• 

1876. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 257 

the many and lleYer to their exclusion, in the interests of the few, 

confirms the conceptions formed of him at home and makes universal 

the picture engraven upon the hearts of his own people. 

W bile the deceased stood thus distinguished from the masses of men in his public life, in his private virtues he was pre-eminently a roan- the highest and best type of man. While many of the most celebrated characters of history have had their glories dimmed with re- flections from dark spots upon their private lives, Mr. KERR was wholly free from any !Veat private fault whose presence detracted 

from the public esteem m which he was held. He was temperate aud 

sober, honest and upright, frugal and charitable, generous and just, 

conscientious and a Christian, a warm friend, a constant husband, and an affectionate father. He had his likes and dislikes1 bnt they were distrilmted by reason and controlled by causes. He had his partialities and his prejudices, but they were never wholly without foundation. He had his peculiarities, but they never approached distasteful eccentricities, and with all the details of ·character the aggregated 

whole rendered him a desirable neighbor, a useful citizen, and an es- teemed man. · We have inadvertently pronounced him dead. True we have. placed 

his mortal remains in the tomb of his fathers and his ashes are mingling with the dust from which they arose, but he is not dead. Such men never die. There has been a change, yet it bas been one in which 

but the grossness of earth-life has been swept away, leaving only 

the intellectual, the spiritual, and therefore the higher and purer life, 

to commune with us, t-each us, and lead us onwa.rd and upward. He 

lives in his work and example; nor will they die wholly until in the 

dim distance of future time the obliterating waves of oblivion shall 

submerge all that has been and now is, and the dark funeral pall 

shall be thrown over all the glories of the past and greatness of the 

present. 

A.s a proper closing of these solemn ceremonies, I now offer the 

following reRolutions, and move their adoption: 

Resolved, Tbat the sad announcement of tbe deat.h of MICHAEL C. KERR, late 

member from the State of Indiana, and Speaker of this Honse, is received by us in 

the deepest sorrow and profoundest re!ITet, and that in his untimely decease the 

llouse of Representatives of the Unitea States has lost an impartial, competent, and noble presiding officer, a faithful and patriotic member. . JleRolved, That in testimony of our respect for the memory of tho deceased 

Speaker, his chair be draped in mourning during the unfinished term of tho Forty. fourth Congress, and as a further evidence of o'ur continuing esteem for the dead, 

the officers and members of this House will wear the usual badge of mourning for 

tho sp:wo of thirty days. . .Resolved, That the Senate be informed of the death of the lat.o Speaker by forwarding to that body a copy of these resolutions, and tba.t the Clerk transmit a. copy of tho samo to the affiicted family of the illustrious dead. 

Resolved, That, as a further tribut-e of respect to tho departed officer, this House 

do now adjourn. 

'fhe question being taken on the resolutions, they were unaninlously 

adopted; and accordingly (at three o'clock and forty-five minutes p. 

m,) the House adjourned. 

PETITIONS. 

The following petitions were presented at the Clerk's desk under 

the rule, and referred as stated: 

By Mr. FELTON: The petition of 60 citizens of Polk and Haralson 

Counties, Georgia, for~ post-route from Rock Mart, Polk County, to 

Buchanan, via Tallapoosa copper mines in Haralson County, Georgia, 

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

By Mr. RIPDLE: The petition of J.D., Bond & Brother, of David- son County, Tennessee, to be refunded $171.75 taxes ille~ally collected from them, to the Committee of Claims. 

By Mr. SHEAKLEY: The petition of William Spillon, late a private in Company A, Fourteenth Regiment New York Cavalry, for a pension, to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

IN SENATE. 

MONDAY, December 18, 1876. 

Prayer by the. Chaplain, Rev. BYRON SuNDERLAND, D. D. 

The J ourna:I of the proceedings of Friday last was read and ap- proved. 

PETITIONS AND l'I'IEMORIALS. 

Mr. CAMERON, of Pennsylvania, presented the petition of Job H. 

Jackson, Joseph G. Moore, and other citizens of Pennsylvania, praying for prohibitory legislation for the District of Columbia and the 

Territ.ories; the proh1bition of the foreign importation of alcoholic 

liquors; that total abstinence be made a condition of the civil, military, and naval service; and for a constitutional amendment to prohiiJit the traffic in alcoholic beverages throughout the national domain; which was referred to the Committee on Finance. 

He also presented the petition of William A. H. Allen, passed assistant cngi~eer United States Navy, praying to be allowed the increased 

pay of his grade from the date at which he completed his term of sea service aa required by law in his previous grade; which was referred 

to the Committee on Naval Affairs. 

Mr. DAWES presented the petition of the Methodist Episcopal church of Natick, :Massachusetts, signed by its pastor a"nd other offiV-17 

cera, praying for prohibitory legislation for the District of Columbia 

and the Territories; the prohibition of the foreign importation of alcoholic liquors; that total abstinence be made a condition of the civil, 

military, aud naval service; and for a constitutional amendment to 

prohibit the traffic in alcoholic beverages throughout the national domain; which was-refened to the.Committee on Finance. 

Mr. CRAGIN presented the petition of the Grand Lodge of the Good 

Templars of the State of New Hampshire, officially signed, representing 1,200 members, praying for prohibitory legislation for the District 

of Columbia and the Territories; the prohibition of the foreign importation of alcoholic liquors; that total abstinence be made a condition of the civil, military and naval service; and for a constitutional 

amendment to prohibit the traffic in alcoholic beverages thronghout 

the national domain; which was referred to the Committee on Finance. 

Mr. BOUTWELL presented the memorial of Messrs. Howes and 

Crowell, and 38 others, merchants and importers of Boston, Ma-ssachusetts, in favor of action upon the bill (H. R. No. 2685) for the distribution of the unappropriated moneys of the Geneva award; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

:Mr. BAYARD. I have received the petitions of certain Sons of Temperance, sent to me through A.M. Powell, of\Vashington, District of 

Columbia, to bo presented, praying that the National Government 

shall take cognizance of the trade in alcoholic liquor. I move the 

reference of the petitions to the Committee on Fina,uce. The motion was agreed to. 

REPORTS OF COMl\fiTTEES. 

Mr. CRAGIN, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, to whom was referred the bill (S. No. 152) relating to the promotion of commodores on the retired list of the Navy, reported it adversely, and. moved its 

indefinite postponement, a House bill of similar import having passecl 

at the la.at session of Congress ; and the motion was agreed to. 

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

(S. No. 771) regulating the accountability for clothing and other 

property in the Quartermaster's Department of the United States 

Marine Corps, reported adversely thereo~; and the bill wa.s postponed 

indefinitely. 

CONTESTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS. 

Mr. WRIGHT, agreeably to notice, introduced a bill (S. No. 10&2) 

to establish a court for the trial of contested elections in the offices 

of President and Vice-President of the United States; which was read twice by its title. 

Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. President, I shall not ask at this time a refer- ence of the bill. I have drawn it, I may be allowed to say, without 

consultation with any person. It embodies my views touching legislation as indicated by the title just read by the Secretary. I am not , so committed to its terms nor so wedded to its plans but that I shall 

be very cheerful indeed to receive any suggestions from others looking to its perfection. I at all times mistrust my judgment upon any 

matter and the correctness of my action, and I especially do so upon a question of this magnitude and this gravity. 

I may be allowed to say that I do not share the feelings of many who 

imagine that troubles and dangers arein advance of us. I have con- fidence that these feared troubles will vanish as we approach them. 

There may be threats and there may be turbulence, but in my judgment the Constitution and the law of the land will ride supreme over all of them. My confidence is in the practical common sense and 

patriotism of the people of this country. We have in this country 

almost a traditional love of peaceful political methods. 'Ve have in 

this country a traditional hatred of everything like license and violence. My confidence is that this traditional love of patriotic, peaceful methods, legal methods, and this hatred of vices and violence, will 

triumph. 

The bill that I have introduced is in thf!ldirectionindicated. It looks 

to a tribunal to settle the question a-s between contestants after the 

vote shall b~ declared. I belivewe have the power to thus legislate, 

and I believe that ala w can be pa.ased which will meet the great emer- gency. 

I a-sk that the bill whichihave introduced may lie on the table for 

the present, and shall ask that it be referred either to a select com- mittee, if such shall be raised, or to such other committee as I may 

indicate. I desire to say also that if a recess should take place I shall 

embrace the earliest opportunity after the convening of the Senate to 

present some views in favor of this measure. If no recess shall take 

place I shall probably ask the Senate to hear me some time next week. 

Several SENATORS. Let the bill be printed. · The PRESIDENT pro temp01·e. rhe bill will lie on the table and be 

printed. 

BILLS INTRODUCED. 

Mr. CHAFFEE asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave 

to introduce a bill (S. No. 1083) to amend an act entitled "A.n ·act 

granting the right of way thron7:h the public lands to the Denver and 

Rio Grande Railway Company,' approved June 8, 1872; which was read twice by its title, referred to the Committee on Railroads, and 

ordered to be printed. 

Mr. WINDOM asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, lea.\e to 

introduce a bill (S. No. 1084) for the relief of John N. Hall; which was read twic~ by its title, referred to the Committee on Finance, and 

ordered to be printed. 
258 CONGRESSION 1\.L RECORD-SEN ATE. DECEMBER 18, 

Mr. DORSEY a.aked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to 

introduce a bill (S. No. 1085) allowing pay to certain watchmen and 

others therein named; which was rea.d twice by its title, referred to 

the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed. 

Mr. WRIGHT asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to 

introduce a bill (S. No. 1086) granting a pension to Isaac Herring; 

which was read twice by its title, referred to the Committee on Pensions, and ordered to be printed. 

Mr. HITCHCOCK asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave .to introduce a bill (S. No. 1087) to divide the State of Nebraska into 

two judicial districts; which was read twice by its title, referred to 

the Committee on the Judiciary, and ordered to be printed. 

He also asked, and by unan!mous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S. No. lOBS) to establish a post-road; which was read 

twice by its title, referred to the Committee on Post-Offices and ~ost 

Roads, and ordered to be printed. 

Mr. EDMUNDS asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave 

to introduce a bill (S. No. 10 9) relating to evidence in causes of the 

United States; which was read twice'by its title, referred to the Committee on the Judiciory, and ordered to be printec,l. 

PAPERS WITHDRAWN AND REFERRED. 

On motion of Mr. DAVIS, it was 

Ordered, That tbe petition of Hoy .McLean be taken from the files and referred 

to the Committee on Claims. 

COMMITTEE ON COUNTING THE ELECTORAL VOTES. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. I move to take up the resolution which I olft~red 

on Friday last for the appointment of a sele6t committee in answer to 

the message of the House. , The motion wa8 agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to consider the 

following resolution, submitted by Mr. EDMUNDS on the 12th instant: 

Ruolved, That the messa~e of the Honse of Representatives on the subject of the 

presidential election be rererred to a. select committee of seven Senators, with 

power to prepare aml report, without nnneces~ary delay, such a measure, either of a le!rislative or other character, as may, in their judgment, be best calculated toac- co'mplish the lawful counting of the electoral votes, and best disposition of a.ll ques- tions connected therewith, and tbo due declaration of the result; and that said com· mittee havejower to confer and act with the committee of the House of Represent- atives name in said massage, a.nd to report by bill or otherwise. 

Ordered, That the Secretary notify the Honse of Representatives herewith. 

The resolution was agreed to. 

By unanimous consent, the President pro tentpore was authorized to 

appoint the committee. 

FOURTH ARKANSAS CAVALRY VOL~TEERS. 

Mr. CLA.YTON. I move to take up the bill (S. No. 683) for therelief of the officers and privates of the Fourth Arkansas Cavalry Volunteers . . The motion was agreed to; and the Senate, as in Committee of the 

'Vhole, proceeded to consider the bill. 

The bill was reported from the Committee on Military Affairs with an amendment to strike out all after the enacting clau~Se and insert in 

lieu thereof the following: 

That·the Secretary of War, upon the possession of evidence of service which to biro may seem satisfactory, is hereby directed to cause to b'e investigated the claims 

of the forces known as the Fonrtli Arkansas Cavalry Volunteers, enlisted for 

twelve months, under the' authority of Major-General Frederick Steele, in Arkan- sas, dated November 21, 1.363; and if he find the troops performed actual service, 

he shall cause tho officers and soldiers thereof to be paid at the same rates for their 

actual services rendered, while absent from their homes, as were allowed by law to other >olnnteer forces in the military service at the sa.me time. And in estimating the amount due the said force, the officers and non-commissioned officers thereof 

shall be paid under the mustering regulations of tho Army in force at the time the 

re!dment wa.'! under recruitment. And no allowance shall be made for any troops wfi'o did not perform actual military service in full co-operation with, and subject to the orders of, the United States authorities. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. Will th~enator from Arkansas be kind enough 

to explain this bill, if there Is no written report T 

Mr. CLAYTON. The bill was reported by the Senator from Missouri [Mr. COCKRELL,] but I am familiar with the fad-s in the case. This is the case of a fragment of a regiment of troops that was called 

into sf..rvice by Major-General Steele commanding the Department of 

Arkansas. They served less than twelve months. After they had 

been in service some· time the War Department decidecl· that their 

services were not needed, and a question arose as to whether they were properly organized. The orfler for their organization came, as l say, from the major-general in command of the department and not 

from the War Department. These men did this sernce. Congress 

passed a bill of a similar character to relieve another fra.ction of a r.egiment.sowe two or three years ago. There were two regiments, one of infantry and one of cavalry, raised in this way. Congress passed ~ bill.to relieve the infantry regiment, but there was no relief provided 

for the cavalry regiment. This bill merely provides that the Secretary of War shall be authorized to make inquiry as to the organization of this regiment and as to whether these men did actual service, 

and if he finds that they did actual service for the Government that 

they shall be paid as other volunteers were paid. It is the re-enactment of another bill which was passed some two or three years ago 

to cover a similar case of an infantry regiment in that State. As I 

understand, the cases are alike. The Senator from :Missouri can state 

tbo fllJlt{J IJ1.ore fully erba.ps. 

Mr. COCKRELL. There was an act pa.';sed for another regiment, an infantry regiment, and under it the Secretary of War acted upon some cases, and I believe had the fortune of rejecting every solitary one of them, nothing being allowed; but still he investigated the 

matter. This bill is drawn precisely as that acj; and follows its exact 

language. This bill was reported by me, aud I think I drew it in the 

exact language of the other bill, which was drawn by the Secretary 

of War. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. I should like to inquire whether General Steele was an officer of the Army of the United Statest 

Mr. CLAYTON .. He was the major-general commanding the department of Arkansas. · Mr. EDMUNDS. This bill assumes, and therefore settles the fact, 

that General Steele did enlist these companies of cavalry. I submit 

to the Senator from Arkansas whether the bill, unless we have some evidence on the subject, ought to assume that fact T If we are going 

to refer anything to the·. Secretary of War, ought not the Secretary 

of War to be authorized to inquire whether this enlistment was made 

under the authority of the laws of the United States? 

Mr. CLAYTON. I think if it was based upon that, the relief would 

fail, because if these men had been enlisted under the laws of the 

United States they would have received their pay at once. The difficulty in the. way is that t.he major-general commanding the department assumed to accept the services of these men. They were citi- zens of Arkansas who remained true to the Union and entered the 

service, I think, during the year 1863 or 18G4. The major-general of 

the department assumed to organize them, and did put them into the 

service. They served for about six months as a small £ragmen t of ::uegiment, and at the expiration of that time the question arose at the 

War Department as to their authority for enlistment and they were discbargeu. This bill is to cover that case. Of conrse, if there is any 

doubt as to whether Major-General Steele did make this enlistment, 

that question might bo left to the Secretary of W a.r to. determine; 

but there is no question about that; be did issue the order for their 

enlistment; but then if the Senator from Vermont desires to leave 

that also a question of inquiry with the Secretary of War, I ha.ve no objection to having the bill so amended. The only thing we ask is 

that if these men did render service to the Government they shall 

have an opportunity to be paid as other soldiers were paid. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. Wllat were these troops employeu about T 

:Mr. CLAYTON. They were employed as soldiers. 

Mr. ED.MUNDS. Yes; but were they employedassoldiersinmerely 

keeping tho peace in the State, as soldiers in Vermont were employed 

often during the ·war-not often, but on one granu occasion when we were invaded from the north by the confederates-or were they em- ployed to make war against the common enemies of the country f 

1\Ir. CLAYTON. They were armed anu equipped by the Government of the .United States, and were under the command of the military officer there, and were employed as other soldiers wero em- ployed. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. Were they put into any general Army that was moving from place to place, or stationed somewhere by themselves f 

Mr. CLAYTON. I thhtk they were put in the Army with the others. 

That is my recollection of the case; but thatcan be all left. subject to 

inquiry, if it is desired. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. I wish we could have a report from the Secretary 

of War showingexactlywhatthe history of this regiment wa.s before "ie are called upon to do this thing. 

Mr. COCKRELL. Thematterwasreferred to the Secretary of \Var 

and he wrote back referring to the act which we passed applicable to 

the infantry regiment, stating that be did not discover that it covered 

only the infantry regiment, and he stated what he had done under that 

act. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. Is his letter among the papers T 

Mr. COCKRELL. His letter is with the papers. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. I should like to hear the letter of the Secretary 

of War read. 

