, as I understand, where the man, being under the ab olute control of 

military authority, was forced into the service, was taken prisoner, 

and died in prison. I understand those to be the facts. Mr. BUFFINTON. There is no que tion about that. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I do not understand that this man was forced into 

the service. I a k that the report may be read again. 

The report was again read. 

Mr. HOLMAN. Now, 1\.fr.Chairman, it isveryclearfrom that report 

that this was a chartered vessel; and it is proposed that the captain 

of this vessel shall receive a pension. This is going very much further 

than the House has ever gone before. I am willing to join in doing 

justice in that vast multitude of cases where actual military service 

has been rendered, but where the claims have _ been rejected at the 

P ension Office upon merely technical grounds. Yet I must object to 

the precedent which favorable action upon this case would establish; 

for I must insist that this i the first instance in which a civilian, a cn,ptain or employe upon a chartered ve sel in the service of the Government, has been regarded as in the military service so as to entitle him 

to a pension. On the contrary, I regard this as manifestly the beginning of a civil pen ion list. 

I know of no duty that is more clearly incumbent upon the Government than that of providing a liberal system of pensions with 

reference to persons who actually render service in the Army or the 

Navy. The establi hment of snch a system is to be advocated not 

werely a a matter of sympathy or humanity, but on the ground of 

the public interest; so that persons in the military and naval service 

of the Government may feel that1 in case of casualty, they or their 

widows and children shall not be left without any provision for their 

support. But, in the case now before ns, the motive for a pension is 

entirely absent. Here was the capt ain of a chartered vessel--

1\Ir. RUSK. Will the gentleman permit me to make an explana.-

tion'f · Mr. HOLMAN. Certainly. 

Mr. RUSK. This ves el was chartered to transport horses from New 

York to New Orleans, and after dischargingthatcargowas impressed 

into the service to carry rattons from New Orleans to another point. 

Mr. HOLMAN. That does not appear in the report. 

Mr. RUSK. I examined the case and made the report; anu tho statement I now make as chairman of the committee is as good a'i 

the statement embraced in the report. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I admit that fully. 

Mr. RUSK. I will state further that I submitted this matt r to the 

gentleman from Indiana, [Mr. HOLMA.J."'i,] and he told me he would 

not object. . Mr. HOLMAN. I did ·not understand the gentleman. 

Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. If the whole report we1·e read, 

it would show--

Mr. HOLMAN. Mr. ChairrnanMr: BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I have the floor now. 

1\!r. HOLMAN. I will yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts 

in a few minutes. I always like to hear him speak. 

Mr. HAWLEY, of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, who ha the floort 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Mas achn etts [1\fr. BuFFINTO:N] took the floor some time ago. How long a time did he yield 

to the gentleman from Indiana, [Mr. HOLMAN Y] 

Mr. HOLMAN. I did not ask the gentleman from Ma sachusetta 

to yield the floor to me. I asked and obtained the floor in my own right. · 

Mr .. BUTLER, of Massa-chusetts. The five-minute rule, I believe, 

prevails. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HOLMAN] 

has been much more than five minutes on the floor. 

1\!r. HOLMAN. Then I yield to the gentleman from Ma sachnsetts 

with great pleasure. [Laughter.] 

Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I only desire to say--

Mr. DAWES. I would lik-e to understand why the five-minute 

rule obtains. 

1\!r. RANDAL.L. There is no five-minute rule operating now. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. RANDALL] is correct. 

Mr. DAWES. So I supposed. 

The CHAIRMAN. That is the rea.son the Chair asked the gentle- man from Massachusetts [Mr. BUFFINTO:N] how long he yielded to 

the gentleman from Indiana. The gentleman from Massachusetts 

[J\.fr. BUTLER] has the floor now. 

_1\.fr. BUTLER, of Ma sachusetts. I de u·e to say that this report 

when fully rea-d, answers all the objections of the gentleman frorli 

Indiana. It states that- · 

The immediate voya._1~e which resulted in the capture of the vessel was undertaken 

by orders from the military commancler. 

So that this man was brought directly under the orders of the Government. 

Mr. HOLMAN. If tbis vessel was chartered would she not till be 

operating under an order '1 Is there anything to repel the as umption that the ve sel was a chartered vessel 

1\Ir. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. The ve sel, whether chartered or not, was under the oruers of the military command r. The captain 

and the crew had no choice; they must go wh re they were told to 

go. They were as much under the orders of the military command r as wa-s any soldier. I want to say further, thi House and Congr s have set the precedent of giving r elief in special cases where men were not mustered in. FoT example, the Sixth l\Ia achusett Regi- ment started from Massachusetts without b eing. mustered into the 

service. They went through Baltimore. They could not be mustered 

in, for they were going to Washington to be mustered in. Six were killed in Baltimore in coming to Washington, and the country has taken their families under its charge. There are other cases wher men were killed while going to muster. So the only question ~:~, wa. the man potentially or legally in the service of the United States f 

If he ~s legally in l?Y m1:1ster, he gets a pension without coming h ere. If he IS onlypotentiallym by order, then h e h as to come here to get it. 

Mr. BUFFINTON. I hope the bill will now be laid aside, to be 

reported to the House with the recommendation that it do pass. 

1\Ir. HOLMAN. I do not understand what pension it is propo ed to 

pay under this bill. This is not a private soldier in any ense. He was not a naval officer. I ask the bill be again reported. The bill was again reported. _ 

Mr. HOLMAN. I wish to know from the chairman of the committee exactly what is the pension of a master in the Navy. 

~fr. RUSK. I believe it is thirty dollars, but he is only to be paid 

the pension as fixed by law for this grade. 

Mr. HOLMAN. Thirty dollars is the highest pen ion known. 

Mr. KELLOGG. Is it proposed to pay thi man the highest pen iou Y 

1\fr. RUSK. It is not. 

