5080 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JUNE 17, 

By Mr. HARRIS, of Virginia: The petition of Z. W. Pickerill, of 

Petersbnrgh, Virginia, to be comi>ensated for tobacco taken by United 

States troops to the Committee on 'Var Claims. 

By Mr. RICHMOND: The petition of Nathaniel Carey, for an appropriation to test his invention for producing rain by a,rtificial 

means, to the Committee on Appropriations. 

By Mr. SENER: The petition of owners of steamers and sailingvessels plying Chesape~e Ba,y, for the erection of a light-house on the 

eastern terminus of Dammeron's Marsh, in said bay, to the Committee 

on Commerce. 

Also, the petition of Mrs. Triffy Evans, of Accomac County, Virgi!:ia, for compensation for sloop Georgeanna and schooner Sea 

Flower, seized by the naval forces of the United States in 1862, to 

the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. SESSIONS: The petition of W. T. Duvall, for relief on con- tract with the Supervising Architect of the Treasury, to the Committee 

on Public Buildings and Grounds. 

By Mr. SHANKS: The petition of citizens of Montpelier, Blackford 

County, Indiana, for the passage of the bill to aid in the construction 

of the Continental Freight Railway, to the Committee on Railways 

and Canals. 

By Mr. VANCE: The p3titio!l of G. W. Hayes and 44 other citizens 

of Cherokee County, North Carolina, asking aid in building the West- ern North Carolina Railroad from Old Fort, North Carolina, to Ducktown, Tennessee, to the Committee on Rail ways and Canals. 

By Mr. WHITTHORNE: The petition of George N. Stine and 76 

others, of Dickson County, Tennessee, for the restoration of the 10 

per cent. reduction of duties on iron and steel, and for free banking, 

to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. WOODWORTH: The petition of the Girard Iron Company 

and 154 other persons and business firms, for the pa sage of the bill 

to aid in the coustruction of the Continental Freight Ra.il way, to the 

Committee on R~ilways and Ca.nals. 

IN SENATE. 

WEDNESDAY, Ju'Jle 17, 1874. 

The Senate met at eleven o'clock a.m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. BYROX SUNDERLAND, D. D. 

The J onrnal of yesterday's proceedings was read and approvocl. 

HUDSON'S BAY C01\1PA.l.'IY. 

Mr. HAMLIN. I ask permission of the Senate to allow me to call 

up Honse bill No. 3351. It will take but a very few minutes, and it 

fulfills an obligation which is imposed on this body that I am snre no Senator will disregard. 

There being no objection, the bill (H. R. No. 3351) to ascertain the 

possessory tights of the Huclson's Bay Company and other British subjects within the limits which were the subject of the award of His 

Majesty the Emperor of Gen:nany under the treaty of Washington of 

May 8, 1871, and for other purposes, was considered as in Committee 

of the 'Vhole. 

The preamble mcites that it was stipulated · by article 1 of the 

treaty concluded at Washin~n on the 15th of June, 1846, between 

the United States and Great Britain, that the line of boundary between the territories of the United States and Her Britannic Majesty, 

from the point on the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude, up to 

which it had already been ascertained, should be. continued westward along that parallel of north latitude ''to the middle of the 

channel which separates the continent from Vancouver's Island, and 

thence southerly through the middle of said channel and of Fuca 

Straits to the Pacific Oc-ean;" and that by article 3 of that treaty i t 

was stipulated that "in the future appropriation of the territory 

south of the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude, as provided in the 

first article of this treaty, the possessory rights of the Hudson's Bay 

Company, and of all British subjects who may be in the occupation 

of land or other property lawfully acquired within the said Territory, 

shall be r especteu;" and that by article 34 of the treaty concluded 

at Washington on the 8th of May, 1871, the question of where "the 

boundary which runs southerly through the middle of the channel 

aforesaid" should be located was submitted to His Majesty the Emperor of Germany, whose decision was to be final and without appea:J.j and that by the award of His Majesty the Emperor of Germany, 

of October 21, 1872, the boundary was established, and it now devol ves upon the United States to discharge its treaty obligations. 

Therefore the bill provides for the appointment of a commissioner by 

the President of the United States to make and report to the Secreta-ry of the Interior a list of all British subjects who, on the 15t,h day 

of June, 1846, were in the occupation of laud, lawfully acquired, 

withjn the limits which were the subject of the award of His Majesty 

the Emperor of Germany, together with a description of the laud 

actuaUy occupied by each at that date. The commissioner shall proceed to the vicinity of the land in question, and there receive proof 

of the occupancy of such land ancl of the mode by which such occu- pancy was acquired, after first giving reaaonable notice as to the 

matters to be reported by him. Snch proof shall consist of oral te - timony, under oath, and such documentary proofs as the occupants 

may present. The testimony of all witnesses shall be reduced to 

writing, and all documentary proof offered by the parties and r - ceived by the commissioner shall be attached to the deposition of the 

party ofiering such proofs, which testimony and proofs s.hall be submitt.ed by the commissioner with his report, and such report sh.all be 

subject to r eview by the Secretary of the Interior, whose action 

thereon shall be fin at. 

The commissioner is to receive for his services ten dollars per diem, 

together with traveling expenses at the rate of ten cents per mile for 

the distance actually traveled in the execution of his commission; 

and the sum of $1,000 is appropriated to defray such expenses. 

All British subjects whose claims shall be approved by the Secretn.ry are to be allowed to pnrchase from tho United States the land so designated at any time within one year from such approval, at the 

ordinary minimum price per acre where the lands are situated outside railroad limits, and at double minimum price where the lands are within railroad limits. Such entries are to be according to legal 

subdivisions, so as to include the improvements of the occupants; 

and where two or more parties shall have improvements on the same smallest legal subdivision, they may make a joint entry thereof. In case entry and payment be not made within one year from the date 

of such approval by the Secretary of the Interior, all possessory rights 

named in article 3 of the treaty of June 15, 1846, shall be considered 

forfeited, and the lands shall thereafter be deemed and treated as a 

part of the public domain, to be disposed of as other lands. 

Mr. THURMAN. This may be right, but I should like to ask the 

Senator from Maine a question about it. By tho treaty commonly 

called the Oregon treaty of 1 4ti it wa provided th~ 

In the future appropriation of the territory south of the forty-ninth parallel of 

north latitude, aa provided in the first. article of this treaty, thepossos. ory rights of 

the Hudson's Bay Company, and of all British subjects who may be already in the 

occupation of land or other property lawfully acquired within the said territory, shall be respected. 

After the execution of that treaty the Government of the Unitetl 

States settled with the Hudson's Bay Company and obtained are- lease; and the question that I wish to have answereu is whether that 

release covers this island which we always claimed after the execu- tion of that treaty, but which was not finally determined to bE\ onrs until the Emperor of Germany made his award, or whether the 

release of the Hudson's Bay Company for which we paid a pretty 

ronndsum, and a great deal more in my humble jndgment than that 

company was entitled to, was limited to that territory which was not 

disputed between us and Great Britain f If these islands which were in dispute were excepted from that release, then it seems but right 

and in fact we are bound by the treaty to respect those rights or to 

make some compensation or in some other way to extinguish them. 

But if they are embraced by the release which was executed to us by 

the Hudson's Bay Company, then that company can have no further 

claim. 

Mr. HAMLIN. In reply to the inquiry or suggestion made by the 

Senator from Ohio I will say that I understand onr Government and 

I understand the British government do not regard the lands lying 

outsifle of the line named in the treaty of Washington, so called, a included in the relea e. In other words, this bill does not cover any 

of the lands named by the Senator for which compensation has been 

made. It understood by onr Government. It is so understood by the 

British government. This bill is only to carry out the provisions of 

the .treaty of Wa hington as understood by the respective parties. 

None of tho land covered by this bill was at all affected in the settlement which was formally made, and therefore the bill is eminently 

ju t. I will add that the bill was carefully drawn at the State Department where all the facts were known; it underwent a careful 

in pection by the Committee on Foreign Relations and received their 

unanimous approval. 

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

read the third time, and passed. 

ADDITIO:NAL L~~D DISTIUCTS ~ KA.t~SAS. 

.Mr. HARVEY. The Committee on Public Lancls, to whom was re- ferred the bill (H. R. No. 203) to create two additional land districts 

in the State of Kansas, have had the same under consideration and 

have instructed me to report it back without amendment ; and I ask 

for its present consideration. 

By unanimous consent, the bill was considered as in Committee of 

the Whole. 

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

read the third time, an(J. pas ed. 

NAlm OF A YACHT. 

Mr. WASHBURN. There are two little bills on the Ca.lendar that 

will take but a moment which I should like to ha.ve considered. Tho 

first is House bill No. 2384. 

By unanimous consent, the bill (H. R. No. 2384) to change the name of the pleasure-yacht Planchette to that of Laxen, was consiuered as in Committee of the Whole. 

The bill was report-ed to the Senate, ordered to a third reading, 

read the third time, and pas ed. 

MARY S. HOWE. 

1\Ir. WASHBURN. I ask for the consideration of House bill No. 26i0. 
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 5081 

By unanimous consent, the bill (H. R. No. 2670) granting a pension 

to MaryS. Howe was considered as in Committee of the ·whole. 

The bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to place on the pension-roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension 

laws, the name of Mary S. Howe, widow of David Howe, la.te special 

aO'ent of the provost marshal's office for the fourth district of Massnr 

chusetts, and to pay her a pension at the Tate of eight dollars a 

month. 

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

read the third time, and passed. 

WYO:\IL.~G TERRITORIAL APPORTIOIDI~"'T. 

:Mr. HITCHCOCK. There are a couple of bills reported by the 

Committee on Territories to which there will be no objection, and I 

should like to have them disposed of. I ask first for the consideration of House bill No. 2450. 

There bein<Y no objection, the bill (H. R. No. 2450) to provide for 

the apportio~ent of the Territory of Wyoming for legi lative purposes wru::~ considered as in Committee of the Whole. It provides 

that the apportionment of the Territory of Wyoming for the election 

of members of the next Legislative As embly of the Territory shall 

be made by the governor thereof, in accordance with the provisions 

of an act of Con<Yress entitled "An act to provide a temporary gov- .ernment for the Territory of Wyoming," approved July 25, 1868; but 

for the purpose of such apportionment it shall not be necessary to 

take a new or additional census or enumeration of said Territory. 

The power hereby co:ulerred upon the governor is to be continued in 

full force until an apportionment shall be mado by the Legislative 

Assembly of the Territory, under the provisions of the organic act 

thereof. 

The bill was reporteu to the Senate, orderod to a thirU. reading, 

read the thirtl time, and passed. 

TERRITORIAL PE),TJ:TE~TIARIES. 

Mr. HITCHCOCK. One other bill I wish to have passetl. It i.s 

House bill No. 440. 

By unanimous consent, the bill (H. R. No. 440) to mnend the act 

entitled "An act transferring the control of certain territorial penitentiaries to the several Territories in which the same are located," 

approved January 24, 1873, was considered as in Committee of the 

Whole. It pz:oposes to amend the act entitled" .An act transferring 

the control of certain territorial penitentiaries to the several Territories in which the same are located," approved January 24, 1873, 

uy striking out the words ''Montana," "Idaho," and "Wyoming," 

wherever the same occUI· in that act, which is herea;fter to have no applicability to the Territories of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming. 

The penitentiaries in tho e Territories are to continue uncler the care anti control of the marshal of the United States for the Territories, under and pursuant to the provisions of the act entitled" An 

act in relation to certain territorial penitentiaries," approved Jan nary 

10, 1871; which last-mentioned act is revived and re-enacted so far as the same applies to the Territories of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming. 

The bill, wru::~ reported to the Senate, ordered to a third reading, 

read the third time, and passed. 

SUFFERERS FP.O:\f MISSISSIPPI OVERFLOW. 

Mr. WEST. I am directed by the Committee on Appropriations, to 

whom was referred the bill (H. R. No. 3573) making an additional appropriation to enable the Secretary of War to carry out the provisions 

of the act of April 23, 1874, entitled" An a-ct to provide for the relief 

of the persons suffering from the overflow of the Lower Mis issippi 

River," and for other purpo es, to report the same back without 

amendment and to ask that it be put upon its passage immediately. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection to the present 

consideration of the billY 

Mr. SAULSBURY. I think that bill had better go over. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Delaware objects 

to the present consideration of the bill. 

J A.1:1ES A. 1111 CULLAH. 

Mr. SCHURZ. I move that the Senate take up House bill No. 3173. 

The motion was agreed to, and the bill (H. R. No. 3173) for the 

relief of James A . McCullah, late collector of the :fifth district of Missouri, was considered aa in Committee of the Whole. It directs the 

proper accounting officers of the Treasury to credit the account of 

James A. McCullah, late collector of the fifth district of Missouri, with a sum not exceeding $7,814.19, being the amount alleged to be uncollected on assessment lists transferred by him to his successor in office, 

and which were destroyed by fire while in the hands of his said suc- cessor; but such credits are not to be allowed until it shall be shown 

to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, by affidavits general in their character and applying to said amount in the a~gregate, that due diligence was used by McCullah to make collection 

ot the smne while the lists remained in his hands, and that it was not 

collected by him. 

The Committee on Finance proposed to amend the bill by striking 

out, commencing in line 12, the words "by affidavits general in their 

character and applying to said amount in the aggregate;" in line 15, 

by striking out the words "the same" and inserting the words "said 

taxes;" a.nd in line 16, by striking ont the words "it was" and inserting " they were ;" so as to make the proviso read : 

Provided, That such credits shall not be allowed until it shall be shown to the 

satisfaction of the Commissioner of Internal_Revenue that due diligence was used 

by said McCullah to make collection of said taxes whilo said lists remained in his 

hands, and that they were not collectecl lly him; it being the intention of tills act to relieve said McCullah from complying with the strict requirements of existing 

regulations relative w the abatement of uncollected t~es. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

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

The amendment was ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read a third time. 

The l>ill was read the third time, and passed. 

A. C. VORIS. 

Mr. SHERMAN. I ask the Senate to act upon a pension bill which 

has beenreportedrecently and which will take but amoment. I move to take up House bill No. 2671. 

The motion was agreed to; and the bill (H. R. No. 2671) granting a pension to General A. C. Voris was considered as in Committee of 

the Whole. It provides for placing on the pension-roll, subject to 

the provi ions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of General A. C. Voris, late colonel of the Sixty-seventh Regiment of Ohio 

Volunteers, at the rate of thirty dollars a month, to commence from 

the date of his discharge from the service of the United States. 

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

read the third time, and passed. 

P.OSA VERThTER JEFFREYS. 

Mr. STEVENSON. I move to take up Senate bill No. 878. 

The motion was agreed to; and the bill (S. No. 878) for the relief of 

Rosa Vertner Jeffreys was read the second time and considered as in 

Committee of the Whole. It provides for the payment to Rosa Vert- ner Jeffreys of $5,000, in full compensation for the use of and dama.ges 

done to her property in Lexington, Kentucky, by reason of occupation of the same by the military authorities of the United States in 

the years 1862, 1863, 1 64, and 1865. 

The bill was reported to the Senate, ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time and passed. 

1\fr. SCOTT. I move to proceed to the consideration of House bill 

No. 27H7. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I rose to call for the reading of the report 

in the case of Mrs. Jeffreys. 

Tfte PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator can move to reconsider 

the vote on the passage of that uill. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I did not know what the bill was about. 

I move to reconsider the vote if that is neces ary to secure an explanation. 

ThePRESIDE:t\'Tp1·o lentpore. The Senator from New Jersey moves to reconsider the vote by which the bill (S. No. 878) for the relief of 

Rosa V ertner Jeffreys was passed. 

1\Ir. STEVENSON. 1\Iay I ask the Senator from New Jersey why 

he made the motion Y 

Mr. FRELL."'{GHUYSEN. I stated that I did not knQw what the 

bill was about. 

1\Ir. STEVENSON. I did not hear the Senator ask the question. 

1\Ir. FRELINGHUYSEN. I am perfectly willing to withdraw my 

motion and hear a statement from the Senator from Kentucky. 

1\fr. STEVENSON. This is a bill reported unanimously from the 

Committee on Claiins. The dwelling-house of Mrs. Jeffreys, who was a loyal woiDan in Lexington, was occupied by the troops of the United 

States when she was at the North. I think every maJor-general who was there and occupied it has testified to the merit of this claim. The 

chairman of the Committee on Claims knows a great deal more about 

the case than I do, and I would be very glad if be would make a statement. 

1\Ir. SCOTT. I can state very briefly about this claim. The house occupie~ was ~ne of the :finest in the city of Lexington, and it was :filled Wlth a library, plate, very fine furniture, and many other appliances of luxury used by the family to which it belonged. If it were possible to allow for the whole extent of valuation that was destroyed in that property $20,000 would not pay the owner, and I re- gret very much that it was not in the power of the Committee on Claims to allow the full amount, and I regret just as much that the 

War Department has not seen proper in many instances to take the 

shoulder-straps from some officers who permitted such spoliations as tho evidence showed were permitted in that house and on that property, where very valuable carpets, libraries, &c., in a house occupied as the headf1uarters of a high commanding officer, were permitted to 

be despoiled and carried away. The amount allowed, after very great 

contest in the committee, is not more than one-fourthofthedamn<Yes 

suffered, and all such items were excluded. This amount is for rgnt 

and actual damages, and it was the result of a very protrJ.(lted con- sideration in the committee. I think the claim is entirely just and 

ought to be paid. 

. Mr. FRE~INGHUYSEN. I would ask the Senator from Peunsyfva- ma a question. Of course everybody would be glad under the circums1ances to vote this money; bnt the question I want to ask is one 

that involves the principle, whether this property wns within our lines or within the enemy's lines Y · Mr. SCOTT. It was within our lines. 

Mr. FR.ELINGHUYSEN. Then I baYe no objection. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator withdraw his 

motion t 

1\Ir. FRELINGHUYSEN. No. 
5082 CONGRESSIONAL ~ECORD. JUNE 17, 

. 

PITTSBURGH MA.Rnm HOSPITAL. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempm·e. The bill indicated by the Senator 

from Pennsylvania is before the Senate. 

The bill (H. R. No. 2787) to provide for the sale of the present pnited 

States marine hospital and sit? and t~e p~chase .of a ne'_V site and erection thereon of a new manne ·hospital, m the mty of P1ttsburgh, 

Pennsylvania, was conside1·ed as in Commi~ee of the Whole. 

Amendments were reported by the Committee on Commerce. 

The first amendment wa-s after the word" point," in line 14, to insert 

'and in accordance with designs to be pre:p~ed by the Super~ing 

Architect to the sa,tisfaction of the supernsmg surgeon of marme- ho pital service and approved by the Secretary of the Treasury." 

The amendment was agreed to. 

The next amendment was to strike out in line 27, after the word 

"orovided" the words "the terms of sale of the present building will 

not admit ~f their rerp.aining therein'~ ~nd in. ert "it is practi?able so to do· but in the event of such proVIsion bemg found to be rmpractica-bie, theu the present building shall be occupied for such patients." 

The amendment was agreed .to. 

The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amendments were concurred in. . The amendments were ordered to be engrossed, ancl the bill to be 

read a third time. 

The bill was read the third time, and passed. 

WILLIAM J. PATTON. 

Mr. CLAYTON. I believe I have not asked the Sena,te to take up a bill this session. I now move to take up Senate bill No. 459. 

The motion was agreed t~i. and the consideration of the .bill (S. 

No. 459) for the relief of William J. Patton was resumed as m ComInittee of the 'Vhole. 

The bill was reported to the Senate, ordered to a thirG. reading, read 

the third time, and passed. 

BUSINESS OF COMMITTEE • 

Mr. BUCKINGHAM. The Committee on Indian Affairs have re- ported quite a number of bills wl;tich are on the Calendar which .a:I?-

pear to be important. Some are from the House and some are ongi- • nal bills of the Senate. I rise to ru:!k the Senat.e to give me from one to two hours to tn,ke up and act upon billii reported by that committee, 

n,nd I would ask that they give me to-morrow evening. . I propose 

thn,t we have a recess to-morrow, n,nd that to-morrow evemng one or two hours, as shall seem best to the Senate, be given for the purpose 

indicated. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Connecticut a ks 

the Senate to order a recess to-morrow, the session to-morrow evening 

bein (J' for the purpose of considering bills reported from the Comlnittee on !~dian Affairs. 

Mr. STEWART. I do not think the evening is a good time. 

The PRESIDENT p1·o tern,pm·e. The motion is not in order; bnt the 

Senator a-sks an under!U;anding, so that the motion can be made to- morrow. 

1\fr. BUCKING HAM. If the motion is not in order now I will withhold it. 

Mr CHANDLER. I ask unanimous consent, if it is in order, to mov~ that the Senate take a recess to-day for the purpose pf considcrin<T this evening bills reported by the Committee on Commerce. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It is in order to move for a recess to-day. Mr. CHANDLER. I move thali the Senate take a recess from five 

o'clock to half-past seven o'clock this evening for the purpose I have 

indicated. -

1\.fr. ANTHONY. I think it would be much better to give the Senator from half past five 08 long a time as he may require than it 

would be for us to adjourn at half past five and come ba{lk at half 

past seven. What can we do from half past five to half past seven except to <YO throu<Yh the heated streets, get a poor dinner, and come back a(J'ah; f I wo~d much rather stay here the same length of time 

that w~ should have to stay in the aggre<Yate if we took a recess ancl came back afterward. Therefore let the Senator ask for a particular 

time this afternoon, say at half past five o'clock, instc'td of taking a recess at that time, to take up his bills and then go through w1th 

them. 

Mr. CHANDLER. That will suit me as well. 

The PRESIDENT P'I'O tentpore. The Senator from Michigan asks 

unanimous consent that at five o'clock this afternoon t he Senate pro- ceeL. to consider bills reported by the Committee on Commerce. Is 

the1·e objection f 

Mr. WEST. That arrangement undoubtedly will contribute very 

much to our comfort and-perhaps contribute to the measure that the 

Senator desires to lay before the Senate t but it ~gh~ haye the 

effect of indefinitely postponing the post-office appropnat10n bill. If 

it is to be understood that that business which the Senator proposes 

to brin(J' forward shall not interfere with that bill I have no objection, otherwise I must object. 

1\fr. CHA..L"\TDLER. I will consent that that appropriation bill, if 

not passed by that time, shall be the unfinished business after we get through. 

Mr. WE;o;T. I am ouligetl to the Senator, but I must ohject to any 

such anangement, for it is an imlefinite postponement of the postoffice bill. 

Mr. CHANDLER. It is not. 

Mr. WEST. How not 'l 

Mr. CHANDLER. Because it retains its place. 

Mr. WEST. I object to its going over. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I a k unanimous consent then that the po toffice appropriation bill be considered the unfinished bu iness at the 

adjournment to-day. 

The PRESIDENT p1·o tempm·e. It is propo ed that unanimous con- sent be given that at five o'clock to-da.y the Senate will proceed to 

the con ideration of bills reported by the Committee on Commerce. 

1\fr. SCOTT. Let me inquire of the chairman of the Committee on Commerce whether it is his design to take up any other bill than the 

river and harbor appropriation bill f 

1\lr. CHANDLER. I do not desire to take thn,t up this evening. I 

wish to act on other busine s. 

11fr. SCOTT gave notice that as soon as the po t-office appropriation was over, and that was concurred in by the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, he would ask that the bill reported uy the 

Committee on Claims for the payment of awards made by the claims 

commissioners be taken up. 

Mr. CHA.NDLE.R. I propose to take up the river and harbor bill 

the moment we ~et through with the post-office appropriation bill. 

Mr. SCOTT. 1 do not propose to object if that is the only bill the 

Senator from 1\fichigan wishes to consider to-day. 

1\fr. CHANDLER. To-night I wish to take up general business of 

the Committee on Commerce. That committee has not had a day or an evening, and I propose to take up some twenty or thirty bills tonight, but not the river and harbor bill. 

1\Ir. SCOTT. Let us take the recess, and let the Senate determine in 

the evening whether they will take up the Senator's bills or the bill 

I have indicated, and I shall abide the decision . 

. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair would like to learn 

whether there is :my understanding on this subject. Is it understood 

that at five o'clock this afternoon the Senate is to proceed to consider 

the bills reported by the Committee on Commerce, and that the postoffice appropriation bill is to be called up before the adjournment in 

order that it shall remain the unfinished business f Is there objection 

to that understanding Y 

.Mr. DA. VIS. If the river and harbor bill is the only one the Sen- ator from Michigan intends to call up, there is no objection. · Mr. CHANDLER. It is not. 

1\fr. DA. VIS. Then I object. I think that bill ought to be con- sidered. 

1\fr. CHA.l.WLER. I propose to take that up the very moment we get through with the po t-office bill, and I do not wish to consider it 

at an unusual hom. I will call it up the very moment the post-office bill is through. 

1\fr. DAVIS. I want t.he river and harbor bill considered as soon as the post-office bill is through with. 

:Mr. CHANDLER. That I shall insist upon. 

The PRESIDENT pro tentpore. No understamliug can be arri vetl at, 

apparently. 

LAND DISTRICT IN COLORADO. 

:Mr. OGLESBY. I ask the Senate to proceed to the consideration 

of a bill which was taken up the other morning, read, and considered, 

and we were just about to proceed to vote on it. It doe not require 

to be read at all. It will take le s than quarter of a minute to pass 

it and there is no objection to it. It is the bill (H. R. No. 1507) to 

create an additional land district in the Territory of Colorado. 

By unanimous consent, the bill was considered as in Committee of 

the Whole. 

Mr. OGLESBY. The Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Cu YTON] objected and he has withdrawn his objection. 

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

the third time, and pa:ssed. 

CHANGE OF N.UIE OF A Bll.IG. 

1\Ir. MITCHELL. There are two local bills in which my constitu- ents are very much intere ted. I do not think they will take one minute. I ask to take up House bill No. 3591. 

There being no objection, the bill (H. R. No. 3591) to change the name of the brig Sidi to Sea Waif was considered as in Committee 

of the Whole. 

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

the third time, and passed. 

WILLIA.:\1 L. AD.A...\IS. 

1\fr. MITCHELL. I now ask to take up for con itlcration Senate 

bill No. 382. 

There bein!! no objection, the uill (S. No. 382) for the relief of William L. Ada.nis, late collector of customs at Astoria, Oregon, was con- si<lered as in Committee of the Whole. 

The Committee on Claims reported an amendment to strike out all 

after the enacting clan e of the bill and in lien thereof to in e1t the 

follo"\"\ing: 

That tho proper accounting officers of the 'l'rea nry be, and they are bor eb_y, 

directed bo allow Willi:> .. m L. Adams. late olleotor of the port of Asto1·ia1 in the fli. - tdct of Oregon, in the settlement of his cco~ts, so much of the_ pnblic funtl.! n~ 
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 5083 

were stolen from him and never paid into the Treasury, while enga.,.ed in February 

1866, in conveying said funds from his office in A.storm to San ~cis'co California' 

for the purpose of depositing the same with the United States assista.~ttreasure; in that city, pursuant to the instructions of the Secretary of the Treasury· Provided 

That t.he sum so allowed said Adams shall not exceed $12,190. · ' 

The amendment was agreed to. 

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

It wa{; ordered thn.t the amendment be engrossed and the bill read a third time. 

The bill was read the third time, and pas ed. 

REMISSION OF DUTY 0~ RECOVERED SUl\TJruN MERCHA.~J)ISE. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Vermont. I am directed by the Committee on Finance, to whom was recommitted the bill (H. R. No. 3539) to admit free of duty merchandise sunk for two years and afterward recov- ered, to report it back without amendment, and as it is very brief I 

ask for its present consideration. · ' 

There being no objection, the Senu.te, a{; in Committee of the Whole 

proceeded to consider the bill. Whenever any ship or vessel lade~ with mercJ;tandise ~n whole or in part subject to duty, shall have 

been sunk ill any nver, harbor, bay, or waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and within its limits, and shall have re- mained so sunk for the period of not less than two years and shall 

be abandoned by the owners, the bill proposes to permit :m_y person or persons who may raise any portion of the cargo of such ship or ves- sel to bring the merchandise o recovered into the port nearest to the 

place where such ship or ves el was so sunk free from the payment 

of any duty thereupon, u.nd without being oblicred to enter the same at the custom-house, under such rules and rcgcl.ations as the Secretary of the Treasury may pre cribe. 

The bill wa.s reported to the Senate without amendment ordered to a third reading, rea<l the third time, and pas ed. ' 

W'A.S~GTO~ ~l.A.RKRT CO::\IP£\Y. 

~~r. MORRILL, of Vermont. I de ire to give notice that some time 

tluri.?g the day I shaH ask the Senate to take up Senate bill 937, an- n.ulling some act~ of the Le~islati ve Assembly in this District in relatwn to theW ashington MarKet Company, and if Senators in the mean time will look at report No. 449, I do not think the bill will take five 

minutes' time. JO EPII S. READ. 

Mr. FRELINGIIUYSEN. I move that the Senate take up House 

bill No. 2463. It is simply a bill payincr a few hundred dollars to a messenger here in the Capitol. 0 

Tb.e motion was agreed to; and the Senate, as in Committee of the 

\Vhole, proceeded to consider the bill (H. R. No. 2463) for the relief 

of Joseph S. Read. It directs the proper accounting officer of the Tre~sury.to pay to Joseph .s. Read the sum of $395.72; which is to be 

received m full compensation for the services of Read as an assistant 

door-keeper to the House of Representatives from t.he 1 t of August 

to the lOth of November, in the year 1868. 

The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment. ordered ~o a third reading, read the third time, and passed. ' 

COST OF SURVEY OF NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD L~DS. 

Mr. PRATT. A~ the instance of an old friend, an eminent citizen 

of the Sta;te of O~I~, who for many years was a member of this body an~ one~ Its ~residing Officer, I desue to call up Sellate bill No. 797. 

It IS. a bill that was referred to the Committee on Public Lands, fully 

considered by them, and reported unanimously. It will occupy but a short time. · There being no objection, the enate, as in Committee of the Whole proceeded~ consider the bill ( . No. 797) to n.mend an a.ct in relatio~ to the survey of certain lands granted to the Northern Pacific Railroad 

Company. 

The bill proposes to repeal so mnch of the act entitled "An act making appropriations for stmdry civil expenses of the Government for t~e year ending if nne 30, 1871, and for other purposes," approved July 

1::>, 1870, as reqmres the payment by the Northern Pacific Railroad 

Company of the cost of surveying a'Ild conveying the la,nds crranted to 

the compu.ny, and no cost for SUI'veying is to be collected from the 

company. 

. Mr. DAVIS. I should like to know how much is involved in this 

bill u.nd wh:'l't is to be paid under itT I observe tp.at it proposes to 

release a. railroa-d c~mp~y from the cost of surveying lands. 

Mr. PRATT. !will bne:tlystate to the Senator from WestVir!!inia 

wJ;tat ~he trouble in this case is which is sought to be remedied by 

this ~111 .. T~e chu.rter of. the Northern Pacific Railroad Company p_roVIded m Its fourth sectiOn thu.t a certain qu:tntity of land on each 

s1de of the r.oa.d. should be co.nveyed to the company by patent upon 

the compl~ti.on of everr; sectiOn of twenty-:fi. ve mile-s, on the report of t~e COffiiDlSSl?Ders provided for by the law. There are some ten million acres which have been earned by the company which are now withheld from patent because of a clause tha.t was attached to the 

sundry civil :t_ppropriation bill of 1870, which reu.ds as follows: 

~nd provided furtlttr, Th:~.t before any laJj} w.anted to said company by the 

p-mted Sta;tes shall b~ convoyed to :J.IJy party entitled thereto nnder any of the acts mcorporating !>r relating to said-company, there shall be first paid into the '1'reas· 

ury of th~ Umted States the cost of SID'Veying, selectinrr, and conveyinrr the same by the SaJ.d company or party in interest. 0 0 

This proviso is clearly in contravention of the terms of the original 

charter. Why it was ever put upon this appropriation bill, why it was ever enacted at an, I am at a loss to imagine. ..A.s I said a mo- ment ago, the company nave built about five hundred and fifty miles 

of their road, and about ten million acres under their charter are due to the company at this time, but are withheld from them until 

in pursuance of this proviso that I have read, the company shall :first 

pay the cost and expenses of the survey. Unless some gentlemllD. is 

able t.o demonstrate that this provision hitched upon this appropriation bill was originally right, I hope this bill will pass. 

Mr. DAVIS. My friend from Indiana has not yet stated how much 

money is involved in the bill. 

Mr. PR.A.TT. I do not know what was the cost of surveyincr these 

lands; but the original charter required that the United States ~hould survey and convey by patent to this company these lands when the 

CO!fipany should earn them by constructing sections of twenty-five 

miles. 

Mr. D..A. VIS. I understand that there are seven or ei(l'ht hundred 

thousand dollars involved, and that all the railroad co~panies who 

have got public lands ·heretofore have paid the cost of the surveys. 

I see no good reason why this company should be exempt, or have the 

money returned to them if they have already paid it. I do not wi h 

to object to the bill, but I want the Senat-e to know what the bill is. 

Mr. PRATT. I have stated the whole question. 

Mr. HOWE. My attention is just called to this hill, and if it is not lon~ I should like to have it reported once more. Tne PRESIDENT pro tempore. It will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read the bill. 

Mr. HOWE. Have any especial surveys been made upon the application of tho company itself 7 

1\Ir. PRATT. Not that I am aware of. Here is the provi ion in 

the original charter which require-s the United States to survey tho 

lands without expense to the company. Mr:· ~OWE. I understand about that. I think the subsequent law 

reqmrrng the.m to pay the expe.nses of surveying was wrong; but the same leg~slat10n has been bad ill reference to the Union Pacific and 

the Union Pacific it seems to me ought to llave the same relief kd I 

do not know but that the Central Pacific should also. I would htquire 

of the Senator why he cannot amend his bill so as to extend this 

relief to other roads T 

Mr. PRATT. I would prefer at this stage of the se sion not to 

amend the bill. This is clearly a matter of justice to this particular 

company. I do not know what other companies are entitled to a like measure of justice. But here is the charter which provides that these 

l:tnds shall be conveyed without expense to the company, as they are earned, and I hope the Senate will pass the bill as it is. 

Tho bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, ordered 

to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and pas ed. 

LEVEES OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER. 

Mr. ALCORN. I a k the indulgence of the Senate to t."tke up 

House bill No. 2988, a bill to which I do not think there will be any 

objection. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. What is the title of the bill f 

lli. ALCORN. I will read it: ''A bill (H. R. No. 2988) to provide 

for the appointment of a commission of engineers to investigate anll 

report a permanent plan for the reclamation of the alluvial basin of 

the Mississippi River subject to inundation." Pursu:tnt to the recom- mendation of the committee I reported the bill with an amendment 

and I hope it will now be acted upon. ' 

There being no objection, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whol(' 

proceeded to consider the bill. It proposes to direct the President t~ a.ssign three. officers o! ~he C~rps of EJ:tginee~, U~ted States Army, 

and to appomt two mvil engmeers emment ill therr profes ion ancl 

who are acquainted with the alluvial ba-sin of the Mi sissippi River 

to serve as a board of commissioners; the president of the board t~ be designated by the President of the United States. It .is to be the 

duty of the commission to make a full report to the President of the 

best ~ystem. for the. perma~ent re~lamation and redemption of the 

alluv1al basm from illunda.twn, which report the President is to tra.nsmit to Congre-ss at its next session, with such recommendations as he 

shall think proper. 