Mr. COCKRELL. The Secretary of War thought when be examined it that an act had already been passed covering this case, and re- ferred to that act which had been drawn with a great deal of care and which covered the whole case. Mr. EDMUNDS. I should like to hear the letter of the Secretary 

of War read. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempcn·e. The letter will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: WAR DEPARTMENT, 

Washington Oity, April11, 1876. 

SIR: Acknowledgin~ the receipt of your reference of the petition of William J 

Patton, for payment ot members of the four companies of the Fourth Arkansas 

Cavalry, enlisted under an authority from Major-General Fred. Steele, I have 

the honor to inclose herewith copy of the report of the Adjutant-General, which 

embraces information touching the several questions contained in your letter of the 3d in.stant. I also return the petition of Mr. Patton. 

Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

Ron. F . .M. COCKRELT., 

ALPHONSO TAFT, 

Secretary of War. 

Of Oommittee on Military Affairs, United States Senate. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. Now let ns hear the letter of the Acljutant-Geth 

eral read. 

• 
187& CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-· SENATE. 259 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

WAR DErARTMENT, ADJUTANT·GE~ERAL'S OFFICE, 

April 12, 1R76. 

Respectfully returned to the Secretary of War. 

By act of Gbnltl'ess approved March 18,1870, the Secretary of War. upon the pos- session of evidence which to him might seem satisfactory, was directed to investigate the claim of the force known as the Fourth Arkansas" Mounted Infantry, en- llsted for twelve months (without the sanction of the War Department) under an authority from Major-~eneral Fred. St~ele; _and, if he found that the force performe<l actual semce, m full co-operation mth and subject to the orders of the 

United States authorities, to cause the officers and enlisted men thereof to be paid 

the same rates as were allowed by law to other volunte~r forces in the military serv· ice at the same time. 

On the promulgation of this law numerous claims were presented, including sets of rolls by claim agents and others. 

'.rhose claims were carefully investigated in connection with the official records 

of this office, and it was found : 1. That the returns of the district of Northeast Arkansas, made a.t the time of the 

ar.tual enlistment of the force and based on presence, regimental and post returns, 

show for the months of January, February, March, April, and May, 1864, a much 

smaller force than that on and covered by the rolls submitted. 2. Men whose· names appear on the rolls referred to have heretofore been paid as members of other organizations for the period for which pay is cL'l.imed. 3. Notations setting forth the loss of horses appear on one set of rolls which are not enumerated on other rolls on file. 

4. Men enlisted by one officer are claimed to have been enHsted by another, and even then the dates of enlistment as claimed to have been made by each are entirely at •arience. 

5. One set of rolls bears the name.of a man aR an officer, while on another he is 

borne as a corporal. 6. 'l'he rolls certify to company organizations existing. when it is known from the 

records of this office tbatthe companies, as such, were never organized. 

The foregoing, in connection with the fact that contradictions as to when, where, 

and by whom mjUly of the force were enlisted, indicated clearly that fraud permeated 

the claims to a greater or less extent, and, under the rulings of the Treasury Department, that fraud, in a portion of claim, invalidated the whole, and justified the 

military branch of the Government in withholding any claim tow bich was attached a suspicion of fraud, which would invalidate snc1i claim in law. The department 

declined to accept the rolls submitted as correct evidence of service. 

The foregoing facts were officially communicated to Hon. Elisha Baxter, June 

28, 1872, ana to his attorneys, Messrs. Lowe and Archer, on May 13, 1875. 

1 Since the latter date no new evidence has been submitted in the premises. 

The bill for the relief of the Fourt-h Arkansas Mounted Infantry was carefully 

prepared by the War Department, alike to protect the interests of the Government as well as those of all legal claimant-a, and it is held that, as the law now stands' 

any and all·just claims can be met without further le~ation by Congress. ' 

The petition of Mr. William J. Patton is returned nerewith. . . •E. D. TOWNSEND, 

Adjutant-General. 

Mr. CLAYTON. This report was made through misapprehension on the part of the Secretary of War. The case which he there speaks 

of having investigated is in regard to another organization, an Arkan- sas infantry organization. This bill is intended to cover a. cavalry 

organization, which is entirely different from the one on which he made 

this report. As will be seen, this bill, which is in the exact language 

of the law be refers to there, will ~i ve the Secretary of War fnll power 

to investigate this case. A similiar bill did authorize the investigation of the claims under this infantry organization and resulted in 

their getting nothing; the claims were ruled out. All that this cav- alry organization ask is that they may have the same opportunity of 

settling their claims, and if the Secretary of War :finds that they are not just he will only treat them as he did in that case I presume. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. I move to amend the amendment. I am satisfied 

after the explanation that the case ought to be investigated ; but I move to amend the amendment reported by the committee in the manner I have suggested in the bill which I send to the Chair, which 

I believe is satisfactory to my friend from Arkansas. 

The PRESIDENT pro- tempore. The amendment will be read. 

The CmEF CLERK. In line 6 of the amendment of the committee, 

after the word" volunteers," it is proposed to insert "alleged to have 

been ; " so as to read : 

That the Secretary of War, upon the possession of evidence of service which to him may seem satisfadory, is hereby directed to cause to be investigated the claims 

of the forces known as the Fourth Arkansas Cavalry Volunteers, alleged to have 

been enlisted for twelve months, under the authority of Major-General Frederick 

Steele, in.Arkansas, dated November 21, 1863. 

The amendment to the amendment was agreed to. . The next amendment to the amendment was in line 10, after the 

word " service," to insert "for the United States; " and in line 11 to 

strike out the word "their" before" actual" and insert 'f such;" so as to read: 

Anrl if he fip.d the troops performed actual service for the United States he shall cause the officers and soldiers thereof to be paid at the same rates for suoh actual 

services rendered, while absent from their homes, as were allowed by law to other 

volunteer forces in the military service at the same time. 

The next a.mendmeni to the amendment was at the close to insert 

the words "and for the United States;" so as to make the clause 

read: 

And no. a.ll~wance shall be ll!ake f?r any troops who did not perfonn actual mili· 

tary service 1D full co-operation with, and subject to the orders of the Unit{ld States, and for the United States. ' 

The amendment to the amendment was agreed to. 

Mr. CLAYTON. That is satisfa-ctory. The amendment, as amended, was agreed to.· The bill was report.ed to the Senate a.s amended, and the amendment made as in C.ommittee of the Whole was concurred in. 

The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third rea.dino-, read the 

third time, and passed. . o 

PROPOSED IIOLIDA Y RECESS. 

Mr. CAMERON, of Pennsylvania, submitted the following resolution for consideration, giving notice tha,t he would call it up to-mor- row: 

Resolved by the Senate, (the House of Representaaves concurring,) That when the two Houses of Congress shall adjourn on Friday, the 2\!d day of December instant, 

they adjourn to meet on Wednesday, the 3d day of January, 1877. 

REPAVEMENT OF STREETS IN WASHINGWN. 

Mr. DORSEY. I move that the resolution I offered .the other day 

be taken up at this time for consideration. 

The motion WM agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to consider. the following resolution submitted on the 12th instant : 

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

directed to inquire into the necessity and expediency of repaving or otherwise im- proving all or any portion of the streets and avenues named in the schedule hereto 

annexed, and to ascertain, as near as may be, the cost of such work, and the proportioiJ!! to be borne respectively by the United States, the District of Colnmbili. out of Its general revenues, and the property-owners along said streets and ave- nues, and to report by bill or otherwise. 

Worn-out wood pavements. Between what limits. 

E street, N. W ............... New Jersey avenue and Fourth street, N. 11,433 

W.; Fifth ancl Seventh streets, N. W.; 

Eighth and Ninth streets, N. W.; Ninth 

and Tenth streets, (half square.) 

F street, N. W............... Ninth and Thirteenth streets; Seventh 15; 867 

and Fifth st-reets; Fourth street and 

New Jersey avenue. • I street, N. W ••• _.. . . • • . • . . . Fifth and Tenth streets . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12, 320 

L street, N. W .••••.••••••••. New Jersey and Pennsylvania avenues.. . . 55!'i M street, N. W • • • • • • . • . • . • . . ~bird and Fourteenth streets; M-street 30, 6fi7 bridge and Montgomery street. Bridge street, Georgetown . . . Intersection of Potomac street .........•.. Potomac street, Georgetown . ·Second block north of Bridge street ..... . High street, Georgetown. . . . . Bridge and Second street ..............•.. . East Capitol street ........... First and Sixth streets, E ................ . Penusylv~ avenue, S. E ... First and Eighth streets .........•...••••. Pennsylvarna avenue, N. W.. Circle and Rock Creek ..............•..... A street, S. E...... . . • • . . . . . . First and Second streets .................. . C street, N. E ................ First street, W. and Third street, E ..... . First street, E...... . • . • . • . . . . B anfl C streets, S.; ]l and C streets1 N .... . Delaware avenue, N. E ...... Band Cstreets .......... · ................ . New Jersey avenue, S. E ..... B a.ndEstreets .......................•.... New Jersey avenue, N. W ... Band H streets; K and N streets ........ . Massachusetts avenue, N. W. New Jersey avenue and Seventh street; 

First strel't, N. W ........... . Second street. N. W ..•....•.. Sixth street, N. W ...••••..•. Seventh street., N. W ..••..... Seventh street, S. W ........ . Eighth street, N. W ..•...... Tenth street, N. W ......... . Fourteenth street, N. W .... . Fifteenth street, N. W ...... . 

Ninth and Fourteenth streets. Pennsylvama avenue and E street ........ . Band H streets .......................... . E street and Louisiana avenue ........... .. I and N streets ........................... . C and L streets .......•.•...............•.. E anJF streets ...... : ................... .. K an'd M streets .......................... . N and Rhode Island avenue . ...... . ...... . Pennsylvania avenue and B~treet; Rhode 

Island avenue and K street .....•.•...... 

1.330 

1, 283 

5, 400 

3, 212 

14, 172 

14,370 

583 12, 5i0 

3, 770 

3, 667 

9,599 

26,611 

29,947 

7, 467 

10,525 

4, 300 10,683 

Iii, 530 

l, 400 

:1,804 

4, 200 

11,667 

Eighteenth street, N. W..... K and L streets.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1, 5.')5 

B street, N. W ......•...••.•. Fourteenth and Twelfth streets; Ninth 9, 528 

and Sixth streets. 

Total ..... ··--.•...• : .........................• : . ...•....... _ .... : . . ,"303;oi5 

I certify that the above is 'correct: 

The resolution was agreed to. 

.J. W. PHILLIPS, 

Ooerseer. 

SALARY OF THE PRESIDE!'I"T. ~ 

Mr. WRIGHT. I gavenoticeonl«'ridaythati shouldMk theSen::.teto 

proceed to the consideration to-day of the bill ( S. N o.172) fixing the salary of the President of the United States, a bill which was reporte(l from the Committee on Civil Service and Retrenchment on the 25th 

of May, 1876. I stated at the time I gave this notice that I did not 

propose to enter into any discussion of the bill, but stated that I 

deemed it to be my duty to the committee and to the Senate and to 

the question to at least ask that a vote be taken by the Senate a,t this 

time. I therefore move that the Senate proceed to the consideration 

of this bilL 

The motion was aQTeed to; and the Senate proceeded to reconsider 

the bill (S. No. 172) fixing the salary of the President of the United 

States. · 

Mr. WRIGHT. That bill, having passed both Houses, was vetoed 

by the President of the United States. The question now is on the 

passage of the bill, notwithstanding the objections of the President 

of the United States. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. This' bill having been returned by 

the President of the United States with his objection--

Mr. EDMUNDS. I should like to hear the message of the Presi· 

dent read. It may furni!h a good reason for not passing the bill; 

presumptively it does. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempo1·e. The message will be reporte~. 
260 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. DECE~IBER 18, 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

To the Senate of the United Statu: 

Herewith l return Senate bill No. 172, entitled" .An act fixing the salary of the 

Presiilent of the United States," without my approval. I am constrained to this course from a sense of duty to my successors in office, to myself and to what is due to the dignity of the position of Chief Magistrate of a nahon of more than forty millions of people. When the salary of the President of the Unitecl States, pursuant to the Constitution was fixed at $25,000 per annum, we were a nation of hut three millions of people 'poor from a long and exhaustive war, without comme.rce or mannfa{)tories, with lmt few wants, and those cheaply supplied. The salary must then have been 

deeme<l small for the responsibilities and dignity of the position, bot justifiably so from the impoverished conclition of the Treasury and the simplicity it was desired to cultivate in the Republic. The salary of Congressmen onder the Constitution wa-S first fixed at $6 per day for the time actually in session-an average of about one hundred and twenty days to each seRSion-or 720 per year, or less than one-thirtieth of th~ salary of the President. 

Con!!Tess have legislated upon their own salaries from time to time since, until 

finally"'it reached $5,1100 per annum, or one-fifth that of the President, before the 

salary of the latter was increased. 

No one havina a knowledge of the cost of living at the national capital will con- tend that the p;esent salary of Congressmen is too high, unless it is the intention to make the office one entuely of honor, when the salary should be abolished-a 

proposition repugnant to our republican ideas and institutions. 

I do not believe the citizens of this Repll'blic desire their p.ublic servants to serve them without a fair compensation for their services. . Twenty-five thousl\nd dollars does not defray tho expenses of the Ex:.ecutive for one year, or has not in my experience. It is not now one-fifth in value what it wa.s at the time of the adoption of the Constitution in supplying demands and wants .. Having no personal mterest in this matter, I have felt myself free to return this 

bill to the House in which it originated, with my o~jections, believing that. in doina so I meet the wishes and juugment of the great majority of those who indi· 

reotly pay all the salaries and other expenses of Government. 

U.S. GRANT. EXECUTIVE MANsiON, .April 18, 1876. 

FOUTY-FOURTH CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

At the first sesaion, begun and held at the city of Wru!hingt~n on Monday, the 6th _ ·day of December, 1875. 

.An act fixing the salary of the President of the United States. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Revresentatives of the United Statu of 

..America in Oongress assembled Thatfrom and after the 4th day of March, 1877, the 

salary of the President of the United States shall )>e $25,000 per annum; and that 

all acts and parts of acts inconsistent herewith he, and the same are hereby, re- pealed. MICHAEL C. KERR, 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. T. W. FERRY, 

President of the Senate pro tempore. 

25,000ayear. From George Wa-shington to AndTew Johnson, through 

all changes of administrations and parties, through all fluctuations 

in currency and through all the vicissitudes of peace and war, President and people seem to have been satisfied with the rate of ex- ecutive compensation. But on an unlucky day the Congress of the 

United States, with a. lofty appreciation of the value of their past 

services, voted that which looks very much like a donation of $5,000 to 

each of its own members, and, to provide against all contingencies, an additional allowance of 100,000 was made to the President who signe<l 

the bill, to be paid during his subsequent term of service. If this 

tremendous increase was effected through the agency of an appropriation bill, how did it happen when the same agency was invoked for 

reduction that it was treated with scorn and contempt, as if it were a novelty and an outrage upon the well-settled principles and pra-ctices of the Government f If the Senate insist that the law must be' 

changed before appropriations are reduced and refuse to change the 

law, that is a most effectual barto all progress in the way of economy. 

During a former session I heard comparisons institutec;l between the 

salary of our President and the enormous incomes of the kings and 

potentates of Europe. It must not be forgotten or overlooked that om Government was neither formed nor fashioned after the model of the 

despotisms of the Old World. Previous to the !~evolution, America. was under a monarchy, and so little taste had she· for that institution that 

for seven loug years her fields were wasted by fire and her sons were mown down by the sword, that t.he cro\1ned head as well as titled noble 

might offer their homage to the severei~nty of the people. Whatever 

may have been spoken, written, or believ.ed of "the divine right Q:f 

kings" to plunder and oppress their subjects for their own aggrandizement, was tried on this continent by wager of battle, and the verdict was in favor of the people; so that 1·oyal prerogative and royal incomes, 

whether great or small, are entitled to no consideration in the adjustment of any question touching the administration of our affa.ir . 

I certify that this act did originate in the Senate. 

Our Government may exercise the powers dele~ated by the Constitution. It was intended to be plain and simple in its operation, and 

its machinery was desi~ned to run, not in the exclusive intere t of 

office.:holders, but for tne common benefit of ~ll the people. The har- m~ny of onr system is its chief attraction. In building a house for 

the occupation of the President, the capitals of Europe wer·e not ran- sacked for plans and specifications of a gorgeous palace, but a plain 

structure of solid material was erected, a fit residence for a. republi- can president, and the salary was fixed at a sum not to excite cupidity bnt to give him a decent support while in the discharge of his 

duty. Let us bring it back to the old amount, and i{ there is less of 

GEO. C. GORHAM, ostentation it will be more in accordance with the spirit and genius 

&cretar-y. of onr free institutions. I give it as my deliberate opinion that there 

Mr. THURMAN. Mr. President, I am satisfied that Samuel J. Til· should be a very considerable reduction in all official salaries. The 

den desires to bring back the simplicity and frugality of the fathers, distressed condition of the country and the very existence of the Reand that he is able to live on .. 25,000 a. year. I can therefore safely public demand it. Ambition and avarice are the most irrepres ible 

vote for the bill. and insatiate passions of human nature, and they wiU not hesitate to 

Mr. EDMUNDS. He willli ve on less, so far as the United States is · employ fraud and force in carrying out their objects. If this Governconcerned, I hope. [Laughter.] .... ment shall recover from the shock of the last presidential election, it 

Mr. McCREERY. Mr. President, since the beginning of the session cannot withstand the frequent repetition of such imbittered contests. 

the Senate has borne a strikin~ resemblance to a debating society, In view, then, of the importance of seeming tranquillity in the inoccupying much of its time in d1scussiop, and it looks somewhat like ture, of establishing order and maintaining inviolate the rights of the a new departure that so important a document as the message of the citizen, let us purify ambition by striking down the temptations of 

President should be passed upon without the utterance of a single word. avarice. 