Mr. KELLOGG. Then it is not proposed to pay more than thirty 

dollars if that be the highest pension V 

Mr. RUSK. It is only proposed to p ay him the pension allowed L 

illw. · 

1\Ir. HOLl\IAl~. We are a-cting blindly, for we are not able to tell 

what is the pension we propose to grant. 

1\fr. BUFFINTON. It is the pension under the law. 

1\Ir. RUSK. I am told the pension in this case will be fifteen dollars. It does not make any difference what the man is. If he is entitled to 

that pension he ought to have it. This bill grants him a pension which 

under the law he is entitled to. 

Mr. HOLMAN. He was not a captain in the service, although he 
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 1073 

w::LS the captain of a chartered ve el. Jle was not an officer or a. sailor 

in our service. · That is clear enough. The fixing of this grade in this 

c::LSe is therefore purely arbitrary. And I wish only to adu to w4at I 

have n,lready said on this subject, that there seems to beagrowin~ tendency, which ought not to be encouraged, to build up as it were in the e ca s n, civil pension list. That tendency seems to be very strong. It 

disp ln,ys itself at every se~ion of Congress more or less. All that seems to be necessary is to get some extreme case, where our sympathies are strongly aroused, where the motive for legislation is strong, anel in 

that way lay the fonnclation for building up a civil pension list. Pensions for those who have served in the Army and Navy ono-ht to be 

encouraged, and, in my judgment, we cannot be too liber;J to those 

who have been disabled, or to tho families of tho e who have fallen 

in the service; but I do insist we ought not to begin the estd>blishment 

of a list of civil pensions. 

Mr. BUFFINTON. I move tha the bill be laul a&de, to be reported 

to tho Hou ·e with the recommendation that it do pass. 

The committee divided; and there were-aye 8:~, noes 18. So the bill wa.s l:tid aside, to be reported to the House with the. recommend:ttion that it do pass. 

EZRA TAYLOR. 

The CHAffi:MAN. The next thine~ on the Private Calender is an adverse report upon the petition of Ezra Taylor, which will be read. 

The Clerk read as follows : 

That Colonel Ezra Taylor, chief of artillery Fifteenth Army Corps, in 1863 and 

1964, was honorably discharged from the 11ervice on the 20th day of .July, 1864, on account of gunshot wounds received at the battle of Dallas, Geor~ria; that he mado 

application for a. pension on tho 28th day of December, 1871, anll t-hat pension was granted him at the rate of thirty dollars per month, commencing on the 3d day of :February, 187~ application not havinrr boon made within tho five years' limitation. II.o asks that his pension shall commence on the dat.o of his discharl!e from tho serv- ice, and that he be paid the arrears due him. Your committee believe, from all the 

circumstances snrronnding the case, that Colonel Taylor should be allmved the arrears of pension from date of discharge from·the service to the 3d clay of Febrnat·y, 1872, but, owing to an nnjust provision in tho pension laws, and the :wtion of 

the IIonse in similar worthy cases, are forced to report adversely. 

Mr. HURLBUT. Mr. ·Chairman, I desire briefly to call the attention of the committee to this ca.se. :Mr. WILLARD, of Vermont. I rise to a point of order- what question is there before the committee 

The CHAIRMA..,.."'i. An adverse report on the petition of Ezra 

Taylor. Mr. HURLBUT. I- propose' to have the case recommitted to the 

committee. I move that it be laid. aside to be reportecl.back to the 

House for the purpose of being recommitted, with instructions to the 

oommitteo to report back a bill for the relief of Ezra TaylOJ:. 

Mr. RANDALL. I suggest to the gentleman that he omit from his 

motion any instruction to the committee, for it does no good. l\zy. HURLBUT. I afn not parti~a.r as to how the motion shall be 

stated. I ask for the reading of the petition. The CHAIRMAN. There seems to be no petition, but there is a letter from Colonel Tay~or, which will be reap.. 

Mr. HURLBUT. The letter of Colonel Taylor embraces a statement of the facts. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

CmcAGO, November 17, 1873. 

DEAR Sm: I have the honor to inclose a copy of the bill for mv relief, which failed to become a law, as I suppose, from want of time to get throu(Th the committee before the Forty-second Congress adjourned, and most respectfn~I v to solicit your in· 

fluence in my behalf in getting this or a similar bill passed at the co.cin~ session 

of Congro . There can be no doubt I am justly entitled to the relief asked, and 

that I am greatly in need of it the bill will, no doubt, convince you. I lost all by 

the fire, after which I overworked myself in my endeavor to provide a new home 

for myself and family, the result of which was that in December last I was taken 

sick and confined to the honse all winter and spring and prevented from attending to my business, which is that of inspector of proVIsions. 

..1-bont the 1st of August last got to work again for a few days; when the money panic c:une on and cut me off ltrrain, so that in the pa t year I have scarcely done 

an.vthing. It being quite impossible to live on air, I have been compelled to borrow 

-,ooo in order to enable me to meet my o\>ligations. 

Mr. HURLBUT. I de ire to state to the committee that Colonel 

Taylor entered the service as captain of Battery B early in 1 61. He 

wag at Donelson and Shiloh; was promoted cblonel of the Fn:st 

Regiment lllinois .Artillery, acted a chief of ordnance for-General 

Sherman, and continued in the service with him until the 20th da,y 

of July, 1 6i, when he was honorably discharged the service on account of gunshot wounds received at the battle of Dallas, Georgia. 

lle h'18 a Tecord as good as that of any of the most gallant officers 

that served in n,ny portion of our Army. Now, sir, this gentlemn,n, being comparatively well to do in the 

world n,t the end of the war declined to become an applicant for a pension, and to be a burden upon the country·; and he neve.J' made 

any application for a pension at all until in the great fire at 'Chicago 

his property was swept away. He then made his application for a pension, and it was allowed him at the rate of thirty dollars a month, 

to commence from the 3<1 day of February, 1872; and. he asks now that his pension or the arrears of it be granted. to him as if he ha<l. 

made· his application when hewa by law ·entitled to do it. 

