1570 CONGRESSIONAL R:ECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 12, 

to the Senator that the last clause of the amen~~t sho~ld be stricken 

out. I agree with the Senator that the construction of the amepdment 

will be as he supposes; and now that the matter has been the subject 

of debate so as to show what is intended, and will be some direction to 

the land officers, I shall not insist upon any amendment to the amendment. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the 

amendment of the Senator from Ohio. 

.Mr. MORGAN. As I understand the. amendment of the Senator 

from Ohio it is to cutoff the right of private entry. ~lr. SHERMAN. Yes, that is what is intended, except as to landwarrants, &c. I say nothing about them, because the technical phrase 

"priTate entry," I am told, is confined to the entry of public land 

with money. 

Mr. MORGAN. The chairman of the Committee on Public Lands, 

who is not present at this time, made rather a complete st.'1t6ment on 

the subject in regard to the amount of lands in the United States subject to private entry. 

Mr. SHERMAN. My amendment expressly excepts all lands that 

have heretofore been offered at public sale. It does not affect any of 

the lands that have been in controversy in the Southern States. 

Mr. MORGAN. I ask that the amendment may be read. 

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

The CHIEF CLERK. It is propo ed to insert as an additional section 

after section ·4 of the bill: 

SEc. 5. That hereafter no public lands of the United Stat~ not heretofore offered at public sale, except abandoned military or other reserv-ations. and mineral and other lands the sale of which at public auction has been authorized by act of Congress of a special nature having local application, shall be sold at public .sale or be subject to private entry. 

~1r. SHERMAN. The amendment purposely except-8 all lands that 

have heretofore been offered at public sale. 

The PRESIDENT pro t~mpor . The que. tion is on agreeing to the 

amendment offered by the Senator from Ohio. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

'l'he PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question recurs, Shall the 

amendments be engrossed and the bill be :read a third time? 

The amendment-8 wereordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read 

a third time. 

The bill was read the third time. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is, Shall the bill pass? 

Mr. SLATER. I ask for the yeas and nays on the passage of the 

bill. 

The PRESIDENT pro ternpm·e. The Chair assumes, and if there be 

DD objection will take it, that the yeas and nays heretofore ordered on 

the passage of the bill shall stand. as the presen.t order. The Se.cretary 

will call the roll on the passage of the bill. • 

The yeas and nays were taken. 

Mr. GEORGE. I am paired with the Senator from Rhode Island 

[Mr. CHACE]. If he were present, I should vote "nay.' 

Mr. ALDRICH. I am paired with the Senator from Maryland [M.r. 

GORMAN]. 

The result was announce~-nays 26, nays 20; as follows: 

Blair, 

Brown. 

Cameron of Wis., 

Conger, 

Cullo1n, 

Dolph, 

Harrison, 

Bayard, 

Coke, 

Colquitt, Edmunds, Garland, 

l!awley, 

!till 

RoO:.., 

Lapham, 

McMillan, 

1\Iahone, 

l\Iandet on, 

Groome, 

Hampton, 

Ilal·ris, 

Jackson, Jonas, 

Aldrich, Chace, 

.Allison, Cockrell, 

Beck., Dawes, 

Bowen, Fair, 

Butler, Farley, Call, Frye, Camd~n , George, Cameron of Pa., Gibson, 

So the bill was passed. 

YEA8-26. 

Miller of Cal., 

1\!iller of N.Y., 

Mitchell,· 1\forrill, 

Palmer, 

Pike, Platt, 

NAY.s-20. 

1\laxey, .1\Iorgan, 

Pendleton, 

Pugh, 

Ransom, 

ABSENT-30. 

Gorman, 

Hale, 

Ingalls. 

Jones of Florida, Jones of Nevada, Kenna, Lamar, 

Logan, 

The title was amended so as to read: 

Sa. bin, 

Sawyer, 

Sherman, 

VanWyck, Wilson. 

Saulsbury, 

Slater, Vance, 

Vest, 

Voorhees. 

McPherson, 

Plumb. 

Riddleberger, 

Sewell, 

Walker, Williams. 

An act to repeal all laws providing for the pre-emption of the public lands, the 

laws allowing entries for tunber-culture, the laws authorizing the sale of desert 

lands in certain States and Territories, and for other purposes. 

~Ir. DOLPH. Iaskthatthe billjust passed be reprinted as amended. 

It is an important bill. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Oregon asks that 

the bill just passed about pre-emption laws, &c., be printed as passed. 

That order will be entered if there be no objection. 

fore the Senate the next special order, being Order of BllSiness 336, 

which by unanimous consent was to-day placed at the head of the Calendar of Special Orders. The title will be read. 

The CHIEF CLERK. "A bill (H. R. 3933) to declare a forfeiture of 

lands granted to the Texas Pacific Railroad Company, and for other purposes.'' . Mr. BLAm. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of 

the bill (H. R. 2550) to prohibit the importation and migration of foreigners and aliens under contract or agreement to ~rform labor in the 

United States, its Territories, and the District of Columbia. 

:Mr. VANWYCK. If that bill will take but a short time I sh.a.ll 

consent to taking it up, but I do not wish to do anything to displace 

the special order. · The PRESIDENT pro tempm·e. Debate is not in order. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. Let it be informally laid aside then. 

The PRESIDENT pro t.empore. The Senator from New Hampshire 

mo>es that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of House bill 

No. 2550. The question is on agreeing to the motion. 

1\1r. INGALLS. May I make a parliamentary inquiry, Mr. President? In case the motion of the Senator from New Hampshire should 

be agreed to, will the special order that has ju t been named by the 

Chair be displaced and go upon the Calendar of General Orders? 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair it will. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. Then I trust it will not be laid aside. 

1\fr. BLAIR. There is no objection on Jl11 part to the special order 

being laid aside informally. I did not suppose it was before the enate. 

:Mr. CAMERON, of Wiscon in. It has been laid before the Senate. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. I move tnat the Senate do now adjourn. 

The PRESIDENT prn tempore. The Senator from Nebraska moves 

that the Senate do now adjourn. 

Mr. McMILLAN. I hope we shall be allowed ~o have an executive 

se sion. 

Mr. HARRISO~. A brief executiTe session is necessary. 

M:r. VAN WYCK. ·r have no ohjection to that. 

Mr. HARRI.SO~. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of executive business. 

.Mr. BLAIR. Mr. President--

Mr. HARRISON. I felt under obligation to the Senator from Nebraska, as he yielded for a ·motion to go into executive session, to make 

that motion. · 

The PRESibENT pro tempore. The ques~ion is on the· motion of the 

Senator from Indiana. 

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to the consideration of executive business. After twelve minutes spent in executive session the doors were reopened, and (at 5 o'clock and 13 minutes 

p. m.) the Senate adjourned. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 

THURSDAY, February 12, 1885. 

The Honse met at12o'clock m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. JoHN 

S. LINDSAY, D. D. . The Journal of yesterday's proceedings was rea.d and approved. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

?tlr. TOWNSHEND. I dema.nd the regular order. . The SPEAKER pro tempm·e. The Committee on Enrolled Bills desires to submit a report. 

ENROI::LED BILL SIGNED. 

Mr. YAPLE, from the Committee on Enrolled Bills, reported that 

the committee had examined and found truly enrolled a bill of the 

following title; when the Speaker pro tempore signed the same: 

A bill (H. R. 7131) to authorize snit-8 for damages where -death re- sults from the wrongful act or neglect of any person or corporation in 

the District of Columbia. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

The SPEAKER 11ro tempore. The Chair desires to submit certain executive communications, and asks permission of the House. ·. There was no objection. 

GREEN AND BARREN RIVERS, KENTUCKY. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House a letter from the 

Secretary of War, transmitting reports from the Chief of Engineers upon 

the condition of Green and Barren Rivers, Kentucky; which was referred to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors, · and ordered to be 

printed. 

CLINTON RIVER, MICHIGAN. 

TEXAS PACIFIC LAND GRANT. The SPEAKER pro. tempore also laid before the House a letter from 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It is the duty of the Chair to lay be- the ~re~ry of War, transmitting a report from the Chief of Engineem 
1885. OONGRESSIONAL RECORD~HOUSE. 1571 

of the survey of Clinton River, .Michigan; which was referred to the 

Committee on Rivers and Harbors, and ordered to be printed. . 

SURVEY OF LAKE CH.Al\lPLAIN. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore also laid before the House a letter from 

the Secretary of War, transmitting a report from the Chief of Engineers 

of the survey of Lake Champlain at Four Channels, New York; ·which was referred to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors, and ordered to be 

printed. 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE. 

By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted as follows: 

To b1r. CRAIG, indefinitely, on account of illness 

To b1r. RIGGS, for the rest of the week, on a{X!Ount of sickness. 

ORDER OF B'GSINESS. 

M:r. CUTCHEON. I ask leave to introduce a bill for reference. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I call for the regular order. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The regular order is demanded. 

HOUR OF DAILY' MEETING. 

Ur. Rll'DALL. I rise to submit a privileged report from the Committee on Rules. 

The CleTk read as follows: 

The Oommittee 1)n Rules, to whom wa referred the Co~ towing resolution-

" .Resolved, Tha.t the hour of daily meeting of the House for the remainder of 

the session be 1t o'clock a. m. "- having had the same under consideration, rE-port it back with the following substitute: · · Ruolred,. That on and after Monday next the hour of daily meeting of the 

House for the remainder of the present session be ll o'clock a. m. 

Mr. RANDALL. I ask the previous question on the adoption of the 

report. . Mr. THOMAS. I desire to offer an amendment. I called the attention of the Speaker before the previous question was demanded. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. 

RANDALL] was recognized, and the gentleman from Illinois had no right under the rules to sweep the gentleman from Pennsylvania from 

the fioor. The gentleman from Pennsy I vania has submitted the report 

of the Committee on Rules and asks the previous question. It is in the 

pleasure of the Honse either to order it or to refuse it. 

The previous question was ordered. 

:Mr. RANDALL moved to reconsider the vote by which the previous 

question was ordered; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be 

laid on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

The substitute recommended by the Committee on Rules was agreed 

to; and the resolution as amended by the adoption of the substitute was 

agreed to. 

M:r. RANDALL moved to reconsider the vote by which the resolution was adopted; and also moYed that the motion to reconsider be 

laid on the table. 

The latter motion wa agreed to. 

CONSULAR AND DIPLO~ATIC APPROPRIATION BILL. 