If the convention that formed our Federal Constitution could have Mr. BAYARD. ·Mr. President, a test of the sense of the Senate upon 

foreseen the range of presidential action as well as-the dangers and the subject is now to be taken in what I consider a proper method. 

perplexities involved in the presidential question, it might have fur- A proposition was made at the last sest:~ion of the Senate by ingraftnished an argument against the establish'me,nt of that branch of the ing this measure on an appr(~priation bill to coerce the executive 

Government. ,_ \Yehave been engag~d fox some time in trying to ar- branch of the Government, at the cost of losing an appropriation bill 

range a plan of counting in or counting eut a President, and we are necessary for the support of the Government, into adopting a meas- now confronted ·with the solid and substantial question of executive ure which he had complete justification under the Constitution as an compensation. The bill nuder reconsideration, incumbered as it is at independent branch of the Government, and, as I believe, under the 

present by presidenHal objection, was reported and recommended by facts of the case', for refusing to sanction. I am glad that the questhe Committee on Civil Service and Retrenchment. As I have the tion has been brought up for-the consideration of the Senate in the ~onor t_o be a meJ1?-ber of that committee, it is proper that I should s~y proper manner, in which each Senator, accorilin~ to his judgment of 

somethmg. I desire· to say enough and no more than to place me m the advisability of the mea.snre, shall vote. a proper attitude upon the record. · I have heretdfore given to the Senate my reasons for concurring in 

The will of the people and the wishes of the States, as expressed the main with the judgment of the Presi<.lent of the United States on through their chosen representatives, seem to have small weight with this subject. I consider that so far as I have representative power I 

their chief executive officer. Another veto message admorushes us am compelled to use it for the interest of the public according to my 

of the fact that the legislation of the country must in ever,v particular best judgment. My best judgment in this case accords in substance 

harmonize ancl accord with his own pe.cnliar views of public policy. with the views expressed uy the President, and therefore I for one The argument of the President is based upon the assumption that the will vote aga,inst this measure to diminish the official salary of the 

restoration of the former salary would seriously impair the dignity of President of the Uri.ited States after the 3d day of next ~larch. 

the position, w hioh, to say the least of it, is rather a sandy foundation Mr. CONKLING. I wish in very few words to assign the reason for snob a structure. Nor does his appeal to his own experience _make which will constrain me to vote for the passa~e of this bill, the obit more conclnsi ve, since it is cheerfully admitted that every man may jections of the President to the contrary notwithstanding. Exactly ,expend more than his income, if he has the requisite capital or credit. by what measure I should gauge, in these times of pecuniary strinHow or where the President could have obtained the information gency, the sum which ought to be paid by the nation to its Chief :Mag- ~bich satisfies him that his course will be approved by the judgment i.strate, and exactly the sum which that measure would indicate, I 

pf the great majority of tax-payers, it is impossible to conjecture. Was am not at this moment prepared to say. It does not necessarily con- there e.ver a petition presented praying for the increase of his salary f cern the vote which I am called on to give to· make such a deterf!.as there ev.er been a remonstrance against the reduction f Or can minati.Dn in my own mind. The answer I shall return to my name will 

;the unai.d,ed sagacity of the President enable him to understand the stand upon a different footing. 

;wants ar;td the vishes of the people better than they are comprehended On an appropriation bill, in the dying hours of a session, coming to 

.and uudeistoo~ or their own immediate representatives f In the long the Senate and going to the House from a conference committtl6, so ~ineof his mustrwuepredecessors there wns not probably a single man that the entire bill without changing the dot of ani or the cross of a ~R.o fe~ t tR..Q.f jt 91!? ~lfq.jg~if1e<l or unbecoming to serve the people at t must he adopted or must fail, came provisions raising from $5,000 to 
1876. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 261 

$7,500 a year the compensation to be paid to the members of each condemnation so sweeping t.hat it has omitted nothlng else in repealHouse; also as parcel of these provisions one which doul>led the salary ing the legislation to which I have referred whlch was deemed so ol>-

of the President of the United States. The first of these provisions to noxious, I mu~t in consistency, in accordance with the votes I have 

which I havo alluded has already gone down, removed by repeal from given heretofore, in accordance with the original vote which I recorded 

the statuto-book, removed by a repeal urged on the attention of l>oth against the proposition, in a{lcordanco with the vote which I have 

Houses by the strenuous-(to use no stronger word)-manifestations given on one or two previous occasions to repeal the provi5ion inof popularclisapprobation, whichmanifestationswereacceptedbybotb creasiog the salary, I must now, notwithstanding the views of the 

Houses, I do not mean as the reason for acti'on, but as a fair indica- President, adhere to my belief that consistency and reason require 

tion and measure of what the public judgment indicated that legisla- that we shall complet-e the repeal of this legislation, all the rest of 

tiveaction should do. The statute which added tbat $2,500 to congres- which has vanished except a-s the Senator from New Hampshire sugsional pay was repealed and congressional pay was put back at $5,000, gests where the Constitution itself so hedges it about that it has forever 

where it stood for a long time anterior to the enactment. There it passed beyond our reach. · stands now; and my judgment, I turn aside to say, the remark being Mr. HAMLIN. Mr. President--

suggested by one which fell from the Senator from Delaware, is that The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The morning hour has expired. Is 

$'25,000 a year, considered in any way in which it can truly be consid- there objection to the Senator proceeding Y 

ered as compensation for the President, is compensation quite as ade- Mr. WRIGHT. I · trust there will be no objection. The Senator 

quate, o say the least., as is 5,000 a year for a member of this body. from illinois [Mr. LOGAN] who is entitled to the :floor on the unfinHowever that may be, the le~islation to which I have referred was isbed business is not present, and I trust that this matter will be 

undone, the law was re-established, members of both Houses declaring allowed to proceed. 

that they so re-established the old law and the oltl compensation, not ~be PRESIDENT pro tempm·e. ThE) Chair hears no objection. The as matter of judgment speaking to what of right it ought to be, buj; l>e- Senator from Maine is entitled to the :floor on the bill called up by cause the character, the circumstances, the various considerations sur- the Senator from Iowa. · rounding thlslegislation which had been put upon an appropriation Mr. HAMLIN. In the vote which I shall give on the question now bill were such as to call loudly for its. undoing, for setting back the pending, it is to me a matter of perfect indifference who may be our law where it stood before this interposition occurred. next President. \Vhetherit shall be a man who has an ample fortune, 

Now, Mr. President, I am aware that the case of members of the and without encroa{lbing upon which he may be able to bestow the 

Senatt'l, sitting here on the last night of the session, voting upon the hospitalities of the nation as they should be bestowed, and who might 

question of their own compensation, and that relating back to the be- discharge the duties of Executive without a dollar of compensation, 

ginning of the Congress, is distinguishable somewhat from another or whether it may be a man of humble m.eans requiring the contrifeatnre of the same provision of the bill; to wit, donbling the salary butions of the Government as a compensation for the services which 

of the President of the United States. But, making allowance for that be shall discharge to the country ; whether it shall be the one or the 

difference, my apprehension bas always been that it was the judgment other, so far a~ the vote which I shall give upon this question is con- · of a majority of the two Houses on the last occasion when action waa cerned, I am entirely indifferent. I confess I was surprised at the 

taken on this subject, as it was my judgment, that, under the circum- speech of the Senator from Ohio, [Mr. THURMAN,] mado in one single 

stances, the whole of that legislation upon the appropriation bill ought sentence. I will not characterize that speech as I think it deserves; 

to be expunged; the .whole thing should be put back, the whole act I will not characterize it aa I think the calm judgment of the public 

should be undone; and then, whatever might be wise or proper as to will estimate 1t. 

fixing over again the compensation of the members of the two Houses, I shall vote against the passage of this bill, not because I voted 

the compensation of the members of the Cabinet, the compensation against it when· it originally passed, not because I voted against it 

of the President and Vice-President or of any or all other officers, when it was in a bill coupled and conditioned with a variety of other 

should be taken up anew, unembarrassed by the odium which, in many salaries, but I shall vote against th~ passage of this bill because my 

minds, attached to the way in which a part of thls was once done, judgment tells me that it isrigbtsoto vote. When the bill was passed, 

and ~;bould be considered on its merits as applicable to the future. I could see no possible course for the President to pursue but to re- And at this moment I am reminded of a thing which I had forgotton turn it to us with his object.ions, as he has done. The salary had been 

and w hicb is quite pertinent to the line of my remarks. If I have increased; he ha~ received that increase of salary; and for him to 

fallen into an error, Senators will correct me. My impression· is that approve of this bill would place him in a position which made him 

thls same legislation on the appropriation bill raised the aminal sal- distinct from all other persons who bad held the executive authority 

nry of members of the Cabinet, whose compensation surely is inade- of this country. Consistent with his own position, aside from the 

quate if the compensation of the President of the United States is in- true merits of the case, I did not . see how he conld avoid vetoing 

adequate. They received $8,000 a year; it was raised to $10,000. In the bill as it is called, returning it to us with his objections for that 

the reformation which took place, the legislation to undo what had reason. But it was of course a reason he would not state. He has, 

been done, we did not omit to strike down the members of the Cabi- however, stated in his message retn.rning the bill to us reasons which 

net to the old $8,000. I think ought to be conclusive with us. I do not myself believe that 

Mr. THURMAN. I think you are wrong. there was any objection in the. community to the increase of the salMr. CONKLING. No; here sits thebonomble Senat.orfrom Massa- ary of the President when connected with that of others. I beard 

cbusetts [Mr. BOUTWELL] who was then a. Cabinet officer, who, in ad- none, and my recollection of the discussion of the press is that it was dition, is always accurate, and be tells me that I am right. So we very generally believed and stated that it would have been a. ri~ht 

find that we did not stop with the compensation of the members of thing to do to increase the President's salary, but the wrong consisted 

t.he two Houses in repealing; we extended it to the members of the in the increase of the other salaries connected therewith. 

Cabinet; and I am bound to say-and there at least, I think, the bon- Now, take the condition of our Government·at the present time ann orable Senator from Delaware [Mr. BAYARD] will agree with me-that contrast it with what it was when the President's salarr was fixed; 

I am utterly unable to distinguish between the propriety of leaving look at the population then and now; examine the duttes devolved 

the salary of members of the Cabinet to stand at $10,000, $2,000 bav- upon the President then and upon the President now; look upon the 

ing been added, and leaving the salary of the President to stand at . hospitalities that belong to that position, which are the hospitalities 

the $50,000 to which it bad been advanced. of the nation; and the compensation of $50,000 is meager to-day in 

Mr. D.A. WES. Will the Senat.or allow me to make a suggestion f comparison with what the original salary was when it was established. 

Mr. CONKLING. I will if I have time. I see that the morning I think, sir, that in the eyes of many persons from other nations who 

hour is about out. . visit us they estimate us very much l>y the hospitality of the nation. 1 Mr. DAWES. The Senator is aware, of course, that it extended to It is at least one standard by which foreign people measure us as a. 

a great many other officers, and we undid everything that the Con- people, aml perhaps our institutions. 

stitution allowed us to undo. But looking at it in its broad and comprehensive sense, looking at 

Mr. CONKLING. I am very much obliged to the Senator from the condition of things then and the condition of things now, I bold 

Massachusetts for making that suggestion. I rose without re.flection, that the sum which the law at present allows is but a meager one as and several of the incidents pertinent were not in mind, and it did a just equivalent for the responsibilities assumed and the duties disnot occur to me that the action was so broad as stated by the Senator charged. We know, all of us, that many of our Presidents have left 

from Massachusetts [Mr. DAWES.] . the Executive Mansion absolutely poor, and I have myself, on more Mr. CRAGIN. As the Senator from New York expresses a desire to than one occasion, on several, contributed by indirection sums wb ich 

do away with all the legislation in reference to the increase of salary, became absolutely necessary for their support in after life. 'Vho 

I would inquire of him what be proposes to do with the judges of the does not know that purchase of work after work of this statesman 

Snpreme Court. and that, who waa President of the United States, has been made by 

Mr. CONKLING. I propose to do with the judges of the Supreme Congress that never would have been made but for the absolute poYConrla.nd with allotherjudges,and with all other men not judges, and erty of the individual f Does it reflect to our character as a people, 

with all other ~hin~s with whic~ I am called upon to act, exactly does it come home to our judgment, tha.t we shall ask the best heads 

~bat the Const1tut10n of the Umted States commands me to do; and of the best of our statesmen in guiding and directing the destinies 

masmnch as within the commands of the Constitution r cannot touch of this Government and then turn them out in after life to little less 

the juuO'es of the Supreme Court in the way indicated by the ques- than absolute poverty! I think that an adequate compensation 

tion of the hqnorable Senator, I propose to do nothing in that regard. should be given to every public officer, and believing tho present is B~t inasmuch as the Constitution of the United States does commit not adequate, I certainly shall vote to keep .it wherA it is rather than 

this question to onr consider3.tion, and inasmuch as I am not able t.o to diminish it. I hope, sir, that such will be the judgment of the 

select this one single thing and say that that should be saved from a Senate. I believe such is the judgment of the American people, and 
262 CONGRESSIONAL . RECORD-SENATE. DECEMBER 18~ 

that t.he people themselves will characterize the whole movement as one which I will not characterize here. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Shall the bill pass, the objections 

of the Pre i.rlent of the United States to the contrary .notwitbstand- in~f Ou this qnestion the vote will be taken by yeas and nays. 

The que tion being taken by yeas and nays, resulted as follows: 

YEAS-Messrs. Alcorn,- Bo~, Clayton, Cockrell, Conkling, Cragin, Davis, 

Dawes, Ea. ton, Ferry, Gold thwa1 te, Harvey, Hitchcock, Johnston, Kernan, Key, Mo. 

Creerv, Maxey, Morrill, Morton, Price, Sherman, Thurman, Whyte, and Wright-25. NAYS-Messrs. Anthony Barnum, Bayard, Blaine, Booth, J3ootweU. Burnside, 

Cameron of Pennsylvania~ Chaffee, Dorsey, Edmunds, Hamlin, Ingalls, Jones of 

Florida., Mitchell, Norwooa, Parldock, Windom, and Withers-19. 

ABSENT-Messrs. Allison, Bruce, Cameron of Wisconsin, Christiancy, Conover, 

Cooper, Dennis, Frelinghuysen, Gordon, Ha.milton, Howe, Jones of Nevada. Kelly, 

Logan, McDonald, McM:ilian, Merrimon, Oglesby, Patterson, Randolph, Ransom, 

Robertson, Sargent~ Saulsbury, Sharon, Spencer, Stevenson, Teller, Wadleigh, 

Wallace, and West-31. 

· Tho PRESIDENT pro teritpm·e. On this question the yea.s are 25 

and the nays19. Two-thirds of the Senators present not having voted 

for the same, the bill is not passed. 

ELECTORAL VOTE OF OREGON. 

Mr. MITCHELL. I call for ihe regular order. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The un~nished business is t.he reso- lution relative to the electoral vote of Oregon. 

Mr. MITCHELL. The Senator from lilinois [Mr. LOGA.i.~] was en- titled to the floor this morning on this proposition, bot I regret to say 

that l;le is laboring under very severe indisposition to-clay and is not 

able to be in the Senate. He is very desirous, however, of being heard on the resolution, and has sent me word to that effect. Of course, so far as I am concerned, I am very desirous to accommodate him. I un- derstand, however, tha.t there are some ot-her Senators who desire to 

speak upon the subject, and I propose that we go on, but I do not 

wish to ask for a vote to-day for the reason that the Senator from 

Illinois is not able to be here. I understand the Senator from Ten- nessee [:Mr. KEY] desires to submit some remarks. 

Mr. KEY. Mr. President, the advantage, or rather one of the an- vantages, which we claim for our form of government is, that the 

people select their rulers. The voice of the majority is said to bo :potential, and when it fails to l1ave force and expression, under legal 

authority-when it is or shall be suppressed by power or subterfuge or other means-it is or will be time that our gravest fears should be e.xcited and strongest apprehensions aroused in regard to the safety 

of our liberties and the perpetuity of republican institutions. It be- comes a subject of deep concern, not to one party or the other, but to the whole body of tlle people, and affects alike the interests of the 

present ·and the future. If the voice of the majority shall be stifled 

and disregarded, the proud boast of republican institutions will be 

gone, and the nod of faction or beck of the tyrant will take the place 

of the people's voice. We at this moment stand on the brink of 

uanger, and we should pause long and consider well before doubtful 

steps are taken. I am no alarmist. I am not afraid of civil war. I 

do not believe that 'it is near at hand in any threatened-event. The les~ons of our late struggle are too fresh; ita events are too recent; 

its scenes of carnage and death too vividly unpressed; its agonies, 

distress, and losses too apparent and well-remembered, to permit an- other and similar contest. Our widows are yet in mourning; the 

orphans' tears are not yet dried; and all around are the lame and the 

wounded. The places made waste "and desolate have not yet been 

rebuilt, nor do they blossom. The southern section of the Union is 

shorn of power, and must submit to contumely, reproach, and injustice, 

if they be heaped upon it. Its people are without remedy for wrongs, 

if the Constitution and laws of the land fail them. As one of the mem- bers of this august body from that section, I am rsent here with no threatening message. If our voice be disrega,rded, our valid elections · set aside, we ma.y complain; we may invoke peaceful remedies, but we cannot, will not, resort to violent measures. It were ma<lness in us to attempt it. 