Mr. IIOL.MAl~. Will the g ntleman from illinois [Mr. HURLBUT] 

'nfo1·m us whether this pension was granted in the reguJar course by 

tho Pen ion Bllreau or by act of Congress' I would infer from the 

letter which has been read that it was gr.anted by act of Congress. Mr. HURLBUT. I undertitand it was granted by an act passellln.st 

session. 

68 

Mr. KELLOGG. Is not the reason for the pension commencing from 

the date of its being gmnted to be founrl in the fact that this appli- cant did not file his petition within tho five years' limit 

J\.fr. HURLBUT. 'fbe pension was granted to Colo11el Taylor, not 

byspeci:tl acto£ Congress-! wa in error as to that-but in the regular course of business in the Pension Office, and. could only commence from the elate of the pension bein~ granted, because he had allow cl 

the lapse of time to run against him. Now I sta.te to the House as a fact within my own personal knowledge, and I will be confirmed by 

two gentlemen from Chicago who are Representatives upon this floor, 

that the rea ons why Colonel Taylor did uot make application within 

the time that would. h:tve entitled him to draw thQ pension from the 

d..<tte of his ilisability are such as I have stn,teu; that he had no call 

from pecuniary necessity at thn,t time to become a burtlen on the coun- try, and consequently did not choose to load it down by any uemancls 

of his own; but now that calamity has overtaken him be asks this 

Congress that the pTovision w bich your own committee designated as 

an unjust 11rovision in the p nsion law may not operate to defeat his 

receiving the arrears to which he is entitled on all principle of equity 

and of justice. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I woulll sugt;est to the gentleman fi·om Illinois 

whether it would not be right, m view of this report from the com- mittee, in which for my own part I concur, to 11rovi~le by a general 

bill for an extension of nsions back to the elate of the tlisn,bilities 

incuned in the service. Mr. HURLBUT. To hat I would have no objection; but I do not 

want to have the case of my friend overslaughed. by a. general act. Mr. SPEER. Just such' a bill as th:it was pas ed by the House L<tst · Congress, but failed in the Senate. 

J.Ir. HURLBUT. I hope such a bill will be passed here again . ., 

Mr. WILLARD, of Vermont. Thi ame question ha been before 

Congre for several yeru:. at every ession. Of course this is a mer- itorious case, In fact, in every C::LSe where a person is pen ioned on ac- count of injuries received in the ervice, he 11ension in justice, (me 

would think, should date ba.ok to the time of the injmy instead of 

dating from the application for tho pen ion. But the policy which 

has been adopted by Conm:e , in law and. in practice, has been t(i <late 

the pensions gmnted by all tbe~:;e special acts fi·om the passage of the 

act. And, besides, there is the general statute of limitation applying 

to all these cases that are not brought to the notice of the Pension 

Office within five yeaTs. · Now, whether this i~ wise or unwise as a matter of law, while it is a law it ought to be respecteu, and such a case as this ought not to be 

pas ed over t}le law. It is no more meritorious than hundreds of other cases. I~ fact, in roo t of the e ca es- and they come to the atten- tion of members every day- when the application bas not been made 

within five years it has been delayed for the very rea on stn,ted in 

this case of Colonel Taylor. The persons entitled. to the vension were in easy circumstance , and they did not care about drawing 

bounties from the Government while they wm-e abumlautly able to 

support themselves. They therefore ui<l not take ac:lvautage of the 

pension law. But, some ill aster havingovertaken them, their prop- erty haying been swept away by fire or some other calamity, they come then and,ask that they may have their }lension. Antl whether 

it be wise or unwise to refn e to <late back their pensions, the 11oli y 

which Congress has adopted dminf? the last four :rears has been to 

refn.se to grant arrears. And I think there is some wis<lom in that in one aspect of it. In the last Congres some gentlemen will remember 

that we had applications runnin~ back twenty, thirty, and forty yen,rs. 

I was on the Committee on Revolntional'y ·Pensions and ' Var of 

1812 in the last Ho.use, and a.pplieation. came before that committee 

to elate pensions back to the time of the war of 1812, and was sup- ported with much zea-l. Special acts have been passed granting pen.: 

sions to persons for disabilitie occasioned by their service in the war of 1 12, granted twenty, thirty, or forty years after that war. They came and asked for arrears of p nsion running back to the war of 

1 12. It ha..."! been thought, I know, by some gentlemen in the House 

that this delay in applying should. bo treated us a relinqui hment, as an abandonment of the claim for pension; that. the person had waived. 

for the time being his claim, and that he should not he allowed to re- vive it at some later da.y. llut., as I said at the outset, whether it is a. wi e or unwise provision of law, it seems to me the ouly way of get- ting over it is to repeal the law ; and so I shall object very much to 

the passage of the bill in this particubr case, a.Jthongh I am not at 

all certain that I should object to a repeal of the law, and the tleter- mination by law that -all pensions of this kind may date back to the 

point of disability. 

Mr. POTTER. Mr. Chairman, I agree entirely with what bas been 

saill by the gentleman from Vermont, [Mr. WILLATID. ] This bill be- long to what I conceive to be the most vicious class of legislation; 

special legislation for the benefit of· particular persons in the nature 

of Government bounty, without any public reason. 'Ve have a law 

which prohibits soltliers from curing their pensions except fi·om the 

time they apply fm . them. This law may be wise or it rnny be unwi e, but it is a general law, ancl should be applied to all whom it 

afl"ects equally. I regard nothing as more viciouo· in tho nature of 

legis1ation than to listen to the cry of a ma.n who comes here and 

sa.ys, "Make me an exception to the general law; give me the pen- sion that you refuse to everybody else;" simply because he comes here 

and asks for it. We have such cases every w~ok, not only in the 

• 
1074 CONGRESSIONAL REC0Rb. JANUARY 30, 

form of applications for pens1ons, but of applications of every other 

kind for relief from the p1·ovisions of general laws. One man comes here apd says, "Let me introduce a foreign-built ship, one not entitled 

to come in under the registry Jaw, and give her a register;." Another man comes here and says, "Let me bring in goods free, which I can- not get through the en tom-house without paying duties upon them." 