The second section provides that the members of the commission 

who may be appointed from civil· life shall receive compensation at 

the rate of $5,000 per annum. The commission may employ a secre- tary at a. rate of compensation not exceeding ~00 per month for the 

time he is employed; and the necessary traveling expenses of the 

members of the commission not offic~rs of the Army, and of the secre- tary, are to be paid upon the approval of bills for the same by the 

Secretary of War."'" 

The third section appropriates the sum of 10,000, or so much thereof ~s may be n~cessary .t.o caiTy into effect the foregoing provision , which lB to be subJect todisbursementbytheSecretaryofWarinaccordanco 

with the provisions of the act. 

The Select Committee on the Levees of the Mississippi River re- ported an amendment to the bill to increase the appropriation in ~ection 3 from $10,000 to $25,000. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

The bill was reporteu to tho Senate as amcnucd, anu the ameniliueut was concurred in. 
5084 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. Jmill 17, 

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

a third time. 

The bill was read the third time, and passed. 

MARSHAL FOR WESTER..."{ DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA. 

Mr. MERRIMON. I move that the Senate take up House bill No. 

223. 

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

Whole, proceeded to consider the bill (H. R. No. 225) to amend the 

act entitled" An act to establish a western judicial district of North 

Carolina." 

The bill proposes to amend section B of the act of June 4, 1872, 

entitled "An act to establish a western judicial district of North Carolina," by adding thereto the following : 

There shall also be appointed a marshal of the United States for sa,id western district of Nort.b. Carolina, who shall receive such fees and com.J?ensation and exer- cise such powers and perform such duties as are fixed and enjomed by law. 

The Committee on -the Judiciary reported the bill with an amendment to strike out the following words at the end of the bill: 

Receive such fees and oompeusation and exercise such powers and perform such 

duties as are fixed and enjoined by law. 

And to insert : 

Be entitled to a salary of S200 per annum ; payment to be made quarterly out of 

the Treasury of the United States, and in addition thereto the fees- of office fixed by 

law. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

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

was concurred in. 

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

a third time. 

The bill was read the thlrd time, and passed. 

MARY E. GROSVE~OR. 

Mr. ALLISON. I ask the unanimous consent of the Senate to take 

up House bill No. 3306. It is a pension bill reported unanimously by 

the Committee on Pensions. 

There being no objection, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, 

proceeded to consider the bill (H. R. No. 3603) granting a pension to 

1\Iary E. Grosvenor. It directs the Secretary of the Interior to place on the pension-roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the 

pension laws, the na-me of l\bry E. Grosvenor wi<low of Thomas W. 

Gro venor, deceased.; late lieutenant-colonel o? the Twelfth Regiment 

Illinois Cavalry Volunteers. 

The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, ordered 

to a third reading, read the thir<l time, and pa se<l. 

TAX AND TARIFF BILL. 

:Mr. SHEIDIAN. I am directed ·by the Committee on Finance to 

report back the bill (H. R. No. 3572) to amend existing customs and 

internal-revenue Jaws and for other purpo es, commonly known as the 

tariff bill, with sundry amendments; and I desire to state to the Senate that it is manife t at this stage of the session, if it is expected to 

pass this tariff bill, it will have to be taken practically as it is. The 

Committee on Finance have added no new matter, simply because we thought to add new matter would probably defeat the bill at this se sion; but we have proposed to strike out various sections of the 

bill, leaving in it the matter to whlch we thlnk there- is no objection 

in either House. 

Mr. CONKLL.~G. What are the sections stricken out f 

Mr. SHERMAN. The last section is stricken out in regar<l to the 

tax: on all sales of bonds, stocks, &c., and there are some sections about 

the tobacco tax stricken out, and there are modifications in a slight 

degree of other sections; but the substance of our report is the unobjected points of the House bill. I desire to state further that if Senators propose to pass this bill, it should be done at least to-morrow or the next day, an<l it will have to be passed without any materia.! amendment. 

The PRESIDENT p1'o tempore. The bill will be placed on the Calendar an<l printed, with the amendments of the committee. _ 

METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH AT NEW CREEK. 

1\Ir. BOREMAN. I ask unanimous consent to take up Senate bill 

No. 295. 

There being no objection, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, 

proceeded to consider the bill ( S. No. 295) for the relief of the trustees 

of the Methodist Episcopal church at New Creek, West Virginia. 

The bill requires the Secretary of the Treasury to pay to James 

Carskadon, P. M. Dayton, R. S. Dayton, James I. Barrick, Edmund 

Duling, and William Warner Smith, trustees of the Methodist Episcopal 

church at New Creek, Mineral County, West Virginia, to be used for 

church purposes only, the sum of 1,400, for the occupation and con- version to the use of the Army of the United States of the house of 

worship of the said church at that pla-ce as a bakery, by the Commissat'y Department, from the 1st of April, 1862, until the 28th of 

November, 1864, under orders of the proper officers of the Army; on which last-mentioned day the bouse of worship being so occupied was destl.·oyed by the rebel army. The Committee on Claims proposed an amendment in line 9, to re- tluce the appropriation from $1,400 to e1,000. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

Mr. BOREMAN. I move to strike out the latter clause, that was put in merely as an incident, "on which last-mentioned day the said 

house of worship being so occupied was destroyed by the rebel 

army." 

1\Ir. WRIGHT. I should like to inquire of the Senator from West 

Virginia what his object is in striking out the latter clause' 

Mr. BOREM.Al'f. That is merely stated as an incident. We do not 

claim for the destruction of the property by the rebel army. We 

merely claim for the use and occupation of the property. 

:Mr. WRIGHT. But I suggest to my good friend that if he strikeB 

that clause out, it will be open so that they can make a claim for the 

destruction of the house hereafter. This $1,000 is intended to cover aJl damages and the destruction, ancl if you strike out the latter part 

the destruction may be claimed for hereafter. 

:Mr. BOREl\fAN. I withdraw the amendment. 

Mr. CONKLING. Whether the amendment is withdrawn or not, 

I have a suggestion to make about this bill, It is very hard to object to a claim on behalf of a house of worship, especiaUy when it was used as a bakery; but notwithstanding those peculiarities it is one of the cases in whlch it is proposed to pay for the occupation or injury of property during the war ; and how far or bow near in respect 

of the theater of war, I do not know and the Senate cannot know 

without hear in~ the report read and hearing a discussion of this bill. 

It is taken up although the morning hour has actually expired. I do 

not mean to object to it if the Sena-tor having charge of the unfinished 

business does not1 but I want to hear the report and I want to know 

the facts before this bill passes. 

1\fr. WEST. I call for the regular order. 

Mr. BORE MAN. Allow me a woru. I would willingly submit 

this case to the Senator from New York for his judgment if be would 

take the trouble to read the papers and become familiar with the 

facts. 

Mr. WEST. I call for the regular order. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The unfinished business is the postoffice appropriation bill. 

MOIETIES UXDER CUST0:\18 LAWS. 

Mr. SCOTT. When reports were in order I endeavored to get the 

floor for the purpose of moving to take up the report of the com- mittee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the moiety bill~ but in the press of business was unable to move it. 

That being in the nature of a privileged question, I trust there will 

be no objection to taking it up now, an<l I therefore move that the 

Senate proceed to the consideration of that report. 

Mr. WEST. Laying a.side the post-office bill informallyT 

Mr. SCOTT. Yes. • Mr. MORRILL, of :Maine. I object to that. We cannot afford to 

allow anything to interpose against an appropriation bill that is 

ready at this time, unless you are willing to extend the ses ion. 

The PRESIDENT pro temp01·e. The Senator from Maine objects. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. As soon as this appropriation bill is 

through we shall not trouble the Senate again for a day or two. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. If there be no objection the Chair 

will now receive strictly morning business, as there wa.s no opportunity 

for it during the morning hour. 

PETITIO:NS Al\'"D ME:\IORIALS. 

Mr. OGLESBY presented a petition of 500 workingmen of orth 

Chicago, employed in rolling-mills, praying the restoration of the 10 

per cent. duty on iron and steel and for free banking; which was 1·eferred to the Committee on Finance. 

MESSAGE FR0:\1 THE HOUSE. 

A me age from the House of Representatives, by Mr. M:cPIIERSox, 

its Clerk, announced that the House had concurred in tbe report of 

the committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the bill (H. R. No. 79-2) to repeal the act entitled "An act to establish a uniform system of bankruptcy throughout the Unit d States,'' 

approved March 2, 1867J and all laws and parts of laws amendatory 

thereto. 

The message also announced that the Honse bad passed the bill (S. 

No. 571) to authorize the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company to 

construct a branch and to change the location of its road within the 

District of Columbia, and for -other purposes, with amendments in 

which it requested the concurrence of the Senate. 

The message further announced that the House ba-d passed the following bills: 

A bill (S. No.7~) granting a pension to .A.ndrew J. Lasley; 

A bill (S. No. 613) granting a pension to Jefferson A. French; 

A bill (S. No. 814) granting a pension to Ebenezer W. Brady; 

A bill (S. No. 877) granting a pension to John W. Truitt; 

A bill (S. No. 690) granting a pension to Thomas Smith; 

A bill (8. No. 768) granting a pension to JohnS. Long; 

A bill (S. No. 41) granting a pension to Margaret E. Alexander, 

widow of Edwin A. Alexander, deceased, late a private in Company 

K, Eighth Regiment of Indiana Cavalry Volunteers, known as the 

Thirty-ninth Indiana Re<Yiment; 

A bill (S. No. 503) for t'he rell f of Susan R. Moore, the relative and 

legatee of Phrnbe Sofield, a pen ioner; 

A bill (S. No. 536) granting a pension to Ln.vinoa Ingraham; and 

A bill (S. No. 609) granting a pension to 1\fa.cgaret A. Ho~e:j-' 
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 5085 

The message also announced that the House had concurred in the 

amendments of the Senate to the following bills: 

A bill (H. R. No. 2095) gmntin~ a pension to Charles McCarty; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3652) providmg for publication of the revised 

statutes of the United States; 

A bill (H. R. No. 194R) granting a pension to Mary J. Blood; and 

A bill (H. R. No. 1227) grantin(J' a pension to Eliza A. Maxham. 

The message further announced that the House bad passed the bill 

(H. R. No. 3641) to amend the act entitled" An act to incorporate the 

\Vashington and Georgetown Railroad Company," approved May 17, 

1872, in ~hicb it requested the concurrence of the Senate. 

REPORTS OF COIDIITTEES. 

Mr. llUCKINGHill, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, to 

whom was referred the bill (S. No. 505) to amend the act entitled 

"An act making appropriations for current and contingent expenses 

of the Indian Department, and for fnlfillin(J' treaty stipulations with 

varions Indian tribes, for the year ending J nne 30, 1849, and for other 

purposes," approved July 29, 1848, reported it with an amendment. 

:Mr. HOWE, from the Joint Committee on the Library, reportM a bill ( S. No. 956) for the relief of William Tod Helmuth, of New York; 

which was read, and passed to a second reading. 

Mr. HOWE, from the Committee on Railroads, to whom w:1s referred 

the bill (H. R. No. 3281) to amend the act entitled "An act to amend an a-ct to aid in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from 

the Missouri River to the Pacific Ocean, and to secure to the Government the use of the same for postal, military, and other purposes, 

approved May 2, 1864," reported it with an amendment. 

Mr. HOWE, from the Joint Committee on the Library, to whom was referred the bill (S. No. 944) authorizing the delivery of certain 

bronze ordnance, reported adversely thereon; and the bill was postponed indefinitely. 

He also, from the same committe~, to whom was referred the bill 

(H. R. No. 3422) for the relief of Mercy Ann Hall, willow of Captain 

Charles F. Hall, reported it without amendment. 

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

(S. No. 685) to authorize the Librarian of Congress to send books to 

the governor of Iceland, and for other purposes, reported adversely 

thereon. 

Ir. FRELINGHUYSEN. I should like to have that bill placed on the Calendar. 

The PRESIDENT p1·o tempore. The bill will be placed on the Calendar with the adverse report of the committee. 

1\Ir. DAVIS, from the Committee on Claims, to whom was referred 

the petition of John Montgomery, praying compensation for the use of his property by the Army, submitted a r eport thereon, accompanied 

by a bill (S. No. 951) for the relief John Montgomery and Thomas E. 

Williams. 

The bill was read and passed to a second reading, and the report 

was ordered to be printed. 

}.lr. MERRIMON, from the Committee on Claims, to whom was re- ferred the petition of Jeremiah Beatty, of Walker's Station, West 

Virginia, ru;king compensation for property lost in the Government 

service in 1862, reported adversely thereon, and asked to be discharged 

from its further consideration; which was agreed to. 

He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred the petition of Sarah E. Ballantine, widow of David Ballantine, sr., of Boonville, ~lissouri, praying compensation for property destroyed by the 

United States troops in J nne, 1861, by order of General Lyon, reported a bill (S. No. 952) for the r elief of Joseph Kinney, administrator of 

David Ballantine, of Missouri; which was read and passed to a sec- ond reading. 

Mr. INGALLS, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, to whom was referred the bill ( S. No. 456) for the sale of the Black Bob Indian lands 

in the State of Kansas, reported it with an amendment. Mr. WRIGHT, from the Committee on Finance, to whom was re- reiTed the bill (H. R. No. 3668) for the relief of Smith & Matthews, 

of illinois, reported adversely thereon; and the bill was postponed 

indefinitely. 

Mr. GOLDTHWAITE, from the Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. No. 2090) for the relief of Je se F. Moore and 

Charles W. Lewis, reported it without amendment. 

He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred the petition of J. W. McClure, asking to be allowed a moiety out of the proceeds of certain cotton captured by him and turned over to the special 

Treasury agent at Mobile, Alabama, in 1865, asked to be discharged 

from its further consideration, which was agreed to; and he submittau an adverse report thereon, which was ordered to be pJinted. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, t<> 

whom was recommitted the bill(H. R. No.2897) authorizing the President to appoint George Hemy Preble, now a captain on the active 

list of the N:tvy, to be a commodore, reported it without amendment. 

Mr. ALCORN, from the Select Committee on the Levees of the 

Mississippi River, reported a bill (S. No. 953) for the relief of the 

overflowed levee districts in the States of Mississippi, Arkansas, and 

Louisiana; which was read and pa,ssed to a second reading. 

Mr. SPRAGUE, from the Committee on Public Lands, to whom was referred the bill (S. No. 939) extending the time for the completion 

of a railro:1d in the State of Louisiana, from the Texas State line to 

a point on the Mississippi River opposite Vicksburgh, Mississippi, 

reported it without amendment. 

}.Ir. CRAGIN. The Committee on Naval Affairs, to whom was re- ferred the bill (H. R. No. 1063) to restore Captain .John C. Beaumont, 

of the United States Navy, to his original position on the Navy Register, have had the same under consideration, and have directed me to report it back without amendment, and to ask for its passage. It 

is a very short bill, and I ask for its present consideration. 

Mr. WEST. I object to the consideration of any bill now. The PRESIDENT pro te-mpore. The bill will be placed on the f'alendar. · NAVY-YARDS AND NAVAL HOSPITALS. 

Mr. CRAGIN. The Committee on Naval Affairs, who were by a reso- lution of the Senate instructed to inquire into the expediency of re- ducing the number of navy-yards and naval hospitals, have directed me to report the following resolution, and ask for its present consideration: 

Whereas the Committee on Naval .AJfa.irs is instructed to inquire into the expediency of reducing the number of navy-yards and of naval hospitals, and report by bill : Therefore, . Resolved, That the Committee on Naval Affairs be continued durinu the recess, .and that they be authorized to visit the different navy-yards and naval'bospitn,ls on the Atlantic coast for the purposes of such inquiry; and that the Secretary of the 

Navy be authorized to furnish the necessary facilities for transportation, &c. 

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

CO~TNECTIONS OF PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPA.!o.TIES. 

:Mr. IDTCHCOCK. I desire to call up the Senate bill No. 713, for 

the purpose of moving its indefinite postponement. 

There being no objection, the bill (S. No. 713) making additions to 

the fifteenth section of the a~t approved July 2, 1864, entitled "An 

act to amend an act entitled '.A.n act to aid in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the Missouri River to the Pacific 

Ocean, and to secure to the Government the use of the same for postal, 

military, and other purposes,' approved July 1, 1862," was taken from 

the Calendar and postponed indefinitely. 

BALTIMORE Al\'1> OIDO RAILROAD. 

The PRESIDENT pro te-mpore laid before the Senate the amendments of the House of Representatives to the bill (S. No. 571) to 

authorize the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company to construct a branch and to change the location of its road within the District of 

Columbia, and for other purposes; which were read, as follows: 

In section 1, line 3, after the words " W ashingt~n branch" insert the words " one and a half miles north of Boundary street." 

In the same section, line 5, after the words "any point'' insert the words "one 

mile north of Boundary street." 

In the same section, line 7, strike out the word "five" and insert the word ''two." 

Add at th6 end of the first section the following: "The said line shall avoid all 

Government property." Also add at the en a of the first section the following: " The points of intersection as well as said lateral branch to be approved by the engineer of public buildings and grounds." 

Add at the end of section 2 the following: " This act may be altered, amended, or· repealed." 

Mr. DAVIS. I move that the Senate concur in the amendments of 

the House. · 

The motion was agreed to. 

POST-OFFICE APPROPRIATIO~ BILL. 

The PRESIDENT p1·o tempare. The bill (H. R. No. 3094) making 

appropriations for the service of the Post-Office Department for the 

year ending June 30, 1875, and for other purposes, being the unfinished business of yesterday, is before the Senate as in Committee of 

the Whole, the pending question being on the amendment of the Senator from Vermont [:r.Ir. MORRILL] to the amendment of the Senator ·from New Jersey, [Mr. FRE.LDIGHUYSEN.] 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. If I have a right to do so I will accept 

the amendment of the Senator from Vermont, as that seems to give · general satisfaction, so as to end this debate in reference to the whole 

subject. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The yeas and nays have been or- dered on the amendment to the amendment. 

1\Ir. RAMSEY. It can be done by unanimous consent. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection to permitting the 

Senator from New Jersey to accept the amendment offered by the Senator from Vermont. The Chair hears no objection. The amendment 

is so modified; and the question now is on the amendment of the SenatoP from New Jersey, as modified, which will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read the amendm~nt, as follows: 

SEc. -. That hereafter the requirement that postage shall be prepaid shall not apply to public (locuments certified to be such by any member of the Senate or of 

the House of Representatives, or by the President · or head of Dny Executive De· 

partment or other person entitled to the franking privilege when the law was passed 

abolishing the same. And the postage on no single volume of a public document 

shall exceed the sum of twenty-five cents; and the same, if not prepaid, shall be 

payable by the person to whom the same may be directed and received; and the 

words '"Public document," written or printed on the envelope containing any public 

document and subscribed by the member or other person mailing the same, shall be 

deemed a sufficient certificate that the same iB a public clocument; and the term "pl}blic document" shall be deemed to include all publications printed by order of 

Congress or either House thereof or of any Department of the Government. And 

if any such document shall not be taken from the -post-office to which the same sb.all be directed within thirty days after being rece1ved thereat, the postma.Qwi 

may sell the same for the amount of posta)!:e due thereon, ancl shall a{lcount to the 

Post-Office Department for the proceeds thereof: P·rovided, That this shall apply only to documents ordered to be printed previous to the passage of this act. 
5086 C.ONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JUNE 17, 

:Mr. CONKLING. I know I have no right to call on the Chail: to 

coll5trne proposed legislation; but I should like to know from the 

Chair or from somebody what the proviso means when it says "provided, tha;t this shall apply." \Vhat is "this 1" The riuht of the 

post rna. ter to sell if the postage is not paid, or more or iess of the 

matter that precedes it'l I see the Senator from Vermont is here, 

and I suggest to him that this amendment ought to be changed so as to contain something more than the words "this shall apply." I 

take it he means the proviso shoulu restrict the provisions of the 

whole section. 

:Mr. MORRILL, of Vermont. Yes, sir. , 1\Ir. CONKLING. I suggest that he make it so. . :Mr. :MORRILL, of Vermont. I insert the word" section" after the 

word " this." . The PRESIDE"NT p1·o tempore. The amendment will be so moilified. 

Mr. CONKLING. I now ask for the yeas and nays on the amendment. 

The yeas and nays were ordered. 

Mr. COOPER. I propo e an amendment to the amendment to trike 

out the following words: 

.an:d the postage on no single volume of a public document shall exceed the sum of twenty-five cents, and the same if not prepaid sh.'l.ll be payable by the person to whom the same may be directed and received. 

And also to strike out these words: 

And if any such document shall not be taken from the post-office to which the same shall be directed within thirty days after being received thereat, the post- master may sell the same for the amo.>unt of postage due thereon, and shall account to the Post-Office Department for the proceeds thereof. 

The effect of my amendment is simply to allow the pa-ssage of the 

documents provided ·for without postage. The amendment of the 

Senator from New Jersey, as amended by the Senator from Vermont, 

limits it to documents already printed. The amendment I propose 

seeks to let such documents pass free of postage. That is all. 

Mr. WEST. I think the attention of the Senate should be called 

to the nature of this amendment before it votes without understanding it. It virtually throws open the whole post-office machinery to 

the transmission of mail matter free of charge and actually restores 

the franking privilege on all public documents. I think the Senate 

ought to understand the proposition of the Senator from Tennessee 

before they vote upon it. 

:Mr. COOPER. I supposed the Senate did understand it. 

Mr. CONKLING. What is the question"' 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on the amenc.lment 

of the Senator from Tennessee to the amendment of the Senator from 

New Jersey. 

Mr. CONKLING. I may be alone in not understanding what that 

amendment is--

:Mr. COOPER. I sought to say that it is an amendment providing 

for the transmission of the documents already ordered to be printed, 

free of postage. It is confined to those that we have already ordered 

to be printed. 

1\Ir. CONKLING. Without being sure that I understand the full 

force of the amendment of the Senator from Tennes ee, it is a matter 

of great indifference to me whether it shall prevail or not, because I am opposed to this proposition whether it be amended or not, and I 

will occupy but a single moment in giving my reasons. I voted to abolish the frankin~ privilege. I thought it ought to 

be abolished. I am for its abolition or its remaining abolished now. I shall be in favor of it always unless by actual and fair experiment 

it turns out that its abolition was a blunder. The essence of the 

abolition of the so-called franking privilege was to subject aU mail 

matter to lawfnl postage. Surely, everybody will agree with me in 

that. What does this proposed legislation mean f To exempt large 

clas es of mail matter and of the recipients of mail matter from the 

postal laws. I will not run the risk of encountering my friend from 

Ohio by venturing to say that it means a restoration of the franking 

privilege. I will avoid those words because I have no wish to provoke controversy or difference of opinion. Surely, I state a fact that 

all will admit when I say that although we have abolished the so- called franking privilege here comes a proposition to send through 

the mails an immense bulk of matter without its being subjected to 

the ·prepayment of any postage and without its being subjected in 

any event or contingency to that postage which the law declares. I am opposed to it forthatreason. Iamopposed toit forotherrea..sons, 

but I stop with that because I do not wish to consume the time of the 

Senate. 

·In this connection, :Mr. President, I beg to make another remark 

about a fact which escaped me yesterday. I do not know that I can make the remark without in some way endangering the alrea{}y imperilled liberty of the people. I find of late that there is great danger 

in saying anything which relates to newspapers without thereby endangering the very altars of liberty in respect of the press. But 

notwithstanding that, I venture to call the attention of the Senate to 

the fact that in the amendment offered by the Senat{)r from Ohio, 

which in the first instance was adopted, I find these words: 

That newspapers, one cop_y to ea~h annual subscriber residin.,. within the county where the same are printed in whole or in part, and published, s'hall go free through the mail ; but the same shall not be deliYered at letter-carrier offices or distributed 

by ~aniers unless postage is paid thereon a.s now provided by law. 

I should like to in'l.nire of the Senator from Ohio or orne other Senator whether any petitions have been receivecl asking for this legis- lation. · 

Mr. SHERMAN. I will say to the Senator from New York that 

t:his provision of the amendment I offered is found in a bill pa-ssed by 

the House of Representatives at its present se sion, and I am sure it 

had the assent and approval of the Committee on Post-Offices and 

Post-Roads of this body. As I statecl when I introduced the propositiod, the whole of it was simply the work of the Post-Office Committees of the two Houses. It is a restoration to the country papers of 

the old privilege they so long had, and I think it is right on this 

g1·ound. The postal laws make no discrimination on account of distance ; they charge the little country paper that weighs about an eighth as much as the great metropolitan journals for carrying it 

twenty miles a-s much as they do for carrying the metropolitan journals from New York to San Francisco. This provision giving the 

country papers the freedom of the mails within the county I think is a -kindof fair mode of distributing tho cost of the mail service between 

the large and the small papers. 

Mr. CONKLING. The Senator from Ohio mi takes me in supposing 

that I intend in any way at this time to challenge this provision. I 

do not call attention to it for that purpose. I inquired of the Senator whether petitions had been sent here in behalf of the newspapers 

asking that they be exempted from po tage, that they be exempted 

from the abolition of the franking privilege. · · ltlr. SHER~IAN. I ouO'ht to say to the Senator that I haye received 

myself such petitions an'a have presented thoro for reference; and th~ <?ountry editors in th ir local meetings have generally asked this 

pn vilege. 

Mr. CONKLING. I did not know how that was. I believe in my own State some of the papers have denied that this privilege wa coveted by newspapers at all. 'Vithout, however, ayinu anythll1g on that point, and 'vithout stopping to discuss the me~hs of thi 

proposition, without indicating any oppo ition or objection to it, I 

call attention to it for this reason: Having abolished the frank:iuoprivilege in order to subject to posta<Ye all mail matter, what dot 

this section do f It provides not mercly that the little papers as the 

Senator from Ohio says, but that the great papers, as for example 

in the city of Chicago, shall go three hundred and sixty-five days in 

the year, if they emit a Sunday edition, as I believe some of them do, 

through the great county of Cook. The same thing is true of all 

the Western States. In the State of Ohio, I have just inquired of 

the Senator farthest from me [Mr. THUR;\fA.l.~] as to the size of their 

counties, and the minllnum he gave me shows that they are of great 

s-eographical extent. Accordingly from every great newspaper center m the country the enormous weight and bulk of newspapers is to be 

crn:ried daily through the mails for the l> nefit of subscribers free of 

postage. Now, without denying the propriety of that, without inviting any discussion in that regard at this time, I a k is not that a very 

strange commentary upon the theory on which, in accordance with 

the summons of the pres and of public opinion, we enacted that all 

mail matter should pay postage to the entl that the post-office reve- nues might be nourished and to the end that clleap po tage might in 

the end be won f 

I have n?t bef?re me th~ figures to show the relative weight and 

bulk of this spemes of mail matter. Every Senator knows that it is 

a great proportion of all the contents of the mail. Now havinoabolished the franking privilege and having sub tantiallyrestored {t as to all executive officers, a-s the Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. CRAGL.~] proved from the papers yesterday, we propo e to restore it 

virtually as to public documents, we propo e to restore it as to news- papers; and nothing is to remain except that our constituents cannot 

write to us and we cannot WTite to them upon public bu ine s without paying postage. 

Mr. President, as I said, I mean to stand fairly by that for which I 

voted, namely, putting an end to that burden and inconvenience 

which wa-s known as the privilege of franking by members of Congress. I will stand by the whole of it while I can, and when I can stand by only a. part of it I will stand by that; but I submit to the 

S_enate.that this legislation, the pending propo_ it.ion taken in connec- t~o~ \Vlth all that we have done heretofore and with the other pro- VlSIOUR of the amendment of the Senator from Ohio, is a virtual r - call of the repeal of .the frankin_~, privilege in every re pect except 

that which pertains to us. It will still stand as a barrier auainst 

every pensioner, every constituent, every petitioner, every claimant 

who has a right to come to Congress. It will stand as a barrier between us and our constituents in respect of public business aml everything else; but when you pass beyond that field, it seems to me that 

by degrees we are giving up the whole thing. 

Mr. ~AMLIN. Mr.' President, yesterday I believe was a day for 

confe s1ons by Senators, and there are very few in this body who did 

not state how they voted upon the abolition of the franking privilege, and many stated ~hy they voted, aod mo t expres ed regret 

for the vote they had gtven. I have no apology to make, no con- fes ion to make. I did vote to abolish the franking privile{Te and 

I mean faithfully and fairly to stand by it to the end. I t'hl.n.k I 

voted right then. I believe now that I voted right. I do insist that to 

the country what we are doing will llardly eem reputable to tbe 

body, and I feel sorry to see what I witnessed here. I think we hatl 

better bea~ the little _b~!len that th_e repeal of t~at law has imposed 

upon us Without exhtbitmg that kincl of uoea me ·s which will ho 
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 5087 

attributed to this bo<l.y. Whether it be true or not, it will be said 

all through the land that all this controversy has relation to the little 

thing of posta.ge which we pay, and we cannot avoid it if we would. 

·when I speak frankly, I am obli~ed to admit that there is more in it 

than I wish there was. It will also be believed all over the country, 

whatever ma.y be the motive of Senators offering or voting for the 

proposition, that this amendment if not de 1gned is calculated as the 

first blow to break down the abolition of the franking privilege by addin~ immensely to the burden of the mails and making a select 

quant1ty of matter go without being prepaid. 

I say to the Senator who offered the substantial amendment to this 

bill-I mean the Senator from Ohio, [Mr. SHEID:lA.i.~]-that his amendment surprises me as coming from him, and why 7 He has offered an amendment here which changes the whole law and makes prepayment 

necessary in relation to all the newspaper press, all the periodicals, 

and everything that went through the mails before without prepayment. He proposes by his amendment that on every newspaper, save the local newspapers in their counties, postage shall be prepaid, and 

that upon all mail matter passing between newspapers and periodicals 

the postage shall be prepaid. As a matter of revenue there can be no doubt that it will be highly beneficial to the Government. We re- ceive now only about one-third part of the revenues which we ought to 

derive from these two clas es of mail matter. Prepayment at one and a half cents an ounce on newspapers and three cents on periodicals will increase your revenues more than a million dollars. But 

the rate which the Senator has fi.xe:d in his amendment will diminish 

your revenue to a point which no man can calculate. The Senator 

shakes his head. That is my judgment. When you put your rate of 

postage at four cents a pound you drive every pound out of your 

mail, and the express companies will compete with you aud compete 

successfully. I doubt whether the express companies will not com- pete with you at the rate of one and one-half cents per pound on newspapers and three cents for magazines; but the newspapers say 

they are willing to accept these terms, and we may try them. 

But that was not the point. The Senator for the purpose of aiding 

the revenues, I apprehend, and of correcting an existing evil proposes an amendment here that all this matter heretofore going through 

without prepayment shall now be prepaid, and he follows that with au amendment in contravention of the whole spirit of the amendment 

which ·he had offered before, that documents shall go free. In other 

words, he brings in one class which baa been free and compels the 

prepayment of postage, and then he brings in another class on .which 

heretofore prepayment has been required, and lets that go, the postage 

to be paid at the end of the route. 

Mr. SHERMAN. That is perfectly right. 

Mr. HAMLIN. 0, yes; the Senator thinks it is perfectly right. 

Mr. SHERMAN. The present law discriminates in favor of news- papers against public documents; public documents must be prepaid, 

but newspapers need not be. I propo e to reverse it. I think there 

ought to be a discrimination in favor of the distribution of public 

documents printed at public expense by Congress; but if I am in error in that, the Senate can very easily vote me down. 

Mr. HAMLIN. There is just where I disagree with the Senator. 

If you are going to require all mail matter to be prepaid, or if you are going to require newspapers and periodicals to be prepaid, you 

should not be so inconsistent, as I consider it, as to turn around and 

say at the same time you will let documents go free, and they need 

not be prepaid. You will find the same result arising from sending 

public documents without prepayment that you have found by sending newspapers and periodicals without prepayment, to wit: you will 

not get one-half of the po tage that legitimately attaches to them. 

Your amendment provides that documents remaining jn the postoffice uncalled for may be sold for the postage. My friend who sits 

beside me [Mr. HowE] asked me what was the value of this document, [holding up the report of the Select Committee on the Affairs of 

the District of Columbia,] which has been laid on our tables this 

morning, and my reply to him was, "Tell me its weight and what 

the man who collects paper gives per pound for it, and I will tell you 

what the document is worth." It is not worth, and will not bring, 

the amount of the postage. And so your documents that have been 

transmitted through the mails subject to postage in many instances 

will never pay the co t of transportation. 

But, Mr. Pre ident, I in ist that it i inconsist.ant while you are compelling the postage on the newspapers and periodicals to be prepaid 

to let this other clas of documents go free. I oppose the amendment 

for perhaps a much better reason. I have seen the expenses of our public printing spring from a few hundred thousand dollars up to 

two or three millions. I never had much confidence in a v~ry great 

diminution of the expenses of transporting the mails in consequence 

of the abolition of the franking privilege, but I did have. some faith 

in a very marked reduction in the expenses of our public printing ; 

and if Senators will only hold on to the law precisely as it is, stop distributing these public documents except to persons who wish for them, 

and are willing to pay the postage on them, and let them be printed 

at co t for aH who wish them, we may witne sa still greater diminution in that regard. 

But the Senator from California [Mr. SARGE:NT] yesterday stated 

correctly that the actual expenses of printing have been reduced at 

least one and a half million dollars, and I think we may add one a.:nd a half million dollars more to that. But if you inaugurate a measure 

that will let members send these documents away by simply putting 

their names upon them and trusting the expense of their transmission to be paid by the recipients, you encourage preci ely what we shall see; you encourage 1 he printing of these documents, you 

beat down the repeal of the franking privilege, and you come back to 

all the abu es of an immense quantity of printing that co ts you 

millions of dollars each year. That will be the result of it. The 

country '-rill so look at it. It will end in that. 

I hope, therefore, that the amendment to the amendment will be 

defeated, and then I hope the whole amendment will be defeated. I 

think that is in the line of sound economy. I think that is in the line 

of correct principle. 

Mr. BUCKINGHAM. Mr. President, I do not know whether I have a confession to make or not. If I have, it is a confession of ignorance, 

for I did not know enough to vote for the abolition of the franking 

priruege; and the reason I did not vote for it was this: although it 

had suffered abuse, yet it appeared to me that it was important for 

the people of the. country that they should have that information 

which they could secure by the transmission through the mails of 

public documents and information which was sent from this Capitol 

throughout the country. It did not appear to me to be advisable to 

destroy the bridge that carried this news until you had provided some other way to cross the river. For that reason I did not vote for the 

abolition of the franking privilege; nor have I since it was abolished, 

if I recollect the course I have taken, voted in any manner for the 

restoration of the privilege or any portion of it. 