The closeness of our centennial presidential election, its peculiar 

features, and the methods of obtaining results have attracted profound interest, and the whole country is now in anxious suspense and 

excitement in respect to the entire subject, in all its aspects. Senators, let us be calm, considetate, and, as far as possible, dispassionate, iu all that we shall say and do in regard to this important matter. 

Let us remember tllat in an election which, by law, belongs to the 

people the will of t.he majority is sovereign and conclusive, and must 

be respected and obeyed as such. · There is no revising power or tribunal to which we may appeal frolll its decision without violation 

of essential principles which underlie and sustain our Government. 

I assume this proposition as sound and indisputable: On a doubtful question, involving the theory or practice of the GoYernment, that 

construction ought to be g1ven which is consonant with the spirit of 

our institutions, and in barmony with the general principles of our fun<1amenta.l law. That is to say, if one construction, in case of an election by the people, gives force and effect to their ascertained will, 

and the other failed to do so, that construction ought to be given which 

is in favor of· and gives efficiency to the popular will, and this must 

be peculia,rly so when the choice of the highest' officer of the nation 

iR involved. I do not wi h to be understood as maintaining that an election held contrary to law, or in violation of law, is to be sustained, 

however clear and decisive the voice of the majority may be expressed; 

but I do insist that in a legal election, fairly held according to law, 

and honestly and lawfully conducted, no doubtful\nterpretation of 

law or fact should defeat the will of the people, but that construction 

should be given which upholds the popular will. Take, for instance, 

the case of the democratic elector in Oregon. That State voted for 

the Hayes and Wheeler elect.ors by a majority of about fifteen hundred votes. The people of Oregon declared in that election that they 

desired that the electoral votes of that State should be cast for General Hayes for President, and Mr. Wheeler for Vice-President of the 

United States. Much could be said on both sides as to the result of 

the ineligibility of the postmaster selected as one of the electors; as to whether his resignation created a vacancy which might be filled by 

the other electors under the law of the State of Oregon; or whether 

his ineligibility was of such character that he could not be elected to 

the office, so that a vacancy could not be created in his case. I do not 

question the honesty, the motives, or the patriotism of Oregon's governor, but bad I been in his stead, and with my views in regard to the 

premises I have a.ssumed, I should have held so as to givE) force to the 

spirit and intention of the general law; t.hat there was a vacancy 

which could be filled, and thus have carried out tlle verdict of the 

people, who bad been called on to determine the question. The other 

construction defeats the fundamental object of the election. 

But let us go to a broader field. On the 7th of last November, a majority of the people of the United States, amounting to two hundred and forty-eight thousand or about that, counting the votes of 

Louisiana, South Carolina, and Florida as determined by t he returning boards, declared that they desired that .Samuel J. Tilden should 

be President of the United States, and Thomas·A. Hendricks their 

Vice-President. Under our electoral system, it does not follow that 

these gentlemen have been elected to these offices, but in the determination of doubtful questions affecting the electoral vote, the doubt 

should weigh in favor of the voice of the majority. The apparent 

majorities in Louisiana and Florida, at all events, are in favor of Tilden and Hendricks, but their returnilig boards hn.ve adjudged illegal-· ities in the votes of these States sufficient to reverse the majorities 

in those States. The distinguished Senator from Ohio [Mr. SHERMAN] said to us the other day, speaking of the returning board of 

Louisiana: · · 

Tbe members of the returning board are just as much officers in the performance of a limited judicial duty as your Supreme Court is in a broader one, just as much as ajustico of the peace is. Thejurlicial powers and cluties of that tribunal must he respected by tho tribunals of tho United Stat..es. The Constitution of tho United 

States declares that the electors shall be elected according to tho laws of the States. 

It is Loui ian a that says bow her electors shall be elected ; it is Texas that says how 

hers shall be electecl; it is Ohio that says how hers shall be elected. The United 

States have no power to interfere with their law!!. Their laws and their tribunals, 

their mode of returning and contestinj!, have to be regarded. It is by their law!! 

that this case must be decided, and by the laws of Louisiana this returnin~ board 

is required to pass upon these returns. It has done so, a.ncl I feel bound a8 a man who saw them do it~ who witnessed their proceedings, to say tha.t thoy dicl it in a manner to demand and require of you the same respect for their decision a.s wonlcl. 

be given to the decisions of the Supreme Court of the Unit~d Sta.tes. Their decis· 

ion is final, made so by the law of Louisiana ancl. by the supreme law of the land. 

Now, if all this be true of Louisiana. and its returning board, it is 

equally true that it is Oregon · that says how ller electors shall be 

electeu. The United States have uo power to interfere with her laws. 

Her laws and her tribunals, her mode of returning and contesting, have 

to be regarded. It is by her laws this case must be deciued, and by 

the laws of Oregon- # 

The secretary of state shall prepare two lists of the names of the electors elected 

and affix tho seal of the State to the same. Such lists shall be signed by the gov. ernor and secretary, ancl by the latter delivered to the college of electors at the hour 

of their meeting on such first Wednesday of December. 

The returns must be t.ransmitted to t.he secretary of state, at the 

seat of GoVtlrnment, and it is made the uuty of the secretary of state, 

in the pre ence of the governor, to canvass the votes, and then the 

governor must certify as before stated. In other words, the laws of 

Oregon constitute the secretary of state and governor its returning 

board. It is by the laws of Oregon this case must be decided, and by 

the laws of Oregon the secretary of stato and governor are required 

to pass upon these returns. They have done so, and we are bound to 

give their decision the same·respect that would be given the Supreme 

Court of tho United States. Their uecision is final according to tho 

law of Oregon and the supreme law of the L'tnd. We cannot go back 

of it to. see whether it was properly made or not. If tile governor of 

Oregon certified that Croniu was elected, his decision is final as a judgment given by t.he Supreme Court. We must take it as true. Thia 

must be so, if the position assumed by the ·Senator from Ohio [Mr. 

SHERl\IAN] be ti:ue. And equally true must be the converse of the 

proposition. If we may go bebinc1 tho certificate of the governor of 

Oregon and review and change biB decision, we may, in a like man- ner, go behind the certificates of the returning board in Louisiana 

and review and determine the merits of its decision. Both reverse apparent majorities, and each has the same dignity and force in this 

respect. Bot, sir, it seems to me that we shonld take a broa(ler view 

of the subject. In each case the tribunal has decided iu favor of its own political party, and in doing so has changed majorities-reversed 

them, aud these changes meet party necessities in the hour of party 

extremity. In neither case did t.he opposite party have couu el or representation. Each tribunal was partisan and decided in favor of 

its party, \vben each understood that its party triumpb could not be 

assured without tho decision it bas given should be made. The coun- try will never have confidence in either. Our Government is weak 

indeed, if its administration is to be chosen by the action of return-
1876. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 263 

ing boards or go.;ernors against the will of the people. It is weak 

indeed, if we may not go behind t.be fraudn1ent decision of a returning board or governor and must accept it as final, though we may know 

it was erroneous or corrupt, and thus allow the will of t.be people to be 

thwarted. Such a proposition is an admission that our Government 

is not strong enough to protect and defend the privileges and franobi es of freemen and our public libeity. . 1 

I have said that I did not agree with the determination of Cronin's case by the governor of Oregon. Far more reprehensible do I esteem 

the action of the returning boards of South Carolina, Louisiana, and 

Florida. It will nat do to Jet these or either of these defeat the will 

of the majority of forty millions of people, by mistake; erroneous proceedings, or fraud. Notwithstanding the eulogies we now bear pronounced over the Louisiana returning board, it would seem that the 

President was in want of confidence in it., as well aa ih those in South , Carolina.andFlorida; for though the election was a State matter with 

which Congress or the President bad nothing to do, notwitqstanding as asserted by my friend from Ohio, [Mr. SHE1ll\lAN1] "itisLouisiana 

that says how her electors shall be elected, * * * and the United 

States have no power to interfere with her laws," and, as a consequence, 

with her count of the vote under these laws, yet the President of the 

United States called upon several of the most distingp.ished members 

of the republican party to go and watch the count of the votes bytbis 

board, and see that there was a fair count of the votes cast; and these 

gentlemen felt that it was best that the count made by these gentle- men should be watched, for they did go as the President requested, 

though there was no official or other compulsory obligation on them 

to do so. The manner of the count and its results excite suspicion, for, 

though the law requires the Louisiana board to be composed of men of 

both political parties, there was not a democrat upon the board. These 

boards managed also in all these States to count on t by the most mea- ger majorities generally all the democratic candidates for governor, 

and most of the democratic candidates for Congress. This is notably so in Florida. Now is it not remarkably strange that the points 

of intimidation should have been so conveniently situated so as to 

procure a successful count in favor of the republican party by rept'lblican returning boards f The circumstances are all suspicions, and I 

maintain that tllese boards are not so sacred, and their acts clothed 

with such final official sancity, that we may not lift the curtain and 

peep behind it to see what is there. But I do insist that if the doctrine of sta1·e decisis is to control in the case of the certificates of these 

returning boards, it must also apply to the certificate of the governor 

of Oregon. The same reasons exist therefor save one, and that is the 

decision of one is tho action of a republican tribunal and the other 

of a democratic one. Eliza Pinkston has fearfully wrought up the feelings, the sympathies, the indignation of the Senator from Ohio, [Mr. SHERMAN.] Her 

story does not make the impression on my mind it did on his, because 

I do not believe it; he-does. The murder of the husband, the massa- cre of the helpless innocent babe, the character of the injuries to the woman arenot•thework of the white race or any othercivilizedrace. 

They never occurred as detailed. I know nothing of the facts except as I have seen them in the papers; but I undertake to say that no white man was concerned in the outrages detailed by Eliza Pinkston. 

My friend from Ohio will learn that as a general proposition negro testimony is not of the highest cllaracter of credibility. It is no matter 

of surprise that this is so. The ancestors of this people were savages 

when brought to onr shores. Their descendants were born in slavery. 

The school-house was shut against them. The law was violated in 

teaching them to read and write. Slavery and ignorance demoralize 

the slave. Their associations were with their own race, and even the 

free colored ma:n was not permitted to mingle with the slaves. Under 

such circumstances it was impossible that they should be the subjects 

of many refining influences, or that their moral perceptions should be 

clear and distinct. They were not to blame for all this; bnt theresult was, as every one knows who understands the subject at all, that 

with most of them truth was not appreciated, chastity was held in 

little repute, and the obligations of an oath were not understood, for 

they were sca.rcely ever in courts or examined as witnesses. There are many and glorious exceptions to this statement; and since the eman- cipation of the colored race the evidence of a marked, I think I mav say an astonishing, improvement in all these respects is most encom::- aging. But history and experience teach us that when a race or people have been demor~lized by ·any cause, there are many of them who never can bO recovered or elevated. 

I beg to assure my friend from Ohio [Mr. SHERMAN] that there are not so large a number of banditti and savages amongthewhite people of 

the South a.s he has been led to suppose by the testimony he heard before the Louisiana i:.eturning board. About the 1st of :May, 1 66, what 

wa~ called tbe Memphis riots occurred. During the first session of the 

Thirty-ninth Con~ress the Honse of Representatives appointed a se- lect committee, w1th our present distinguishedminister to the government of France at its head. This commit.tee heard testimony detailing brutalities, outrages, and ferocHies equal, or nearly so, to those 

detailed by Eliza Pinkston. Among the witnesses examined by that 

committee were Frances Thompson and Lucy Smith. By referring 

to the report of tba.t committee (Honse Representatives Report No. 

101, first session Thirty-ninth Congress) the testimony of Frances 

and Lucy may be fonncl. According to Frances's story, she and Lucy 

lived together; seven Irishmen came to their house, insulted her and 

Lucy, beat and chokecl and robbed them, and fom of the Irishmen 

outraged Frances's person, and three of them Lucy's. Lucy attempts 

the corroboration of Frances's testimony; says that she and Frances 

lived together; that she was seventeen years old; that but one Irish- man violated her person. 'l'be next one said she was so near dead 

that he wouJd have nothing to do with her, so he struck her a blow 

and left her. The impression this testimony made on the minds of 

that committee was as strong and vivid as that made by that of Eliza. 

Pinkston on the judgment and feelings of the Senator from Ohio, 

[Mr. SHEIDIAN.] On pages 13 and 14 of Mr. W ashburne'sreport will 

be found what he says on the subject. He tells us thatThe colored girl, Lucy Smith, who was bei>re the committee, said to be sixteen or seventeen years old, but who seemed from her appearance to be two or three 

yea'rs younger, was a girl of modest demeanor and highly respectable in appear- ance. 

He spea.'ks of Frances thus : 

She had been a slave, was a cripple using crutches, having a cancer on her foot. 

So atrocious was the story of these wrongs that the blood of Mr. 

Washburne boiled over at the horror of its details, as did that of the 

Senator from Ohio [Mr. SHERMAN] over Eliza Pinkston's, and he tells · with a burst of righteous indignation, that- , 

It is a singular fact that while this mob was breathing vengeance against the 

negroes, and shooting them down like dogs, yet when they f9tmd unprotected col· 

ored women they at once "conq nered their prejudices." and proceeded to violate 

them under circumstances of the most licentious brutality. ' 

That committee believed, honestly believed, all this was done. Fran- ces Thoorpson some years after was arrested for violation of the law, 

aml upon examination of the case it was discovered that Frances was a man, a fact no donbt known all the while to Frances's bedfellow, 

the young, modest, and "highly respectaule" Lucy Smith. The testimony of these witnesses was utterly and necessarily untrue, and so is that of Eliza Pinkston, as is most apparent from its face. She says 

that she bad her baby in her arms; that some of the men laid its 1i ttle 

bead upon her arm and cut its throat, and then they went to cutting 

her; they shot her twice, once in the throat and once in the leg. This was all done in the bouse. They then got her out of doors, and cut 

her jaw into the jaw-bone, and cut her throat. They then got the axe which she chopped wood with, and struck her a blow on the head 

with it with such violence that it broke tlie iron axe just at the eye. 

They cut her headstrings off. The Senator from Ohio [Mr. SHERlfA.N'] 

says they hamstrung her and violated her person. Here was this 

woman, shot in the breast and leg, with her throat and jaw and headstrings cut, stricken on the head with an axe with such force that the axe was broken, .hamstrung, and violated, who was able to get over into the cotton-field, and thence to Mr. Tidwell's house, and then to 

Epsy Williams, and then to Mirand Gates's, where slle staid a few days. 

How far these . places were apart she does not tell us. A salamander 

is nothing to Eliza. She tells us that they left Henry Pinkston unburied, and her for dead, and yet they took the body of the dead child a quarter of a mile away and threw it into a lake. And on this testimony, the falsehood of which is so apparent on its face, a State .is to 

be disfranchised and a President whom the people never elected is to 

be placed iQ office. My friend from Ohio lets his heart run away with 

his head in giving credence to Eliza's story. The brutal treatment of 

the husband, the murder of tlle child, and the injuries to Eliza w.ere not the deeds of white men or any other race. I do not believe they 

occurred as detailed. And, sir, these darkest deeds are done, we are told, in a State which is under republican control, and no warrants 

issued, offenders arrested, and no efforts made to punish the guilty 

monsters. 

Before southern States and people are held guilty of such gross out.; 

rages there ought to be a sufficient amount of kinship between the 

sections not to allow each other to be convicted of t.he most fiendish 

crimes onsuchfalseand unreasonable testimony. JtwoulU be better 

to hold that all presumptions of crime are against the southern people, 

and that they are conclusive. 0, sir, it is time that we become infused 

with more of that charity which "thinketh no evil and is kind;" it is 

time that we should have that confidence which would allow us tort'-

posetrnst in each other. It is time for us tomake our Government one of 

law instead of force. It is time that offenders should be tried and pun- isbedandnotthosewhoareinnocent. Thewickedshouldbecottdemned 

and not communities or States because wicked men are in them. If 

a people Jose confidence in the good faith and justice of their government or the government lose confidence in its people, there will in 

such a country soon be an end of liberty and free institutions. Before 

the people of my own State in the canvass lately ended I on all oc- casions indorsed the candidates of the republican party for President 

and Vice-President as patriotic and honest men, of whom any party or country might be justly proud. ~ supported Mr. Tilden and Mr. 

Hendricks because I thought them in every way worthy for the high 

offices to which they aspired. My opinion of none of them has changed. 

