1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENA'J:'E. 689 

By Mr. THOMAS WILSON: Petition of 139 citizens of the First dis- , trict of Minnesota, for prohibition in the District of Columbia-to the 

Select Committee on the Alcoholic Liquor Traffic. 

The following petitions for an increase of compensation of fourth.-class 

postmasters were severally referred to the Committee on the PostOffice and Post Roads: 

By Mr. C. L. ANDERSON: Of J. J. Daniel and others of North 

Bend, ~eshoba County, Mississippi. ' 

By Mr. ARNOLD: Of citizens of Rhode Island. 

Also, of Thomas G. Kenyon and others, of Rhode Island. 

By Mr. BLANCHARD: OfS. H. Westbrook and 32 others; of J. J. 

Swann and 51 others; and of J. F. Lucius and 38 others citizens of 

Louisiana. ' 

By l\fr. ~ROWER: Of John Bullock and others,ofGranvilleCounty; 

ofW. F. Highfill and others, and ofN. F. Sullivan and others, of North 

Carolina. 

By Mr. FINLEY: Of citizens of Price ville, Ky. 

By Mr. GAINES: Of S. E. Wilkes, J. M. Flournoy, B: W. Lewis 

and others, of Virginia. ' 

By l\Ir. GRIMES: Of S. G. Duke, H. H. Cook, and other citizens of 

Heard County; Georgia. 

By Mr. HARE: Of citizens of Keeter, Wise County, Texas. 

By Mr. HATCH: Of citizens of Clark County, Missouri. 

By Mr. S. I. HOPKINS: Of L. A. Pugh and 40 others of Mount 

Zion, Campbell County, Virginia. ' 

By Mr. HUNTER: Of J. W. Long·and others, of Kentucky. 

By Mr. McCLAMMY: Of citizens of Little River Academy Cumberland County, North Carolina. ' 

By Mr. McCREARY: .O.f J. E. Rader and others, of Kentucky. 

By Mr. McRAE: Of Citizens of Pike County, and of Polk County, 

Arkansas. 

Also~ of citizens of Silver Hill, Sevier County, Arkansas. 

By Mr. MORGAN: Of W. B. Nowel and others, of Selden, Miss. 

By Mr. NEAL: Of A. Denton and other ·citizens of Goodfield 

Meigs County, Tennessee. ' 

By Mr. NEWTON: Of citizens of Rouum, La. 

By Mr. OWEN: Of citizens ofTilman, Carroll County Indiana. 

By Mr. PEEL: Of citizens of Sexton, Ark. ' 

By Mr. ROWLAND: Two petitions of citizens of Bennett, Anson 

County, North Carolina. 

By Mr. J.D. TAYLOR: Of John Hanna and 67 others of Wintersville, and of S. R. Henderson and 41 others of Mitchell'~ Salt Works 

Jefferson County; of James Mooney and 6S others, of Don; of Jam~ T. Bentley and 67 others, of Bannock; of Silas Duerig and 61 others 

of Hendershot; of E. H. Snyder and 68 others of Olivett and ctf An: 

drew Smith and 59 others, of Wegee, Belmont County· ~nd of John 

A. Raney and 20 others, of Ridge-; of Robert McKelly ~ud 30 others 

of Crooked Tree, and of John Nesselwad and 29 others from Oliv~ Green, Noble County, Ohio. ' 

. By Mr. H. G. TURNER: Of W. M. Adams and others of Chastain 

and of C. Strickland and others, of Milltown. Ga. ' ' 

By Mr. WILKINS: Of L. Kinsey and 25 'others, ofWakatomicka 

Coshocton County, and of Hiram Williams and 10 others of Vanatta' 

Licking County, Ohio. ' • ' 

By Mr. WHITTHORNE: Of W. M. Murphree and others, of Hick- man County, Tennessee. 

SENATE. 

WEDNESDAY, January 25, 1888. 

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

The Journal ofye3terday's proceedings was read and approved. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATION, 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate a communicat~on from the Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting for the consideration of Congress a report from the Light-House Board in relation to the 

necessity for the establishment of a light and fog-signal at or near the 

outer sh?al off Cape Hatteras, North Carolina; which, with the ac- companyrng papers, was referred to the Committee on Commerce and 

ordered to be printed. ' 

:MATTIE S. WHITNEY. 

. The PRESIDENT p1·o te-mpore laid before the Senn.te a communication from the clerk of the Court of Claims, transmitting the findinO's of 

fact filed ~Y: the c?urt January 23,1888, in the case o(M:attie S. WhitneY:, adll!miStratnx: of Fr~klin S. Whitney, vs. The United States; wh~ch, With the accompanymg papers, was referred to the Committee on Clarms, and ordered to be printed. 

PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS. 

The PRESIDENT P!'O !empore present~d a resolution adopted by the 

board of c~mnty co~m1ss10ners of Bernalillo County, in the Territory of 

New MeXIco, favonng the passage of a law establishing a commission 

XiX-44 

or court to settle the land titles in New Mexico· which was referred to 

the Committee on Private Land Claims. ' 

Mr. CAMERON presented a petition of members oHhe North Unite.d 

Pre?byteria~ Churc~ of Ph~ladelphia, Pa., praying for the passa-ge of the 

Bhqr educatiOnal btll; whteh was ordered to lie on the table. 

He also pre~ented resolutions adopted by the Philadelphia-(Pa.) Board 

o~ '!-Tade, urg~n_g that the pri~ciple ~fprotection should not be lost sight 

of m any rev1s10n of the tanff; whiCh were referred to the Committee 

on Finance. 

He a:So presented a pe~ition of the faculty of Bucknell University, 

a~ Lewisburgh1 Pa., praymg for the passage of the international copynght law; wh1ch was referred to the Committee on Patents. 

He also presented six memorials of citizens of the Sixth and Fourt€enth Congressional districts of Pennsylvania, remonstrating against 

the admission of Utah as a State with polygamy; which were referred 

to ~he Committee on Territories. 

He also presented a petition of 196 citizens of the Sixth, Twentieth, 

Twenty-first, and Twenty-fifth Congressional districts of Pennsylvania 

praying for prohibition in the District of Columbia; which was referred 

to the Committee on the District of Columbia. 

:Mr. VEST. I have been requested by the Woman's Christian Temperance Union of the District of Columbia, department of legislation 

and petition, to present a petition of 150 citizens of the Second Congressional .distr~ct ~f ~Iissouri, praying for the prohibition of the liquor 

traffic m thiS DIStnct. I movethereferenceofthepetition to the Committee on the District of Columbia. 

The motion was agreed to. 

1\ir. FRYE presented a petition of 150 citizens of the First ConO'ressional district of Maine, praying for the prohibition of the sale"' and 

manufacture of alcoholic liquor in the District of Columbia· which 

was referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia. ' 

. Mr. BUTLER pre:'e~ ted a petition of citizens of South Ca,rolina, prayIng that an appropnatwn be made for the improvement of the Congaree River; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce. :M::. BROWN :presented a J?etition o.f t~e Georgia Medical Society, 

:praym~ that_ medical ~d surg:cal supplies, mstruments, andappliap.ces, 

mcludmg those used m the diagnosis as well as treatment of diseases 

be imported free of import duty; which was referred to the Committe~ on Finance. • ·- · 

M.r. EVARTS presented a petition of the faculty of the Rochester UniverSity, at Rochester, N. Y., and a petition of the faculty of Vassar Coll~ge, at Po~ghkeepsie, ~· Y., praying for the passage of an.international copynght law; which were referred to the Committee on Patents. 

He ~lso presented a; pe~tion of the faculty of Vassar College, at Poughkeepsie, N. Y., praymg for the removal of the duty which is now laid 

on books and on apparatus for scientific investigation; which was referred to the Committee on Finance. 

. He als.o p:esented a petition of 52 citizens of the Twentieth CongresSIOnal d1stnct of New York, praying for prohibition in the District of 

Columbia.; which was referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia. 

Mr. STOCKBRIDGE presented a petition of 49 citizens of the Third 

Congressional district of Michigan, and a petition of 25 citizens of the 

Sixth Congressional district of Michigan, prayinO' for prohibition in the 

District of Columbia; which we1·e referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia. 

Mr. SAWYER presented a resolution adopted by the Chamber of 

Commerce of Milwaukee, Wis., indorsing theactionofthevessel-owners of Cleveland, Ohio, in their report looking toward the improvement 

of the Western lakes; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce. 

l\fr. BECK presented a petition of 31 citizens of the Seventh Congressional district of Kentucky, and a petition of 28 citizens of the Ei~rhth 

Congressional district of Kentucky, praying for prohiBition in the ~District of Columbia; which were referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia. 

REPORTS OF Co:\IMITTEES. 

Mr.' SAWYER, from the Committee on Post-Qffices:md Post-Roads, 

to whom was referred the bill (S. 968) for the relief of Leslie Bassett 

reported it without amendment, and submitted a repor~ thereon. ' 

Mr. CHANDLER, from the Committee on Naval Affairs to whom was referred the bill (S. 1370) for the relief of Assistant Engi~eer Howard D. Potts, United States Navy, reported it without a.mendment. 

M:r. DAVIS, from the Committee on Pensions to whom was I'eferred 

the bill (S. 181) granting pensions to ex-soldiers' and sailo'rs who are inpacitated fo~ the perfo.rmance of manual labor, and providing for penSI?ns to dependent relatives of deceased soldiers and sailors, reported it 

with amendments. 

1.:fr. MANDERSON. The bill reported favorably with cert..•in amendments by the Senator from Minnesota. [JI.Ir. DAVIS] is what is kown as 

the Grand Army pension bill. There will be, I know, a very large call 

upon '?embers of the Senate for copies of the bill as amended by the 

co~mittee, an~ as the expense -will be very trifling, I move that 1, 000 

copies of the bill as proposed to be amended be printed in document 

form for the use of the Senate. 
·, 

690 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. J ANU.ARY 25, 

Mr. EDMUNDS. Additional copies? 

Mr. MANDERSON. Additional copies. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. Will the expense be less than $500? 

Mr. MANDERSON. 0, a great deal less. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair thinks that under the rule a motion to print additional copies should be referred to the Committee 

on Printing. . Mr. MANDERSON. I ask that that reference be made. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The motion will be referred to the 

Committee on Printing. 

Mr. SPOONER, from the Committee on Claims, to whom was referred 

the bill (S. 728) for the relief of William J . Martin, of Oregon, reported 

it without amendment. 

Mr. QUAY, from the Committee on Claims, to whom was referred 

the bill (S. 603) for the relief of Thomas P. Morgan, jr., reported it 

without amendment. 

Mr. HOAR, from the Committee on Claims, to whom was referred 

the bill (S. 416) for the relief of Mrs. Harriet H. Robinsou, reported i~ 

without amendment, and submitted a report thereon. Mr. PLATT, from the Committee on Patents, to whom was referred 

the bill (S. 852) for the relief of William C. Dodge, reported it with an 

amendment, and submitted a report thereon. . He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred the bill (S. 

395) for the relief: of Hyland C. Kirk and others, assignees of Addison 

C. Fletcher, reported it without amendment, and submitted a report 

thereon. DANIEL B. LUCAS. 

Mr. JONES, of Nevada: I am instructed by the Committee to 

Audit and Control the Contingent Expenses of the Senate1 to whom was referred the resolution to pay Daniel B. Lucas, of West Virginia, com- pensation for expenses incurred in contesting the seat ofHon. CHARLES 

J. FAULKNER in the Senate, to report it favorably without amendment. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The resolution will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read the resolution, as follows: 

.Resolved, That there be paid to Daniel B. Lucas, of West Virginia, out of the 

contingent fund of the Senate, as compensation for expenses incurred in con- testing the sea t of Hon. CHARLES .J. FAULKNER in the United States Senate, Sl, 000, the same to be in full for a ll claim for such expenses, and also for any claim to salary as Senator. 

:Mr. FAULKNER. I ask the unanimous consent of the Senate to 

consider the resolution at the present time. 

The resolution was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to. 

DISTRICT STREET-RAILWAY TAXES. 

Mr. JONES, of Nevada. lam instructed by the Committee to Audit 

and Control the Contingent Expenses of the Senate, to whom was re- ferred the resolution submitted by the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. 

SPOONER] on the 11th instant, to report it with an amendment in the 

nature of a substitute. I ask for the present consideration of the res- olution and the adoption of the substitute. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The original resolution will first be 

read. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows : 

.Resolved, That the Committee on the District of Columbia be, and it is hereby, 

directed to inquire whether the street-railway corporations of the District are paying a fair proportion of taxes, :~,;.egard being had to the value of their fran- chise and property and the amount of their earnings; and also whether a just tax upon the gross earnings of said companies is not, in the public interest, preferable to the present system of valuing and taxing such property. And the said committee may, in prosecuting such inquiry, send for persons and papers, administer oaths, and employ a stenographer; said committee to report by bill or otherwise. 

The PRESIDENT p1·o tempore. The amendment reported by the 

committee as a substitute will now be read. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

.Resolved, That the Committee on the District of Columbia be, and it is hereb;y, 

directed to inquir{! whether the street-railway corporations of the District are paying a fair proportion of taxes, regard being had to the value of their fra n- chise and property and the amount of their earnings; and also whether a just tax upon the gross earnings of said companies is not, in the public interest, pref· erable to the present system of valuing and taxing such property. In the prose- cution of such inquiry said committee may send for persons and papers, administer oaths, employ a stenographer, and may report by bill or otherwise. The necessary expenses of such investigation shall be paid out of the contingent fund 

of the Senate upon vouchers t{) be approved by the Committee to Audit and Control the Contingent Expenses of the Senate. · 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. There being no objection to the present consideration of the resolution, the question is on agreeing to the 

amendment reported as a substitute. 

. :Mr. HOAR. ,.:.:Mr. President, I should like to call your attention, as chairman of1lheCommittee on the District of Columbia, and the attention of the Senate, to the fact that a very much more convenient form 

of resolution is to provide that the committee to whom any inveshlgation of the kind is committed, or any subcommittee of their number, 

shall be a committee to inquire, etc. That makes the subcommittee 

itself a committee of the Senate for that particular purpose, and gives 

the subcommittee the power to administer oaths and to send for persons 

and papers without requiring always the presence of a quorum of the 

full committee. 

I suggest that the resolution be modified in that way. Of course I 

have no special interest in this particular investigation. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The resolution was introduced by 

the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. SPOONER]. Mr. SPOONER. I shall be glad to have the modification made as suggested by the Senator from Massachusetts. The PRESIDENT pro·tempore. The proposed modification will be ~ 

stated. 

Mr. SPOONER. Add after the words "District of Columbia" the 

words ''or any subcommittee thereof." 

Mr. HOAR. If the Secretary will allow me to look at the resolution, 

and the Senate will pass over the matter for a moment, I will suggest 

the point where the words should be inserted. Mr. MANDERSON. As to the resolution that is under consideration, I hope that the scope of the inquiry may be enlarged. I see the 

proposition is to ascertain whether these corporations are paying their 

proper proportion of taxes. I should like very .much to see an inquiry 

whether it is possible that the street railways of Washington may not 

by some process be compelled to make a quicker transit, and in lieu of 

the present slow methods of locomotion adopt a more improved method 

leading to rapidity by the use of cable tramway, or by the use of the 

electric motor. Certainly it is a very great evil that so much time 

should be consumed in going from one part of this city to another. 

The fact is, these corporations are not keeping pace with the march of 

public improvement in that direction, and I for one would like very 

much while this inquiry is being made that that subject-matter should 

also be included by the committee. 

I suggest also, as to the matter of taxing, that not only are the meth- ods pointed out by the resolutionusual in the taxing of street-railway 

companies, but it is not unusual that an income should be raised by a -license tax upon each car, which seems to be a very 'proper method 

for them to pay their proportion of the public expense. I should like 

very much to see the resolution enlarged in that direc'tion, iJ it meets 

with the approval of the mover of the resolution. · 

Mr. SPOONER. It will be a sufficient reply to the remarks of the 

Senator from Nebraska. to bring to his atten~on the fact that at the 

last session of Congress the entire subject of steam and street railways 

in the District of Columbia and their operation was referred b_y the · Senate to a select committee. Thatcommitteehasmadecommendable 

progreSs, and will be ready in due time, I think, to report upon that 

subject. , 

Mr. :MANDERSON. I was not aware of that fact. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Let the resolution be again read. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The resolution as proposed to be 

amended will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

Resolved, Tha t the Committee on the District of Columbia, or any subcom· 

mittee thereof, be, and it is hereby, directed to inquire whether the street-rail- way corporation s of the District are p a ying a fair proportion of taxes, regard being had to the value of their franchise and property, and the amount of their 

earnings; and also whether :a just tax upon the gross earnings of said compa- nies is not, in the public interest, preferable to the present system of valuing and 

taxing such property. In the prosecution of such inquiry said committee, or such subcommittee, may send for persons a nd papers, administer oaths, employ a stenographer, a nd may report by bill or otherwise. The necessary expenses of such investigation shall be paid out of the contingent fund of the Senate upon vouchers to be approved by the Committee to Audit and Control the Contingent Expenses of the Senate. 

Mr. HOAR. I suggest instead of the words "any subcommittee" 

to say "a subcommittee thereof." 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair would suggest that the resolution as read is anamendmentreported bytheCommitteetoAudit 

and..Control the Contingent Expenses of the Senate, and the amend- ments submitted by the Senator from Massachusetts, the Chair supposes, must be voted upon to incorporate the words he proposes in the 

report of the committee'. The amendments proposed by the Senator 

from Massachusetts will be read . 

The CHIEF CLERK. After the word" Columbia," in the second line 

of the resolution, it is proposed to insert the words "or a subcommit- tee thereof.'' 

The PRESIDENT pro tentpm·e. Will the Senate agree to this amend- ment? 

The amendment to the amendment was ~o-reed to. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The next amendment will be re- ported. 

The CHIEF CLERK. In line 18, after the word ''committee,'' it is 

proposed to insert the words ''or such subcommittee;'' so as to read: 

In the prosecution of such inquiry said committee, or such subcOmmittee, may send for persons and papers, etc . 

The amendment to the amendment was agreed to. 

Mr. BECK. I should like to see the resolution. enlarged so as to instruct the committee to inquire whether the street railways ofthecity 

of Washington should not be required to furnish cars to accommodate 

the public and allow every person ·who pays fare to have a seat, and 

not .be crowded, as the passengers frequently are, like pigs in a pen. I 

should like to see some inquiry made in that regard. 

:M:r. HARRIS. The Senator from Kentucky evidently was not in 

his seat a moment since, when the Senator from Wisconsin explained 

that a select committee was raised by resolution at the last session of 

Congress especially charged with the investigation of the whole sub-
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATEo 691 

ject, and that committee has it under investigation at the present ~~ 0 

0 

l\1r. BECK.- I was not in when the statement referred to by the Senator from Tennessee was made and did not hear it. For several yeaf!3 

I have been endeavoring tiJ see if we could not have some arrangement 

made whereby cars in the cityofWa.shing~n could be provided so that 

passengers might be comfortably seated instead of being crowded as - they have been, but as that matter is being investigated now, I have no suggestion to make in regard to the pending resolution. 

The PRESIDEN~ pro tmnpore. Wi.U the Senate agree to the amendment as amended? 

The amendment as amended was agreed to. 

The resolution as amended was agreed to. 

!lfESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. 

A message from the Ho~se of Representatives, by Mr. CLARK, its 

Clerk, announced that the House had passed the following bills; in 

which it requested the concurrence of the Senate: 

A bill (H. R. 365) granting a pension to John Humes; 

A bill (H. R. 1204) conferring civil jurisdiction in certain cases ;:trising in the Indian Territory on the United States courts which may now 

or may hereafter exercise criminal jurisdiction over said Territory; 

A bill (H. R. 1523) for the establi'3hment of a light-house at Cob 

Point Bar, at the mouth of the Wicomico River,'.in the State of Maryland; 

A bill (H. R. 1584) granting the right of way to the Duluth, Rainy ~ake River and Southwestern Railway Company through certain Indian 

!anrls in the State of l\1innesota; 

A bill (H. R. 2076) for the relief of James H. Gilbect; 

A bill (H. R. 2112) for the relief of Capt. John Burkhart; 

A bill (H. R. 2467) to amend chapter 191 of the private acts of the 

Forty-ninth Congress, passed at the second session, concerning James 

H. Young; 

A bill (H. R. 2974) the relief of John Snoddy; 

A bill (H. R. 2578) authorize the construction of a bridge over the Uissonri River at or near the city of Lexington, Mo.; and 

A bill (H. R. 2927) to author1ze the construction of a bridge across 

the Mississippi River at :Memphis, Tenn. 

ENROLLED BILL SIGNED. 

The message also announced that the Speaker pro tempore had signed 

the joint resolution (H. Res. 72) relating to the invitation of the British 

Government to the United Stat€s to participate in the international 

exhibition at Melbourne, to celebrate the founding of New Son th Wales; 

and it was thereupon signed by the President pro tempore. 

BILLS INTRODUCED. 

Mr. VEST introduced a bill (S. 1648) for the relief of J. B. Philipson; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Claims. 

Mr. CULLOM introduced a bill (S. 1649) granting a pension to James 

Fairman; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Pensions. 

Mr. HISCOCK introduced a bill (S. 1650) for the relief of 1\faj. Gen. 

W. W. Averell; which wa,s read twice by its title, and referred to the 

Committee on Military Affairs. 

He also introduced a bill (S. 1651) for the relief of Capt. Henry S. 

Pratt; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Military Affairs. 

Mr. HALE introduced a bill (S. 1652) for the erection of a public 

building at Bar Harbor, in M:aine; which was read twice by its title, 

and referred to the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds. 

Mr. BLAIR introduced a bill (S. 1653) granting a pension to Catherine E. Babcock; which was read twice by its title, and referred to 

the Committee on Pensions. 

Mr. CAMERON introduced a bill (S. 1654) granting a pension to 

1\:t:rs. Catherine Wagner; which was read twice by its title, andreferred to the Committee on Pensions. 

He also introduced a bill (S. 1655) granting a pension to Mrs. Leah 

E. Lady; which was read twice by its title, and, with the accompanying paper, referred to the Committee on Pensions. 

He also (by request) introduced a bill (S. 1656) to promote Commodore Louis C. Sartori, now on the retired-list of the Navy, to be a rear- admiral on said list, in accordance with his original position on the 

Navy Register; which was read twice by its title, arid, with the ac- compa.nying papers, referred to the Committee on Naval Affairs. 

Mr. BECK (by request) introduced a bill (S. 1657) for the relief of 

William Bayard, a citizen of the United States; which was read twice 

by its title, and referred to the Committee on Military Affairs. 

Mr. COCKRELL introuuced a bill (S. 1658) granting a pension to 

William H. Shivers; which was read twice by its title, and referred to 

the Committee on Pensions. 

Mr. BUTLER introduced a bill (S. 1659) to provide for the enrollment of a naval militia and the organization of naval reserve forces; 

which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Naval Affairs. 

He also introduced a bill (S. 1660) authorizing the voluntary retirement of certain officers of the United States Navy who have rendered 

conspicuous services in battle or who have served thirty years in the 

Navy; which was read twice by its titlP-, and referred to the Committee 

on Naval Affairs. 

Mr. SAWYER introduced a bill (S. 1661) granting a pension to Pliny 

Jewett; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Pensions. 

Mr. JONES, of Arkansas, introduced a bill (S. 1662) for the relief 

of James Trabue, Thornton Thatcher, Michael Callahan, and the widow 

of John Waters; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the 

Committee on Claims. 

He also introduced a bill (S. 1663) authorizing the Little Rock-and 

Alexandria Railway Company to build certain bridges in the State of 

Arkansas; which was read twice by its title, and referred to tp.e Committee on Commerce. 

Mr. MITCHELL introduced a bill (S. 1664) for the erection of a public building for a post-office and United States land office at the city 

of The Dalles, Oregon; which was read twice by its title, and referred 

to the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds. 

Mr. HAWLEY introduced a bill (S. 1665) granting a pension to 

Theresa B. Hoffman; which was read twice by its title, and referred to 

the Committee on Pensions. 

l\fr. DAVIS introduced a. bill (S. 1666) to regula.te the salary and provide for the payment of the expenses of the district judge of the United 

States for the district of 1\finnesota; which was read twice by its title, 

and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

ADMISSION OF DAKOTA. 

Mr. BUTLER.. I present a substitute for Senate bill185, to enable 

the people of Dakota to form a constitution and State government, and 

to be admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the original 

States. The bill was reported by the majority of the Committee on Territories on the 23d instant, and I offer this substitute on behalf of 

the minority of that committee. I ask that it be printed and placed 

upon the Calendar to accompany the bill. Th~ PRESIDENT pro tempore. The substitute will be printed and 

placed on the Calendar. 