My own judgment now is that we should wait until the people 

know by actual experience whether it is wise or not to restore it; 

that we should wait until we shall have a general law which will 

meet the demands of the public, and also furnish Congress and the 

heads of the Departments with those fa<Jilities which are necessary 

to transmit information from the capital throughout t.he country; and 

until the public demand shall be crystallized in such a manner as to 

present to us some plan whi~h will meet this contingency, I do not 

propose to vote for any measure which will tend to restore the franking privilege. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. ANTHONY in the chair.) The 

question is on the amendment offered by the Senator from Tennessee 

[Mr. CoOPER] to the amendment offered by the Senator from New 

Jersey, [:Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN.] 

'fhe amendment to the amendment was rejected. 

Mr. HOWE. I rise to inquire of the Senator from New Jersey what 

is meant precisely by the expression, "a single document¥" 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. That has been altered to "a single vol- ume of a document," by an amendment. 

Mr. HO,VE. I think that is a better expression. Would the Senator object to changing the rate of postage from twenty-five cents per 

volume to a certain rate per pound, say four or five or six cents per 

pound! 

:Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Would not that come to about the same thing on the average T 

Mr. HOWE. I do not know how it w.ould average, but I think it 

would be more equitable. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. That is the rule adopted in the bill, to 

pay by the pound. 

1\Ir. HOWE. That would make this amendment in harmony with 

the principle of the bill. . Mr. MOH.RILL, of Maine. Yes; entirely. 

Mr. HOWE. "What is the rate per pound in the bill f 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. Eight cents. 

Mr. HOWE. That is too high. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Four cent . 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. Four cents for newspapers, eight cents 

for books. 

1\Ir. FRELINGHUYSEN. My impression is you would realize n.s much revenue in that way; but I do not know. I should be willing 

to accept such an amenG.ment. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. The Senator from Minnesota will know 

what the rate is. I ask him what is the rate fixed for books per 

pound¥ Is it eight cents f · 

Mr. RAMSEY. That is third-class matter. "\Ve are simply legislating now on second-class matter-newspapers to subscribers. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. We do not raise that question. As it now stands, I think it is sixteen cents a pound. 

Mr. RAMSEY. Books are two cents an ounce. The proposition 

appears to be to reduce it to one cent .for two ounces, making it uniform with the other rates for third-claas matter. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. My understanding is that it is eight 

cents a pOlmd. 

J\lr. SHERMAN. Eight cents for books and four cents a pound for 

newspapers and periodicals. · Mr. HOWE. I think eight cents is perhaps a little high. 

J\Ir.- SHER~I.A.N. I see that the postage on newspapers and pamphlets is only four cents a pound, and that would be high enough for 

public document, in my judgment. 

Mr. HOWE. I think it would be. 

J\lr. MORRILL, of Maine. On what principle could that be sof 

Why should we burden the mail with documents at ;J. lower rate than 

the publishers of other pooksnot less desirable possibly, I might ven.- tnre to say to the people, are permitted to send them through the mails r 
5088 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JUNE 17, 

:Mr. HOWE. For a very good reason as it seems to me. First, we do burden the people with the expense of publishing these books upon 

the theory that they are specially desirable and necessary. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. Does not my honorable friend understand that we have abolished the franking privilege for the very rea- son that the sending of these documents through the mail had be- come a burden to the people f · · 

Mr. HOWE. Well, partly that and partly because the people felt 

that they did not get the benefits of the books that they paid for 

publishing; whereas if you let the books go to those who call for them 

and are willing to pay the postage upon them, those will get the 

books who most desire them. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. Now, let me state a proposition which is 

in harmony with the whole features of this bill, and that is, that 

there shall be some adequate compensation to the service for all mailablo matter transmitted through the mails. 

Mr. ~OWE. Some compensation' 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. Some equitable, fair compensation; some remunerative compensation. 

Mr. HOWE. Very good. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. You have placed the rate upon the 

?ooks at eight cents per pound, and graduated other things accordmgly. 

Mr. HOWE. That is the rate as igned to merchants who make 

books for sale and for profit, and is therate.at which the Government 

will undertake to carry that kind of commodity from the merchant 

to the purchaser. This is very different. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. That is not stating it exactly, perhaps; 

that is the price at wliich the publishers are able to communicate 

with their customers. Now, why should a different rate apply in 

regard to public documents which people may desire' The people on all hands and on all sides desire to use this service for the transmission of books. At least I assume they do, because we have adopted 

that policy. Now, why should there be the slightest. discrimination as to the class of books which the people may receive f 

Mr. HOWE. Because, as I understand, there is no analogy, there is no similitude between the document which you publish by order of 

Congress or a House of Congress and the book which the Harpers publish for the trade; the one being a collation of these elementary political facts, a knowledge of which on the part of the people is essential 

both to the Government and to the people, not merely essential to the one who gets the facts, but essential to the life and well-being of every one of us that all our neighbors have possession of these facts; and I am one of -those who believe that the weakest spot in our existence to-day 

grows out of the simple fact that so few of our people know what 

the Government is actually doing; whereas the book which is published by manufacturers engaged in that business is published for the 

sole amusement, instruction, or profit of him who will buy it. It is a pure business transaction. It is published by the publication house 

for profit, and is bought for individual instruction and individual advantage. The Government sends this last book from the manufacturer to the purchaser at a price which will compensate the Government. This other book I think should be sent through the mails at 

something less. We have heretofore sent it for nothing. I do not see any reason why we should not send it now for a sum which will fairly 

defray the cost of its transmission. I think that five cents per pound 

would be sufficient to cover that. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Was the suggestion of the Senator from 

"\ViHconsin to strike out "twenty-five cents" and insert "at the same rate fixed for periodicals f" 

Mr. HO"\VE. I would agree to that. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Say" the same rate per pound," or "per ounce." 

Mr. THURMAN. Mr. President, I have taken no part in this dis- ~mssion; but there is one view which I should like to move as an amendment if it is in order, and I presume it is now. The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is. 

Mr. THURMAN. I want to move an amendment that the CoN- GRESSIO~AL REcoRD shall go free through the mails. The people of 

this country have a right to know what is done in Congress, and they can learn that in no authentic way except by the record of our debates. Now, to whom do the Co~GRESSIO~AL RECORDS go f To 

whom did the Congressional Globe go before f I can speak for myself, and ·I think in doing so perhaps I am repeating the experience 

of every Senator OJil this floor. I forget the exact number of copies 

that I received of the Congressional Globe; I think about seventy. 

At least one-half of those I sent off to public libraries, to the State 

library, to certain great libraries in the cities, to college libraries, and some smaller libraries, taking about one-half. The rest go to the 

publil:!hers of the newspapers. 

There is, therefore, in the distribution of that RECORD, the best use 

pos.~ible made, so that the mass of the people can have access to it and 

see what their public servants have done. It cannot be said of them 

that th y were so much waste paper i t.hat they serve to make wrappers for grocers. On the contrary, they are kept in the libraries to 

which they are sent, or they are carefully preserved by the editors of 

newspapers who are desirous to have them that they may inspect the 

proceedings of Congress. 

It is a dit~tribution, therefore, of the debates of Congress which Con.-

gress ought to make for the information of the people, and I see no reason in the world why any tax should be levied upon that publication. It ou&ht. to !?ass free through the mails. For the very same reason that It IB pnnted at the expen e oi the Government, for the 

very same reason it should be distributed free by the Government. 

Why print it at all, prayf Why not limit ourselves to our Journal f 

Why have anything in print of our debates if the matter printed is 

not to be distributed f Whatever may be the ca-se with document/3-

I do not call the CONGRESSIONAL REcoRD a document--whatever may 

be the case with documents properly speaking, whether they should 

pay postage or should not pay postage, in respect to the Co~GRESSIONAL RECORD I submit to the Senate that we are b01md to distrib- ut~ that, and distribute it without cost. In other words, we are bound 

to inform the people as well as we are able to do it what their representatives in the Government have been Hbout. 

I therefore move to add at the end of the pendincr amendment the 

following proviso: 0 

And provided further, That the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD shall be carried through the mails free of postage. 

1\.Ir. MORRILL, of Maine. Is that in orderf 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. This subject seems to be a very prolific s~mrce of debate, and to afford a grand opportunity for the pre entation of all sorts of unconsidered propositions. If it is in order, I move to lay the amendment of the Senator from New Jersey on the table. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. That motion is in order. The Senator from Maine moves to lay on the table the amendment of the 

Senator from New Jersey, which will carry the amendment to the 

amendment with it. 

Mr. SHERMAN. That simply carries the pending amendment on the table. 

Mr. THURMAN. The Senator from Maine moves to lay the amendment of the Senator from New Jer ey on the table. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Such is the motion. 

1\Ir. STEVENSON. Does that carry all amendments with it f 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. All the amendmentM to the pendincr 

amendment. There is but one. 0 

Mr. STEVENSON. How would it affect the amendment which is 

offered by the honorable Senator from Ohio f . 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It would carry that amendment ~~ . 1\fr. THURMAN. On that motion I ask for the yeas and nays. 

1\Ir. FRELINGHUYSEN. I suggest to the Senator from Ohio to 

withdraw his amendment and let us take a vote on this one and 

then he can renew his amendment. - ' 

.1\lr. THURMAN. No; I would rather they should go together. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion of the Senator from 

1\faine is to lay on the table the amendment of the Senator from New 

Jersey, which carries with it the proposition of the Senator from 

Ohio. 

Mr. THURMAN. On that I ask for the yeas and nays. 

The yea.a anq. nays were ordered. 

Mr. WASHBURN. Let the amendment be reported. 

The Chief Clerk read the amendment and the amendment to the 

amendment. 

Mr. CONKLING. Will the Chair be kind enough to state exactly 

what will be carried on the table if this motion prevails f 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment proposed by the 

Senator from New Jersey [1\Ir. FRELINGHUYSE~] and the amendnrent 

to that propo ed by the Senator from Ohio, [Mr. THURMAN.] 

Mr. CONKLING. NothinJ? else Y 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Nothing else. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. And also the amendment of the Senator 

from Vermont [1\fr. MORRILL] limiting the amendment only to the 

distribution of the books on hand. , · 

1\Ir. CONKLING. That is part of the oriO'inal amendment now. The question being taken by yeas and nay~, resulted-yeas 23, nays 31; as follows ; 

YE.A.S-¥es~s. Anthony, Boreman, Bout:well, Buckingham, Chandler, Conkling, Fe~ of Mic~an, Flanagan, Hager, Hamilton of Maryland, H amlin, Hitohcocl;:, 

Morrill of Maine, Oglesby1 Patterson, Ramsey, Robertson, Sargent, Schurz, Scott, 

Washburn, West, and Wnght--23. 

_NAYS-:-Messr:s. Alcorn, Allison, Ba;.varn Boey, Carpenter, Cln.yton, Cooper, Da- vis, Denms, Frelingbuysen, Goldt.hwrute, Harvey, llowe In.,.alls k elly Lewis Mc- CreeiJ•, Merrimon, hlitohell, Morrill of Vermont, Morton, "l'e~e. Piatt, R~~om, Saulsbury, Sherman, S}Jraj!Ue, Stevenson, Thurman Tipton, and Windom-31. AllSE ... T-Messrs. Brownlow, Cameron, Conover, Cra;rin,Dorsey Edmunds F en- ton, Ferr.,Y of Connecticut, Gilbert, Gordon, Hamilton of Texas, .Johnston .Tones Logan, Norwood, Spencer, Stewart, Stockton, and Wadleigh-19. ' ' 

So the motion to lay the amendment on the table was not agreed to. 

The PRESIDING OF:l!'ICER. The q estion recurs on the amendment of the Senator from Ohio to the amendment of the Senator from 

New Jersey, by addino-: 

And provided further, That the Co!>GRESSIONAL RECORD shall be carried throu.,.h 

the mails free of postage. 0 

Mr. HOWE. Whom shall they be carried to f 

Mr. THITRUA 'f. ... To whoever thev are directed to. 

Mr. HOWE. Who shall direct them f 

Mr. THURMAN. Somebody who writes n. fair, good hand. It is 

only reviving what was the law as to the Globe. The Congressiona1 

Globe went through the mail without any frank. The law expressly so prol ide d. _ 
1874. CONGRESSIONAL· RECORD. 5089 

Mr. STEVENSON:- I suggest to the Senator from Ohio in his amendment to add "that the words 'CO~GRESSIONAL RECORD' shall be 

:printecl on the outside cover," so as to show the character of the document. That was the enactment in reB'ard to the Congres ional Globe. 

:Mr. THURl\IAN. I have no objection to that, but I clo not think 

it is necessary. Suppose I direct that [holding up to-clay's RECORD] 

t.o the Ohio State Library, you can see by looking at the wrapper that 

it is the CONGRESSIONAL RECOB.D. Why shoUld it not go through ~he 

mail without any more formality' The Clerk can add the words rnclicatecl, however, if the Senate desire. Tr. CONKLING. Mny I make an inquiry 'I 

:Mr. THURl\IAN. Certainly. Mr. CONKLING. Suppose we add to the amendment of the Senator 

from Ohio when he comes to send one of his speeches, ns I hope he 

will to as ~any persons as he cau afford to send it to, a.nd take a pat:t 

of the CONGRESSIO~AL RECORD, not the whole of it, will that go free 

under this provision, or must he bny the whole RECORD¥ 

1\Ir. THURMAN. Does the Senator mean a pamphlet speech T 

Mr. CONKLING. No. Jf my fi·iend from Ohio takes his Slleech in 

the RECORD to send off, must he bny the whole RECORD of that day 

although it may contain four times a.s many C?lnmns a.s_ the ~peech oc- cupies, or will that part of the RECORD whwh contarns his speech 

alone go free T 

l\1r. THURMAN. If I were Postmaster-General I should take the 

words " Con!ITessional Record" to mean the CoxGimSSIO. AL RECORD 

and not to m~an a. portion of it cut out in that way. If the Senator 

from New York were to send off one of his speeches in the way he 

llroposes to do, there might be some inj~y £!-one in the. public. mind. 

The answer to it ought to go along With It, the antidote With the 

11oison. 

Mr. CONKLING. We could arrange that by a partnership; the Sen- at.~r and I could club together and each contribute and send the two 

off in couples. The Senator has so much law and I have none that I 

hope he will not be impatient with me if I take off the first fourteen le~wes of the RECORD to-day, marked "Congres ional Record," and 

ask whether, under this provision they may go through the mail, or whether I must buy all the rest of this RECORD, containing to-day ~:;eventy-six pages~ And I am seriom! about this becam:;e it.will make a difference in my vote. 

MI·. THURMAN. If the Senator does not speak of pamphlets I 

agree with him. I supposed be referred to pamphlet speeches. The 

whole includes all the pa.rts, uudoubtedly. 1\ir. CONKLING. I think that aids the Senator's proposition if it 

is so. Mr. THURMAN: Undoubtedly it is so. Mr. CONKLING. A Senator wants to send off two or three pages 

of the CONGRES IONAL RECORD to-clay; must he buy the whole sev- enty-six pa<-res and send them through the mail in order that he may 

send the tw~ or three pages to a constituent who may be interested 

in something there f ' 

1\fr. CARP ENTER. Say "the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD or any part 

thereof." 

Mr. CONKLING. I think that would do. 

!t1r. THURl\IAN. Well I willputin "the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 

or any part thereof." 

The PRESIDING OEFICER. The amendment will be so modified. 

Mr. ALCORN. I suggest to the honorable Senator from Ohio whether 

he is not involving himself in a little difficulty and almost absurdity by 

the proposition he now makes f I hope he will not accept those words 

"or any part thereof." The REcoRD contains the proceedings of Congress in entire.ty. 1\Ir. CONKLING. Here is the RECORD to-day of seventy-six pages. 

Does the Senator think it would be economical to the Government or fair to a Senator who wished to pay for something in it and to·sencl it 

off, that he should be obliged to buy and pay for seventy-six pages 

of quarto printed matter and compel the mail to carry it when a 

single page may be all he wants to-day to transmit ' 

Mr. ALCORN. If the Senator were to inquire of me, I ·might sa.y 

that perhaps I would vote for a proposition to permit the honorable 

Senator from New York to send his speeches printed in pamphlet 

form. 

Mr. CONKLING. If the Senator sl1ould say that, I could not credit 

it. It would be a draft on my credulity that I coultl not honor. 

Mr. ALCORN. I do not. ask the Senator to make any extraordinary 

clranghts on his credulity. I merely make a suggestion. The RECORD 

is au entirety, it is the day's doings in the Congress of the United 

States, and it is the purpose to sencl that RECORD out for the benefit 

of tho people. It is a benefi\ to the cquntry and not to a particular 

member of Con~ress that this free transmission through the mail is 

allowed. I desiTe to strip it of the characteristic of being a benefit 

to the member of CongTess himself, but it shall go to the country as an entirety, as t.he record of Congress. 

l\1r. CARPENTER. Then we ought to make another amendment, 

because if the honorable Senator from Mississippi should make one of his able speeches it could not go to the country without benefiting 

that Senator, and therefore it would be improper to send it through the mail. 

Mr. ALCORN. If I possessed the ability of throwing light on every 

subject that comes up here and did attempt it in the degree that is 

attempted by my honorable friend from Wisconsin, then I would be 

319 

he~d vulnerable to the charge he makes; but, sir, I see the purpose of 

thiS. 

1\fr. MORRILL, of Maine. I think the proposition of the Senator 

from Ohio is greatly in danger of having the beauty and symmetry 

of it marr~rl; but nevertheless, as it illustrates a principle, I am glad to see 1~ go on: It did seem to be a littlestriking.when tho Sen- ator from Ohio, bavmg moved tha.t the CONGRES 10~ AL RECORD, being a record of our proceeding , should go free through the mails, said that 

the people ought to kQow everything that Congres ays ancl do s. There did seem to be some little f9rce in the argument; but w heu yon come to clilnte it, when you come to get it down to a fine point to 

illustrate the exact thing we are about, it somehow or other reflects 

the idea that we want to get out to the country as cheaply as possible, in some cheap way, now that the frankincr privilecre is abolished 

the little bits of things that we say he:re beforg the Sen~te. .AlthouO'h 

it is a little gross perhaps to send the whole book, we are ask~cl why can we not send a few pages, why not the little wise sayings 

thq,t we get off¥ Suppose they ru-e but a snatch, suppo e they are just a paragraph, why should they not go free 'f To illustrate, why 

should not all this be put on the wires T Why should we not extend 

the wires from this Chamber that now go to the Depa.rtments, so that 

whatev.er "'e utter may go on the wings of lightning everywhere all over this land, so that my honorable friend may electrify his. con- stituents morning, noon, and night f Then they would know when 

he sits down, when he gets up, and after he utters a thing here whv 

should it. not go to them f l\Iy respect for the honorable Senator an it 

my admiration for hjs character and abilities are such that I should 

be delighted to seo that thing done. 'Why not ha.vo something of 

that sort, so tha,t all the speeches we utt-er, all the wise sayings we utter should go out in one stream circulating on the wires everywhere 'f 

~11·. CONKLING. The postal telegraph could do that I 

Mr. MORRILL, of 1\Ia.ine. The postal telegraph I If we may send 

out this volume, this book which we publish every morning, containing everything we say, word for word, why, if we choo e to send detached portions which may afiect one of our constituents and not the 

whole, should we not be at liberty to do that f 

Ur. President, I wish we would get clone with this. I want to get 

this bill through; but if there are so many conceits to be put upon 

it I see little hope. I know my honorable friend from Ohio does not 

want to embarrass this bill, but after the people of the United States 

had insisted upon it that the carrying of public documents, including the Congressional Globe, was an abuse, and af-iier we ha(l put au end to it, the idea that within a twelYemonth or so after we enactecl 

the repeal, aud enacted it under circumstances of such solemnity that one would think nobody who attended that ceremony would ever raise a voice in that direction, we should be found here by the ·e insidious steps working our way back to the free delivery· of tho 

choice things we publish in the Senate Chamber does seem to me ex- traordinary. 

1\fr. THURMAN. Mr. President, there never was any complaint in 

this country that the Congressional Globe or the speeches of mem- bers of. Congress delivered on the :floor of the Senate or the House of 

Representatives were sent free through the mail. There never was any complaint by the people of any such thing. The complrtint 

made were of the abuses of the franking privilege and of the violations of law. If the law bad never been violated it never wouhl 

have been repealed. It was because it gave rise to such violations 

of law, such abuses, that the people clamored for its repeal. It was.. not much of a clamor either ; it was a stimulated thing got np in this 

city of Washington to gi \"e a certain officer of the Government a great r~putation as ami ghty reformer; and how much he has reformed, 

and how much expense he has saved to the people, we know now by the 

reports.· But there were abuses, abuses that made me vote for its re- peal; and what. were they, prayf They were that perhap one entire 

half of the franked matter t.hat went through the mail in times of high 

political excitement was matter that was not frankable at all under 

the law. Do you know, sir, that if you were to deliver a speech outside of the Halls of Congress there never was a law which authorized 

yon to frank that speech f 

1\Ir. CARPENTER. If it was less than four ounces f 

Mr. THURMAN. If it was less than four ounces. 1\!r. CARPENTER. The Senator is mistaken. · Mr. THURMAN .. I am not mistaken, for I have looked carefully 

into it. Yon had a right to frank your correspondence. 

1\Ir. CARPENTER. The language of the law !think waa "a package 'Yeighing not to exceed four ounces." 

Mr. THURMAN. No, sir. You had a right to frank your corre- spondence; you had a right to frank public documents. There was no necessity for a law to frank the Congressional Globe, for it was expressly provided that-it should go free through the mails. You had a right to frank speeches delivered in Congress, too, but you had not a right t<> frank even your own speech that was not made in Congress, 

and much less had you a right to frank here political pamphlets that were made up for electioneering purposes. How was it in the last 

presidential contest I saw with my own eyes this Capitol filled after 

the aujomnment of Congress two years ago with men, women, and 

children putting up all kinds of political stuff, extracts from the New · · York Tribune, almost a volume, to show what Greeley had said about 

the democrats, and not very interesting reading, I can tell you. 

Mr. CARPENTER. To the democrats'i [Laughter.] 
5090 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JUNE 17, 

Mr. THURMAN. Not to the democmts. Then in high Dutch and 

in low Dutch anu in French were all sorts of political pamphlets of 

all kinds and <lescriptions. Thls Capitol was filled with men, women, 

and children putting them up in Government wrappers, an<l clerks were writing on them the franks of members of Congress when the 

members of Congress wore hnnW:eu of miles away. I sawthat with 

my own eyes. Ihave in my house now four of these documents, all 

purporting to be frankeu by the same man and his name written by 

four different i)ersons, an<l he hundreds of miles away from Wash- ington City at the time. That was the thing that was going on. It · 

was because of the abuses of the franking prlvilege; it was because 

of the violations of law that it was abolished. nut in respect to the 

provision of lawthatthe Congressional Globe shoul<l go free through 

the mails there never was any complaint. That was not the franking 

privilege at all. Thoro was no necessity for anybody to frank a Con- grcssionnl Globe, for tho law passed it free through the mail. There- fore when petitions came here asking for the abolition of the frank- ing privilege they did not ask yot~ to repeal that provision of tho law 

which let the record of congress10nal debates go free through the 

muils. The people want those debates; they want to see what their 

public servants ara doing; they want to know the reasons which they 

give for their action anti for their vote . fy amendment simply proposes, not to restore the franking privi- lege, not to restore anything that c:tme within tho franking privilege as it existed, but to restore the olli provision that mauo the record 

of the <lobate!:> of Congre ·s pass through the mail free wit.hout any 

frank at all. It i~ ::m entire mistake to treat this provision as having 

boon a provision of la.w authorizing franking. It was not so at all. }.fT. CARP ENTER. Will the Senator allow rne to interrupt him 

to reau the sta,tuto"' 

1\Ir. THUR~fA.l'{. In a moment. On the contrary, the fact was that by speciaJ. provision of law the record of the debates of Con- gre weut throngh the mail free. Now I have a worcl or two to say" in answer to my friend from 

Maine [ Mr. MORRILL] who bas employed tha,twit which he posse ses in such great abundance upon this a.menclmcnt. He says that when 

this thing comes to be dilnteJ., anu wo see what it is, it is only an attempt of Senators to get their speeches before the public. I submit 

to him tha,t it is a, uuty tha,t a Senator owes to send his speeches to 

his eoustituents that t!Jey may know what are his opinions anu what 

he has been saying upon public measures that intere t them; and in- stead of a Senator being reproached for that, that Senator best dis- eharcres his duties who, among the other good things he does, sends 

t o hi~ constituents the opinions which he as their representative has 

expressed in the Congress of the United States. . But, sir, that does not cover the case at all. Why is it that you 

publi h seventy-odd copies for each Senator of the Co~GRESSIO~AL 

RECORD or the Congres ·ional Globe When a Senator sends one of 

those copies, three or four big volumes on which the postage would 

be I do not know bow much, perhaps five, or six, or seven doUars-- Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. On an average, for five volumes of one session, $3.50 I think. · Mr. THUR~fAN. When we publish such a book as thut, I wa,nt to 

send it to libraries as I have been acctlBtomed to do over since I have 

had a, seat here. I have sent copies of the Globe to tho Iocbanics' 

Libmry of Cincinnati, to the 1\fercantiloLilJrary of Cincinnati, to the 

Ohio State Library, to the various colleges in Ohio. n tha,t way 

I have always disposeu of more than half of those assigned. to me. Why ought they not to pass free through the mail Y They are part 

of the public transactions of this Government, and for almost as strong a reason as that which requires you to publish your laws you ouaht to publish a.nd distribute your deBates. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. HAMLIN in the chair.) The ques- tion is on the amen<lmcnt of the Senator from Ohio to tho amendment. Mr. ALCOnN. Let it be read. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment to the amendment 

mll be read. The Chief Clerk read as follows : 

.Andprovidcdjwrthcr, Thn.tthe CmwuES IONAL RECORD, or any part thereof, shall 

bo carried through the mails free of postage. 

Mr. ALCORN. I shall not vote for that amendment as it is pre- sented. The COXGRES IONAL RECORD of to-day i seventy-six J..>agcs. Under the operation of the amemlment I can tear off thirty-eight 

leaves and each aud every one of them may l>e sent through the 

mail separately. I do not think it woulu gi vo str ngth to the proposit ion. l\fr. CONKLING. They would not weigh any more in t.hat way. 

}.fr. FRELINGHUYSEN. The amendment which I introtluced, a· modified by the Sana tor fiom Vermont, simply provides for disposing 

of the printed matter which we have on hand by suffering those who 

wish the e documents to pay the postage for them wheu they are re- cei-.;-ed. I hope that that amendment will not lle loaded down with 

other provisions. When we como here at another session if we want 

to make arrangement for the REcoRD, or for anything else, then is the 

time to <lo it, uot now. .1lir. HOWE. Mr. President, it seems to me if tho Senator from 

Ohio IUcnns to make tho am udmeut operate equally and fairly he 

ought to provide not merely that anybody may send the RECORD 

through tho mails free, but that iJ,nybody may have the REcoaD to 

send free through the mails. If the a,mendment stands in the lan- guage the Senator has put it in, it allows that one <locument, that one commodity, to be carried th1·ough t!Je mails for nothing; not 

merely carried from the office of publication to tho subscriber for 

nothing, but the bound volumes, set.S, are included, and they can bo 

carried from the office of pnblication, they can be canied from any- body who has them. The book merchants who hn.vo back numbers can send them to purchn.sers; they cn.n travel to and fro in the mail . That is perhaps l'ight enough ; but now if you proviue that anybouy 

may have them printed by j ust calling at the Government Pl'inting 

Office, then, although it may not be a sensible provision, it woulu bo an equitable one, so far as individuals are cone rned. 1\ir. THURMAN. Perhaps everybouy ought to have the laws of the 

United States ; but we only print a limited number of them anc.l so we print a limited number of the Co GRESSIONAL RECORD. It is in the discretion of Congress to print more or less as it sees fit. Mr. HOWE. The Senator does not propose to send the laws free 

through the mail' 

l\fr. THURM.Al.~. They ought to be. 1\lr. HOWE. It is not included in the amendment. Mr. THURMAN. One amendment for one point is enough at a time. 

Mr. HOWE. There are those here who think a great ma,ny thinrrs 

ought to be sent free through the mails, bnt it is not exactly the efforl 

that we are aiming at to provide for sending everything through the 

mails free. 

:Mr. WEST. I am admonished by the prolongation of this debate 

that probably this bill will not be .finished if the Senate adj ourns at 

its ern tomary hour. I desire to give notice to the Senate now that I 

shall ask the Senate to remain here this evening until a final vote on the bill can be had. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the amendment 

to the amendment. 

The question. being put, there were on a division- aycs 15, noes 14; no quorum voting. 

1\lr. THURMAN. I call for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. 

}.I.r. HAGER. I do not understand the amendment now before the Seuate. I shoulcllike to have it reported. 'l'he PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment t o the amendment 

will be again read. The Chief Clerk r ead the amendment to the amendment. Mr. OGLESBY. Mr. President, yesterday the Senate proceeded to 

the consiuemtion of the post-office appropriation bill. If mym mory serves me aright they had sub tantially finished that work when a cla s of amendments was pre ented to the biU which either directly or remotely hau reference to the franking privilege. I have voted on several occasions this session on that subject, without having s:ti<l 

anything about what my views were on the question. Although the 

RECORD does furnish to those who cru:e to trace it something of the 

history of a man's views, it furnishes those views in such disconnected 

and so fn-apart ways that unless it be stndicd connectedly through no man will over know what a I'epreseutn.tivo's views upon any given question are unless he hears something from that representative him- self. It is too big ajob to go all through the RECORD or the Globe to 

trace out the me:.mderiugs of a representative's votes to find out just 

where he stood or j ust where he di<l n ot stand npon any questiou be- fore the country. · 

If I understand the public sentiment on this question of the frank- ing privilege in all of its phases and in all of its bearings, if I have 

any jnst appreciation of the public feeling upon that question, it is 

that the country is opposed to it. I um very sincere in saying that I 

have arriveu at this conclusion after giving some attentiou to the 

subject. I remember perfectly well that petitions were sent over t.he country a few years ago through the Post-Office Depurtment 

soliciting signatures to those petitions for tho repea.l of the fran1..-iug 

privilege ; but I do not remember that where I live auy man ever signed such a petition who wn.s not absolutely in favor of it. It had 

grown to be in the public estimation a pestiferous thing. I am free to confess that the public were not entirely uncloudcu in 

their consiueration of that question. I believe tllat a great many 

false statements and representations wore made to the public iu re- gard to it. But as the oeuator from Maine [.1\lr. IORRILL] has said on more tlJ::m ouo occasion in tile b.st forty- igbt horn'S, ancl I 

think tho Senator from Ohio [Mr. TrrulDIA.r] too, there wa a well- settled belief in the country that tho fTanking pri viiego had Ueen 

abused. I tlrink the statement of both those Senators will bo cor- roborated by the recollection of every member on this floor as to the 

public sentiment in that direction, that the franking privilege hn.u 

been abusetl. Therefore the country said with almo t one voice, 

"Let us get rjd of the franking privilege." Did thoy say anything 

else t If I under"tancl the public they said something el e ; and when 

I adopt the public viow upon a question I auopt it in all its length 

anti depth and breadth. I take t!.lcm at what I uuderstanu them to 

say. Accompanying that expression of public feeling in reganl to 

the franking privilege there was another expression of tho pnl>lie 

very largely indulged in bJTthe people, that Congress was publishing 

too much tra~h, that many of the documents were worthies or ;,lt a11y 

rate were un lesir:! ble; and the same pnulic voice tlul.t saiu "Lot thero 

be no more franking privilege," also sn.id " Let there be uo more pub-
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 5091 

lication of worthless and tmnecessary public documents." They did 

not discriminate between what were good documents and what wore worthless document~; but there was a general sweeping denunciation tln:ongh the country; and every other man you would meet 

would sa.y ''Of what con eq uence to me is.· that report" or "that documcnU I care nothing about it." Once in a while a man would get 

auAgricnlturtbl Report or possibly a report upon some of the western 

surveys or explorations, an1l once in a while au executive document- that is a document n·om one of the Departments of the executive 

uranch of the Government--with which he was satisfied; aml I have occasionally during the past winter received requests from the people 

of the West for executive documents, sometimes for the Congressional 

Directory, sometimes for copies of the Constitution of the United 

States, sometimes for the Agricultural Report, sometimes for surveys 

and explorations in the we tern country; but I have never yet re- cei vcd a request for a Coast Survey report, for the report of the sur- vey across tlle Isthmus of Tehu::mtepec. I have received no request 

for the volume of statistics in regard to commercial relations, or in 

regard to finance, or-in regard to many other reports published by 

Congress. Some of the grangers have asked for Agricultural Reports 

and for copies of the ceusus o.f 1870 and of the censuses compendium; 

but in almost every instance in which I have received a request from 

illinois for a public document eithe1· the postage has been sent·to me or I have been requested to send it to the applicant by express. 

I have not been borne down by my con ·tituents ; I have not been 

worried much under the prepayment of postage ou public documents. I am not overly fond of that kind of enjoyment. So I wish to consider 

this fr:mking privilege in all its length and breadth, and I shall vote 

against its restor:1tion. Therefore I shall vote for the necessary 

corollary of that, which was so elegantly alluded to yesterday by the 

stalwart eloquence of the Senator fxom New York, [.Mr. CONKLING.] 

IIe appe!1led to me to stand by him. I will stand by him or any other 

Senator here in voting against the restoration of the fran1.'ing privilege. I have already vot-eu once this morning in that direction, and 

I will stand by him and by every other Senator to keep the franking 

]HivHege out of the laws of Congress. I am asked if I ought not to 

send the RECORD through the mails froe V Well, I ought not to senu tho RECORD through the mails free unless I can send a good record; 

aucl if I can send tho RECORD how many can I send free T How many 

shaJl I get¥ Probably thirty or forty. That is all I can send. 

IIow i:s it in regard to the amenW:nent offered by the Senator from 

Kentuck-y to give seventy-five thousand copies of the .Agricultuml 

Report to the Senate for distribution I should get one thousand 

copies and my colleague would get one thousand copies. There 

would be two thousand copies of the Agricultuml Report for distribution in Illinois. How many legal voters are there in the State of 

Illinois to-day¥ Nearly six: hunilied thousand; and my colleague and 

I would get two thousand to distribute partially to a few friends, and 

yon call on the other voters of Illinois to pay for the publication of 

the document, to pay for transmitting it free through the mails to 

two thousan(l selected men while the other five hundred and ninetyeight thousand go without it. ·Now I ask the public of illinois if they can indorse that sort of distl:ibntion of documents¥ I do not ask 

Senator·, I ask the voters of the State of Illinois if they have a right 

to call on me to stand here and vote for the publication and distribution of a partial and limited number of public documents for the 

favor and accommodation of my few friends, not to go to the residue 

of the public of the State of Illinois 'I I appeal to the voters of Illinois and ask them whether I shall give such a vote as that¥ No, I 

will not givo it. 

The Pl~ESIDE}."'T p1'o tempore. The Senator from Illinois should 

address the Chair. [Langhter.] 