None of them desire the offices for which they were supported against the will of the people as expressed under the methods provided by 

law . . We must be actuated by the same spirit. We must settle this 

question in some fair, just, and honorable mode, at once peaceful and 

conciliatory. The pea·ce, the harmony: the liberty of the people are of far greater importance than the question as to who shall be the oc- cupant of the presidential chair. Success should be sought only on the 

merits of the cas~ Neither party should seek the advantage under 

technical theories or by force of physical power, but. the right sbouJd 
264 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. DECEJ\IBER 18, 

be reached by honest, non-partisan, and peaceful methods and the :Mr. DAVIS. The chairman of the Committe~ on Rules, I take it, 

country, the whole country, be. uppermost in all minds and hearts. knows that the Senator from North Carolina [Mr. MERRUlON] is not 

Mr. BRUCE. Mr. President, I wish to ask the Senator from Ten- . present; . but he knows best whether the Senator from North Carolina ne see simply one question. I have no desire at thi8 time to reply to ought to be cr interuled to be here when these rules are considered. 

his argument; but I ask him if he believes that the outrages com- Mr. FERRY. I am aware of the fact that the Senator from North 

mitted on Mrs. Pinkston must have been committed by black men Carolina, a member of the Committee on Rules, is absent. The Senbecause of the revolting and atrocious character of the outrage com- ator from North Carolina understood that if.t~ere ~as~ opportunity· mitted t I would eudea,vor to call up the report, and It IS with h1saasent that I 

Mr. KEY. I will say to the Senatorfrom Mississippi that I did not do so. The report is the unanimous 1·eport of the committee, and I 

say: they were committed by black men. I said they were committed call it np simply to avail myself of an opportunity when I see the Sonby 'savages, or those who had the instincts of savages. I did not say ate is not particularly engaged, that the subject may be acted upon 

they were committed by white men or committed by black men. l'he before the recess, in o.rder that we may have these rules, if adopted, 

expression I used was '"savag s, or those who had the instincts of placed in the hands of the Chief Clerk, that he mayincorporatethem 

savaaes." • in his Manual. Mr~ BRUCE. Then I misunderstood the Senator, and I bea his par- Mr. CONKLING. To avoid the necessity of aaking to have read 

don ; but I wish to ask him if it is proved conclusively to his mind enough of this report to enable us to understand what it is, I ask the 

that those outrages were not committed by white men t I think the Senator from Michigan to state sufficiently to denote to us the rules 

Senator bas read the report of the outra~es committed at Coushatta, in which 'changes hav~ been made, indicating in such general terms 

at Grant, and Colfax ·Parishes, and I as.K if he really believes that as he no doubt conveniently can what these changes are. those outrages were committed by other than white men T I do not Mr. FERRY. There are but very few of the rules that have been 

assert that w bite men would commit outrages that black men would changed. Substantially there is but very little difference between the 

not commit; I do not hold that black men are better than white men; present report and the current rules of the Senate. In one particular 

and, while I have no wish to discuss this matter this morning, I am the rule i'icbange~in regard to the :tttenclauceofSenators. We have 

somewhat surprised at the Senator from Tennessee when he cMts a heretofore found dtffi.culty when w1thout a quorum . . gross reflection upon a race that certainly does not deserve his cen- Mr. JOHNSTON. I should like to ask if these rules have been sure. printe(l f 

Mr. KEY. The Senator is mistaken in what I did say, as I. have re- Mr. FERRY. They have been pl'inted ; they were printed at the 

marked. . last session. The present rule as reported by the committee gives the 

The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. MoRRILL in the chair.) The ques- Senate the power to compel the attendance of Senators. ln that re- tion is on the amendment reported from the Committee on Ptivileges spect, and in that only, does the. new rule on that subject differ. 

and Elections. Is the Senate ready for the question f Then, in relation to the relevancy of amendments to appropriation 

Mr . .MORTO~. The Senator from Oregon [l\Ir. MITCHELL] called bills, we have found the d,ifficulty of settling the relevancy of amendthe attention of the Senate to the fact that the Senator from Illinois ments, and the present report provides that the question of entertain-

[Mr. LOGAN] desires to be heard on this question and that he is iudis- ing such amendments shall be submitted to the Senate instead of beposed to-day and cannot be present. I su~gest, therefore, that it ing decided by the Chair. All the .other subjects that might be con- would bardJy be proper to take the vote at tnis time. sidered materially different betwAen this report and the present rules 

:Mr. MITCHELL. I do not desire the vote to be taken until the Sen- consist in bringing tho practice of the Senate jnto the form of rules. ator from Illinois can be present. It is well known to all Senators that there are many decisions based 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no objection, the resolu- upon the practice of the Senate, and we find a great deal of difficulty 

tion will be laid aside informally. The Chair hears no objection to when a question comes up if there is no rule for it. \Ve have to adthat course being taken. here to the pra-ctice of the Senate, and the pra:ctice is not so familiar 

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. to Senators as the rules because those ilecisions are not before t.hem so much. The report covers that practice and reduces it to form, and 

A messa~re from the House of Representatives, by l'iir. GEORGE M. in that respect it differs from the present rules of the Senate. I think 

ADAMS, its~ Clerk, announced that the House bad passed the following if the Senate should take up the rules and proceed with their considerbills; in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate: ation, I have notes here by which I can show Senators, if need be, where 

A bill (H. R. No. 4187) making appropriations for the service of the the. present report differs from the rules of the Senate as contained in 

Post-Office Department for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1878, and the Manual. . 

for other purposes; and . .Mr. DAVIS. l\Iay I ask the Senator whether I understood him 

A hill (H. R. No. 4207) to remove the political disabQities of F. E. aright to say that the report was nna.nimous, and that the Senator 

Shepperd, of Virginia. from North Carolina agreed with him as to these changes t . 

Mr. FERRY. He did; the Senator is correct. I would also state 

that the committee have given a great deal of attention to this matter. I might revert to the fact that the present report bas reclassified the rules, placing them umler their various subject.s; and in that 

respect it would be a great advantage, if in no otl1er, as will readily be seen by reference to the report. The report is printed; it WM printed 

at the last session, and can be laid upon the tables of Senators, or probably it is thoro now. 

DEATH OF SPEAKER lql:RR. 

The me sage also communicated the following resolutions, which 

bad been passed by the House: , 

Resolved, That the sad announcement of the death of Michael C. 1\ err, late mem- ber from the State of Indiana and Speaker of this House, is received 1ry us in the 

deepest sorrow and profoundest regret, and that in his untimely decease t.he I{ouse 

of Itepresentativesof the Unit-ed States has lost an impa.rtial,·competent, and noble 

presiding officer, a faithful and patriotic member. 

r.esolved, That in testimony of our respect for the memory of ·the deceased 

Speaker, his chair be draped in mourning during the nntinished term of the Fortyfourth Congress, and, as a further evidence of our continuing esteem for the dead, 

the officers and members of this House will wear the usual badge of mourning for 

the space of thirty da:vs. 

Resolved, That 'the 'senate be informed of the death of the late Speaker by forwarding to that body a copy of these resolutions, and that the Clerk transmit a copy 

of the same to the afflicted family of the illustrious dead. 

Mr. MORTON. In reference to the obsequies of the late Speaker of 

the House, regarding which we have just received the resolutions of 

the House, I beg leave to say that my colleague, [Mr. McDONALD,] a long personal friend of the late Speaker, Mr. Kerr, is absent on duty, 

and it would be agreeable to his wishes as well as to mine and to the 

friends of the deceased that this matter should lie upon the table un- til th~ return of my colleague, and then a time will be fixed wht1n it 

will be taken up in the Senate. I therefore ask to have the· resolu 

tions lie on the table. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The resolutions will lie on the table. 

RULES OF THE SENATE. 

Mr. FERRY. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration 

of the renort of the Committee on Rules on the revision of the rules. 

I call the· attention of the Senate to the fact that at the last session a resolution was passed instructing the Chief Clerk to prepare a new Manual, and it was thought advisable that the new :Manual should 

include the new rules, if they should be adopted by the Senate. The 

Senators are well aware that the present edition of the l\Ianual is so far exhausted that all Senators have not been supplied. The new Senators who have been lately sworn in have no copies and many of 

the senior Senators have none. In order to meet that, as well as to 

perfect our rules, I ask that the Senate now proceed. to the consideration of that report. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question before the Senate is on the motion to take up the report of the Committee on Rules for present consideration. · The- motion was agreed to. 

Mr. FERRY. I now ask that the report be considered as in Committee of the Whole, and that the rules be taken up se1·iatim. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. That course will be pursued if there 

be no objection. The first rule reported will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

QUORUM-READING THE JOURY.AL. 

1. The presiding officer ha.nng taken the chair, and a quorum being pre ent, the 

.r ournal of the preceding day shall then be read, anu any mistake made in the entries 

may be corrected. 

Mr. FERRY. If the Clerk will allow me to interrupt him at this 

moment, I wish to state the difference between this antl the present 

rule, and Senators will see the force of the change. The present rule 

readsTo the end that any mistake ma.y be corrected that shall be made in the entries. 

That is, that you shall correct errors that shall be made in·the future, "shall be made in the entries." We provide that ''any mistake 

made in the entries may be corrected," applyino- to the past. That is 

all the difference between the present report and the old rulo. What 

follows of rule first is new matter. 

The Chief Clerk I'e nmed the reading of Rule 1, as follows: 

The reading of the .ToUI'll!ll shall not be suspended unless by unanimous consent· and when any motion shall be mado to amend or correct the same, it sha.U be deemed a privileged question, and proceeded with uutil di8posed of by the Stinate. 

Mr. FERRY. That is merely bringing the practice down into a rule. I think there can be no objection to that. 

' 
• 

1876. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 265 

Mr. BOGY. Will the Senator from Michigan allow me to inquire 

what has become of the resolution of the Senator from Oregon! 

Mr. FERRY. It was informally laid aside for the purpose of con- siuering this report. 

:Mr. BOGY. I desire to know whether it was laid .aside until tomorrow, or whether it iB likely to be called up at any time to-day. 

If it lies over until to-morrow, which I presume was the intention 

of the Senator from Oregon, I shall know how to govern myself, aa I 

desire to offer an amendment to the resolution. I understand the 

resolution lies over until to-morrow. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It was laid aside in consequence of 

the illness of the Senator from illinois [Mr. LOGAN] who will not be 

present to-day. 

1\Ir. BOGY. So that, of course, it will lie over until to-morrow. I so understand it. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair will take it to be the pleas- ure of the Senate that unless objection is made each rule as it is read, 

thus presented as an amendment to the ~xisting rules, is assented to. 

The first rule will be regarded as agreed to. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. Are we in Committee of the Whole T 

Mr. }~ERRY. Yes, sir. The rules will be reported to the Senate 

hereafter. 

1\Ir. EDMuNDS. All right, then. 

Mr. FERRY. I will now state for the information of the Senate 

that rule second is new matter. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

WHEN A QUORUM IS NOT PRES~'T. 

2. If either at t.he commencement of any daily session of the Senate, or at any time durin.,. its daily sessions, a. 9.uestion shall be raised by any Senator as to the 

presence of a quorum, the presiding officer shall forthwith direct the Secretary to 

call the roll of Senators\ and shall ·announce the result to the Senate ; and these 

p'roceedings shall be witnout debate. 

llr. FERRY. This bas been the practice of the Senate. It iB really 

reducing the practice to form. We have hitherto ·had no rnle that 

controlled it. 

Mr. HAMLIN. In this connection I want to say to the Senate that, 

while I was one of the committee which aided in preparing these 

rnles,Ididnot deem it advisable to press upon the con ideration of that 

committ.ee an amendment to this rule, which I think, after we shall 

have gone through it in Committee of the Whole, I shall offer; and I 

make the stat-ement now for the purpose of asking the consideration 

of Senators to tho point. It is an amendment which will authorize a less number than a guorum, when the Senate shall be found in that 

condition, to compel the attendance of absent Senators. The_ rule 

which bas always existed has been based upon the supposition 

that absent Senators if notified will appear; while you and I, sir, 

know that the rule has been, if not "more honor'd in the breach than 

the observance," o:ten dishonored in the breach; and I believe the 

time has come when the same power should be vested in a. number 

less than a quorum here that iB vested by the rules of the Honse in a number less than a. quorum there. We often find ourselves at midnight, or even at a later hour, without a quorum of members present. 

The majority of that number present are seekin~ to accomplish an object. We do know, and now I speak as an rndividual, who are not present and ought to be; and legislation is thus defeated. I 

think thero ought to be an absolute power provided by rule to allow 

the Senators present, being less than a quorum, to compel the attend- ance of absent Senators; aml I think I will offer an amendment at 

tho proper time to that effect. 

Mr. FERRY. I desire to call the attention of my colleague on the 

committee to Rule 3, where he will see, I think, that that case is 

covered, if I understand him correctly; but I may have misunderstood 

him. It provides that a majority of Senators present may compel the 

attendance of Senators. 

Mr. HAMLIN. I was not aware that it was put in. 

Mr. FERRY. It covers the question, I think. 

Mr. INGALLS. Why did the committee omit the definition of" qnorum" contained in the .second clause of the first rule as it now standsf . Mr. HAMLIN. The Constitution does that. 

Mr. FERRY. It is in the Constitution. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there be no objection, the second 

rule will be considered as agreed to and the third rule will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

AnS~'T SE.'IATORS SE}I""T FOR TO MAKE A- QUORUM. 

3. No Senator shall absent himself from the service of the Senate without leave 

first obtained. Whenever it shall be ascertained that a quorum is not present, a majority of the Senators present may direct the Sergeant-at-Arms to request, and, 

when necessary, to compel the attendance of the absent Senators, which order 

shall be determined without debate; and, pending its execution, and until a quorom 

shall be present, no motion, except a motion to adjourn, nor debate, shall be in or- der ; and all proceedings under this rule shall cease upon a.n adjournment. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. This rule will be considered as agreed 

to, if there be no objection, and the fourth rule will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

PRESIDEXT PRO TEMPORE TO BE CHOSEX. 

4. In the absence of the Vice-Presillent, the Senate shall choose a President pro 

tempore, and the presiding officer t:1hall have tl1e riaht to namen. Senator to perform 

the duties of theUhair; but such substitntion sh:ill not extend beyond an adjourn- ment. • 

· The Chief Clerk next read as follows: 

ltiAKING UP THE JOURNAL. 

5. The proceedings of. the Senate shall, briefly and accurately, be stated on the 

.Journal. Messages of the President, in full; titles of bills and joint resolutions, 

and such parts as shall be affected by proposed amendments; every vote, and a brief statement of the contents of each petition, memorial, or paper presented to the Senate, shall be entered. 

The Chief Clerk r~ad next as follows : 

SEPARATE JOURNALS TO BE KEPT. 

6. The legislative proceedings, the executilve ~roceedings, the confidential leg- islative proceedings, and the proceedings when Sitting as a court of impeachment, of the Senate, shall each be recorded in a separate book. 

Mr. FERRY. The next rule is a new one. The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

PRESENTATION OF CRRDENTIALB. 

7. The presentation of the credentials of Senators-elect and other questions of 

privilege shall always be in order, except during the readin~ and correction of tho 

Journal, while a question of order oramotiontoadjonrnispending, orwhilethe Sen- ate is dividin~; and all questions and motions arising or made upon the presenta· lion of such credentials shall be proceeded with until disposed of by the Senate. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. No objection being made, this rule 

will be considered as agreed to and the eighth rule will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

ORDER OF BUSINESS; 

Morning h8ur. 

8. One hour next after tbereadinf of the Journal shall be designated as the morn- ing hour, during which the order o business shall be as follows: 

First. The presiding officer shall lay before the Senate messages from the President, reports and communications from the heads of Departments, and other com· municatj.ons addressed to the Senate; and snob bills, joint resolutions, and other 

messages from the House of Representatives as may remain upon his table from 

any previous day's session undisposed of. 

Second. The presiding office.r shall then call for, in the following order: 

The presentation of petit.ions and memorials. R~ports of th.e standrng and select committees. 

The introduct.ion of bills and joint resolutions. 

Concurrent and other resolutions. 

Until the ousiness of the morning hour shall have been concluded and so an- nounced from the Chair, no motion to proceed to the consideration of any bill, reSolution, report of a committee, or other subject upon the Calendar ahafl be enter- tained by the Chair, unless by unanimous consent; and if _such ~nsent be given, the motion shall not be open to amendment and shall be decided without debate up- on the merits of the subject proposed to be taken np; nor shall the consideration 

of any subject taken up during the morning hour, except a. motion to amend tho 

Journal, or a motion pertaining to the credentials of a Senator-elector his admis~ion 

to his seat, be extended, unless by unanimous consent, beyond the expiration of the 

morning hour. 

If any portion of the morning hour shall remain after the call for resolutions, the 

presi!ling officer shall lay before the Senate, in their order, resolutions and concur- rent reso1utions introduced on any prior day, and the same shall be proceeded with, 

bot not beyond the expiration of the morning hour, unless by the unanimous con- sent of the Senate. 

Mr. -FERRY. I desire to propose an amendment from the committee, and that is to insert after the word "after" in the first line of this 

rule the words" and including," so that it may include the J ourna.l and 

not llave the morning hour fluctuate with the length of time required 

for the reading of the Journal. - The amendment was arrreed to. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The rule, as amended, will be agre_cd _to, no objection being made, and rule ninth will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows : 

UNFWSHED BUSINESS. 

9. Immediately upon the expiration of the morning boor, the presiding officer 

shall lay before the Senate the unfinished business at its last adJournment, which 

shall take precedence of the special orders, and shall be proceeued with until dis· 

posed of by the Senate. 

'fhe Chief Clerk next read as follows: 

CALENDAR OF GENERAL ORDERS. 

10. At the expiration of the morning hour, if there shall be neither unfinishen 

business nor special order, the Sena~e shall proceed with the Calendar of General 

Orders, unless iii shall otherwise <letermine; and the snb,iects upon the Calendar 

of General Orders shall be taken up in the order in which they stann, and, if not finally disposed of, shall retain their respective positions on sai<l Calendar until 

such final disposition. And in all cases where the Senate shall take up the Calendar of General Orders, aod shall not have gone through therewith, when the same shall be resumed, it shall beat the point which was reached when last under con- sideration. 