Ur. BURNES. I rise to make a privileged report. I am instructed 

by the Committee on Appropriations to report back the bill (H. R. 

7857) making appropriations for the consular and diplomatic service of 

the Government for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1886, and for other 

purposes, with amendments by the Senate, and to move that the amendments of the Senate be non-concurred in. 

Ur. THOUPSON. I reserve all points of order. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. . The Chair thinks there is no point of 

order that can be reserved now. The gentleman from Missouri moves non-concurrence in the amendments made by the Senate. 

1\Ir. THO!\IPSON. Is it not the right time now to reserve all points 

of order against those amendments before they are non-concurred in, so that they shall be considered in the Committee of the Whole House on the state ofthe Union? 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair does not think there is any 

custom generally of reserving points of order at this stage. The gentleman from Kentucky bas a right to make any point of order he may 

state. · 

lli. THOl\IPSON. .A..s I understand the ruie, the amendments ingrafted on a House bill by the Senate are subject·to the same points of 

order as if the propositions had originated in the House. . 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The rule provides that any amendment 

of the Senate to any House bill shall be subject to the same point of 

order sending it for its first consideration to the Committee of the Whole 

House on the state of the Union that would apply if the proposition originated in the House. 

l'rlr. THOUPSON. I only want to reserve the points of order so that 

we may know what we are doing. There may be something in those 

amendments which ought to go to the Committee of the Whole Honse on the state of the Union to be considered there. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The reservation of points of orderuow, 

in the judgment of the Chair, would amount to nothing. The motion 

of the gentlemnn from M.is=Jouri i3 to non-concur in the amendments and 

send them out of the Honse. 

Mr. THOMPSON. If the points of order be reserved and the amendments be read, would it not then be in order to make the point against 

any amendment that it should be first considered in the Committee of 

the Whole House on the state of the Union? 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair thinks the point of order 

should be stated when the amendments are submitted for consideration. 

:M:r. THOMPSON. I mean that the amendments should be read now to the Honse. 

The SPEA.KER pro tempore. Does the gentleman demand the read· 

ing of the amendments? 

l\Ir. TH0)1PSON: I think we should know what is being done. 

Mr. WHITE, of Kentucky. I think the amendments should be 

read. 

The SPEAKER p ro tempore. The cierk will read the amendments 

of the Senate. 

Mr. KEIFER. Mr. Speaker, I trust the gentleman will not insist 

upon the reading of the amendments. There is a ~rge number of them; 

many of them are merely formal, and the Committee on Appropriations 

have unanimously recommended that they be non-concurred in. 

Mr. THOMPSON. I would like to ask the gentleman who asks non- Concurrence whether these amendments have been considered by the 

Committee on Appropriations? 

Mr. BURNES. These amendments have been considered by the 

Committee on Appropric'ltions, and the committee has unanimously instructed me to ask what I have asked-that the House non-concur and 

that a committee of conference be appointed. 

Mr. WHITE, of Kentuck-y. Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of 

order. · 

The SPEA.KER pro tempore. The gentleiill1n will·state it. 

Mr. WHITE, of Kentucky. There is so much conversation in the 

Hall that it is impossible to hear the statement of the gentleman [Mr: 

BURXES]. I have no desire to take up the time of the Honse by having these amendments read if the gentleman will state the points of 

difference. · . . Mr. BURNES. Mr. Speaker, thereisquitea numberofthese.amendments, bnt many of them; and indeed most of them, are merely fonnal 

and inronsidemble. For instance, •many of them involve merely a change of title, as from "consul-general" to "consul; " from'' enyoyextra{)rdin.:lry and minister plenipotentiary '' to ''minister resident,,, and 

so on. Then there are some changes with regard to amounts. There 

is about 200,000 increase and some two or three thousand dollars de- crease in the total appropriation. These amendments have been considered by the Committee on Appropri...'ltions and, without dissent on the part of any member of the committee, I have been instructed to move that the House non-concur in aU the amendments' and to ask for a committee of conference. I now demand the previous question. 

The motion to non-concur was agreed to. 

Mr. BURNES moved to recousiderthe vote by which the motion WM 

agreed to; and also moved tQ lay that motion on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

The SPEA.KER pro umtpore announced, as the conferees on the part 

of the Honse :Air. BumrEs, Mr. TOWNSHE~D, and ~Ir. WASHBURN. 

ORDER OF B'GSINESS. 

Mr. REAGAN. · Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent tQ offer a resolution of inquiry and put it upon its passage. 

Mr. WHITE, of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order 

that the resolution is not in order under this call. 

· Mr. TOWNSHEND . . Mr. Speaker, I have this morning felt it my 

duty to insist upon the regular order and have declined similar requests 

from other members, and therefore I must object to this resolution. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will state that this is a. privileged matter under the rule. 

!tfr. TOWNSHEND. If it i privileged, of cburse I can not object 

to it. · 

~Ir. KEIFER. Not privileged for present consideration, Mr. Speaker. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair does not so hold. . The Chair 

asks the gentleman from Texas [Mr. REAGAN] whether the resolution 

which he offers is reported from and under the order of any committee 

of the House ? 

Mr. REAGAN. It is not. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Then it is not privileged. 

PENSION APPROPRIATIO~ BILL. 

ur: HANCOCK. bir. Speaker, I rise to make a privileged report. 

I am instructed by the Committee on Appropriations to report ba<:k the 

bill (H. R. 7785) making appropriation for the payment of invalid and 

other pensions of the United States for the fiscal year ending June 30, 

1886, and for other purposes, and to move that the House non-concur 

in the Senate amendment:El to said bill, and ask for a committee of con· ference. The motion to non-concur was agreed to. 
1512 CONGRESSIONAL-RECORD-·HOUSE. ~EBRU.ARY 12, 

Mr. HANCOCK moved to reconsider the vote by which the Senate 

amendments were non-concurred in; and also moved tolay that motion on the table. · The latter motion was agreed to. 

The SPEAKER pro tempm·e appointed as conferees on the part of the 

House Mr. HANCOCK, Mr. FOLLETT1 and Mr. WASHBURN. 

ORDER OF :BUSINESS. 

1\Ir. TOWNSHEND. Now, Mr. Speaker, leaH fortheregularorder. 

The SPEAKER p1·o tempore. The hour under the special rule begins 

at this time-half pa.st 12 o'clock. The Clerk will report the unfinished 

business coming over from the last hour, which is the bill (S. 1609) to 

provide for the purchase of a site and the erection of a public building 

thereon at Detroit, Mich. The question is on the SCCQDd amendment 

offered by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Ho'UIAN], which the Clerk 

will report. 

Mr. HOLMAN. Mr. Speaker, when the first amendment was put 

there was not a q~orum present, and for that reason the yeas and nays were called for. There being a quorum now present, I withdraw the 

call for:the yeas and nays, and ask for tellers upon that amendment. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HoLMAN] is correct. The House was dividing upon the first amendment 

submitte(l by him, which was to reduce the amount appropriated from 

$750,000 to $500,000. U~n thatquestionnoquorum had voted. The 

gentleman from Indiana LMr. HoLMAN] ~ow asks for tellers, and the 

Chair appoints as tellers the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. HoL~I.AN, 

and the gentleman from 1Ylichigan, Mr. M.A YDURY.-

The House again divided; and the tellers reported-ayes 52, noes 

112. 

So the amendment was not agreed to. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question now recurs on the second 

rune'ndrilent offered by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HOI.MAN], 

which will be read. · · -

Mr. HOLJ\1AN. The amendment about to be read applies to the 

first section of the bill; and in view of -the action j nst taken it should 

be modified by striking out "$750,000" and ID:serting "$900,000." j The· Clerk"read as follows: 

Add tbe following to section ~: . , . "Provided, however, That if a new site shall be purchased for said building, as hereinbefore authorized, it shall be the duty of the Secretary of the Treasury, after the site for said building shall laave been purcllased, to cause a plan and 

specifications of said building to be prepared, which said plan and, specifications shall not involve an expenditure in the erection and completion of said building and the approaches thereto exceeding the portion of said $900,000 remainin~ after 

the site of ~id building shall-have been paid for. And no plan for said building shall be approved by the Secretary of the Treasury involving an expenditure exceeding the sum so remaining aft-er paying for the site of said building." 

Mr. ~IA YBURY. I am willing to accept that amendment. 

The amendment was agreed to. - Mr. HOLMAN moved to reconsider the vote. by which the amendment was agreed to; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be 

laid on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

The bill as amended was ordered to. a. third reading, was accordingly 

read the third time, and passed. 

Mr. MAnURYmoved to reconsider the v.ote by which the bill was 

passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the 

table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

DA...'\I .ACROSS THE ~IISSISSIPPI AT :BRAINERD, MINN. 

1tir. NELSON. I call up for consideration the bill (H. R. 6764) to 

authorize the Mississippi Water-Power and Boom Company, of Brainerd, Minn., to construct a dam across the Mississippi River. 

The bill was read, as follows: 

Be it enacted, ~c., That the :Mississippi Water-Power and Boom Company, of 

Brainerd, Minn., is hereby authorized and empowered to construct across the 

Mississippi River, at some point not more than two miles from the limits of the 

said city of Brainerd, ,a dam, <>anal, and the appurtenances thereof, for water- power and other purposes: and in connection therewith a wagon and foot bridge for public travel: Providea, That the Government of the United States may at any time construct in connection therewith a suitable lock for navigation purposes: Pro~ed also, That the Government of the United States may at any time 

take possessiOn of said dam and control the same for purposes of navigation 

by paying said company the actual cost of the same, but slul.ll not do so to the 

detriment of the water-power created by said dam: Providedfu~, That the 

Secretary of War may at any time require and enforce, at the expense of the owners, such modification and changes in the construction of said dam as he 

may deem advisable in the interests of navigation; and that said dam shall be so built that boats and rafts may pl\88 through the same when necessary: And 

pro"'ided further, That all suits relative to any obstruction of navigation arising 

from said dam may be tri'ed in ·the United States circuit and district courts for .Minnesota.. 

Mr. WHITE, of Kentucky. I call for the reading of the report. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will read the report. 

Mr. NELSON. That will not be taken out of my time? 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will reco~ the gentle- man from Kentucky to control the time in oppo~ition to the bill. The 

gentleman from Kentucky ~emands theread!ng of_the report~ his time. 