Another man says, "Give me a pension whiC'h I am not entitled to 

under the general law." Now, I am one of those who believe tr:.tde t:~hould be free. I favor, with some limitations, free ships. I am opposed to duties of a protective nature, but I have nevertheless always re isted granting special privileges of such nature to anybody, be- cause laws should equal and just. The first duty of the Government is to see that its laws operate impartially on all its citizens. 

Why, sir, I have sent me from my own district cases like that of the 

gentleman from illinois; ca-ses of men who were entitled to pensions 

long before they applied for them, but who delayed applying for them, 

because unwilling to add to the burdens of the country. Sir, such men are entitled to the gratitude of the country for their patriotism, 

and I greatly regret that it is not in the power of the Government to 

give them everything they may ask. It would indeed be a very gratifying· thing if we could carry on the Government on ·the principle 

avowedbyTittlebatTitmonsewhenhe:fi.rstwenttoParliament,ofgiving everybody everything; but inasmuch as somebody must pear the 

burdens of Government, and those burdens should be distributed 

equally, it is against the :first principles of justice to discriminate in 

favor of persons, however meritorious, who are without any good rea- son for the discrimination except that they come her~ and importune 

the bvor of the Congress to give them, at the expense of the whole 

people, what is denied to all others of the same class. 

:J\1r. SPEER. The gentleman from New York is inaccurate in this, 

that there is a limitation by general law as to the time when a man may make applioation for a pension. The limitation is this, that if 

the application is not made within five years from the time of. the 

death or the injury, then the pension shall date only from the date of 

the application or from the time of filing the proof. If a soldie1· had 

been injured thirteen years ago, at the beginning of the war, he could 

appl:i to-day for a p~nsion-there is no limitation against his filing an application; but when the pension is allowed, it begins only from the 

date of the application, and does not run back to the date of the 

injury. . In the last Congress I introduced a bill to repeal that limitation, 

and provide that where an application for a pension is granted, the ·pension in all ca es shall date back to the time of the death or of the 

injury. I think that is logical and ju t. If the pensio:.;t is given for 

the injury, it should commence when the injury was incurred. That 

bill passed the Honse and went to the Senate, and was there defeated. 

It wa-s stated in the House by the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations [Mr. GARFIELD] that that bill would take 20,000,000 

from the national Treasury. If it would have taken · 20,000,000 then, 

now, after the lapse of two years, it would take still more out of the 

Treasury. But the bill was based on an e sential principle of justice; 

the principle is right and just, and if right and just it should apply 

to all cases. There is no justice in extending a just principle to a single case. 'It is using a just principle to inflict injustice; to' deny to one soldier what you cannot to another. 

Now, I will not oppose the bill of the gentleman from Illinois, [Mr. 

HURLBUT,] but I suggest that the tl:ue policy of this Honse is for all 

those gentlemea who agree with him to join hands here and pass a ~enoral bill, and then to go to th Senate witl! it, and induce the 

tsenate to pass the bill Then all cases will stand on an equal basis, 

and when pensions are granted they will date back to the time of 

the death or injmy. But I submit that the policy is wrong of appealing to the· generosity and sympathy of the Government to do a wroug; because, while it may grant to this soldier what is justly his, 

other soldiers, poorer perhaps than he, less able to support themselves - and their families than he, are drawing pensions only from the date of 

their certi:fi.cat.es. It would be giving .to this soldier something like 

two or three thousand dolla1·s of arrears of pensions ; that is, thirty 

dollars a month for six or eight years. I say I will not vote against 

thjs bill, but 1 submit to the gentleman that the bill should be general, so as to em brace all. 

Mr. HURLBUT. Such a bill is now pending before the committee. 

Mr. HOLMAN. Then let this bill be laid aside until the general 

bill is·1·eported. · · 

.Mr. HURLBUT. My motion is that this b.ill be laid a-side, to be re- ported to the Honse with a recommendation that it be recommitted 

to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I would ask if the Committee of the Whole has the 

power t.o report a subject back to the House with a recommendatwn 

that the subject be referred to the appropriate committee with instructions! 

The CHAIRML~. No doubt that motion might be made, but the 

gentleman from Illinois [1\Ir. HU.RLBUT] withdrew that portion of his 

motion. · Mr. HOLMAN. Then I move to amend the motion of the gentleman 

from Illinois, so as to add the recommendation to recommit this bill, 

with instructions to the committee to report a general bill extending 

pensions already granted back. to the time of the death of the soldier. 

Mr. RANDALL. What amount of money would that take out of 

t~~ 'fre/lBury 

1\:h-. HOLl\fAN. 'I do not know. 

1\fr. RANDALL. The gentleman is an economical member. He 

should consider that such a bill would take twenty millions out of the~asury. . 

Mr. HOLMAN. When it is a question of justice to the · men who 

served in our Army and Navy in times of the nation's peril, I have never sought to inquire the cost of doing jl]jltice, and I shall not now stop to inquire. When this House.passed such a bill a few year ago, one that was conceded by all t.o be an act of mere common justice, tho 

argument that it would be attended with great expense was not 

deemed to be a good one. I do not think such an argument is a good one now. It should not operate to the prejudice of the soldier that 

he delayed making application in this case. I suppose none of us have 

failed to .receive applications from our conetituents involving this same principle. I insist that, in whatever other respect we may econo- mize, we should not att-empt to eCOJ!omize at the expense of justice to 

the men who exposed their lives in our service. I never shall mise 

the cry of economy when a question like this is before the Honse, as I never have done. 