The PREGID!NG OFFICER. No objection being made, this rule 

will be considered as agreed to. _ - :Mr. FERRY. As this rrue has been agreed to, I ask that it be t.ransposed to follow Rule 13. The rule as to" general orders" should follow 

the rule as to ''special oruers." Then they will be in this order : first 

the unfinished business, next the special order, and then the general 

orders. This should be Rule 13" instead of 10. It simply regards the 

order of arrangement. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. That will be done by unanimous consent. 

Mr. DAVIS. I understand that this report is being read now as any 

hill, and that it may be committed or amended after we shall finish 

the readinlf. _ I beli~ve that I am correct in that view. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. 'fhe report iB in committee now, and 

will be passed npon again. Mr. FERRY. I understand that it is in Committee of the Whole, 

and we are now passing upon each rule and making amendments, 

and then the whole body of rules will have to come into the Senate 

subject to control as usual in the Senate. - - The PRESIDING OFFICER. Tho next rule will be read. 

• 
266 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--SENATE. DECEMBER 18, 

The Chief Clerk read as follows : 

SPECIAL ORDERS. 

11 . .Any subject or matter may, by a vote of two-thlrtls of the SenatorS' present, ue made a special order; and when the hour fixed for the consideration of a special 

order shall arrive, it shall be the duty of the presiding officer to lay such special 

ordet• before the Senate, unless there be unfinished bll8iness of the preceding day, in which case the unfinished business shall have precedence. 

1\Ir. BAYARD. Is that a change in the existing rule T I wish the 

honorable Senator who has this matter in charge whenever he comes to a point in which there has 4f>een an alteration in the rules would 

indicate the extent of the alteration and the effect. 

Mr. FERRY. I will state to the Sen·ator from Delaware that this 

is the language of the present rule: 

No bill, joint resolution, or other subject shall be made a special order for a par- ticular day and hour without the concurrence of two-thirds of the Senators present. 

It is simply a change in phraseology. 

Mr. CONKLING. What is the number of that rule f 

Mr. FERRY. The number of that rule is 31 in the present Manual. 

Mr. CONKLING. Mr. President, I have no objection to this particular rule. I rise, however, to ramark that it is quite out of the question 

that the Senate this morning shall render any essential aid to the 

Senator having this matter in charge in considering these rules. In one sense the report is accessible; I have it in my hand. It does not 

indicate at all the changes which havf\ been made; it is printed here as a novelty, entire, by itself. The rules are recast as to their order, as the Senator says, classified; so that a Senator with the Map.ual 

before him c~not make the comparison. We have now before us an instance of it. Here is Rule 13 of this revision. Yon turn to the corre- sponding rule in the Manual and it turns out to be Rule 31; and the 

Senator from Delaware adds that Rule 11 refers to a rule far succeeding that number. I suggest that if we are w do this intelligently at ~11, or intelligibly at all, accurately speaking, we must do one of two 

things: the Senator from Michigan must state in respect of these rules 

exactly what the proposed change is, or else this report must be 

printP.d, as it seems to me it ought to have been printed 'originally, 

showing the amendments, so that by looking at the paper you may seo the changes that have been made; but to go on and read these 

separately gives no light whatever. 'Ve might just as well adopt 

them in a lot. I have great confidence myself in the Committee on Rules; but I submit that these rules ought either to be reprinted, 

putting in brackets or italics the matter added or the matter stricken 

out, and referring to the present rules, and then giving notice of the 

day when the matter shall be taken up and considered, so that Senators may possess themselves of it; or else the Senator ought in each case to state whether the rule remains the same or not, and, if a change 

has occurred, state, as the fuller material before him no doubt will 

enable him to do, just what the change is. 

Mr. FERRY. I stated when the rf}port was taken up that I had 

notations here of the differences between tho present report and the 

rules as they now exist in the :Manual adopted by the Senate ; and I am prepared to give the changes. At the same time, if the Senator 

from New York or the Senate desire to liave the rules reprinted and 

put in the form which he proposes, it might be a more intelligent way 

of reaching the object. This matter. has been before the Senate ever since last session. The revision was printed then and distributed; 

and my object in calling it up now ;was to facilitate the completion 

of the :Manual. But irwe can arrive at a conclusion more intelligently and accurately by having it reprinted an~ the changes put in 

italics, I am disposed very readily to yield to that method or any 

other that will reach t.he end. 

Mr. CONKLING. If the Senator will allow me a moment, I will not 

interpose such suggestion unless some other Senator does, as I have 

alreacly intimated that I have great coufiuence in the Committee on Rules and certainly no wish to add to .their annoyance or trouble in 

making any compilation of the rules which we have. I shall be quite 

satisfied if the Senator will take the trouble, in the case of each rule 

rea.d, to indicat~ to us the change that has been made, if any, and if so the nature of that change. },urther than that, I will not ·ask him 

to go; but I should like as one member of the Senate to understand 

the subject intelligently. 

Mr. }"ERRY. I would be glad to do that, Mr. President. 

Mr. HAMLIN. If my friend will allow me, I will state that I am very strongly impressed with the' idea that we shall make more prog- ress if we adopt the suggestion made by the Senator from New York. 

Indeed I supposed the rules when printed for our consideration would 

show in the imprint the preci e pages that were amended. I thought 

they would be so printed. The Sena'tor from North Carolina, [Mr. 

MERRIMON,] not now in his place, and the Senator from Michigan [Mr. l<,ERRY] and myself constitute this Committee on Rules, u.s the Senate know. We have devoted to this subject a, very great deal of attention. I cannot say how many meetings we had, but I t~ink we had twenty on this subject. We took the rules and we considered them 

rule by rule, line by line, sentence by sentence. We sought first to classify them so that they would be grou peel in their appropriate manner. We 

sought to strike out that which was so mew hat ambiguous and make the 

Janguageofeach rule plain, conforming to whatwasthepracticeof the 

Senate. We sought to incorporate a few new rules which would carry 

out the uniform practice of the Senate that had been had without 

1·ules; and I may say that when we got thr4?ugh we were unanimous 

inonropinion. Iamqnitesurotltatwo havemadosomeimprovement, 

~. - --

and yet the changes cannot be as familiar to Senators as to the com- mittee who have examined the subject, and I am inclined to the opinion, and I am going to make the suggestion directly to the chairman, 

that if we reprint so that a Senator shall see right before him whether 

any rule is changed at all, if changed how changed, or if a rule be a new one what practice of the Senate it covers, if a rule ha.a been modified how modified-I think if we have that in print for each Senator we shall make more progress than we shall by acting on the mere suggestion of the Senator who is so familiar with them. The chair- man of the committee will state precisely, and yet that will not be as satisfactory to the Senate or to Senators as if they have the whole 

matter precisely before their own eye in print. 

I therefore suggest to the chairman, and I t.hink it will help forward the matter; to have this report reprinted with aU the changes, 

showing precisely what they are. I thought it was so printed. I did 

make that precise suggestion in committee myself, and when I took 

the report np this morning I supposed I should find it just in the shape 

that I suggest now it ought to be. 

Mr. DAVIS. I am disposed to add a word to what has been so well 

said by the Senators from New York and Maine. I fully concur in 

their opinion. I endeayored to follow the Clerk as he read the rules 

to find what the changes were, but like the Senator from New York 

and the Senator from Delaware it was impossible for me to do so from 

the fact that some of the rules were changed perhaps as much as four or five or six pages from one another. 

Mr. HAMLIN. If the Senator will pardon me, he will see in a mo- ment how this became necessary. We classified them aml if any old 

rule was not in its proper place we transferred it to another place. 

Mr. FERRY. I should like to make another suggestion to the Senator from West Virginia before he takes his seat, which is that many 

of the old rules are made up to cover several subjects, and iu the re- classification they have been distributed to their properplaces, therefore dividing up and distributing the rules, so that in the case of a rule in the Manual it may be distributed into two or three other rules, 

aml for that reason the Senator will see the difficulty of quoting the 

rule from which one of these is taken, because there may be more of 

that rule, or the present rnJe may include more than the corresponding 

rule in this revision. I had taken the pains to note the difference in 

each particnillr wherever there was ·a change; I have it here in the 

margin. 

Mr. DAVIS. I notice that some of the rules which the Senate has 

been acting under, perhaps from the beginning of the present form of 

government, are changed. That is very impor~ant; so much so that ' 

I think we ought to see these proposed chancres in print and have an opportunity of examining them uefore the Senat.e acts upon this re- port. I hope the suggestion of the Senators from New York and Maine 

will be adopted, and that the chairman will have printed his marginal 

notes so that each Senator may see for himself just what the changes are and where they will lead us to. .As I said a moment ago, the re- port changes some of the rules, some of the practices of the Senate 

that have been in force since the present form of government, and we certainly ought to go slowly before we make radical changes in rules 

which have stood so long and which have answered our purpose up to 

the present time. I believe that many of the changes that have been 

indicated by the new rules are proper and ought to be adopted, but we ought to know whatwearedoing. !hope, therefore, that the suggestion coming from the other Senators will be adopted and that there 

will be a reprint indicating such changes as have been made and including the marginal notes which the chairman of the Committee on Rules ha.s before him. He can make his own notes and prepare them 

in sunh a way that the proposed rules may be printed in that shape. 

Mr. INGALLS. I do not regard this subject as of the slightest importance or consequence, for rules are never observed in this body; 

they are only made to be broken. 'Ve are a law unto ourselves, and 

it is entirely immaterial in my judgment whether we have a code of 

rules or not. But I do not agree with the Senator from Maine that 

this subject will be better treated by being postponed. If we are to 

consider it at all there is no better time than now. ·we have an un- occupied afternoon that certainly cannot be more innocently employed 

than in the discussion of these rules that are never to be observed, and 

I am entirely willing to take the action of the committee on trust. A 

resolution has already been offered for an adjournment over the holidays, and a rostponement now would probably result in a delay of this 

question until after the beginning of the new year. Every Senator 

knows that subjects of much greater magnitude and importance will 

soon press upon our attention, and if we are to have any action at 

all, it had better be had now. As some Sena.tor ha.'l observed, ·there 

is a great necessity for n. reprint of the :Manual. It was ordered at 

the last session of Congress and has been postponed, as I understand, 

until the present time for the purpose of enabling the Chief Clerk to 

incorporate into it the present body of rules reported from the com- mittee. The inconvenience resulting to Senators from the want of 

that :Manual ha.s already been very great, and I would suggest that we had better continue this afternoon, taking the statement of the 

committee on trust, believing them to be entirely accurate, and finish 

this matter. 

Mr. THURMAN. The fact stated by the Senator from Kansas t.bat 

the rules are very little observed in the Senate is the best proof I 

know of two things: first, of the inutility of the rules and, second, of 

the good behavior of Senators; and these two~acts show that this 
1876. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 267 

matter may be well laid over without any detriment to the public 

service or to the convenience of the Senate. 

Mr. INGALLS. We want the Manual. 

Mr. THURMAN. That is true; but we can get along without the 

Manual well enough, and would get along if there were no Manual. 

I am not afraid to trust the action of seventy-four gentlemen on this 

floor. I agree wlth the Senator that very little attention hfs been 

paid to the strict roles of the Senate, and yet I can say here, after 

nearly eight years' service, that I do not know of a single act of injustice to any Senator, on this floor by the enforcement of any rule or by the omission of the enforcement of any rule. But if we are to 

have any change in the rules, as some Senators think we ought to 

have, let us know what we are about, let us have a print of the roles 

with the proposed amendments, and then every Senator can judge 

for himself as to the propriety of the proposed alterations. I do not 

think we ought to hurry this thing through in the way suggested by 

.the Senator from K::uisas without actually knowing what are the 

changes proposed. I hope, therefore, that the suggestions that have 

been made by the Senator from New York, the Senator from Maine, ·and the Senator from West Virginia will be followed, and that this 

matter will be laid over until the rules can be printed in the manner proposed, so that the suggested alterations will be accessible. 

Mr. FERRY. Mr. President, I will make a suggestion to the Senator from Ohio directly and to the Senate, that we go through with 

the rules, as the committee have two or three modifications to make, 

and then have them reported to the Senate and printed, according to 

the suggestion of the Senator from New York, that the modifications 

shall be in italics or in some form that shall be plain ro all the Senators. 

I wish to state in this connection, verifying what has been stated by 

my colleague on the committee, that the Committee on Rules have 

given a great deal of time and attention to these rules. They spent 

all the leisure of last session; whenever it was possible for them to 

meet consistent wi"th other duties they met and devoted their time to 

the perfection of these rules. So far as the classification is concerned, 

which appears so apparent to Senators, I think it is pretty generally 

conceded that it is a great convenience and in that respect it would be a great object to have them adopt.ecl and become a part of our Manual. 

So far as the modification of the rules is concerned, I stated at the 

outset there is no substantial difference; that this is merely bringing into form what has been the practice of the Senate. We have 

labored under a great difficulty whenever questions of order have 

arisen; we have frequently referred to the practice of the Senate ra~her than to the rules. Practice of course becomes rule; but yet 

Lhere is such ambiguity and such uncertainty in the minds of Senators where they are guided by their recollections rather than by the 

form of the rule lying before them, that in orcler to obviate that the 

committee desired to put into form that practice, so that we should 

have the rules plain and explicit and be governed hereafter by them. 

Now, if thero be no objection, I will suggest that we go through with 

these rules and make the modifications that the committee propose, 

agree to the little transpositions they would make of one or two rules; 

then let them be reported to the Senate and ordered to be printed in 

the form suggested by the Senator from New York and reiterated by 

the Senator from Ohio. In that way we shall have made progress, 

and I am exceedingly desirous that tQ.is thing should be done. We are going into a recess by which we shall lose a couple of weeks so far as business is concerned. If we do this much we can have our work 

printed, and then if we are prepared before the recess we can take it 

up; if not, it will be ready to be taken up at the resumption of the 

session. I trust that so much will be done to-day. 

Mr. DAVJS. I should like to suggest to the chairman of the Committee on Rules whether or not, if his plan be adopted, we gain anything¥ The Senate will not be prepared to take np and pass upon 

the new rnles without seeing what they are. When .they are called 

up again t.hoy will have to be reread, and therefore there will be 

nothing gained by going on now. No Senator, no matter how desir- ous of. following the Clerk through the reading now, can tell what 

the changes are without explanation from the Senator who has charge 

of the subject. I see nothing to ba gained by going on to-day. We 

1i ten to the reading to be sure. If the object is not to read them 

when we take up these rules again, then we should gain, but the gain 

I think would be in the wrong direction. I suggest to the Senator in 

charge whether I am not correct iu that position. I cannot see how 

the business will be forwarded if we are to read the rules again when 

they are taken up; and if they are not t-o be read then, the Senate mn tact upon them without reading them at the time when action is 

tak<n. 

Mr. FERRY. I desire to say in reply to the Senator from West Virginia that we shall gain this much: If we print the amendments in 

italics and tho Senator has a rest of some two weeks, and that is before him, he will be prepared when he comes back here, as his colleagues will be, to adopt the amendments, if they suit them, without 

the formal reading of the whole rules. The question will then be on the adoption of the amendments as they appear in the italics. Therefore we shall havo gained that much time. 

Mr. THURMAN. Will the Senator from Michigan allow me to ask 

l1im a question! 

Mr. FERRY. I will. 

.Mr. THURMAN. Does the Senator propose that we shall go throngh 

with the rules to-day and then have them printed 1 What is meant by 

going through the rules1 Does he mean that we are to go through 

and adopt them, or just have t.hem read f If we are to go through 

and adopt them, then there is no use of talking a. bout correcting them 

afterward. 

Mr. FERRY. We are in Committee of the Whole. I suppose we have two stages. \Ve report from the Committee of the Whole to the 

Senate, and then the report will be open to amendment on the question of concurring in tl:te amendments made as in Committee of the 

\Vhole. 

Mr. CONKLING. Suppose you want to reconsider, then yon must 

reconsider the vote reporting the measure to the Senate, and get it • back into Committee of the Whole to act on it. If you do not want 

to reconsider, you will not save any time. 

Mr. FERRY. The question will be on concurring in the amendments . Mr. CONKLING. But practically thero can be no time saved. If 

the Senate is agreed, as I hope the Senate will be, in the main at all 

events, to these propositions, considering them will be merely to read 

them in Committee of the Whole, and they will be assented to. If 

you assume that will not be so, it is because discussion, difference of 

opinion is to arise. In the last event, by reporting them to the Senate 

you simply put one additional impediment in the way; then you will 

have to reconsider and go back; whereas if the Senator thinks, as the 

Senator from Maine suggested, that it will be convenient aml suitable 

that Senators have an opportunity before they vote to advise them· 

selves what the changes are, manifestly I submit to the Senator from 

Michigan the economical way in respect of time is to havo this printed now before it goes further, to the end that in place of retracing our steps one single going through may do. So it occurs to me. Mr. FERRY. I may be somewhat obtuse, but I cannot see the point 

the Senator from New York makes. If we go through and adopt 

these rules, when they are reported to the Senate the question will be on concurring in these amendments. I do not see bow the question 

of reconsideration can apply when the question will he upon con- curring in the amendments made in Committee of the Whole. 