1\-lr. THUR.i\fAN. .A.B I am not one of the voters of illinois, and 

therefore am not just now addressed by the Senator from Illinois, I 

do not know but that it would be impertinent in me to ask him a question; but if I may be allowed as one not having tho privilege of 

living in Illinois to ask him a question, I would ask bim whether he 

propo!:!es to print as many copies of. the laws of the United States as will furnish every man, wom:1n, and child in Illinois with a copy~ 

Will he dare to limit the number of the laws of the United States 

and put them in the hands of a favored few ~h. OGLESBY. Yes, I will dare to limit the number to be published of the laws passerl by the national Congress, and I will dare 

to limit the number of every public document ordered by Congress; 

and I will go further and dare to do what the Senator from Ohio, I 

believe, will not dare to do, I will say to the people of illinois and to 

the 11eople of the United States that the information that comes to 

this body through the legitlimate channels of the Government and 

from the recognized constitutional Departments of the Government 

shall be published by authority of Congress, and under the direction 

of the Committee on Public Printing of both Houses of Congress it 

shall be distributed to :.tll the people who will pay the postage and 

pay the cost of the printing and the paper in the document. That is 

what I will vote. 'I'hat is the franking privilege that I desire. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator's ten minutes have 

expired. 

Mr. OGLESBY. It would affurcl me infi.n.ite pleasure to address 

my. elf to the Chair ten minutes longer. [Laughter.] 

.Mr. ANTHONY. I hope tho Senator will have tho privilerre. Tho PRESIDENT pro tmnpore. The Chair would bo delighted to 

hear the Senator. The question is on the amendment~ offered by the 

Senator from Ohio to the amendment of the Senator from New Jm·sey. Tile question being taken by yeas and na-ys, resulted-yeas 2d, nays 

27; as follows: 

YEAS-Messrs. Alcorn, Allison, Bayard, Bogy, Carpenter, Clayton, Davis, Den. 

nis, Goldthwaite, Harvey, Ingalls, Lewis, McCreery, Mcn-imon, llitchell, Norwoou, 

Patterson, Pease, Ransom, Robertson, Saulsbury, Spencer, Sprague, Stevenson, 

Stock-ton, Thnrman, Tipton, and Wadleigh-2~. 

N"A.YS-l\Iessrs. Anthony, Borcma.n,Boutwell, Buckin.~rham, Chandler, Conkling, Ferry of Michl.!;an, Flana,.,.an, Frelinghuysen, Gilbert, ~er, Hamilton of Mary- land, Hamlin, Hitchcock, Howe, Morrill of Maine, Morrill of Vermont, Oglesllv, Pratt, na.mscy, Sargent, Schurz, Scott. Sherman, 'Vashburn, West, and Windom-27. 

.ABSE-:-rT- Messrs. Brownlow, Cameron, Conover, Cooper, Cragin, Dor ey, 

Edmunds, Fento:::J., Ferry of Connecticut, Gordon, Hamilton of Texas, Johnstou, 

Jones, Kelly, Logan, Morton, Stewart, and Wright-LB. 

So the amendment to the amendment was agreed to. 

The PRESIDENT pro tCTnpore. The questionrecurson the amendment of tlle Senator from New Jersey [Mr. FRELlliGHUYS"&."'] as amended, upon which the yeas and nays have been ordered. 

The question being taken by yeas andnays, resulted-yeas33,nays 

26; as follows : 

YEA.S- Messrs. Alcorn, Allison, Bayard, Bogy, CIUJ.)enter, Clayton, Cooper, 

Davis, Dennis, Goldthwaite, Gordon, :Harvey, Irigalls, Kelly, Lew1s, McCreerv, 

Merrimon, Mitchell, Morton, Norwood, Patterson, Pease, Pratt, Ransom, Sauls· 

~ur!d.o~~~· Spencer, Sprague, Stevenson, Stockton, Thurman, Tipton, and 

NAYS-Messrs . .Anthony, Boreman, Boutwell, Buckingham, Chandler, Conklinrr, 

Ferry of Michigan, Flanagan, Gilbert, Hager, Hamilton of Maryland, Hamiiton of 

Texas, Hamlin, Hitchcock. Howe, Morrill of Maino, Morrill of Vermont, Oglesby, Ramsey, Sargent, Schurz, Scott, Stewart, Wadleigh, "\Va.shllurn, and West-=26. 

.ABSENT-Messrs. Brownlow, Cameron, Conover, Cragin, Dorsey, Erli::mnds, 

Fenton, FerryofConnecticnt, Frolinghuysan, Johnston, Jones, Logan, Robertson, 

and Wright-14. 

So the amendment, as amended, was agreed to. 

Mr. RAMSEY. I desire to move an amendment to the bill, merely 

to correct an omission. 

Mr. ROBERTSON. I have an amendment lying on the Secretar:v's 

desk which I wish to have acted upon. • Mr. RAMSEY. I hope the Senator will allow this to go on. It is 

in harmony with the sections we have already adopted. The amendment is to add the following: 

SEc.-. That so much of this act as changes the rate of postage on newspapers and 

periodical publications shall not take effect until the 1st day of January next. 

Mr. WEST. I should like to inquire of the Senatorwhatis the occa- sion for that proposition T 

Ur. RAMSEY. It is most obvious to any one. It wa-s part of the 

original proposition as reported from t~e Post-Office Committee and as it came from the Honse of Representatives. Contracts are already 

made by publishers with their subscribers for the current year. We 

have now provided for a new state of things which ought not to take 

them unawares, and this amendment postpones its operation until 

the 1st of J anuary. Mr. SHERllfAN. That was in the original proposition I submitted, 

but I struck it out and. handed it to the Senator so that his attention 

might be directed to it. 

The PRESIDENT 1Jro tempm·e. The question is on the amendment 

of the Senator from Minnesota. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

lli. ROBERTSON. I have an amendment on the table, which I now offer and ask to have read. 

The Chief Clerk reatl the amendment, which was to insert as an adilitional section the following: 

That the act entitled ".An act to abolish the franking privilege," approved Jann· 

acy 31, 1873, be, and the same is hereby, repealed; a.n<l the franking privilege, as the same existed prior to the passage of said act, is hereby restored. 

Mr. ROBERTSON. Mr. President, inasmuch as we have restored 

the franking 11rivilege in its most obnoxious form to all the heads of 

Departments aud taken it away from ourselve , and we propose to send 

public documents t.o our constituents for the purpose of giving them 

information and letting them know what we do, I offer this amendment, so that Senators can put themselves squarely on the record. I 

desire a vote upon it. 

The PRESIDENT p1·o tempo1'e pnt the question on the amendment 

and declared thn.t the noes appeared to prevail. 

Mr. ROBERTSON. I call for the yeas and nays. 

The yeas and nays were orderecl; and being taken, resulted-yeas 

17, nays 34; as follows: 

YEAS-::tlessrs . .Alcorn, Carpenter, Dennis, Goldthwaite, Gordon, Harvev, Hit<Jh. 

cock, Kelly, .Merrimon, Norwood, Patterson, PeaBe, Ransom, Rohertson, Sprague, Stevenson, and Tiptou-17. 

NAYS-MesRrs . .A.lli on, Bogy, Boreman, Boutwell, Buck-ingham, Chandler, 

Cl:l.yton, Conkling, Fla.nag:m, Frelingbuysen, Gilbert, Hager, Hamilton of Mary- land, Hamlin, Lewis, McCreery, Mitchell, Morrill of Maine, Morrill of Vennont, 

.Morton, Oglesby, Pratt, Ramsey, Sargent, Schurz, Scott, Sherman, Stewart, Stockton, Thurman, W&.dleigh, Washburn, West, and Windom-34. 

ABSEr T - Messrs . .Anthony, Bayard, Brownlow, Cameron, Conover, Cooper, 

Cragin, Davis, Dorsey, E<lmunds, Fenton, Ferry of Connecticut, Ferry of Michigan, 

Hamilton of 'l'exas, Howe, Ingal.ls, Johnston, Jones, Logan, Saulsbury, Spencer, and 

Wrightr-22. 

So the amendment was rejected. 

The PRESIDENT pro tem.pore. There is one amendment of the 

Committee on Appropriations which has not yet been acted upon. It 

will be reported. 

Mr. SHERi.fA._l'f. That is superseded. 
5092 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. J1JNE 17, 

The Chief Clerk read the amendment, which was in section 1, line 

10, to add the following proviso to the clause appropriating $16,400,000 

for inland mail transportation : 

Provided, That postages shall hereafter be prepaid on all mailable matter at the 

time of mailing; and all act~ inconsistent berewi~h are hereby repealed. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. That amendment. is superseded by the 

amendment which has been adopted. 

Mr. WEST. The committee withdraw that amendment. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempm·e. The amendment will be withdrawn 

if there be no objection. 

.Mr. 'VEST. I should like an opportunity of making a typographical correction in line 8 of tho amendment offered by the Senator from 

Ohio; and that is, to strike out the comma after the word "circulars" 

to make it correspond with the present law, as one of those commas would be very apt to give us trouble again. · The PRESIDENT p1·o tempore. That correction will be .made if 

there be no objection. 

Mr. STEVENSON. I offer the following amendment : 

And that three hundred thousaml copies of the report of the Commissioner of 

Agriculture shall be printed for circulation, which shall be duly strunpcu with 

posta"'e stamps; two hnntlred thonsand copies for tho use of the House, seventy- live tilousand copies for tho use of the Senate, and twenty-five thousand copies for 

the use of the Commissioner of Agriculture. 

Mr. CONKLING. How many are oraered now f 

Mr . .ANTHONY. I am not in favor of this amendment; but the 

proportions are not right.. That is a document of which the House of 

Representatives have always had a much l:l.rgerproportional number 

than the Senate. I do not think there has ever been an occasion 

whmi as many as seventy-five thouRand co1)ies have been distributed 

t.o Senators; while there have been more than one hundred thousand 

copies distributed among members of the Honse. It is a document 

which according to all the precedents of Congress belongs more to 

Representa.tives than to Senators. 

Mr. MORTON. Under the a,mendment the number is two hundred 

thousand for the Representatives. 

].h. ANTHONY. There are uocuments of which Senators have the 

l:uger number, such as the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. We have forty 

to each Senator, anu the House of Representatives have twenty-five 

to each member; but the custom has always b(len to give a much 

larger nnmber of the Agricultural Report to each Representative than 

to each Senator; for the manifest reason that the CONGRESSIONAL 

RECORD is intended for clistribution in the way in which the Senator 

from Ohio, [Mr. THURMAN,] whom I do not now see in his seat, said 

he distributed his, to libraries and to editors, extending over all the 

Stat.e, of course, while the Agricultural Report is sent or should be 

sent to farmers. It is for popular distribution, while the RECORD is 

for a different kind of distribution and for more permanent uses. I 

think, therefore, it would be better to alter the proportion fixed in 

this amendment, giving to Representatives a larger number and to 

Senators a smaller number, although I state frankly I shall vote 

against the proposition. · Mr. STEVENSON. I only desire that the farmers of this country 

shall have the benefit of the Agricultural Bureau, and it is immaterial to me whether the report is distributed by the House or the Senate. I propose to print two hundred thousand for the use of the 

House and seventy-five thousand for the Senate, so that the people 

shall get it. I have given to the Commissioner twenty-five thousand, 

because the libraries and the granges who have libraries and all these 

people will write to him for a copy and will get it, anu it seems to me the proportion is about right. . Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. I simply desire to emphasize an important statement of my honorable friend from Kentucky. In the spirit 

of liberality and magnanimity so worthy of the larg!'}-heartedness of 

that Senator he is disposed to do a big thing, a grand thing for the 

farmers! There are about six millions of them, I believe, and he proposes to distribute among them, to eke out through the partiality of 

Senators and members of Congress three h1mdred thousand copies of 

this report! I call for the yeas and nays on the amendment. 

1\fr. STEVENSON. I ·arn disposed only to do what I think is my 

duty as a Senator. I represent here in part an agricultural State, 

and-I am nnwillin~ that the people of this country should be taxed 

to keep up a magnificent Bureau here where plants, trees, foreign seeds, 

and all things pertaining to agriculture are kept for the inspection 

of the people who come to ·washington without giving the people at 

large the benefit of that which they are taxed to support. That may 

be big-heartedness or it may be bliuclne"Ss; I do not care which.· It 

seems to me you should either abolish the Commissioner of Agriculture, or allow the people who are practical farmers to have the benefit of his research and of his foreign importations. Let us give them 

all the means of progress in agriculture; let us furnish them with the 

material by whlch they can a-dvance the agriculture of the country. 

I hope Senators will not attempt to kill off this proposition by sidebar remarks. · I repeat, sir, let us either abolish the Agricultural Bureau, or distribute among the people the results of the la.bor of that Bureau. That 

is the simple question. If this were an original question as to the 

establishment of that Bureau probably I should not support it. I 

admit it has been of great benetit. It is among the instrumentalities 

of the Government which are in great favor with the people, aml I 

have no wish to make capital out of this subject. My only desire 

is, ·as long as this Bureau is kept up, to let the people have, free 

of expense, the annual report of that Bureau. I hope the yeas and 

nays will be taken on the amendment, so that every Senator can ex- press his opinion upon it. 

Mr. RAMSEY. I suggest to the honorable Senator from Kentueky 

that for the same reason he urges in-this case he ought to send to the 

people the report of the Commissioner of Education. There is a Bureau 

of Education maintained here at \Vashington. Then again we have a Bureau of Public Lands, and its report ought also to be sent to the 

people; and there are varionl:l other Bureaus whose reports ought to 

be sent out among the people for the same reason which the Senator 

has given in support of his amendment. · Mr. STEVENSON. I will say to the Senator from Minnesota that 

the States have bureaus of education, and I suppose theh· reports are circulated, but I should think Minnesota would be the last State to 

object to this, especially as the Senator has already gotten a land 

grant dnring this session for his State out of the public Treasury. 

Mr. RAMSEY. 0, we only got our own lands, I beg to say to the 

Senator. · Mr. STEVENSON. I do not think, after the special privilege that 

has been conferred this winter upon Minnesota, the Senator from 

Minnesota ought to be so niggardly in his bounty to the people as to 

deny them the privilege, free of postage, of seeing what the Agricultnntl Bureau has been doing. 

Mr. RAMSEY. .A.ll that you gave the people of Minnesota were their own lands, the value of which they had created. They were not worth a cent an acre when they went there, and they are worth 

whatever you get for them now. Bnt, Mr. President, one objection that I have ·to the Senator's 

amendment is that it does not go far enough, as I told him the other 

day when he offered it originally. There are three hundred thonsand 

of these reports to be ilistribnted, and we have two or three million 

farmers. If he were to give one to each farmer I could understand 

and appreciate the value of his amendment ; bnt if one in ten or twenty is to be selected and favored by a copy of this report, I am unable to see the fairness or justice of it. . Mr. CARPENTER, (Mr. INGALLS in the chair.) The Senator from 

Minnesota thinks this amendment does not go far enough; The hero 

of the great reform must be patient. We cannot accomplish all these 

things in a moment. We propose to discipline his nerves by gradual 

advances up to the idea of allowing the people to have some little 

information, for which they pay, in 1·egard to the management of 

the Government which is their govemment and which is directed by 

their agents. Three hundred thousand copies of this AgTicultural 

Report are a great deal better th;1n nothing. That is as much probably as the nerves of the Senator from Minnesota could stand at _one dose. Next year perhaps he may stand five hundred thousand. f 

should vote for that just as cheerfully as I shall vote for this. The 

experiment succeeded here two or three years ago of shutting down 

all information from the people, cutting otf the supply. Now we have 

got to feel our way back again. Three hundred thousand are pretty 

good for a start. Let the Senator from Minnesota get accustomed to 

that, and next year we will join him in going for five hundred thou- sand. 

Mr. RAMSEY. I suggest to my honorable friend, who was the 

leader of the other great reform of the last Congress, the increase of 

pay, that we may perhaps be·compelled to go back again on our action 

next winter. [Langhter.l 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Is the amendment of the Senator from 

Kentucky amendable 'I 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is. 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I move to amend the amendment by strik- ing out that part of it which provides that these Agricultural Reports 

shall go free by being stamped. We have already adopted an amendment providing that there need not be prepayment, bnt that the per- sons who wish these reports may pay for them when they receive them. Tha.t being the sentiment of the Senate,·and by that arrangement 

everybody will get these books that wants them and those who do 

not desire them will not have them, I move to strike out the words 

"which shall be duly stamped with postage-stamps." 

.1\Ir. STEVEJ.~SON. I am surprised to hear the amendment offered 

by the Senator from New Jersey. I 1.Jlow him to be a most efficient 

friend of agriculture, :mel he must know that some of the be t farm- ers and planters in this uation cannot afford to pay for this report, 

and to that extent he would deny to these men the opportunity of 

reading it. · But the Senator will remember that we have already to-day provided that the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD shall go free. Is not this 

report as valuable to the six million farmers in this nation as the 

RECORD, and if one goes free why should not the other go free' I 

think all must admit the importance of giving to the substantial interests of the country, to the laboring masses, the information which 

will be derivell from this Agricn1tur~ Bureau. I thiuk it is almost 

incalculable; and I do hope that tlle Senate will not only allow the 

printing of these three hundred thousand copies, but will permit 

them to go postaO'e free. . . Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. The postage on one of these volumes·wiJl 

be about ten cents under tl1e provision we have just aclopte<l. It 

seems to me to be very fickle legisLation for the Senate one ha.lf-honr 

to pass a law that the documents shall pay postage and the next half-
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 509:3 

hour that they shall go free. I think the fact that a person writes 

for them and pays ten cents postage for them secures a better distribution thau if tlley were sent free. 

1\Ir. SAULSBuRY. Ihopetheamendmentof the Senator from New 

Jersey will not be adopted. If there is any public document printed 

that is appreciated, I am satisfied, from my experience in the distribution of documents while the franking privilege existed aud since, 

that the report of the Agricultural Commissioner is more highly appreciated than any other ·public document printed by order of the 

Senate. 

The Senator from Maine ridicules the idea that three hundred thousand copies amount to anything for the great farming interests of the 

country. Jt is utterly impossible to f-urnish every farmer or every 

person engaged in a~icultural pursuits with a copy of the report of the A~ricultnral CoiDillissioner; but these three hundred thousand copies 

Will be distributed throughout the diff1:1rent States. Under this amendment there will go into the small State which I have the honor in pa,rt 

to represent some two thousand or twenty-five hundred copies. That 

will put a number of these reports in every neighborhood; aud that 

is true of' every State in this Union. Take the State of New York, 

for instance. While there are but two Senators here from that State, 

there a.re some thirty-three or thirty-four Representatives in the other 

House, and they will distribute into every neighborhood copies of 

this report. It will furnish valuable information to the a-gricultural 

community in which it is distributed, anrl now we ought not to begrudge so small a favor for the agricultural interest. 

My friend from Maine, who opposes this amendmeiJ,t so zealously, 

certainly favors matters which protect special interests in his own section of the country. Why, sir, one tithe of the taxes that are imposed 

upon the people of this country for the benefit of tho manufacturing 

interests of the country, so well represcnte(l by the Senator from 

Maine and others on tl1is floor, one tithe of the tribute paid by the 

agricultural interest to tho e manufacturing interests by the way of 

protection, by the way of tariffs upon their interests, would pnt an Agricultural Report in every farmer's hand th1·oughout the country. 

The farming community have been taxed for the benefit of other 

interests; and no\Y when this small boon is asked, that three hundred thousand copies of tho report of the Commissioner of Agriculture may be distributed among them, i.t i.s met with opposition. To 

my mind, it is most unreasonable and unjust. 

The agricultural interest of this country has never asked protection, has never asked for any special fa.vor at the hands of Congress; 

but Congress, in order to convey the impression to the agriculturists 

of this country that their interests were regarded, established here a Buxeau that is costing, according to the appropriations for it the present year, nearly a quarter of a million dollars. The Agricultural 

Report is published. You have a publishing house established by the 

Government, and the small expense of the publication of three hundred 

thousand copies is but a trifle. Why may we not publish that num- ber and distribute them free through the mails so that the farmers of 

t,he country may see what information this Agricultural Bnreau is 

collecting on the subject of agriculture, so that they may be benefited 

if any good is contained in tho e reports 7 

I concur with the suggestion of the Senator from Kentucky that 

unless there is something practical for the farming interest to grow 

out of the establishment of this Burea.u we ought at once to abolish 

it . The people of this country ought not to be taxed to the extent 

of a quarter of a million dollars for the purpose of keeping up an establishment here in the city of Washington where not more than one man in a thousand can see it. If it is not to distribute any of its 

benefits to the country, why keep it in ex.i tence bereV If it is for 

ornament, for the same amount of money we can establish ornaments 

in every section of the country. Your quarter of a million dollars 

will put as great an ornament in every State in this Union in the course of ten years. We ought not to continue this Bureau, and I 

will vote myself to abolish it if none of the advantages which it was designed to effect are to be conveyed to the people. 

Sir, we are distributing document , we are publishing thousands 

upon thousands of documents that have no valno as compared with 

this report. Documents, political in their character, are being published. We appropria,ted the other day $200,000 for the purpose of 

making surveys for great works of internal improvement, when but 

very few Senators on this floor would avow their willingness to vote 

for the measures if they should be reporteu favorably upon by the 

engineers. What was that done for'/ We all understand it. It was to make a favorable impression upon the farmers of the West that 

something was to be done for their interests. I opposed that meas- ure because I thought nothing practical would come out of it; that 

when the proposition ca.me here for Congres to undertake the estab- lishment of line of canals and railways across this eountry the Senate would find they were destitute of authority and power under the 

Con titution to make them; and that the 200,000 that we appropriated was thrown away, as I conceived, upon a political project, to 

make an impression upon the grangers of the West and others that 

their interest wa.s being looked after here in Congress. But here is a. practical good to the granger interest and the farming interest, the 

distribution of a document that is supposed to contain valuable 

information on the subject of agriculture, and yet when a proposition 

is made that it shall go free through the mails so that the people may 

get information from it, it is met with objeetion. 

Sir, I will v:ote for this proposition, and if it is voted down then I 

will vote for any other proposition that will restrict the publication 

of books and public documents to the absolute necessities of the Sen- ate, and that no public documents shall be distributed whatever. I am prepared to meet this que tion fairly, to do it or not do it at all. 

Giv:e tho people tJ;Le informa~on t-hey require, or else cease the publicatwn of every kmd of pubhc document other than w ha.t is absolutely necessary in order that the Senate may transact the business 

devolving upon it. 

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. 

. A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. McPHERSON, 

1ts Clerk, announced that the House bad passed the following bills; 

in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate : 

A bill (H. R. No. 1142) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to 

indemnify the holders of pre-emption and homestead certificates ancl 

certificates of entry and patents upon lands in Iowa within the so- callell Des Moines River grant on account of failure of titles, and to 

procure a relinquishment of the pa.1·amount titles to the United States; 

and . -

A bill (H. R . .No. 3528) for the relief of owners and purchasers of 

la-nds sold for direct taxes in insurrectionary States, and for other 

purposes. 

NEWSPAPER PUBLICATION OF REVISED STATUTES. 

Mr. STEVENSON. · I a k leave to introduce a bill of public importance in order that it may be put on its passage at once and sent 

to the Honse. Yesterday, when I reported a bill for the publication 

of the revt ed statutes, the Senator from New J ersey [1\Ir. FRELING- rr YSE~] put a question to me a to whether there was in the bill a section repealing the publicartion of the ln.ws in newspapers. I misunderstood that question. I supposed the question wa"3 as to Ble 

repealing of the contra.ct with Little & Brown. It now turns ont 

that ther.e is. nothing in that _bill which repeals the act authorizing 

the publicatiOn of the laws m the newspapers. Therefore, if tb:tt 

law staD:ds, the newsp_apers would, under their authority to print the 

laws, prmt these reVIsed statutes. I therefore now ask unanimous 

consent to introduce a bill prohibiting the publication in the news- papers of the revised statutes, and I ask for its present consideration. 

Mr. CONKLING. Before that bill is read, I wish to inform the 

Senator from ~_entncky, that we ma,y avoid confusion on this subject, 

that the proVISwn wh1ch he now proposes-has already twice pa ed 

the Senate. It wa"3 adopted yesterday early in the day on my motion as an amendmeJ?-t to the pencling post-office appropriation bill. It 

turns out that 1t was also adopted as a part of the legislative ex- ecutive, a_nd juilicial appropriation bill, although ye terday we c~uld not. ~nd 1t, an~ therefore, for ab~mdaJ?-t caution, I moverl it as an a<ldit10nal sectwu to the post-office bill, aud it was added without 

objection. I think I_ ma._y say frn:th~r that ther~ ~s no special neecl, 

though I have no ob.Jection to th1s bill, of a proviSIOn on tha.t subject 

to-day or t?-motr?w. T~ore was need~ as the Senator expla.ined yes- terday, of rmm.ed1ate act10n on the l.nll he report.ed from the Committee on the Judiciary; but that bill being acted upon, the fact of 

the_ Pre. ident signing the revised statutes will not thereby entail any 

obl1gat10n whatever upon the Government to publish them in the 

newspapers. On the contrary, if at any time witlrin a, week, or within 

the limits of tl?Js s~ssion, the pending appropriation bill becomes a law, or the legi.Slative, executive, and judicial appropriation bill beCO!fies a law with t~e cla~se there peniling, his object will be accom- plished ... I state th1s, l!ot m the nature of an objection, but my honorable fnend was not m the Senate yesMrday when the le()'islation 

took place to which I refer. 0 

Mr. STEVENSON. If this bill pas es it will dispense with the 

provisions of the amendments to the bills alluded to bv t4e Senator 

from New York. It might be that under the existinO' 'law which is now before the President the newspapers mi()'ht claim the ri()'ht to 

p_ublis~ the revised ~tatut-es as part ?f. the la~s, and upon co;sultatwn _wxth the Comnnttee on the J udimary of the House, as this bill was mtrusted to me, I prefer to make this matter certain· and as it 

will not take a minute, I ask to put the bill on its pa ~ge that it 

may be se~t immediately to the House and passed there. ' 

By unanimous consent, the bill (S. No. 954) prohibitinO' the publication of the revised sta~utes of t.be United States in the gewspapers at 

the expense of the Umtecl S!iates was read three times, and passed. 

PRESIDENTIAL APPROVALS. 

A mesi':ag~ from the President of the United States, by Mr. 0. E: 

BABCOCK, h1s Secret.ary, announced that the President had this day 

approvctl a.ncl signed the following acts: 

An act (S. No. 563) for the relief of John :M. McPike; and 

An act (S. No. 870) giving the assent of Congress to the a.cceptance 

by the offieers of the United States ship Monocacy oi silver medals 

presented to them by the King of Siam. 

LEGISLATIVE, ETC., APPROPRIATIO~ BILL. 

l\Ir .. l\IOR~ILL, of l\Iaine. I wi h to present a conference report on 

the d1sagreemg votes of the two Houses on tbe leO'islative executive 

and judicia.l appropriation bill. It is important that it should b~ passed now, so that it may go to the House this evening. 

The Chief Clerk rea-d the report, as follows: 

The committee of conference on the clisagreein..,. votes of tlJe two Houses on the amendments uf the Senate to the bill (H. R. No. 2064) making appropriations for 
5094 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JUNE 17, 

the legislative, executive, and judicial expenses o~ the GQve_rnment for the year endio "' Juno 30 1875 and for other purpo3CS, havmg met, dtcr full anll free con- feruuoo, have aw·eed'to recommend, a,u<l do rec-ommend, to their rc!!pectinJ Houses 

a.s follows: 

That the Senate rf\Cetle frwn their ame!l•lmonts numbered 12, 17, 18, 19, 49, 52, 63, 

65, 6!J, 7i, !H, 92, 94, 98, 101, 102, 106, 108, 113, 13.3, aml 13J. 

That the House rccsdo fro:1.1 their tlis.t:rrcoment to th ~ am'):H1ments of the Senate 

nnn1l>ered 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 29, 33, 45,. 47, 4 , 51 ~ 53, 55, 5!i, 57, 53, 5:J. liD, 61, 62, G7, 70, 73. 74, 

79, 80, 81, 85, 6, 87, sa, 89, 90, 103, 115, 117, 118, 123, 127, 123, 13"3, 134, 140, and 14;:), 

and agree t<> the S:1IllC. 

That tbo House recede from their disa!!re<'mcnt to amen lmont numbere:lll. anfl a,.ree to the sMile with an amendment striking out tho war,ls "aml eighty-ei,;llt;" 

a~<l tbe Senatea~ree to the same. That tho Houso recede from their clisa.,.reement to the amendment numbered 13, 

and arrreo to the same witll au amemlmcnt strikin~ ont "fh·e hundred and eightyfour .rand inserting in lion thereof "four hunw:o:l ;"and the Senate agree to tile 

same. '.rl1at the House recede from their ilisagreement to tho n.me<nclment numbore!l 14, 

aml a!!I"ee to the same, wit.h au a:uendmeut striking m1t ·•forty-two thousand seven hund:r"'ed and sis.ty-oight" and inserting" tlill:ty-seven thousaml eight hundred;" 

and the Senate agree to the same. That tho House recede from their disa!!I"oement to tho amendment numbered 15, 

autl a!!I"ee to the same with an amenumtllit striking out' " Bi ht thousantl two hnn-

«lred 'Rnd fifty-six:'' nnd inserting "two thousand.six humtrod;'.' and the Senate 

wrree to the samo- "That the Senate recede from their dis3.greement to tho amcmlment of the House to tho twenty-first amemlmont, and a~ee to tllo same. That the House recede from t-heir tlisa~eemont to the :1mendment nnmb€'red 22, 

and agree to the same with an amcntlment, striking ont '' 2,580," and inserting 

•·6,816;" and the Senate a!!l·ee to the s:1.me. That the House recede fr"Om tllNr disagreement to tho amendment numbered 23, 

aml agree to the same with the followin~ n.momlm:.m.t: Substitute for the words stricken out the following: Provided That so much of the act entitletl "An uct providing for the election 

of a Con!!T~ssional Printer," approved Fehrna.ry 2-2, 1867, as provic1es for the election of s;ich officer l>y tho Souatc, an<l provides that such olliel'r shall be dcemeu an officer of the Senate, shall con so and determine :mu become of uo effect from and 

after tho date of the first vacancy occurring in said office; that the title of sa.itl 

o!Iicer shall thereafter be Public 'Printer, aml he shall be dee moo an officer of tho Unit~d States, aml a:ti:l office Rhn.Jl be filled by appointment l>y tho President, by •.md with the advice and con out of the Senate. · And the· Senate agree to the &'\me. That the Senate recede from their iliR.'tgroement to tho amendment of the House to tho thirty- eventh amendment, and a~ree to the same. That the"House recede from their disagxcementto theamenilments of the Senate 

nnmberecl39 40 41, 42, 43, and •14, with au amendment as follows: In lieu of the 

words propo~ed to be insortecl by said Senate a,meodmcnta insert, after st-rikiug out the text of the bill from tile word "dollars," in line 3, parre 13, of the bill, down to and inclmlin "' the word "each,'' in line 7, same page, the folio wiJJ"': "One p1"inci pal 

clerk of warfanta and appropriations, $3,000; seven principal clerks, at $2,800 each; 

eif,ht assistant clerks, ali &'2,400 each;" ancl tho Senate agree to the same. :rhat the House recede from their 1lisagree-ment t<> th' amenument numbered 46, 

and aaree to the same with an amendml.'nt, a8 follows: Strike out" 6,003" and in- sert u'r lieu thereof "two thousand one ;'' anu the Senate agree t<> the same. Tilat the House recede from·their disagreement to the amendment numbered 50 

and agree to thesa.mewithanamendmentstrikingout "5,004" and inserting "2,006 ,'1 

antl the Senate agreed to the same. That the Honse recede from their disagreement to the amendment numbered 54, 

and agree to the same with an amendment striking out "8,002" a.ud inserting ' 5,004-;" and the Senate agree to the same. That the House recede from their disagreement to the amendment nmnbered 64, 

and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: Strike out" 1,008" and insert 

'·1()(l6 ;"and the Senate agree to the sa.::ne. . That the House recede fi"Om their disagreement to tho amendment numbered 66, 

and a•rree to the same with an amendment ns follows: Strike out "eight" and insert 

"fi>e;• ancl after the woru "each" in liue 4; page 18 of the bill, insert the words "one 

stenographer, at $2,000; " and the Senate agree to the same. That the House recede from their disagreement to the amendment numbered 68, 

and agree tothesamewithau amendment as follows: Stx·ikoouttheword "twenty," 

and insert in lieu thereof the word "eighteen;" and tho Senate agree to the same. That the House recede from their disagreement to the amendment numbereu 71,. 

and a,.<TI"ee to thesamewithanamendmcnta~follows: Strikeout the word '"fi.ftoeu," 

and insert in lieu thereof the word "fourteen;" and the Senate agree to the same. That the House recede from their disagreement to the amendment numbered 72, 

and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: Strike out "51,140," and 

insert m lien thereof "43,540;" and the Senate agree to the am e. That the House recedo from their disagreemL'Dt to the amendment numbered 75, 

and agree to the same with au amendment, as follows : In line 18, page 18 of the bill, 

Rtrike out the word "five" and insert in lieu thereof tho word "six; " and thb Senate agree to the same. That the House recede from their disagreement to the amendment numbered 82, 

anrl a aree to the same with an amendment\ as follows: Strike out the word •: three" 

and ilf ert in lieu thereof the word "two; " and the Senate agree to the same. That the Honse recede from their disagreement to the a~endment numbered~. 

and arree to the same with a,u amendment, as follows: Strike out " 16,500" and lllsert i~ lien ther eof "15, 780;" and the Senate agree to the same. That the Honse r ecede from their disa~eement t<> the amendment numbered 

84, and agree to the same with an amenament as follows : Strike out the word 

"six" and insert in lieu thereof the word "four;" aud the Senate agree to the 

same. That the H ouse rocede from their disagreement to the amendment numbered 93, 

and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: Strike out "18" and insert 

"16 -" and the Senate a,.,O"J.'ee to the same. Ti1at the House recede from their disagreement to the amendment numbered 95, 

and a !!Tee to the same with an amendment as follows: Strike out the words "three t.houfl~nd" and insert in lieu thereof the worus "two thousand eight huudred;" 

anrl the Senate agree to the same. · That the Hon8e recede from thoir disagreement to tho amendment numbered 

96, and ajiTOe to the same with an amendment as follows: Strike out "3,000," and 

in crt in lieu thereof "2,800;" and the Senate a,<TI"ee to the same. That the Honse recede from their (lisa.greement to the amendment numbered 97, 

and a!ITCe to the same with an amendment as follows: Strike out the word' nine" 

and u'rsert in lieu thereof thewonl "five;" and the Senate agree to the same. That the Honse recede from their disagreement to the amenclment numbered 

105, aud ag-r:ee to the same with an amendment, as follows : Strike out the wortls 

"ninety-eight thousand four bnndred," and insert in lien thereof "seventy-two 

tbom:and ;"and the Senate agred to tho same. Tbat the House recede from their disagreement to the amendment numbered 107, 

anrl agree to the same with an amendment as follows: In liuo 23, page 35 of the bill, 

strike out the woru "five" aml insert the word "six," antl in the same liue strike out the wortl "three" and in ert the word "four," and strike out all after the word 

"dollars " in liue 25, (same page,) down to and including the word "dollars" in liue 

26 ; and the Senate agree to the same. 