1\fr. RICE. I hold that the question of justice and liberality does .not enter into the question that is now before the-committ-ee. I believe that every man in the United States desires through his Government to help those who sought to assist their country when in 

danger. Those who have been disabled in that service are entitled 

to assistance from this Government. But the Government of the 

United States has no more money now than it needs, and when thoae 

who served their Government and were disabled in that service ha,ve 

enough of this world's goods to make them independent of Gov rn- ment assistance, and do not apply for that assistance.} I hold that by 

every principle of right the Government is debru:rect from a-ssistin,.. 

them i.n the days when they need no a sistance. For that reason i 

believe the law as it stands is just and equitable to all the ·people, that from the day of their nece sity, from the day when they shall 

ask for a sistance, this Government shall grant it, and not befor . I 

therefore move that the adverse report of the committee be adopted. The CHAIRMAN. There is a m~tion pendin<r to recommend t.hat 

the bill be recommitted; and there is an amendment to that motion 

to recommit with instructions. · Mr. G. F. HOAR. I rise to a point of order. Is it in order to amend 

any motion for commitment or recommitment of a private bill, by adding instructions to bring in a general law! 

The CHAIRMAN. That point of order is raised too late. The 

amendment.has been discus ed for some time past. 

1rlr. G. F. HOAR. The motion to amend.. has just been made. 

The CHAIRMAN. The motion to amend wa-s made by the gentle- man from Indiana, [Mr. HoLMAN,] and he and other gentlemen have 

made speeches on it. 

The questioif was then taken on the amendment; and it was· not 

agreed to upon a division-ayes 46, noes not counted. . The question recurred upon the motion of Mr. HuRLBUT to report 

the bill back to the House with a recommendation that it be I'ecommitted. 

1rlr. POTTER. If I understand the question, it is simply whether we shall adopt the adverse report of the committee on this claim, 01: 

recommit it to the committee. 1 . 

The CHAIRMAN. The question is upon non-concurring in the adverse report, and directing that the bill be reported back to the House 

with a recommendation that it be recommitted to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. · 

The question wa-s taken; and there were-ayes 41, noes not counted. 

So the motion ofl\1r. HURLBUT was not agreed to. 

The question recurring on concurring in the adverse report of the 

committee, it wa-s concurred in. ' 1 

1\Ir. RANDALL. I move that the committee nse. The motion was agreed to; there being-ayes 90, noes not counted. 

The committee accordingly rose; and the Speaker having resumed 

the chair, Mr. CESSNA reported that the Committee of the Whole on the Private Calendar hacl had the same under consideration, and had 

directed him to report certain bills. · 

SESSION FOR DEBATE T0-1\fORROW. 

Mr. RANDALL. I ask unanimous consent that the session of to- morrow be devoted to debate only. 

Mr. COBURN. I wonld like to inquire whether the Committee on Appropriations do not wish to have a session to-morrow for bnsine sY r · - M.r. RANDALL. I think I can answer that they do not. . The~PEAKER. If there be no objection, it will be ordered that 

the sessiOn ·of to-morrow be for debate only, no business. to be transact-ed. 

There being no objection, it was so ordered. 

SECURITY OF LIFE ON STEAM-VESSELS. 

Mr. NEGLEY, by unanimous consent, reported from the Committee on Commerce a bill (H. R. No. 1588) to amend an act entitled ''An act 

to provide for the better secuxity of life on board of vessels propelled 

in whole or in part by steam, and for other purposes," approved Feb- ruary 28, 1871; which wa read a first and second time, ordered to 

be printed and recommitted, not to be brought back on a motion to 

reconsider. 

# 
1874 . . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 1075 

APPROACHES TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESE~TATIV'ES. 

Mr. H.A. WLEY, of Tilinois. I de1I1J1nd the regular order. 

The SPEAKER. The regular order is the consideration of bills, 

&c., reported from the Committee o:f the Whole on the Private Calendar. The first proposition is a resolution which will be read. 

The Clerk read aa follows : 

Resol•Jed, That the architect of the Ulrited States Cap~tol .::xt.ension be authorized 

and directed to employ a. man, at a. salary of not exceeding sixty dollars per montb., 

for the pUrJ.lOSe of keeping the approaehes of the House in gOod order during the 

sessions of Congress. . 

The SPEAKER. This resolution is reported from the Committee 

of the Whole, with a recommendation that it be not adopted. Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I move that the resolution be laid 

on the table. The motion was agreed t?. 

WILLIAM H . VESEY. 

The next business reported from the Committee of the Whole on the Private Calendar was the bill (H. R. No. 1400) for the relief of 

William H . Ve ey. . The bill was read. It directs the Secretary of the Treasury to pay 

to William H . Vesey, former consul of the United States at Havre, in 

France, out of anymoneyin t he Treasurynot otherwise appropriated, 

the sum of 1,320.57, being the amount of his loss in consequence of 

the failure, on March Z'l, 1857, of the house of Green & Co., American 

bankers, with whom he had deposited moneys belonging to the United 

States to the amount of $1,467.30, upon the assignment by Vesey to 

the United States of his claim against the firm for the moneys so 

deposited .. ~fr. MILLS. I move that the House now adjoui:n. 

The motion wa.s not agreed to. · 'l'he bill wa~ ordered to be engrossed for a third reading; and being 

engrossed, it was a-ccordingly read the third time ancl passed. 

Mr. COX moved to recon iderthe vote 11ywhich the bill was passed; 

and also moved that the motion to reconsider be l:lid on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

PENELOPE T. HEALD. 