FOURTH INTERNATIONAL PRISON CONGRESS.-

Mr. BROWN. The Fourth International Prison Congress is to meet 

in 1890 in St. Petersburg. The Russian Government brought the matter to the attention of our Government, and the President at the last 

session of Congress sent a special message to Congress recommending 

the appointment of a delegate to represent this Government in that 

congress. No final action was taken, however; no appropriation was 

made for it. The matter was again brought to the attention of the Secretary of State by the R'ussian minister during the present session, and a joint resolution was introduced authorizing the appointment of a delegate, and making an appropriation of $3, 000 to bear his expenses. 

That resolution was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations, 

and they authorized me to report it favorably, which I did a few days 

since. I now, at the suggestion of a member of the Committee on Appropriations, as the best way of securing action on the matter, submit the substance of the joint resolution, to be referred to the Com-. mittee on Appropriations, so that they may consider it as an amendment to the urgent deficiency appropriation bill when it shall reach 

the Senate. • The PRESIDENT pro temJJore. The amendment proposed by the 

Senator from Georgia will be referred to the Committee on Appropriations. 

VENEZUELAN CLAil\IS CONVENTION. 

1\:t:r. QUAY submitted the fo]lowing resolutions; which were considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to: 

Resolved, That the President be requested:to communicate to the Senate, if not in his judgment incompatible with the interests of the public service,'any corre- spondence between the Government of the United States and the Government 

of Venezuela in regard to the exchange of ratifications of the claims conven- tion of December 5,1885, between the United States and Venezuela, and also 

any correspondence between the Secretary of State and owners of Venezuelan 

certificates of award, or their attorneys, since December 5, 1886. Andjtvrther reso~ved, That the President be requested to inform the Senate 

whether ratifications of the aforesaid claims convention have been exchanged with the Venezuelan Government, a.Qd if not, what bas prevented such ex- change ; also whether the funds which have been received from the Venezuelan 

Government on account of the Caracas awards have been distributed, and if 

not, upon what ground such distribution bas been withheld; also what amount is in hand applicable to the payment of the-said awards, and how the same is 

invested. 

WARM SPRINGS INDIAN RESERVATION. 

1\Ir. MITCHELL submitted the following resolution; wliich was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to: 

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he hereby is, directed t-o 

transmit to the Senate a copy of the report made to him by Special Agents Gordon and Martin, of date December 29, 1887, under instructions from the Department of date October 7 and 8, 1887, directing them to investigate the north 

boundary line of the Warm Springs Indian reservation in the State of Oregon, 

and to 1·eport what line heretofore surveyed would nearest conform to the 

treaty; also that such copy of report be accompanied by a tracing showing the 

several lines of survey referred to in such report. 

ACTION OF THE NAVY DEPARTMENT. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair lays before the Senate a resolution offered by the Senator from New Hampshlre [Mr. CHANDLER] upon a previous day. ·· 
692 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JANUARY 25, 

The Chief Clex:k read the following resolution, submitted by Mr. 

CHANDLER January 23; 1888: 

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Navy be directed to inform the Senate 

what plans, designs, drawings, or specifications of ships or marine engines have 

been purchased or procured in foreign countries by or.on behalf of the Navy 

Department, and from whom they have been obtained, and to state what plans, 

designs, drawings, or specifications so purchased or procured have been adopted, 

in whole or in part, for vessels or engines now under contract or construction; 

and also to transmit to the Senate a statement of the cost to the Government of 

each of such plans, designs, drawings, and specifications, and also an account of 

all expenditures made by the Navy Department since March 20, 1885, under the 

appropriations for information from abroad, and for emergencies and extraor- dinary expenses arising abroad. 

The PRESIDENT pro temJJO?'e. 'rhe question is on agreeing to the 

resolution. 

1\ir. MORGAN. Was the resolution offered this morning? 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It was offered on a previous day, and 

laid over under the rules and ordered to be printed. 

Mr. MORGAN. I have no objection to it. 

The resolution was agreed to. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate the following 

resolution, submitted by Mr. CHANDLER January 23,1888: · 

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Navy be directed to tmnsmit to the Senate a statement of the changes made from the original plans of f·he Chicago, Boston, 

Atlanta, and Dolphin in addition to those specified in a communication from 

the Navy Department to the House of Representatives of February 11, 1885 

(constituting House Executive Document No. 220, Forty-eighth Congress, sec- ond session), and in a communication from said Department to the Senate of 

May 24,1886 (constituting Senate Executive DocumentNo.1'53, Forty-ninth Con- gress, first session), together with the cost of such additional changes in each case; and that the Secretary be directed also to furnish the Senate with copies 

of all documents and correspondence on file in said Department written since 

:March 5, 1886, in any way concerning the aforesaid vessels, which are not con- tained in the annual reports of said Department, including all report'S of boards 

and of commanding officers and engineer officers, and all log-books kept while 

the vessels have been in motion since said date, and all the evidences of settle- ments and payments made since said date by the United States, and of any un- settled claims on account of said vessels; and that the Secretary be directed 

further to state the present condition of the Atlanta, Boston, and Chicn.go, and 

the reasons for the delay in their completion and reception int-o active service. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempoTe. The question is on agreeillg to the 

1·esolution. 

Mr. BUTLER. I do not know that I have any objection to the information asked for in the resolution, but it seems to me from the scope 

of the resolution that it ought to go to the Committee on Naval Affairs, 

to be examined by that committea. Unless there is some good reason 

to the contmry, I shall make that motion. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from South Carolina 

moves that the resolution be referred to the Committee on Naval Affairs. 

:Mr. CHANDLER. I have no objection, Mr. President. 

Tl1e motion to refer was agreed to. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate the following 

resolution, submitted by Mr. CHANDLER January 23, 1888: 

Res l~:ecl, That the Secretary of the Navy be directed to transmit to the Senate 

information concerning all naval vessels, and machinery and armor for the same, and aU nstval ordnance and gun metal for constructing or furnishing 

which contracts have been made by the Navy Department since March 4,1885, as follows: 

1. Copies in the case of each contract of the advertisement and of the written or printed conditions and rules for tests and inspections upon wllich proposals were invited. • 2. A schedule of the proposals received and awards made. 

3. A copy of the contract made. 

4. A statement showing the time within which the contract was to be per- formed, and the present condition of the work, and the payments made thereon, 

with copies of the reports and correspondence upon which each payment was made. And that the Secretarv be directed also to inform the Senate whether or not, since said contracts have been made, any of the terms or conditions of any of them have been altered, or any agreements have been made for changes in 

the qualit.y of material or work, or any of the stipulations or rules for tests and 

inspections have been r elaxed or varied; and, if so, to state the circumstances 

and causes of any such alteration, change , or variation. 

The PRESIDENT p·ro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the 

resolution. 

Mr. BUTLER. I see that the resolution only goes back as far as 

1885. I move to amend the resolution by striking out "1885" and inserting 11 1880. '' 

The PRESIDENT p1·o tempore. The question is on agreeing to the 

amendment proposed by the Senator from South Carolina. 

Ur. CHANDLER. Mr. President, I havenottheslightestobjection 

to having laid before the Senate the information which the honorable 

S~nator seem.~ to desire. As a matter of fact, thew hole of it has already 

been laid before the Senate precisely as this resolution calls for information concerning ships and contracts since March 4, 1885. I do not suppose that the Senator really wishes to duplicate upon the records of the 

Senate any information; and therefore I think the amendment is objectionable, and objectionable only for that reason. 

The resolution as it stands without the amendment, -ca.ll.s simply for 

full information as to the action of the Navy Department since March 

4, 1885, in reference to naval vessels and new naval OTdnance, and is 

designed to give to the Senate all the information on that subject properly available in addition to what is contained in the reports of the 

Secretary of the Navy. 

If the Senator will introduce his amendment in a separate form and 

will stat-e to the Senate that there is any information which he desires 

to obtain that has not already been forwaided to Congress and printed, 

it will give me pleasure to vote for the reso1ution which he offers. 

I am also entirely willing that the resolution which I have offered, 

with t.he amendment proposed by the Senator, should be referred to the 

Committee on Naval Affairs, and let the Committee on Naval Affairs 

consider how far this inquiry should be made; for I certainly am anxious for all the light that can be given by the present Secretary of the 

Navy, not only concerning the transactions of the Department since 

March 4, 1885, but also concerning all its transactions in previous years. 

Mr. HALE. Mr. Pre$ident, I hope the Senator .from South Carolina. 

will not insist upon his amendment for this reason: Much of the information that is called for by the original resolution of the Senator 

from New Hampshire has already been laid in one form or another before the Senate; but it will be a very convenient thing for the committees having these subjects specially in charge and for Senators to have 

i!; all in one document together, in considering the subjects that we have 

to introduce; and .the sooner we get that the better. 

Therefore I would be glad to see this resolution go through without 

referring it to the Naval Committee, in order that the Secretary of the 

Navy may at once have all thesubject-mattertreated by it put into one 

document, which he will transmit to us, I have no doubt, very gladly. 

Mr. BUTLER. Do I understand the Senator from Maine to conclll' 

in the amendment I have offered? 

Mr. HALE. I do not see the necessity of that information on the particular subject that weare considering. I would have that information, 

if neca."Sary, as a separat-e thing. The Senator did not catch what I 

said, I think, on this particular part of the subject covered by the resplution of the Senator from New Hampshire. I said that it would be 

better to have that in one document by itself; that the Secretary would 

be glad to send it in; that it will cover many papers which he has already sent us, but we shall get it all together, treating upon this new 

construction since the dates which are given in the resolution. 

Mr. BUTLER. I havenotthe slightestob' 'on to the information 

being called for, and I have no doubt the Sec ry of the Navy will be 

very glad to furnish it; but it seems to me that if we are going to get 

the information in regard to one set of contracts it would be very desirable to have the information relating to all of them. · While ih is 

true, perhaps, as suggested by the Senator from New Hampshire, that 

we have received the information as to the contracts made prior to 1885, 

yet, in order to pass intelligently upon them, it would seem to me that 

they ought all to be embraced in the same report. I shall therefore insist upon my amendment. 

I desire not only the information which is called for in the form presented by the resolution, but also the information which would be embraced if my amendment were adopted. I can see no earthly objection 

to its coming in in that form. 

I did not intend to ask that the pending resolution should go to the 

Committee on Naval Affairs, but to permit it, as far as my vote would 

do so, to be put upon its passage at once. 

I .trust the Senator from New Hampshire will recognize the propriety 

of embracing the additional information which my amendment will b~~ \ . :M:r. CHANDLER. I have said that I shall vote for the Senator's 

proposition covering the years between 1880 and 1885 if he will put it 

in a separate resolution and will &tate that the copies of contracts and 

copies from the records of the Dep(;)rtment which he desires have not 

been previously transmitied to Congress and are not already in print 

and accessible to Congress. I undertake to say that four-fifths of all 

the documents which would be sent in in answer to the resolution as 

amended, concerning the period between 1880 and 1885, have already' 

been transmitted to Congress and are now in print on the records of the 

Government and accessible to every one, while I also desire to say 

that the information called for by the resolution concerning the contracts since March 4, 1885, is not now in print and has not been transmitted to Congress, and probably nine-tenths of ibis not at this moment accessible to any member of the Senate; and that is the distinction 

between tbe two propositions. 

Mr. GORMAN. I trust the amendment of the Senator from South 

Carolina will be adopted. Congress, I have no doubt, will be very well 

instructed if we can have before us jn a connected statement, in one 

document, the whole history of the contracts which have been made 

since the Government bas entered upop. the construction of war Yessels 

of iron and steel, showing tbe progress we have made from 1880 to the 

present time. I submit to the Senator from New Hampshire that if 

he desires Congress to have this full information it can only be had by 

having in one statement from the Secretary of the Navy the history of -

these transactions. 

Ur. President, it is perfectly well known that since 1880 we have 

made very great progress, not only in the designs of these ships and in 

the material of which they are constructed, but in the construction of 

the vessels themselves; and while the greater portion of the information 

that is covered by the amendment of the Senator from South Carolina. 

from 1880 to 1885 has been transmitted to Congress, it has been in such a fragmentary way that it is almost impossible to get an idea of the 

wholo history of these transactions. I therefore trust the amendment 

will be adopted. 

I 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL REOORD·-SENATE. 693 

Mr. BECK. The amendment covers contracts made prior to 1885. 

Mr. GORMAN. Yes. Unquestionably the vessels contracted for 

between 1880 and 1884 are not yet completed. In point of fact they were taken out of the bands of the contractors and put in charge of the 

Government, and no intelligible and connected statement of the whole 

transaction can be made unless it covers the period between 1880 and 

1885. . 

Mr. CHANDLER. I have already stated the only objection I have 

to extending the call as desired by the Senator from SQuth Carolina. 

I have not tlte slightest objection to having printed in one book all the 

contracts that have been made for guns, ordnance, or naval material 

since 1880. The objection I see to having the resolution passed in the 

amended form is, first, what I have stated, that all tha contracts between 1880 and 1885 have been once printed, and nearly all the other 

documents that would be called for during that period have been already printed, and it would be useless and a needless expense, as it seems to me, to print them again. But if the Senators think otherwise, 

and the Senate thinks otherwise, I have nothing to say. 

The only other objection that I can think of would be that the 

amendment might serve to delay the answer to this resolution; but in 

order that Senators may be gratiiied and may see the exhibit from 1880 

to 1888, and may have these documents all reprinted in connected form, 

if they desire it, I, so far as I am concerned, withdraw all opposition to 

the amendment of the Senator from South Carolina. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on the amendment 

proposed by the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. BUTLER]. 

Theamendment was agreed to. 

The resolution as amended was agreed to. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I now ask unanimous consent of the Senate to 

have the resolution which has been referred to the Committee on Naval 

Affairs recalled from that committee and acted upon at the present 

time. t The PRESIDENT o tempore. The Senator from New Hampshire 

asks unanimous cons t that the vote by which the resolution to which 

he alludes was referred to the Committee on Naval Affairs may ·be re- considered. Is there objection? 

Several SENATORS. Let it be read. · 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The resolution will be read for information. 

The Secretary read as follows: 

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Navy be directed to transmit to the Senate a statement of the changes made from the original plans of the Chicago, Boston, 

Atlanta, and Dolphin in addition to those specified in a communication from the 

Navy Department to the House of Representatives of February 11, 1885 ( consti tut- ing House Executive Document No. 220, Forty-eighth Congress, second session), 

and in a communication from said Department to the Senate of May 24,1886 (con- , stituting Senate Executive Document N o.153, Forty-ninth Congress. first session), 

together with the cost of such additional changes in each case; and that the Secretary be directed also to fu.rnish the Senate with copies of all documents and cor- respondence on file in said Department written since March 5, 1886, in any way concerning the aforesaid vessels, which are not contained in the annual reports of 

said Department, including all reports of boards and of commanding offioors and 

engineer officers, and all log-books kept while the vessels have been in motion 

since said df\te, and all the evidences of settlements and payments made since 

said date by the United States, and of any unsettled claims on account of said 

vessels; and that the Secretary be directed further to state the present condition 

of the Atlanta, Boston, and Chicago, and the reasons for the delay in their com- pletion and reception into active service. · 

Mr. BUTLER. I have not the slightest objection to that resolution 

passing at once provided the Senator from New Hampshire will consent 

to a similar amendment to it to that which I offered to the former resolution, so as to embrace the entire history of these vessels. I see that 

this resolution only calls for the correspondence since a certain peri9d 

of 1886. I should like to have all the correspondence relating to the 

construction of these four vessels from the inception of their building 

to the present time. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I ask the Senator whether he has read this book 

which I hold in my hand, sent in a year ago in answer to a call on this 

subject? 

Mr. BUTLER. Mr. President, life is too short to read all the books 

that are sent in. 

:Mr. CHANDLER. I suggest this explanation for the Senator's benefit, that on the 5th of March, 1886, the Senator from Maine submitted a resolution, which was agreed to, calling for all information np to that 

date, which was sent to the Senate and is here printed. 

The resolution which I now offer is a resolution that calls for similar 

information concerning these ships since that date, and the answer when 

printed as a supplement to this book will contain exactly what the Senator Sa.ys he desires to read, but the first chapter of which I discover he 

has not yet bad time to read. 

Mr. BUTLER. Perhaps I have been very derelict in not reading the 

:Q.rst chapter of that very interesting document, and I plead guilty; I 

have not read it. I should like very much, however, to have an opportunity of glancing over it before consenting to the passage of this .resolution in its present form. I therefore suggest to the Senator from 

New Hampshire that he allow the resolution to lie over until to-mor- row. until I can have that opportunity. 

:Mr. CHANDLER. I do not understand the Senator to want it to 

lie until he reads this book. 

Mr. BUTLER. No, sir. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The resolution bas been referred to 

the Committee on Naval Affairs. The pending question is on therecon· 

sideration of the vote by which it was referred. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I ask unanimous consent. Does the Senator 

from South Carolina object to it, after having amended the other reso· lution? 

Ur. BUTLER. I object. I think it had better go to the committee. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does tbe Senator from New Hampshire insist on his motion to reconsider? 

Mr. CHANDLER. No; I withdraw the motion. 

ISAAC D. SMEAD & CO. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair lays before the Senate a resolution offered by the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. DAWES] on a previous day, which will be read. 

The Secretary read the resolution submitted by Mr. DAWES January 

23, 1888, as follows: · · Resolved, That the commissioners of the District of Columbia be, and they are hereby, directed to furnish the Senate with a detailed statement of the en- tire amount paid by the· District government to Isaac D. Smead & Co. from the 

date they commenced work for the District to the present time, giving in con- nection with each payment its amount, date, kind of work done, and designation of the building in which it was done; also to report whether there was any competition or whether any proposals were invited for said work before contract was entered into therefor, and, if so, to furnish specific information in 

regard to the same. 

The resol~tion was agreed to. 

C<EUR D'ALENE RESERVATION. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair lays before the Senate a resoluti'on submitted by the Senator from Oregon [Mr. MITCHELL] on a previous day. 

The Secretary read the following resolution, submitted by Mr. 

MITCHELL January 23, 1888, as follows: 

Whereas it is alleged that the present area of the Creur d'Alene Indian reser- vation, in the Territory of Idaho, embraces 480,000 acres of land; that there are, according to the statistics in the Indian Bureau, only a.bout.476 Indians in the 

tribe now occupying such reservation, or more than 1,000 acres to each man, woman, and child; that Lake Creur d'Alene, all the navigable waters of Creur 

d'Alene River, and about 20 miles of the navigable part of St. Joseph River, 

and part of St. Mary's, a navigable tributary of the St . .Joseph, are embraced 

within this reservation, except a shore· line of about 3t miles at the north end of 

the lake, it being alleged that this lake and its rivers tributary constitute, the most important highways of commerce in the Territory of Idaho, and are in fact 

the only navigable waters, except Snake River, now used for steam-boat navigation in the Territory; that all boats now entering such waters are subject to the 

laws governing the Indian country and all persons going on such lake or waters within the reservationlines are trespassers; and 

Whe1·eas it is further alleged that the Indians now on such reservation are located in t.he extreme southwest corner of the same, around De Smet Mission; near the town of Farmington, in Washington Territory, where the land is good for agriculture; and it being further alleged that all that part of such reserva- tion lying between Lake Creur d'Alene and Creur d'Alene River and that part 

between the C<eur d'Alene RiYer and St. Joseph: River is h. territory rich in the 

precious metals and at the same time being of no real use or benefit to the In- dians: Therefore, 

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, directed to inform the Senate as to the extent of the present area and boundaries of the 

C<eur d'Alene Indian reservation in the Territory of Idaho; whether such area. includes any portion, and if so,abouthowmnchoftbe navigablewatersofLake 

Creur d'Alene, and of C<eur d'Alene and St. Joseph Rivers; about what pro- portion of said reservation is agricultural, grazing, and mineral land, respectively; also the number of Indians occupying such reservation; also on what 

portion of such reservation t.he Indians now thereon are located; also whether, 

in the opinion .of the Secretary, it is advisable to throw any portion of such 

rese1:vation open to occupation and settlement under the mineral laws of the 

United States, and if so, precisely what portion; and also whether it is advisable to release any of the navigable waters aforesaid from the limit of such reserva- tion. 

The resolution was agreed to. 

The preamble was agreed to. 

INDIAN MARRIAGES. 

Mr. D.A. WES. Yesterday a motion to reconsider the vote by which 

the Senate passed the bill (S. 928) in relation to marriages between 

white men and Indian women was withdrawn, and the bill was laid 

on the table in order that the Senator from Texas [Mr. CoKE] might 

look at it. He is now present, and I should like to have him state 

what action he desires. 

Mr. COKE. I have examined the bill, and I see that it covers the 

point which I wished to provide for. I have no objection to it now. 

The PRESIDENT p'ro tempore. The bill then stands passed by the 

Senate and will be returned to the House of Repres~ntatives. . . 

HOUSE BILLS REFERRED. 

The following bills from the House of Representatives were severally 

read twice by their titles, and referred as indicated below: 

The bill (H. R. 365) granting a pension to John Humes-to the Com· 

mittee on Pensions. 

The bill (H. R. 1204) conferring civil jurisdiction in cert.ain cases 

arising in the Indian Territory on the United States courts which now 

or may hereafter exercise criminal jurisdiction over said Territory-to 

the ·c.ommittee on the Judiciary. The bill (H. R. 1584) granting the rigbtofwa.ytotheDuluth, Rainy 

Lake River and Southwestern Railway Company through certain Indian lands in the State of Minnesota-to the Committee on Indian 

.Affairs. 
·• 

694 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JANUARY 25, 

. The bill (H. R. 2067) for the relief of James H. Gilbert-to the Committee on Claims. - The bill (H. R. 2112) for the relief of Capt. John Burkhart-to the 

Committee on Military Affairs. 

The bill (H. R. 2467) to amend chapter 191 of the private acts of the 

Forty-ninth Congress, passed at the second session, concerning James 

H. Young-to the Committee on Pensions. · · The bill (H. R. 2974) for the relief of John Snoddy-to the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads. 

The following bills were severally read twice by their titles, and referred to the Committee on Commerce: 

A bill (H. R. 1523) for the establishment of a light-house at Cob 

Point Bar, at the mouth of the Wicomico River, in the State of Maryland· 

A bill (H. R. 2578) to authorize the construction of a bridge over the 

Missouri River at or near the city of Lexington, Mo.; and 

A bill (H. R. 2927) to authorize the construction of a bridge across the Mississippi River at Memphis, Tenn. 

LIGHT AND FOG-SIGNAL OFF CAPE HATTERAS. 

Mr. FRYE. This morning there was laid before the Senate a com- munication from the 'lh'easury Department, transmitting one from the 

Light-House Board touching the establishment of a light and fog-signal at or near the outer shoal off Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, and 

the order made was that it be printed. It is necessary for the Committee on Commerce to have these papers to use to-morrow morning. 

Therefore I ask that that order may be reconsidered, and that the papers 

and chart be referred to the Committee on Commerce without printing. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. PLATT in the chair). The Senator from Maine asks the Senate to reconsider the vote whereby the 

papers which he has mentioned were ordered to be printed. Is there 

objection? The Chair hears none. Mr. FRYE. I now move a reference of the papers and chart to the 

Committee on Commerce without printing. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The papers will be so referred. 

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. 

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

Clerk, announced that the House had passed the bill (S. 290) to au- thorize the construction of a railroad, wagon, and foot-passenger bridge across the Mississippi River at or near Burlington, Iowa. 

The message also announced that the House had passed a bill (H. R. 

339) for the relief of J: E. Pilcher; in which it requested the concur- ;rence of the Senate. · The message further announced that the House had passed the followingresolutious; in which it requested theconcurrenceofthe Senate: 

A concrurent resolution for the printing of 2, 500 copies of the annual 

report of the health officer of the District of Columbia; and 

A concurrent resolution for the printing of 43,000 copies of the report 

of the Commissioner of Education for 1886-'87. 

DEFICIENCIES IN APPROPRIATIONS. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there further morning business? 

If there is none, the order of morning business is closed. , 

Mr. HALE. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of 

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

Whole, resumed the consideration of the bill (H. R. 4271) making appropriations to supply deficiencies in the appropriations for the fiscal 

year ending June 30, 1887, and for prior years, and for other purposes, 

the pending question being on the amendment proposed by Mr. 

HAWLEY, on page 26, after line 6, to insert the following: 

For manufacture of adhesi>e postage and special·delivery stamps, $6,884.45. 

For manufacture of stamped envelopes, newspaper-wrappers, and lettersheets, $65,237.78. 