.Mr. NEI.80N. I wish the gentleman frOm Kentucky would allow me to make an explanation. · Mr. WHITE, of Kentucky. I can not yield to the gentleman any 

of my time. I will let the gentleman occupy his time now. I reserve my time. 

Mr. PAYSON. Mr. Speaker, has not the gentleman from Minnesota 

the right to occupy the first five minutes? 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. 

NELSON] has the right to occupy five minutes in favor of the bill, and 

the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky as entitled to the ' 

five minutes in opposition. 

Mr. NELSON. Air. Speaker, this bill ha.s been before the Committee on Commerce, by whom it wa.s referred to the Secretary of War, 

who joins with the committee in recommending its passage. It pro- . vides for the construction of a dam in the Mississippi.River at a place 

called Brainerd, where the Northern Pacific Railroad crosses the river. 

This point is between two hundred and fifty and three hundred miles 

above Minneapolis or the Falls of Saint Anthony, which is to-day prac- . tically the head of navigation on the Mississippi River. .The Falls of 

Saint Anthony at present totally obstruct navigation beyond that point. 

One hundred miles above the Falls of Saint Anthony is a dam con- structed, under authority of an act of Congress, at a pla.ce called Saint 

Cloud. Three miles above that is another dam constructed at Sank 

Rapids, a dam which has been in existence over ten years. Beyond 

that some sixty or seventy miles is a succession of rapids called the 

Little Falls; and beyond that is this place called Brainerd, where it is 

proposed to construct this dam. 

Mr. GIBSON. I desire to ask the gentleman whether the Government has not been appropriating money for the illlprovement of the 

navig.ttion of that river above where it is proposed to put this dam. 

Mr. NELSON. I was coming to an explanation on that point. Some 

two hundred miles above this dam is what is known as the reservoir 

system of the Mississippi River. These reservoirs are built for the purpose simply of retaining water to be let out when necessary to improve 

the nav-igation ofthe Mississippi below. On this reach of the river from 

Saint Cloud to Brainerd and thirty miles beyond the river ha.snever been 

navigated. If the Government undertook to make that portion of the 

river nav-igable, it would have to do so by the construction of a system 

of.locks and dams. Under the ad vice of the Secretary of War, the com- mittee have ingrafted upon this bill amendments providing that this 

_dam shall be so constructed that boats and rafts may ·pass, and that 

the Government may at any time take possession of the dam and use it for purposes of navigation. · Mr. GIBSON. But you require the Government to pay for the work. 

1\'Ir. NELSON. We proposetorequirethatifthis work be taken for 

the purposes of the Government the reasonable worth of the property 

shall be paid. , Mr. WARNER, of Ohio. But the Government is not required to pay 

for any lock or other work to be made now. 

Mr. NELSON. No; the bill does not involve any appropriation at 

present. · 

~1r. MAGINNIS. There is no reasonable expectation that there ever 

will be any .nav-igation on that part of the river. I have ·traveled in 

'that country and know this to be the fact. 

Mr. NELSON. There _is no opposition on the part of any of the people ef Minnesota to this measure. 

Mr. W .ASHBURN. I would like to say to the gentleman from West 

Virginia I am personally acquainted with this whole region, and that 

it can not in any state of the case interfere with practical navigation. 

Mr. CUTCHEON. This is intended for water-power, as I understand. · Mr. NELSON. And help the floating of logs down the Mississippi. There is to be left a free passage for logs in the dam. 

Mr. WARNER, of Ohio. At the expense of those who build the dam, 

and not the Government? 

Mr. NELSON. Certainly. It does not involve a cent of expense to 

the Government. 

Mr. WHITE, of Kentucky, took the floor. 

Mr. NELSON. I reserve the balance of my time. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's time has expired. 

Mr. WHITE, of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, this is a matter of no personal concern tom~. But. as affecting the right of Congress to appropriate money to improve. the nav-igable rivers of the United States 

it is a matter of importance to me and every other gentleman. 

1\Ir. NELSON and Mr. WASHBURN rose. Mr. WHITE, of Kentucky. I do not yield. Mr. WASHBURN. Only for a question. 

Mr. WHITE, of Kentucky. Not just now. Mr. Speaker, I will read 

from the report attached to this bill, which I suppose is the most favorable 

which can be brought to bear in favor of this extraordinary measure: 

* • * The 1rfississippi River at Brainerd is a part of the navigable wate,s 

of the United States, and its improvement, as a part of the third subdivision 

Mississippi transportation route, was reported upon in Senate document, first session Forty-third Congress. There has been no steamboat navigation in the vicinity ot Brainerd for a number of years ... Should such navigation be resumed, a lock would become 
1885. OO~GRESSIONAL RECOJtD~HOUSE. 1573 

necessaey were the proposed dnm built. But so long ns the river remains. un- ()bstructed by a dam the supply of water from the reservoirs above that point will preclude the necessity of any expensive river improvement by the United 

i!tates. 

That is signed by the Chief of Engineers, but! can not take up niytime 

by reading further from this report. It was the duty of the gentleman 

asking this Congress to pass this bill to have this report read in his own 

time. 

I have read the most favorable statement in favor of the passage of 

this bill, and to that I desire to make one reply. It is the inteRtion 

of even the Democratic party, as it bas been the practice of the Republican party and it was the·pnrpose of the old Whig party, to make internal improvements throughout the United States where it could be 

done, and when there was money enough in the Treasury for that purpose. We have done a great deal for the 1t1ississippi River above the 

Falls of Saint Anthony. This is above those falls. A member of Congress on this :floor, for the benefit of a portion of his constituents, asks 

to put a mill-dam in tliere fbr the purpose of securing water-power. ·They propose in the end to sell that dam to the Government when 

they want to improve the navigation of that river. Above this we have the Mississippi RiveT reServoir, nominally t9 supply the 1tfississippi River, when there is no water, but really to supply the mill-owners 

along that river. . Now, that t~ bill should come in here a~ this time in this way is 

prepost~ons in: view of the strenuous ·effor:ts being made to improve 

the. naVIgable nvers of the country. There are· one hundred and forty- one rivers, which the Government engineers recommend to be improved, 

which ·have been ignored by the Committee on Rivers and Harbors of 

this Honse. Now, if you are going· to turn them over to the mill- owners on those rivers, how many shall we need to improve at all? ~hat is the gist of this whole matter of the improvement of navigable 

nvers. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's time has expired. Is 

there objection to the present consideration of the bill? 

Mr. GIBSON~ I object. 

The SPEAKER pro temJiore. Those in favor of sustaining the objection to the present consideration of the bill will rise. [After a pause.] 

More than a sufficient number has risen, and the bill is not before the 

Honse. 

SALE _OF NEW YORK INDIAN LANDS IN KANSAS. 

Mr. BLANCHARD. I call up for consideration the bill (H. R. '2047) 

to provide for the sale of certain New York Indian lands in Kansas, re- ported from the Committee on Indian .Affairs with amendments. 

The bill was read, as follows: 

Be it enaeted, cfc., That those persons, being heads of families or single persons over 21 years of age, who havema,de settlementandimprovem.entupon(andare bonafide claimants and occupants of, either in person or by tenant, the mnda in 

Kansas which were allotted to certain New York Indians, and forwpichcertifi- cates of allotment, dated the 14th day of September, 1860, for three hundred and 

twenty acres of land each, were issued to thirty-two of said Indiana shall be 

and hereby are, authorized and permitted to enter and purchase at the prope; 

land oftl~, at any tim.e within one year fr~m the passage of this act, said lands so occup1ed by them, m tracts not e.x:ceedmg one hundred and si:xty acres ac- oordin_g to the Gove~ent surveys, at no~ less than $3 per acre, payment be made m three annualtnstallments, one-thud at date of entry one-third at the 

end of one year from date of entry, and the balance in two y~ars from date of 

entry, with interest on said amounts, respectively, from date of entry at 6 per cent. per annum in cash at time of purchase ; and the moneys arising from such sa~es shall.be pai.d into the T~easury of the Uni~ed Sta.tes, in trust for and to be paid to, satd Indtans, respectively, to whom sa1d certificates were issued or to th~ir heirs, up?n sat~s~tory proof of their identity to the Secretary of the Intertor, at any trme wtthm five years from the passage of this act· and in case such proof is not made within the time specified, then the proceed~ of such sale or so much thereof as shall not have been paid under the provisions of this act' 

shall become a part of the public moneys of the United States. ' • SEc. 2. That any lands not entered by such settlers at the e.:s:piration of one year from the passage of this a.ct shall be offered at public sale, in the usual manner, at not less than sa per acre, notice of said sale to be given by -public advertisement of not less than thirty days; and any tractor tracts not then sold 

together w~th such tracts ns have he~etofore been, or may hereafter be, entered: 

and wherem default ~as been made m the pa~ent of any portion of the purchase-money, or .the mte:r:est thereon, as herem ?r heretofore provided, shall 

be 1hereafter subJect to pnvate entry at the appratsed value of said tracts. 

The amendments were read, as follows: 

In section ~ strike out " in three annual installments, one-third at date of en~ry, one-thud at the end of o_ne year from date of entry, and the balance in two years from date of enky, wtth interest on said amounts 1·espectively from 

date of entry at 6 per cent. per annum," and insert in lieu th~reof the follo~g · ' ·in cash at time of purchase.'' · And in section 2 strike out the following words: •• '.fogetber with such tracts as· have heretofore been or may hereafter be 

entered, and wherein default has been made in the pay~ent of any portion of 

the purchase-money, or the interest thereon, as herein or heretofore provided." 

111!. BLAN'CHAHD. I send up to the Clerk's desk, to be read and 

considered as pending at this time, an amendment which I propose to 

the bill. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill is not yet before the Honse. 

Mr. BLANCHARD. I desire to speak on the amendment. 

The SPEAKER pro temp01·e. Without objection the amendment will 

be reported for information. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

In s~ction 1, strike ~ut " at not less than sa per acre " and insert in lieu "the 

&ppraised value of satd tracts as heretofore ascertained by the Secretary of the · 

Interior, in accordance with the provisions of the act. of February 19 1873 en titled 'An act to provide for the sale of certain New York Indian 'land's u;' 

Kansas.'" 

Also strike out, in lines 3 and 4 of section 2 the words " per acre " and in lieu .thereof insert the WOrds" the appraised valtie." 1 

Mr. BLANCHA.RD. Mr. Speaker, a bill relating to this snbjectbas 

been reported favorably from the Committee on Indian Affairs in the 

Fox:ty-sixth, Forty-seventh, and Forty-eighth Congresses and the passage of the bill providing for the sale of these lands for 'the benefit of 

these. Indians bas been favorably recommended by the Secretary of the 

In tenor and the Commissioner of Indian Affairs. 