Mr. CONKLING. It will not be unless you want to ~o back for a general revision. Here you strike out certain matters m Committee 

of the Whole. It will be in order to concur or non-concur in that. 

But snpposo you want to change it, suppose you want to put back 

what has been stricken out, suppose you want to make some of the 

various motions which cannot be made in the Senate and which can be made in Committee of the Whole, then the only way is to recon- sider and go back. If no such thing arises, you lose no time by letting it stand as it is, provided always you are going to wait for the 

reprint and allow Senators to understand and exercise their judgment 

upon it. I have no choice myself as to the mode; but I surrgest to the 

Senator that if he thinks the suggestion of weight enoug~ to induce 

him to reprint these rules, then the simple way is to reprint them at 

the point where we are, to the end that we may act advisedly all the 

way, and not be called upon to retrace our steps or get into any jangle as to what has been or has not been agreed on and what may or may 

nqt be changed. . Mr. FERRY. I have no desire U> get into any jangle. I am seeking 

the interest of tho Senate ancl its good order, and it is for that reasou I am representing the Committee on Rules in this report. I supposed 

that there would be time gained by going thr.ough this report now and ruaking the modifications the committee desire to make. I do not 

wish to be tenacious about this matter; I only desire to serve the best 

interests of this body. There are modifications which the committee 

desiro to make and which should be included in the print. If the 

Senate have any confidence in the report of the committee, these modificat-ions are also suggested by the committee and should go with the 

report so that all may be printed together. Now if there be no objection that informally the committee shall include these suggestions 

in the proposition to reprint and have them go together, I shall waive 

any preference that I may have, so far as I am concerned, and let it 

be done. 

Mr. HAMLIN. We all agree to that. 

Mr. FERRY. If there be no objection, then, I will ask that thereport of the committee, with the modifications proposed, be printed, and 

that all the modifications be put in italics, or in such plain manner that the amendments made by the committee and the original roles 

will be easily distinguishable. . Mr. EDMUNDS. And with references in the margin to the number 

of the old rule in each case. Mr. FERRY. And, as suggested by the Senator from Vermont, with 

references in tho margin to the old rules, and t-o the several rules 

composing the rules now reported, where there i~ a consolidation. 

Mr. CONKLING. And also with the little foot-notes printed with 

each rule in the Manual st.ating when it was adopted, and a reference 

to the other rules in the l\Ianual relating to the same subject, which 

is perhaps a matter of adding one humlreds words in printing. Then 

we shall have the whole matter before us. Mr. FERRY. Including the suggestion of the Senator from New 

York, which I suppose the Clerk has. 

Mr. ANTHONY. I hope the suggestion which has been made that 

the consideration of these rules be postponed until after the recess, 

will not prevail. I think it quite desirable that the rules should be 

adopted now. We have been waiting for a year nearJy to reprint the 

• 
268 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. DECEMBER 18, 

Manual, which is entirely out of print. The new Senators have no copies of it; the old Senators frequently require them'for publicpurposes, and it is impossible to get them. I had occasion some time ago 

to try to get a Manual for a person whom the whole Senate would be 

very glad to obligA, and it was impossible to :find one. We do not 

wish to reprint the Manual until we have the amended rules. 

The Senator from Kansas very justly says the rules are not greatly 

observed, and it is very much to the credit of the Senate that they are not, 'because the rule of the Senate has been its own sense of propriety and dignity, and the rule that prevaiied in this body, and I . trust always will, bas been the rule of courtesy. It is very seldom 

that the strict requirements of parliamentary law are enforced or are needed to be enforced here; but still we should have rules, and when- ever they are necessary we should have them in the best form, in the 

form most acceptable to the Senate. Therefore the modification 

which has long been needed ought to be acted upon before the recess, 

that the Manual may be printed and may be laid upon our tables as soon after the recess as possible. If the rules are not adopted until 

after the recess, we shall not get the Manual probably until near the 

close of the session. 

.Mr. EDMUNDS. We have not agreed to any recess yet. 

Mr. ANTHONY. We shall have a recess pra~tically whether we have one nominally or not. There will be no business done iri this 

body next -week, no matter whether we are formally in recess or whether we meet here and adjourn from day to day. For my own part; I would much rather sit here and tral}sact the public business 

if it were possible; but long experience and repeated trials have shown me t.hat it is entirely impossible to transact any business during the 

holidays. 

Mr. HAMLIN. I want to put in my distinct caveat to what ha-s 

'been said here on this floor, that we do not observe the rules of this 

body. I affirm that the rules of this body are our guide, and that we do observe them. It is true that, as the body is composed of different men at different times, you find, precisely as you :find in your courts, now and then, a decision overruled; but we are a law-abiding body, 

and the law is the rule of the body. 

I wish to say that I hope the simple motion to postpone and print 

will be made, without any )imitation, and the reasons have been 

stated by the Senat.or from Rhode Island very clearly. A motion to 

postponA and print leaves it in our power to take up this report so soon as we can after it shall have been printed. That is the best fohn 

to leave it in, and I hope the Senator from Michigan will so make his 

motion, and I shall be very glad if the Senate will so a~ree to it. 

Mr. DAVIS. I did understand from the chairman of the Committee on Rules by his :qodding that he aBSented to the views of the Senator 

from New York as to references, &c., to the dates of the adoption of 

the former rules and other things--

Mr. FERRY. I stated that the reprint, as proposed by me, would 

include all that. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Michigan as- sent to the suggestion of the Senator from Maine T 

Mr. FERRY. In a moment. I desire to say to the Senator from 

West Virginia that I stated that my motion included the proposition 

of the Senator from New York, and•iuclnded the date of the passage 

of each rule as it now stands on our Manual. I believe that is the object the Senator has. I wish to state, in connection with that, that 

there will be no possibility of having this ready before the recess, if a recess is taken at the time suggested here this morning. So far as I am concerned, I am disposed to remain here, and expect to remain 

here and continue to transact the public business without a recess; 

but I am persuaded we shall have a recess, as we always do; or, if not, we shall find ourselves without a quorum, and be compelled to take a recess practically by doing no business day after day. I desire the 

Senate to understand that it will be impossible to a.rrange this report 

for the printer in time to have it printed for information before the 

recess, if a rece s is taken this week. 

Now, Mr. President, I move that the subject be postponed, and that 

the report of the committee with these modifications be printed. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion is to postpone the consideration of the present report aml that it shall be reprinted with all 

the modifications and notes tha.t have been suggested by the Senator 

from Michigan and other Senators. 

Mr. BAYARD. I ask the Senator from Michigan whether this is 

limited for the purpose of having the report now printed with refer- ences to the matter of the old rules by numbers, so that when we 

want to know in considering this question what changes and amendments have been made we shall find a reference iu the report of the 

committee to the number of the rule under which the subject has 

been treated in our present compilation. I ask also whether it is to 

include the foot-notes of dates which are a historical record of the 

rules originally, and the various amendments to which they have 

been subjected, so that the report now to be furnished to us will preeent these facts. Unless it does, I fear that we shall scarcely be able, 

in the current examination of the report during the sessions of the 

Senate, to contrast the changes proposed by the. committee now with 

the rules under which we ha,·e heretofore been acting so as to understand t.he scope anll extent of the proposed amendments. 

Mr. FERRY. I suppose the Senators understand thproughly now tho rules of the Senate as contained in the Manual which I hold in my 

Land. I under t~ml th~ suggestion of the Senator fi·om Delaware to 

-

be that th.e print shall cover opposite each rule, or included in it, in 

different type the rules from which it is taken or with which it differs. 

I do not understand, however, that foot-notes, with a history of ea~h 

original rule, are to be given, since the rules were adopted. The date 

of the passage of each rule, as contained in the Manual, and that I 

understand is to be included. The Senator will also see that some of 

these r.-es contain parts of two or three of the rules in the Mam:rnl, so that, in order to bring them into juxtaposition, you will have to 

bring the several rules or parts of the different rules opposite the one proposed to be adopted . 

Mr. BAYARD. There will be no difficulty, I suggest, where a rule now proposed is composed of two or more preceding rules-in other 

words, where there has been a consolidation of rules-in noting that 

fact at the foot· of the report now made. Let me illustrate what I mean: · 

.U.r. HAMLIN. Will the Senator from Delaware allow me to put a question to him! . · Mr. BAYARD. With ple~ure. 

.Mr. HAMLIN. Let me ask the Senator if he means simply to add . what is in the Manual at the foot of each rule, to wit, the time when 

it was adopted, and if changed the time when changed f 

Mr. BAYARD. Yes. 

Mr. HAMLIN. There is no trouble in doing that. 

Mr. FERRY. That has already been included. 

Mr. BAYARD. It is that the historica.lnotes which accompany the 

present Manual shall be carried into the new compilation; but there 

is also this: Take Rule 11 as reported by the committee; it relat.es to 

special orders. The corresponding number in our old rules to Rule 11 . relates to precedence of motions when a question is under debate. 

In recasting the rules the numbers no longer consist. What I mean is that when the Senator brings this matter back for the consideration of the Senate, we shall be enabled by glancing at the report to 

:find a reference to the present rule as now numbered, so that we can observe the new treatment of the subject-matter to which the rq1e 

relates, and with that also wiLl come the matter referred to by the 

honorable Senator from Maine that these foot-notes contained in our present compilation giving the history of the origination of each 

rule and its amendment may be continued in the new publication. 

Mr. FERRY. The Senator from Delaware, I think, ha.s mi apprehended the rule in tne Manual to which Rule 11 of the report refers. 

It refers to Rule 31 in the Manual, both referring to special orders. I 

have the reference in the margin. 

Mr. BAYARD. That is true, but the rule a-s to special orders is num- bered 31 in the present Manual; it is numbered 11 in the report now made. I merely wish the new report to make reference to the old rules, · so that in comparing the two we may see what changes have occurred, 

and may be able readily to understand it. 

Mr. FERRY. That I understand to be done. Now I move tllat the 

report be recommitted and printed with the notations as suggested 

by the several Senators. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Senators have heard the motion. 

The motion was agreed to. 

GIBBES & CO. 

Mr. WRIGHT. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Senate bill No. 946. It is a private bill to which I do not think 

there will be objection. 

Mr. ?!flTCHELL. Let it be subject to a call for the regular order. 

Mr. WRIGHT. Certainly. 

There being no objection, the bill (S. No. 946) for the relief of Gibbes 

& Co., of Charleston, South Carolina, was considered as in Committee 

of the Whole. It provides for the payment of $4,045.11, being a bal- ance due Gibbes & Co. on account of money deposited by them with 

the Secretar.v of the Treasury. 

Mr. BOUTWELL. Is there a report in that case t 

Mr. WRIGHT. There is a report that I have here, and it can be rea~ . _ The Chief Clerk read the following report submitted by Mr. WRIGHT 

from the Committee on Claims o~ the 19th of July last: 

The Committee on Claims, to whom was refeiTed the bill (8. No. 946) for therelief of Gibbes & Co., of Charleston, South Carolina, submit the following report: The fads in relation to this cia~ furnished, at the request of your committee, 

in a letter from the Secretat'Y of the Trea8ury, dated July 10, 1876, are as follows: 

"Late in the year 1865 certain cottons in Augusta, Georgia, were seized or detained by Treasury agent!! as confederate or blockade cottons. They were claimed 

by Gibbes & Co., of Charleston, as being in part their property, and in part the 

property of certain English firms, of whom they were the agents. Upon evidence 

produced by the claimants the Secretary of the Treasury, (.)U the 27th of Febrn~.ryJ 