The next bill reported from the Committee of the Whole on the 

Private Calendar was the bill (H. R. No. 1401) granting a pension to 

Penelope T. Heald. 

The bill was read. It authorizes and directs the Secretary of the 

Interior to place on the pension-roll, subject to the provisions and 

limitations of the pen ion-laws, the name of Mrs. Penelope T. Heald, 

widow of Henry H. Heald, captain of schooner Norman, and pay her a pension the same a.s if he w·as a master in the United States Navy, 

from and after the passage of this act. The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading; and being 

engros ed, it was accordingly read the third time and passed. 1\fr. BUFFINTON moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill wa.s pa.s ed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. · The latter motion was agreed to. 

EZRA TAYLOR. 

The next business reported from the Committee of the Wh ole on the 

Private Calendar was the petition of EzTa Taylor. _ The SPEAKER. This petition wa~ reported upon adversely by 

the Committee on Invalid Pensions, and was sent to the Committee 

of the Whole on the Private Calendar, whence it is now reported 

adversely. The question is, shall it lie on the table f 

The petition was laid on the table. ' 

DIBTRIDUTION OF CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 

Mr. PENDLETON. I move tllat the House now adjourn. 

Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I rise to a privileged motion. I move to go to business on the Speaker's table, for the purpose of 

taking therefrom the res91ution providing for the distribution of the 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, whicb has been returned from the Senate 

with amendments, in which I shall a k the House to non-concur and 

appoint a committee of conference. 

Mr. RANDALL. I woulQ. like to make a statement of the effect of 

those amendments. ~fr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I wish you would. 

Mr. ELDREDGE. Is this question of higher privilege than the 

motion to adjourn f 

Mr. PENDLETON. I withdraw the motion to adjomn. 

The question being taken on the motion of MI-. BUTLER, of Massachusetts, to p;o to busine on the Speaker's table, it was a~reed to. 

The first business on the Speake1Js table was the followmg resolution, returned from the Senate with amendments: 

Resolved, by the House of Representatives, (the Senate concurring,) That the Con· gressional Printer be instructe(l to furnish to each Senator, and to each Member and 

Delegate in the House of R.epresenta.tives, twenty-four COJlies of the COXGRESSIONA.L 

Rncon.D, or of any such other like official reports of the de bares in Congress as may 

btl hereafter authorized by la.w, either daily as originally published, or in the re- vi ed form, without bindin~, or· in bound volumes, or part in eaeh form, as ea<!h 

Senator, Member, or Delegat-e may elect. 

The SPEAKER. This comes back from the Senate amended thus: 

The Clerk read a~ follows: 

Strike out all after "concurring," jn line 2, down to and inclnding "copies," in 

• 

line 6, ruul insert tho following: "That the Con,grcs. ional Printer be dircctt>d to fur. 

nish thirtv-one hundred copies for tho ut~e of ilie Senate, and seventy-two humlrcd 

and fifty ior the use of the Howe of Representative.-.." 

In line 12, after" each," where it occurs the second time, insert" Senator." 

In line 13, after " Delegat.e," insert " receiving the same." 

Mr. RANDALL. Mr. Speaker, as I introduced the original resolu- tion into the Honse, it may not be amiss for me to state the effect of. 

these amendments of the Senate. The resolution as originally proposed, as will be seen by the reading gave us twenty-four copies each, 

to the members of the Senate and the members of the Honse alike. The amendments of the Senate, lumping the number to the Honse. a.nd · lumping the number to the Senate, give to the Honse twenty-three 

copies each, with a fraction of two hundred and fifty-four for extra 

requirements, and give to each member of the Senate forty-one co pie·, 

with sixty-six extra copies. I merely state the fact , and the House can now determine whether they wish to be on an equality with the 

Senate in this particular- - · ~fr. DAWES. Without regard to previous condition. [Laughter.] 

Mr. RANDALL: Or whether they wish to give to the Senate more copies than they receive themselves. 

Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I move to non-concm in the 

runendments of the Senate. 

Mr. DONNAN. I move that it be referred to the Committee on 

Printing. . . Mr. RANDALL. It has been to the Committee on Printing once · already, so that the motion of the gentleman from Ma achusetts is 

in order. The SPEAKER. It is not necessary to go to the Committee on Printing at all. The gentleman from Massachu etts can call the previous question, as b,eholds the floor, having called up the amen(lments 

of the Senate. 

Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I demand the previous question. 

The SPEAKER. That will cut off the motion to refer to the Committee on Printing. 

The previous question wa~ seconded and the maJ.n question ordered; 

and under the operation thereof the amendments of t.he Senate were non-concurred in. Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I move that the House ask for a conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses. The motion was agreed to. - The SPEAKER appointed as managers of said confe1·ence on the 

part of the House, Mr. BUTLER, of M.a.ssachusetts, Mr. RANDALL, aml 

Mr. DONNAN. 

HENRY SAVAGE. 

Mr. E . R. HOAR, by unanimous consent, from the Committee on Foreign Affairs, reported a bill (H. R. No.1589) for the relief of Henry 

Savage, a-cting charge d'affaire of the United States in Gun,temala., 

from May 7, 1856, to :November 14, 1858; which was read f~ :first and 

second time, referred to the Committee of the Whole House on tlae 

Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying report,-ordered to be 

printed. 

PROTECTION OF THE TEXAS FRO~TIER. 

Mr. GIDDINGS, by unanimous consent, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, reported a bill (H. R. No. 159"0) to provide for the better protection of the frontier of Texas against Indian and Mexican 

depredations; which was read a fhst and second time, ordered to be 

printed and recommitted, not to be .brought back by a ' motion to 

reconsider. 

CAPTAIN BENJAl\UN GREADELL. 