For manufac~ure of registered-package, tag, official, and dead-letter envelopes, 

817,813.49. 

Mr. HALE. Mr. President, this amendment and the situation 

which brings it before the Senate were pretty thoroughly discussed 

yesterday, and I do not now desire to occupy any further the attention 

of the Senate. That discussion dic:;closed to Senators the attitude 

which has been taken by the Committee on Appropriations and the .reasons therefor, and, a.s I said last night, the committee has discharged 

its duty and the matter is left with the Senate. It is for Senators to 

decide, under all the conditions .and circumstances, whether this 

amendment," covering subject-matter that should be appropriated for 

and speedily,-onght to go on this bill. I leave it to the vote of the 

Senate. 

Mr. DA.. WES. Mr. President, I ~m fully in sympathy with the 

Senators from Connecticut in the position they have taken in reference 

to this amendment. I, however, as a member of the Committee on Appropriations, agreed to the policy which has been presented by the 

Senator from ~Iaine, and shall therefore vote with the committee. 

At the same time that the claim.presented by the Senators from Connecticut is full of merit and ought to be paid, and it is a reflection upon 

the Congress of the United States that they should hesitate lio pay it, I 

want to say to the Senate that there are other claims of like character, 

and situated, if not precisely like this claim in reference to this bill, in 

such a situation in my opinion that they are quite as much entitled to 

the consideration of the Senate. 

One of my constituents has a claim; it is not $80,000, it is $50,000. 

It was put into this deficiency bill last year and into the deficiency 

bill of the year before, ~d I am not quite certain that it was not in a deficiency bill the year previous to that. It originated in 1884 upon 

a contract entered into by the United States with one of my constituents to manufacture heavy guns, cast-iron guns, his being the only 

establishment at that time in the United States which was capable of 

manufacturing those guns, and that has gone down under the policy 

which is oppressing the citizens of Connecticut in the manner represented by the Senators from Connecticut. He also appealed from year 

to year to Congress to pay what was his due upon that contract, and 

failing to get it he has been obliged to borrow money to pay the interest upon his expenditure under that contract, and _in consequence 

ofthe failure of the Government to keep its part of the contract the 

contract itself has expired, and the unfinished work _is on his hands. 

The result is that he has come to a position where he is unable to bor- row money to pay the interest. He is in a worse condition than the 

constituent of the Senators from Connecticut. 

The proper Department has appealed to Congress at both ends of this 

Capitol to pay that money. It is admitted that it is due him. It has 

been put into at least two or three deficiency bills, but the committee 

of conference on the part of the House, pursuing the policy which 

struck at the claim of the constituent of the Senators from Connecticn t, 

succeeded in the conference against my constituent's claim as they did 

not succeed with the conference in the last Congress in reference 'to the 

claim of the constituent of the Senators from Connecticut. That is 

the only difference; this has had the misfortune to be stricken out in 

conference three times because the committee on the part of the Senat-e 

did not hold on to it quite as strongly as they did in the last Congress 

to this claim of the constituent of the Senators from Connecticut. 

Mr. HAWLEY. This was never stricken out. Nobody ever asked 

to have it strieken out. 

Mr. DAWES. I say mine has been stricken out three times, and that 

is the difference between mine and that of the Senator from Connecticut. 

Mr. STEW ART. I should like to inquire if ever on any occasion 

while the subject has been before the Committee on Appropriations, 

there has been any difficulty in obtaining a provision in an appropriation bill to pay members of Congress? Have they not paid themselves, 

whether they paid others or not? 

Mr. DAWES. I am not discussing that question o.r anything ha.v- · ing relation to it. I am stating a fact which I supposed would reinforce the Senators from Connecticut by stating the condition of other 

claims. 

I know this was not stricken out the last time, but I do not see that 

that affects the merit of it so much as the pers~tency of our committee 

of conference. I hope the Senate will adopt the amendment proposed 

by the Senator from Connecticut, although I am bound to stand by the 

Committee on Appropriations myself, because I have concluded that 

in the long run it would be the best policy to adop~in reference to all 

these claims. 

Mr. CULLOM. May I ask the Senator,-as he states that he will vote 

with the committee, but hopes the amendment will be adopted, is it 

the hope of the Senator that all other amendments which will be presented by different Senators of like· character should be adopted and 

added to this bill also? 

Mr. DAWES. I' shall be entirely frank before I sit down. 

Mr. CULLOM. I want to know how broad the Senator is going to 

make his rule. 

Mr. DAWES. I think that every honest claim against this Government, especially of the character of that represented by the Senators 

from Connecticut, for work and services done for this Government, 

ought to be paid, and ought to be paid promptly. 

I was of opinion, and I am still of opinion, that if we co.uld intimate 

to the other House, and adhere to it, that they are to consider these 

claims in the same light that we are bound to consider them, in the 

end it would be better. . My constituent came here as the constituent of the Senators from 

Connecticut did, and appealed to this committee to put his claim in 

again, while his furnaees are stopped and his workmen are scattered; 

but when he was informed by the committee that this bill was to be 

taken as it came from the Honse he went away, hoping that in the 

next deficiency bill he would be more fortunate. 

Now, all I have to say is that there is not a wQrd that can be said 

against the claim, or the justice of it, presented in this amendment. 

If it is adopted I shall feel as if I ought to offer the amendment that 

my constituent is interested in; although, listening to the policy as con- cluded upon by this committee, I have not put it in order by offering it 

in advance as an amendment, and so a single objection could throw it 

out, If that is done I shall say to my constituent when he comes here 

agtrin that he would be more fortunate if he would put the advocacyof 

his claim in the hand of the Senators from Connecticut than he would 

if he intrusted it to any effort of mine to secure payment. · :Mr. HOAR I should like to ask my colleague before he sits down 

what there is in the attitude of the conferees on the p:1rrt of the Honso 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 695 

which gives us any reason for supposing that this gentleman will be 

mme fortunate than the others. 

l'tfr. DA. wEs. I was not on the committee of conference, and therefore can not speak as to that point. · Mr. HOAR. I should like to have that question answered by some 

one. . Mr. PLATT. I rose for the purpose of asking the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. DAWES]1 who is on the Appropriations Committee, if 

it does not interrupt him too much1 to tell us, judging from past ex- perience, when we shall be likely to get to .the consideration of another 

deficiency bill here in the Senate? . · J\ir. DAWES. I think we shall put these just claims into any: deficiency bill when it comes up, and when the Senate puts them in, a conference committee will do the best they can in their struggle with 

the Houser and two-thirds of them will go out, and there will be little 

opportunity to distinguish which thirdoughtto remain and what twothirds ought to go out. That is my experience, which has been somewhat extended. 

l't.fr. PLATT. But we have been waiting now about ten months to 

get this deficiency bill passed; and when it will be passed does not 

depend so much on this body as it does on another body. 

Mr. DAWES. I am aware of that. 

Mr. PLATT. Brrt the question I asked was, when we should be 

likely ever to get at another deficiency bill. 

:Mr. DA. WES. And whether you will get the deficiency bill or the 

regular appropriation bills through in proper shape or not by following the policy adopted by the committee is for the Senate to con- sider. The Senators from Connecticut should. understand that the 

position taken by the Committee on Appropriations does not reflect 

upon the justice of their claim, nor does it reflect upon the justice of 

the claim of which I have spoken; but it is a question whether the 

Senate shall surrender its judgment of what is due to the creditors of 

the Government to any policy outside, or whether it shall fuke a stand 

which in the end will bring C(H}peration rather than antagonism. 

lli. STEW ART. Mr. President, it appears that this trouble grows 

out of the desire of somebody to make a very economical showing to 

the country. Nobody is questioning the honestyof this claim. It is 

a debt admitted to be due. It occurs to me that it would be a gocd 

idea for those who are so anxious to show economy to abstain themselves from presenting their claims against theGovernmentfor awhile, 

and I would suggest as a remedy for this if the Democratic House or 

the other House~r anybody wants to repudiate an honest debt because 

they want to make an economical showing, postpone the appropriations 

to pay the salaries of mem hers of Congress. J do rlot see why they can 

not wait just as well as this constituent of the Senators from Connecticp.t or the constitrrent of the Senator from. Massachusetts. They will 

not be any moTe likely to go into bankruptcy. Suppose we should fail 

to pay all the o:ffice:rs of the Government getting over $2,000 per annum. They can better afford to wait than many of the people who are being 

destroyed by the delay of Congre...<1a. 

I wonld suggest that the Senate can ~e a pretty good showing by 

requiring some of the higher officers. of the Government to wait. They 

can afford it better than the poor men who have been doing work for the 

Government. Then we shall get down to the discussion of the legitimate question whether the Government shall be honest or dishonest, 

whether it shall pay its debts or not. If anybody is to trust the Government, let those who- have the power to- wait,. like members of Congress, wait a:w bile. I think there should be no appropriation to pay 

members of Congress who do not come here :md act honestly. 

Mr. 1IARRIS. I desire to ask the Senator from Maine if the items 

contained in the amendment of the Senator from Connecticut have been 

examined by the committee and found to be just and due, but the paymentwithheldsimply to await the necessary appropriation. IS that the 

state of the case or not ~ 

Mr. HALE. A pp1·opriations. covering these items were estimated for 

last year. They were examined then. It was seen plainly that they 

covered the necessities of the Post-Office Department, t:ha.t in essential 

particulars it could not do its business to the satisfaction of the public 

without these appropriations. In the Senate that proposition was maintained, and! when we got into conference committee these items, which 

meet the assent of the Senator from Tennessee, were agreed to by both 

House and Senate conferees, and had the bill passed then these items 

would have gone in for the very reason suggested· in the Senator's question, that they were needed. Now the Department comes in and shows 

that so great was the need that it went on and used the material, had 

the service performed, and yet against all _that the other branch has 

left all these items. off. The Committee on Appropriationsr in leaving 

them off, attempt to raise no question about the items, about their necessity1 about the importance of appropriations to cover them; no such 

question arises anywhere. . 

Mr. HARRIS. The Senator's answe:r is perfectly satisfactory to me, 

and I shall vote for the amendment o.f the Senator from Connecticut. 

Mr. H.A W].tEY. I thought it very likely the vote would be taken 

immediately this morningr and I would not trespass on the Senate a moment longer b-ut for the statement of the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. DAWES], and I will make my statement now just as brief 

and clear as I possibly can. 

Earlier than laBt February the Post-Offi.ee Department found that 

such was the extraordinary increase in thedemandforadhesive stamps 

and envelopes that the appropriation for the previous year, which seemed 

to be very reasonable under the reduced price of these things, was going 

to run out and the Government would be without stamps and envelopes 

of some classes somewhere in May, absolutely without them, unable to answer the demand from a single post-office in the United States. 

Under the circumstances they said to my constituents, the manufa-ct- urers of these articles, "If you will go on and supply us as usual we 

will have you paid as. soon as we can in December; but understand, we can not make any bargain; the law forbids it7 yon will have to do it on trust entirely." 

My constituents made over $90,000 worth of ar~cl~s, and for their 

goods, stock, and so on, borrowed the money at bank. The Govern .. ment took those stamps and envelopes, sold them all in the market in 

the usual course of businessr and has the money in its pocket. The 

Postmaster-General now says that this is a debt of honor, and but for 

the considerate favor of these contractors the Department would have 

been out of all those necessary articles. Here we are in the latter part 

of January, eight or nine months after they furnished these articles for 

which the cash on delivery was due. 

The Cabinet is not at fault at all, in my judgment. My constituents are out of the money and the Government has the money in its own pocket, and the Postmaster-General in what I read yesterday says what 

I have told you, that but for the considerate favor of the contractors, 

the Department would have been out of these articles. I know personally that my constituents are carrying $85,000 in bank and paying 

6 per cent. interest upon -it for this simple, straightforward debt of common decency. It is not to bestigmatizedasaclaim1 fo.rthatcarries 

the idea with many members of Congress that it is a thing to be put 

offr of course. If the Senator from Massachusetts should abandon any of his constituents, it is not my fault. I am not going to abandon mine. He 

says that he has a constituent who has not been paid for three years. 

That is the case of a contract for certain guns. It is a different thing and 

has got into the category of claims and ought to be considered before 

the Committee on Claims, perhaps. Idonotknowanythingaboutthat 

and I will not p-rejudice it. I ~n1y talk about this one claim, and I 

say it will be a damaging spectacle if' the Government of the United 

States', after having begged a private-citizen to help them out and go in 

debt for that purpose and pay interest for that purpose, should, having 

put the money into its own pocket, now, after the recommendation of 

the Postmaster-General1 and after this has been in one deficiency bill, 

refuse to put it in again. 

The PRESIDENT pro U!mpore. The question is on the amendment 

proposed by the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. HAWLEY]. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

Mr. REAGAN. 1\Ir. President-- Mr~ HALE. I have some committee a-mendments. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. :Under the mder of the Senate, 

amendments of the Committee on .Appropriations are first to be 

received. 

Mr. HALE. There are two other amendments that come under the same class as the amendment offered by the Senator from Connecticut, 

and adopted by the Senate1 items of necessity that were agreed to in the 

old conference, and as the Senate has adopted the amendment of the 

Senator from Connecticut I will offer the others. 

The PREsiDENT po tempore. The amendment proposed will be 

read. 

The SECRETARY. Insert after line 16, page 16,· the following: 

To pay construction and armament of the steel cruisers Chicago, Boston~ and Atlanta, namely: under the Bureau of Ordnance, Sl75,000; under the Bureau of Navigation, $2,500; under the Bureau of Construction and Repair, $4{),000; and to reimburse the appropriation for construction a.nd repa.ir 1888 for amount ex- pended therefrom on these cruisers, $4.3,691.25; in all, ~61,191.25. 

Mr. COCKRELL. I hope the Senate will not adopt that amendment. It is no deficiency whatever. There is no parallel between that 

amendment and the amendment offered by the Senator from Connecticut. In the case of the Senator from Connecticut, the amendment was putin the last deficiency bill, which failed during the last session1 and 

it was put in because it was a deficiency which would exist before the 

30th day of June last. That bill havingfailed, thede.ficiencywasabsolut.ely created. The work was done; the Government of the -United 

States received the benefit of it. Now, this amendment was put into 

the deficiency bill last year, to be expended between that date and the 

30th day of last June. It has not been expended. Not one cent of 

it, not a dollar of it, has been spent. It is a prospective deficiency, to 

be spent between this and the 1st day of next Jnly, and I protest 

against it being inserted here. ·It is not a deficiency in any sense of 

the word. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I should like to inquire of the Senator who has 

charge of this bill1 whether this amendment reported by the Committee on Appropriations is substantially an amendment which was in the 
696 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JANUARY 25,. 

deficiency bill that failed, and which was agreed to by the conference 

committee? 

1\Ir. HALE. I bn.ve stated that that is the reason why I have offered 

it. - M"r. CHANDLER. I should like also to inquire whether or not this 

appropriation is recommended by the Secretary of the Navy as an appropriation which it is desirable to have made in this deficiency bill? 

M:r. HALE. Not only that, Mr. President, but it is enforced very 

strongly by the Secretary of the Navy, who desires it to be incorporated 

in the first bill coming before the Senate, because the work on these 

ships is hung up. 

Now, the Senator from 1\Hssouri 53.ys that this appropriation does not 

stand as w~ll and as strong as that covered by the amendment which 

the Senate Las j nst adopted. The situation was precisely the same last 

winter. 

Mr. COCKRELL. That is true of last winter, but not now. Mr. HALE. Last spring they were precisely the same. The need 

for these ships, that all of us have been interested in for years, to be finished, both in hull and in equipment, is just as great as the need of the 

Post-Office Department. We are all desirous that they should be finished. I should be glad to live long enough to see the day when one of these new ships will be found putting its nose into foreign waters 

and showing that it is to sail about the waters of the .globe. Last 

spring the Navy Department submitted the estimates and showed the 

necessity for· this as a deficiency to be expended during the fiscal year. 

The bill failed. 

In the case of the Post-Office Department, the Postmaster-General took 

upon himself a risk that the law did not permit him to take. He was_ by law called upon to say that if Congress has not appropriated the mont~Y for these stamps, these envelopes, and these other materials, it 

is my duty to let the servicesu:ffer, and not spend the money, but wait 

Ull til Congress appropriates it, because the law is specific arid directs no expenditure beyond the appropriations. ThePostmaster-General went 

on to expend the money for the sake of the service. _ The Secretary of 

the Navy might have done the same thing, but he did not. 

Mr. HAWLEY. May I explain a moment? The Postmaster-General did not expend a dollar. The situation was perfectly understood 

by my constituent; he knew that he was throwing himself on the mercy 

of Congress. 'l,'he Postmaster-General explained to him, and he knew 

that if he went and made another envelope for the Post-Office Department his right to compensation \vou.ld be in the nature of a Claim. 

Mr. HALE. When I say " expended the money " I mean that he follow~d out the contracts for the materials and took and used them in 

the service. He might have said, ''I can not do it because Congress 

has not appropriated." The Secretary of theNavy, though these ships were waiting for the final money to complete them, said, "I will follow the mandate of Congress; I will not spend this money; I will not 

go on; I will not put the contractors to the obligation of expending 

money, but I will wait, and when that bill is taken up again I have no 

doubt these things will be agreed to and they will go onto this bill;'' 

and they ought to go onto this bill if the other goes on. The necessity was just as great, and this Department ought not to be punished be- cause it conformecl to the law and did not carry out the contract and 

furnish the material. These vessels remain hung up, and will; it may 

not be a matter of very many days; but if one of ihese items goes -on the others ought to go on. · 

There is another item I shall move, and that is for the water supply 

here, which we are all interested in, suffering because of the want of 

money. 

Mr. BECK. I desire to ask a question of the Senator from Maine. 

Are not all the items in the bill reported by the committee matters of 

actual expenditure for the fiscal year 1887 and for prior years? 

Mr. HALE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. BECK. Now,• this proposition is to insert into this bill money 

for expenditures to be made in the fiscal year 1888, between this and 

the 1st of next July. Ought it not to come in the regular deficiency 

bill for this year and not as part of a deficiency bill providing for the 

expenditures of prior years? 

Mr. HALE. Not by any means, because the operation of the passage 

of time has been, as the Senator will see in a moment, that hundreds 

of the items here that we have put into the bill come to just that con- dition he has stated; they will be expended in the year 1888, because 

that is the only time they can be, and the work will go on. 

Mr. BECK. But they are for obligations created before this bill was postponed last year. 

Mr. HALE. This was an obligation created before. 

Mr. BECK. Is there not a bill now that we are expecting every day 

which will contain these items?-

Mr. HALE. That I do not know. 

Mr. BECK. That I understand is the case. Mr. HALE. I do not know that. I presume if we postpone these 

items one after another, and select one item and put it on and do not 

select others now, in time they will get on; but I protest aO'ainst the 

injustice of selecting out one of these items and putting it o:f and then 

not putting on the other when the needs are just as great in the one case as in the other. 

• 

Mr. PL UM:B. Mr. President, there is a very decided difference be~ 

tween these items and the general run of items which enter into this 

bill, and I for one shall vote a~ainst putting anything else on this bill, 

because I· want this bill to go through at the earliest possible moment. 

This bill will relieve more actual necessity than ·any appropriation bill 

passed hy Congress for years. There is not a neighborhood in the 

United States that has not got from one to a dozen old soldiers in it 

who are waiting, praying, hoping that this bill will get through at the 

earliest possible moment in order to relieve their absolute, pressing ne- cessities. 

There ought not to be a moment's delay in passing this bill. There 

ought to be nothing put upon it that will result in any controversy 

whatever with the other House. Every day's deJay that the Senate 

contributes to it will make it criminally culpable in the minds of these 

people. Here is a matter for war-ships and guns and armament of old 

ironclads of one kind or another lying on our coast that we can appropriate money to repair and complete and soon. If we go into. that and 

get into a controversy about it with the other House, such as we have 

hadheretofore, thisbillmaybedelayedforweeks, andforwhat? Simply 

because we are not willing to avail ourselves of the proper opportunity 

for making these appropriations. · 

This bill is necessary to meet the negligences and shortcomings of 

the last Congress. Perhaps the House of Representatives did not put 

into it all that ought·to have been put in; I do not think it did; but 

at all events it sent a · bill here which provides for undoubted claims 

and meets a crying need. It was the duty of the Senate, as I think, to 

have taken it up and passed it without adding to it or subtracting from 

it, or at all events without doing anything that would contribute one moment's delay to its becoming a law. 

We do know-not officially perhaps, because we can not know such 

things officially-that a bill is pending in the Committee on Appropriations of the other House known as the urgent deficiency bill, of a kind 

that has beoome rather common in the legislation of the past few years, 

and which is expected to be brought in at the early days of every session of Congress, to provide for things which can not wait until the regular deficiency bill is reached. 

Mr. COCKRELL. I call attention to the fact that this bill has now been in the Senate twelve days since it passed the House. 

Mr. PLUMB. That is a reason why there ought to be no further 

delay. 

Mr. HALE. Let me call the attention of the Senator from ML~ouri 

to the fact that it remained in the House for six weeks before it was sent to~ • 

Mr. PLUMB. I am not going to apportion the responsibility. I 

admit, and not only admit but claim, that the House of Representatives is responsible for this delay. I only hold that we shall not put 

ourselves in a position to share any portion of the responsibility, as we shall do if we put on other items, especially items such as the Senator 

from Maine has moved. We shall have another deficiency bill here 

within ten or twelve days probably. If I remember aright the assur~ 

unce was given -in the House. of Representatives when this bill was under consideration that in a few days another such bill would be re- ported. 

Mr. COCKRELL. The general deficiency bill for 1888. 

Mr. PLUMB. We have had information that the House committee was considering that bill, and that it is liable to come before us at any 

moment. That will be a bill which perhaps will not contain appropriations of as urgent a character as those we· are considering now. It 

certainly will not represent claims which ought to have been appropriated for at the last session of Congress; it will be for deficiencies of an anticipatory kind, just such as is proposed by the amendment of the 

Senator from Maine. 

This bill ought to pass. I do not say anything about the twelve 

days it has already been here, but those twelve days ought not to be 

added to by an additional twentyofour hours. 

Mr. CHANDLER. Mr. President, I am not urging the Senate to 

put upon this bill any item which will .occasion controversy between 

the Senate and the Honse of Representatives, or between the Senate 

committee of conference and the Honse committee of conference. ·I 

am only calling the attention of the Senate to the fact that this amendment, moved by the Senator from Maine, who has charge of this bill, is 

to put a clause upon the bill which was upon the deficiency bill that 

failed at the last Congress, and which was agreed to by both confer- ence committees; and I now ask the Senator in charge of.the bill, or 

the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, if he will allow to 

be read the letter from the Secretary of the Navy requesting that this 

appropriation may be made upon this deficiency bill? 

The PRESIDENT p1·o tempore. The paperwill be read, if there be no objection. 

Mr . . HALE. I send the letter to the desk. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, u~tnuary 14,1888. 

DEAR Sm: I inclose copies of the correspondence between the Department. and 1\lr. Randall, chairman of the Appropriations .Committee of the House which will show that an item imperatively required by this Department failed 

inse1·tion in the deficiency bill which is now in the Senate. The!item was in the 

bili at the time that. it failed last year. It is imperatively required. The ord• 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 697 

nance work upon the new cruisers, the Boston, Atlanta, and Chicago, has now been delayed many months by reason of the failure of the deficiency bill at the 

last session of Congress. The ships are ready, but their armament is not. I beg that the items may be inserted in the Senate. 

Very respectfully, 

llon. WILLIAM B. ALLison, U. 8. Senate, 

Ohai1·man Oommittee on App11tpriations. 

W. C. WHITNEY, 

See1·ctary of t.he Nav1J. 

Mr. CHANDLER. Now, I spe::tk in behalf of the Secretary of the 

Navy, and concur with him in the hope ihat this appropriation may 

be put upon this bill, in order that these ships may"be finished. I read 

in the Washington Post of January 24 what purports to be a statement 

of the condition of these vessels. It says: 

The Chicago has already successfully undergone her sea test, and her final 

completion as a war vessel will be accomplished 'vhen her battery is l;}elivered. 

She will not be sparred and rigged for some time. 

* * * * * .. * The finishing touches to the Boston' in the way of equipme~t, rigging, etc., can not be added at present, for the reason that no money is available, and a further 

appropriation will be required for this purpose. 

I do hope, Mr. President, that I shall have the pleasure of living to 

see these ships finished, and I hope to see them finished some time during the ,present Administration. But the condition which the Senate 

is called upon to confront is that an item which shall enable these ships 

to be finished, which was in the appropriation bill of the last Congress, 

agreed to by both conference committees, is left. out by the House of 

Representatives at this time, and Administration Senators now oppose 

the request of their own Secretary of the Navy. 