The bill reported by the Committee on Indian Affairs which has been 

read by the Clerk; is not the bill the passage of which 'is recommended• by the Secretary. That bill provides an arbitrary price for these lands 

of $3 per acre, and the amendment which I have sent up and which 

has been read and considered as pending, provides that thes~ lands shall 

be sold at their appraised value. 

Now, then, I hope the Honse will consent to the consideration of this 

bill. It is my purpose to press the passage of the bill not as reported 

by tJ1e Committee on Indian Affairs, but as recomme~ded by the Secretary of the Interior. The Honse will remember that this is the same bill called up a few days ago by the gentleman from Kansas [Mr .. PERKINS] and to which I objected at the time, not, however to the pas· _sage ?fa bill relating to the subject, but to the passage of'the particular b1p offe!ed py him. I said at the time that in my j ndgment a bill on this subJect should pass, but that a bill should not pass which fixed an arbitrary price for the lands .• The amendmegt I sent up covers t-he 

defects in the bill, as I understan<l them, as reported from the Committee on Indian Affairs. 

I reserve the remainder of my time. until the opposition is heard. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has one minute of his· 

time remaining. 

11J: .. PERKI~S. Mr: Spea~er, as suggested by the gentleman from , LoUlSlana, a bill on ~h1s subJect ought certainly to be passed by the 

Honse. For a l?ng time the necessity for legislation upon this subject' 

has been recogmzed. There has been no difference of opinion upon' 

that. It has been pressing for many years. . The Secretary of the Interior of to-day, and the Secretary of the.Intenorof the laf:>-t administration, and every Commissioner of Indian Affairs '!"-<> whom the su:t>ject was refe~ed .have recognized the necessity and the 

nnportance of Jt?-St such legislatiOn. The only difference of opinion 

that has ever eXISted upon the subject has been as to the price fixed for 

the lands; whether they should be sold at the price fixed in the bill or some--~ther fixed price, or be sold at a price to be fixed by appraisement. 

I thmk the amend:went of the gentleman from Louisiana should not 

prevail, for ~he simpl~ reason that it would result in accomplishing nothmg. In 1817 Congress gave the-settlers on th~ land an opportunity to 

acquire title to the lands at the sum or price fixed by the amen<;lment of 

the gentleman from Louisiana, but they would not take it because it was regard~d as ~ excessive rate, and the result has been that they are in 

possess1on ot the property and have been since 1859, cnltivatin(J' the 

lands and improving their homes, but without title while the Indians 

hold their certificates of allotment and get nothing. 'Now the Indians as 

w:e!-1 as settl~rs ~ant somethi~g to be done, and are satisfied with the pro- ~Ions oftl;ris b1ll .. No Indian has been found who has objected totbe 

pr1ce fixed m the bill. On the contrary, they sent an attorney here six 

years ago, proposing to take at the rate of $2.50 an acre for the land, and 

the bill was reported favorably at that time. We propose now a settlement on the basis of $3 an acre, and I have no doubt that that price 

is ample, and particularly in view of the fact that.those pe1·sons who 

have acquired title or who may acquire title under the provisions of 

the bill complain that they should ba.ve the lands fo1· $1.25 an acre which is the price their neighbors paid for their lands, and is the pric~ for which the balance of the reservation was sold. 

The Tonawanda Indians in 1859 settled with the Government for all 

their interest in this same reservation on the basis of $1 per acre for the 

land, and as late as 1874 the Oneida Indians, being a part of the New 

York Indians, submitted a proposition agreeing to sell their interest in 

the lind at the same price, and to settle with the Government upon the 

basis of $1 per acre; and yet we propose to pay the allottees under the 

provisions of this bill $3 per acre, which is entirelysatisfactoryto them, 

and from which they will get something for the lands that will be of 

benefit to them and the settlers will get security. 

Mr. W AHNER, of Ohio. May I ask the gentleman a question? 

Mr. PERKINS. Certainly, with pleasure. Mr. WARNER, of Ohio. What is the value now of unoccupied and 

unimproved lands in that vicinity? , Mr. PERKINS. The value of unoccupied and unimproved lands 

will probably range from $10 to $20 per acre. But these Jands have 

been occupied by settlers since 1859, and at that time they were not 

worth $1.25 per acre. In 1858 Mr. Thompson, then Secretary of the 

Interior, declared this great reservation of 1,824,000 acres to be open 

t-o seLtlemen t, because the Indians had not gone there. In consequence, 

settlers went in and took possession. Some time afterward several of 

the New York IndiaJis claimed that they had entered the reservation 

in time, and having complied with the law were entitled to an allot-

-
1574 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 12, 

ment of the lands. A commission was accordingly sent out by the Department to investigate and report upon the claim of these IndianS. 

Tllis commission reported in favor of thirty-two of the Indians, and 

such thirty-two were allowed to select their-allotments from any part 

of this whole reservation; and the commission further report that in 

almost every case they selected 1:1nds already occupied by settlers under 

the order of the Secretary of the Interior declaring them subject to settlement; and as a consequence these parties so dispossessed, or, in other 

words, having their homes given to the Indians, have never been able 

to obtain title. Tha,t is the condition and has been for many years. 

Mr. WARNER, of Ohio. I had reference to the value of unimproved 

and unoccupied lands in that vicinity. 

Mr. PERKINS. It is about as I have stated. 

[Here the hammer felL] 

. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Louisiana has one minute remaining. · 

Mr. BLANCHARD. l\1r. Speaker, there can be no question but that 

this amendment should be adopted. In 1873 Congress passed a bill 

directing that a commission should be appointed and that this commission should appraise the lands. That commission executed the duty n:ssigned to them, and I hold in my hand a report of the commission. T~t 

commission made their report and appraised. 'this land at from$3.75an 

acre up as high as $10 an acre. Mr. PERKINS. May I ask the gentleman a question? 

Mr. BLANCHARD. No; I have but a moment. I state that the 

a vernge price as fixeq ten years ago is i6 an acre, as shown by the report 

of this commission; and this bill which is now before us proposes ar- bitrarily to fix the. price at $3 per acre. The bill ought to be considered and amended. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time allowed for debate has expired. 

1\Ir. RYAN. That amendment ought not to be adopted. ;It is unjust to the settlers who have made their homes there. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the present consideration of the bill? 

1\Ir. BENNETT. I object. But if the amendment suggested is accepted by the gentleman from Kansas [1\Ir. PERKINS] I shaH withdraw 

the objection, if not I shall insist on it. 

1\Ir. BLANCHARD. The amendment can be submitted to the vote 

of the House. 

The SPEAKER pro te1npore. ThOde objecting to the present consid- em tion of the bill will rise. 

More than the requisite number objected. 

PUBLIC BUILDING AT ERIE, PA. 

1\Ir. BRAINERD. I call up for considemtion from the Speaker's 

table the bill (S. 1751) to amend an act entitled "An act to provide a 

building for t.he use of the United States circuit and district courts of 

the · United States, the post-office, internal-revenue offices, and other 

Government offices at Erie, Pa.," and making an additional appropriation therefor. 

The bill was read, as follows: 

Bt 1l rnacted,~c., That the 1irstsection of the act entitled "An act to pro,·ide a buil<li.ng for the use of the United States circuit and district courts of the United States, the post-office, internal-revenue offices, and other Government offices at Erie, Pa.," approved July 27, 1882, be, and the same is hereby1 amended by sub- stituting the words "three hundred tl1ousand dollaril" in place of the words "one hundred and fifty thousand dollars; " so that the said first section of said act, as amended, shall read as follows: "Shall not exceed the cost of $300,000." SEc. 2. That the sum of $100,000, in addition to the sum heret<>fore ·appropriated, be, and the ·ume is hereby, appropriated. ont of any money in the Treas-· ury of the United Sta.te.'3 not otherwise approp1·iated, to be erpended and used, under the direction ofthe Secretary of the Treasury, for the prosecution of the work of construction and furnishing materials therefor. 

• The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Penn y 1 vania 

desire to be heard in support of the bill? 

1\Ir. BRAINERD. I will reserve my time for the present. 

Mr. CURTIN. I suggest that the report be read. 

Mr. BRAINERD. I will yield two minutes of my time to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [1\Ir. CURTIN]. · 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. 

CCUTIN] calls for the reading of the report. 

l\1r. "r ARNER, of Ohio. Then it will be rf'.ad in the time allowed 

in support of the bill. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Pennsylvania 

(1\lr. BRA!NERD] demand the reading of the report? 

Mr. BRAINERD. 1 do not demand it. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. It will not be taken out of the gentleman's time unless he demands it. 

1\Ir. l\Ic~fiLLIN. I suppose the gentleman from Pennsylvania [1\Ir. 

BRAIK~RD] will not insist on the passage of a bill doubling the amount 

originally fixed as the limit of co t of this building without some cause 

being shown either by a statement or a reading of the report. 

The SPEAKER pro tempure. The Chair will recognize any gentle- man who wants to <:ontrol the five minut-es in opposition to the bill. 

Does -J;he gentleman from Pennsylvania call for the reading of thereport? It will come out of his time if he wants it read. 

Mr. BRAINERD. For the information of the House I desire the re- port shall be read. 

The Clerk proceeded to read the report. Before he had completed 

the reading, 

The SPEAKER pro tempore said: The time allowed for debate in 

favor of the bill has expired. 

Th~ report (by Mr. BRAir-"'ERD) is in full as follows: 

The Committee on Public Buildings atid Grounds, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 1415) for a public building at Erie, Pa., submit the following report: Ene is a rapidly growing city of nearly 30,000 inhabitants. It is situated on the soi.lth shore of Lake Erie. It bas the onJy harbor of refuge on the south shore of Lake Erie, and the only lake harbor in the State. There are four main lines of railroad running to and through the city, thus making it a place of large and increasing commercial importance. The post-office does a large business, and is a distributing office for an extensive section of country, and has no place for the transaction of business except such as can be rented. The collectors of customs and internal revenue hold their offices at present in 

::c~te<ft~~e:=~~~~:~;.· ~~eau~A~JS~~~~~iic~~i~~ J?:tricf~!r~e:r the western district of Pennsylvani are held here and hold essions twice a year when able to secure a place in the county court-house for that purpose. The wunt of a proper building in which to hold the cou.rt, and provide for the accommodation of its offices, and the keeping of its records bas long been felt and has impeded the progre of the public busine s to the· annoyance of the courts and to the great detriment of suitors and the public. At the first session of the Forty-seventh Congress a bill was passed authoriz- ing the purchn.se of suitable grounds and the construction of a building at Erie. 