That the llouso recede from t.beir disagreement to the amendment numbered 109, 

and a$roe to the same with an amemlinent as follows : Bnh~tituto in lien of saitl amen ament the :llollowing: after tile word Dcpartmcut, inlino 18, pa ""e 07 of t.IJe bill, in&ert th~ wonlt~ '·in llio city_of Washington," anLl strike out the \Vords '·Onl- nanco antl AdJutant-General's Ollice" from said amendment, anu a.fl.cl' the word 

"unties,'' liuo 21, same pagl', insert tho followin"": 

Provided, Tlmt tile Adjutant-General is anthofize<l to r et:tin during the nerl fiso::U year, and no OJ~?er, such portion of hls force of employe uow on duty in his olli ce, as may l>e actuP.lly nece ary for the sernce thereof; but no new nhstm nts shall 

be matte into the general service; and nothing in this act shall be so con trued as to incren.'3e the agrregate force now employed in any office of the War Department. 

And the Senate agree to tho carne. That the Senate recede from tileirclisagreement to the amendments of t.he House t<> the amendment of the Senate numbered 112, and agree to the sanle. 

That tho House recede from their clisagreement to tne amendment nnm bercc112.3 

and agree to tho same with an a.mt'ndment as· follo~-s : Strike out the words "fiy~ hundred;" aml the Senate agree to tho same. Tl.Jat tile House recede from theit· disagreement t.o tho amendment numbered 131 

anti a~ee to the ~>arne with an amendment as follows: In lien of "fifteen" snbsti~ tuto 'i'tcn," anrl after the wonl "doll::n"R," in line 14, page 55 of tho bill, add thofol· 

lowing: "That it shall bo tile tluty of the healls of tl.to several Executive Depart· mcn~.s, anll_of the a~s of the respective Burcau.'3 therein, iu tho int.(\rosts of tl.to 

:pablic 2croce, to req_mro of all clerks of class ono and above, and of chiefs of divi - 1ons, suc_h hours of labor as may be doomed necessary for tho proper dispatch of 

the public business, not exceeding, however, the time for which saiu Departments n.r:> by law required to b9 open ~or bu ines , any u age to the contrary notwith- standin~;" ami the Senate ag-reo to the samo. That the llorrse recede from their disa,..,"Teement to the amendments numbered 

13.3, 136, and 137, and a;rree to the sa.mo "\Yitil amendments as follows: Insert in lieu of tho matter proposed to be insertctl by said a.mcnunient, af'L.,er strikinrr out of tho t ext .of tho bill all after, ~he ~ord ;• Trea: ury" in line 20. pag:e 56, dowii to autl inclmlmg th~ ":~rd" each: lD liue ~ th?-t J;as x;ot already been Rtrickon out hy sahl ::rmeu!lmen", Lile foll.o"Wl.Dg: "two pnnmpal clerks at 2,800 each; two a,s!;ista.nt 

clerks at ~,400 each;" and strike out "3,503" and insert" 3,409 ;" a.n!l the Sena.to a.greo to tho same. That the House recede from their disagreement to the amemlment numbered 141 and a'"'r e to the lilaiDe with an amendment as follows: Strike out "six" and insert 

"nine; " and the Senate agree to tho same. That tho Hou e recede from their disagreement to the amendment numberorl 

143, antl agroo to the same with an amendment as follows: Strike out "28 ooa•· an1l 

insert "14,007 ;" and iu line 9, page 57 of the bill, strike out "60" antl insert "80·" 

and tile Senate a!!I"ee to the same. ' That tho Sonata recede from their disagreement to the amendment of the IIouso to the amomlment numbered 145 and agree to the same. '.rhat tho House recede from their amendment to the amendment of the Senate 

nnml> rctll47, and agree to tho samo with an amendment as follows: Strike out from the matter _QI"OJ?OSed to be inserted by the oena.to tho words "this provision 

shall not apply," m liue 1, and insert in lieu t.horcof the following: "this provi ion 

shall. not apply to permanent specific appropriations, appropriations for rivers and har~ors, light-houses, fortiilca.J?.o~s, public b_uihli_ngs, or. tho pay of ~he Navy and Mnrme Corps; but the appropnationsuamed lD th1s prov1 o shalt contmue a.vailable en til otherwise ordered l>y Conrress a.nd this provision shall not appl:y -" after t.be 

wor£1 "Congress," in liue 14, insert tho following : "with his annual esti.r:·mtes -" anu the Senate agree to tho same. ' 

LOT M. MORRILL, 

A. A . SARGENT, 

H. G. DAVIS, 

Managers on the part of the Senate. 

.TAMES .A.. GARlfiELD, 

S. W. KELLOGG, 

SAMUEL .T. RANDALL, 

Managers on the part of the House. 

Mr . .ANTHONY. I should like to have some points in this report 

explained. In the first place I understand that there is an important 

addition made to the salaries of certain officers of the House of 

Representatives, making them higher than the corresponding officers 

of the Sena.te-. Is that sot 

Jifr. MORRILL, of Maine. I will state how that is. It is true that 

the House increased the sala.ries of certain employes of the Honse. It has been the custom heretofore of each House to fix the salaries of 

its own employes, and as a matter of courtesy it has been acquiesced 

in by the other branch. Therefore we did not feel that it was a matter absolutely within our province to insist upon the Senate amendment striking out the increase. Yielding to the courtesy which had 

obtained for many years, the conferees on the part of the Senn.te felt 

at liberty to recede from our position ~m that proposition. 

Ir . .AJ."'fi'HONY. I h::we always been in favor of allowing each 

House to regulate the compensation of its own officers, and I do not 

wish to enter into a race with the House in raising the salaries of 

officers, but I recollect that when we desired to vote n,n adequate 

compensation to an officer of the Senate, for whom we all have the 

highest respect, and who has been here at least twenty years lonO"er 

than the Senator longest in continuous service, we had the utm~st difficulty in getting the House to agree to it, and then it was only on condition that it should apply to the present incumbent of the office. Mr. 1\IORRILL, of Maine. I t is perhn.ps due to the House of Rep· rescntatives that I should say that in regard to two employes whose 

salaries have been increased, it was upon the principle of complimenting those officers which had been adopted by the Senate in former 

years in regard to one of its own meritorious officers, and the example 

therefore has that in its favor. Mr. ANTHONY. How many officers have their salaries raised f 

:Mr. MORRILL, of .Maine. Five, I think. 

Jifr. ANTHONY. I would like to ask the Senator further, what is 

the status of the Congressional Printer T 

1-Ir. MORRILL, of Maine. That has just been read, but the Sena- tor's attention probably "!"as not called to it. Substantially it is this : That whenever there is a vacancy in that office the officer is to be ap- pointe<.l by the President and confirmed by the Senate, and is to ue 

denominated "Pnblic Printer." · Mr . .ANTHONY. But it does not legislate the present incumbent 

out of office. 

. 
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 50-95 

1-fr. MORRILL, of 11a.ine. It does not. 

Mr. ANTHONY. I think tha,t is perfectly right. I think that the 

Public Printer shon1d be nominated by the President and confirmed 

by the Senate like the other great officers of the Government. This 

cha,nge to the existing mode of appointment was made at the urgent 

request of the House of Representatives, and not until they had sent us a second bill for that purpose. I myself assented to it with very 

great reluctance. I think that the name "Congressional Printer" is a misnomer, for thero is more printing done for the Departments than 

there is for Congress. At the same time I think to legislate a man out 

of office at a time when charges of the gravest nature have been preferred against him, which are now under consideration and upon which 

tho committee of which I have the honor to be chairman will soon be 

called upon to report, would be an act of very gross wrong. Since the 

change in the tenure of tho office and in the appointment of the offi- cer was made at the urgent request of the House, I think that the 

committee of conference have done perfectly right in holding on to 

the measure which the House have compelled us to, until there shall 

be a vacancy under the existing law. Then I thihk the matter should 

be as the bill provides. Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. There seemed to be no disposition, as I 

could understand, to legislate the present incumbent out of office. 

He is left as I have stated. Now a single word in regard to the bill a.s a geneml proposition. 

It will be noticed that there are numerous amendments, in regard to 

which on the one side and the other the Senate recede and the House 

x·ecede, which become necessary of course in order to any agreement 

upon a general conference. The House, exercising a very laudable 

ambition to curtail the public expenses, had cut down the public 

service so to speak pretty largely in many of the executive branches 

of the Government. When the bill carne here this led to a very careful 

x·evision of the whole subject, and the Senate Committee on Appro- priations reported to the Senate a large number of amendJ:nents in 

the direction as they believed of the actual demands of the public 

service. Of course that was the chief matter of conference, and it 

will be seen that the report restores the public service somewhat 

largely as the bill carne from the House to the Senate, but still the 

conference report is a reduction of something over $100,000 in the 

aggregate from the bill as presented by the Committee on Appropriations on t.he part of the Senate and as accepted by the Senate. 

I know of nothing so striking or marked in the report as to lead me to make any special remark in regard to it. I will answer any in- quiry which any Senator may desire to make in regard to any amendment. 11r. ROBERTSON. I should like to ask the chairman of the com- mittee one question: Does not this bill perpetuate the Congres- sional Printer in office so long as h e lives 'I 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. It does not. He may be reached by the 

power that created him. A vacancy unquestionably may be created 

in the office ; but at the same time it does not legislate him out of 

office. The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. INGALLS.) The question is on agreeing to the r eport of the committee of conference. The r eport was concurred in. 

PENSION BILLS. 

A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. McPHERSON, 

its Clerk, announced that the H ouse had passed the following ,bills; 

in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate : A bill (H. R. No. 2765) granting a pension to John W . Darby; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3683) granting a pension to Melissa Rankin, of 

I ndiana; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3684) t o increase pensions in certain cases; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3685) for the relief of George A. Schreiner ; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3GS6) granting a pension to Nancy Curry; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3687) granting a lension to Victoria. L. Brewster; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3681) granting a pension to William M. Drake; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3682) granting a pension to Theron W. Hanks, a private of the Third Minnesota Battery; 

A bill (H. R. No. 2400) granting a pension to William White; 

A bill (H. R. No. 2156) granting a pension to Nathan A. Winters; 

A bill (H. R. No. 2949) granting a pension to James R. Dorland; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3(392) granting a pension to Harriet W . Wilkinson; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3693) granting a pension t o Aaron B. Hughes; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3694) granting a pension to Rebecca W . Taylor ; 

A bill (H. R. No. 2235) granting a pension to Henry Korn; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3695) granting a pen ion to Eliza Flamant; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3696) granting a pension to Mary A. Hough, 'vidow 

of Joseph Hough, late sergeant of Company B, Sixty-first Regiment of 

Pennsylvania Volunteers; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3697) granting a pension to Belinda Craig; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3715) granting a pension to Sarah Bacon, of Frank- fort, Kentucky ; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3698) ~mnting a pension to William C. Davis, a 

private in Company B, Eleventh Regiment Tennessee Cavalry Volunteers ; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3699) granting a pension to Lydia Simpson; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3700) granting a pension to Teter Wolfyoung; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3716) granting a pension to Elizabet.h B. Dyer; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3717) granting a pension to Sarah 1\fcAdams; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3588) grunting a pension to William 0 . Madison ; 

A bill (H. R. No. 6~9) granting a pension to Bernard Sailer; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3090) granting a pension to Peter Campbell; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3691) granting a pension to James Burris; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3718) granting a pension to Cornelia 111. Arthur; 

A bill (II. R. No. 3719) granting a pension to Matthew B. Whitaco ; 

A. Lill (H. R. No. 3720) granting a pension to Charles C. Haight; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3721) granting a pension to Ezra C. Owen; 

A hill (H. R. No. 372·1) grantiug a pension to Michael Qun,rry; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3725) granting a pension to Mary Ann Eaton; 

A hill (H. R. No. 372G) granting a pension to Catharine H . Gallagher; . A bill (H. R. No. 3727) granting a pension to John M. Allen; 

A bill (H. R. No. 1G06) granting an increase of pension to Stephen W eatherlow; 

A bill (H. R. No. 1241) restoring to the pension-roll the name of 

Joseph V. Cartwright; 

.A. bill t H . R. No. 2'254) granting a pension to the minor heirs of John 

H . Evans; · A bill (H. R. No. 3427) granting an increase of pension to :MaryW. Shirk, widow of James \V. Shirk, deceased, late commander in the 

United States Navy; 

A bill (H. R. No. 2334) granting a pension to Mrs. Emily L. Slaughter ; 

A hill (H. R. No. 78) granting a pension to Salem P . Rose, of North 

Adams, Massachusetts ; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3278) granting a pension to Margaret Beeler; 

A bill(H. R. No. 3277)granting apension to Robert D. Jones; . A bill (H. R. No. 1438) granting a pension to Emily Phillips, widow of Martin Phillips; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3711) granting a pension to Martin D. Chandler ; 

A bill (H. R. No. 11544) granting a pension to Hannah E . Currie; 

A Lill (H. R. No. 3712) granting a pension to Stillman C. Spaulding; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3031) granting a pension to Catharine A. Winslow, widow of the late Rear-Admiral John A. Winslow ; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3713) grantin~ a pension to Sarah S. Cooper; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3714) grantmg a pension to Moses B. Hardin, 

guardian of minor children of Stanley Smith; 

A bill (H. R. No. 1722) granting a pension to Martha Wold; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3703) granting a pension t o Margaret H. Pit- ~~& : • 

A bill (H. R. No. 3707) gran tin~ a pension to Louisa Thomas; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3718) granting a pension to Eunice Wilson, mother of J ohn C. Wilson, late private of Company D, Forty-ninth 

Regiment Illinois Volunteers; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3709) granting a pension to William H. II. Duck; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3710) grant.ing a pension to Henry C. Mills; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3701) granting a pension to :Mrs. Maria. D. C. Bache, widow of General Hartman Bache, United Stares Army; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3702) granting a pension to Alice Roper; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3703) granting a pen.sion to Catherine Lee, widow of 

J esse M. Lee, private Company B, Second Regiment Ohio Volunteers; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3704) granting a pens~on to Mary E. Stewart ; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3705) granting_ a pension to Arthur l\1. L ee, late 

first lieutenant Eighteenth Tilinois Infantry; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3731) granting a pension to Bridget Collins; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3732) granting a pension to 0 . G. VanDusen, guard- ian of minor child of Reuben :M. Pratt; 

A bill (H. R. No. 2119) for the relief of Elizabeth McCluney; 

A bill (H. R: No. 2677) granting a pension to Mrs. Mary G. Harris; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3722) granting a pension to John Fink ; 

A bill (H. R. No. 372:3) granting a pension to Mary Logsden; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3193) repealing the act granting a. pension to Wil- liam 1I. Blair, approved July 27, 1868;' 

A bill (H. R. No. 619) granting a pension to Elizabeth Tipton, of 

Tennessee ; . A bill (H. R. No. 3273) granting a pension to Rachael W . Phillips, 

widow of Gilbert Phillips; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3728) granting a pension to Abby A. Dike; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3729) granting a pension to Anne Eliza Brown; 

A bill (H. R. No. 2504) granting a pension to Henry B. BurO'ar; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3730) granting an increa e of pension to Washington A. Holloway; 

A bill (H. R. No.1183) granting a pension to l\frs. Martha R. Robinson, of Portsmout.h, Ohio ; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3276) granting a pension to Davenport Downs; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3275) granting a pension to Eli Persons; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3274) granting a pension to JohnS. Corlett; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3190) granting a pension to Harriet Leonard; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3191) granting a pension to Elizabeth Brannix; ' 

A bill (H. R. No. ~192) granting a pension to the minor children of 

J. A. Brewer. 

The above bills were severally read _ twice by their titles, andre- ferred to the-Committee on Pensions. 

POST-OFFICE APPROPRIATION BILL. 

The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, resumed the considera- tion of the bill (H. R. No. 309-t) making appropriations for the service 

of the Post-Office Department for the year ending June 30, 1875, and 

for other purposes, the pending question being on the amendment of 

Mr. FRELL.'\GHUYSEN to the amendment of Mr. STEVEXSOX. 
5096 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JUNE 17, 

Mr. MORRILL, of Vermont. Mr. President, if this proposition of the 

Senator from Kentucky shall meet with the approval of the Senate to 

print three hundred thousn,nd copies of the Agricultural Report, it follows that we are going back to the old practice and will publish documentsad libitum hereafter onalls:.tbject whatever. That amount will 

give me enough to send about two copies to eachpost-officeiu my State; 

and there will be hundreds, many of whomreceive their mail matter 

at the same office, who will feel that tbey are just as much entitled 

to ue recipients of its favor as those who get it, and they will even be angry because they do not gt>t it. 

The1·efore, Mr. Preaident, it is absolutely impossible to publish 

enough of these reports to give copies to all those whom we may 

think deserving; and then if we ·publish these, why should we not 

publish the Land Commis ioncr's report 'l Are we to publish reports 

for only one classY There are also reports in relation to the mining 

districts. Are we to suppress them, or are they to go like these 

through the mails free of expense Y Then there are various other 

reports, as suggested by my friend from Maine, [Mr. HAMLIN,] the 

report on education, pe1·haps the most valuable that we have. Is that 

to be excluded f Then take that on tish culture. Some of my sporting 

friends would be glad to uistribute that. 

But, Mr. President, I did not rise to di:scnss this question. It seems to me that we have a rule that no amendment iu regard to appropriations shall be made unless it comes from a committee with previous notice. 'l'his evidently involves a cost of two or three hundred 

thousand dollars. I should like to make the inquiry whether this amendment is in order or not. U it comes in conflict with that rule, as it clearly seems to me it does, it is out ~f order. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ChaiT holds that as no appropriation specifically is made in the amendment, it is not amenable to 

the point of order. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Vermont. It involves the expenditure of money. 

I do not desire to discuss the question; but it seems to me that it is 

clearly in conflict with the spirit of the rule. 

The PRESIDING OFl<'ICER. The question is on the amendment 

offered by the Senator from New Jersey to the amendment proposed 

by the Senator from Kentucky. 

Mr. WEST. Let it be read. . The CHIEF CLERK. The amendment as first proposed reads: 

That three hundred thousand copies of the report of t.he Commissioner of Agri. 

culture shall be printed for circuln.tion, which shall be duly stamped with postagestamps; two hundred thousand copies for the use of the House, seventy-five thousancl copies for the use of the Senate, and twenty-five thousand copies for the use of the Commissioner of Agriculture. · 

It is proposed to amend the amendment by striking out the words 

"which shall be duly stamped with postage-stamps." 

The amendment to the amendment was rejected. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question recurs on the amendment of the Senator from Kentucky, [Mr. STEVENSON.] 

Mr. WEST. Now I raise the point of order that, the amendment 

of the Senator from New Jersey having been rejected, this amendment offered by the Senator from Kentucky does increase the appropriation l>y these very postage-stamps that are put upon the documents. I submit that to the Chair. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. . The Chair thinks that as the amendment contains no specific appropriation it is not open to the point of 

order; but he is willing to submit the matter to the Senate and have 

the sense of the body upon it if the Senator from Louisiana desires. 

Mr. WEST. I do not desire it. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question recurs on the amendment of the Senator from Kentucky. . Mr. DAVIS. I think we had hotter have the yel:18 and nays. 

The yeas and nays were ordered. . :Mr. BORE~IAN. I should like to have some explanation of this 

amendment. I do not understand how postao-e-stamps are to be·pnt on these documents. It does not state wh~tE'er the postage-stamps are to be placed upon the documents here or elsewhere, or by whom. 

It does not make it anybody's duty to do it. 

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

27, as follows: 

YEAS-Me srs. Bayard, Bogy, Carpenter, Clayton, Cooper, Davis, Dennis, 

GDldthwaite, GDrdon, Hit.chcook, Ingalls, Kelly, Lewis, McCreery, M rrimon, 

Mitchell, Norwood, Patterson, Ransom, Robertson, Saulsbury, Spencer, Sprague, Steven:son, tockton, Tipton, and Windom-27. 

NAYS-Messrs . .A.llison, Antho11y, Boreman, Boutwell, Bnck.inc:;ham, Chandler, 

Conkling,_9ragin, Frelinghnysen, Hager, Hamil ton of Maryland, Hamilton of Tc:;:as, 

Hamlin, .t1owe, Morrill of Maine, Morrill of Vermont, Morton, O~lesby, Pratt, 

Ramsey, Sargent, Schurz, Scott, Sherman, \Vadlcigh, \Vashbnrn, and West-27. 

ABSENT-Messrs. Alcorn, Brownlow, Cameron, Conover, Dor"Rey, Edmunds, 

Fenton, Ferry of Connecticut, Ferry of Michigan, Flanagan, Gilbert, Harvey, 

Johnston, Jones, Logan, PeMe, Stewart, Thurman, and Wrigh~19. 

So the amendment was rejected. 

The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amendments made as in Committee of the Whole were concurred in. 

The amendments were ordered to be engrossed, and the bill to be 

read a. third time. · · The bill was read the third time, and passed. 

1\IESSAGE FRO~I THE HOUSE. 

A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. McPHERSON, 

its Clerk, n.nnotmced that the House had passed the bill (S. No. 482) 

to &nthorize the construction of a bridge over the Willamette River 

at Salem, in the State of_ Oregon. 

.· 

The message also aimounced that the House had pa sed a concur- rent 1·esolution extending leave to the woman's centennial .xecutive 

committee of Washington to occupy the Rotunda of the Capitol upon 

the afternoon anll evening of the lOth of Dece~b r next, .for the purpose of celebrating the de ·traction of the tea in the harbor of Boston on the night of the 16th of December, 1773. 

PENSIO~ APPROPRIATION BILL. 

Mr. SARGENT submitted the following report: 

The committee of conference on the disa!ITeeing votes of the two Houses on the 

amendment !Jf th~ Senate to the b~ll (H. R.l{o. 34:ll) makin~ appropriations for the 

payment of mva.lid and other pen Ions of tho United States for the year ending J nne 30, 1875, havin_p met, after full and free conference have agreed to recommend, ancl 

do rooommenu, to their re.!pective Eouses as follows : That the Honse recede from their disal::,rreement to the amendment of the Senate, 

and agree to the same. A. A. SARGENT, 

D. D. PRATT, 

JOHN P. STOCKTON, 

Managers on tiLe part of the Stmate. 

CHARLES O'NEILL, 

J. 1.1. RUSK, 

ERASTUS WELLS, 

The report was concurred in. Managers on the part of the HOtUJe. 

HOUSE BILLS REFERRED. 

The following bills were severally read twice by their titles, and 

referred as indicated below: 

The bill (H. R. No. 3679) defining the qualifications of territorial 

Delegates in the House of Representatives-to the Committee on Territories. 

The bill (H. R. No. 3535) relatin~ to telegra.phic communication between the United States and foreign countries-to the Committee on Foreign Relations. 

The bill (H. R. No. 1565) relating to the c01:p.missioners of claims, 

and for other purpo es-to the Committee on Claims. 

The bill (H. R. No. 3641) to amend the act entitled "An act to 

incorporate the Washington and Georgetown Railroad Company," 

approved May 17, 1872-to the Committee on the District of Columbia. 

EASTERN BRANCH BRIDGE. 

The PRESIDENT p1·o t.e1J"/,])OJ"e laid before the Senate the · amendment of the House of Representatives to the bill (S. No. 75 ) to au- thorize and provide for the construction of a substantial iron and 

masonry bridge and of a causeway across the .Anacostia or Eastern 

branch of the Potomac River at or near the site of the pre ent nM:yyard bridge, which was. to insert after the word "appropriated," at 

the end of .the first proviso, these words: 

And no part of this apJ?ropriation shall be paid out of the Treasury tmtil contracts shall have been entered mto with responsible parties and with goo~l and snilicicnt 

sureties to be approved b:y the Secretary of War for the constrnction and completion of said bridge, including the ma.sonry, iron-work, and causeway, at a cost not to exceed 146,000. 

The amendment was concurred in. 

. BILL L"fi'RODUCED. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. I ask unanimous con ent, without previous notice, to introduce a bill which is neces ary to correct a mistake in an appropriation bill. I should like to have it printed so as, to have it acted on to-morrow morning. 

By unanimous consent leave was giv-en to introduce a bill (S. No. 

935) to amend the" act to ratify an agreement with certain Ute Indians in Coloudo;" which was read twice by its title, referred to 

the Committee on Appl'opriations, and ordered to l>e printed. 

SHIP ALHAMBRA. 

A message was received from the House of Representatives, by Mr. 

McPHERSON, its Clerk, announcing that the House had passed a bill 

(H. R. No. 3741) to authorize the issue of an American register to the 

ship Alhambra; in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate. 

Mr. CONKLING. I am told by a member of the House that this 

bill has passed both Houses twice in the last Congress and this, and 

fallen between the two. It is a very small matter, and I ask that it 

be acted upon at once. By unauimous consent the bill was read three times, and passed. 

CLAniS REPORTED BY THE CLA.Il\1S COMMISSIO!\TERS. 

~fr. SCOTT. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration 

of the bill (H. R. No. 2797) making appropriations for the payment of 

claims reported allowed by the commissioners of claims under the act 

of Congress of :March 3, 1871. · Mr. C.: HANDLER. I niove to postpone that and all prior orders for 

the purpose of taking up the r·ver and harbor bill. 

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

the Senator from Pennsylvania. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I hope that bill will not be taken up. 

The PRESIDENT p1·o ternpore. The question is on the motion of 

the Senator from Pennsylvania. If it be voted down, the Senator 

from Michigan can then make his motion. 

Ir. LEWlS. I hope this bill will be taken up. My constituents are largely interested in this measure, and I hope the motion will not 

be voted down. 

Mr. SCOTT. If the Senator fTom Michigan will listen to a v<>ry 

brief statement h~ will probably see that this bill will not occupy 

very long. It is a bill making appropriations for tho payment of al>out 
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 5097 

a thousand claims, and if read regularly tlrrou~h it would take proba- _bly near an hour to read it; but I presume tnat unanimous consent 

will be given to a-ct upon the amendments to the bill without going 

through the reading of the whole of the thousand names. If that be 

done, I think the amendments can be acted upon in a very short time 

and the bill disposed of. It is, aa has already been stated by 'the Senator from Virginia, a bill interesting to a very large number of people, and I hope it will be taken up and di!'posed ~f. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I hope not. 

Mr. DAVIS. There are nearly a thousand persons interested in this 

bill in various amounts, ranging from fifty to three or four thousand 

dollars. I hope the Senate will take it up. There will be no dllipute 

about it. 

Mr. SPENCER. I am satisfied it will only take long enough to read 

the bill to pa-ss it. 

Mr. CHANDLER. It is for the Senn.te to decide whether they prefer 

this to the river and harbor bill. 

The PRESIDENT JWO temp01·e. The question is on the motion of 

the Senator from Pennsylvania. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I call for the yeas and nays. 

The yeas and na,ys were ordered; and being taken, resulted-yeas 

40, nays 15; as follows: 

YEAS-Messrs. Baya,rd, Bogy, Boreman, Clayton, Conover, Cooper, Davis, Dennis, Flanagan, Goldthwaite, Goruon, Hamilton of Maryland, Hamilton of Texas, 

Hamlin, Hitchcock, Kelly, Lewis, McCreery, Merrimon, Mit{}hell, Morrill of Vermont, Morton, Norwood, Oglesby, Patterson, Pratt, Ransom, Robertson, Sar~ent, 

Saulsbury, Scnurz. Scott, Sherman, Spencer, SpraguQ, Stevenson, Stewart, Swckton, Tipton, and West-40. 

N A YS-Mes~rs. Allison, Boutwell, Buckingham, Carpenter, Chandler, Conkling, Cragin, Ferry of ¥ichigan, Frelinghuysen, Hager, Ingalls, Ramsey, Wadleigh, 

Washburn, and. Wmdom-15. 

ABSENT-Messrs. Alcorn, Anthony, Brownlow, Cameron, Dorsey, Edmunds, 

Fent.on, Ferry of Connecticut, Gilbert, Harvey, Howe, Johnston, Jones, Logan, 

Morrill of Maine, Pease, Thurman, and Wright-lB. 

So the motion was agreed to; and the bill (H. R. No. 279'1) mn.king 

appropriations for the payment of claims reported allowed by the · commissioners of claims under the a-ct of Congress of March 3, 1871, 

was considered as in Committee of -the Whole. 

Mr. SCOTT. Before the Secretary proceeds to read the bill I will 

ask to make a brief statement prior to asking unanimous consent to 

dispense with the reading of the whole bill. The bill as originally 

received from the House appropriated $680,060.78, divided among the 

following States : 

l~f!tlj-1t- tif~--!!1!1-1~!!!-;1!1!!!1\11111111111 !I I 

The amendments which the Committee on Claims of the Senate 

propose will strike out -from the present bill about $62,000. There was one item which we had proposed to strike out, and which by 

subsequent agreement of the committee we decided to retain in a different form. It would have left the amount $604,000 if that had 

been stricken "out; and if it is retained it will make about $611,000. 

Mr. SARGENT. What amendment does the Senn.tor now refer to 7 

Mr. SCOTT. I will state very briefly the n.mendments which we propose. We propose to strike out three appropriations and send 

back the claims to the commissioners for re-examination, namely, one to William Bailey, of Louisiana, for $45,161.72; the case of Letitia 

Elsey and Mariah H. Turpin, each 3,563.48; the case of John Campbell, administrator of the estate of Stephen S. Springer, deceased, 

$9,2'25. The other one which we propose to retain in a modified form 

is to the legatees of John Fox, $7,545. 

With the exception of the amendments to which I have already 

referred, the others in the bill are merely verbal for the purpose of 

correcting the errors that have crept into the bill in the names. The more substantial amendments are those that I have already referred 

1.o. While I have no desire on that subject, I will state that time will 

be saved if the Senate will be satisfied to dispense with the reading 

of the bill n.nd take up the amendments. Senators will see by looking at the bill that it is simply .au enumeration of the names and the 

amounts due to claimants, covering sixty-six pages. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Is there no legislation in itY 

Mr. SCOTT. There is no legislation in it of any character but the 

appropriations and the amendments which I pro~ose for the purpose 

of sending back some of the c~es to the commisswners. I ask therefore to dispense with the reading of the bill and proceed to consider 

the amendments. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Pennsylvania 

asks unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of the bill. Is 

there objection 7 

' Mr. CONKLING. I wish to interpose not.hing to consume time. 

Before consent is given to the request, I caJl the attention of the 

Senate for illustration to what appears on page 53: 

To the jublic school trustees of Manassas, for the materia-l of theBradbh school-

:ds~h~ch~~~f:;e~~~· Jreb~~~~ co~!he ba,sis of a compromise between t e school 

If the bill is not to be read, such matter as this and other specia.l 

matter is to be passed in the lump. I suggest to the Senator that we ought to know a little more about the bill than we do in taking it as a sealed volume containing sixty-six pages and selecting from it four 

amendments, confining our attention to those. 

Mr. SCOTT. As I said, I have no deane on the subject . . I made th~ suggestion simply to save time. 

Mr. CONKLING. I do not make an objection, but I say to the 

Senator--

Mr. MORRILL, ef Maine. I think the bill had better be read. _ Mr. SCOTT. If_the Senator from New York desires an explanation 

of the particular subject to which he refers I will give it. 

Mr. CONKLING. I did not select it; I happened to faJl on that 

because I opened the bill at that page; but nobody can go through 

this bill who is not familiar with it. Still I do not make an objection. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection to dispensing 

with the reading of this bill 'l The Chair hears no objection, and the 

amendments will be reported. 

The CHIEF CLERK. The fi.Tst n.mendment of the Committee on Claims 

is on page 2, line 19, strike out "Gilreath" and insert "Gilbren.th." 

The amendme-nt wa-s agreed to. 

:Mr. SHERMAN. I think the Secretary had better read where there 

is anything more than a mere name and amount. On page 17 I see something about the transfer of n. judgment. Wherevor there is anything except the mere name and amount I think the bill ought to be 

read. The Secretary can glance at it in a moment and see where those cases occur. Mr. SCOTT. I have a memorandum of the amendments. The next 

amendment is in line 376, where the word "tennant" is misspelled. 

The CHIEF CLERK. On page 16, line 376, it is proposed to strike out 

"tennant" and insert "tenant." 

The amendment was agreed to. 

Mr. SHERMAN. I ask for the reading of the clause on page 17, 

line 387. 

The CHIEF CLERK. On page 17, line 387, the bill reads: 

To Elizabeth D. Wa<ie, administratrix of th.e estate of Henry G. Wade, 9, 750; and 

that the judgment rendered in favor of the United States against the sureties of 

the said Henry G. Wade, upon the bond given by Wade anu his sureties for the 

purchase-money of the wharfboat, be, and the same is hereby, d.ischarged. 

Mr. SHERMAN. What does that mean f ~Ir. SCOTT. The Senator from Oregon is more familiar with this case than I am, he having ·examined it fully; but my recollection is 

that it is for the value of a boat which waB taken and impressed into 

the service of the Government. Some claim arose about the boat 

after it was recaptured, and the judgment referred to here was against 

the sureties of Henry G. Wade upon a bond given by Wade for the 

purchase of the boat. This is a stipulation by which that judgment 

is to be released, the sum appropriated here being.in full for both the 

value of the boat and its use while it was in the service of the Government. That is my recollection of it, but it is more familiar to the 

Senator from Oregon who examined the case. lli. MITCHELL. I will state for the information of the Senate 

that the claim was made for a boat taken by order· of one of our generals during the war and used on one of the Arkansa-s rivers. The 

boat was some considerable time afterward turned over to an agent 

of the Treasury Department and sold. At the sa.le the owner became 

the purchaser. Instead of pn.ying the purchase-money, the officers of 

the Government took his bond with certain sureties for a certain 

penal sum conditioned for the pawment of the amount at a certain 

time. Afterward suit was commenced on the bond in one of the 

circuit courts of the United States, and judgment obtained. · The 

commissioners in passing upon-the claim allowed the claimant for the use of the boat, and also recommended that Congress release this 

judgment. That is all there is of it. The Committee on Claims rec- ommend the same measure that the commissioners did. 

Mr. SCOTT. If nothing further be desired in I'eference to t.hat, the 

next amendment is in line 435. 

The CHIEF CLERK. The nextamendmentof the Committee on Claims 

is on page 19, lines 436,437, and 438, to strike out the following item: 

To Jolm Campbell, administrator of the estate of StephenS. Springer, deceased, 

$9,225. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

Mr. SCOTT. The next amendment is in Jines 513 and 514. 

The CHIEF CLERK. On page 22 the Committee on Claims propose to 

strike out lines 513 and 514, as follows: 

To William Bailey, $45,161.72. 

:Mr. WEST. Mr. PresidentMI'. SCOTT. Will the Senator permit me to suggest before he goes on that while this is stricken out here the second section reported by 

the committee proposes to send the claim back for re-examination to 

the commissioners. 

Mr. WEST. I will yield to the Senator from Missouri. 

Mr. BOGY. I will state that I have been callP.d upon to investigate this cln.im of Mr. Bailey. I have done so with some care, and I am 

at a loss to understand why the committee have made a report against 

the claim. It is embraced in the report of the commissioners of claims. 