Ur. BECK. Mr. President, the letter of the Secret.1.ry of the Navy 

itself shows that the money that he wants to expend for these cruisers is 

to be expended during the fiscal year. He wants it; be wants it very 

urgently. This bill, as I said a few moments ago, provides for deficiencies that occurred during the fiscal year 1887 and two or three previous years; and although both Houses in the last Congress were willing to give the money and have it expended, the bill did not reach the 

President, was never enrolled; Congress adjourned by limitation at noon on the 4th of March, and hence that money was not expended. 

A deficiency bill and an urgent deficiency bill will be presented perhaps within a week to this body containing the ite~s for this fiscal 

year, of which that now presented isapart; and there will beno delay 

and no disposition to refuse it to the Secretary of the Navy; but when we are making up our accounts of the expenditures of the last fiscal 

year and of previous fiscal years, this does not form part of them, and 

this is to be expended during the present fiscal year, and therefore i~ 

~mght to be charged to it; aud for that reason, doubtless, the other 

House left it out of this bill. 

It was a proper appropriation in the last bill because it was then ex- pected to be expended before the 1st day of last July; but the failure 

of the bill prevented that being done. Now it is to be expended in 

this fiscal year, for which a bill will come up at once; and when the 

urgency and necessity for it are shown, as exhibited by the Secretary 

of the Navy in his letter, the money will be given perhaps as quickly as this can be agreed to and be available if this bill goes to a confer- ence on disp~ted items. 

Mr. CHANDLER. Will the Senator allow me to a&k a question? 

Mr. BECK. Certainly. 

Mr. CHANDLER. The Senator is a member of the Committee on Appropriations? 

Mr. BECK. That is true. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I ask him whether there is upon this bill that 

is now being considered any appropriation that is not for money to be 

expended after the act passes? . Mr. BECK. The chairman can answer that better than I can, be- cause the subcommittee of three in charge of this bill consisted of the 

Senator from Maine [Mr. HALE], the Senator from Iowa [Mr. ALLISON], and the Senator from Missouri [Mr. CocKRELL]. They hav~ had 

charge of it specially, and I am not prepared to answer. Mr. HALE. Let me answer the question. 

Mr. CHANDLER. Let me explain first. If this bill appropriates 

only moneys which have been already expended, then I recognize the 

force of the argument of the Senator from Kentucky; but if it appropriates moneys that are yet to be expended for things yet to be done, 

then it seems to me it is about as expedient to finish these ships as it 

is to do any other future work. If the bill is what the Senator from 

Kentucky s;lys it is, and what the Senator from Kansas 'says it is, a bill which merely pays debts already owed, where the money has been 

already expended or the work already done, then I have nothing 

further to say. 

Mr. HALE. It is not so. The bill is full of items covering just 

such conditions as these. 

Mr. COCKRELL. I should like the Senator to point out how many 

there are. I take issue on that proposition. I say the bill is not full 

of such items. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Maine is entitled 

to the floor. Does he yield to the Senator from Missouri? 

Mr. HALE. I will read one item: 

Road to cemetery, Springfield, Mo.: That the citizens of Greene County, l\1issouri, are hereby authorized to improve or adorn, at theh· own expense,'the road 

constructed by the Government from Springfield, Mo., to the national cemetery 

near that city, and said road shall be known and designated as Phelps Boule.. 

vard. 

Mr. COCKRELL. How much is appropriated there, please tell me? 

lt:t:r. HALE. 'l'hen it is still more strongly open to objection if it is 

not an appropriation. It is a clause in a deficiency bill. The Senator 

has been makin a point that he would not vote for anything that was not for a deficiency for money expended already, and here in one Stat.e 

this bill has a provision without regard to appropriations authorizing 

certain parties to go on and finish a road; and here just above it isNatc~z Cemetery roadway: For completion of the macadamized or gravel 

road from the city of Natchez, Miss., to the national cemetery near that city, 

~~ . Here is an appropriation in Utah for an entirely new enterprise where 

money bas not been expended,'' for Industrial Christian Home." There 

is another for an expenditure on the Potomac River; and if I had time 

I could go through the bill and point out many others. Everybody who 

knows anything about deficiency bills knows that ilhey are not simply 

_for the' payment of moneys _that have already been expended. That is 

not their purpose; it is to make the service touch from year to year, 

and they run over several years in many cases. The distinction which 

has been raised here as to one amendment or another, that in one case 

the money bas been expended and in another it has not been, is not a good distinction as applied to a defic:ency bill. 

Mr. M:cPHERSON . . Will the Senator yield :to me for a moment? 

Mr. HALE. Certainly;; . 

Mr. McPHERSON. It.seems to me a most extraordinary spectacle 

that, in order to make an urgent deficiency bill like this tally with the 

book-keeping of the Committee on Appropriations, items of so mu~h 

importance as the one now under discussion should be rejected from 

the bill. 

Here are several ships that have cost the Government millions of 

dollars waiting for what? For an armament to be put on board those 

ships; and the Committee on Appropriations, after having been advised 

by the Secretary of the Navy of the necessity of an appropriation i~ 

order that he might contract for this work, in order that he might 

hasten the departure of these ships, say now it must not be put upon 

this bill because it interferes with our fiscal book-keeping! 

If I underst.-i.nd aright the ca.Se of tlle constituents of the Senator fro~ 

Connecticut, as explained by him yesterday, they proceeded at their own cost and expense to furnish stamps to the Post-Office Department 

in anticipation of its needs, and they were required to wait the pleas- ure of Congress. With a deficiency bill now pen~ing before the Sen~te 

upon which appropriations of that charaeter may be made, still many 

members of the _Senate, particularly of the Committee on Appropriations, dissent from that view. ·. It seems to me as though these appropriations might be passed in 

both Houses of Congress in a good deal le..c;s time than it takes to dis- cuss them here and settle whether they should be Oil this particular 

bill or some other. Certainly ~e need them, and to me that is suffi.; 

cient. The urgent necessity' is shown by the letter sent here by. the 

Secretary of t·llO Navy. Unless you appropriate the money a delay will 

be occasioned and these ships will not be put int{) practical use. I think 

that is a full answer to the question. 

Mt. HALE. In looking over the bill I find many items of the class 

referred to where no money has been expended by the Government. 

For instance: 

Court-house at Jefferson City, Mo.: For completion of the building, $11,000. 

That ought to be done; that building ought to be completed. We 

agreed last year that it ought to be completed. 'rbe Government can not go on and expend this money tmtil it gets the appropriation. It 

ought to be on this bill as it was on the old bill of last year where the 

controversy was settled. It is just so about these other items.· I am willing for one to take the vote without occupying any more time. 

Mr. REAGAN. Mr. President, it seems to me the Senate have lost 

sight of the fact that the appropriations necessary to carry on the 

Government are to be determined and fixed by Congress. The two 

Houses a:re the proper authority to settle the items which should be 

put upon such bills. The fiscal year expired, it seems, and some head · of Department has gone on outside of the appropriations of Congress, 

not respecting the authority Congress gives him to expend money, but 

assuming to judge himself of the amount of money which should be 

expended. 

It seems to me that the heads of Departments ought to adopt such a method that they will limit their expenditures to the money appropriated by Congress. Instead of doing that we treat these deficiency 

bills as if they were a matter of course and were justified by law. It 

may be that exigencies may sometimes arise which may render deficiency bills necessary; but now our practice here seems to ignore existing law with reference to the duties of Departments in making estimates and limiting themselves to the appropriations of Congress. , 

So far as I am concerned in reference to this and all other items 

where the heads of Departments choose to make a deficiency before the 

end of the fiscal year, I shall certainly vote against justifying it. 

Mr. HALE. The Senator will bear in mind that in this case tho 

Secretary of theN avy did just what he desires. He did not go ori and 

expend the money. The amendment I have o.ffered covers precisely 

the case the Senator has in mind. The Secretary, when Congress ad-

' . 
698 CONGRESS! ON AL RECORD-SEN ATE. JANUARY 25, 

journed last Uarch, instead of going on and spending this money, declined to do so because Congress had not given the appropriation, and 

now comes in on the first deficiency bill and asks that he may have the 

money to finish the vessels. He has·complied with the law. Some of 

the other Departments did not. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The hour of2 o'clock having arrived, 

the consideration of the unfinished business will be resumed, being the 

bill (S. 371) to aid in the establishment and temporary support of common schools. 

1\Ir. HALE. I hope that may be informally laid aside nntil.we finIsh the deficiency bill. 

Mr. BLAIR. I have no objection. ' 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The unfinished business will be laid 

aside, and the Senate resume..c; the consideration of the deficiency bill. 

1\Ir. REAGAN. This is a deficiency, and it is sain this money has 

not been expended. 

1\Ir. HALE. Let me explain to the Senator. Does he not see that 

in finishing a ship, or arming a ship, as it approa-ches completion, the: 

head of the Department who is building it discovers that the money he 

has is not sufficient? It is like a man building a house, or a railroad, or whatever may; be done by human hands. He is confronted with 

that situation; he bas got to have the money in order to finish the 

ship. What more can he do, what better can he do under the law than 

to stop the work, as the Secretary has done in this case, and .report to 

Congress that he wants more mon·ey, and wait until Congress appropriates the money? He does not make_ the deficiency. The money 

has run out. What, I ask the Senator, would he have the Secretary 

to do in such a case beyond what the Secretary of the Navy has done 

in this case. When he finds the money is gone, he does not go on and run up debts, but be appeals to Congress and asks that in theveryne:xt 

deficiency bill that is passed-the money may be given to him to finish 

the ship. What more can he do? 

1\fr. REAGAN. I now understand the Senator; and his statem_ent 

makes a different case from that which I had in view in the remarks I 

made on this bill; but! still desire to be understood as objecting to-the 

continual makingof deficiency bills indisregardofthedutyoftbeheads 

of Departments to conform their expenditures to the appropriations 

ma<le by Congress. Congress should have the duty of voting the proper 

am?unt of money to•be expended in the service of the different Departments of the Government, and the Departments should not be permitted 

to exceed the authority Congress gives them. 

Ur. PLUMB. Mr. President, I did not make objection to--the ex- penditure solely or mainly; my objection to the amendment is that it 

is going to make a controversy with the other House. The Senator 

from Maine, in anticipation of a row with the House of Representatives, wants to get this on this bill. There will be plenty of chances on succeeding bills for it. I do not want the class of claims of which 

I have spoken, which affect a very large class of citizens of the United 

States, a very meritorious class-a class of people whose claims for actual 

services rendered have been adjusted and allowed by the Departments 

which ought to have been paid last year-! do not want them to wait w bile the Senator from Maine and the House committee are negotiating 

_ and contending about a matter which will certainly be the subj~ct of 

contention. It is trifling, in my judgment, with interestB which ought 

·to receive a great deal more kindly consideration at the hands of the 

Senate than they have heretofore received. . I think we ought to pass this bill without putting anything on it 

that the House of Representatives will probably object to. ·We shall 

have another deficiency bill after awhile, and these ships which have 

been waiting for the last twelve months for lack of this money can wait twenty or thirty days longer, and the contractors and all the men who are going to make profit out of the expenditure of that money can afford to abate something of their impetuosity for a few days, I think. 

. Mr. GORMAN. I regret very'hmch that the Senator in charge of 

this bill is departing from the rule he laid down in his opening remarks on presenting the bill to the Senate. 

'l'his bill came to the Senate from the House, was sent to the Committee on Appropriations, and I understand it was the ullan.imous 

agreement of the committee that in view of the peculiar origination of 

the appropriation bills by another branch of this Government, it was unwise for us on a deficiency bill to attempt to consider all the measures that we thought properly belonged there at the last Congress. 

We adopted a rule that as the House of Representatives had seen proper 

to exclude all these items on this deficiency bill, reserving them for 

another that may come later on, the Senate ought to leave them off 

now, and not be put in the position of being forced in cases such as the 

one that the Senator from Connecticut has presented to the Senate and 

the one which the Senator from Uaine now presents, to load up a deficiency bill in this body. There was nothing in the urgency of the case in any Department of the Government in our judgment that re- quired it. 

Now I submit to the Senator from Maine that there are a hundred 

other items equally meritorious, equally as urgent as the one which be 

presents, and that if the Senate determines that we are to go into these 

measures and consider each on its merits, then this bill ought to be recommitted to the committee, and let us onsider everv item that has come before the committee and present it to the Senate: 

1\Ir. HALE. Let me ask the Senator if he does not clearly discern 

the reason why I offered this amendment. · The whole question was brought up by the amendment offered by the Senator from Connecticut 

[.Mr. HAWLEY]. After the attitude of the committee had been stated, 

the situation between the two H.uses, and a pretty full debate. the 

Senate decided not to take that attitude; as it clearly had a right to 

do; and the Committee on Appropriations having performed its duty, 

and the Senate having concluded to put that item on, then I felt con- strained to movethisitem, which, as I conceive, comes under the.same 

category. There may be some distinction. but that is why I have offere~ it: I have not ~b~ndoned the ~onnds, I have 'lost none of my C?nv1~tl{lD: as to what 1t would be desuable to do on these appropriatiOn bills m order that we may not be confronted hereafter with the 

conditions that so beset us heretofore. But the Senate bas taken upon 

itself the exercise of its discretion; and I am very sorry that while 

~hat ame~dment was pending, and while that critical point was com· rng, we did not hear from the Senator from Kansas in opposition to 

that amendment. I heard nothing from him until this amendment waa 

offered, and I offered it because the Senate bad concluded to depart from 

the policy laid down by the Committee on Appropriations. I do not care what the Senate does with it. It may take one course on one ameudment and another course on another, but let us have the expression of the Senate on the subject. 

1\Ir. BECK. Some gentleman rose toofl:"er anamendment, and I understood the Senator from Maine to ask him to wait until he could offer 

amendments from the c;ommittee, and t,be amendment he offers now was 

an amendment from the committee as stated by him. Therefore other 

amendments were postponed that other Senators desired to offer until 

he could offer a committee amendment. I do not understand this to 

be a committee amendment. 

Mr. HALE. It may be that my expression did not convey the whole 

idea. The subject had been before the committee and it was considered altogether. The understanding there was that these three items 

should go off. I have no doubt that if we bad concluded to put one on, we should have concluded to put on all. 

Mr. PLUMB. The Senator must speak for himself. I certainly 

wouJd have voted against this one and protested against it strongly. 

Mr. HALE. No distinction was Illilde that I remember in committee upon them. Perhaps I wasnotjustifiedinsaying itwas a committee amendment as considered by the committee, but th~ Senate had 

adopted the other amendment, aytd, being in charge of the bill, I wished 

to present an amendment before others came in, and I did it, I will 

say, on my own responsibility, feeling that as one amendment bad been 

adopted I wanted the others of the same character. 

Mr. COCKRELL. Did I not make the point expressly in the Appropriations Committee that the amendment of the Senator from Connecticut was on a different footing from this? 

Mr. HALE. Undoubtedly. 

Mr. COCKRELL. :And showed the same distinction as has been 

shown here ?-

Mr. HALE. Undoubtedly; but the committee then went on and 

made no distint9tion, but put them all together and rejected the three. 

Mr. COCKRELL. It excluded them all. 

Mr. ALLISON. Mr. President, is it in order to state what occurred 

in committee? 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair knows no rule of the 

Senate that forbids the statement of what occurred in committee. 

Mr. ALLISON. Then it is in order? · 

· The PRESIDENT prq tempore. The Chair knows of no rule that 

forbids it. 

Mr. GORMAN. I desire not to transgress the rules, but I will make 

the general statement that there was a reason for the action of the com- mittee, and those of us on this side of the Chamber were perfectly prepared to stand by the chairman of the committee, and on this bill let 

it be understood that all the appropriations that are necessary to carry on the affairs of the Government should not be left off elsewhere, thereby forcing the Senate into the })Osition of increasing appropriations and 

then being charged with extravagance. 

There was a principle involved in it; not that the Senate should abdicate its right to put amendments on appropriation bills, but the fact was notorious that there was an attempt made, and it has been the 

custom for some time past, to put the Senate in the attitude of voting 

for large appropriations, appropriations necessary to carry on the affairs of the Government. But in the opinion of the Committee on Appropriations, and I may say the unanimousupinion ofthat committee, 

it was a wise thing to take this bill as it came from the House of Representatives, and let it be understood hereafter that it wouJd only meet 

with fair consideration on the line that was drawn there. In my j ndgment it is absolutely necessary to the Senate that we should meet this 

question now. As to the amendment of the Senator from Connecticut, I did not think 

it was necessary for us all to talk on that one amendment. The con- ditions of that appropriation are entirely different from the one we are 
1888. CONG:RESSIONAL RECORD--SENATE. 699 

· now considering. There was a case where I believe the executiveoffi- That brought the fight on. The whole proposition that the Commit- . cer was compelled to exceed his authority and have stamps and en~ tee on Appropriations agreed to, consented to, acquiesced in by Demvelopes printed. The work was absolutely necessary for the conduct ocrats as well as Republicans, was brought up when the Senator from 

of the affairs of the Post-office Department, and the contractor was la- Connecticut moved his amendment. 

boring under great hardships. It was an exceptional case; and while I presented the case as I best could, as the cqmmittee bad decided 

I would have had him wait until the next deficiency bill comes along upon it and as I was directed to do, giving what assistance I could to the so as to conform to this general rule, still it could not be compared members of the committee, and then the Senate voted to put the propowith this or any other amendment that may be offered to the bill. I sition on. When that was done by the Senate, on my own responsi.l 

think it was a strong case; but I say to the Senator from Maine, as to bility, -not for the committee, I thought it was wise that they should 

the amendment which he offers, that the Government will not suffer have the opportunity .of passing upon other amendments that came in 

by not putting it on this bill. The guns wanted can wait for six the same category tha-t I have referred to before as having been on the 

months longer. bill as agreed upon by the conference at the last session. I do not say 

Mr. HALE. The Secretary says i.t is imperatively needed. He is that that binds anybody, that we are obliged to take the bill just as the 

not my Secretary. · conferees agreed upon it at the last session, but it makes a distinctive 

Mr. GORMAN. I have never known a Secretary that did not say category of cases, it separates and puts apart a class of propositions 

every appropriation h~ wanted was absolutely necessary. I have no that does not include other propositions, and these three items, so far 

doubt the work is needed. I have no doubt the people of this city from being selected by me, as the Senator from Kansas intimates, were 

would be greatly benefited if we would insert an appropriation in this selected by the House of Representatives and left off the bill without 

bill that ought to be there for the completion of the water-works. I any good reason being given. And when our committee considered 

think the Government would save hundreds of thousands of dollars if them, though there may be a distinction between one and another, it 

all these needed appropriations were made in time. They -certainly was concluded not to put them on, and I was directed by the commitwould in the water-works case, where the tunnel so far as constructed tee to make the fight. 

is lying idle and will be depreciated in value by remaining as it is. I have not picked outtheseitems. I wanttheSenate, having agreed 

Mr. HALE. That. is one of the amendments of this class. to one of these propositions that the House left off, I think without 

l'l1r. GORMAN. And yet the Senator knows that if the Senate is reason, to have a chance to pass Qn the others. I do not care how my 

going to make a fight on these items much delay will ensue. I give amendment fares; I do not care whether the Senate rejects this amendthe Sena.tor notice that if he departs from the rule, he should select mentor accepts it. The Senate ought to have an opportunity of vot- one or two cases and not make a fight on the rule laid down. So far ing upon it because it belongs to the category of the items which were 

as I am concerned I can not support it. agreed upon and which would have passed if Congress had sat twentyMr. BECK. The Senator from Kansas has stat-ed correctly that we four hours longer last March. That is all I am seeking to do here. All 

ought to pass the bill as nearly as it came .from the other House as pos- that I desire is a vote of the Senate on this proposition. Let it be re- sible and as soon as possible and get clear of it. jected if the Senate choose; that will satisfy me. 

About the dealings._ofthe committee with each other I desire to say Mr. ALLISON. Mr. President, this bill has undergone several 

this m ncb more: In committee the Senator from Kansas [Mr. PLUMB], stages; and I think in view of what has been said in respect to the atthe Senator from Iowa [Mr. ALLISON], the chairman of the committee, titude of members of the Committee on Appropriations, that I ought 

and the Senator from Maine [Mr. HALE], as well as myself, agreed as to say a word upon t.he entire subject; and I want to begin, in giving 

to. what should be done. While I am as ultra a par~an perhaps as the history of this bill, with the last session. 

any man on this floor, I do not approve of appropriation bills coming If any Senator will turn to the discussion upon this bill elsewhere, since 

from the .other end of the Capitol withholding provisions which ought the present session began, it will be discovered that it was therestated 

to be made and then having them inserted in the Senate, and having that there was some sort of understanding-I do not know how that un- · the charge made that the Hous~ is an economic~ body and the Senate dersta.nding exists-that this bill should include only those items that 

is an extravagant body. · were agreed to in conference last year. I thinK it has been understood, 

Tah'ing all the amendments my desire was that the Senate should in the main, that this bill as it came from the House of Representatives 

acquiesce in this bill because it is right as far as it goes, and that the did not include what was in the bill of last year, as agreed to by the 

House should take the responsibility of sending over the other needed committee of conference of the two Houses. Now, it is worth while 

items to us. It is because of that, as the Senator from Maine very well ror us to consider some points beyond that. 

knows, that all the gentlemen of the committee who entertain my po- . It was stated elsewhere that this bill failed to receive the signature 

litical views did not want this body, especially in a Presidential year, of the President of the United States at the last session because the 

to go into the canvass loaded down with charges of extravagance by add- Senate of the United States insisted upon putting on it items which 

ing on things that it might be said would not be put on but for our ought not to be there, and it was openly stated that it was the resist-. extravagance. I do not believe in that, and therefore I wanted to keep ance of the Senate to the elimination from this bill of the Choctaw 

this bill, as the Senator from Kansas said, as near as we can in the con- claim and the Pacific Railway judgment that made this bill (being 

dition in which it came from the other House, hoping these other things largely a bill for the ·benefit of the soldiers) to fail at the last session. 

will come in another bill. l'l1r. President, this bill which we have now before us was a general 

Mr. PLUMB. It is not a very important consideration, but the Sen- deficiency bill last year. It was not what it is now-the relic of a ator from Maine has picked out three itell!B which he thinks ought to remnant of deficiencies. It was then a general deficiency, such asapgo on the bill. The committee voted not to put them on. Now, ·be- pears here every year, covering every branch of the service as respects cause the Senate has voted down the committee on one proposition, the the failure to make appropriations in advance for that service, and this 

Senator from Maine turns around and assumes that all the others are bill had included in it many items requiring minute investigation. It 

to go on, overlooking the fact that if the whole question had been voted did not come io this body until the evening of the 1st day of March, on in the committee, the committee would have put on not only the 1887; it came to this body after a recess on the 1st day of March, 

three amendments, but three times three, or perhaps ten times three, after 8 o'clock p. m., as is shown by the Journal of that day. It 

which would be just as germane to this bill, and just as necessary to was then-being a bill of 100 pages or more-necessary that it should 

conduct the Government as this, or much more so; but some amend- be printed, in order that the Committee on Appropriations could give 

mentsinwhichhehappenstofeelsomepeculiarinterestarejustcrowded it that intelligent consideration which the Senate required it to do. 

upon us in this way, and we do not have a chance to consider the whole The bill was printed and did not reach the Appropriations Committee 

question. · room until the morning of the 2d day of March, and on that day, as 

• He is now determined that the House shall take this measure for the · every member of the Committee on Appropriations will bear me out 

finishing of the ships or else lose the appropriations for the old soldiers. in the statement, we sat there during that entire day in the consideraIt is to be put on this bill because he is not willing to have it take its tion of the bill. · 

chance on a bill on which there will be some opportunity to give and The Senator from Maine, who is in charge of it, says that he brought 

take; but yielding to the disposition of the House now to repair the it in here during the evening session of the 2d day of March. It was 

neglect of last session,:whereby they would be willing, perhaps, to give considered here not at great length. If Senators will turn, as I have 

something, he seeks to thrust it upon them at this time, thus cutting turned this morning, to the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD and see the deout the committee itself from a fair opportunity of presenting amend- bate, they will discover that this bill was only debated about an hour 

ments of a similar character which some of us were ready to present, or an hour and a half in all. The Choctaw claim, being a judgment 

violating the most solemn understanding that ever existed in any com- of the Supreme Court of the United States, was put _ upon the bill on mittee of any body, in my judgment. the motion of a Senator in this body, not upon the motion of the Com- . l'lir. HALE. Mr. President, I do not think there is likely to be any mittee on Appropriations, and it was put upon the bill without one 

great division in the Committee on Appropriations upon this or any word of utterance pro or con, as the RECORD shows. So that did not 

other subject. We are in the habit of working together, an<fi pre- delay the consideratio!l of the bill a single second of time, either here 

sume will do so hereafter. My attitude has been simply this: I have or in the committee of conference. The debate, as respects the judgviolated no understanding, and do not propose to do so. The Commit- ment for the Pacific Railroad, did occupy perhaps half an hour of the 

tee on Appropriations directed me to make the fight on these items, time of this bodv. 

and I made the fight when the first one came up. I did not bring it After passing through the ordeal here the bill went to the House of 

np; the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. HAWLEY] brought it up. Representa~ves, and did not reach there until the 3d of March, 1,1eces-

-
700 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JANUARY 25, 

sa1·ily, because it takes some time for the clerks of this body to prepare 

and engross the amendments. It came back here again, with the 

amendments disagreed to, on the 3d of March, when it was our duty at 

12 o'clock of the 4th of March to adjourn the I•'orty-ninth Congress. 