In 1883 a site was purchased by the Government fronting on the public park. The site is a very desirable one, and the best that could be obtained. This wu purchased at the sum of $36,000. This was a very reasonable price. The prop- erty is said to be worth much more. The bill limited the cot~t of the building and grounds to the sum of 150,000. The sum of $100,000 was appropriated for immediate use. The Government ha thus far expended, in the purchase of grounds and expenses.-836,180. Tllis leaves $63,820 of the appropriation unex- pended, and lea\'es the sum of $113,820 with which to construct the buildin~. 

The balance authorized to be expended by the act of 1882, is not sufficient, m our opinion, to construct such a building as the public interests demand. The necessities seem t<> require a large and well-constructed building at this place. The construction of the building has not yet-been commenced for the reason of the inadequacy or the amount authorized to be expended in its const.ruction. 1\lr. Hill, the late Supervising Architect of the Treasury Department, in his re- port, says : "Jt would seem in th~ lntere t of economy: to construct a bnildin~ that will accommodate all the custom , po t-offices, and court officers in Erte, but the ba.lance of the amount fixed by Congress, as a limit, will be insufficient for a building large enough for this purpose." The present Supervising Architect of the Treasury Department, l't!. E. Bell, in answer to our inquiry as t{) his opinion as to the amount a. building to meet th& .requirements in this case would cost, inclulliug the cost of the site, says: "lt. would seem to be advisable to have a building of sufficient capacity to-ac- commodate a.!l t£e Government officials, and, in my judgment, the amount spe- cified in the bill H. R. 1415, namely, $300,000, will be necessary for the construc- tion of such a building." The opinions of the archUects are entitled to weight. A public building having been authorized\ and considerable m.oney already 

expended, rura matter or economy such a bui ding should be constructed as will meet alllheTequirem.ents of the case, and provide for the post-office, cust<>m.· house-, internal-revenue office, and the United States courts. The amount au- thorized to be-expended is n<>t sutftcient for this purpo e. Under the facts, your committee recommend the passage of this bill. 

'1\Ir. WARNER, of Ohio. I desire to ask the gentleman who has 

charge of this bill what amount-if it is in the report I drd not hear 

it-what amount has been paid for the site? 

Mr. BRAINERD. Thirty-six thousand dollars. 

1\lr. WARNER, of Ohio. Leaving 114,000 for the building? 

1\Ir. BRAIN1~RD. That is what is left. 

Mr. WARNER, of Ohio. There is, I understand, a United States 

court at Erie? · 

1t1r. BRAINERD. Yes, sir; that is the pla-ce where regular sessions 

of the circuit and district courts for the western district of Pennsylvania are held twice a year. 

1\Ir." WARNER, of Ohio. This bill proposes an addition of $150,000 

to the amount heretofore fixed as the limit of cost. That will make 

how much for the building alone? 

Mr. BRAINERD: The difference between the cost of the site and 

expenses, $36,180 and $300,000; being about$263,000. 

1\Ir. WARNER, o( Ohio. Has the plan been approved? 

1\lr. BRAINERD. There has been a plan made. 

:Ur. WARNER, of Ohio. And that plan involves how much? 

l\1r. BRAINERD. Only$150,000as originally~ade; and then they 

stopped on account of the inadequacy of the appropriation. · 1\!r. W ARN·ER, of Ohio. I a k the gentleman from Pennsylvania to 

accept the amendment which I send to the Clerk's desk to be read. I 

think he will accept it. 

The SPEAKER pro tempo1·e. The bill is not yet before the House 

for consideration, but the amendment can be read in the gentleman's 

time. · 

The Clerk read the proposed amendment, as follows: 

Add to the first section the following: "And no plan shall be approved which will involve an expenditure for site au~ b~ilding greater than the amount hereby appropri ted. 

M:r. WARNER, of Ohio. I do not want a plan a-pproved that will 

involve any more than the amount in the bill. 

Mr. BRAINERD. ThegenUeman's.amendment says "greater than 

the amount hereby appropriated." That should be changed. 
1885. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--:HOUS.E. 1575 

Mr. WARNER, of Ohio. I mean the amount fixed by your bill. 

1!1r. McMILLIN. I make the point that the amendment is not in 

order at this time. . The SPEAKER pro tempore. The amendment is not at this time before the House for consideration. The bill is not yet before the 

House. 

M:r. BRAINERD. I will say to the gentleman from Ohio that if he 

makes his amendment to apply to the amount fixed as the limit of cost 

I will not object to it. 

M:r. WARNER, of Ohio. I will change the language of the amendment so that it will read '' greater than the amount hereby fixed as the 

limit of cost." 

Mr. BRAINERD. In that form I accept the amendment. 

M:r. WARNER, of Ohio. I have nothing further to say than this, 

th.'l.t if the bill comes before the House I will propose to reduce the 

amount of increase from $150,000 to $100,000; which will still leave 

over $200,000 for the building itself. 

Mr. McMILLIN. Is the gentleman from Pennsylvania willing·to 

accept an amendment of that kind? · Mr. BRAINERD. I think I could not accept an amendment of that 

1..-ind, because I am informed $30 0, 000 is as small an amount as a proper 

building· can be erected for. · Mr. McMILLIN. It appears to me no sufficient ~ason is given in 

the report for the expenditure of another $150,000 on this public building. In. general term~ we have a description of the business transacted; 

but there are no figures given that I was able to hear which show the 

necessity for this increase. 

Mr. BRAINERD. About $200,000 of revenue are collected there 

every year. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time allowed for debate has expired. 

Mr. CURTIN. The amendment of the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. 

WARNE:&] will be accepted as a part of the bill. 

1!1r. McMILLIN. What is the agreement? . J,fr. BRA.ThTERD. That the limit shall be $250,000-i..ns.tead of $300,-

000. 

Mr. McMlLLIN. I object to the appropriation of $250,000 for this 

building. 

• Mr. BRAINERD. By the amendment of the gentleman from Ohio 

the limit of cost will be $100,000 additional to the present limit. ·Mr. 11-IcMILLIN. I object. . 

Objections being called for, the consideration of the. bill was objected 

to by nine members; not the requisite number. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill is before the House, and the 

question is on the amen<;Iment of the gentieman from Ohio [Mr. WARNER], which the Clerk will read. · . Mr. McMILLIN. Let the amendment be reported. 

The Clerk read as follows: -

The Clerk proceeded to read the bill, which is as follows: 

Be it enacted, &c., That section 17 of the act of .July 2, 1864, entitled "An act to amend an act entitled 'An act to aid in the construction of a railroad and tele- graph line from the 1\Ilssouri River to the Pacific Ocean, and to secure to the Government the use of the same for postal, military, and other purposes,' appro'\"ed .July 1, 1862,'' be, and is hereby, amended by adding the following: That snch railroad company, now organized or that ma,y he'I'eafter be oxga.n- ized under State or Territorial laws, a's the President of the United States, by its request, may designate or appro'\"e for that purpose, shall construct and operate a line of railroad and telegraph from Sioux City, Iowa, westwardly, via the Nio- brara Valley, to such point on the Union. Pacific Railroad west of the one hun- dredth meridian as .such company may seiect, not west of Granger, in the Terri- tQry of Wyoming, and on the same terms and conditions and with the same rights as are provided in this act, and the act tow Web this is a.n amendment, for the con- struction of the said Union Pacific Railroad and Telegmph Line and bmnches: Provided, That said company shall recei'\"e neither bonds nor lands, as provided i.n said acts: .And provided furtlur, That said company shall not be burdened by 

.a.nyofthe obligationsimposed upon the said UnionPacificRailwayCompanyby reason of the lands and bonds given to thatcompa.ny;norentilled to any special benefits conferred by said :wt growing out of such obligations, but shall be en- titled to all benefits conferred by section 15 of the said act approved July 2, 1864, 

amendatory of the act appro'\"ed .July 1, 1862,and thesaidcompanyand the said Union Pacific Railway Company shall be regarded a.s a continuous line; and each company shall receive from and deli>er to each other freight, express mat- ter, passengers, cars, and all traffic, and each company shall charge and receivo compensation therefor pro rata. according to distance: And pruvided further, That said road shall carry the mails at such prices a.s Congress may by law provide, and until such price is :fixed by law th~ Postmaster-General may fix the rato of compensation: And provided further, That aid road shall be completed within five years from the passage of this act. SEc. 2. That nothing in this act shall be construed or taken in any wise to affect or impair the right of Congress at any time hereaftel' further to alter, 

amend, or repeal the said acts her-einbefore mentioned; and this act shall be 

subject to alte-ration., amendment, or repeal as, in the opinion of Congress, jus- tice or the public welfare lllilY require. And nothing herein contained shall be held to deny, exclude. or impair any right or remedy in the premises now ex- isting in favol' of the United State-s.· S.Ec. 3. That each and every of the pl'Ovisions in this act contained shall sev- erally and rcspe~tive•y be deemed, taken; and held a_~ in alteration and amendment of said act !lf 1862 and of said act of 1864, respecth•ely, and of both said act-s. -

Before the reading was concluded, 

The SPEAKER pro te7n.p(}re. The hour provided for by the special 

rule ofthe House bas expired. 

Mr. THOMPSON. I rise to a -parliamentary inquiry. · The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it. _ Mr. THOMPSON. I desire to ask the Chair whether the consideration of this bill will be continued to-morrow in the special hour? 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. J:t will go over as unfinished bnsiness, 

and will be the fil'St business in this hour to-morrow. 

MEMBER SWORN. 

·Mr. SPOONER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to a. question of privHege, ..and 

send up to the Chair the credentials of Mr. Nathan F. Dixon, ~ mem- ber-elect from the State of Rhode Island. He is now present, and I ask 

that be be sworn in. 

The.SPEA.KER pro tempo1'e. The credentials will be read. 

The Clerk read as follows: Add to V1e bill the following: "And~o plans shall be approved which will involve an expenditure for site By His Excellency AUGUSTUS 0. BoURN, go1:ernor, captain-general, and com-o ~~-'~uilding complete greater than the amount hereby fixed as the limit 'Of mander-in-Chief of the State of Rfwde Isl«ndand Prcwidence Plantations: 

The amendment was agreed to. 