It appears to be properly sustained by abundant testimony. It passed the House, and I am at a loss to understand why the committee report 

against it. I therefore move that the amendment reported by the 

committee be non-concurred in. 
5098 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JUNE 17, 

Mr. WEST. I understand there is a motion now made by the 

Senator from l\lissouri to non-concur in the amendment .. The PRESIDil~G OFFICER, (M.r. FERRY, of Michigan, in the chair.) 

The question is on agreeing to the amendment reported by the com- mittee. · 

Mr. WEST. I wish to say a few words to the Senate on the subject 

of this claim. In the report that was made by the commissioners of 

claims and acted upon by the committee of the Honse of Representa- tives at the close of tile last Congress, the claim of William Bailey for 

the sum stipulated in this bill was included, and the bill with that 

claim included in it was just about being passed in this body when some objection was made by some individual inducing the committee 

to withdraw their recommenclation for its payment, to enable the 

commissioners of claims to consider the suiJj ect once more. Now 

the :proposition of the Senator from Penns.ylvania striking out the 

appropriation in favor of the payment of this claim, and also pro- viding that it shall be recommitted to the commissioners of claims, 

is a renewal of just what was done twelve months ago. Consequently if there is any justice in this claim at all t he claimant is sub- j ected to the delay, the perplexity, and the privation of once more submitting his claim to the commissioners. 

Now, there is certain testimony tangible here that can be laid 

before the Senate which I think will justify them in declining to 

accede to the proposition of the committee. In the report that the 

commissioners of claims made at the close of the :Forty-second Con- gress they used specifically this ltmguage: 

After a careful examination of the testimony and all the papers in the case, and after the most thorough and searching inquiry, we find lli. Bailey to have been a constant and consistent Union man !luring the whole war. 

That was the finding of the commissioners; they themselves were compellecl to admit that Mr. Bailey was a loyal man. There not beino- any written report from the Committee on Claims on this case, I h~·e no means of knowing what their reasons are for withholding 

p ayment; but if tho Senate will examine they will find that at 

the time the commissioners made this report there was a charge 

made against Mr. Bailey that ho had been gu~lty o~ selling cotton to 

tho coniederate government. He was exarruned m regard to that. 

Tho corrimissioners also alluded to it in their report in these words : 

General Bailey, upon his examination in this case, swears that he did sell five 

htmdred bales of cotton to the confederate government, or to some confederate or State a"ent, alle!rln,.,. that he was compelled to sell it to get money to pay his taxes; 

o.nd if Ire had refus~d it would have been taken or burned. 

And yet, notwithstanding that investigation and admission by the 

claimant himself, for nobody else swore to it, the commissioners of 

claims considered that the claim was a just and equitable one and 

should be paid. 'There has come into the possession of the Government of the United States since this report was presented to the last 

Congress certain record evidence of the transactions of the confed-: .erate cotton bureau to what is known as the trans-Mississippi department. I was aware at the time this claim was presented to Congress 

la-st year of the existence of those records, and I was also aware, 

havino- examined them, of what they said in reference to Mr. Bailey. Those0

records prove conclusively, but no more conclusively than was proved by the admission of the claimant himself, that Mr. Bailey did 

sell that cotton; but his testimony is there, and the testimony is also 

there of the agent of the confederate government, that he sold that 

cotton under duress. The commissioners, in presenting a supple- mental report particularly relating to this claim of Mr. Bailey, under 

the date of March26, 1874, give the precise questions put to Mr. Bailey 

and answers made by him, as follows : 

Question. Did you contribute anything to aid the confederate cause~ 

Answer. Never one farthing, neither directly nor inilirectly. 

Q. Did not you have to pay tithes~ . A . I had; and I was compelled to sell five hundred .bales of cotton ~tho confed- erate government~ or have it burned and destroyed, rn order to pay my taxes. I 

sold it to a young man, an agent of the confederate government there. 

There is some allegation here that the young man who is alluded 

to was a son-in-law of the claimant. The facts were that at the time 

this young man was there confi.scatin rr the old fellow's cotton, he was coniiscatin(l' the daughter also, and there wa,s a slight disagreement 

'between them on the question of cotton and on the question of the 

daughter, and the young man got them both, bu~ he got them both 

under duress and contrary to the assent of the clarmant. There is abundant and overwhelming testimony of loyalty. I have 

it before me, but I do not consider it necessary to trouble the Senate 

with it, because I claim this man's loyalty under the admission of the 

commissioners themselves. If it is necessary to go into that, I can do so. I shall briefly, however, refer to one affidavit in the case to 

show tha,t this ma,n was not only loyal to the Government, but wa.s l oyal in heart and loyal to the core, and it is to such men throughout 

the South that we should give our encouragement and assistance. 

Here is what one man says : 

Dnrina the Red River campaign there flocked to within our Army lines upward of ten tli'ousand freedmen. These were of all ages and of every condition-sick, 

lame, :n,~ed, hungry. . The Army w~ without adequate supplies, and the freed- men, in many cases, died by the ways1de. 

Mr. SCOTT. I ask the Senator whether he reads from testimony 

taken before the commissioners f 

Mr. "WEST. Here is testimony given by a man and his testimony 

is referred to by the commissioners. It is given by a man whom I 

very well know. 

Mr. SCOTT. That is not the question. Was it taken as testimony before the commissioners 'f 

1\lr. WEST. I am not prepared to answer that question, but I have n ot a doubt that it was. 1\Ir. SCOTT. What is the date f 

Mr. vVEST. The 27th day of April, 1874. 

Mr. SCOTT. Then it was not taken before the commissioners. 

Mr. WEST. Well, we will take it now. There is no question of 

his loyalty now raised. They have admitted his loyalty. . · 

It was during this campaign th~t I ~t met MI,-. Bailey, and it was then-a yf'ar before the war ended-tllat he assisted rn word and deed as none but a friend woultl 

do. The ~mount of supplies furnished from his }Jlace to the Army and the free!l- men was Immense. We must have had five thousand freedmen on his place at one time, aml all these were in need of food which could be had at the time only from 

the conn try through which we passed. Nearly all the planters had conceale(l their 

stock of provisions or sent it within the lines of the enemy, but lli. Bailey !lit!. not do so. On our :ll'rival we were welcome to what be had, so t hat the Army on the one hand and the freedmen on the other swept everything. Not only did they take 

thefoork, horses, sheep, and cattle that could. be found, but the fences were burnt 

~Er ~~l~:;;.and I saw his mules driven away to the camp of the .Army by some of 

At this time, as well as in 1865, lli. Bailey was the friend of the Army, and declared to mo that everything he had on earth he would rather sacrifice than see the 

Union destroyed; an!l so far as slavery was conce1ned he avowed the conviction 

that he could do better with free than with slave lal.Jor. 1 

Mr. Bailey man'dmitted two hundred of his slaves in the State of 

Virginia before the breaking out of the war. He was a man of im- mense wealth, having immense estates in Virginia, having immense 

estates also in tb.e State of Louisiana, with enough slaves there to 

provide amply for himself and his family, with a very large estate, and 

he manumitted those who were in Virginia. The report.of the com· missioners themselves admits this man's loyalty; there is over ... whelming proof of it; and I cannot see with what propriety the Com- mittee on Claims can recommend the remission of the case to the 

commissioners of claims. They have given us no intimation of whnt 

their object was; they have not told us that this man was disloyal; 

and so far as the testimony goes it is conclusive that he was loyal to 

tho Government. 

I have so far merel:v stated the outside of the case. If the chair- man of the com,mittee has evidence or will state to the Senate that ho 

has evidence of the man's disloyalty, I should like to hear it. :M:r. SCOTT. I had hoped that this case would give rise to very 

little discussion. The amendment is offered hy the committee not 

for the purpose of depriving General Bailey of compensation for supplies furnished to the A...--my, if he is entitled to it, if ho wa.s in the languarre of the statuto under which he claims a loyal inan during the 

who1e of the rebellion, but it is offered for the pmpose of having the 

question heard before the commissioners of claims, so that what I 

shall state hereafter bearing upon his loyalty and against it can be 

met by him and wha,t he offers to rebut it can be heard by the com- missioners upon cross-examination of the witnesses that he produces. 

Now let me state as briefly as I can the true position of this claim. 

The Senator from Louisiana has not looked as closely at the history 

of the case as he would have done, perhaps, from the statement he 

has made, had he been called upon to investigate it in committee. 

He has stated that after it was first reported by the commissioners of 

claims it was sent back to them, and that they had re-examined it. 

He is mistaken as to a matter of fact. This claim- and I state the fact 

from an examinatian of the papers--

1\Ir. WEST. On that point will the Senator tell me what I am to 

think of what I see in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of 1\fay 23 0? 

"Office of the commissioners of claims"- the revision of the case bv 

the commissioners. That is what I ba.sed my statement U.Pon. • Mr. SCOTT. I am aware that. the Senator was reading from the 

CoxGRESSIONAL RECORD and I am giving him what I get from the 

record; and the debate in the House has in it ex parte testimony just 

like that the Senator read, taken since the question has been mooted 

in Congress. I will state the position I occupy on this question. We established the commissioners of claims for the very purpose 

of enabling them to examine these claims dispassionately, to do jus- tice to the claimants and to do justice to the Government. The com- plaint was made in Congress that tho hear:ipgs before committees were all ex pa,1·te, and so they were; that anybody could make out 

his case; and it wa-s desired that instead of an ex parte hearing there 

should be hearings where the Government could be represented, and 

where the claimant conld present his ca-se. The commissioners of 

claims after hearing this case upon the testimony presented, first re· ported it, as they were required by law to do, on the 1st of December, 1872, and they reported it favorably. The Senator by referring 

to the record from which he quoted will see that that is the case. The 

bill passed the House at that session of Congress. It came to the 

Senate and this claim was struck out of it upon the motion of the 

then chairman of the Committee on Claims, the Senator from Wisconsin, [Mr. HoWE,] upon information given to him from some quarter alleging the disloyalty of General Bailey. Upon that it went 

back to the House, the amendment was concmred in striking out 

this case, but the case was not sent back for re-examination and it never has been re-examined before the commissioners. It remained 

in the Honse of Representatives, where all the papers remain under 

the law, the report being made to the House. When the Committee on War Claims came to make up the bill at this session they again 

inserted this claim in their bill and it was reported back by the com-
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 5099 

mittee to the House. Bnt during the winter at some time information came to the commissioners of claims that the records of the 

trans-1\iissisHippi cotton department of the Confcuerate States showeu 

that two sales of-cotton hall been made by General Bailey to the con- federacy in November, l.tl62, and January, 18G3, that a portion of each 

sa,le ha-d been taken by him in confeuerate bonds and the balance in 

money. That commtmication was sent to the chaJ.rman of the Com- mittee on War Claims, and when the bill came before the House he 

moved to strike out this item, aud upon that the discussion aJ'ose to 

which the Senator has referred. In that discussion statements, letters of General Sherman, General Sheridan, General Canby, and 

others were read, which had never been before the commissioners of 

claims at all. 

Now what do we propose to do 'I We propose not to decide that 

General Bailey was a disloyal man, not to cut him off, not to strike 

at his case, but this testimony having come in against him-- 1\Ir. WEST. What is the testimonv that has come in 1 

1\Ir. SCOT'I;. If it is desired I will read it all; but I wanted to 

state the effect of the committee's action. As the Senator desires it, 

I will proceed to sa,y what it is. Mr. WE$T. Whore wus that testimony taken f 

Mr. SCOTT. I will tell the Senator; but ono thing at a time. I 

have not the original book here although I have it in my committeeroom, and I will therefore read an extract from a book which was ·obtained by purchase by our Government containing the archives of 

the trans-Mississippi cotton uepartment under the confederate government-a transcript from that book of tho agency which was kept 

by A. W. McKee, the person roferreu to as the son-in-law of General 

Bailey. This entry appears: 

ALEXANDRIA, LOIDSLL~A. 

A. W. McKee, Dr. 

1862, 

Nov. 14. To cash amount paid W. Bailey for 536 bales oot;. 

· ion, in bonds ..... .. .... .. ............. . ....... ~20,000 00 

Balance paid in notes .... . ........... ·-·---..... Hs, 731 44 --- ~,73144 

A. W. McKee, Dr. 

1863. 

J an. 1. To cash amount paid W. Bailey for 680 bales cot- ton, in bonds ..... . .. . ............. -- ---·- · .. -· 24, 100 00 

Balance paid in notes . ....... . _.· --- --.-·.-----· 30,001 64 54,101 64 

Here follows the certificate that these entries are copied from the 

book. Thus from this book it appears that sales were mn,ue by Gen- eral llailey to the confederate agent, A. W. McKee, in November, 1862, 

and January, 1!:l63, of cotton amounting to about $92,000, and of the 

purchase-money he took about 44,000 in confederate bonds and the 

balance in money. That is what appears against him on the book. ~!r. MEIW.UION. Uay I ask the Senator a question at this pointY 

Mr. SCOTT. Certainly. . Mr. MERRL\ION. I beg to ask the Seuat.or if there is a fact or a circumstance in this whole case ·that ten lis to impeach the entire loy- alty of the claimant except that simple memorandum, and further- more whether he is any party at all to that memorandum' 

Mr. SCOTT. That is the very reason why I wish to send this case back where he can be heard. Here is a book. The book itself is in 

the building ; I have given an extract from it; and it is as to the 

regular business operations of that cotton agency in which appear 

these two entries showing that this man, on these two days, solt.l this 

cotton. The Senator asks me if there is anything else in the case which shows his disloyalty. So fa.r as the question of disloyalty isconcei·ned, I am not here, as I have a,lready said, to say that General 

Bailey is or was a disloyal man. I am here to say that tllere is evidence enough to justify these commissioners in sending in this testimony as they did and in our sending this case back tQ them for 

re-examination. I do not want to prejudge him. I want to give him a fair opportnnity to be heard. J\1r. WEST. If it will not interrupt the Senator, I desire to a.sk a question. 

1\!r. SCOTT. Put the question. 

Mr. WEST. The question is, whether the papers relating to this 

Bailey case have not been withdrawn from the Senate and put in the 

hands of the commissioners of claims, between the time that the 

Government became the owner of these papers and the time that they _made the report a<Tain Y 

Mr. SCOTT. No, sir; so far from that, the commissioners asked 

whether they had the power to reopen a case and rehear it, and 

they obtained the opinion of the committees of bot.h Hou-ses that a case could not be reopened, and could not be sent back to them without :m act of Congress; that after they had reported a case it was out o.f their hands, and it has never been back for re-examination, 

and there never has been a subsequent report upon it .. 1\!r. WEST. That is not the question !asked the Senator. I asked 

whether the commissioners themselves did not withdraw the Bailey 

papers from the files of the Senate, and have they not had them in 

their possession up to December, 1873 f 

Mr. SCOTT. Not to my knowledge. 

1\Ir. WEST. I am tolU it is the fact. 

Mr. SC.OTT. I am informed exactly the other way. Now, Mr. Pres- id~nt, I ~~refer to ~ive these p~pers in the order in which they occur WJthout mterruptwn, and I will gladly, when I get them in, answer any question that maybe asked about them. 

Here are these two transactions, ancl I ask the attention of Senn.tors 

who are listening to the dates, November 14, SS~, and January 1, 

18{):3. It is alleged that two ales were made of this amount of cotton · and that a certain portion of tho proceeds was taken in bonus. On 

the 4th of February, 1tl63, a letter was written by A. \V.l\lcKee to 

M. 1\1. Rhorer, a man who was in his employ. I say a letter was written, because it is a letter certified r..s found a,mong the same papers 1 

and now in possession of the Government, anu I will ask the at,tention I 

of the Senate whi1e I read iii. It is a regular business letter written 

in the course of tlleir transactions; and so that it may be seen that 

the points to which I make special reference come in the course of the 

letter, I will read the·whole of it. 

M . M. RHORER, Alexandria : HOUSTON, February 4, 1863. 

MY DEAR Sm: I arrived yesterday from San Antonio after a tedious trip and 

much delay in returning in conse<Juence of l.Ji;rh wat-er, bad roads, &c. I am in receipt of your several favors of 14th, 18th, 20th, and 25th ultimo. Con- tents of all carefullv noted. · Col. 'l'hos. Martill. went to Richmond for money, and I hope will bring a good lot, 

unless tho Secretary of the Treasury couclmlcs ·that he woultllike to seo some of our mont.bly returns ere forwardiuP more. This department is informed of funrls ~ route long enongh to have rcacncd here twice. * * · Bomls are largely m demand here at par, and in some instances at 1 per cent. premium. 

Now I call attention to this sentence : 

When Lasere pays yon, tbe same funds can be used to bny with, and if General 

Bailey wishes to eiclianp;e $10,000 of his bonds for notes, do so. 

Now, mark it, Mr. President, a sale of cotton in November, 1862, 

about one-half taken in bonds; another in January, 1853, anu nearly 

one-half taken in bonds; and this letter, February 4, 1863, in tho rcO'- ular course of business says, when yon get this .money, "if Gener~ llailey wishes to exchange $10,000 of his bonus for notes, do so." 

Mr. BOGY. lly whom was that letter written 'F 

1\.lr. SCOTT. \Vritten by A. W. 1\fc.Kee, the confederate agent for 

the pnrchaso of cotton, tho man who paiu GencraJ Bailey, according 

to tho entry, the bonds anu the money- written to his clerk at Alex- andria., Louisiana. 

Now 1 a,sk not whether General Bailey is disloya 1 or not, not w hot her 

he took thcso bonds, for it isaJloged that he cliclnot-his affidavit is put 

in here since the thing is mooteu saying he never had one of these 

bonds. When a letter is written by a confederate a<Tent in the reiJ'u- lar course of business, directing his clerk to exchange SIO,OOO of mo~ey for bonds, is there 4

not enough to put Gene-ral Bailey on the defensive, for tlle pnrpose of showing that he did not get those bonds. We 

have made in the act of Congress continuous loyalty during the whole 

rebellion an element to bo fonntl by these commissioners before any man is paiu; and if General Bailey sold cotton in 1SG2 or 1863 to tho 

confederacy and took ~40,000 worth of their bonds it was an act of as high disloyalty as it would have been to ~ivo them $40,000 worth 

of guns ancl ammunition, for cotton was thell' ammunition. Mr. WEST. He had to sell it or they would take it. lli. SCOTT. We will come to that directly. I have his affidavit, 

put in here by himself since the thing was mooted, saying he never had the uomls. I protlnce this letter in connection with those entries 

not for the pmpose of showing that he had the bonds, but for the 

purpose of sayiJ1g that before we pass this claim it ought to go back 

before these commissioners, so that General Bailey may be permitted 

to meet this testimony; and if there is other testimony, as I am informed there is, bearing on this question, that it can be laid before 

the commissioners and they can cross-examine his witnes::;es. 1\fr. SARGENT. Will the Senator allow me to ask him if he thinks 

that letter would be received as evidence in any court where Bailey was a p:uty, a letter written by another man to his own clerk, not to 

Bailey, never coming to Bailey, but the simple statement of one man to another about something llailey had done or micrht do, by which 

Bailey shon1d not be criminateu in any way 'I 0 

1\ir. SCOTT. I am glad the Senator puts the question. Within 

the last fe~ days a pamphlet has been laid ~u <_>ur tables containing 

the affidaVIt of A. W. McKee, the man who 1t 1s alleged wrot.e .this 

letter, and I have no doubt the Senator ha.s seen it. It has been maue in thiS city. He is living. When he wa,s taken before that 

commission to make out the loyalty of the man who was his father- in-law, he could not tell whether he wrote that letter or not. 

1\Ir. SARGENT. Does the Senator say he was his father-in-law at 

the time the letter was written 1 

J\1r. SCOTT. Yes, sir; I believe he was. Mr. SARGENT. No, sir; he was not his father-in-law nntil after 

the war. Mr. SCOTT. Well, so far as that is concerned there is no exact 

date fixed as to whenhe did marry the daughter; but the Senator is 

mistaken in that respect. He was his father-in-law before the close 

of the war. But, 111r. President, let me go on, because I am so constantly inter- rupt~ ~t t?-e ~~cl of every sentence tha~ I can hardly keep up any 

contmmty m thl.B statement. I was saymg that there was eviuence 

enongh here to put Gene1·al llailey on the defensive for the purpose 

of showing whether he was loyal or not. Let me read on : 

There is no objection to purchase hisThat is General Bailey'sor your brother's cotton. 

· Showing, according to a statement of this agent at that time, that 

he takes it for granted that General Bailey's cotton can be purcha,sed. 
5100 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JUNE 17, 

This follows right after the mention of General Bailey about the 

$10,000-

There is no objection to purchase his or your brother's cotton ; n.nd if you can pick np enough to pay all expenses in this wise it is all right. I would not advise any al.l.ia.nces, however, with General B. More anon. 

That sentence has been diiferently construed. One construction 

has been put upon it that GeneralBa.iley was a Union man, and there 

should not be any more alliance with him on that account. Another 

construction was that this man, writing to hjs familiar, his clerk, his 

confidant, referred to an alliance, in a playful way, to the General's 

daughter. I do not know which it is; but here is the letter following 

up these two alleged sales, showing that it was proposed, first, to 

exchange money with him for the confederate bonds which this agent 

said he had; and, second, to buy more cotton from him. Now I go on to the other papers ihat are in the c:.tse. The third 

paper which I referred to, found among these archives, is a memo- xaiHlum of G. W. Sentell's purchase of cotton for Bailey & . Ward. 

I will not take the time to read the whole of that, but here are nine 

hundred and eighty-five bales of cotton Jmrchased for Bailey & 

Ward, and this letter attached: 

AUSTL\'1 TEXAS, May 12, 1864. 

DEAR Srn: On my arrival at Houston I bought from Major A. W. KcKee, as the agent by power of attorney from William Bailey, all the interest of the saicl Bailey in the nine hundred and eighty-five bales of cotton in the parish of Bossier. In 

the payment of the tax, &e., on the cotton, charge the same to my account. 

I do not know to whom the letter is addressed, but it was written on the 12th of May, 1864, by J. T. Ward, in which he speaks of buying from Major A. W. McKee, aR the a~~nt by power of attorney, 

from William Bailey all -the interest of tlailey in the nine hundred 

and eighty-five bales of cotton in t.he parish of Bossier. 

.Mr. SARGENT. If the Senator will allow me, is there anything 

disloyal in that one man buying cotton from another Y 

Mr. SCOTT. No, sir; but mark it: A. W. IcKee is the agent for 

the Confederate States, purchasing cotton. 

Mr WEST. What js the date of that transmission 7 

Mr. SCOTT. One thing at a time while thls cross-fire goes on between the Senator from California and the Senator from Louisiana. 

Major A. Y.l. McKee is the :tgent for the purchase of cotton for the 

Confederate States, and on the 12th of May, 1864-he had rem:tined as agent during all of this time-J. T. Ward, jn a business letter calls 

A. W. McKee the agent by power of attorney from William Bailey. 

It is alleged that William Bailey and A. W. McKee were at tlacrgers 

puiuts because McKee had married his dau~hter, and it is a llttle 

singular if th:tt be so that GeneraJ Bailey, a loyal man, would select 

the agent of the Confederate States as his attorney in fact for the 

purpose of selling his cotton. That is not the way in which a loyal man wonld act according to my experience of human nature. 

Mr. WEST. Mr. McKee was not the agent at the date of that 

transaction. 

Mr. BOGY. That was before the marriage. 

Mr. SCOTT. I do not know when the marriage occurred exactly. 

Mr. BOGY. I state the fact to be that it was before their mar- riage. Now the Senator answers that he does not know, and I know 

he does not know. · 

Mr. SCOTT. The difference between me and the Senatol"S' who 

have examined this ca-se is this : I have looked all through the testimony to find the date of this marriage; I wanted to see it; I uo not 

find it in the testimony. They have information perhaps from parties who can tell. Mr. McKee is here himself, and he has made au affidavit within the last week; but according to the statements in 

the testimony I drew the inference that it was very soon after this 

time in 1862 and 1863 that McKee married General Bailey's daughter. I am not here, as I have r epea,tedly said, to argue these facts for 

the purpose of determining in the Senate that he is disloyal, but for 

the purpose of saying th:tt before we set the precedent of paying to 

any ~an 45,000 for supplies who in 1862 or 1 53 sold cotton to the 

amount of 90,000 to the confederacy, th:tt man and the Government both should have a fair hearing. It is not Ge:Q.eral Bailey 

alone. That is not the question. This is the first case that has come before Congress arising out of the examination of these com- missioners of claim involving the question of whether a sale of cotton to the confederacy i9 of itself one of those disloyal acts which 

!'lbould deprive a man of his claim before that commission. If yon 

vote this case in before this testimony has beon heard before the 

commissioners of claims, before the Government has the opportunity 

of being heard, it is not simply the appropriation of $45,000, but it 

is opening the door to an avalanche of cases of a similar character, 

and the application will be made to open the door to extend the 

time for filing claims. It is on your table now. A bill came over from the House to-day to extend the time. for filing the claims before 

these commissioners ; and I warn the Senate tllat before they set any 

precedent it should be in a case fully heard before the commissioners of claims. This one has not been. This testimony which I have now read ha~ all come to light since the commissioners of claims 

reported upon it. 

Mr. ALCORN. Will the Senator allow me to a.sk him a question for information 1 

.Mr. SCOTT. Certainly. 

:M.r. ALCORN. If a citizen of the Government of the United 

States as it existed at that tillle had purchased cotton of the confederate government, would the Senator take that to be a disloyal 

act on the part of the citizen of the United State f Would the p\nchase of cotton from the confederate government have been held to 

be an act of disloyalty ¥ 

l\.fr. SCOTT. I am not going to turn aside .to discuss the question 

whether a purchase by a citizen from the Confederate States would 

be an act of disloyalty or not. I am discnssin~ the question of the 

sale of cotton by a citizen to the Confederate ~tate , and one ques- tion at a time is enough. 

The next paper that is furnished from these archives is a list of 

cotton: 

List of cotton purchased by M. M. Rhote1·, sub-agent of .A. W. McKee, 

general agent jot Loui-siana. 

Date. From whom. Residence. Bales. Where deposited. 

Novemboc14,1862~- Wm.Bailey ..... Alexandria__ _ 536 On his plantation. 

(Here follows a list of sixty-nine other names.) 

May Z'l, 1863 -.•••• - W. Bailey-- .. -._ Alexandria --_ 21 I.T- P. Grim ball's 

plantation. 

Here are tillee distinct sales: one November 14,1862; second, Jan-- uary 1, 1863, both large am~;>nnts; and third, May 1 63, for twenty-one 

bales. These papers show these sales, .if they are entitled to creflit. 

It may be said they are not evidence against General Bailey. I a:v that while they :;tre not to _be taken a.s conclusive evidence against him, 

they are that krnd of eVIdence whiCh when produced should bid us halt before we pay him tmtil he has had an opportunity of meetincr 

it and rebutting it if he can. <=> 

If the Senator from Louisiana desires to see what report these com- missioJ?-ers have made, here is the report, the only other report which ~hey did_ make ~er the fu:st report, and after this testimony came mto the1r _POsses~wn. I ~hmki as the nator. from Loui iana has 

alluded to It, I will have 1t reaf , and I will send It to the desk for the 

purpose of having it read. The date will show when they made the 

communication and sent it to Congress. The Chief Clerk read as follows : 

OFFICE OF THE COIDITSSIONERS OF CLADIS. 

Washin!Jton, D. 0., Ala.rch 25, 1874. 

DEAR Sm: The records of the trans-Mississippi cotton bureau, purchaselll>y the Gover~ent since tho_report waS made in the ca-se of \VilliamBailey, No. 980, 11how 

facts which we doom 1t our duty to r eport to yonr committee. 'l'ho ca e a-vin~ 

been reported by us to CoD!rre. s, we do not feel at liberty to make any further in- vesti,.,.ation of it unless specially dir~eted by that. body to do so. It Clearly appears that General Bailey soltl to the confederate government on the 

14th of November, 18G2, five hundred and thirty-six bales of cotton. His Rou-iulaw, Andrew W. McKee, batl been appointed by the coufederate governmcut namely, in October, 1 62, general agent for the purchase of cotton in 'Vest rn J ... onbi: ana and Texas. Tho fir 1t sale mad.e was by General Bailey Novemuer 14. 1tlti2. 

'£his five hundred and thirty-six bales of cotton was no part of the oirrht hUll:lred 

and thirty-four bales litigated in the United States di<>tnet cou:.·t fox!" the eastern district of Louisiana in 1864. It may be perhaps the cotton referred to by General 

Bailey (~ee ~is te timony before the commissioners of claims of November 14, 1871, 

pa•7 e 5) m h13 answers, as follows: 

'?Question. Did you contribute anything to aid the confederate causeY "Answer. Never, one farthing, neither directly nor indirectly. "Q. Did not you have to pay tith 1 

"A. I had; anu I was compelled to sell five hundred bales of cotton to the con. federa~e go>ernment, or have it burned a-nllllestroycd, in orucr to pay my taxes. I sold It to a young man, an agent of the confetleraw government there." ~e subseq nently tells of. an armed force comin~ out to burn hi:; cotton; of his 

telling them he woulll sell1t, &e. The statement 1s confused and mconsistent the 

date ~neert.;in, bu~ migh~ be ~ovcmber, 186~; aml if ~bo younrr man, the a_ieut, was his son-rn-law, 1t may Identify the transa.ction, but will make t'he story of d m·ess or an arme<l force very iinprobab1e. . It would seem to be clearly established by the papers now obtained that General ~ailey on th~ 14th of November, 1862, sold, volUlltaril:r, fi>e hundred and thirtySIX bales of cotton to the confederate government; that he ·was the first leading planter ~o so .~ell his cotton; and that his son-in-law was tho confederatu a;;ent who 

bought 1t. It further appears from tho "da_y-uook" of the eot.ton an-oucy in the 

custody of the Secretary of the Treasury (to which our attr.ntion ha.<> r~eentl,J.: been 

called) that A. ,V. McKee, as confederate a~ nt, bought of William Bailey,~ ovtJm· ber 14, 1862, tivo hundred anu thirty-six bates of cotton, and paid him therefor iu 

confederate bonds 20,000 and in notes~ $18,731.44, maki~~!l a ~o!o.l of ,731.44; also that on the 1st of Janu.ary, 1863, McKee bonght of Batley stz hundred and ei{lhty 

bales of cotton, and paid hin~; in bonds $24,100 and in notes $30,001.64; m.a1.ing $54,101.64. It also _appears from t~e paper that one_G. W. ~en tell bon_::;ht for ~illiam Bailey, or for Bailey & Ward, mne hundred am1 e1ghty-tive bales of cotton rn t-he pari h nf Bo sier; that Bailey, throut?h his son-in-la:w, 'the confeuerate ~ent, (MeKe~.) sohl - his interest therein to Waru, and that soon after the confederate «overnmeut took 

possession of all this cotton for its own use. Consid rin~ the r eYations of Bail y 

and McKee, anll that the property soon went for confederato use, it seem~:~ probable 

that Bailey should ha>e shared m this purchase, and that it was made for coni cu. orate use. It also appears from a letter found amongthesepapersthatCaptain W. W. 'Vithenburg was an agent of the confederacy under McKee, a-nd engagetlin tran porting cotton for the confederate government to market. He was an important witness for aml much relied on by General Bailey to e ta.b- lish both the facts and loyalty in his ease. He claimed to have been loyal himself to the cause :md Government of the United States. His connection with the con- federate government was not made known to us at the time; but that fact wonld seem to have an important bearing on the credibility of the witness. 

Ron. WILLIAM LAWRE:XCE, M. C., 

Ohainnan Oommittee of War Olaims, rec., Houscof ltepre:;e11tatives. 

A. O . .ALDIS. .T. B. HOWELL, 0. FERRISS, 

Oommissioners of Olai1ns • 
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 5101 

Mr. SCOTT. It will be seen from what has already been stated, 

t:bken in connection with this last paper read, that General Ba.iley 

alleged that he sold his cotton for taxes, that he sold it because if he 

did not sell it it would be burned, and it has been s~ated here and 

elsewhere that a trial occurred in New Orleans with reference to this 

and other cotton, in which it was shown that part of the cotton which 

he was alleged to have sold was never delivered; the sale was can- celed. Now, I call attention to General Bailey's testimony. I ha,ve 

the whole of it here, and I have read it careflllly as to the manner in 

which he stated the sale of these five hundred bales. Let it be 

remembered that Mr. McKee has been his son-in-law. It has not 

been stat.ed, although I am informed since I was on the floor before 

that by reference to other papers, :11.1 of which I have not brought in 

here, it has been discovered that in 1864 when this agent .McKee was on his trial before a confeclera.te conrt-martia.lletters were there produced fTOm his wife in which reference was matle to their child. That is pretty good presumptive evidence that they were married 

before 1864. In stating the sale of this five hundred bales in his testimony General Bailey stated-I do not take time to quote him-that 

he was compelled to sell the five hundred bales or have them burned 

and destroyed, and in :mother place that he sold that cotton in order 

t.o pay taxes. To whom does he say he sold it He says to" a. young 

man, the agent of .the confederacy." He does not name him at all; 

he uoes not s::ty who be was in his testimony; but says he sold it for 

these p!U'poses, and for the pnrpose of preventing it from being 

1mmed. The testimony in other p::trts of the case shows that no cotton wa burned in that vicinity until probably a year after tha.t time, 

in November, 1863. · Let me now refer to the dates. I do not deny that there is testimony in this ca e howing the strongest expressions of loyalty by 

General Bailey; but let us look when they are professed t.o have been 

made. The e sales were in 1862 and 1863. That territory was ·then 

nuder confederate control. In 18134 General Ba.nks arrived on the 

Roo River, and he occupied Geneml Bailey's plantation, and it is for 

the snpplies fumished to th::tt ::trmy after its arrival that this allow- ance is made, not for cotton in any form. I do not wish it understood 

that the claim is for cotton, although a p::trt of it is for cotton destroyed by the troops, or nsed by thorn for bed1ling; but the claim is 

for supplies furnished after the arrival of General Banks in Louisiana 

in 1864. Now, then, if General Bailey did sell cotton in 1862 and 

1 63, the expre ions of loyalty a.fter 1 64 can be readily accounted 

for consistently with this act of disloyalty in 1862 am'l 18133. He be- came a Union man-- 1\fr. WEST. It was a nice time to be a loyal man down thete in 

1802 and say anything about it! 

l\fr. SCOTT. That is what I am saying, Mr. President, that he may 

have committed acts of disloyalty, those acts which this Government 

in self-protection is bound to consider acts of disloyalty in 11:162 and 

1 53; and whateve1· his expressions of loyalty may have been in 1864, 

after the ani val of General Banks, after he was under the protection of the flag, can be accounted for very consistently with those 

acts in 1 ()2 and 1863. If he is entitled to this claiin on the ground 

of his active loya.lty before the arriv::tl of General Banks on that 

ground, and if he shows that these transactions are not properly 

represented by these books, I shall be the la-st man to deny him his 

money. But let me go on, Mr. President. I do not wish to take up time in 

going over ::til the allegations that have been made in this case. It 

ha-s been said that in a trial at New Orleans the six hundred bales were shown not to have been delivered. I have looked through that 

testimony and let me state what there was in that. In 1864 eight 

hundred and thirty-four bales of cotton were libeled. The United 

States claimed these eight hundred and thirty-four bales of cotton a-s having belon,~ed to the Confederate States. Proceedings wore in tituted in the united States comt, and in those proceedings a number 

of witnesses were examined. There is no testimony identif.ving the 

six hundred and fom·teen bales which appear in the books in January, 1863, as the same cotton which made up any part of those eight 

hundred mid thirty-four bales. There is a reference to a sale of six 

hundred bales, but the specific date w.hen it was sold, or an identification with the e six hundred and fourteen bales is not giwm; and more than that, there is nothing to know wb.at became of that pro- _ceeding. I have inquired for the purpose of showing what became of 

it. The testimony is given. There is no decree. My information is 

that by some ::trraugement between General B::tiley and the officers of 

the Government a compromise w::LS effected in regard to that cotton, 

which leaves the question of whether it was confederate cotton or his cotton entirely unsettled. I do not know what that compromise 

was, but I have looked through the te timony and I do not find any- thing in it which would disprove the statements that are made and 

that are relied upon as coming from these books. 