This bill was considered by the conferees of the two Houses without 

many of the amendme'nts being in print, because we had not time to 

print them. The Senate amendments agreed to in this body were not 

printecl. 

To claim anywhere that this bill is here now because of the delays of 

the Senate, or because of the fact that the Senate put upon it items to 

which the House could not agree, is a misstatement of the truth as re- spects the consideration of a deficiency bill. 

A question is raised as to what was agreed to in conference. That 

conference, and I presum~ I can state it, was held between the hours 

of 3 in the rooming and 7 or 8 in the morning Of the 4th day of March, 

when this clock was put back. We sat there in that conference during 

those hours for the purpose of endeavoring, if possible, to facilitate the 

final consideration of the bill by the two Houses, so that it might receive the signature of the President. Although we sat until 8 o'clock 

in the morning, and then agreed to these items, I will say here in the 

presence of Senators that the conferees on the part of the Senate took this 

bill, although the Senate had placed upon it many important amendments, and said to the House conferees, "Gentlemen, do you agree to this 

or not? We are so anxious to pass this bill that we will forego, for the 

time being, the judgment of the Senate as respects many it-ems, in order 

that the necessary appropriations may be made for the carrying on of 

the Government." In this deficiency bill were items for money that had 

already been expended, were items for money that it would be neces- sary to expend, as was st-ated, between the 3d day of March and the end 

of the :f?.scal year, the 30th of June. One of those it~ms constituted a large deficiency in the Post-Office Department. It not only included 

the items which the Senator from Connecticut has had inserted in the 

present bill, butitincluded items for clerk-hire, forpostal-r::dlway clerk, 

and various other items which were essential to the conduct of the public service in that regard, and the failure of the bill crippled that serv- ice greatly; The result was that in the section of the country where 

I dwell the postal seryice never was in such condition of inefficiency as it is this day and this how:. , 

Mr. PLATT. Everywhere else, too. 

Mr. ALLISON. I only speak of my own section. There was includea in it this deficiency. I do not wish to discuss the amendment 

of the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. HAWLEY] which has already 

been agreed to. I admit that the Senator from Connecticut ha.."' a just regard for his constituents, who, in good faith:doubtless. furni~hed articles 

to the Post-Office Department; but the Postmast-er-General in receiv-. ing them violated the law, which the Senator from Texas has con- demned the Postmaster-General for violatin~. The Postmaster-General violat-ed a plain provision of statute in allowing the Government 

to incur an obligation as respects a service which had no appropriation 

of money to meet it. That was what was done with respect to that 

particular amendment, although the item was on this bill on the morning of the 4th of March, and if it had passed then would have passed 

" accordingtolaw. But the Postmaster-General, acting, Ihaveno doubt, 

according to the discretion he believed he had, rather than cause a partial failure of the postal service, did violate the law and receive these 

articles from the constituents of the Senator from Connecticut. That 

is all I care to ·say so far as that particular item is concerned. 

That item was just as well known to the body that passed this bill 

before it came to us a)<; it was known to us. The Postmaster-General, 

in his report, very properly and very wisely stated that he was obliged, 

becauseofthefailure of the bil1, toincurthisresponsibility, and he asked 

the House of Representatives and the Senate to make the necessary appropriation immediately, because he considered the obligation one of 

honor to these men, who were willing, in violation of law, to allow the 

Government to receive a portion of their labor and their manufacture. 

There were upon this bill two other items; one relating to the tunnel that is now bejng constructed in the District of Columbia for the 

supply of water here, which we all agree about. It is an important thing. 

It was on this bill last year. Since the 1st day of November this tunnel has been filling up. with water, and it will be a great expense to 

the Government, to the contractors, or to somebody, every day that 

this is delayed. 

Now as respects the amendment which is under immediate consideration, that item was also in this bill before. We knew perfectly 

well, and every body who has examined the subject, certainly every Senator here, knows perfectly well that these cruisers will be of no value 

on the ocean until the armament is provided, and everybody knows 

that we have been talking for years here and in the other branch about a new navy, and as the Senator from New Hampshire, who was Secretary of the Navy, I believe, when these vessels were inaugurated, said 

he hoped to live long enough to see these vessels floating upon the 

water, so do I. 

These are three items that I submit to the Senator from Kansas that, as we understand this question, ought to be provided for. How that 

understanding prevails, I only refer to as disclosed in the discussion 

elsewhere; but these items stand in a little different relation from the 

other items which were discarded in this bill, as respects our duty to 

bring them forward immediately rather than wait for another bill. 

The Committe·e on Appropriations decided, I think I can say with una- nimity, thatnoneoftheseitemsshouldgoupontbisbill. Why? !twas a singular fact that after we had gone through the bill last year and eliminated from it every practical objection that could possibly be made in 

the House of Representatives, and cut down the bill so that it contained 

only a few of the items that were put upon it in the Senate, it went· 

back there, and with this understanding, I will say, on the part of people elsewhere, that the bill as then agreed to and then cut down should 

be put in anew aud other things should be eliminakd, they left off 

these three items. Why? I do not know what was the motive. A 

Senator once used to say here that that black drop called human motive 

could not always be disclosed or judged of. It so turns out that these· three items constitute about 20 per cent. of this entire bill; so that 

when we came to make up the final situation at the close of this ses- sion it would be paraded against our committee, and against the Senate of the United States, that we had added 20 per cent. to these bills 

in the Senate in our extravagclllce! 

Therefore, and I say it with great respect for the minority Senators 

upon the Committee on Appropriations, we have said hitherto in our 

committee and in the Senatethatthere had been no party division upon 

these subjects of appropriation; and they would not put us in tlie attitude as Republicans of presenting appropriations increasing our bills, even although they were necessary appropriations for the conduct of the 

public service or to pay some honest creditor. With unanimity the 

Committee on Appropriations decided that it would eliminate from this 

bill all these items, so that when the bill went back to the House of 

Representatives it would go back there at least in such form that no 

expert or arithmetician of that body or elsewhere could show that the 

extravagant Senate had put 20 per cent. upon the bill. 

Mr. President, although I think these three items are mainly in the 

same line, I voted against the amendment of the Senator from Connecticut, altboughhavinggreatsympathy with his constituents as respects it, 

feeling that we ought not to do this in view of the fact that the Post-· master-General had violated a plain provision of law in order to carry 

on the Government so far as the Post-Office Denartment was concerned 

without calling an extra session of Congress, which for many reasons the President was bound to do when this and other bills failed on the 

4th of :March last. 

Mr. HAWLEY. , I submit to the Senator that his logic is very bad 

in that case. Why does he not impeach the Postmaster-General and 

pay my constituents? 

Mr. ALLISON. The Senate having put this provision in the bill 

and this being the best argument on my part, I trust the Senator will 

not get excited on that particular topic. Besides that, I am to act as a judge if the Postmaster-General should be impeached, and I beg to be 

excused now in anticipation from expressing an opinion on that subject. 

So I will withdraw that remark. 

Mr. BUTLER. I have listened with great interest_to what the Senator 

from Iowa bas said--

Mr. ALLISON. I know the Senator always does. 

Mr. BUTLER. As I always do; but I should be very much obliged 

to him, and should ..feel very much instructed, if he would first tell us in this body precisely what the Committ-ee on .Appropriations intend, 

what they mean, what they desire us to do in this regard. I have 

.heard one Senator from that committee say one thing, and another an- other, and another another. I should be very glad indeed if, as the 

representative of that committee upon this floor, he would say to ns· just what he wants us to do in regard to the matter. I will adopt him as my file-leader. _ 

Mr. ALLISO:N. I am very much obliged to the Senator, ancl I will 

tell him whatiproposetodo without advising him as to whathisdutyis. ·I shaU vot-e against the amendment of the Senator from Maine hecause I believe that is the true policy of this body as respects this particular appropriation, although I should be glad tovotewithhim at any 

other time upon this subject. I shaH vote against him al$o upon the water 

tunnel, although I believe that is the most pressing public service for 

which we can appropriate money at this time. But after the Committee on Appropriations have so decided, and as I believe wisely, I do 

not care to open up these questions again. Therefore it is that I hope 

the Senator from Maine will withdraw the amendment now proposed 

by h_im. 

I have said thus much upon this bill for the purpose of showing to 

the Senate and to people elsewhere who may be interested in the subject that this great bill is not before the Senate now because of any 

fault of the Senate as respects any single matter in connection with it; 

that it is here because elsewhere it was delayed until such time as that 

it was impossible for it to be considered here. From whencesoever comes the statement that the bill failed last year because of the con- duct of the Senate, I repeat it did not receive the bill until the night 

of the lst of March, two days before we adjourned; that the Committee on Appropriations, which was bound in honor to consider it item by 

i tern, did not receive it until the morning of the 2d of March; and that, 

sittinghoursthatou~ht to have been devoted to sleep and to rest, and devoting that time to the consideration of the bill, they were only able to 
I' 

1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 701 

bring it before the Senate at such time as that it was impossible to 

print it :finally for consideration by the Congress of the two Houses. 

All I rose to say was to repel the idea that the Senate of the United 

States is in any sense responsible for these delays. 

Mr. BECK. Mr. President, I only desire to say that since this debate begun I have taken pains to ascertain that a bill will be presented 

to us within a week from this time-! think within :five days-containing all these important items of appropriation, and that it is very 

much better to consider them then than now. I have taken pains to 

ascertain that, without being able to say how. 

Ur. HALE. Mr. President, if this amendment is going to give rise 

to the offering of many other amendments, as I have been told it will, 

owing to the desire I have to get through as soon as possible, I will 

withdraw it. 

The PRESIDENT p1·o tempore. The amendme~t is withdrawn. 

Mr. REAGAN. I move to amend the bill by striking out from line 

7 to line 12, inclusive, .on page 38, in the following words: 

For payment of judgments and awards recovered against the United States 

for flowage damages caused by the improvement of the Fox and Wisconsin 

Rivers, in the State of Wisconsin, and reported to Congress by the AttorneyGeneral in Senate Executive Document94, Forty-ninth Congress, second session, as follows. 

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

amendment proposed by the Senator from Texas [M:r. REAGAY]. 

Mr. REAGAN. Mr. President, I make this motion on which to · predicate the observations I have to make, but my objection goes to 

all that part of the bill which extends from line 6, on page 38, to 1ine 

19, on page 49, except so much of it as proposes to repeal the act of 

1875, under which it is insisted that these damages have grown up. 

As the recital of the bill is that these payments are predicated upon 

judgments and awards, it may be that the Senate will consider itself 

bound bythe.judg~ents of the Court of Claims, and I know that ordinarily I should feel so bound. 

Whether this amendment and my objections to this portion of the . bill be sustained or not, I think it is right that a statement should be 

made to the Senate in regard to the history of· this appropriation. 

In 1846 the Government gave to Wisconsin three half sections of land 

to the mile on each side of the Fox and Wisconsin Rivers for the purpose 

of aiding Wisconsin when it became a State, for it seems it was then 

in process of coming into the Union, to form an open water-way for 

navigation between the Mississippi River and Lake.Michigan. This 

land was in some way disposed of. I do not propose to discuss it further than to state that Wisconsin got the three half sections to the inile 

for the entire distance from Green Bay to the Mississippi River, that is, 

960 acres of land to the mile• This land, I say, was in some way disposed of. Appropriations have been made by the Government to carry on this work. By the act of 1875 the right seems to have been secured 

to persons injured by the flowage of the lands, and under that act the 

judgments embraced in this bill and those in former bills have been 

brought before Congress for appropriation. 

Subsequently to the disposition of the land granted in this case, the 

Government has spent about $2,000,000 in appropriations from time to 

time ranging from $175,000 to $250,000, perhaps in one or two years 

$500,000. The work it seems is now abandoned, and I was advised 

many years ago by the Chief of Engineers, or rather by his assistant, 

that it ought to have been abandoned sooner. This large amount of 

money has been expended. 

I ought, however, to state that it seems when Wisconsin abandoned 

the prosecution of the work it turned the work over for prosecution by 

the Government of the United States, that is the improvement of the 

river, but reserving the water to the State of Wisconsin. Locks and 

dams were built at a number of places along the Fox River, furnishing 

very :fine water-power. This water-power is occupied by private individuals, and numerous mills and manufactories are now carried on upon 

that river by the water-power furnished by thE> locks and dams built 

by the Government at an expense of $2,000,000, after the immense 

amount of lands above referred to had been previously granted. 

In 1875 there was an appropriation of $25,000 to pay for condemned 

land and for flowage, it seems, that year. Then there have been one 

or two other items. There have been three appropriations made to pay 

commL"-Sioners for assessing the damages on account of flowage, and 

these payments altogether amount tosome$10,000. ThelastCongress 

appropriated $91,301.11 to pay for flowage. The present bill appropriates a Jit.tle over $130,000 more. While we may not avoid the making of these appropriations, it may 

be useful; if not to us, to the people of some of the other States, to learn 

hc.w to be 'i:nterprising and thrifty by following the example of Wisconsin in this case, in securing I do not know how much land, for I 

do not know the distance from Green Bay to the Mississippi River, but 

it must be some 400 miles. They obtained 960 acres of land to the 

mile, besides -$2,000,000 in cash, and some additional appropriations. 

The work is still incomplete so far as the navigation between the Mississippi and Lake Michigan is concerned, but it is complete enough to 

furnish water-power for a great number of manufacturing establish- ments and .mills along the Fox River at Government expense. 

I think in makiug these appropriations it is right that we should 

understand we are making them to satisfy demands of that ldnd upon 

the Government, where there is no possible show of equity, but the 

str'ongest evidences of improper practices to obtaitl money from the Government, not for the purpose of public use, but for the benefit of the 

mill-owners and manufacturers along the river. 

As I have stated, the items here cover eleven pages of this bill. It 

is recited in the paragraph which I propose to strike out that they are inserted on account of judgments and awards made under the act, I 

suppose, of1875. Ifmy amendmentwill not do any good in arresting 

such an appropriation this year, it may do good, as I suggested, in stimulating people in other States and other portions of the country to like 

th1·ift and enterprise in securing the enrichment of citizens out of the 

Federal Treasury. 

Mr. HALE. M:r. President, this subject has been for years before 

Congress and it comes about in this way: After the Government had 

commenced that great work, upon which vast sums of money had been 

expended, of improving the Fox and Wisconsin Rivers, questions arose as to damages that were done to owners of property lying upon the 

river and near by; and Congress in 1875 passed the act approved 

March 3, 1875, which'is entitled "An act to aid in the improvement 

of the Fox and Wisconsin Rivers, in the State of Wisconsin." That 

act, in terms, recognizes the faCt tnat claims for damages are arising 

from time to time against the Government on account of its works 

there, provides for adjudication of the subjects-matter, and that the 

Government should be represented by attorneys and proper representatives when the question of consideration of damages to the citizens 

should arise. 

That act is the fundamental statute upon which these claims are presented. In accordance with that act the Government went on with 

its works, and from time to time claims were made because of damage 

from flowage and other causes resulting from the Government works. 

The matters were brought into court and a commission appointed, 

which was recognized by the Government, appearing before it and con- testing the claims .. Some dispute arising on certain of these claims, 

the Government took an appeal from the court which had appointed 

the commissioners and carried the case to the Supreme Court; and the 

Supreme Court decided that the machinery as put in operation by virtue of the fundamental statute was correct, and that the parties had, 

under the legislation of Congress and under the act of the Government, 

proper claims. 

That having been established, the Attorney-General from year to 

year has certified these claims and they have been presented to us as regular estimates. As the foundation of the provisions which are found in the bill, in the regular Estimates, page 25 of Document No. 

29, under the head of "Fox and Wisconsin River Improvements," is 

this estimate: 

For payment of judgments and awards recovered against the United States 

for flowage damages caused by the improvement of the Fox and Wisconsin 

Rivers in the Slate of Wisconsin, and rep01·ted to Congress by the AttorneyGeneral in Senate Executive Document No. 94, Forty-ninth Congress, second sessi~n, as follows. 

The list follows, gi ving"the names of the claimants and the amounts 

of their judgments. Those judgments having passed through the 

scrutiny of the court in which the Government was represented, and 

then through the Department, are certified to Congress and adopted by 

the House of Representative~. The Senate Committee on Appropriations has agreed to the propositions as embodied in the bill by the 

House of Representatives. 

Now, as to whether there are any cases of undue claims or a disposition to mulct the Government, I am not infoi'med. The Committee on Appropriations has not gone into the subject-matter of each 

distinctive case, but has found that the general appropriations rest 

upon the foundation of an enacted statute passed by Congress and approved by the President; that the proceedings have been in accordance· with that statute; that the Government has been represented everywhere; and that to be certain of its rights it took an appeal, which was settled against it, and therefore the propositions have come up here. 

I am glad to say that we have got about to the end of these claims, 

and that there is a provision in the bill, in corpora ted by the other House 

and agreed to thus far by the Senate, repealing the whole thing, and 

winding it up; and I suppose sooner or later we shall see th.e last of 

these claims. That is the reason why the provision is on the bill. 

M:r. McPHERSON. I should like to inquire of the Senator from 

:Maine as to the character of these damages, if the committee went into 

that part of the subject. Is it for overflow upon the lands adjoining 

the river by re.:'lson of the damming up of water? 

Mr. SAWYER. I will answer that question. Yes, that is the case. As the Senator from Maine stated, there was an act passed by Congress 

allowing the damages to be asce1·tained under the State law, and they 

were. ascertained under our condemnation law. Commissions were appointed. A suit was taken to the Supreme Court of the United States 

and that court affirmed the judgment of the court below. After that 

there were a great many suits appealed to the circuit court, but in 

almost every case the plaintiffs obtained an increased judgment over the awards. Those cases were reported to the Attorney-General. The, 

Attomey-General says, in a document which I have not in my hand, 
1-

702 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SEN ATE. JANUARY 25, 

because I did not suppose the provision would be attacked, that there was nothing else for the Government to do but to pay the awards. 

As the Senator from Maine says, I think all the claims for damages 

have been settled. 

At any rat~ there were a great many claims filedlastsummer. The 

commission first went along the river and then filed claims back. They 

reported one hundred and twenty-three claims amounting to $300,000. 

Those, of course, are notyet paid. This provision repeals the L'l>w, and 

if it is adopted I think it ;will wind up the business, e~cept that there 

may be a little charge for the service of the commissioners last sum- mer. 

I hope the provision will not be stricken out, and I do not think it 

would be, if it was fully understood. It was fully discussed in the 

other House and put in there. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. PLATr in the chair). The question is on agreeing to the amendment proposed by the SenatOr from 

Texas [Mr. REAGAN]. 

The amendment was rejected. 

. :Mr. EVARTS. I beg to call attention to the proviso in the clause on the fifth page regarding repayments to importers. The proviso be- gins at line 9. A provision is asked for by the Government to pay the 

obligations incurred in repayment of duties exaded beyond the rates 

fixed by law, and occasion is taken of this appropriation to introduce 

here a clause of general legislation. I will read the proviso: 

Provided, That section 3011 of the Revised Statutes of the United States be, 

and the same is hereby1 amended by inserting after the word "paid," in the 

seventh line, the followmg: "Together with costs of suit and interest at the r ate of 3 per cent. per annum." · 

The gmvamen of this proviso is in reducing the interest now called for 

by the statute in force as 6 per cent., or in whatever State at the rate ·of interest that there prevails. Now, this is general legislation. It has 

no concern with the appropriation or with the deficiency; and I propose 

to strike out the whole clause. If it should not be stricken out it is 

very important that it should be made apparent that this provision of 

this reduced rate of int{lrest should only apply to4tsuits and to claims 

which ba·m not already accrued. The Senate will see at once that if 

a right of action has now accrued and is in suit or is in complete right 

of action to be suea, to take a way a rate of interest that has already ac- crued and been accruing under the laws as they have existed is simply 

extracting so much money from the rightful and accrued claims of creditors. :Mr. HOAR. I lost part of the Senator's statement. Did the Senator 

state that where duties were paid under protest they now bear interest 

before judgment? 

Mr. EVARTS. Yes; always. 

1\Ir. HOAR. At what rate; 6 per cent.? 

11r. EVARTS. Whatever is the rate of the State in which the suit 

is brought. 

The Treasury Departmenthave not desired that this retroactive effect 

shall occur, and the Secretary of the Treasury has drawn a clause in the 

language here used with tbeintention thatit shall notapplytoany suit 

heretofore brought. The Committee on Appropriations of the other 

House asked also for a clause that would cover pending cases, and the 

Secretary of the Treasury gave them a -clause to that effect, but accompanied it with this observation: 

I do not, however, wish to be understood as recommending the latter course, inasmuch as these claims have to a. great extent already accrued, and the o bligations being now fixed under existing law, the effect of such legislation might be seriously inequitable if not found to be unconstitutional. 

The House of Representatives has not followed the latter clause, but 

that which was regarded as operative only perspectively. As this pro- vision takes its place in the text of the Revised St-atutes, if it is adopted, 

I propose this precautionary clause : "But this provision shall not affect existing suits or demands." I use the words "suits " and "de- mands'' because those are the words used in the section of the Revised 

Statutes, and that section, let me add, is exclusively. applied to these 

very suits for the recovery of auties. · . I move that the clause I have read shall be added, to make it clear 

by law that the views of the Secretary of the Treasury are right, that 

it shall have no operation upori accrued and existing claims. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York will send 

his proposed amendment to the desk, and it will be read by the Secre- tary. 

1\Ir. HALE. The Senator has moved to strike out the proviso. If 

he succeeds in that he does not want to add any amendment to it. 

Mr. EVARTS. I shall move afterwards to strike out the whole pro- vision, if I am in order. 

1\Ir. HALE. Uove to amend first. 

Mr. EVARTS. I ~o not want to lose any right to strike it out as general legislation. I suppose that making it better does not alter my 

right to move to strike it out. . Ur. HALE. The Senator can take his choice, of course, in moving 

the amendment first or moving first to strike out the clause. If the 

clause is stricken out, he of course does not want to offer any amend- ment to it. • 

Ur. EVARTS. Tbenperhaps,asthatissim.pler, Isballmovetostrike out the general legislation. .. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator move to strike out 

the clause? 

Mr. EVARTS. I move to strike out the proviso. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The words proposed to be stricken out will be read. 

The SECRETARY. Beginning in line 9, on page 5, ih is proposed to 

strike out the following proviso: 

Provided, That section3011oftheRevised Statutes of the United States be, and 

the same is hereby, amended by inserting, aft-er the word" paid," in the seventh 

.line, the following: "Together with costs of suit and interest at the rate of 3 per cent. per annum." 

Ur. EVARTS. I think every Senator will a~.rree that this is a piece 

of general legislation, whether it is wise and just and equitable legis- lation, providing that the Government shall pay back to its importers 

what it had exacted illegally from them with only 3 per cent. interest, 

whereas when it sues them for their not paying what they owe the 

United States exacts from them 6 per cent. interest. Wbatever Senators may think about that, we shall all agree that this is general legislation, as it seems to me. It is a change of the general laws regarding 

the payment of interest and the general provisions of law. 

Aside from the particular section to which I refer, which is now un- der consideration, and is to be amended by the proviso which I desire 

to discard, it really introduces for the first time a rule that there shall 

be one rate of interest by which the debtors of the Government shall 

be held in their payments, and another and lower rate for the United 

States in pa1·i 'materia concerning the same subject of debt. It is, therefore, plainly a disturbance of the geneml arrangements which make 

the law of interest. Wherever interest is recoverable by the Government or recoverable against the Government, it is on the same level of 

interest. 