Mr. WARNER moved to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to; and also moved to lay the motion to reconsider on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the second amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. WARNER], which the 

Clerk will report. 

The Clerk read the amendment, reducing the amount appropriated 

by the bill from $300,000 to $250,000. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

Mr. WARNER moved to reconsider the Tote by which the amendment was agreed to; and also moved to lay the motion to reconsider on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

The SPEAKER pro te1npore. The question is upon ordering this bill 

to the third reading. 

The bill was ordered to a third reading; and it was accordingly read 

the third time, and passed. 

Mr. MAYBURYmoved to reconsideriJle-rotebywhich the bill was passed; and also moved to lay the motion to reconsider on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

NIOBRARA VALLEY RAILROAD. 

Mr. THOMPSON. M:r. Speaker, !understand that the hourhasabout 

expir"Gd. 

The SPEAKER pro tem:pon. The Chair would inform the _gentleman 

that there are three minutes left. · 

1!1r. THOMPSON. Then, Mr. Speaker,~ call np the bill (H. R. 7081) 

to amend an act entitled ''.An act to aid in the construction of a :railroad 

and telegraph line from the Missouri River to the Pacific Ocean, and to secnre to the Government the use of the same for postal, military, :and 

other purposes." 

Be it known that Nathan F. Dixon_, of Westerly, in the State aforesaid, qual- ified according to the Constitution ot th{' UnJted States for a Representative in Congress thereof, was, by the people of the second district of said State having the qualiticationsrequisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the Leg- islature thereof, on the 5th day of February, A. D. 1885, regularly elected aRep- resentati're from said State in the Forty-eighth Congress of the United States, in accordance with the laws of said State, to fill the va~cy caused by the rea.- ignatioo of'.JoNATHA..."' CHACE, who resigned said office on the 26t,h day of .Jan- uary, A. D.1885. In witness whereof I have hereuntQ set my hand and caused the seal of· said State to be affixed, at Pro'"\-idence, this 7th day ofFebruru-y, in the year of our Lord1885, and of the Independence of the lJnited Statesof America· the onehun- dred and ninth. (SEAL.) 

. By the go,·ernor; AUGUSTUS 0. BOURN . 

.JOSHUA :M:. ADDEMAN, 

Secrelaf11 of .fJloJe. 

Mr. DIXON appeared at the bar of the House, and was du1y qualified 

by taking the oath prescribed by law. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

-Mr. TOWNSHEl\TD. Now, Mr. Speaker, 1 move to dispense with 

the morning hour. 

Mr. SPRINGER and others called for the regular order. 

JOHN G. THOMPSON. 

Mr. TUCKER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a privileged report. 

J: am instructed by the Committee on the Judiciary to report back a bill (H. R. 8184) to pay the judgment rendered by the supreme court 

-of the District of Columbia in the case of Hallet Kilbourn 8-n<ra.inst .John 

G. Thompson, late Sergeant-at-Arms of the- House -of Representatives. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Mr. Speaker, I rise to a point of order. 

The SPEAKER pro tempm·e. The gentleman will state it. 

l'tfr. TOWNSHEND.. That is not a privileged report. 

A MEMBER. Yes; it.is. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. It ought to go to the Committee of the Wllolo. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The information. received by the Chair 
1576 .(JONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 12, 

from the Clerk's p.esk is that, under the order of the House, this matter was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, with leave to report at 

any time. 

Mr. RANDALL. But subject to the point that if it makes any appropriation it must go to the Calendar. 

The SPEAKER pro tempm·e. Yes; subject to the point that if it 

m:l.kes an appropriation that will carry it to the Committee of the 

'Vbole Honse on the Private Calendar. 

Mr. KEIFER. 1\Ir. Speaker, is this a privileged repott? 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. ~t is. · Mr. KEIFER. Then if it is a privileged reportit carries with it the 

right of consideration in the Honse. · 

The SPEAKER pro t.e1npore. The Chair does not understand, that 

tberuleofthe Honse can be a\oided which requires all bills w~ch 

make appropriations to go to the Committee of the Whole House on 

the state of the Union. 

A MEID3En. Does the Speaker overrule the point of order? 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. That point of order has not been 

raised. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. It bas been made, Mr. Speaker. 

The SPEAKER pro tenllpore. The Chair understood that the point 

made by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. TowNSHEND] was that this 

was not a privileged report. 

Mr. TO,VNSHEND. And then the gentleman from Pennsylvania 

[Mr. RANDALL] made the point of order that the bill must go to the 

Committee of the Whole. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. .Does the gentleman from Pennsylvania 

[Mr. RANDALL] make that point of order? 

Mr. RANDALL. I state the fact, that the gentleman from Illinois 

(Mr. 'tOWNSHEND] makes it. [Laughter.] . 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill has not been read. The gentleman can not make the point of order at this 'time. 

The Clerk read the title of the bill, as follows: 

A bill (H. R. 81SJ) to pay the judgment rendered by the supreme. court of the 

District of Columbia. in the case of Ilallet Kilbourn against John G. Thompson, Jate Sergeo.nt•at-Arms of the House of. Representatives, and to pay other ex- penses attending upon the trial of said case. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Now, Ur. Speaur, it is my duty to press the 

consideration of the post-office appropriation bill; I can not-give way 

for any other matter. Therefore I make the point of order that this 

bill must receive its first consideration .in Committee of the Whole. 

Mr. COX, ofNew York. Why notpassitnow? 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. 

TOWNSHEND] insist on his point of order? 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I do. The gentleman can withdraw the bill 

and'preseut it hereafter. 

The SPEAKER _pro tempore. The Chair sustains the point of order. 

The bill was read a first and second time, referred to-the Committee 

of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. 

ToWNSHEND] moves to dispense with the morning hour. 

M:r. WILLIS. I rise to make a privileged motion. I move that at 

the close of to-day's session the House take a recess until to-morrow 

morning at 10 o'clock. If the motion be adopted I will at five nlinntes bef~re 12 o'clock move that the Honse adjourn. My object, if the 

Honse will permit me to state it, is in those two hours to take up the 

river and harbor bill, consider it, and if possible pass it. 

Mr. RANDALL. That parrt of the gentleman's proposition relating 

to the river and harbor bill requires unanimous consent. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Still it is competent for the House to 

determine by a majority vote whether it will take a recess and to fix 

the hour to which the recess shall be taken. 

Mr. RANDALL. If the Honse adopts this proposition it does not 

commit the Honse to the consideration of the river and harbor bill. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. It amonnU; to this, -that the river and 

harbor bill can be taken up at that time if the Honse so desires. 

1\Ir. BLOUNT. I wish to inquire whether the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. WILLIS] expects to co-operate with the Committee on Appropriations in the consideration of regular appropriation bills after 12 

o'clock . . M:r. WILLIS. Certainly. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. That is just the question I intended to ask. 

Mr. WILLIS. We hope in four hours to pass the river and harbor 

bill. I _propose to move to limit debate on the whole appropriating 

section to one hour and a half, and to give one hour to the opponents 

of the bill and thirty minutes to its friends. · 

The SPEAKER p1·o tempore. The question is on the motion of the 

gentleman from Kentucky, that when the Honse finishes its business 

to-day it will take a recess nntil10 o'clock to-morrow morning. 

The question being takf\n, there were--ayes 128, noes 16. 

1\Ir. BRUMM. No quorum. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. No quorum having voted tellers are 

ordered, and the Chair appoints the gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. 

WILLIS, and the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. BRUIDI. 

The Honse again divided; and the tellers reported-ayes 1591 noes6. 

So the motion was agreed to. 

Mr. WILLIS moved to reconsider the vote by which the motion wa.CJ 

agreed to; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the 

table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I now renew my motion that the morning hour 

be dispensed with. 

The motion was agreed to (two-thirds voting in favor thereof). 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I now move that the House resolve itself into 

Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union for tlie consideration 

of general appropriation bills. 

~LAWF L OCCUPANCY OF THE PUBLIC LANDS. 

Mr. PAYSON. I rise to make a privileged motion. I desire to call 

up Honse bill 5479 from the Speaker's table, for the purpose of con- curring in the amendme.qts of tlie Senate. · 

M1'. TOWNSHEND. I rise to a point of order. Pending the motion 

I have submitted, is ~tin order to make a privileged report? 

The SPEAKER pro tempare. This is not a privileged report, but a 

privilegetl motion, with a view of concurring in amendmenU; of the 

Senate to a House bill. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. This does not come frqm a conference com- mittee. 

The SPEAKER pro tempor ~ The Chair will state that it is upon a privileged subject. The Clerk will report for the information of the 

gentJ_eman the title of the bill. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

A bill (II. R. 5479) to prevent unlawful occupancy oC the public lands. 

1::-~ THE SENATE OF THE U~"ITED STATES, February 10, 188.5. 

Resolved, Tbatthls bill pass with amendments. 

Mr. TOWXSHEND. I have no objection to the measure which my 

colleague [1\lr. PAYSON] wishes to bring up; but my point of order is 

that this privileged question, if it be such, can not take me off the floor on my motion to go into Committee of the Whole for the consideration 

of appropriation bills. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair has no doubt that the matter 

which the gentleman from Illinois (1tlr. PAYSON] seeks to bring up is 

privileged; but if the gentleman from Illinois on the right [Mr. TowNSHDm J insists-on his occupancy of the floor and protests against the 

introduction of this motion, the Chair must sustain the point. 

Mr. PAYSON. May I have the a~ntion of my colleague for a mo- ment? We can concur in these amendments while the gentleman is 

making his point. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I have no objection if it can be done in a mo- ment. 

Mr. PAYSON. It can. Therewillbenoobjection. [Criesof''Regular order!"] 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. TOWNSHE~D] insist on his point? · 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. In order to obtain final disposition of the PostOffice appropriation bill I must insist. I have no objection at all to 

the measme which my colleague desh·es to bring up. 

The SPEAKER JJro tempore. The question is on the motion of the 

gentleman from :plinois (l\fr'. 'rOWNSHEND] that the House now re- solve itself into the Committeeof the Whole House on the state of the 

Union for the consideration of general appropriation bills. The motion was agreed to. 

POST-OFFICE APPROPBIATION BILL. 