1866, directed that the cottons be restored to them upon therr pa~en t to the U rutoo 

~~~:Cti~~~ili~:~f&~s ~~to~~a~nses paid or incurred by reasnry agents in 

''The amount so :paid a.'3 charges was principally due ro Savary & Co., who were engaged in putting m order (i{)vernment cottons and in transporting and shipping the same. The amount of their bill for expenses, &c., on the Gibbes & Co. cotton, 

$44,217.48, waa deposited by Gibbes & Co., and went into tho hands of the United 

St.ates Treasurer. Afterward it was ascertained by Gibbes & Co. that there bad 

been delivered to them bymistakeone hundred and sixty bales of cotton which did not belong to them, and which they accordingly returned. In the bill rendered by Savary & Co. there was charged the sum of $7,733.04 aa expended by them on this 

lot of one hundred and sixty l>ales. Tbia sum Gibbes & Co. cL'limed should be re- turned to tbem by the United States. To this demand Savary & Co. interposed a. further bill of expenses, not included in this first bill, which they claimed they had 

incurred on the Gibbes & Co. cottons. Their second bill amounted to $!,576.92. 

Gibbes & Co. alleged that the charges made by Savary & Co. were generally exces- sive, but con entetl to raceiye at that time from the United States the diiference 
1876. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 269 

between their bill of $7,733 04 and the bill of Savary & Co., 4,5i6 92, namely, $3, 156.12. Afterward Savary & Co. applied to the Secretary of the Treasury for 

pa'YU!-ent of their bill of $4,576.92. Upon a close examination of all their accounts 1t wa's found that their charges which bad been paid to them in connection with 

Government cotwns and cottons seized, but released by the Secretary, were exces- sive to an amount greater than their claim of $4,576.92 against the United States. 

The payment of this claim was therefore. refused. 

"The balance (namely, $4,576.U2) of the bill of 7,733.04 paid by Gibbes &. Co., as expenses on cottons returned to the United States, has ne>er been paid to them. 

Justice woulclsoom to require the payment of this balance." 

In answer to inquiries made by your committee of the Secretary of the Treasury as to whether th1s claim, if properly presented, would not have been cognizable by the Department without the intervention of Congress, the Secretary, under date of 

July 13, 1876, replies: ,;'That prior to the 30th day of March, 1868, the question to whom the sum of 

money now claimed by Gibbes & Co. was due, whethertothemortoSavary & Co., 

had not been decided. On that day was passed tho joint resolution of Congress ro- qniring all moneys derived from captured and abandoned property to be covered in- to the Treasury. Tho money in question was included in that fund, and was ac- cordingly covered into tho Treasury. Since that time no appropriation has been 

made by' Congress out of which the claim of Gibbes & Co. could properly have been 

paid." Under this state of facts, we think claimants clearly entitled to the relief asked, 

and therefore report back the bill and recommend its passage. 

Mr. BOUT1VELL. On that report I do not see how thls money 

should be paid to Gibbes & Co. The report sets forth, as I understand it, that there was.held by the Government a sum of $4,000 to be 

paid to Savary & Co. for services performed upon Gibbes & Co.'s cotton which had been overcharged; that ultimately the Government, 

instead of paying this sum, refused to pay it, upon the ground that 

Savary & Co. had overcharged the Government for work do.qe on the 

cotto0n, and that as between the QQvernment and Savary & Co. there was nothing due to Savary & Co.; and that they held this money to 

oompensate· th~ Government for overcharges. 

Mr. WRIGHT. My friend from Ma&sa.chusett·s does not understand this matter. Gibbes ~Co., who are these claimants, have paid 

the demand of the Government upon them. This demand of tho Government upon them was for money paid Savary & Co. for their care in and about this cotton. When Gibbes & Co. fo1md that there WE:'re one hundred and sixty bales of their cotton, of cotton upon which 

Savn.ry & Co. had made charges, that did not belong to them, they 

returned it t.o the officer of the Treasury, and they then claimed that so mnch of t.he expenses included in the bill of Savary & Co. as ap:.. 

plied to these one hundred anll sixty bales should be returned to them. 

'fhe Government said "Yon ought to have that money;" and thereupon Savary & Co. said they were entitled to still additional charges, some four thousand, I omit the odd dollars. Gibbes & Co. said, 

"Our claim upon these one hundred and ·sixty bales of cotton thn.t 

have been returned is some $7,000." Savary & Co. clainied$4,000 more. Gibbes & Co. say, "We will take the difference between the seven and the four," and did take, say, $3,000. When they came to mn.ke 

inquiry into the claim of Savary & Co. for the work they had done, 

t.he officers of the Treasury found that they bad no such claim, and, 

finding that they bad no such claim, t.hey decided that Gibbes & Co. 

ought to have the balance of this $7,000 which was in the Treasury ; 

but, inasmuch as it had been covered into the Treasury by the act of 

1S68, they couM not pay it., and, therefore, they come to Congress. 

.Mr. BOUTWELL. That would be so if it were true that the excess charged by Savary & Co. to the Government had been upon cotton 

that belonged to Gibbes & Co.; but if it were upon cotton generally 

which had been seized by the Government, the case would be different. The report is not exp1icit upon that point. It says: 

Upon n. close examination of all their accounts it was found that their charges which had boon paid to them in ctmnection with GovernmAnt cottons and cottons seized, but released by the Secretary, were excessive to an amount greater than 

theii· claim of $4,576.92 against the United States. 

Mr. WRIGHT. Allow me to just read from a portion of the report 

preceding that, and the Senator will see that it is clear of doubt: 

In the bill rendered by Savary & Co. there was charged the sum of $7,733.04 as ex- pended by them on this lot of one hundred and sixty bales. This sum Gibbes & 

Co. claimed should be returned to them by the United States. 

It is therefore shown that this $7,000 was expended on the one hnndrcel and sixty bales that were returned. 

Mr. BOUTWELL. I do not think it appears so from this report. 

If this report be considered as a whole, it docs not show clearly whether 

the extra charges of Savary & Co. against which the Government set 

up this claim were charges upon cotton that was restored to·Gibbes 

& Co., or were charges upon other quantities of cotton seized by the 

Government, put into their bauds, and on which expenses were incurred and afterward released. It may be so; and, if so, they ru:e entitled to this return. 

.Mr. WRIGHT. My friend will find that this report also states this 

fact: 

To this d~mand Savary & Co. interposed a further bill of expenses, not included in 

their first bill, which they claimed they had incurred on the Gibbes & Co. cottons. '* * * Afterward Savat·y & Co. applied to the Secretary of the Treasury for par- ment of their bill of $4,576.92. Upon a close examination of all their accounts 1t wo.s found that tiloir charges which had been paid to them in connection with Gov- ernment cottons and cottons seized, but released by the Secretary, were excessive to an amount greater than their claim of 4,5i6.92 against the United States. 

I think it fairly appears that this $7,000 was excessive npon these one hundred and sixty bales, and when they came to re-investigate 

their accounts the officers found thn.t they were not entitled to any 

tmch sum. The Secretary of the 'l'rea.sury also says, as the Senator 

will se13, that justice would seem to require that this amount should 

be returned to these parties. 'Ve were governed no~ a little by the ) 

opinion of the Secretary of the Treasury that it ought to be returned 

and that he would have returned it but for the act of 1868. 

Mr. BOUTWELL. I dare say it is all right, but the report, I am quite satisfied, does not show that the chn.rges are properly set off 

against this item. But I do not o~ect to it. 

The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, ordered 

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

EDWIX ROGERS. 

Mr. HAMLIN. I ask the Senate to take up Senate bill No. 991, for 

the relief of Edwin Rogers. · Thora being no objection, the bill ( S. No. 991) for the relief of Ed win 

Rogers was read the second time and considered as in Committee of 

the Whole. 1t authorizes the Secretary of the Treasmy to pay $525, 

to re-imburse Ed win Rogers for postage-stamps stolen from his possession as postmaster at North Adn.ms, in Massachusetts, on or ab~ut 

tho 13t.h of May, 1876. 

Mr. HAMLIN. There is a report accompanying the llill. It is for a small sum, and I believe it comes within the rule the Senate have 

adopted in all such cases. Let tho report be read. . The Chief Clerk read the following report submitted by .Mr. HAl\iu..~, from the Committee on :Post-Offices and Post-Roads, on the 

15th of J nly, 1876: 

The Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads, to whom was referred the peti- tion of Ed win Rogers, postmaster at North Adams, .Massachusetts, for relief, hav· in~ had the same under consideration, respectfully report: That on or about the 13th day of May. A. D. ll:l7G, said postmaster was robbed of 

postage-stamps to the amount of 525; that every effort was made through the po- lice authorities to detect the thief, without a.vail; tha.t tho postmaster immediately notified the Department at Washington of ·the robbery, -and a. special a~~nt was detailed to examine the case and report the facts to the Department, wnich was done, and the amount of stamps there stolen was found to be $525. It was also 

found that the postmaster had used due care with the property of the Government, 

ancl that these stamps thus lost or stolen were so lost or stolen without his fault. 

No suspicion rests upon the postmaster or hi8 clerks. 

1.'he committee recommend the passage of the accompanying bill. 

The bill was reported to the Senate, ordered to be ·engrossed for a. 

third reading, and read the third time. 

Mr. ALCORN. Mr. President, since I have had the honor of a seat 

in this body, I have uniformly opposed legi::dat.ion of this character. 

The case before us is one that I the more readily oppose because I un- derstan<l from the committee there is no quest.ion that the petitiOner 

is .honest in the declaration which he makes, that there is no reas- onable doubt that he was set upQn by robbers and that he lost $500 in 

postage-stamps; and the bill now before the Senate proposes to shift 

this loss from the shoulders of the postmaster who gave bond faithfully to discharge his duties and faithfully account for all public 

moneys and post-office stamps that came into his hands. The Government by this legislation is to relieve the postmaster of his obligation 

and assume the loss. The principle is wrong. It is one that if con- tinued by Congress must necessarily work a change in the administration of the Government when applied to officers intrusted with 

public funds. 

The principle for which I contend has been repeatedly contested 

and decided in the Supreme Court of the United States, not upon any 

special statute bu~ upon general legal principles and grounds of public policy, and the doctrine is now well settled that the case of officers 

who receive public moneys under bond to collect and pay over, perform, fulfill, &c., <lifters from ordinary bailees, first, because the forcible takina of money from an officer, whether b:V robbery or otherwise, 

is not within the conditions or covena:Q.tsof his bond, and constitutes no answer to a snit on that instrument, and, second, because public 

policy forbids that such a defense should be allowed. I cannot otherwise so well state the reasons for this view of the subject as in the langua~e of Mr. Justice McLean in delivering the opinion of the Supreme tJourtin the case of the United Statest·s. Prescott et al., 3 Howanl, 578. He .;ays : 

This action was brought in tho circuit court for the district of lliinois, on a bond 

given by Prescott, wiili the other defendants as his sureties, for his f~ithful per- formance of the duties of receiver of public moneys, at Chicago, in the State of 

lliinois. The defense pleaded was that the sum not paid over by tho defendant, 

Prescott, andforwhich the action was brought, had been feloniously stolen, taken, 

and carried away from his l_l~ssession by some person or persons unknown to him, 

and witboot any fault or negligence on his part; and he avers that he used ordinary care and diligence in keeRing _said money and,prevcnting it from being stolen. 

To this plea the plaintiffs filed a general demurrer; and on the argument of the 

demurrer the opinions of the judges were opposed on the question whether "the 

felonious taking and carrying away the public moneys in the custody of a receiver 

of public moneys, without any fault or negli~ence on his part, discbarged him ani! 

his sureties and may be set up as a. defense to an action on his official bond Y " And 

this point is now before this court, it having been certified to us under the act·of 

Congress . 

On the part of the defendant it is contended that the defenclant Prescott was a. depositary for hire; and that unless his liability was enlarged by the special con- tract to keep safely, be is only subject to the liabilities imposed by law upon such a. depositary; that the special contract does not enlarue his liability. 

This is not a case of bailment, and consequently tile law of bailment does not apply to it. The liability of the defendant Prescott al'ises out of his official bond 

and prindpleR which are founded UpQn public policy. The conditions of the bond are, that the sai(l Prescott has "truly and faithfully executed and discharged, and 

shall truly and faithfully continue to execute and discharge, all the duties of said 

office," (of receiver of public moneys at Chicago,) "according to the laws of the 

United States; and, moreover, ha.s well, truly, and faithfully, ancl shall well, truly, and faithfully, keep safely, without loanin~ <?r using, all the public moneys collected 

by him, or otherwise at any time placed in nis possession and custody, till the same bad been or should be ordered by the proper department or officer of the Govern- ment to be transferred or paicl out; and when such orders for transfer or payment · had been or should be received, had faithfully and promptly made, and woul<l faithfully and promptly make, the same, as directed, " &c. 

The condition of the bend has been broken, as the defendant, Prescott, failed tc 
270 CONGR.ESSIONAL RECOR.D-HOUSE. DECEMBER 18, 

pay o>er the money received by him when reqnired to do so; and the question is 

whether be shall be exonerated from the condition of his bond on the gronnd that 

the money bad been stolen from him. . . The obJection to this defense is that it is not within the conditi~m of th~ bond; 

and this would seem to be conclusive. The contract was entered mto on his part, 

and there is no allegation of failure on the part of the Government .. Ho":', th~n, 

can Prescott be discharged from his bo~d 1 He kn~w the ~xten~ of ~s obligation when be entered into it, and he has realized the frw!-S o.f _this obligatiOn ~y tho en- joyment of the office. Shall he be discharged from hability contrary to his own ex- press undertaking 1 . There is no principle on .which au?h a defense ~n be sus- tained. The obligation to keep safely t~e public money 1s abso!ntehmthout _any condition, express or implied; and nothing but the payment of 1t w en reqmred can discharge the bond. 

Th!3 case of ]foster et al., vs. The Essex Bank, 17 Mtassac:huse~s _Reports, ~79, was a mere naked bailment, and of course does not. apply m prmCl_ple to this. case. The deposit in that case was for the accommodation of the depositor, and Without 

any rulv:mtage o the bank, as the 'com1s say, "which can ~nd ~o .increase its ~ia­ bihty. No control whatever of the chest, or of the gold contained m 1t, wasleftw1th 

the bank or its officers. It would have been a br~h of trust to have opened the 

chest, or to in8pect its contents." . . Public policy requires that eYery depositary of the pnb!Ic money should be held to a strict accountability. Not only that he should exerclSe the htghesti ~agree of 

vigilance, hut that "he should keep safely " the moneys which ~omo ~his hamls. 

Any relaxation of this condition would open a door to il-auds, whiCh might be pra?· 

tice{l with impi:mity. .A. clepositary woultl ~avo1_1othing I_UOre to do than to_ lay his 

plans and arrange niR proofs, SO as to estabhsh his loss, Wlthout laches On hiS part. Let such a principle be applied toonr postmasters, collectors of custo?JS, rece1Ters 

of public moneys, and others who receive more o_r less of the p~bl~c funds, and 

what losses might not be anticipated by the pub~Ic.. No such prm~1ple has been 

reco!!Ilized or admitted as a le.,.al defense. And It 1s bello-red the 1nstances are few "if indeed any can be fou:8d, where any relief baa been given in such cases by 

the interposition of Congress. . • . . . .A.s e,·e1-y depositary receives the office with a full knowledge of 1ts res~nsibihties ho cannot in case of loss complain of hardship. He must stand by his bond 

and' meet the b'azards which ho voluntarily incurs. " . The qneRtion ce;rtified to us is answered, that the ,defendan~ Prescott and h1s 

sureties are not discharged from the bond by a. felomous stealin~ of the money, withont any fault or negligence on the part of the depositary, ana, consequently, 

that no such clefense to the bond can be made. 

The principles and policy of this decision have been emphatically 

reiterated in the late cases of the United States vs. Morgan, 17 Howard 161; The United States vs. Dashiel, 4 Walla.ce, 182; and the 

United States t·s. Keibler, 9 'Vallace, 86. 

The case I have quoted is argued by Mr. Justice McLean, and to 

that argument no answer can be made. ~tis usele~ to multiply w~rd.s; 

but in order to illustrate the force of his reasonmg and suggestwns, 

I will, by permission of the Senate, recite a case which occurred 

in the State of Mississippi while I had the honor to be governor of 

that State. A sheriff wa.'i in default to the State for a sum amounting to about 4,000. He went to the Legislature, ba.cked by his secu- rities, protesting that his offic~ had been entered and he !obbed ~f the 

public funds of the State. His stury was, that late at mght, while at 

the court-house, where he kept his safe, his safe-door beiug open and 

be enrracred in counting his funds and preparing his papers for settlement ~fth the auditor of public accounts, suddenly a half-dozen men with drawn pistols rushed upon him, knocked hi.m down, gagged a!ld 

bound him hand and foot, and he was told that If he made any ~01se 

his life would pay the forfeit. The funds were taken; the th1eves 

escapecl. After a _time, suffering great torture o~ acco~t of.th~ gag 

that was in his mouth and the strong manner m whwh biB limbs were bound, be commenced his cries, suppressed as they were by the 

gag. Relief came to him; be was unbound, contusions. were ~ound 

upon his head. These were the blows that bad been given him by 

the robbers. Witnes&es testified as to the condition in which he was found. His story was believed. The Legislatme of-the State without hesitation paBsed a bill for his relief. . When considering the bill, I called the sheriff before me and after 

cross-examining him for some time my suspicions were aroused that 

the case was one put up by h!m. The princip.le itself was WTong and 

I should have vetoed the bill anyhow upon th1s ground, but I was the more ready to do so after I discovered what I supposed to be some bad(Tes of fraud. I vetoed the bilL It went back to tlie Legislat.ure, 

but the sympathy for the sheriff was so great that the Legisla~ure so~m passed the bill over my Teto, aud the sum ~a.s -passed ~ his credit. 

About six months subsequently some detectives m workmg up a case of a violation of law in the county in which this sheriff resided came upon a clew which led to a discovery that the sheriff in the case I 

have recited had committed a fraud upon the State. 

The charge was made, prosecution was about to be entered, b"'?t the 

sheriff :fl.ecl. It was unmistakably a case of successful consprracy. 

This shows how easy it is, aud how great the inducement is for office.rs 

who hava in their hands large sums of public . money, to engage m conspiracies of this kind in order to rob the Government. 

The Senate is now about to apply the principle in the face of the 

decision of the Supreme Court to a postmaster. Let this principle be 

carried out Mr. President, and in ten years' time I venture to say that 

the public ~fficials of this Government will represent half their number in public robbers. Not less, I judge, than one million dollars have 

been voted out of the public Treasury under this character of legis- lation within the last fi>e years. I have sat by and witnessed it, and 

occasionally have entered my protest. I now repeat that protest 

althourrh satisfied tills bill is to pass, and would impress upon t~ Senate th~ necessity of reform in our legislation upon subjects of this 

nature so fre(]uently coming before Congress for relief. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER,(Mr. WRIGHTin the chair.) Tbeques- . tion is on the passage of the bill. 

The bill was passed. 

CATHERL~E THRUSH Al-.TJ> WILLIAM n. STONE. 

Mr. WHYTE. I ask unanimous consent to take up House billN o.1S2. 

There being no objection, the bill (H. R. No. 732) for the relief of 

Catherine Thrush and William B. Stone, owners of the schooner 

Flight, wa~ considered as in Committee of the Whole. 

The Committee on Naval Affairs reported an amendment to the bill, 

striking out all after the enacting clause and inserting: 

That the clainl of the legal owner or owners of tho schooner Flight, her cargo, 

freight, and personal effects, alleged t() have been sunk by colli8ion with the 

United States steamer Tallapoosa, October 8, 1873, be referred to the Court of 

Clainls to bear and determine the same to judgment, with right of appeal n.s in 

other cMes: Provided, That no so it shall be brought under the pro"\'isions of this act aft-er six months from the date of the passage thereof. 

The amendment wa~ agreed to. 

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

It was ordered that the amendment be engrossed and the bill to 

be read a third time. The bill was read the third time, and passed. 

The title was amended so as to read: "An ad referring the claim of 

the owners of the schooner Flight to the Court of Claims." 

WILLIAM H. WARD. 

Mr. JOHNSTON. At the request of the Senator from New Ramp· 

shire, [Mr. 'V ADLEIGH, J chairman of the Committee on Pa;tents,. I ask 

unanilnous consent of the Senate to proceed to the considemtwn of 

the bill (S. No. 419) for the relief of William H. Ward. 

Mr. BOGY. If this requires unanimous consent, I object . The PRESIDING OFFICER. It does not require. unanimous con- sent. The Chair understood the Senator from Virginia to moye to 

proceed to the consideration of the bill. 

Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes, sir. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The que~tion is on' that motion: 

Mr. CONKLING. May I inquire from what committee the bill 

comesT 

Mr. JOHNSTON. The Committee on Patents. 

Mr. CONKLING. A Senator near me inquires whether it is the 

unanimous report of that committee. I should like to know. 

Mr. JOHNSTON. I have the report here. 

Mr. CONKLING. Is it the unanimous report to the committeef 

Mr. JOHNSTON. I believe so. I know nothing to the contrary. 

There is a report in print and it can be read. It was made by the 

chairman of the committee, and I make the motion at his request. 

Mr. CONKLING. I do not fool at liberty to object to the bill. My 

impression is that the Senate bas always b~en very guarded ab~ut 

allowing any court to cast the Government m damages or royalt1es 

for the use of inventions or apparatus covered by letters patent; and 

in that view the title of tills bill when I came to hear it struck me. I will not interpose, having no knowled!!e of this subject, to prevent 

the consideration of the bill. If it be taken up, however, I shall ask 

that we may hear the report read or the special circumstances stated 

which except this case from the general rule. 

Mr. JOHNSTON. I shall ask that the report be read. 

The PRESibiNG OFFICER. The question is on the motion to take 

up the bill :for consideration. . The question being put, there were on a division-ayes 14, noes 7; . no quorum voting. 

Mr. CONKLING. A motion to adjourn is in order, I believe. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is. "?!Ir. CONKLING. I submit that motion. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Se11ator from New York moves that the Senate do now adjourn. 

The motion was agreed to; and (at three o'clock and twenty-five 

minutes p.m.) the Senate adjourned. 

··. . HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 

MoNDAY, Decmnber 18, 1876. 

The House met at twelve m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. I. L. 

TOWNSEND. 

The Journal of Saturday last was reacl and approved. 

ORDER OF BUS~ESS. 

The SPEAKER. The morning hour commences at nine minutes 

past twelve o'clock, ancl this being .Monday, the first business in order 

is the call of States and Territories, beginning with the State of Main~, 

for the introduction of bills and joint resolutions for refe_rence to thetr 

appropriate committees, not t~ be brought ba?k on motiOns to reco~­

sider. Under this call memonals and resolutions of State and terntorial Legislatures may be presented for reference and printing. 

Tll\IBER ni COLORADO. 

Mr. HALE introduced a bill (H. R. No. 4209) to authorize citizens of 

the State of Colorado to fell and remove timber on the public domain 

for building, agricultura~, mining, and domestic purposes; which was read a first and second t1me. 

Mr. HALE. I ask that the bill may be read. 

The bill was read at length; and was referred to the Committee on Public Lands, and ordered to be printed. 

. 

A