It is also special legislation concerning this general regulation on the 

statute-book of the mattef of the collection of the revenue. ~fr. HALE. If the proposition covered by the proviso had been in 

the form of a Senate amendment to the House bill, it would be subject 

to the point of order suggested by the Senator from New York; but it comes to the Senate as a part of the bill which the House of Representatives passed. While that body has now stringent rules excluding 

general legislation upon appropriation bills, there is there, as here, no rule, however stringent, that will prevent any measure passing unanimously. This proposition, I believe, passed the other House ne'/'11>. con. Nobody there inv.oked the rule. It is before the Senate a.s a part of the 

bill, and:we can not deal with the question of order. So that question 

is disposed of in itself. Further than that, the Committee on Appropriations did not think it worth while, as a matter of wisdom, to interfere with this provision which the oth House had put on. 

The cases where duties have been exacted by the Government, paid 

by the importer, become the subject of protest and suit, and, in many 

cases, of judgments against the United States, are already favored cases. The rule generally is that the Government does not pay interest until 

after judgment. An exception has arisen in this case. Years ago tbe 

question was raised and it was passed upon by the Supreme Court, in 

which it was decided that interest applied after the payment to the 

Government and before judgment, upon which numerous cases have 

arisen. Many suits are found upon the dockets of the courts of the 

southern district of New York to recover sums wrongfully exacted, 

and. interest upon them, and the claimants· all the while are favored 

to this degree, that not only do they get from the Government in erest~ 

but they get it at the rate of o per cent. whenever the statute of the 

State in which the duties are exacted provides that rate. So the im- porters of New York have been getting back their money and 6 per 

cent. besides up to the date of judgment as well as afterwards. When 

they get their judgment it is as good as a bond of the Government. 

It has been thought that this favored class, who are receiving interest 

from the Government, which pays interest on its debts when incorpo- rated into a judgment, ought not to receive as much as 6 per cent.; that 

they ought to be content with 3 per cent. There are many who believe that all this interest ought to be stricken out, and that it should 

not be computed until the claim is embodied in a judgment like other 

classes of claims. I do not know but that an amendment will be 

moved here striking out the interest entirely. It has been suggested 

to me that such an amendment will be moved, but the other House 

did not consider it wise to go so far, neither did the Senate Committee on Appropriations, but left; it at 3 per cent., which is about as fair a rate 

and which is as large as the Government is paying now upon any new engagements that it enters into, or on any new issue of bonds, and men 

can borrow money upon good security, as the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. HoAR] suggests to me, at that tate. 

Therefore the committee bas not thought it wise to in,erfere with 

this provision. I hope that the Senator's amendment will not prev-ail, 

but that the clause will be left as the House left it, with these men getting 3 per cent., as hardly anybody else does against the Government, and that they will be content with th-at. 

Mr. EVARTS. The Senator from ~Iaine is, I think, inattentive to 

the ground of the suit and the claim on the part of the merchant. It 

arises from an illegal exaction enforced by an authority of Government 

against the importers which extracts from them money that they do 
,_ 

1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 

not owe. The original suits were at common law and on the direct 

right of a citizen to sue the collector for extorting from him a rate of 

duty that the law had not imposed. He was a wrongdoer; he was not 

executing the law; he was not puttingtheimporteror merchant in the 

condition of a debtor to the Government; he compelled, by force of hi'3 

power in office, a payment contrary to law. , There never has been, and I hope there never will lie, in the country 

from which we draw our habits and our laws, or in our own, any impediment that will be thrown in the way of the full recourse of every 

citizen against oppression, and I hope that no qualification of his indemnity will be adopted as an insidious mode of accomplishing that 

oppression. Having. that right at common law and by common right, 

the plaintiff in his judgment had a right to pursue the collector out of 

his own fortune for his having violated the law. 

There was no favor asked of this Government in the matter. All 

that has supervened in the series of legislation bas been this: that instead of leaving the collector to this pursuit, even to the point of exe- cution, this right should be recognized as unchanged in quality. Nobody has ventured to say that any impediment should be thrown in 

the way of any importer or any citizen recovering money that was taken 

contrary to law. All that the legislation has done has been this: that 

although the judgment should be allowed, and the right of judg~ent 

should proceed upon the same ground, yet there should be certain protections to the collector. It required that there should be prompt suit, 

that there should be prompt protest, that there should be prompt appeal, and prompt decision by the Government, whether they would 

stand bythecollectorornot. Then further, and that is all they undertook in regard to the right of recourse, after that it was provided that 

though the right was passed upon in this same sense and nature, when 

the judgment was given against the collector it should not be enforced, 

but was then accompanied with a provision that it should be paid out 

of the Treasury. No~, is it to be said that it is awisethingthatmoney shall betaken contrary to the statute from a citizen, and if he recovers judgment 

for it at the distance of three, or six, or nine, or more years, he shall 

haYe it without interest? What is that but a Congressional exaction 

contrary to law in the shape of proper indemnity as to the restoration? 

Is it, then, any more j nst, if you can not take away the whole interest, 

for you to claim tha,t you have restored the money illegally taken when 

you do not restore it until ten years afterwards? Are you ready to 

say that by mere power of law, contrary to every regulation of interest 

provided for .collections by the Government, or collections against it 

where they are are allowed, there sh~ be not 6 per cent. but in this case only 3 per cent. allowed ? 

It seems to me that Senators must understand that they are trifling 

with a direct, a universal, and an impregnable right to see that money 

is not taken from a citizen contrary to law. Everywhere we are at the 

mercy of collectors, everywhere the courts do not do justice between 

the importer and the Government, while they do justice between all 

other citizens and the public wherever that recourse is given. · Certainly it is quite true that when a measure ·has been inserted in a deficiency bill which on objection here could not be put in, as con- trary to our rules, and which could not have been put on in the other 

Honse if it had been objected to there, a Senator can move to strike it 

out and appeal to the interest and the duty in proper legislation of 

this body that they will not tolerate general legislation in a deficiency 

appropriation bill. The present motion is to strike out. If that is 

not granted-! hope ib will be-then I will consider the question of 

making very clear what I suppose the Treasury Department means to 

make it, that it shall not apply to accrued claims. 

Mr. HOAR. I was inclined, when my attention was first called to 

this proposition, to think that the Government would have satisfied its 

dttty to the citizen by providing a remedy for the recovery from the 

Government of the money exacted from him by the collector and a rate of interest for its detention equivalent to that which the Government was itself paying upon its loans directly, or as ascertained by the 

rate at which a Governmenh bond is sold in the market. But I am satisfied on further reflection that4hhat is an erroneous view, and that 

the Senator from New York is not only clearly right in his claim, but 

that he might ~we gone further and have insisted that the preservation 

of the present rule, instead of the amendment of the law proposed by 

the House of Representatives, is essential to the constitutionality of 

the whole proceeding. 

The Constitution of the United States in the fifth article of amend-' 

ment is express, as Senators well know, that 

No person shall • * * bedep_!ived of life, liberty, or property, without due 

process of ~a.w; nor shall J;)rivate property be taken for public use without just compensation. 

Here is a person who is authorized by the power of the Government 

itself to seize without any lawful process, without any lawful occasion 

without any lawful right, the property of the citizen, unless he shall 

pay to him a sum of money "unlawfully exacted. , 

If we were to pass a law that in any such case as that which could 

be described the citizen should have a right to sue the despoiler in 

court, of course such an act, whethet passed by Congress or by any State 

Legislature, would be held at once to be unconstitutional as depriving 

the citizen of a remedy in the courts and as indirectly making possible and withou~ legal remedy the seizing of his property without due 

process oflaw. It has been held, just as it is held in thecaseoftaking 

private property for a public use, such as a public building, or anything 

of that kind, that an ample remedy given by statute against the Government is to be presumed~ be ample compensation in the one case or an ample remedy for a wrong in the other case, if it be a wrong. 

And therefore I suppose the courts have sustained and would sustain 

(although that must have been a question of some doubt in the beginning) the law which, after a judgment is obtained against the collector, 

deprives the citizen of any execution against the private property of the 

wrongdoer a,nd compels him to accept as a substitute a claim against 

the Treasury of the United States. But certainly that law could not 

be supported for a moment if it gave to the citizen, instead of the en- tire amount of the judgment he has recovered against the collector, 90 or 70, or 50 per cent. only of that judgment. His claim against the 

Treasury of the United States must be ample and complete and com- mensurate with his injmy, or the constitutional provision is not satisfied. 

It seems to me it is equally unconstitutional to provide that the citizen's property maybe seized bythe collectorofthe port ofNewYork, 

and that he shall have not interest for the-detention for three, four, or five years-while his remedy is pending, or before the act of Congress 

passes which compensates him, as it would be to say that he should 

get but 75, or 80, or 90 per cent. of the amount of that judgment when 

he comes to be paid from the Treasury. 

So, then, it is essential to the constitutionality of this wholematter, 

which the Government has adopted for its convenience, of substituting 

for a remedy against the collector a claim against the Treasury of the 

United States, that there shall be a provision for the payment of the 

principal sum and a sufficient and adequate rate of interest. It is not a sufficient and adequate rate of interest to compensate a citizen for the 

detention of money for a term of years to pay him the sum which a government of undoubted and unquestioned credit and strength can bor- row money for. 

I can not borrow money at 3 per cent., the rate which is now proposed to be fixed here, and I suppose there is no private individual in 

the country that can, as a rule; and therefore, in. order to support this legislation at all under the Constitution, there must be a provision which 

not only provides for the recompense from the Tresasury of the sum lost, but of a rate of interest equal to that which the ordinary average 

citizen in decent credit is obliged to pay to make up to himself money 

which is detained from him; and of course there can be no better means ofascertainingwhat that is than to ascertain what is the rate of interest 

which in each State the State Legislature finds a prope_r and rea-sonable sum for making such recompense for detention as between citizen and 

citizen. 

That is the present and existing policy. If, then, you cut down this 

rate of interest from 6 per cent. to 3, in the case of the citizen of 

New York whose private property is taken by· the collector and turned 

into the Treasliry, you have deprived him of a portion of his constitutional remedy, just as much as if yon deducted that difference between 

3 per cent. and 6 per cent. from the principal of his claim. 

It seems to me, therefore, that the honorable Senator from New York 

might with entire safety have gone even further than I Understood 

him to go in his argument, and have assailed this proposition as con- trary not only to the spirit but to the exact letter of the Constitution. 

Mr. EVARTS. The question now is on the motion to strike out. 

When we come to the 3 per cent. provision I have already intimated 

that the only protection of that reduction would be a computation for 

future action. 

Mr. HALE. It strikes me that the only fault with the fine reasoning 

of the Senator from Massachusetts which followed the equally fine reason- ing of the Senator from New York is that theyirivest the subject of interest which attaches to the claim against the Government with the same solemnity and the same definitiveness as the original proposition that 

the Government shall not take private property without making indemnification. 

:Mr. HOAR. Now, will my friend allow me to put a. question there? 

Does the Senator doubt that a provision that private property might be 

taken for public use, its value at the time of taking ascertained, and the 

money repaid without interest at a distance of four, five, or six years, 

would be unconstitutional? 

Mr. HALE. That question is not raised here. 

Mr. HOAR. That is the exact question. 

Mr. HALE. That question is not raised here, because the proposition is not to deprive the citizen of some attaching rate of interest from 

the time when he has been deprived of his property. That proposition 

is not involved here. Whether I should argue that or not if it came up 

it is not necessary to assume here now; but to declare that because the 

Government is bound by the constitutional provision to indemnify the 

citizen for the property which it has taken carries with it an equal 

obligation that it must pay the rate of interest that the local statute 

fixes at the place where the payment has been exacted by the Govern-

,
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE, JANUARY 25, 

ment is a great deal further than I would go or than I believe lawyers or judges generally would go. 

The interest that follows a claim of this kind attaches to the original 

proposition. That the Government in declaring how the citizen shall 

seek his remedy, through what courts he shall apply, may not also declare that in its wisdom, that in the judgment of Congress a fair rate 

of interest that shall attach to that original claim shall be so and so, I do 

not believe. There is no sanctity about the local statute of New York 

that fixes 6 per cent., or of California that perhaps fixes 8, or another 

State that fixes 7, which obliges the Government to pay that as a matter of course because it has taken a man's property; but if there 

is anywhere any authority lodged in any tribunal to decide what that 

rate of interest shall be, it must be in Co:qgress. 

Suppose that it can not confiscate the citizen's right to interest as an attachment to his claim against the Government for money taken, who 

shall decide what that rate of interest is? I believe that Congress is 

the proper auth·ority. It can not perhaps confiscate it entirely, but it 

is not obliged to say that because the exaction has been made in the 

port of Boston, therefore there attaches to it the rate of interest prescribed in Massachusetts, or that in California it is the rate prescribed 

there, or in New Orleans the rate that is prescribed there. Congress 

must have the power to fix in reason the amount of interest that shall 

go as an attachment to this claim that the citizen has against it for 

having taken his property. · That is the basis, I take it, on which the 

other House put in this clause. 

Mr. HOAR. Suppose what the Senator fromMainesaysistrue, that 

the law-making power may fix the rate of interest, but they must fix 

a reasonable rate. Myproposition isthatnolaw-making power can put 

a rate which is clearly and manifestly below what is the average and 

proper rate of interest between private citizens. 

Mr. HALE. Who shall decide it? 

Mr. HOAR. We shall decide it; but nobody doubts that when the 

House of Representatives propose to us to fix this rate of 3 per cent., 

instead of 6 as it is now, they are making a rate below that at which 

private citizens in good credit can borrow money for three or four years as a rule. 

?!fr. HALE. .Any man in New York, on the judgment of the United 

States in his favor, certified by a court having undoubted jurisdiction, can raise money at 3 per cent. any day upon that judgment. 

Mr. EVARTS. On the contrary, in my judgment, according to the 

experience of the collections by these judgment creditors, they would 

gladly part with 25 per cent. of their judgments. 

Mr. SHERMAN. :Mr. President, I think that this discussion and 

this provision in this appropriation bill illustrate more strongly than 

any case I have known the absolute folly of attempting to legislate on most difficult questions of finance and law upon appropriation bills. 

Here is a bill called an "urgent deficiency bill," that has in it a great 

multitude of appropriations for debts clearly due, that have been due 

for months and years without bearing any interest, and yet the House 

of Representatives felt at liber~y to attach a provision here which 

changes a law of forty years' standing, a law that has been practiced 

upon, relating to two separate classes of claims against the Government, having no relation to each other. First, this clause deals with 

claims of importers who, in order to get possession of their goods, deposit more money in the Treasury than is required to pay the duties, so that they may get immediate possession, leaving the question of the 

precise amount to be liquidated afterwards. 

There is no confiscation about that. It is done as a matter of convenience, for the expedition of the transaction, for the convenience of 

the Government. In those cases no interest is paid by the Government, but as soon as the matter is liquidated the excess is paid over under existing laws; or if there is a controversy about the rate of duty, 

the collector decides what he thinks is right according to the law, and 

then the cit!zen, if d.issatisfied, pays the amount and commences his 

suit for what he alleges to be the erroneous exaction of the collector. 

When that suit is commenced within the proper time and in the 

proper way, it may be pending for years, and there are now cases under 

the loose methods adopted in the city of New York where these suits 

have been lef~ for years runningc:lfter they have been brought. Finally, 

if judgment is ren.dered in favor of the importer, a judgment for the 

n.mount of the duties is rendered, and then, not in pursuance of express 

provision of law, but in pursuance of universal common law, where 

the collector has taken more than he ought to have taken, the law pre- sumes that besides the money which the importer deposited over and 

above the amount found due, he shall have interest on that deposit. 

In the one case, therefore, interest is paid, and in the other case interest is not paid; but this provision undertakes to say that in all such cases interest shall be paid at the rate of 3 per cent., besides the costs of 

suit. One effect of this is to increase the amount of interest that will 

be paid, because this provision, being an amendment to that section of 

the Revised Statutes which regulates the importation of goods, would 

apply to both classes of invoices, both classes of payments into the 

Treasury; and, if it applies at all, it will apply just as much to interest on the amount that is voluntarily paid by the importer in excess of 

the d'uties as upon the amount recovered in judgment. 

Then .the ln.nguage is so loosely drawn that no man can tell what is 

meant by it. Let us look for a moment. The section referred to by 

this bill provides: 

SEc. 3011. Any person who shall have made payment under protest and in 

order t.o obtain possession of merchandise imported for him, to any collect<Jr, or J(erson acting as collector, of any money as duties, when such amount of ~uties was not, or was not wholly, authorized by law, may maintain an action m t.he nature of an action at law, which shall be triable by jury, to ascertain 

the validi~y of such ~emand and payment of duties, and to recover back any ex:· cess so paid. • 

According to the plain language of the law, he can only recover back 

the excess paid, but as this is a suit against the collector, the courts 

have uniformly declared that interest followed the claim. If the money was illegally exacted, as is claimed by the importer, then the interest 

followed the principal, and therefore the courts in New York have in 

some cases allowed as much interest as principal. Cases have run along 

for ten or fifteen years, and in some cases where I was required to pay, 

myself, as Secretary of the Treasury, the interest was in excess of the 

principal. 

There was negligence on the part of the importer in failing to prosecute, probably, or in leaving it to the lawyer to db as he pleased, but 

in most cases the interest largely accrued. That interest was not au- thorized by express Jaw, but authorized by the universal principle of 

justice that, where a debt is withheld, unreasonably, interest follows as 

a necessary consequence. That judgment is rendered not under express 

law, but upon the universal law applicable alike to the Government 

and to the individual. 

Now, the provision comes in and proposes that in all this class of cases where there is a dispute arising as to the amount that should have been 

paid interest shall be allowed at 3 per cent. 

The section I have read is to be amended by inserting, after the word 

"paid," in the seventh line, the following: "Together with the costs 

and interest at the rate of 3 per cent. per annum." 

When does the interest commence? Is it to accrue after judgment? 

If it only means interest afwr judgment rendered, it would be one thing. When shall the interest commence? 

Mr. HALE. From the date of payment. 

1\fr. SHERMAN. That would enormously swell the amount of interest to be paid, because in the great mass of these cases there is no interest now paid by the Government. There is no interest paid by 

the Government in any case except where excessive duties are collected 

by the collector. To change the existing law now in this way would cover a multitude of cases and thus deprive a man of the command of 

his property without law. . 

For instance, taking the doctrine stated by the Senator that this 

should go back to the time wl!'en the money was paid into the hands 

of the Govern~ent, suppose now, under the existing law, the man is 

entitled to 6 per cent.; suppose the amount of principal was$1,000and 

the interest $500 now accrued, have we a right to say that that interest., which has accrued for many years, shall not be paid at the rate of 

6 perc~t. when the law requires it to be so paid? '.rhat would be un- just, that would be confiscation, a deprivation of a man's property actually accrued, because another section of the law provides expressly 

that on all judgments rendered against the United States in circuit and 

district courts interest shall accrue at the rate cunent in the State 

where the judgment was rendered. That is in a previous section of 

the Revised Statutes. That section ought to be referred to in case this 

legislation is passed. 

Section 966 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, relating to 

the judiciary, provides thatInterest shall be allowed on all judgments iu civil causes. 

And this is a civil cause. Mr. President! what I protest against is 

this kind of legislation on an appropriation bill, where we can not amend 

it; where we can not distinguish between different kinds of claimsthose bearing interest and those not bearing interest. It seems to me, 

therefore, that the Committee on Appropriations ought to say to the 

House of Representatives, "This is a matter that properly ought to be 

considered by the Finance or the Judiciary Committee; we can not con- Eider it; we can not see exactly the effect and operation of this clause, 

a'nd it therefore ought to be omittel from this bill." 

I have a long argument here by a very respectable gentleman in 

Nnw York, known to most of the Senators, I suppose, in which he 

speaks of the hardships and difficulties that would accrue out of the 

pa.Es::tge of this provision. .Those he represents only knew of it by 

seeing it in the newspapers by accident. Now, their attention is sud-

'denly called to it, their interests are affected, and their whole manner 

of doing business is to be changed or affected by a hasty provision in 

what is called an "urgent deficiency bill." 

Notwithst::mding my familiarity with these laws, I ca.n not under· 

stand the effect and application of this provision. I can not see to 

what extent it may be applied. I can see that honest men might con- tend for extending interest back to the origin of the claim, as the Senator from Maine does, or back only to the date of the judgment. Is it 

applicable to old judgments, or only to those which may be rendered 

hereafter? Is it applicable to old claims which have been running 

along previously, or only to new claims which may ariseafterthisdate? 

All these are important questions .that ought to be defined by lcgisla~ 

tion. 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- · SENATE. 705 

I believe that a law should be carefully framed declaring as to all 

judgments rendered against a collector that they should be promptly 

presented and paid; but there is now authority of law without any 

special appropriation, a general law to refund excessive duties. These 

daims ought to be promptly presented and they should be promptly 

paid upon the judgment being rendered, and there ought to be some 

provision made by which these cases should no~be lingering for year 

after year; there ought to be some provision that unless they are prosecuted duly and even with extraordinary baste they should draw no 

interest whatever and no interest should be allowed by the court. 

That provision ought clearly to be adopted. For instance, if men lay 

quietly upon a claim thus accruing year after year, the law ought to 

declare that unless the claim is prosecuted with due diligence no interest should be allowed by the court in pronouncing the judgment. 

That provision surely ought to be added. · 

Mr. HALE. Then the Senator admits that the law-making power 

may deal with the question of interest and regulate it? 

Mr. SHERMAN. Undoubtedly. Nobody denies that. But the 

question is this: You are here dealing with it in a way that is entirely 

insufficient and utterly illogical. Congress may say that the courts of 

the United States shall allow no interest against the Government of 

the United States or against its office11> when acting in the discharge 

of their duty. Congress may say that, but it would not be rjght for 

them to say it, because Congress has neglected t}le prompt discharge of 

its duty, and Congress ought not to impose a hardship on the citizen 

because it neglects to make the necessary appropriations. / 

I intend, if I have the opportunity; before this bill closes _to offer to 

the Senate-whether it is in order or not I can not say-a provision 

that will give interest to those persons who bad claims adjudicated in 

their favor at the last session of Congress, and who have been deprived 

of their interest, and the money withheld from them with an overflowing Treasury, because there was not sufficient diligence in Congress to 

pass the necessary appropriation. I do not blame the Senate for it; 

because, according to the statement made here yesterday, this deficiency bill was not sent here until a few days before the end of t.he 

session, when it was manifestly impossible for the Senate to act upon 

the bill properly. Therefore, the fault rests somewhere else; and yet 

it is a fault for which the claimants ought not to suffer. 

There are hundreds of claims in this bill; I know nothing abouttheir 

merits; but I assumethatthey are good claims. They have been found 

in some cases by tribunals like the Court of Claims, they have been 

passed upon in some cases by heads of Departments; in other cases by 

different kinds of tribunals authorized to pass upon them; and the 

claimants ought to have interest from the time their claims were adjudicated. A provision of tbat kind I should cheerfully vote for, and I 

should be willing also, where there was unreasonable delay and want 

of diligence on the part of the creditor, to deny all interest or reduce 

the rate of interest to 3 or even le~ than 3 per cent. · 

It is manifest, however, that this provisionoughtnotto be kept here. 

It is totally ill-shaped, ill-made up, put in the wrong place, applicable 

not to the section of the Revised Statutes that is recited in the clause, 

but applicable to another section, a different law. I hope, therefore, 

that the committee will allow this clause to be stricken out and that 

they will stand ~ that action until some practical legislation on this 

su~iect can be made. 

Mr. ALLISON. :Mr. President, I am in sympathy with the statement made by the Senator from Ohio that it is an unwise thing to legislate on matte11> of importance upon an appropriation bill, and especially 

unwise to do so on a bill that requires some haste in its passage; but I 

can not agree with him as respects this particular amendment. 

In the first place, I see no difficulty in construing the clause, as the 

Senator does. Ha.ving examined the clause with some care, I see that 

it only ap,lies to existing conditions. It does not provide for interest 

in any case where interest is not allowed now; it only provides that 

. where interest is now allowed and paid by the Government, the rate 

shall be 3 per cent. instead of 6 per cent . 

. This is not a new question in the Senate, in the House of Representatives, in our committee-rooms, or with Secretaries of the Treasury. 

Away back, as the Senator from Maine said awhile ago, I think as far 

as 1867, it was decided that in all cases where an importer had paid more money into the Trea~mry than the collector was entitled to exact from 

him it was a proper thing for the jury to allow interest from the time 

of such exaction, and I think since that time all Secretaries of the 

Treasury have in these cases of imported goods paid interest in New 

York, where the chief amount of customs duties is collected, upon 

every importation, at the rate of 6 per cent., where in the particular 

case, or in a similar case, the court bad decided that the duty had been 

illegally exacted. That bas been 'the rule in the courts for many years, 

and it has been the rule until, I think, it bas grown to be an evil which 

requires the interposition of Congress for its correction. 