The House accordingly resolved itself into Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union (Mr. SPRINGER in the chair), and resumed 

the consideration of the bill (H. R. 8138) making appropriations for the 

service of the Post-Office Department for the fiscal year ending J nne 30, 

1886, and for other purposes. 

The CHAIRMAN. The pending question is the amendment of the 

gentleman from New York [Mr. SKINNER]. 

Mr. TOWNSI!EJ..~D. I reserve the pointoforder against that amendment until the gentleman has made his explanation. 

Mr. SKINNER, of New York. Let the amendment be read. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Letter·carriers may be employed for the free delivery of mail matter a s Cr~ 

quently 8l!l the public convenience may require at every place containing a pop- u]ation of not less than 10,000 within its corporate limits: Provided The gross revenue Cor· the preceding fiscal year from the post-office or post-offices in such 

place shall have aggregated a t least $10,000. Letter-carriers may also be em- ployed at the principal or most central post-office of towns or places within short 

distances of one another : Provided, Such t<1wns or places contain in the aggregate a population not less than $10,000 and the gross revenue for the preceding fiscal year from the several offices aggregated not less than $10,000. 

All laws or parts of laws inconsistent with this provision are hereby repealed. 

Mr. BLOUNT. I raise the point of order against that amendment. 

The CHAffiMAN. It has already been made by the gentleman from 

IIJ.in,ois (Mr. TOWNSHEND]. 
1885. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE: 1577 

Mr. BLOUNT. Then let there be a decision. 

Mr. SKINNER, of New York. ·If the gentleman will withhold his 

point of o.rder for the present it is all I ask. 

Mr. BLOUNT. I do not wish to be illiberal, but we have little time 

to spare. However~ as the gentleman from illinois does not press the 

point, I will not do so. Mr. SKINNER, of New York. Mr. Chairman, I am perfectly well aware of the fact that if the point of order made by the gentleman is 

insisted upon this amendment can not be considered, for it does ''change 

existing law." The very purpose of the amendment is to change ex- isting law, and I' have offered it in pursuance of the recommendation of 

t.he Post-Office Department, and also in accordance with the unanimous 

action taken by the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads of this 

House in f.wor of the extension of the free-delivery system to places 

having 10,000 inhabitantB, or gross revenues for the preceding fiscal 

year of over $10,000. I give below an extract from the report. of the 

Postmaster-General for the past fiscal year (page 67) touching this 

matter, ·prefacing it with extrru!ts from the same report in reference to 

the growth and present condition of the service, adding a reference to 

the working of the system in England and other countries: 

THE FREE·DKLIVERY SYSTEM, 

The number of free-delivery offices at the close of the yearwas159, an increase 

of 5, namely: Chattanooga, Tenn., Los Angeles, Cal., Montgomery, Ala., 0~ 

tumwa, Iowa, and Scranton, Pa.; and the number of carriers 3,890, an increase 

of 210. 

The regular appropriation for this service was $3,500,000, to which was added a special appropriation of $14,653.40 to prevent an anticipated deficiency, making a total of $3 5H,653.40. The entire cost of the service was $3,504,206.52, leaving an unexpended balance of 810,446.88. The increase of appropriation over that 

of the preceding year was $314,653.40, and the increase of expenditure $330,870.01. 

This increased expenditure was due to the extension of the service to additional 

()ities, to the number of carriers added to the force at the old offices, and to the 

incrensed pay of carriers required by net of August 2, 1882, which provides fol;' the 

increase of the salary of each carrier in cities having o,·er 75,000 inhabitants by 8200 cach_annually, till the m·aximum ($1,000) is reached, and in cities having a smaller population by $?-50 each annually till the maximum ($850) is reached. 

POSTAGE 0~ LOCAL MATTER. 

The total pos~ on local matter at the several offices amounted to $4, m ,484.87, nn increase over that of the preceding year of 8,&17,745.65, and over the entire. cost of the ser,·ice of $1,273,278.35, an increase of 9.95 per cent in postage on local matter and 36.35 over the cost of the service. The average cost per piece in 

handling matter was 2.3 mills, a decrease of one-tenth mill as compared with 

last year. The ~~tverage cost per carrier, based on the total cost of the service 

less the amount paid post-office inspectorS, was $898.78, an increase of$38.83over 

that of last year. This increase wri.s owing to the fa<l~ that a large number of 

carriers reached the maximum salary. · The number of mail letters delivered during the year was 402,577,395, an in- crease of 17.70 per cent. over that of the preceding year; mail postal cards delivered was 97,421,725, an increase of 13.10. per cent.; local letters delivered 

121,853,932, an increase of 16.68 per cent.; lorel postal cards delivered 69,230,7().!, an increase of 14.48 'per cent.; registered letters delivered 3,093,961, an increase 

of 9.32 per cent.; newspapers delivered 231,645,185, an increase of 13.79 per cent. The number of letters collected was 414,198,891, an increase over that of last year 6f 19.95 per cent.; postal cards collected 130,057,314, an increase of 12.98 per (lent. ; newspapers collected 70,475,010, nn increase of 8.84 per cent. • The whole number of pieces handled-delivered and collected-was 1,540,-

554,117, an increase of 16.30 per oent., and the average number handled by each 

carrier was 396,029, an increase of10.02 per cent .. . Additional information concerning the operations of th8 free-delivery service 

will be found in the tabular statement marked E, appended to this report. 

Average result oJ.fr~ilivery seMJicejor th.efl$cal year ended June 30,1884. 

Statistics offree delivery. Total. In crease I Percent. over last o f i n - year. crease. 

Number of officers ................................. .. Number of carriers .................................. . Mail letters delivered ............................. .. Mail postal cards delivered ................... .. Local letters delivered ........................... .. Local postal cards delivered .................. .. Registered letters delivered .................... . Newspapers delivered ............................ . Letters collected .................................... .. Postal cards collected ............................. . Ne,vspapers oollected ............................. . 'Vhole number of pieces handled ......... .. Pieces handled per carrier ....... .. ........... .. 

159 

3,890 

402, 577' 395 

f!l, 421, 725 

121, 853, 932 

69,230,704 

3,093, 961 

231, 64ti, 185 

414,198, 891 

130,007, 314 

70,475,010 

1,540, 554,117 

396,029 

5 210 

60,563,645 

11, 288, 4f!7 

17,416,786 

8,758,511 

263,758 

28,077,180 

68,881,088 

14,943,783 

5,723,168 

215, 916,416 

36,074 Total cost of service, including pay of pos~office inspectors............................ $3, 504, 206' 52 S330, 870 01 

.Average cost per piece in mills............... 2. 3 to.1 

Average cost per carrier*........................ $898 78 $38 83 

3.25 

5.98 

17.70 

13.10 

16.68 

14.48 

9.32 

13.79 

19.95 

12.98 

8.84 

16.30 

10.02 

10.42 

f4.16 

4..51 Amount of postage on local matter ......... ! $4, Tn, 484 87 $417,745 65 9.95 Excess of postage on local matter over total cost of service....... ............... . ....... $1, 273, 278 35 $251, 384 34 24. 60 

*Based on the aggregate ($3,496,267.29) paid C.'\rriers, including incidental ex- penses at the several offices, less $7,939.23 paid post-office inspectors. fDecrease. · 

Long experience has shown that this system of delivery is more acceptable to 

the people than the old mode of office delivery; that it is more accurate and 

thorough in the delivery of letters; that it reduces the number of dead letters • that it diverts to the post-office many letters formerly delivered by private ex~ 

presses and private messengers; that it stimulates mail and local correspond- ence, and increases the postage on local matter; that it saves time and money to the people and fruitless calls at the post-office, and yields a larger surplus of 

postage on local matter alone above its cost, notwithstanding this class of matter for which it gets credit is only about 25 per cent. of the matter handled by carriel'S. In•view of these facts, I do not hesitate to advise that the Jaw governing 

the establishment of this system be so changed as to authorize its extension to places of 10,000 inhabitants, provided the postal revenue for the preceding ftsca.l year at such places amonnted to $10,000; also that in case of several.post-offices 

in the same city or place the revenues from all the offices may be aggregated 

and taken as a standard entitling such place to this system, provided it has the 

required population. . I would also call attention to a class of towns in the more densely settled por- tions of the country within·shortdistances of one another, each with its separate po~ffice, which can not be reached as the Jaw now strulds, having in the ag-: gregate the required population and revenue, but none of which singly reaches 

therequirementsofthelaw,namely,20,000populationwithinitscorporatelimits 

or $20,000 postal revenue. The law should, in my judgment, be so changed as to allow the aggregation 

of the population and postal revenues of these towns, and when they meet the 

requirements of population and revenue this system should be extended. This 

could be easily done by establishing a service at the most important and central 

office and discontinuing the others, or substituting branches of the central office, as may be fonnd on investigation to pe most expedient. · The result would be a. diminution in the number of offices, and a more intelligent, economical, and 

satisfactory service. In this connection, and as showin~ the extent to which the delivery of mail 

by carrier has been ca.rried in the U mted Kingdom of Great Britain, I quote from a letter of July 19, 1883, from the general post-office, London, as follows: 

"There is certainly no village, and but few hamlets, in the United Kingdom 

without n. delivery of letters, &c., from house to house, and that, although in cer- tain thinly inhabited districts the letters are not delivered every day, they are still delivered atleast twice or more, usually three times, o. week. Indeed, with 

but rare exceptions, letters o.re delivered even in rural districts on six days of 

the week, if not seven. * * * As a rule, all towns and m.ost of the considerable villag~ have two deliveries of letters from house to house every week day: * * * Of 880headpost-officesabout350havetwodeliveriesinthecourseolthe day, 300 havethreedeliverie~, 115 have four, 17havefive, 6 have six, and 1 (Liverpool) has seven daily deli \' eries. * * * In the London postal district, which 

comprises an ar~a of about 216 square miles, the number of deliveries on week 

days ranges from twelve in the cent.ral or • town' district to three in a few of 

the outer suburban districts where the population is comparatively sparse." · 

The following table, compiled from the same correspondence, will 

show the extent to which the free delivery of letters, &c., by carriers 

has superseded the deli very through post-office boxes in several of the 

principal cities of the United Kingdom: 

8 i~ II) ""' s= "' "'M s ~t: C). 

.... :., ~0 

2-d ~:;::! 

~:;;; l.o CII!C) "'0 -> Ill C) 

$~i- .... C) ::::1· ... 