Mr. COX. I wish to aSk unanimous consent to report from the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs a joint resolution (H. R. No. 45) tend- ering the thanks of Congress to Captain Benjamin Greadell, officers, 

and crew of the steamship Atlantic, of the White Star line, for sav- ing the brigantine Scotland in mid-ocean. 

I will state before the resolution is read that there was passed 

at the last session a resolution giving the thanks of Congress to the 

o:liicers and crew of this" vessel for saving another vessel belonging 

to Portland, Maine, in mid-ocean. .A. mistake, however, wa.s made io 

the name of the captain. I ask tho joint resolution may be passed 

in the Honse again, so it may go to the Senate, and proper thilll.ks 

be tendered. The English government has given medals to the offi- cers and crew, and I think the lea.st we can do is to tender our thanks 

to the officers and crew of this vessel. 

The joint resolution wa.s read a first and second time. 

It provides that the thanks of Congress be pre ented to Captain 

B. Greadell, and the officers and crew of the steamer Atlantic, of the 

White Star line, for saving the captain and crew of the brigantine 

Scotland, of Portland, Maine, wrecked in a tempestuous sea in micloooan. The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third 

time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time and p~ed. 

Mr. COX moved to reconsider the vote by which the. joint resolution was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider bo. 

laid on the table. 'fhe latter motion was agreed to. 

JAMES DE LONG. 

Mr. MYERS, by unanimous consent, from the Committee on Forei~ 

Affairs, reported a bill (H. R. No. 526) for the relief of James De 

. ..... 
1076 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. J A.L"'ffi.ARY 31, 

Long; which was read a first and second time, referred to the Com~ 

mittee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the 

accompanying papers, ordered to be printed. · 

SESSION OF SATURDAY. 

Mr. PENDLETON. I insist upon my motion that the House do now 

adjourn. ·. · • The SPEAKER. Pending the motion to adjourn the Chair will 

state that in pursuance of the order of the House the ses ion of to- morrow will be for debate only, as in Committee of the Whole, no business whatever to be tmnsacted. 'l'he gentlema.n from Missouri, 

Mr. PARKER1 will be in the chair as Speaker pro tempore. 

The questwn being taken on the motion to adjourn, it was agreed 

to; and accordingly (at four o'clock and thirty minutes p. m.) the 

House adjourned. -

PETITIONS. ETC. 

The following memorials, petitions, and other papers were laid on the Clerk's desk, under the rule, and r eferred as follows : By Mr. BARBER: The petition of Georcre Eley and others, of Green 

County, Wisconsin, :{or an a,mendment of the Constitution which sha-ll 

prohibit the making, selling, importation, and exportation of intoxicating liquors, to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

By 1\fr. BLAINE: The petition of Robert 1\.finnan, of Clearfield, 

Pennsylvania, for arrears of pay, to the Committee on Military Affali'S. 

By 1\lr. CESSNA: The petition of citizens of Somerset County, 

Pennsylvania, for the repeal of duty on friction and lucifer matches, 

to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. CHIPMAN: The petition of Thomas H. Barron, for pay- ment for materials furnished and work done on the city hall, to the · 

Committee on Claims. . Also, the petition of Cecilia McKenna, for compensation for services as nurse in the late war, to the Committee on War· Claims . .Also, the petition of Rev: John Lanahan, presiding elder, and 

o.thor , of Wa hington, District of Columbia, for the pa.yment of the 

claim of the Southern Methodist publishing house, at Nashville, TeJ;t- nessee, to the Committee on War Claims. 

By 1\Ir. DAWES : The petition of the Gmnd Division of the Sons 

of Temperance of Massachusetts, for the appointment of a commis- . si9n of inquir,v concerning the alcoholic liquor traffic, to the Committeo on the Judiciary. 

lly 1\fr. DONNAN: The petition of druggists of Independence, Iowa, 

for the repeal of the stq,mp tax on medicines, to the Committee on '\V ays and feans. . Also, the petition of li. A. Chamberlain 3.Qd others, of Winthrop, 

Iowa, for the equalization of bounties, to the Committee on lilita:ry 

Affairs. · 

By 1\.fr. GOOCH: The petition of citizens of South Scituate, Maosa.chnsetts, for the appointment of a commission of inquiry concern- ing the alcoholic liquor traffic, to the Committee on Education and 

Labor. 

By 1\Ir. G. F. HOAR: The petition of the Congregational church at 

Waltham, l\fassa{}husett , for the appointment of a commis ion of inquixy concerning the alcoljolic liquor traffic, to the Committee on the 

Judiciru·y. 

By Mr. HYNES: The petition of citizens of Arkansas} for the pay- ment of the claim of the Southern Methotlist publishing house at 

Na·hville, Tennes ee, to the Committee on \Var· Claims. .. By M.r. KELLEY: The petition of Jacob Wllitar and others, of 

PhilaQ.elphia, for the repeal of the second section of the act of June 

6, 1872, w1Jich redncecl the duty on certai'n. ruiicles 10 per cent., to 

the Committee on Ways and Means. 

lly Mr. LAMAR: Several petitions of citizens of Mississippi, for 

the payment of the claim of the Southern Methodist publishing house 

at N a{;hville, Tennessee, to the Committee on War Claims. · By Mr. L.A.WRENCE: The petition of S. Brown & Co., 'and others, 

druggists, of Springfield, Ohio, for the repeal of the stamp tax on medicines, to the Committee on Ways and 1\lea,ns. By :hir. LOFLAND: Several petitions of citizens of Delaware, for 

the repeal of the second section of tho act of J nne G, 1872, which re- duced the duty on certain articles 10 per ce~t., to the Committee on \Vays and Means. _ · By t.Ir. LYNCH: The petition of citizens of Mississippi, for the payment of the claim of the Southern Iethoflist publishing house at 

Nashville, Tennessee, to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. MAYNARD: The petitiou of James Mullins, of Tennessee, 

for remuneration for property burned by mm>ked men in retaliation 

for the faithful discharge of his duty as collector of internal revenue to the Committee on Claim . By Mr. McNULTA: The petition of the Pekin Alcohol Ianufacturing Company, of lllinois, to be 1·elieved f.rom liability on export 

hond for fifty lmrrels of alcohol destroyed in transit, to the Committee on ways and leans. 