The Senator from Ohio said trulv that in some cases which came 

under his personal knowledge be was obliged to pay a greater sum in 

the way of interest than the principal sum deposited. Secretary Manning in his report-and, by the way, Secretary Manning drew this 

provision, and it was drawn with the utmost care and with the most 

careful supervision in the Treasury Department-intended to meet 

XIX-45 

I 

this evil. In a New York case a judgment was rendered a little over a 

year ago where the principal sum was $44,000 and the interest $84,000. 

,Mr. CHACE. That showed simply that the claimant was unjustly 

kept out of the claim for a long time. 

Mr. ALLISON. I hope gentlemen will not get excited until I go 

over this question. I do not intend to criticise the reasons for that, but 

it may have been the fault of the district attorney in the city of New 

York; it may have been the fault of the importer, .who probably was a 

foreigner and could get money at 2 or 3 per cent., and was quite well 

content with loaning the Government of the United States money at 

the rate of 6 per cent. I do not care to discuss the details of that case. 

These ca-ses have gone on until the present Secretary of the Treasury 

informs us in his annual report that some corrective should be applied. 

I hope that on such a question we shall all give credence to his statements. He bas stated the situation of these suits; he says that the suits 

now pending in the district court for the southern district of New York 

will not be decided during this generation. I ask Senators whether 

they believe that is a wise condition of things? I agree with the Senator from Ohio that this anomalous position ofthingsoughtnot tocontinue, and that some method should be provided to cure it. I agree 

with him also that this is in some respects an imperfect cure. 

Mr. HOAR. Will the Senator inform the Senate, if he is himself 

informed, bow soon a citizen can enter a suit, and, prosecuting it with 

dilige~ce, in the city of New York, reach a judgment in a case? How 

many years will it take? 

Mr. ALLISON. I think the Senator from Massachusetts has asked 

me a question which the legislation of Congress is required to answer. 

Of course the Senator from New York can answer the question much 

better ,than I can; but I do not believe that if a man was to commence 

hit! suit against the Government of the United States to-day in the 

citY- of New York and take his chances of trial upon that docket, having the cases qtlled in their order and tried in their order, he demanding a jury, be could secure a jury trial in the circuit court in the city 

of New York short of two or three years. 

Mr. HOAR. Now let me ask another question. 

Mr. ALLISON. Let me get through with the first answer. 

After be has secured his jury trial the Govermi:J.ent of the United · 

States, through its district attorney, may or may not be satisfied that 

twelve men gathered from the city of New York, "I will not say from 

whence, are better able to judge as to whether ail article is cotton or 

woolen, or whether it is silk or woolen~ or both, than is au expert on 

the part of the Government who has decided with reference to this 

question. 

The Government being,thus dissatisfied may appeal that case to the 

Supreme Court of the United States, where it hangs up necessarily for 

four or five years more. That is tbe situation in every case, and it is 

the situation in the southern district of New York to-day. 

But that is not the only situation. Here "is a large class of importations resting upon a particular clause in the statute, as, for example, 

steel blooms coming in at one rate of duty and billets of steel coming 

in at another. The expert appraiser in New York decides that on a 

particular importation a merchant is required to pay the hlgher duty. 

The importer is not satisfied with that and be appeals. 

In the mean time the billets of steel, or blooms of steel, or what not, 

pass into consumption, and either the men who made them on the other 

side have sold them at a lower rate in order to meet the competition 

here, or somebody else other than the man who brought them in as an 

importer pays the charges upon them. Every other importer who 

brings in that class of goods does not begin suit. He files, under section 2931, alluded to in this clause, his protest and he appeals. 

He does not commence suit as a ma~ter of fact, because be knows 

perfectly well the snit will not be tried, and because there is an understanding that the first suit begun shall be a test suit. There may be a 

thousand suits brought upon any one of these items of importation. 

There were pending in New York, as I am told, twenty-five hundred 

cases-that is, suits, protests, and appeals-depending upon the decision 

of the Supreme Court in what are known as the carton cases, and those 

carton cases were decided in favor of what is called the importers' view, 

and in everyoneoftbem, where the protest and appeal have been entered, 

the ~overnment of the United Sta.tes pays interest from the day of the 

exaction, pays it under existing law and under the decisions of the 

Supreme Court of the United States. · 

Mr. HOAR. Now, the Senator having ahswered_my first question, 

that for three or four years the man doing his best to get his due will not 

get it in the cityofNew York, and that for four or five years more, making from six to eight or nine years in all, he will not get it if the Government appeals to the Supreme Court of the United States, saying 

nothing now about a new trial being ordered in New York, does the 

Senator think it just that the United States, having exacted that money 

from the man illegally and received it into its Treasury, should pay 

him only half interest for it? 

Mr. ALLISON. I will amrwer the Senator's question by asking him 

another. Does he think that in every case the Government of the 

lJnited States should pay that rate of interest which the importer is 

compelled to pay, and no more and no less? . Mr. HOAR. I think that the United States should pay that rate of 

: 

' 
-- . 

i _ 

I • 

706 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JANUARY 25, 

interest which in the community where the exaction is made is the cur- therefore it seems to me· that although this is a provision on an approrent rate of interest paid by men in good credit. If 6 per cent. is too priation bill, which I regret, it is a provision which has received great 

much, take 5, but3 is manifestly, by the common experience of all man- consideration and the Committee on Appropriations did not see its way 

kind, too little. · clear to stJ.·ike it out. 

The Senator will bear in mind that this is not the case of a man who Mr. EVART~. Mr. President, probably I have naturally more conlends money to the Government; it is not a man who made a contract versance with proceedings in litigation in New York on these topics 

with the Government; it is the case of a man whose legal remedy against than any one else now in the Senate, and I desire to have it understood 

the wrongdoer, which would give him the 6 per cent., the Government that all imputations upon th_e merchants of New York in regard to 

has taken awav. their pursuing their rights at law on a common footing with all that 

Mr. ALLISON. Very well; !.understand all that phraseology per- are protected by law on all subjects, rest upon no distinction in their 

fectly well, and I will say that in my judgment there can be many conduct, no distinction in their interest, no distinetion in their rights, 

cases put wherein there is injustice to the Government. Take this very than those that belong to every American or every foreigner entitled 

bill; here are men in this bill who by a law of 1861 were entitled to under our laws in as erting his rights. 

receive bounty for volunteering in the.. serVice of their country as sol- Mr. ALLISON. Will the Senator allow me to interrupt him a modiers of the Republic, and they have stood by with that statute on the ment? Does he intend to say that I attributed to the merchants of 

statute-books for a . quarter of a century, and finally at the end. of a New York any othel' or different character from merchants in other quarter of a century they have been enabled to secure from the account- localities? 

ing officers of the"Treasury that justice meted out to them, and yet Mr. EVARTS. No. ~atever youhavesaidaboutanybodyelse outunder the accepted condition of all legislation and precedents as re- side of New York would, nodon.bt, have been in thesamesensein which 

spects that Class of claims, no interest at all has been allowed or will be yon alluded to New York; but you spoke only of the merchants in New 

allowed. · York and of the foreigners and of the system of our importations and 

My answer to the Senato.r from Massachusetts is this: Here we put ofcertainmischiefstbatgrowoutofoursystemofimportations. About 

upon our statute-books certain laws respecting the importation of for- that the Senator is right. There are imperfect reO'ulations. There are 

eign merchandise. We do it, first, for the purpose of securing revenue, also very imperfect administrations, in my judgment; of the exactions 

and next we do it for the purpose of enabling our own manufacturers of duty in the very":m.atter about which we are talking. 

to successfully compete with those people who live abroad in the pro- But the merchants there find themselves menace_d by a purely arbiduc~on of these things. Under those laws the system has grown up trary proposition 9f law inseited -in an urgency deficiency bill, and it. 

which now exists as respects the revenue. It has so turned out that is treated as if it was a new regulation of some item or detail of customs 

nine-tenths, or certainly three-quarters, of all the importations of im- regulations. It strikes a.t the root of the matter whether a citizen is 

ported goods that come within the provisions of the statutes which liVe to be indemnified when his rights are invaded contrary to law, by being 

are now consideringareimported by men whodonotlivein this country told that whereas in civil rights of contract in the absence of any exat all, and who manufacture their goods in France, in Belgium., in Ger- press agreement about interest, but mere default giving a right toremany, at wages one-half the wages paid here; and thentbeyimportthem cover it, there is to be a full measure according to the vicinity in which 

through their own agents, get them through the custom-house at the low,. the right is to be pursued, but when the attitude is not of contract beest possible point, and if the appraiser differs from them they resort to tweeD: the merchant and the United States, but from the beO'inning to 

legal methods which the law gives them to make a protest and appeal the end the United States is a tort-feasor, and be is only asking for inand go to the Supreme Court of the United States, and finally recover demnity under law for what has been done against him, contrary to the 

judgment against the United States, possibly for a misconstruction of law, he shall have no interest. How C..'ill merchants, how can business 

the statute, and recover 6 per cent. interest against this Government men, how can honest men believe in this thrust at a particular right 

when they are only paying 2 per cent. interest upon all their plant of theirs which exists by common law and common right· against invawhere these goods are manufactured. I say that it is the duty of this sion contrary to law? 

Government to stand in between and see that this class of men are not Senators h..'\ ve spoken of delays. Does any Senator believe that any 

protected to ' a gre.:1.ter degree than other people are protected in this plaintiff would h ave a disposition to delay a suit in order that his pencountry. . alty might be postponed? We are told of a case of $44,000 of illegal 

I agree thoroughly with the Senator from New York that this pro- exaction, clearly against the law, by this Government against the pervision should not !le retroactive. It is not so now, as the Secretary of son from whom it exacted his substance. The Government exacted 

t.he Treasury decides. I would nothave it apply to an existing condi- from him his substance, and now he can not get a penny out of the 

tion of things. Treasury, though he has been pursuing it long in the courts we have 

Mr. EVARTS. Then the Senator does notol:>jectto my amend.n;tent, opened to him in common wi~h all other injured persons, until the dewhich makes that certain. lay, measured step by step by legal, regular interest, has cost him more 

Mr. ALLISON. I do not, because I say what is not certai.Ii. in the than the original exaction-$84,000 of dclay on $44,000 of original illeeyes of the Senators ought to be m&d.e certain, and the Secretary of the gal exaction! How can you make an appeal in a Senate or in a House 

Treasury so states. of Representatives to favor, to ameliorate, to propitiate such injustice 

Mr. SHERMAN. TheSenatorquotesthe Secretary oftheTreasury. as this? 

If there is any information from him we ought to have it before us. There is a multitude of cases arising under the same clause because 

Besides that, we do not know who the Se<;retary is to be that will pass of the multitude of importers and of importations by the same impo.rtupon this provision. . ers, and this Government bas required with precisinn and accura{!y- a 

Ur. ALLISON. I have not stated that I knew, as far as I am con- protest accompanying every importation. Although the question has 

cerned, and I agree we should make perfectly certain this statute. I been raised, although the question has been agitated, although the 

am only saying what we ought to do in the future. I have been a courts have possession of it, the Government requires an abs_olute act 

member of a committee that has undertaken in some respects to amend of protest and the p.reservation of the evidence, and all the means of 

these laws. We have found these difficulties. pro ecnting the suit are to be preserved, and then when the suit is 

I have only stated a portion of them, because I do not wish to take brought, does the Treasury wish that all those who have claims restup the time of the Senate in discussing them; but we find the method ing upon the same propositions of law and of fact shall add-costs to 

0fimportation in the city of New York and the method of undervalu- their suits? 

ation there to be one of the crying existing evils in our country, and so They have a right to sue and they and the lawyers have a right to 

great is this evil that importations of large classes of goods al'e trans- advocate their cause; but as a matter of fact the great mass of the imferred from the regular people who have purchased them to people who porters keep their position of right until they find that the statute of 

act merely as the agents of manufacturers in other countries, and who limitations is running against them. Is it a fault that they did not 

come here and contest at every inch our importation laws as respects sue at the beginning instead of waiting until they are about to lose 

the construction of those statp.tes with regard to rates of duty. ' their right; and then their long delay of six year in beginning a suit 

'l;'here is now lying upon our tables a bill proposing a new method is to be a saving of the Government and a loss to the importer? Then 

of treating the subject of appraisements and valuations, and one section he commences his suit and he lets it lie, and he does not accumulate 

of that bill provides that no interest at all shall be allowed. That may costs. Then when the time comes-and I speak now with ob ervabe a. radical and extreme remedy, but it is a remedy agreed upon unani- tions as a lawyer, a good many years ago to be sure-that the plaintiffs 

mously by the Committee on Finance, and I was instructed to report must commence their suit<:!, are they not to suppose that the Governthat bill. I merely mention this for. the purpose of showing that here ment will treat all alike? 

is an evil, and, although this is only a partial correction of it, I think When the point is determined in law, if men have not preserved 

it is in the right direction. their right by commencing suit within six years, are they to be de- l thoroughly agree with Senators that we ought not to touch any prived of their rights by this country because they had not aggregated 

existing claim; we should make it apply to all future importations. I costs by earlier suits? 

would even go to that extent, so that il\, no sense would it do an in- Thexe are people in this country besides members of the Governjustice to any man who ha-s hitherto made importations _of goods. ment. There is not a merchant and there is not a bu iness man in the 

I am not troubled about the constitutional question, because I think city of New York that does not know that he has not exceeded his 

we can, if we choose, impose upon people who ·import goods hereafter legal rights in any particular in the respects here spoken of: 

such fair limitations and conditions as we see fit to impose by law; and And then it seems that when the courts provided by this G;overn-
. ' 

1888. CONGRESSIONAL -_RECORD- SENATE. 707 

ment for our citizens involve delays lli the courts of first instance for 

two, or three, or four, or five years, that is a reason for allowing less 

interest be paid to the suitor! And then when four years more are 

needed to finally dispose of these questions unless they are accelerated, 

as they generally may be on the motion of the Attorney-General, that 

delay is heaped up as an objection to claims made bythis description of 

suitors and this description of our citizens. For myself, I would as 

rapidly as I could secure the result by legi Iation by paying out every 

dishonest dolla:r !eft in the Treasury due to a citizen or resident of the 

United States. 

I find now that an argument for this mischief is drawn out of the fact 

that we p·erpetuate injustice and neglect t,o other people, and instead 

of arguing one justice done here towards j nstice to be done to others, 

the argument is, "Do not do justice here, because I can point you to 

other and greater instances in which injustice has been done. " 

l\1r. President, it is a pity that the importers should be kept out of 

their money and of their interest. It is a pity that aggregation of demands on the Treasury should increase in this class. There was one 

rule in the free country from which we came; the English exchequer always had this :rule: that when there was a doubt as to an exaction by 

the Government from a subject the doubt was to be given for the smaller 

exaction and not the larger. But now it seems, under such exigencies, 

or under such influences, or under such policies as have governed us, 

we solve the doubt in favor of the larger sum and drive the citizens to 

pnrsue us throu(Th the courts, and all this litigation has grown out of 

that condition of exaction; whereas if the doubt is by authoritative action solved for the lesser sum, then the Government can raise the question by its snit against the importer for the large1· sum, and the question of interest will be turned over on the importer with regard to any 

money that ma.y be recovered against him. 

The sn.bject-matter, the situation, the antagonism between the Government and the importer is to decide whether the suit should be 

brought by the Government for what he refused to pay or whether the 

suitor against t he Government seeks to recover ·what he has paid. Is 

there a rule of interest one way and a rnle of justice the other way? 

Is that so? It seems to me that at least the Senate-should see to it 

that it will not commit itself to any injustice of this kind. 

On the principle of general legislation, so far as I have heard from 

the Senator from Iowa and our friend the Senator from Maine, who has 

charge of this· bill, not one voice bas been raised here in defense of this 

a.s a proper mode of legislating through a deficiency bill. 

A very great interest is felt in this matter, not merely by the gentlemen who have these snits and these claims, but the whole business and 

mercantile community in the city of New York are aroused on this 

subject. The principle in the future touches them, that by mere power 

of Government, against law, money can be taken from them under 

these importations, and they reduced to the reception of 3 per cent. 

interest in the future, when the Government can recover against them 

6 per cent. . 

And now a word about this notion of a claim against the Government resting in snit being equal to a bond already in hand. Wby, Mr. 

President, it has been one of the mischiefs of this litigation that the 

claimants ha ve before them finally as a paymaster nobody but the 

United States, dependent on appropriations, dependent on the will of 

the United States, and the value of the suits against collectors (whose 

property itself could be made subject to prompt payment of a judgment but for your legislation) is substituted by the magnificent promise of the United States money. One of the mischiefs, I am frank to 

say, is that the claimants in that attitude so little regarded this as money 

in hand, in the sense of the United States being a good paymaster, that 

large obligations have been made to the profession and sacrifices have 

been incurred by sales of claims. That is a condition which is undesirable; nevertheless it grows out of one single thing, that the United States 

is the paymaster, and it is not a goo(l one. 

The PRESIDENT pro ten ;pore. The question is. on the amendment 

of the Senator from New York. [Putting the question.] The "ayes" 

appear to have it. 

Mr. HALE called for the yeas and nays. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. The clause ought to come ont as mere matter of 

legislative provisi6n. 

1\Ir. EVARTS. The motion is to strike it out on that ground. 

Mr. HARRIS. Let the amendment be read again. 

The SECRETARY. On page 5,. beginning in fine 9, it is proposed to 

strike out the following proviso: 

PJ·ovided, That section 3011 of the Revised Statutes of the United States be, 

and the same is h er eby, amended by inserting, after the word "paid," in the seventh line, the following: "Together with costs ofsuitandinterestattherate 

of 3 per cent. per annum." 

1\Ir. EDMUNDS. I shall vote to strike this out on the ground (without going into the que tion of what provision we ought to make in the 

future by a law adequate to that pnrpo e) that if this thing were proposed by the Committee on Appropriations in our own body as an 

amendment to this bill it wou!d not be in order) and would ~ot be in 

order upon just principles that an appropriation bill ought to contain 

appropriations to carry out existing law and nC}t legislation. But the 

Honse of Representatives has sent it to us and the only way we can get 

it out is by an amendment. We can not get it out on a point of order. 

Th H onse has sent us this provision making an important and radical 

change in existing laws) conce:rning the future as well as the past, and 

it is not the right thing, as our rules p:rovide and as we all know the 

truth is and ought to be, to undertake to legislate in this way in appropriation bills. · 

When the question comes ,up on the bill reported by the Senator from 

Iowa, from the Committee on Finance, embracing this with many other 

subjects, we shall be enabled then to consider upon its merits, and disembarrassed f.rom any other consideration, what provision ought to be 

made in the future for rapidly adjusting cases of this character. 

I should hope, therefore, that the Senate, following our own principles that bind us in respect to anything we should put in, would strike 

this legislation out. • 

Mr. COCKRELL. What change does it make in existing law?_ 

M:r. EDMUNDS. It strikes down the right of the person who sues 

to recover interest at the rate of 6 per cent., or the rate in the State, 

whatever it is (in New York 7, in Vermont 6}, to 3 per cent. It is a 

permanent and regular change in existing law, which nobody will pretend would be in order if any member of the Senate or any committee 

of the Senate had proposed it. Therefore it has no place in this bill. 

I waive all discussion of how the law C}ught to be. It has no business 

here at all. , 

Mr. HALE. Mr. President, the amendment reduces the rate of interest that the Government now is paying to the New York importer 

who has paid his money over and gets it back, from 6 pe-r cent. to 3 per 

cent. That is all there is of it. The Senate js to pass on the question 

whether the Government hereafter shall pay to the.se importers 6 per 

cent. or 3 per cent. The Committee on Appropriations think 3 per 

cent. is enough. 

Mr. HARRIS. May I inquire of the Senator from Maine what the 

rule is under this section of the' Revised Statutes, what the practice is, 

or the construction of that statute as to the time at which the interest 

begins? 

Mr. HALE. There iS' no controversy about it. The interest begins 

at the time when the money is paid. 

1\Ir. HARRIS. Then this provision simply reduces the rate of interest from 6 per cent. to 3, or from the rate of interest in the State? 

Mr. HALE. Yes, sir; nearly all these cases occur in New York 

where the rate is 6 per cent. 1 -and it is a question of paying hereafter 

for new cases 6 per cent. or 3 per cent. The committee recQmmend 3 

per cent. Mr. CALL. This is riot a case of the taking of private property for 

public use without due process of law or just compensation. It is the 

case of the execution of the law by an executive officer charged with a 

particnlar duty. In no sense can it be held to be analogous to the case 

of a seizure or taking and using of private property for public use. But 

the question does occur bow far is itjust that a man whose property is 

taken shall be compensated fully and entirely for it? It is a principle 

of universal law that in the redress of wrongs it is just to place the party 

wronged in the position where he was when the wrong was committed. 

It is true that this is impJ"aeticable in the ordinary exercise of jurisprudence, but it is the end sought to be obtained, and it is the just 

end. 

I do not agree with my learned fl"iend, the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, as to the ground upon which he bases this 

provision of the bill. The fOreigner who comes heJ"e under the invitation of our laws has all the rights of an American citizen. Nay, be 

bas more rights to the full and just interpretation of the laws in his 

behalf than onr own people. He bas the right, not only under our 

laws. but also under the comity C}f nations. There is no wrO'ng in 

being an importer; and, being here under the protection of our laws with 

his property here, be surely bas a right to :fnll compensation. This is 

equally true in respect t o our own citizens, and the fact tha.t a citizen 

is a New York importer does not deprive him of this right. Many of 

our most worthy and di tinguished citizens are New York importers. 

Now, what is the measure of damage!:! which the law would provideif 

there were a law? If there was a law providing that damages should go 

to the extent that restitution shonld be made to him who was injured by 

an officer transgressing his duty. or committing an error, what is the 

measure of damages that should be paid to him? It is fixed by universal 

consent. It is the rat e of interest w bich prevails and the measure of damageswhieh prevails at the placewheretbe wrong is done, which is usually 

estimated in the form of interest. If you do not give him this measur., 

of damages, you bn.ve no rule by which to estimate it. This measure o.f 

damages is the amount the Government bas wrongfully taken from him 

and the value of the loss of the u.se of this amon:Qt. If you do not give 

him this snm which you have deprived him of, you may just as well say 

you will allow his property to be taken from him forcibly and without 

law, and you will give him back only a half, or a quarter, or 'none of 

it. This is the argument on which you propose in this bill to give him 

3 per cent. · 

It is no answer to this proposition to say that the tribunals appointed 

by the Government for ascertaining the fucts of the case are inefficient, 

that they delay, that they cause these wrongs to stand unredressed for 

years or for 15enerations. The honorable chairman of the committee 

should provide a law in his capacity as a Senator here which would 

expedite the deeision of t hese cases. This is the remedy for the delay 

·I' 
708 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE~ JANUARY 25, 

which the Government causes. It is a disgrace to Ap:1erican jurispru· 

dence, it is a disgrace to Amerir.an legislation and to this body that 

honest creditors of the Government, whose property has been taken 

without their consent, should for years and years be left without redress by our own inadequate legislation and the inefficient courts, 

which our own negligence and inattention permit. We are sent here 

and entrusted with power by the people to prevent the occurrence of 

such delays and wrongs. 

Mr. President, if it were practicable to provide some general legislation here upon this subject, there is no subject more important than 

the correction of that condition of legislation which permits widows 

and orphans and worthy and honest citizens engaged in legitimate business under the invitation of our laws to become paupers and live in 

poverty their lives through because the Government officers have taken 

their property or money and they can not obtain it for the want of 

sirn ple j~..stice and of proper, careful, and intelligent legislation here. 

There~ no question that under the protection of our laws the importer, if he be a foreigner, without regard to the questJon of protection, is entitled to the full measure of dama,l?;es which prevails between 

citizens at the place where the wrong is done. If a citizen, there can 

be no reason why the G-overnment should do him wrong, and deprive 

· him of the value of the use of his property because some officer of the 

customs has mistaken the law. If I had not been here so long and 

known of so many cases where a reputation for economy has been made 

at the expense of honest creditors, I should be surprised at a case which 

is sought to be defended on the ground that the man whose money has 

been taken and held unlawfully by the Government may possibly have 

borrowed it at 2 or 3 percent., and because he was an ~mporter-a New 

York importer. All men have a right to justice and to a speedy redress 

Jf wrongs, and our business is to see that they get both. 