There is :1 great deal of testimony that I might refer to if I were dispo ed to take up and argue the question of actual loyalty. If I 

am comp9llen to vote upon that, if the friend.s of ~neml Bailey insist here that this tribunal, now, upon e.t parte testimony brought 

in to meet this testimony which is also ex parte shall decide upon his 

loyalty, I shall vote upon it; but I want to send him back where he 

will have a fair showing. Mr. SARGENT. I hope the Senator will tell us anything he knows 

again t the loyalty of General Bailey. If there is anyth.iJ1g hidden, 

do not use myste1ious language, but let us know it. 

1\-Ir. SCOTT. I do not wish to say what A, B, and C have told me. 1rlr. SARGENT. That is not proof. 

l\Ir. SCOTT. We have erected a tribunal for hearing these parties. 

:Mr. WEST. And they do hear what A, B, or C says. That is tho 

trouble. Mr. SCOTT. And they do send in to the Congress of the United 

St.ates records which show that General Bailey ought to have a fair 

opportunity of a hearing before them. That is what I am howing. Mr. MITCHELL. I understand the chairman of the committee to 

m::tke but one point, and that is that there is testimony before the 

Senate showing that General Bailey at some time or other sold cer- tain ·cotton to the confederate agent, and for that rea on the chair- man of the committee desires that this claim should go back to the 

commis ioners in order that they may investigate that fact. Now, I 

do not understand that it is claimed by any person, not even by the 

chairman of the committee, that General Bailey or Mr. Bailey, who- ever he was, committed any other a~t or thin()' that looked toward 

disloy::t1ty except the single fact of having soYd cotton to a confed- erate agept .. I ask the chairman of the committee if Mr. B::tiley when 

he wa.s·oxamined as a witness before the commission did not ::td.mili 

before that commission that he sold certain cotton to t,ho confederate 

agent, and did he not there state that the book" of the confederacy 

would show that bet The point I wish to ma.ke is this: was not 

that fact called to the attention of the commissioners when this case was before the commission, and did theynotthenhavefnllandample 

opportunity to investigate the whole question and pass upon it, and 

therefore why the nece ity of referring the case back again now Y 

l\lr. SCOTT. I will state for the information of the oua.tor from 

Oregon th::tt when General Bailey was before the commission he ditl 

say that he h::td made a sale of cotton to the eonfederate government 

and gave two reasons for it. One was that he ha.d sold it to pay taxes; 

the other was that he 'Old it because if be did not sell it it would be 

burned. He did say in reference to the date that their books would 

show the date; it was a question of date; but he said. not one wonl 

about having taken part of the proceeds in confellerate bonds, and 

that fact was not before the commissioners wheu they mad.o up their 

finding. The fact that he sold six hundred and fourteen bales was not before the commissioners, for GeneraJ. Bailey referred only to the 

sale of five hundred bales, and in neither instance diu ho say a word 

about having taken any part of tho payment in bond8. This testi- mony produced shows not only two sales, but two different receipts 

of confederate bonds and confederate money to the amount of thirty or forty thousand dollars. It shows more th::tn that ; it shows that. he 

got money for other purposes than to pay taxes; he was buying other cotton. It shows more than that; that he had a partner in the pur- chase of that cotton, and this testimony shows that that partner was a disloyal man. Positive testimony, if these books are teitjmony, cir- cumstantial testimony enough cert:linly for the Government to say 

that this case shaH go back to the tribunal which we h::we constitute(} 

for the purpose at the same time of doing justice to loyal claimants 

and protecting the Government against improper claimant . That is 

all I am a king. 

I go further now. As the Senator from Oregon has said th:1t this 

is the only circumstance, I will say there are other circumstances. The case is developing. Since this question has been made, or since 

it became apparent that it was ~oing to be discussed in the Senate, I 

followed it a little further, and 1 may as well refer to that now; aud 

I find in the W::tr Department among_ the jl,rchives from the Confeder- ate States,- not those purchased from the trans-l\Iississippi depa,rtment, but other archives, a copy of the proceedings of a confederate courtmarti::tl in which this man McKee, the confederate agent, wa-s tried 

upon charges and specifications, and one of those charges, the fourth, 

with different specifications, was that he had confederated with Bai- ley to defraud the confederate government out of abol;lt a thousaml 

bales of cott.on on Bailey's plantation. 

l\lr. SARGENT. I shoulu like to ask the Senator if he brings it 

forward M a proof of B:1iley's di, loyalt~r that he confeuerated with 

another man to steal from the confederate government Y 

l\lr. SCOTT. The Senator seems to assume the attitude that I am bringing testimony against General Bailey and trying t.o convict him. Ir. SARGENT. The Senator said if we wanted other evidence of 

General Bailey's disloyalty he was prepared to give it, and I challenge 

him to produce it. 

Mr. SCOTT. I did not say I was prepared to give it, if tho Sena.t.or will pardon me. The Senator from Oregon ro e aud a keel me if I 

had a single thing to show General Bailey's disloyalty except the . transcript from these books. Mr. SARGENT. The Senator is answering by reading a document 

showing that General Ba.iley aided somebody who stole something 

from the confederate government, as a proof of his disloyalty against 

the Government of the United States. . 

1\fr. SCOTT. I have not got through with my statement. I was 

stating the fourth charge, containing various specification , and I 

had not gone any further. Let us see what came on. Mr. SARGENT. I will not ask the Senator any more questions. I am sorry he is so impatient of questions. I do not desire to interrupt 

him. 
5102 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. J UNE 17, 

Mr. SCOTT. I am not impatient of questions at all. I have been on the floor here intendin<Y tc;> make a ca.lm statement of these papers 

from beginning to end, and every Senator who seems to be advocating 

the payment of this money appears to take it for granted that he 

mnst cross-examine me at every stage. Mr. SARGENT. I only wish to apologize for interrupting the Sen- ator; I do not desh·e to trouble him. 

:Mr. SCOTT. I only wish to get the facts before the Senate. I am not arguing the case to show disloyalty on the part of Geneml Bailey; 

I am simply showing that there is enough to send this case back to the judicial tribunal; that is all. 

This char~e is of disloyalty to the confederate government char~ed 

against McKee. What do they charge him with '1 Confederating 

with Bailey. It does not show that they were very great enemies. True, he was charged with confederating with Bailey to defraud the 

confederate government out of a thousand bales of cotton belonging 

to tho confederacy on Bailey's plantation. There is some evidence to 

show that Bailey had sold the cotton on his plantation to the con- federate government. These are circumstances which I think Gen- eral Bailey ought t o have the opportunity of meeting. They are brought out. . Why did I look for this f Because an affidavit was placed· in my 

hands by the friends of General Bailey since this ca-se came to the 

committee, alleging that McKee had been in il'ons and he was not 

worthy of belief, although his testimony had not at that time been 

brought before the Senate. Since then it is before us in a printed 

statement, and finding he had been in irons I wanted to know why, 

and pursuing my inquiries I found that this was the reason why he was in irons. He wa-s tried and he was sentenced to be shot. He has n ot been shot, for he has been here giving his affidavit. 

General Bailey may explain all -this; he may answer, as Senators 

here attempt to answer, that the allegation that he was assisting 

McKee to defraud the confederacy is in his favor instead of against 

him. If it is in his favor, let it be so. I do not withhold it. I am 

giving the fact, and what I introduce it for is to show that Mr. McKee's testimony has been laid on the tables of Senators since this case has been before us, and now, mark it, Mr. PresiUent, he refers to 

the five hundred and thirty-six bales; he gives no account of the six 

hundred and fourteen bales. at all, although he is the man who paid 

the money ; and I ask Senators, without reading it, to take up that ex parte affidavit laid before us, examine it with reference to McKee's 

1·elation to this whole transaction, and there is enough in that to show 

that this case ought to go back for examination. 

I do not wish to take up any very great length of time in discuss- ing this question. I had hoped it would be passed over, for I felt I was doing General Bailey a kindness in sending this case back to the 

commissioners of claims. When it was here before it was struck 

out. It remained here. Now it is put in the bill, and this testimony 

is before us from the commissioners of claims, showing that if this 

testimony had been before them at tha,b time a different result might 

h ave been arrived at. I will not condemn him on it. He ought not 

to be condemned on it. It is ex parte testimony, but he has given ex pa1·te testimony also; and now I say the proper mode of proceed- ing is, as we have erected this tribunal, to send the case back there 

and let him meet these allegations. He knows them. Let the evi- dence on the part of the Government, if ther e be mora of it, be pro- duced where he can cross-examine the witnesses, and let the case be 

dcci<led upon its merits. But, Mr. President, in a ca-se involving the question of whether the 

sale of cotton in large arru>unts to the confedemte government in 

1862 and 1863 was an act of disloyalty which ought to deprive a man of tlte right to claim before the commission, I cannot con ent without entering my protest against it that any such claim shall be incor- porated in this bill, and I think a little reflection upon the conse- quences that are to result will satisfy the Senate that the proper mpde 

of proceeding is to send this case back to the commissioners of claims. .Mr. SARGENT. Mr. President, the proposition that is ma,de by the · Senator from Pennsylvania, and, as I understand, the majority of the 

committee on claim~:~, is that this case be sent back to the commis- sioners of claims in order that they may report that this man is dis- l oyal. That is really what it amounts to, stripped of everything in the way of r>arapbrase. These commissioners have gone out of their wa,y to write a document to show that they believe this man is not 

entitled to this relief, and now we are asked to send back this case uefore this tribunal which has thus pronounced judgment in advance. That is just what this proposition is, neither mora nor l ess. If any one will read the document to be found on page 8 of the CONGRES- SIONAL RECORD of May 23, which was sent up to the desk by the 

Senator from Pennsylvania and read, he will find that all through it 1 there is a prejudice forcibly expressed against General Bail~ and an 

evident desire on tho part of these commissioners to get their hands 

again upon this case. It is contrary to everything that is fair and just to take a case from 

ru1 impartial bouy, as this Senate is, and send it to a court to be decided but one way. They roll this alleged newly discovered testimony as a sweet morsel under tbeir tongues; they paraue it in italics; they 

insist that they cannot get hold of the ca e because they have r eported 

it to Congress; and they in efiect solicit that it may be sent back to 

them in order that they may give what they esteem to be the legiti- mate facts of this testimony and rule this man out of court. 

If there is any merit in his case, if there is anything in his tes i- mony of loyalt-y, if there is anything in any consideration of the 

duress to which he was subjocted and to which all citizen in that 

region were subjected in 1 '62 and 1863, then I want the Senate to va-ss upon this question, and not send it back to a trihuna1 so obviou ly 

prejudiced as these commissioners are shown to be by this document. 

I am not reflecting upon these gentlemen. I ha,ve no doubt they are following what they deem to be the line of duty; but it is au extremely narrow line, which is not tinged for a moment with any 

consideration of eqnity. For the Senate to obey their behest unil 

send this case back to them after it has come here is simply to exclude 

thiH person from any conclusion except the one whlch they havo drawn 

in these papers. 

Now, sir, there is one prominent fact which stands out in this ca. e, and that is that General Bailey sold cotton to the confetlemcy. Tha,t 

is clearly and distinctly proved. It is not so clearly and ilistinctly 

proved whether he took bonds for it or whether he took money for it. 

Whether he took interest-bearing obligations or non-interest-bearing 

obligation . Confederate money is a matter on which great stres is 

placed by the Senator from Pennsylv:.mia; but to my mind it amounts 

to nothing. Where i.s the distinction f Whatilifferencedoes itmako 

whether he took confederate bonds or confederate money .And yet 

upon that distinction they endeavor to mako a point against General 

Bailey. 

:Mr. MERRill ON. ·The evidence taken in the caso that was tried 

shows that he did not take the bonds. Mr. SARGENT. Yes, sir. Mr. SCOTT. Has the Senator read that testimony' 

Mr. MERRIMON. I read a summary of the testimony. 

Mr. SCOTT. I could not find any such testimony, and I road it 

through. 

Mr. SARGENT. The Senator from Pennsylvania i a very industrious man. We have reason to admire him for the evidences of it 

that he shows us every day; but when he takes up a bill of n early one hundred pages, with au item to every line, and goo through the 

whole bill, he cannot neces arily be as well posted on all the facts 

with reference to each item as Senators who have had their attention drawn to a single item of the bill, and made th:1t a m::ttter of 

investigation. Therefore, while admitting the industry of tho Senator, I still insist that we who have examined this claim and all 

the acces ible testimony upon it, and have tried to got at the fact 

and do what was right, have a right to claim some kno·wledge on this subj ect, even if we are not members of the Committee on Claims. Now, sir, it is a fact with reference to the form of regulations (which was a printed form) used in the pur cha e of cotton by tho confederate government, it was always printed in the document that pay- ment was made in confederate bonds. I understancl the testimou 

to be that General Bailey refused to take the bonds, if that fact 

makes the least difference. I only comment upon it because tho Senator fTom Pennsylvania seemed to lay some stress on that point. Bnt 

McKee, who was not on good terms with General Bailey iu .1 G3, who seized this cotton, and seized it among the first, who compelled Gen- eral Bailey to sell his cotton and to sell among the very first, some- time thereafter, writing to his own clerk, and of course 1m owing that 

the paper which was in print referred to bonds as given for cotton in 

this case as in all others, said perha.ps bonds which a1·e 1 per cent. 

premium-! suppo.se he meant premium over confederate currency- coulcl pr obably be obtained from General Bailey by giving him money 

for them. That was all, and that in itself is ea ily explalnal>le under 

the idea that this was the printed form, and this pel on r eferred t o the printed form, and knowing that this negotL<ttion had been mude 

by which the cotton was obtained by the confederate go ernmeut, 

supposed that there was a place where bonds coultll>e had.. :For what reason he wanted them I do not know, and that is enti.rolv uncx- ~~oo~ • But, sir, the great fact stands out that this man did sell more or less cotton to the confederate government. It is a mistake to sup- pose that that fact was fonnd out r ecen tly by these commi sioner ·of 

claims. I call attentio~ to the language of their report on this very case. They say : 

General Bailey, upon his exmnination in this case, swears that he did sell five hun- dred bales of cotton to the co11'federate gove=ent, or to some confedm11te or State 

agent, alleging that he was compelled to sell it to get money to pay his taxes; ami 

if he had refnseu it woulu have boon taken or burneu. . 

They dic1 not cross-examine him on that statement. Here was this 

horrible crime committed of selling cotton to the confederate govern- ment. Their extract from his testimony, as given in the letter which 

they now send and which has just been read at tho desk, shows that 

they did not cross-examine him upon it. They took his statement. 

They did not ask him the name of the agent. The Senator from 

Pennsylvania thinks it is atrocious that be did not state that this 

man's name wasl\IcKee. Was there anything said to call his atten- tion to that i Dicl they ask what confederate agent it was 7 They 

them, elves placed no value upon that point, because they say" he 

sold it to th~ confederate government or some agent of tbe confed- erate government." The gravamen of the statement was tha·t be did 

sell cotton to the confederate government, and that is the crime now alleged against him. These commissioners understood that. It was there in his own statement. When you afterward found the books 
1874. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 5103 -

of tho confederacy which showed that they had bought of him, it 

only proved wlla.t he had said that he had sold it to them. _Is there 

anything in that f.<tct that should c:mse us to refer this case lntck to 

tho commi sioners of claims' Tlloy follow that statement, that he 

did sell thls cotton to the confederate gl>vernment, in this way: . 

The cases of loyalty amonn- the large landec:l proprietors of the South were so '\"'cry rare, that we felt it to £e our duty to investigate this case thoroughly, and 

after doing so we feel fully justified in reporting this claimant as loyal. 

They say that after stating that he sold cotton to the confederate 

government. Do they want this case referred back to them in order 

to say that if he sold cotton to the confederate government they 

would Le justified in reporting him as disloyal 'i If that is so I say 

the court is whimsical; that it acts on no well-considered opinion; 

and that we had better abolish it; at any rate we bad better not send 

back to them cases which are douLtful, but send them only cases which are very clear, only cases involving questions of amount and 

not questions of principle. 

I say there is nothing new discovered in this case. The pi1>rade of 

documents which the Senator from Pennsylvania makes and the refer- ence to the confederate books only relate back in effect to th:::.t which was determined upon before aud to this very man's testimony. He was upon the stand swearing to these very things, and this commission, in view of his affidavit to these facts, say he is a loyal man, and 

that cases of loyalty among large landed proprietors of the South were so rare that they felt justified in reporting this case favorably 

to Congress, and glad to do so. What amount did they report 'I Forty-five thousand cloll::1rs. His 

claim was for "'105,000, and they cut down the claim of this loyal man nearly two-thirds, allowing him but two or three dollars for a ton of hay where the hay was worth thirty or forty dollars. That was the system which they followed. They cut down this highly loyal 

man, as they reported him to be, below the prices of the articles 

taken either in the confederacy or within the loyal States, and upon no distinguishable rule. They had ample testimony before them as to the loyalty of this man, and it will not do to whistle it down the 

wind and to say that the distinguished military men who were brought in contact with this man and who knew him, as General 

Slw:rman said he had known him for years, were entirely mistaken. 

They were talking about a man, as was in proof and as will not be 

denied,' who once owned a lar~e number of slaves on a plantation in 

Virginia. Under the laws of Virginia he was allowed to emancipate 

his slaves. He did so; he manumitted them and went off down to 

Louisana. He was not allowed under the laws of that State to man- umit hiJ3 slaves, but it is in evidence that he treated them with great 

kindness; that he was an ant.i-slavery man-rather unpromising 

materials to make a disloyal man out of. In this condition the war caught him two or three years a.fter be went down there with a large 

plantation on his bands. General Sherman, with reference to this man with these a.ntecedents, says: 

General Bailey, of Rapides Parish, Louisiana, personally known to me before the war, and universally recognized as a Union man throughout the periou of hostilitiesIs General Sherman a man who writes without weighing what he 

sayst He says General Bailey was universally known throughout 

the period of hostilities a.s a Union man and known to him personally 

before the w::1r. There is no doubt about his identityappeals to me personally to befriend him with you in the matter of a claim for cot- ton which has been formally presented for your a<ljudication. 

This was in relation to another matter. General Sherman goes on to state that in his official capacity he cannot meddle with such business; but he says he has a "strong personal :regard" for this gentle- man. General Banks, the major-general commanding the department, 

says-- 1\!r. SCOTT. None of that testimony was before the commissioners. Mr. SARGENT. Whether the testimony wa.s before them or not, 

it is before the Senate, and it has force :1nd weight. We are trying this case. There is no appeal from us back to these commissioners. I 

1.""Uow of no provision of the statutes that requires us if we aro in 

doubt to solve that doubt and ease our consciences by virtue of this 

commission. They are funotus o:fficio. They have actetl on this matter, and having acted on this very point, that this man did sell cotton 

and having sold cotton was a loyal man, I want to know what there 

is to take this case back to them. You might as woU send back every case against which some one whispers to you here. It is said that 

this case was struck out of the bill last yoar because somebody whis- pered something in the e.ar of the then chairman of the Committee on Claims, and you want this matter to go back again now, because of 

the whiRpers and insinuations of some persons, enemies of his very 

likely because he was a Union m:tn; because he would be certified to as loyal by such men as Sherman and Canby and the whole Louisiana 

delcg:ttion in the Honse, and by Governor Wells, of Louisiana, and 

other undoubted loyal men all through the war. Uen who know that 

because they were disloyal they cannot get their claims allowed will 

gladly whisper slander aLout their neighbors who stood up under a hail of persecution that could only be exceeded within the confines of 

the infernaJ. regions. The man in that region who either by wink or nod, by word or act, showed that he had any sympathy with the 

Y::mkees, with the Government of the United States in the struggle 

that was then going on, was a marked man, not merely ostracized from 

society, bnt liable to be shot clown on the highway. He was hauled 

before persecuting courts, placed under continual e pionage. A man who under these circumstances could stand up and preserve anything like manhood, anything like decency, anything like loyalty to 

the Government, would make not one, but hundreds and thousands 

of enemies who would gladly follow him with their enmity to the 

very grave itself, to the portals of yonr courts, to the Senate of the 

United St:ttes, and whisper in the convenient ear of some Senator, 

anxious to do right but hurried with business, "There is something 

wrong in that case; there is a cat under that meal," in order that that man might be prevc:!ntell from getting his claim after he had been 

shorn down two-thirds of the amount which had been taken from him 

to supply the United States Army. 

l\!r. MITCHELL. There was an anonymous letter sent. 

Mr. SCOTT. Twice, perhaps three times, the Senator from California has used a phrase that the enemies of General Bailey or per- sons hostile to him are whispering in the ears of Senators allegations 

prejudicial to him. Of course the meaning n,nd direction.of that can- not be misunderstood. Now I wish to say that I knowof no one who 

has brought before the committee, I know of no one who has come to me to say one word against General Bailey. All that has been done 

has been to put in my hands papers from the officers of the Govern- ment which have been laid before the,m. But a more persistent effort 

to put everything into my ear, through agents, attorneys, amllobbyists, in favor of this claim, I have never met. I have been waylaid on all the avenues of the capital for the purpose of throwing into my ears something in f:t vor of General Bailey. If there a.re any infi uences here against this claim, s6 far as I know about them they have not 

been brought to bear on the committee. Mr. SARGENT. I did not intend to suggest, and I do not think the 

Sen:1tor should have so understood me, anything improper on his part or that of the committee. I understood him and the committee-- 1\Ir. SCOTT. I understood the Senator just now to say that those 

here who were for sending the claim of General B:tiley back to the 

commissioners had had whispered in their ears slanders against him. 1\Ir. SARGENT. I made the remark, following the Senator, that at 

the last session this case at the last moment was dropped from the 

bill on accollllt of some private communication made to the chairman 

of the Committee on Claims. Am I correct Y 

1\fr. SCOTT. I cannot say whether or not. The Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. HoWE] can answer for that. He was then chairman of 

the Committee on Claims. 

Mr. SARGENT. I repeated what was said by the Senator from 

Pennsylvania, rendering almost literally his words. He stated tho 

fact I was commenting upon. I was saying that these demands conl<.l 

be dropped on account of private communications in the ears of Sen- ators--

:Mr. SCOTT. I made inquiry to learn whether it was true that 

statement was made to the Senator from Wisconsin. l\lr. SARGENT. I take the Senator as authority. I have no doubt 

the statement is true. 1\Ir. SCOTT. l\Iy information at that time was from the Senator 

from Wisconsin himself that such information had come to him. 

Whether it was whispered in his ear or where it came from I do not 

know. 

1\!r. SARGENT. When I spoke of its being whispered in the Senator's ear, of course that was a mere figure of speech. I~ may have 

been shouted to him from the house-tops; but other Senators did not 

hear it; and the message struck the very spot where it would reach 

the bill. I was simply arguing that somo enemy might have done this. The Senator speaks about the importunity which is made for this 

claim. Are there not importunities for all claims 'i Are we like the 

unjust judge who finally yielded on account of urging ancl would 

not on account of justice? How otherwise, I ask you, are they to 

get their claims recognized before Congress It is only by bringing 

them to the attention of Senators and members. I do not think 

they m·e to be despised, I do not think they are to be stigmn.tized 

because they are :tn:rious, when they are ruined Ly the delay of 

Congress, that Congress shall attend to their cases. I cannot fiml 

it in my heart to object that any man who has an honest demand 

against the Government shall come to me, take my time, valuable as it may be, and plead with me to listen to him while he tolls me of his wrongs or his rights. I think he has a right to do so; bnt 

when it becomes so wearisome that wo cannot listen under such circumstances, then it seems to me we ought to pass the claims without 

examination. If we cannot give the time to examine them and find 

out that they are right, they should pass without it. When we com- plain of the l:tbor and difficulty and importunity which aro borne upon us and refuse to give any hearing to supplicants, Congress had better 

grant their prayers. The Government cannot a:ffor<l to be deaf to 

petition . It had better Le improvident in granting them than do 

injustice. · 

Mr. SCOTT. Docs the Senator say that when a Senator refuses to 

be wayl:tid in all the avenues of tho capital he refuses to listen to a claimant I s11y to claimants always, "I will decide your case on tho 

testimony presented to me; and yonr verbal statements are not testimony." But if the Senator is disposed to criticise the remark which 

I made, all tho punishment I can wisll to impose upon him is that ho 

shall be associated with mo upon the Committee on Claims, aml he 

will then tmderstand the full force of the rema:rk which I macle. 
5104 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JUNE 17, 

Mr. SARGENT. I have no doubt it is a very onerous position, and 

I endeavored to do full justice to the Senator by speaking of the industry with which he fills it. I do not wish to be understood as re- fiectinO' on him in any :&espect. I have certainly not spoken in any 

unkind feeling or in a spirit of depreciatjon; but I do say it is inseparable from that place and inseparable from the office of Senators 

that we listen to the petitions of the people, to those who have griev- ances to redress, to those who have legitimate claims against the 

Government; and t?e Sena~or exagg~rates, in the arne spirit th~t I 

did myself perhaps m speaking of wh1spers, when he speaks of bemg 

waylaid on every avenue and every corner of a street. We are not 

waylaid on every avenue and corner of a street. Cla.imants do come to our houses, and frequently come at inconvenient periods, come to our committee-rooms, sometimes lay siege to us on the street.s; but 

they do not speak with auy more importtmity than they have a right 

to do if we should attend to their business and neglect it. 

There are men who come to this capital in the bloom of youth and 

bright hope of manhood, ay, and women too, widows and orphans, 

and they see the flag go down on the 4th of l\Iarch, tha.t ends the 

Congress, year ·after year until their locks grow thin, until they are stooped with age, unable to get the ear of Congress with their importunity, and finally die, and their heirs perhaps may get the claim or may not. Is not that so f I do not say tha.t it is a shame that Congre has done so, for know with the burdens and the labors of forty 

millions of people we are overwhelmed; but I say we ought not to 

compl:1in of these importunities, and if sometimes they are not in 

good taste the cause should speak to us if the manner of these persons does not. 

But I was speaking about the loyalty of :Mr. Bailey. I was quotjng 

from the testimony of General Sherman, who speaks with life-long 

knowledO'e of him, and particular knowledge of his history during 

the period of hostilities. I was referring to the te timony of GenP.ral 

Canby. General Oliver 0. Howard, who is a Christian gentleman, a man of high character, a man whose word is unsullied-and I cnallenge contradiction of it-introduces this gentleman to General Mower, 

and says: 

Allow me to introduce to yon Mr. William Bailey, of Louisiana. I hold in my 

hand avery hi.!!h recommendation of him as a Union ma.n, thorou~hly in sympathy 

with free institut.ions and humanity. The recommend:ltion further calls to my 

mind a past record of the best character. 

Calls to his mind, of his own know,ledge, "a past record of the best 

character." . 

He is a. planter in the vicinity of Alexandria, Louisiana. .A:ny sympathy or assist- ance you may render him will be appreciated by him and afford me gratification. 

These letters were written and express just what they say by.men 

who know the meaning of language and men who are jealous of their own reputations and of that which they say, ancl could not be obtained by disloyal men. I ask the Clerk to rea-d a letter signed by 

every one of the Louisiana delegation in the House of Representatives, 

testifying to their personal knowledge of this man and of his loyalty. The Chief Clerk read as follows: WASHINGTON, D. C., June 9, 1874. 

DEAR SIR: We beu to call the favorable attention of yourself and fellow-members of 

vonrcoDlJllit-t.eeto tE.e cases of William Bailey and Whitty M. Sa,~ser, inclmlefl in the 7• outbern claims bill" now before you. W c tio so, as Representative of Louisiana, ln 

order to express our unqualified belief that both Bailey and asser wero con. istent and 

faithful friends o£tho Union throughout tho entire rebellion; auu that it, would be au act oi great injustice to pronounce them "disloyal " on tJ1e ~round that they solfl 

certain cotton to the rebel authorities. The well-known condition of "duress" that 

exi ted at that time in N orthcrn Louisiana~ as well as the ab ence of any other purchasersthan confeder-ate agents, :fTom whom currency could be obtained for paying t:txes and carr_}-inrr on plantation business, alike made such sales absolut-ely neces- sary in most cases~ and not even a suspicion of disloyalty should, we tlunk, be at- tachell t.o Bailey or Sasser on this account. Very respectfnlly, GEORGE L. SMITH. 

FRA K MOREY. <.::. B. D.A.RR.ALL. 

J . H. SYPHER. 

L. A. S.IIELDON. 

Ron. JoHN ScoTT, Ohai·rman of Committee on Olaims, United States Senate. 

l\1r. SCOTT. I know the Senator from California does not wish to 

do any injustice by the introduction of that letter. That letter is one that was printed in a statement that ha been laid on the desks 

of Senators as a letter laid before the Committee on Claims. It is 

addres ed to me as chairman. Now I say that that letter reached the 

committee-room after this ease had been decided. It never waa before the Committee on Claims at all. I only refer to it as showing 

the persistency with which a feeling has been worked up her<?, and 

to say that the Senator from California of course is not aware in 

introducing it that that was the fact . . M.r. SARGENT. Then if the committee ma{}e up this judgment 

without referring to t~s letter, this letter is valuable as additional 

tc t.imony to the Senate. You have not acted on the letter. You have 

not acted on the consideration that GEORGE L. SMITH, FRANK MOREY, 

C. B. DARRALL, J. H. SYPHER, and L.A. SHELDO:s", honorable mem- bers of the other Honse, a ociated with us, and well known to us, 

speak of their own knowledge of the loyalty of this man and say that 

you are doing great injustice in not allowing this claim. 

Mr. SCOTT. The Senator misapprehends my point. I referred him 

to a printed statement laid on the desks of Senators which alleges that a letter, which he has sent to the Chair and had read, a-ddressed to me, 

was before the Committee on Claims, undertaking to allege t.hat we decided against the case notwithstanding that letter. I now state as a fact that the letter which he thus sends np reached the committee- room after the case had been discussed and was disposed of. 

:Mr. SARGENT. That I understand. 

Mr. SCOTT. Whether it was testimony that might have weicrhed or not, I do not undertake to discuss. 0 

Mr. SARGENT. That I understand perfectly, and I was comment- . ing on that fact that the judgment of the committee was made up 

before this came. That does not make it any the less valuable to the 

Senate that 1\fr. s~nTH and Mr. SHELDON and these other gentlemen 

say that they know them ·elves that 1\Ir. Bailey was a loyal man. That 

does not make it less valuable as testimony, because it was not before 

the committee before they decided. That makes it more valuable, 

because the testimony of these gentlemen must have some weight 

with any man. It must have some weight with the Senate most as- suredly, when five gentlemen like tl1ese say this was a loyal man according to their own knowledge. It is a misfortune in this case that their testimony was not before the committee because it prob· 

ably would have changed the result.; at a.ny rate it might have made 

them hesitate a little longer before they came to this conclusion. Bnt on account of its great.value as t.he testimony of these men. I add it 

to that of Sherman, of Sheridan, of Canby, of Howard, and 'all tho e other eminent men who speak of their own knowledge of the recorcl 

of this man, of his sacrifices in the cause of the Union, of that which 

he suffered from day to day on account of his adherence to the cause which seemed lost in the South; and any man who would dare to do 

it was the object of malignity and hate on the part of his neighbors, 

which we in the more settled feelings of the North had no opportunity to appreciate or to measure. General Canby says about this gentleman, General Bailey: 

This gentleman bas been a great sufferer in person and in property by the rebels 

because he was a Unionist, and I am sorry to say by our own troops, :i.lthough he was protected by a safeguard. · 

Is such testjmony worth nothingf Has it no bearing at all f The 

Senator say he speaks as a friend of Dr. Bailey when he asks that 

this may be delayed a year. Here is a man impoverished and broken 

down on accotmt of his losses in tha rebellion, and the Senator speaks as a. friend to him in asking that he shall go back aud prove his loyalty! How shall he prove it Y By calling:General Sherman up to swear that he had known this man before the war and throucrh t.he hostilitjes and that he was a constant Union manY The Sen~tor a ents. I say no, sir. I say here is the proof. Is there any doubt about the 

authenticity of these letters Y The proof is before the Senate. It does 

not need to sift it through these commi ioners who will not give it 

any value because they say this man sold cotton t() the confederates, a thing which they knew before he bad done, and-yet said in the judgment that he was a lo:val man. To send the case back for the testjmony of Canby and Sheridan and Howard is a mere form. It is an insidious blow at the propositjon that the man be paid, I do not care how you disguise it. You may talk about excellent feelings to 

this man; yon may say you love him, that you do this as his frientl; 

but I say it is an unfriendly act, whatever the intent.ion may be, to 

send him back to these commissioners where there is no law requiring us to send the case back, where there is no appeal from us to them. 

It is to ignore all these gentlemen and go ba<Jk to the written judgment you have in advance published in the CONGRESSIO:XAL REcoRD. 

With all the frankness of the man himself, not drawn out of him, 

he admitted that he had sold cotton to the confederacy, not bein (J' 

particular as to amounts or dates, because he was not cro s-questjoned 

about it, but with this admitted in a-dvance I am in favor of disposing 

of this case by the Senate, and letting this man go off with the little 

pittance that the commissioners, even in their highest view of his 

loyalty, were willing to allow him out of the more than 100,000 

claimed in his account. 

Furthermore, if it shall be held that in all cases where there is 

division of opinion in the Senate we cannot pass upon them but must 

send them back to the commissioners of claims, I should like to a k 

when we shall ever dispose of these mattersf It is just as important 

that the commissioners shall reconsider a question as to amounts a.s the question said to be here involved. The principle would carry 

back half theca es reported by the court, and eYery one where a doubt could be raised by anybody. 

Further, in reference to this man1 he had a sa.fegnard and he took 

the oath under Lincoln's proclamatiOn. A very serious qnest.ion has 

been discussed in both Houses of Congress whether that of itself did 

not entitle a party to the restoratjon of all -his rights under the laws 

of Congress, where such taking did not work entire amnesty and oblivion of past offenses. But such argument is not nece sary in the case of this man, because there was never anything disloyal in his conduct 

requiring it. It does not make any difference whether there were five hundred bales of cotton sold or subsequently six hundred more; 

the disloyal act was just as great in selling the first five hundred as the six htmdred subsequently. The discovery of six hundred suiJ e- qnently sold or any other amotmt does not make the man more or le s a Union man. It does not make him a loyal man oecause he only old 

five hundred bales, because there was no virtue in that. If selling 

cotton was disloyalty, then selling a single bale was disloyalty. Now 

he came forward frankly and admitted the whole ca e as it would be 

if it were sent back to the colllllliBsioners of claim.!?; that is, that 
1874. • CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 5105 

he sold cotton. He says he did it under dure s, when he bad to pay 

his taxes, and if he did not do it the cotton would have been seized. 