By Mr. NEGLEY: Sev:eral petitions of "\Yholesale and retail druggist in the State of Pennsylvania, for the repeal of the stamp tax on metlicine, to the Committee on Ways and Mean . By Mr. O'NEILL: The remonstrance of the Board of Trade of Philadelphia, against the proposed reduction to $10,000 of the usual annua.l 

n.ppropriation of 20,000 for the preparation and publicatio!l of the 

Nautiool Almanac, to the Committee ~:m Appropriations. 

By Mr. PURMAN: The petition of l\frs. R. E. 1exander, of Fernandina., Florida, for the settlement of the French spoliation claim , to 

the Committee on Foreign Affa'irs. 

Al o, the petition of citizens- of Apalachicola, Florid:t, for an appropriation to clear out Apalachico allay and fm· other purposes, to-the 

Committee on Commerce. 

By 1\Ir. READ : The petition of. druggists of Lebanon and Spring- field, Kentucky, for t he repeal of the stamp ta,x on medicines, to the 

Committee on Ways and Mean. 

By 1\Ir. SCUDDER, of New York: The memorial of pilots of the 

port of New York, for a change in the 1·egulations governing th u e of lights at e.a, to the Cvmmittee on Commerce. 

By ~Ir. TEIORNBURGH: The petition of S. E. Rankin, for pay :mel 

allowances as first lieutenant from October 5, 1~55, to .February 137 1836, to the Committee on Military .Affairs. 

By Mr. WHITEHEAD: The petition of dealers in and manufacturers of cigru-s and tobacco in Virginia., for a change in the mode of asse sing and collecting taxes on said commoditie , to the Committee on Ways and 1\Ieans. 

'By :Mr.--: The petition of Philip G. Hopkins, for relief, to the 

Committee on .Military Affau-s. . 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 

SATURDAY, January 31; 1874. 

The Honse met at twelve o'clock m. Prayer by the Chapbin, Rev. 

J. G. BUTLER, D. D. 

On motion of Mr. KELLOGG, the reading of the Journal of yesterday was, by unanimous consent, dispensed with. 

ORDER OF BUSTh"ESS. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore, (1\Ir. PARKER, of Mi ouri, in the chair.) 

The Hou e meets to-day, as in Committee of the Whole, for debate 

only, no business whatever to be transactou. The gentleman from 

Indiana [l\Ir. WILSON] has the floor. . 

Mr. WILSON, of Indiana. I yield five minutes to the gentleman 

from New York, [Mr. Cox.] 

ILLEGAL OVERISSUEB-CURRENCY. 

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I am very much obliged tQ the -distinguished gentleman from Indiana [1\lr. WIL ox] for nllowing me a few moments to explain a substitute I have offered for the bill r elative to the currency reported by the Ways and l\feans Committee. 

I ma.de a remark the other day a to our "relapse into barbaritiffi" on the money question, which tripped up my parlinmentary heels 

very dromptly. I wa-s not, trictly speaking, entitled to t1Je.floor at ·the time, so I do not complain; but I ought to explain, ill! the r emark 

seemed. to be a reflection on the civilization of which this House is a beautiful repre entative and exemplar. I meant only that our care for the pre ent and carele ness of the future maue us like tho e of 

the halcyon days of the remote and savage past. This remark was in reference to money. We ru.·e so happy in eeing no difference between printed notes and real money. It is all faerie cLurency to us. On no subject which interests our society have we so much of that 

simple improvidence which belongs to the happy barbaric days. We ar happy in summer and forget the winter ahead. During tho fir t 

half of our hundred years of national existence thore were pr dudices ~xisting in fav.or of gold and ilver as a standard of values. The 

French assignats were too familiar to our ancestors. They were as familiar as the story of Paul and Virginia to our grandmothers. . The 

South Sea bubble was to our early statesmen but a pretty prismatic 

inflation of soap and water-to collap e with the first z phyr; out 

the e statesmen were stern a-nd unpoetical Gradgrinds. 

\Vhen I first came here, as chairman of Revolutionary Claillls, con- tinental money was sent us by the hatful, f01: r edemption l>y special 

act of Congre . -nut for them there was no redeemer. No one could .tell the good from the bad, and two generations were macle happy- the revolutionary one, which had useJ t.he paper, and the present one, which dicl not have to redeem it. It would be hur<l to ay who suffer d by this continental bubble. Itwoul(l be unpleasant to inquire 

in a House o full of optimists as this. 

In one of the e ays of Macaulay it i proven that the youth of the 

world. is most favorable to epic poetry. It is true that he re"\>'i.!:letl' 

this opinion afterward; but tllere ru.·e many writers who hold thttt 

the Arcadian simplicity which belongs to the untutore<l and unci vilized of our race is the happiest. Literature is full of illustrations 

of that bms which is thought to accompany ignor:1Ilce. 

At no time since our l>cginning as a nation 1Jad we such beatitudes. We are really inside of Pru.·adise. Desiring on behalf of the 

wi e men of the East to present l?ome facts, even though tl:ey mili- tate against our present ben.utiful a,nd ro ea.te dreruns f tho fu;cal 

Utopia, I have offered a bill, as a substitute for that of the Cornmlttee on Way and Means. 

When the <lel>atc opens on that bill I shall endeavor to represent 

the views of the best mel'chants and the int rests of the working- men of the city of New York. These viem; and interests are not 

tll.ose of spe~nlators, but of the country.