The PRESIDENT pro temp01·e. The Senator fTom Maine calls for 

the yeas and nays on this question. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I wish to say a word in consequence of the last 

remark of the- Senator from Maine, in which he said that the question 

on which we are to vote is simply whether we wish to reduce the rate 

of interest on these judgments from 6 per cent. to 3 per cent. I do not 

propose to vote on that question at this time if I can help it. I shall 

vote for the amendment proposed by the Senator from New York, because this subject is forced upon an appropriation bill, but I shall not 

vote to take up a subject of this importance upon a bill where the Senate have decided th8,t they will not take up so important a subject as 

the .completion of ships for the Navy of the Government. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Are the yeas and nays desired by 

one-fifth ofthe SenatoTI! present? 

The yeas and nays were ordered, ::md the Secretary proceeded to call 

tberoll. · · 

Mr. CHACE (when the name of M:r. ALDRICH was called). :My 

colleague [Mr. ALDIUCH] is paired with the Senator from Maryland 

[Ur. WILSON]. 

The roll-call was concluded. 

Mr. MANDERSON. I am paired with the Senator from Kentucky 

[Mr. BLACKBURN], whoisabsent. IftheSenatorfrom Kentucky were 

present, I should vote '' yea.'' 

Mr. GIBSON. I am paired with the Senator from Iowa [Mr. Wrr .. -

soN]. • Mr. EVARTS (after having voted in the affirmative). On the general topic which divides the two sides of the Senate I am paired with 

the Senator from Alabama [Mr. MoRGAN], and I ha\e noticed since I 

voted that he is not on the floor. I have asked his colleague whether 

I shou1d count myself within that division of parties, and I desire to 

conform to what is the opinion over,there. I have no desire to vote if 

I shall seem to trench on the pair by so doing. 

Mr. COCKRELL. It is not a party question. 

Mr. EVARTS. I have spoken to the Senator's colleague and he has 

expressed the opinion that I should not withhold my vote. 

Mr. PUGH. I know nothing whatever as to how my colleague 

would vote on this question. I can only state that I do not regard it 

as a party vote, and if the pair only extends to such questions I have no doubt the Senator can vote. · 

The PRESIDENT pro te1npore. Does the Senator from New York 

desire his vote to stand? 

Mr. EVARTS. I adhere to my vote unless I hear something to thecontrary from the other side. 

The result was announced-yeas 24, na,ys 25; as follows: 

Blair, 

Blodgett, 

Brown, 

Ohace, . Chandler, 

Cullom, 

Allison, 

Bate, 

Berry, 

Cockrell, 

Coke, 

Colquitt, 

Dawes, 

Davis, 

Dolph, 

Edmunds, 

Eustis, 

Evarts, 

George, 

Faulkner, 

Frye, 

Gorman, 

Hale, 

Hampton, 

Harris, 

Ingalls, 

YEA8-24. 

Hawley, 

Hiscock, 

Hoar, 

Mitchell, 

Platt, 

Quay, 

NAYS-25 . 

Sabin, 

Sherman, 

Spooner, 

Stanford, 

Stewart, 

Teller. 

.Jones of Arkansas, Turpie, 

Kenna, Vance, 

Palmer, Vest, 

Pasco, WalthalL Pugh, 

Ransom, 

Sawyer, 

\ 

ABSENT~Z7. 

Aldrich, Daniel, 

Beck, Farwell, 

Blackburn, Gibson, 

Bowen, Gray, 

Butler, Hearst, 

Call, .Jones of Nevada, 

Cameron, McPherson, 

So "the amendment was rejected. 

Manderson, 

1\:Iorgan, 

1\Iorrill, 

Paddock, 

Payne, 

Plumb, 

Reagan, 

Riddleberger, 

Saulsbury, 

Stockbridge, Vo01·hees, 

Wilson of Iowa, 'Vilson of Md. 

lr'Ir. EVARTS. I now move an amendment in mder to make it certain that this clause is not retroactive upon any accrued interest. At 

the end of line 14, page 5, I move to add: 

But this amendment shall no~ affect existing suits or d~mands. 

1\Ir. HALE. There is no objection to that. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

1\fr. SHERMAN. I de.siTe to submit an amendment which I believe 

will do substantial justice. I move to add as an additional section the 

following: 

SEc. -. That on each and every item by which money is appropriated to any individual or individuals named in the foregoing sections of this bill there shall be paid to the several respective payees therein named interest at the rate of 4 per cent. per annum from the 4th day of lVIarch, in the year of our Lord 1887, to the date of the passage of this bill, and the amount of said interest is hereby 

appropriated, payable out of any money in f.he Treasury not otherwise appro· priated. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. :Mr. President, reluctantly, respecting the rule as 

to legislation on appropriation bills, I make the point of order that that 

is general legislation. 

Mr. SHERMAN. I gave notice of the amendment, and submitted 

it to the Committee on Appropriations. It is an additional item of appropriation. I feel that in regard to those claims the great body of 

them are judgments of the Court of Claims; claims in f.1.vor of individuals where judgments have practically been pronounced by the Court of 

Claims, and in other cases by tribunals and Departments authorized to 

adjudicate cases of that kind; and they have been reported. to Congress 

merely for an appropriation. Congress having failed for one year to 

make the appropriation, it is but just that these people should have 

interest at the rate of 4 per cent. 

Mr. ALLISON. I do not think this amendment is subject to a point 

of order. It is a mere question of adding to these several approprin.-

tions a specific sum. We certainly have a right to do that. 

· Mr. EDAIUNDS. Is theamendmentreported from anycommittee? 

Mr. ALLISON. It was sent to the Committee on Appropriations. 

Mr. EDI\IUNDS. That is not enough. 

1\Ir. ALLISON. I do not see why we can not increase these items if 

we please. I do not express at this time .any opinion of the merits of 

the question; but having had an elaborate debate on the general question of interest, I should like to hear this discussed. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It is the opinion of the Chair that 

the amendme.nt is not in order under the rule; but the Chair will avail 

himself of the right under the rules to submit the question to the Senate. 

Mr. HOAR. Let the rule to which the Cha.ir refers be read. 

1\fr. EDMUNDS. Read the whole of the appropriation rule. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The rule will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

RULE XVI. 

AMENDMENTS TO .APPROPR.I.A.TION BILLS. 

1. All general appropriation bills sha-ll be referred to the Committee on Ap· 

propriations, except bills making appropriations for rivers and hru·bors, which shall be referred to the Committee on Commerce; and no amendments shall be received to any general appropriation bill, the effect of which will be to increase an appropriati.on already contained in the bill, or to add a new item of appropriation, unless it be made to carry out the provisions of some existing law, or treaty 

stipulation, or act, or resolution previously passed by the Senate during that session;· or unless the same be moved by direction of a standing or select com· mittee of the Senate, or proposed in pursuance of an estimate of the bead of some one of the Departments. !l. All amendments to general appropriation bills moved by direction of a standing or select committee of the Senate, proposing to increase an appropria- tion already contained in the bill, or to add new items of appropriation, shall, at least one day before they are considered, be referred to the Committee on Appropriations, ,and when actually proposed t.o the bill, no amendment pro- posing to increase the amount stated in such amendment shall be received; in like manner amendments proposing new items of appropriation to river and harbor bills shall, before being considered, be referred to the Committee on Commerce; also amendments to bills establishing post. roads, shall, before be- ing considered, be referred to the Committee on Post--Offices and Post-Roads. 3. No amendment which proposes general legislation shall be received to any general appropriation bill, nor shall any amendment not germane or relevant to the subject-matter contained in the bill be received; nor shall any amend- ment to any item or clause of such bill be received which does not directly re- late thereto; and all questions of relevancy of amendments under this rule, when raised shall be submitted to th~ Senate and be decided without debate; and any am~ndment to a general appropriation bill may be laid on the table 

without prejudice to the bill. 

Mr. SHERMAN. On hearing the rule read I have no doubt the point 

of order is well t.aken, if it is insisted upon, although I should nope 

equity would be applied in this ca-se. Mr. EDMUNDS. I insist upon the !lOint simply to illustrate to the 

Senate the evil of our taking from the House changes in the law and 

additions to appropriation bills that wo can not make ourselves; and I · 

must stick to it. . The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The point of order is sustained. 

Mr. HARRIS. I gave notice of a proposed amendment some days 
1888. CONGRESS!ON.AL RECORD-SENATE. 709 

ago, and indeed offered the amendment, and referred it to the Commit- session the doors were reopened, and (at 4 o'clock and 55 minutes p. 

tee on Appropriations. I now offer the amendment, which is on page m.)the Senate adjourned until to-morrow, Thursday, January26, 1888, 

26, after line 14, under "Judicial," to insert the following: at 12 o'clock m. 

Fees of jurors: For fees of jurors, United States courts, being a deficiency for 

the fiscal year 1888, $150,000. Fees of witnesses: For fees of witnesses, United States courts, being a deficiency for the fiscal year 1888, $300,000. _ Pay of bailiffs, and so forth: For pay of bailiffs and criers, United States 

courts, being a deficiency for the fiscal year 1888, $75,000. 

These are deficiencies for the current year estimated for. The only reason why I move it as an amendment to this partieular bill is the 

fact that there is a court now in session in the western district of Tennessee without a dollar with which to pay witnesses, jurors, bailiffs, or any other of the expenses of the tribunal, and I shall be glad if this 

appropriation can be made in this bill, so that that embarrassment may 

be removed. That is all I desire to say, and I do not intend to detain 

the Senate with the amendment. 

Mr. HALE. I_ hope the Senator will not insist upon this amendment. 

Mr. HARRIS. I should be very glad to have the appropriation 

made. 

M:r. HALE. The appropriations in it are fur the next year, and such 

appropriations have always been put upon a regular appropriation bill. 

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

amendment proposed by the Senator from Tennessee [Mr. HARRIS]. 

The amendment was rejected. 

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

The amendments were ordered to be engrossed, and the bill to be 

read a third time. 

The bill was read the tliird time, and pu.ssed. 

AID TO COl\IMON SCHOOLS. 

Mr. BLAIR and Mr. HALE addressed the Chair. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Maine. 

1\Ir. HALE. I was going to move that the Senate anjourn. 

Mr. BLAIR. I wish to say a word. I desire to give notice to the 

Senate that to-morrow morning, immediately after the conclusion of 

the morning business, I shall move to proceed to the consideration of 

the· school bill. I wish to remind the Senate that that bill baa had 

the right of way since before the holiday adjournment and it has not 

received consideration for more than one-sixth of the time to which it 

was entitled. I hope the Senate will be disposed to push it through 

hereafter. 

The PRESIDENT.pro te-mpore. The Senate resumes~ as in Committee of the Whole, the consideration of the unfinished business, which 

is the bHI (S. 371) to aid in the establishment and temporary support 

of common schools. 

1\Ir. HALE. I move that the Senate adjourn. 

Mr. HARRIS. I ask the Senator from Maine to yield to a motion 

for a short executive session. 

Mr. HALE. Unless there is some special reason that t,he Senator 

has I should not like tO do that. It is very late. 

Mr. HARRIS. The only reason is to have some matters referred to 

the appropriate committees. J 

Mr. HALE. I withdraw the motion to adjourn. 

Mr. HARRIS. I m,ove that the Senate proceed to the consideration 

of executive business. · The PRESIDENT pro tempm·e. Before submitting the motion, the 

Chair will lay before the ~enate business from the House of Representatives for reference. 

HOUSE BILL REFERRED. 

The bill (H. R. 339) for the relief of J. E. Pilcher was read twice by 

its title, and referred to the Committee on Claims. 

NOMINATIONS. 

Executive nominations received by tlte Senate the 25th d.ay of January, 1888. 

POSTMASTERS. 

Samuel H. Emerson, to be postmaster at Malvern, in the county of 

Hot Spring and State of Arkansas, the appointment of a postmaster for 

the said office having, by law, become vested in the President from and 

after January 1, 1888. 

Jacob W. L. Little, to be postmaster at West Point, in the county of 

Troup and State of Georgia., in the place of Jacob W. F. Little, whose 

C9mmission expires Febrnary 19, 1888. Leonard G. Babcock, to be postmaster at Lexington, in-the county 

of Middlesex and State of Massachusetts, the appointment of a postmaster for the said office having, by law, become vested in the President from and after January 1, 1888. 

George F. Richardson, to be postmaster at Newton Centre, in the 

county of Middlesex and State of Massachusetts, in the place of Lucy 

A. White, whose commission expired January 23, 1888. 

Charles H. Cossitt, to be postmaster at Owosso, in the county of 

Shiawassee and State of :Jitfichigan, in the place of Nathaniel Ball, whose 

commission expired December 20, 1887. 

William M. Bennett, to be postmaster at Jackson, in the county of 

Jackson and State of Michigan, in the place of William W. Van Antwerp, deceased. 

Andrew W. Mehan, to be postmaster at Mason, j.n the county of 

Ingham and State of Michigan, in the place of Robert G. C. Knight, 

deceased. 

James G. Buchanan, to be postmaster at Pontiac, in the county of 

Oakland and State of Michigan, in the place of Thomas F. Gerls, whose 

commission expires January 24, 1888. 

Bertha Kleven, to be postmaster at Culbertson, in the county of 

Hitchcock and State of Nebraska, the appointment of a postmaster for 

the said office having, by law, became vested in the President from and 

after January 1, 188~. · 

Calvin M:. Wherry, to be postmaster at North Platte, in the county 

of Lincoln and State of Nebraska, in the place of Adam Ferguson, resigned. • H. Fred Wiley, to be postmaste1· at Kearney, in the county of Buffalo and State of Nebraska, in the place of Egbert R. Watson, deceased. 

Jennie B. Hosley, to be postmaster at West Lebanon, in the county 

of Gra.fton and State of New Hampshire, in the place of William P. 

Burton, whose commission expired January 21, 1888. 

D. 0. Corcoran, to be postmaster at Oxford, in the county of Butler 

and State of Ohio, in the place of Daniel P. Beaton, whose commission 

expired December 20, 1886. - Maurice Fitzgerald, to be postmaster at Conneautville, in the county 

of Crawford and State of Pennsylvania, in the place of William A. 

Hammon, whose commission expired January 15, 1888. 

George Horton, to be postma.c:;ter at Sheffield, in the county of War- ren and State of Pennsylvania, the appointment of a postmaster for the 

said office having, by law, become vested in the President from and 

aft.er January 1, 1888. 

Buena Vista Wood, to be postmaster at Rock Hill, in the county of 

York and State of South Carolina, in the place of Buena Vista Wood, 

whose commission expires January 25, 1888. · · Horace N. Montague, to be postmaster at Caro, in the county of Tuscola and State of Michigan, in the place of Farley Craw, whose com~ 

mission expired January 21, 1888. 

REPORT OF COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION. SECRETARY OF LEGATION. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempo1·e laid before the Senate the following James R. Roosevelt, of New York, to be secretary of the legation of 

concurrent resolution from the House of Representatives; which was the United States at Vienna, vice James Fenner Lee, resigned. referred to the Committee onPrinting: 

Resolvecl by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That of thereport of the Commissioner of Education for1886-'87, there be printed 6,000 copies for the use of the Senate, 12,000 copies for the nse of the Honse of Representa- tives, and 25,000 copies for distribution by the Commissioner. 

REPORT OF DISTRICT HEALTH OFFICER. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate the following 

concurrent resolution from the House of Repres~ntatives; which was referred to the Committee on Printing: · 

.Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That there be 

printed by the Public Printer 2,500 copies of the annual report of the health offi- cer of the District of· Columbia; 100 for the use of the Senate, 350 for the nse of 

the House of Representatives, and 2,050 copies for the use of the said health 

officer. 

EXECUTIVE SESSION. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempm·e. The Senator from Tennessee [Mr. 

HARRIS] moves that the Senate proceed to the consideration of execu- tive business. 

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to the consid- ~ation of executive business. After three minutes spent in executive 

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY. 

A. H. Longino, of Mississippi, to be attorney of the United States 

for tbe southern district of Mississippi, in the place of A. B. Harris, 

resigned. 

REGISTERS OF LAND OFFICES. 

J. H. Craddock, of Marysville, Cal., to be register of the land office 

at Marysville, Cal., vice John C. Bradley, term exph·ed. 

Edward 0. Miller, of Visalia, Cal., to be register of the land office 

at Visalia, Cal., vice Jeremiah D. Hyde, term expired. 

H. W. Patton, of Los Angeles, Cal., to be 1·egist€r of the land office 

at Los Angeles, Cal., vice Joseph D. Bethune, resigned. ~ 

Jared .A.. VanAuken, of Georgetown, Colo., to be register of the land 

office at Central City, Colo., in the place of Richard Harvey, whose 

commission expired on the 21st day of January, A. D. 1888. 

RECEIYE~S OF PUBLIC :MONEYS. 

Lewis C. Granger, of Oroville, Cal., to be receiver of public moneys 

at Marysville, Cal., vice Thomas J. Sherwood, term expired. 
710 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. JANUABY 25, 

Robert Kennedy, of Shasta, Cal., to be receiver of public moneys at 

Shasta, Cal., 1:ice William H. Bickford, resigned. 

J. F. Linthicum, of Sacramento, Cal., to be receiver of public moneys at Sacramento, Cal., 'l•ice Charles F. Gardner, term expired. 

John J. Orr, of Owenton, Ky., to be receiver of public moneys at 

Buffalo, Wyo., to fill an original vacancy. 

Absalom H. Wear, of Cassville, Mo., to be receiver of public moneys 

at Springfield, Mo., vice William G. Hobbs. deceased. 

INDIAN AGENT. 

Edwin Eells, of Washington Territory, to be agent for the Indians of 

the Nisqually and S'Kokomish agency, in Washington Territory, vice 

Edwin Eells, term expired. 

PROMOTIONS IN 'IRE REVENUE SERVICE. 

Second Lieut. Albert Bulmer, of South Carolina, to be a first lieutenant in the revenue service of the United States, in the place of First 

Lieut. Jefferson A. Slamm, promoted. · 

Second Lieut. William C. De Hart, of New Jersey, to be a first lieutenant in the revenue service of the United States, in the place of First 

Lieut. Leander l\1. Keene, promoted. 

Second Lieut. Walstein A. Failing, of New York, to be a first lieutenaut in the revenue service of the United States, in the place of First 

Lieut. George Williams, deceased. 

Third Lieut. Charles D. Kennedy, of Massachusetts, to be a second 

lieutenant in the revenue service of the United States, in the place of 

Second Lieut. George E. McConnell, promoted. 

Third Lieut. John C. Moore, of Maryland, to be a second lieutenant 

in the revenue ser-vice of the United States, in the place of Second Lieut. 

Albert Buhner, promoted. 

Third Lieut. George A. Starkweather, of Wisconsin, to be a second 

lieutenant in the revenue service of. the United States, in the place of 

Second Lieut. Walstein A. Failing, promoted. 

Third Lieut. Horace B. West, of Pennsylvania, to be a second lieutenant in the revenue service of the United States, in the place of Second 

Lieut. William C. De Hart, promoted. 

NOi\UNATION WITHDRAWN. 

G. Brown Goode, to be Commissioner of Fish and Fisheries. 

• CONFIRMATIONS. 

Executive nominations confirmed by tlte Senate, January 19, 1888. 

CONSUL-GENERAL. 

Chal'lton H. Way, ofSavannah, Ga., to beconsul-generalofthe United 

States at St. Petersburg. CONSULS. 

·Frank D. Hill, of Goodhue County, Minnesota, to be consul of the 

United States at Asuncion. 

Henry F. :Merritt, of Chicago, ill., to be consul of the United States 1

at Chemnitz. , 

Victor Vifquain, of Nebraska, to be consul of the United States at 

Colon (Aspinwall). 

James C. Quiggle, of Clinton County, Pennsylvania, to be consul of 

the United States at Port Stanley and St. Thomas, Ontario. 

D. M . White, of Peterborough, N.H., to be consul of the United 

States at Sherbrooke. 

Edward P. Crane, of Schooley's Mountain, N. J., to be consul of the 

United States at Stuttgart. 

· Joseph Black, ofCleveland, Ohio, to be consul of the United States 

at Buda-Pesth. 

SECRETARY OF LEGATION .A.ND CONSUL-GENERAL. 

JamesR. Hosmer, of New York City, N. Y., to be secretary oflegation in Central American States and consul-general of the United States 

at Guatemala. 

SECRETARY OF LEGATION. 

Charles Chaille Long, of New York City, N. Y., to be secretary of 

the legation of the United States to Corea. 

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS. 

Hyman Abraham, of Oregon, to be collector of customs for the dist~ct of Willamette, in the State of Oregon. 

SUPERVISING INSPECTOR OF STEA1\I-VESSELS. 

HenryS. Lubbock, of California, to be supervising inspector of steamvessels for the first district. . 

DISTRICT JUDGE. 

William J. Allen, of Illinois, to be United States district judge for 

the southern district of illinois. 

APPRAISER OF MERCHANDISE. 

Fred Klimper, of Ohio, to be appraiser of merchandise for the port 

of Cincinnati, in the State of Ohio. 

RECEIVERS OF PUBLIC MONEYS. 

George W. Parks, of Salt Lake Cit-y, Utah, to be receiver of public 

moneys at Salt Lake City, Utah. 

Charles 0. Stockslager, of Galena, Kans., to be receivm· of public 

moneys at Hailey, Idaho. 

REB-ISTERS OF THE LAND OFFICE. 

Edward Burgess, of Culpeper, Va., to be register of the land office 

at Prescott, Ariz. 

Henry R. Pendery, of Lead ville, Colo., to be register of the land office 

at Leadville, Colo. 

Frank P . Tanner,'of Colorado, to be register of the land office at Gunnison, Colo. 

Jacob T. Ake, of Ironton. Mo., to be register of the lnnd office at 

Ironton, Mo. 

James H. Walker, of Raton, N. Mex., to be register of the land 

office at Santa Fe, N. :M:ex. 

Milton Montgomery, ~f Lincoln, Nebr., to be register of the ]and 

office at Chadron, Nebr. · 

Henry A. Yonge, of Beloit, Kans., to be register of the land office at 

Kirwin, Kans. 

Samuel Demers, of Concordia, Kans., to be register of the land office 

at Concordia, Kans. 

POSTMASTERS. 

Robert M. Gardner, to be postmaster at Christiansburgb, in the 

county of Montgomery and State of Virginia. 

Joseph Haussler, to be postmaster at Hoosick Falls, in the county 

ofRensseJaer and State of New York. 

Michael D. Murray, to be postmaster at Joh~town, in·the county 

of Fulton and State of New Y01·k. 

Giles M. Stoddard, to be postmaster at Groton, in the county of 

Tompkins and State of New York. 

Connally T. Litchfield, to be postmaster at Abingdon, in the county 

ofWashington and State of Virginia. 

Peter A. Albert, to be po tmaster a~ Holley, in the county of Orleans 

and State of New York. · 

William· H. O'Donnell, to be postmaster at Jordan, in the county of 

Onondaga and State of New York. 

Hansori C. Phelps, to be postmaster at Norwood, in the county of 

St .. Lawrence and State of New York. 

James M. Swift, to be postmaster at North Tarrytown, in the county 

of Westchester aud State of New York. 

James Garvin, to be postmaster atMorristbwn, in the county of St. 

Lawrence and State of New York. 

Henry R. Royce, to be postmaster at Fonda, in the county of Montgomery and State of New York. 

George T. Propper, to be postmaster at Wahpeton, in the county of 

Richland and Territory of Dakota. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES; 

WEDNESDAY, January 25, 1888. 

The House met at 12 o'clock m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. W. 

H. MILBURN, D. D. 

The Journal of the proceedings of yesterday was .read and approved. 

PAY OF JURORS. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House a letter from the 

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

the Interior in relation to an appropriation to pay jurors selected in 

proceedings in condemnation of the site for the Congressional Library; 

which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered 

to be printed. 

LIGHT .AND FOG-SIGNAL, OUTER SHOALS, CAPE HATTERAS. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore also laid before the House a letter from 

the Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting a letter from the LightHouse Board recommending the establishment of a light and fog-signal 

at outer shoals, Cape Hatteras; which was referred to the Committee 

on Commerce, and ordered to _be printed. 

ELEVATOR, PUBLIC BUILDING, COLUMBUS, OHIO. 

The SPEA.KER pro tempore also laid before the House a letter from 

the Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting a letter from the Supervising 

Architect in relation to the estimate for an appropriation for an elevator 

for the public building at Columbus, Ohio; which was referred to the 

Committee on Appropriations, and ordered· to be printed. 

SPECIAL EXAMINER OF DRUGS1 ETC. STATISTICAL ABSTRACT. 

Robert I. Bowie, of Cnlifornia, to be special examiner of drugs, medi- The SPEAKER pro tempore also laid before the Honse a letter from 

cines, and chemicals in the district of San Francisco, in the State of the Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting the tenth number of the 

ililifornia. Statistical Abstract; which was referred to the Committee on ·Printing.