He did not sell all he could sell, but he only sold :five hundred or n.t 

most a thousand bales, and yet he had, as is admitted, on his plantations nearly tb1·ce times that amolllit. . If he was selling becau e he could make a speculation by selling 

cotton, and selling because he wanted to put cotton which the Senator says was ammunition in the hands of the confedera.te government, why did he not put more there¥ He had it. He could have 

sold more. The very fact that he sold a part and no more woul(l 

imply that the part he sold wa,s what he was compelled to sell. If it was of his accord2 there w~ the confederate government ready to 

take the rest on the arne terms. If it was a good bargain for him to 

sell it or a favor to the confederates, there was an opportunity for 

him to extend the favor. On the contrary be only sold about a quarter of the amount which he had, and that he frankly admits. In 

addition to that when there was the first opportunity for loyal men to make themselves known in Louisiana, when Banks came there 

with his army and liberated the sentiment of the people, this Illi1n was the vice-pre iclent of a meeting which met to welcome the Union 

forces into that part of the country. Was that a disloyal act f Was 

there any necessity for itf Could be not have gone off and bid himself as disloyal men did, as other citizens of the State of Louisiana 

did Y On the contrary he came forward with another person whose name is mentioned in this bill, ~nd pre ided or assisted to preside over a loyal meeting callecl to welcome the United States forces. I 

ask if that was the act of a disloyal manY And this was subsequent 

to the sale of the cotton. Is this to be brushed aside like all the 

restf · 

This proof shows that he bad the same feelings he had when he 

went to Louisiana as an abolitionist, having emancipated all his 

slaves in Virginia at the great sacrifice of his property. They were worth from 1,000 to 3,000 apiece, and be emancipated a large 

number. He shows that the old abolition feeling which existed in his 

mind, and which nece sarily and naturally maue him a loyalist, still 

existed, and at the very first breathing spell, the :first ray of light let 

in on Louisiana showed him with his hand outstretched to receive 

the Union forces and welcome them when they came there. Such a man of com-se ought not to be entitled to consideration; he ought, on any anoymous communication, or secret whisper, or pleading of 

anybody, to be deprived of the little practical right which was con- ceded to him iu this bill! Let us bast-e to crucify him. Mr. CONKLING. Mr. President, I shall vote with the committee 

upon this proposition; and I think it would be extraordinary, to say 

the lea,st, if the Senate should override the committee. But at this 

moment the Senate, if it is not without a quorum, has scarcely more than a quorum present; and there is upon the table business of an ex- ecutive character which it will oblige a number of Senators if we may 

have a short se ion to dispose of. The Senator having charge of this 

bill has no objection to an executive session; and therefore as the 

bill must go over in any event, I submit the motion that the Senate 

proceed to the consideration of executive business. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. I ask the Senate to yield to me t{) mn.ke 

amotion. Mr. CONKLING. I will hear the motion. 

DAILY SESSIONS. 

l\fr. MORRILL, of Maine. By the order of the Senate the hour of 

meeting will be twelve o'clock to-morrow nnle s otherwise ordered. Now in the intere t of economy of time, which I am sure we all desire, 

I make this general proposition for the residue of the session unless 

otherwise orclered: 

Ordered, That on and after to-morrow the Senate will meet at eleven o'clock a. m. and remain in continuous ession until six o'clock p. m. on each day, unless 

otherwise ordered. 

That will mn.ke it a little flexible. That, will give us seven hours 

continuous se ion, about as much as human endurance will admit, 

according to my experience, and we are more likely to n.ccomplish the necessar.v results than in any other way. l\fr. CONKLING. There i no objection to that, I imagine. 

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. I offer theorderwhich I bave j ustread. The order was agreed to. 

EXECUTIVE BUSINESS. 

l\Ir. CONKLING. Now I insist on my motion that tho Senate proceed to the consideration of executive business. l\fr. C~TDLER. I hope not. 

l\Ir. CONKLING. The motion is not debatable; but I ask my friend 

to allow some of us who want a short execnti ve session a hearing. It 

will not interfere with him at all if we devote :five minutes to execu- tive bm:;iness. 

:Mr. CHANDLER. With the understanding that I shall have an 01-portunity to take up bu iness from the Committee-on Commerce 

when we come out, I hall not object. 

Mr. CONKLING. The Senator can make his motion afterward. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. SARGENT in the chair.) The question is on the motion of the Senator from New York that the Senate 

proceed to tho consideration of executive busine . The motion was agreed to- ayes 29, noes not counted. 

320 

A.. H. VO~ LUETI'WITZ. 

Mr. SPENCER. While the doors are being closed I ask the Senate 

to proceed to the consideration of the bill (S. No. 633) for the r elief 

of A. H. von Luettwitz, la.tc lieutenant Third United Stn.tes Ca,valry. 

There being no objection, the bill was considered as in Committee 

of the Whole. 

The preamble states that A. H. von Luettwitz, late a :first lieutenant 

in the Third United St ates Cavalry, who wa ca hiered from the 

United States service by sentence of a general court-martial on the 8th 

day of July, 1870, ha established his innocence of the charges upon 

which he was so cashiered the United Sta-tes service. The bill therefore directs the Secretary of War to amend the record of A. H . von Luettwitz so that he shall appear on the rolls and records of the 

Army for pay and rank a if he had been continuously in service; and 

the amount required for the pa.yment of this officer is appropriated out 

of any money in the United States Treasury not appropriated for 

other purposes. The Committee on Military Affairs proposed to amend the bill by 

striking out the words "pay and," in line n, and in line 6 after the 

word "service" striking out the words "and that the amount required 

for the payment of this officer be, and is hereby, appropriated out of 

any money in the United States 'l'reasury not appropriated for othe1 

purposes," and to insert, ''provided that nothing ball be paid to him 

for the interval of time from the 8th day of July, 1870, until the passage of this act;" so as to read: 

That the Secretary of War be, ancl is hereby, directed to am nil the record of 

the said A. H . von Luettwitz so that he shall appear on the rolls and records of the 

Army for rank as if ho bad been continuously in service: Providetb That noth~1~ 

shall be paid to l1im for the interval of time from the 8th day of .J nly, 1870, until 

the passage of this act. --

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. What amount uoes that call fort 

1\Ir. SPENCER. It does not call for any money. 

The amendment wa agreed to. The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amend- ment was concurred in. 

The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the 

third time, and pa-ssed. 

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. 

A message :(rom the House of Representatives, by 1\Ir. McPlrnRSON, 

its Clerk: announced that the House had pa-s ed the bill (S. No. 733) 

regulating ga.s-works, with amendments; in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate. The message also announced that the House had passed the following bills; in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate: 

A bill (H. R. No. 3740) to •create the Bozman land district in the 

Territory of Montana; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3584) to grant certain lands in the Territory of 

Arizona; 

A bill (H. R. No. 3611) for the relief of Nelson Green; and 

A joint resolution (H. R. No.lll) authorizing the President to nego- tia,te with civilized powers in regard to international a,rbitration. 

AMENDMENTS TO APPROPRIATION BILLS. 

Mr. HOWE, from the Committee on the Library, submitted an amendment intended to be proposed to the bill (H. R. No. 3600) making appropriations for sundry civil expenses of the Government for 

the :fiscn,l year ending June 30, 1875, and for other purpos s; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be 

printed. · 

.Mr. STEVENSON, 1\Ir. MITCHELL, Mr. MERRIMON, Mr. CLAYTON, Mr. 

HITCHCOCK, ~lr. PRATI, and Mr. ROBERTSON submitted amendments 

intended to be proposed to the bill (H. R. 3GOO) making appropriations 

for slindry civil expenses of the Government for the :fiscal year ending 

June 30, 1875; which were referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed. ~lr. SPENCER, from the Committee on Military Affair , ubmitted an amendment intended to be propo ed to the bill (H. R. No. ~45) 

making appropriations for the support of the Military Academy for 

the fiscal year ending June 30, 1 75; which was refened to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed. 

Mr. WINDOM submitted an amendment intended to be proposed to 

the bill (H. R. No. 3168) makiilg appropriations for tb repair, preser-

-vation, and completion of certain public works for river. and harbors, 

and for other purposes; which was referred to the Committee on Com- merce, and ordered to be printed. 

EXECUTIVE SESSION. 

The Senate proceeded to the consideration of ~xecutive business; 

a.nd, after eleven minutes spent in executive session, the door were reopened. 

HOUSE BILLS REFERRED. 

The following bills were severally read twice by their titles, and 

referred as indicated below: 

The bill (H. R. No. 1142) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior 

to indemnify the holders of pre-emption and home tead certificates 

and certificates of. entry and patents upon lands in Iowa wit-hin t.he 

o-called Des Moines River grant on account of failnr of titl es, and 

to procure a relinquishment of the paramount titles to the United 

States-to the Committee on Public Lands. 
5106 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JUNE 17, 

The bill (H. R. No. 3611) for the relief of Nelson Green-to the the use of gilt letters for the names of ve els was read the ec'ond 

Committee on Post-Offices a.nd Post-Roads. time, and considered as in Committee of the Whole. It propo es to 

The bill (H. R. No. 3584) to grant title to certain lands in the Ter- amend section 3 of the act entitled "An act concerning the register- ritory of Aiizona-to the Committee on Private Land Claims. · ing and recording of ships and vessels," approved December 31, 1792, 

The joint resolution (H. R. No. 111) authorizing the President to so as to allow the name of any vessel to be painted upon her stern in 

neo-otiate with civilized powers in regard to international arbitration- yellow or gilt letters. 

to the Committee on Foreign Relations. The bill was reported to the Senate, ordered to be engrossed for a 

TAX ON SAVL~GS-BANKS. third reading, read the third time, and pas ed. 

The bill (H. R. o. 3678) for the rel'ef of savings institutions hav- JAMES DE LONG. 

ing no capital stoc.k and doing business solely for the benefit of depos- 1\Ir. CHANDLER. I move to take up House bill No. 526. 

itors, was read twice. The motion was agreed to; and the bill (H. R. No. 52G) for there- Mr. BOUTWELL. I should like to have the bill put upon its lief of James De Long was considered as in Committee of the Whole. 

passage. It provides for the payment· to James De Long, late consul at Atrr 

By unanimous consent, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, Cayes, Hayti, $2,816; $1,166 of the s~'lm so approp1:iatcd bein~ for proceeded to consider the bill. It provides that no ~ther colle~tion money advanced and expended by him for the relief of destitute · of •internal-revenue taxes shall be made on the earnmgs of savmgs- colored emigrants colonized lillder authority of the acts of April16 and 

banks or institutions for savings having no capital stock and doing July 17, 1862, and 1,650 being for extraordinary expenses incurred no other business but receiving deposits to be loaned or invested for by him at the siege of Aux Ca.yes dming his consulship at that place. 

the sole benefit of the parties making such deposits without profit or The bill was reported to the Senate, ordered to a third reading, read 

compensation to the association or company, whether the earnings of the third time, and passed. 

the same have been or may hereafter be divided annually, semi:- PROTECTION OF NAVIGABLE WATERS. 

annually, ·or at any other period. Mr. SCOTT. Before that bill is proceeded with, I wish to have it Mr. CHANDLER. I move to take up the bill (S. No. 52R) to prounderstood that the unfinished business is not displaced by this or teet the navigable waters of the United States from injmy and obstruction. by the motion of the Senator from :Michigan. S KTON D · h · d 

Mr. CHANDLER. Certa.inly not ; it is laid aside informally for Mr. TOC · 0 I understand t at these bills are calle up 

the purpose of taking up bills from the Committee on Commerce. subject to one objection' 

The bill was reported to the Senate, ordered to a third reading, ¥~~ ~=J'~ ~~IC~R. The Chair does not so understand. 

read the third time, and pa.ssed. Mr. STOCKTON. I object to that bill, and I desire that it shall not PORT OF DELIVERY AT MONTGOl\-IERY. be called np. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I move that the Senate proceed to the consider- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question before the Senate is 

ation of the bill (H. R. No. 899) to constitute Montgomery, in the whether· the Senate will proceed to the consideration of the bill moved 

State of Alabama, a port of delivery. . by the Senator from 1\lichigan. 

Mr. SCOTT. I understand the Senator from Michigan desires to Mr. CHANDLER. If the Senator from New Jersey will pardon me, 

t?roceed with bills from the Committee on Commerce. If the bill of I will suggest that his colleague has an amendment which will be 

which I have had charge this afternoon relating to the payment of entirely satisfactory to the Senator from New Jersey. His colleague 

southern claims is not displaced, as I am not well enough to remain will offer an amendment which will be accepted. I ask that the bill 

in the Senate dming the evening, I shall make no objection to his and amendment be read. 

proceeding with bills of that character. . , Mr. STOCKTON. I would rather that at this time of the evening 

Mr. CHANDLER. I hope by unanimous consent that bill will be a bill of that kind should not be passed. It is a very important bill 

laid aside informally and will be left as the un:tlnished business for regulating all the harbors of the United States. But if my colleague, 

to-morrow morning. who understands this question quite as well if not bettel' than I do, 

The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. INGALLS in the chair.) If there has ex~tmined the bill and is satisfied that it is correct with his amendis no objection the bill to which the Senator from Pennsylvania has ment, I shall not object. 

referred will be llid aside informally to be considered the unfinished Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I would a little rather that the Senator 

business to-morrow. should look at the bill himself, and that other Senators should do so. Mr. STEVENSON. I ask the Senator from Michigan whether he The effect of the bill, as I have read it, is to make it an offense not 

proposes to bring us back here to-night 'f only to depo it ballast but to make any deposit in the waters of the 

Mr. CHANDLER. I propose to continue right on with these mis- United States without the consent of certain officers named, which is 

cellaneous bills and not to take up the river and harbor bill. goin~ a great way. The amendment which I was going to propose 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the motion of the is this: 

Senator from Michigan. Provided, That nothing containeu in this act shall be construed to either permit The motion was agreed to ; and the bill (H. R. No. 899) to consti- or prohibit the construction of piers, bridges, bulk-heads, or other structures, or the 

tute Montgomery, in the State of Alabama, a port of delivery was filling in of fiats on the border~ of navigable rivers. 

considered as in Committee of the Whole. . That is an amendment which I introduced to a like bill last winter 

The Committee on Commerce proposes to amend the bill by adding or the winter before, and which was passed by the Senate. 

to it the following proviso; Ml'. CHANDLER. That amendment I will accept if it is acceptProvided, That the law constituting Selma, Alabama, aport of delivery, approved able to the Senator from New Jersey. 

January 27,1858, is hereby repealed; this act to take effect June 30, 1874. l\!r. STEVENSON. This is too important a bill to be passed without 

The an;J.endment was agreed t~. coruideration. 

The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amend- l\!r. CHANDLER. Very well; I will pass it over and go to the next 

ment was concurred in. bill . . The amendment was ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion to take up the bill is a third time. withdrawn. 

The bill was read the third time, and passed. OCEAN-COURSES FOR STEAMSHIPS. 

JOHN HORN, JR. Mr. CHANDLER. I move to take up Senate bill No. 368. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I move now that the Senateproceed to the con- The motion was agreed to; and the !Jill (S. No. 36 ) to provide for 

sideration of House bill No. 2398. the establishment of an international commission of the maritime 

The motion was agreed to; and the bill (H. R. No. 2398) granting powers to lay down ocean-com'Ses for steam-vessels, and otherwise a medal to John Horn, jr., for his heroic exploit-s in rescuing men, provide for increase.d safety of sea-travel, was considered as in Com- . · D · Ri · d d mit tee of the Whole. It provides that the President Rhall nominate 

women, and children from droWD.l.D.gm etrOit ver, was consl ere and, by and with the ·advice and consent of the Sena.te, appoint a, 

as in Committee of the Whole. • commi sioner on the part of the United States to meet with such 

The bill was reported t-o the Senate, ordered to a third reading: read other commissioners as may be appointed by the maritime powers of . 

the third time, and passed. Europe to frame such international lao ws aml regulations as may scorn 

BRIDGE AT LA CROSSE. adequate to secure increased safety to ocean-travel by the laying 

Mr. CHANDLER. I move to proceed to the consideration of House down of ocean-courses for inward and outward passages, summer an(l 

b1ll No. 3586. winter, of steam-vessels, by the enforced use of electric .and other 

The motion was agreed to; and the bill (H. R. No. 3586) to author- lights upon all steam-ve sels crossing the North Atlantic or other fog 

ize the construction of a brid~e across the Mississippi River at or near lahtndes, and the -requirement of sufficient raft~accommodation on the city of La Crosse, in the ;:;tate of Wisconsin, was considered as in all iron steamers for the safety of life in case of disaster. 

Committee of the Whole. · The Committee on Commerce proposed to amend the bill by insertThe bill was reported to the Senate, ordered to a third reading, read ing as section ~ : 

. the third time, and passed. That the compensation of such commissioner shall be $2,000 and necessary travelLETTERS FOR VESSELS' NAMES. ing expenses, to be certified to and allowed by the Secretary of State; and no ap- p_omtment shall be made pursuant to the act until one or more of the maritime • Mr. CHANDLER. I move to proceed to the consideration of Senat-e po\vers of Em·ope shall signify its readiness to appoint a commissioner or commisbill No. 683. sioners to co-operate in securing the objE>ct in the first ::ect!on mentioned. 

The motion was agreed. to; and the bill (S. No. 683) to authorize , The amendment was agreed to. 
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 5107 

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

The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the 

third time, and passed. :Mr. SPRAGUE subsequently said: I enter a motion to reconsider 

the vote on the bill (S. No. ~G8) .just now passed, to provide for the 

establishment of an international commission of the maritime powers 

to la.y down ocean-courses for steam-vessels, and otherwise provide an increased safety of sea-travel. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion to reconsidflr will be 

entered. CHARLES J. SANDS. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I move to take up House bill No. 1206. 

The motion was agreed to; and the bill (H. R. No. 1206) for the 

relief of Charles J. Sands, of Brooklyn, New York, was considered as in Committee of the Whole . . It provides for the payment to Charles 

J. Sands of 202.39 for salary due him for service as United States 

marshal of consular court at Chin-Kian~, China, from the 5th of October, to the 19th .of December 1865, inclusive. The bill was reported to the Senate, ordered to a third rea.ding, read 

the third time, and passed. 

J. & W. R. WING. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I move to take up Hoose biU No. 2898. The motion was agreed t:o; and the bill (H. R. No. 2898) for the 

relief of J. & W. R. Wing of New Bedford, Massachusetts, was con- sidered as in Committee of the Whole. 

By the bill the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to pay to 

Me r .• J. & W. R. Wing, agents and managing owner of the late 

American whaling-bark Xantho, of New Bedford, Massa-chusetts, tho sum of 642.22 in gold, in full payment for expenses incurred by thom 

for the up port and transportation of the crew of that vessel after its 

wreck in the Indian Ocean, June 18, 1871. 

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

read the third time, and passed. 

1\fr. CHANDLER. I move to proceed to the consideration of Senate bill No. 775. 

The motion was agreed to; and the bill (S. No. 775) to authorize the 

consti·uction of a bridge over the Willamette River at Portland, in 

the State of Oregon, was collSidered as in Committee of the Whole. 

The Committeo on Commerce proposed to amend the bill by inserting at the end of section 1 the words : 

Provided further, That the said bridge shall be so constructed and built as not t~ obstruct, impair, or in,juriously affcQt the navigat.ion of the river; and in order to secure a compliance with these conditions, the corporation, association, or com- pany proposing to erect the same, previous to commencing the construction of tho 

bridge sbaJl submit to the Secretary of War a. plan of the bridge, with a detailed 

map of the river at the proposed site of the bridge, and for the distance of a mile 

above and below the site. exhibi.ting t-he depths and currents at aU points of the same, together with all other information touching saitl bridge and river as may be 

deemed requi ite by the Seer tary of War to determine whether the said bridge, when built, will conform ro the prescribed conditions of the act not to obstruct, 

impair, or injuriously affect, the navigatm of t he river: Provided fttrther, That the 

~;~~~~rv~; ~~ ~;[e~e~i~~d J.!~':fou. superintend the survey and examination 

The amendment was agreed to. 

The next amendment was to insert the following as section 2: 

SEc. 2. That the Secretary of War is hereby authorized and directed, upon re- o iving said plan and map and other information, and upon being sa.tisfiecl that a briuge uuilt on such a plan ancl at said locality will conform to the prescribed con· ditions of this act not to obstruct, impair, or injuriously affect the navigation of 

said river, to notify the said corporation, association, or comp:my proposing to erect the same that he approves the same ; and upon receiving such notification 

the saitl corporntion, a ociation, or company may proceed to the er ection of saiu 

bridge, conforming strictly to the approved plan and locotion. But until the Secretary of War a\>prove the plan and locu.tion of said bridge, and notify the said cor- poration, assocmtion, or company of the same, the bridge sbaJl not be built or com- mence<!. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

The bill was reported to the Sen..'llte as amended, and the amendments were concurred in. 

The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the 

third time, and passed. 

CHANGE OF NAME OF A VESSEL. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I now move that the bill (S. No. 855) authorizing an America.n register for the French brig Sidi, and a change of 

the name of said brig to that of Sea Waif, be indefinitely postponed 

for the purpose of taking it off the Calendar, as we h2.ve passed a House bill on that subject. 

The motion was agreed to. 

WILLIAM WALKER. 

:Mr. CIIA..l"\TDLER. I move next to take up House bill No. 2292. 

The motion was agreed to; and the bill (H. R. No. 2292) for the relief 

of William Walker was considered as in Committee of the Whole. It 

provides for the payment to William Walker, of Milton, Wisconsin, 

of 374.98, for unpaid salary as vice-commercial agent at Gn.boon, 

from October 1, 1870, to February 12, 1871. 

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

read the third tiiJle, and passed. 

PROTECTION OF IMMIGRANTS. 

:Mr. CHANDLER. I now move to proceed to the consideration of 

the bill (S .. No. 808) for the better protection of immigrants. 

:Mr. STOCKTON. That is one of a cla s of bills so common now in 

Congress interfering with private matters. I do not know how objectionable it is in its details, but I should like a vote of the Senate 

whether it shall be taken up or not. 

Mr. CHANDLER. It is recommended by the Secretary of the 

Treasury, and his letter is with the bill. 

Mr. SPRAGUE. It had better be laid over. Mr. CHANDLER. Very well ; let the bill ~o over. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion 1B withdrawn. 

1\fr. :MERRlliON. It is very manifest that there is. no quorum 

present. I move that the Senate adjourn. 

1\fr. CHANDLER. No; let me get through. I shall be through in 

twenty minutes, I think. I hope the Senator will withdraw the mo:- iion. I shall be through in twenty minutes at the outside-. 

Mr. :.MERRThlON. Well, I withdraw the motion. 

INFECTIOUS DISEASES. 

Mr. CHANDLER . . I move to take up House bill No. 2887. 

The mot ion wa..~ agreed to; and the bill (H. R. No. 2887) to prevent 

the introduction of contagious or infe,qtious diseases into the United 

States was considered as in Committee of the Whole. It provides 

that it shall not be lawful to bring any vessel or vehicle coming from a foreign port or country, and affected with a contagious or infectious 

disease, or conveyin~ persons, merchandise, or animals affected wif.h 

contagious or infectious diseases, into any port of the United State , except under the regulations hereinafter provided. 

The second section constitutes the Surgeon-General of the Army, 

the Surgeon-General of the Navy, and -~ e supervising surgeon of the 

marine hospital service, ex officio, a board to make the regulations to 

be observed bypersons controllingve selsorvehiclescomingfrom for- eign ports or countries into ports of the United States by passengers 

upon and persons connected with ve sels or vehicles so coiDlng, and 

by pilots at the several ports of entry, to the end that no persons, 

animals, or goods affected with infectious or contagious di ease may 

enter the United States. The board· may prescribe the times, man- ner, and places of performing quarantine by vessels, vehicle , persons, animals, and goods coming from foreign ports or countries, and 

may make all needful rules and regulations not inconsistent with 

law, and alter and amend the same, for the efficient execution of the 

purposes of the act; but no rule or regulation or amendment to the same is to have effect until approved by the President. The board js 

to make report annually to the Congress at its meetiug·in December. 

Section 3 provides that there shall be detailed or a signed by the 

President from among the commissioned medical officers of either the 

Army or the Navy, or from among the surgeons of the marine-hospital 

service of the Treasury Department, to be selected without regard to 

rank, but solely with reference to skill and experience in hygiene and 

public sanitary science, one who shall be the secretary to the board, and 

shall in addition, under the direction of the board, be charged with 

the supervision of all matters pertaining to the establishment and 

maintenance of the system of quarantine provided by the act: 

For the execution of the duties arising out of the act the fourth 

section provides that medical officers of the Army or of the Navy, or surgeons of the marine-hospital service of the Treasmy Department, may be detailed or assigned, according to the exigencies of the 

service, with especial regard to economy and efficiency; but no per- son in the employment of the Government so detailed or a-ssigned to 

duty is to receive any additional compensation therefor; and the 

President of the United States is to issue such instructions to the offi- cers of the various Departments of the Government not interferinrr 

with their peculiar duties as shall secure the aid and co-operation 

necessary to perfecting and enforcing the regulations provided for. 

The Committee on Commerce propo ed to amend the bill in the six71t 

section by inserting after the words "apply to" the words ~·or interfere with ; " so as to read : 

SEC. 6. That the provisions of this act shall not be so construed as to apply to or interfere ·with tbe health regulations and quarantine measures maintained by States m· municipalities; and such local systems and their appendages shall remain under the control of the respective local authorities. 

Mr. STOCKTON. I regret very much to object to so many bills ; 

but this is one of the same cla s, interfering with the regulations of 

harbors in quarantine matters. The highest power that is exercisell 

in this country is the power to protect health. The municipal governments exercising t-his power go further in their action than :is permitted to any other body. Why should the United States assume thi 

power¥ "'Why should the Senate at this time of the evening pass a bill giving a jurisdiction to the United States that never has been 

claimed before f I cannot understand it. 

Mr. CHANDLER. If the Senator will read the la t section he will 

see that it does not interfere in any way, manner, or shape with 

local regulations. 

Mr. STOCKTON. I listened very attentively, and I heard thosCI 

words with pleasure; but while it doe not interfere, it establishes a system never est,ablished before, a }""ederal Government system of 

quarantine in reference to harbors in the different States. It seems to me that that involves a great principle. I do not men.n by objecting 

to the bill to say that there may not be some propriety in it; but it 

certainly ought not to be pa sed in this way, as there are but six O"r seven Senators in the Chamber. 

Mr. CHANDLER. Very well; I will lay it aside. 
5108 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. JUNE 17, 

Mr. SPENCER. I wish to appeal to the Senator from New Jersey 

to withdraw his objection. This bill was prepared with a great deal 

of care by the member of Congre s from the Mobile district. The 

obj ect wa<> to k eep the yellow fever out of the Gulf ports. 

The PRESIDING O.Fl<,ICER. The bill ha.s been laid aside by the 

consent of the Senator from Michio-an. 

Mr. SPENCER. I was in hopes the Senator from New Jersey might 

withdraw his objection. 

LIFE-SAVING STATIONS. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I move to proceed to the consideration of House 

bill No. 2655. 

The motion was agreed to; and the bill (H. R. No. 2655) to provide 

for the establishment of life-saving stations ·and houses of refuge 

upon the sea and llike coasts of the United States, and to promote 

the efficiency of the life-saving service, was considered as in Committee of the ·whole. 

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

read the third time, and passed. 

Mr. CHAl'IT>LER. I now move to proceed to the consideration of 

Honse bill No. 1564 establishin~ life-saving stations, and appropriat-. ing therefor, and that it be ind.efi.nitely postponed, as it is virtually 

the same bill as that just pass~d. 

The motion was agreed to. 

LIGHT-HOUSE BOARD. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of House bill No. 3522. 

The motion wa.s agreed to; and the bill (H. R. No. 3522) to extend 

the jurisdiction of the Light-House Board, was considered a.s in CommittE'e of the Whole. 

The Committee on Commerce propo ed to amend the bill by striking out all after the enacting clause, and in lien thereof inserting: 

That the Light-House Board are hereby directed to cause examinations to be 

made, and to r port to the Secretary of the Treasury what light-housea, li~~~. 

beacon , and buoys are required for the b tter security of navigation on the .M..issis ippi, Ohio, and Missour1 Rivers, inoludin::t specific statement a-s to the respec- tive localities where and by whom now maintained, where required, and estimated cost of their construction and maintenance. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

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

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

read a third time. 

The bill was read the third time, and passed. 

REGULATION OF COMMERCE. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I move to proceed to the consideration of the 

bill ( S. No. 7 47) to facilitate and regulate commerco among the several 

States and with foreign nations. 

Mr. BOUTWELL. I must object to that bill. 

The. PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Michigan insist on his motion to proceed to the consideration of the bill t 

Mr. SPRAGUE. Let it lie over. Mr. CHANDLER. If the bill is objected to, I cannot insist under 

the present circumstances. 

Mr. SPENCER. I am very sorry that the Senator from Massachusetts olljects to this bill. I think it is amended so that it will not 

be objectionable. 

Mr. BOUTWELL. I do not object to hearing it read; but unless 

it is changed materially from what it was when I last saw it, I must 

object to its consideration. 

. PROTECTION OF IMMIGRANTS. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I think my friend from New .Jersey will withdraw his objection to the bill (S. No. 08) for the better protection of 

immigrants. If the Senator would listen to a letter from the Secretary 

of the Trea nry I am sure he would not object. I appeal to my friend 

to allow that bill to pa . It bring foreign ships under the same regulations now impo ed on our own, and is really very important, in 

my judgment. The committee were unanimous. 

Mr. STOCKTON. The Senator from Michigan asks me to withdraw my objection, and he is exactly in the same position as the one who told me he came near having a very fine horse. He met a man ridini on a nice horse and a ked him to give it to him, but the man said 'no." I wa.s trying to listen to the Senator when we were pressed with other busine , hoping that I could agree with him. I 

will say" to him candidly that it is really unpleasant to me to object 

to a bill when I have the power, there being no quorum in the Senate, to prevent its passage of my own volition. It is very unpleasant to me to feel obliged to resist these appeals, but, as I said when 

the bill was up, I really think it is .a bad bill and I should not like 

to see it passed without other Senators examining it. 

So far from the Senatorpersuading me to support the bill, I should 

like to get hold of him for two or three minutes to tell him what I 

think about the bill, and I feel satisfied I could p ersuade him that he 

wou]d be sorry himself to have the bill passed. It is a bill, as I un- derstand, taking a subject which is now entirely in the jurisdiction of the courts in the cities and States where the immigrants land, 

and putting it under congressional care. It is the tendency of all 

the bills from the Committee on Commerce. They all seem to tend 

in one direction. When you accomplish this object, when you have 

done this thing, you will find that you have ab olutely destroyed the 

safeguards which have been put over immigrants under the laws of 

the St.ates. I do not think that other gentlemen in the Senate who are absent now wonld feel that I did right if I allowed the bill to go 

through. 

1\Ir. CHANDLER. I wish to expre my gratitude to the Chair and 

to the Senators who have been thus kind to me. I have no more bills 

to offer at present. 

1\Ir. SPRAGUE. I move that the Senate adjourn. 

The mMion was agreed to; and (at six o'clock and thirty-eight 

minutes p.m.) the Senate a~journed. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 

WEDNESDAY, June 17, 1874. 

The House met at eleven o'clock a.m. Prayer by the Chaplain, 

Rev.J.G.BUTLER,D.D. 

Mr. CROOKE. I move that the reading of the Journal be dispensed with; it is very long. · 

Mr. SENER. I object; the House is too thin. 

The Clerk commenced the reading of the Journal, but before con- cluding, 

Mr. COTTON. I ask that tho further reading of the Journal be 

dispensed with. 

Mr. SENER. I withdraw my objection. 

No further objection being made, it wa-s so ordered. 

REPORTS FROM THE DISTRICT COl\HfiTTEE. 

Mr. COTTON. I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the District of Columbia have one hour this morning to conclude 

their reports. Under the rule they were ent.itled to submit their re- ports on Monday last, it being the third Monday of the month; but 

it being within the la.st ten days of these sion they were deprived 

of their opportunity. I understand the gentleman from New York, 

[Mr. TRE!\1A.IN1 ] who has a motion to suspend the rules coming over from yesterday, is willing that we should take an hour now . . Mr. TREMAIN. Will my matter come up immediately afterward Y 

The SPEAKER. It will. 

Mr. POTTER. I have an unfinished matter from yesterday, upon 

which a division was ordered. 

The SPE . .AKER. The Chair will recognize the gentleman afterward. 

No objection was made, andtherequestof Mr.COTTONwas granted. 

WASHINGTON AND GEORGETOWN RAILROAD. 

Mr. COTTON. There is a bill in thehands of the Clerk, which was reported tho other day by the gentleman from Illinois, [Mr. RICE.] 

I ask that it be now considered. 

The pending bill was a bill (H. R. No. 3641) to amend the act en- titled "An act to incorporate the Washington and Georgetown Railroad Company," approved May 17, 1872, reported from the Committee on the District of Columbia with an amendment, The bill provides that the Washino-ton and Georgetown Railroad 

Company may extend its tracks in Washington City, District of Columbia, from Seventh street west, down Water street1 to the intersection of P street south, thence along said P street to the west side of 

the arsenal gate; provided that wherever the foregoing route may 

coincide with the route of the .Anacostia and Potomac River Railroad, on Water street or elsewhere in the District, or connect portions of such 

route, but one set of tracks shall be used by both companies; which are hereby authorized and empo_.wered to use such tracks in common, 

upon such fair and equitable terms as may be agreed upon by said 

companies; and in the event the sai<l companies fail to agree upon 

satisfactory terms, either of said companies may apply by petition to 

the supreme court of the District of Columbia, which shall provide for 

proper notice to and hearing of all parties interested, and shall have 

power to determine the terms an<l condition upon which, and the 

regulations under which, the company thereby incorporated shall be 

entitled so to use and enjoy the tracks of such other treat-railroad 

company, and the amount and manner of compensation to be paid 

therefor; and provided further, that neither of the companie u::;in~ 

such track in common shall be permitted to make the track so u ed. 

in common the depot or general stopping-place to await passengers, 

but shall only be entitled to nse the same for the ordinary passage of 

their cars, with the ordinary halts for the taking up and the dropping 

of pas engers. 

The amendment was to add to the bill the following : 

.A.ndprovidi!djurther, That such railroad track shall conform to the gr:We 68· 

tablished by the board of public works of the District of Columbia. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

The question wa upon ordering the bill, as amended, to be en- grossed and read a third time. 

ilr. RICE. I de ire to state to the House that this. bill is for the purpose of allowing the W ashingtou and Georgetown Ra.Hroad Company, . already built, to extend its trackabouttbreehuncb·ed yards, not fortbe 1 

purpose of benefiting the company, but for the benefit of the property- owners in that region. This railroad terminates at the foot of ~ev-