.. 0 .... Oc> 'Q£ ~:Q> j:l,~ 

~+>11 ~ ~ O'Q 

City. C) j:l,:>. .... "' .... 'tic> .0"0 Gl'tl OlD 0~~ a::: ~~~ C) 'tl~ 

~Q ""H ~~~ :;:!<II Glo ~.:: 5.e~ ces= 

-a.o .o ... H 

:;::! 8'Q> 0 CSOJ ~~] ]~ ~'ti,P ~'tl If)~ z E-4 P-t r;r:;l ' 

Birmingham ................................. 162 65,500 492,500 13.3 408,000 

Dublin ............................ ............... 77 53,000 442,300 11.9 316,l!OO, Edinburgh ............ ...... , ................. 56 27,600. 569,900 4.8 286,!00, Glasgow ........................................ 178 79,400 758,000 10.5 704,400, ·Liverpool ...................................... 206 59,000 582,600 6.9 681,900 

1\Ianchester .................................... 548 186,000 875,500 21:2 5f!7;7oo' Sheffield: ....................................... 176 38,500 205,300 18.7 284,400 London, E. C. district.. .................. 190 193,000 2,710,300 7.1 . .......... ":":':". 

.I 

The present law fixes the limitation at 20,000 inhabitants or gr~ postal revenues of $20,000 annually. There are now one hundred and 

seventy-sevenfre&deliveryofficesintheUnitetlStatessupplying12,000;! 

000 of people directly, not to say anything of the convenience enjoyed 

by the 40,000,000 of people who mail letters to free-delivery offices. , So far as the question of population is concerned the 20, 000' limit was exhausted long ago. So far as the gross revenues are concerned those 

places now entitled to that privilege under the present law, mCMured 

by $20,000 gross receipts, number only nine. During the past year 

eighteen new free-delivery offices have been established. .As the law now stands it will be absolutely impossible t() e.x:tend that system ex.:. cept to these nine places. These places are ·Ann Arbor, Mich.; Battle 

Creek, Mich.; Bradford, Pa.; Fargo, Dak.; Ithaca, N. Y.; Lawrence; 

Kans.; Mahanoy City, Pa.; Middletown, Conn.; and Washington, N. J, 

These are the only places which can be supplied under the existing law: 

The amendment I offer would extend this privilege to one hundred and 

seventy new pQints, containing a populationoflO,OOO inhabitants ea-ch or having gross receipts during the past year of$10,000. 

I take it for granted that this Congress is not going to stop the free.,. 

delivery system where it is, or when these nine places are supplied. 

One of the points named above, according to the last census, has a population of 9, 000 and the smallest is 2, 693. If the free-delivery system 

is not t{) come to an end when that list is taken care of, then the present list must be amended and the law must be amended, or when that 

limit is reached the free-delivery system must stop. 

It has been shown in this debate that on an outlay of four millions of 

dollars there was a profit to the Government in the free-delivery systeni 

of a million and a quarter of dollars during the past year. It is true 

that only twelve cities out of one hundred and seventy-seven are more 

than self-sustaining, but there is not one of these twelve cities, not one 

inhabitant in one of these t.welve cities, who objects t<> the free-delivery 

system being extended to the other one hundred and sixty-five. 

It has come to be accepted as a mutual benefit to all places which 

. .. 
1578 OONGRESSIONAL RECORD- - HOUSE. - FEBRUARY 12, 

1

enjoy its privileges, and :m inestimable convenience to evezy man, 

woman, and child who can read and write or appreciate a picture. 

In that connection it is also true there are only ten States in the ,Union where the post-office system is self- ustaining, while in twenty- ,eightStates it is not; but there is not one of tho e ten States which obJects to the extension of·the system to other States. ·If there were, 

where would the system go? 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman's time has expired. · Mr. SKINNER, of New York. I a k by unanimous consent to print 

this list of post-offices that would come under the propo ed amendment 

as-well as other documents. · The CHAIRMAN. The Chair hears no objection. 

1\.Ir. SKINNER, of New York. The list is as follows: 

PosT-OFFICE DEPART11£ID>--r, OFFICE oF THE FmsT Assxs·rANT PosTM.ASTER-GEllo"'ERAL, 

FREE-DELIVERY DIVISION, 

Washington, D. C., February 5, 1885. 

Sm: I have the honor to transmU herewith theinformation called for by your telegram of the 4th instant. 

Very respectfully, R. W.GURLET, 

Superintendent Free--Delivery System,, 

:non. CHARLES R. SKINNER, 

Houu of Representatives. 

List of po t-o;Uie& (not fru delivery) ha"'ing a g1·oss revenue of $20,000 for the fiscal 

. 11earended June 30,1884. . 

Citie. 

Ann Arbor, Mich. ................................................ . B&ttLe Creek, 1\fich ....................... m .................... . 

B:ra.dford, Pa: .......................... - .......................... . Pargo, Dak .......................................................... . Ithaca, N. Y ........................................................ . Lawrence, Kans .................................................. . Mahanoy City, Pa ............................................... . ?tlidd.letown, Conn .............................................. . Wa.wngton, N. J ............................................... . 

Popuhtion, 1880. 

8,061 

7,06.3 

9,197 

2,693 

91<X> 8;5lo 

7,181 

6,826 

2,142 

Gross revenue, 

1884.. 

$20,959 

20,464 

26,012 

24,133 

22,290 

22,074 

25,109 

20,315 

36, 497 

List of toums and cities that had a population of less than 10,000 under the ce1l8UB of 1880 wlwse post-officu yielded a gross revenue of $10,000 and less than $20,000 for the 

fiscal year ended June 30, 1884. 

Name. Population, Gross revenue, census 1880. 1884.. 

Binning ham, .Ala................................................... 3, 086 

Selma, Ala..... ....................................................... 7,529 

Tucson, Ariz.. ... .. .. . ....... ... ..... . . ......... ..... .. .............. 7, 007 Hot Springs, Ark.................................................. 3,554 

Pueblo, Colo......................................................... 3,217 

Birminghalll., Conn.............................................. 3, 026 Ilanbury, Conu............ ...... ................................. 11.666 Bismarck, Dak........ ............................................. 1, T'oS 

Grand Forks, Dak................................................ 1, 705 

H~rou, Dak... ....................................................... 1M Sioux Falls, Dak............. ............. ......... ............... 2, 164 

Pensacola., Fla...................................................... 6 845 R.ome, Ga............................................................. 2:748 Alton,lll......... ...... ...... ...... ................................... 8, 975 

. g:=ifu~:-:~::·:·:·:-~:-:·:·:·:·:-:-:::·~·::::::.:::::~::::::::::::::::::: ~:~ Englewood, IlL"' .................................................... .............. ..... . Evanston, ill........................... ............... .............. 4, 400 

ir~~~M~·~::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~:~ Monmouth, ill...................................................... 5, 000 

g;:::g.~k:::::::::::::::·:.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~: ~:~ Elkhart, Ind......................................................... 6, 953 La. POI'te, Ind. ..................................... - . .:............. 6, 195 Vincennes, Ind..................................................... 7, 680 Clinton, Iowa ................................ :...................... 9, 052 

Crest.on,lowa....................................................... 5,081 Iowa City, Iowa..................................................... 7, 123 1\la.rshalltown, Iowa............................................. 6, 240 

?tlusca.tine, Iowa .............. ,.................................... 8, 295 

Oskaloosa,Iowa.................................................... 4,598 

Waterloo, Iowa..................................................... 5,630 

Emporia, K.ans ..... -.... .......... ..................... ........... 4, 631 Fort Scott. Kans................................................... 5, 372 

;~~~~KM~·~::::::·::.::::·:~·.:::·:::.:::::::::::·:.: ::::::~: ~ i~ Frankfort,Xy ........................ ............................. 6, 958 Paducah, Ky .................... ~.................................. 8, 036 Auburn, Me........................................................... 9, 555 Bath, Me ... ~... ................................... ................. 7,874 ·Annapolis,lUd...................................................... 6, 642 

Frederick, Md........... ......... ................ ... ...... .. . ...... 8, 659 

w~~~~-:.:_:_:_:_::::.::_:_::_:_:_:::.:.:_:_:_:_:_:.:_::_:_::_:::.::_:_::_:_:.:~::_::_:_: ~: ~ Adrian, Mich ...... . ... ................. ..................... ...... 7, 849 

~t¥f~~ ~~~~::::.:·::::~·.:·:::::::::::::~:::::::::::::: :::::::: ~: ~ ltlanistee,l\Iich... ...... ...... ...... ........... ...... ...... ......... 6, 930 Po•·tH~ron,l\lich ................................................. 8,887 

~~~~to~Mi:;~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::·.:::::::::::::::::::: ~: ~ ~ Wing,~linn................................................... 5,876 

* Within corporate limits or Chiellgo. 

$17,786 

16,269 

11,765 

U ,570 14,044 

10,131 

14,325 

10,299 

10,414 

10,8.51 

10,238 

IO,lM 

10,882 

10,198 

14,881 

10,452 

14,129. 10,043 

12,147 

19,791 

18,527 

10,026 

13,045 

10,681 

12,762 

'10,375 

10,700 

15,334 

11,750 

14,351 

17,935 

14,372 

13,056 

12,951 

16,489 

15, 904 16',525 

14,308 

12,048 

11,288 

10,ll3 

10,384 

14,36.3 

10,618 

10,693 

13,608 

14,482 

14,103 

10,401 

~g·~ 13:836 

19,688 

10,692 

11, 360 

Towns and cities that had apopulaUonof less than 10,000, &c.-Continued. 

Name. Population, Gross revenue, census 1880. 1834. 

Rochester, n-finn........................... ....................... 5,103 

Stillwater,l\'Iinn................................................... 9,().3:) 

Jackson,l\liss....................................................... 5. 204 Ca.rtha.ge,l\lo............... ...... ...... ............... .............. 4, 167 Springfield, Mo.................................. ................. .. 6, 522 Butte City,lUont............... .................................... 3, 3G3 Helena,l\Iont................................. ...................... 3, 624 Fremont, Nebr............ .......................................... 3, 013 

~~~-~~~~--=:::·::::::::· :::::::::::~·:::::::::::::::::::::: ~: ~~ 

:i b~·o;!~k:~:N ~:::~·::::::·:.:::::·:.::::::::·.:: :::::::::::::::: ............ ~.'.~~-· Atlantic City,N.J'......... ....................................... 5,417 

1\lorristown, N.J ................. _ ............................... 5, 418 

Plainfield, N.J....................................................... 8,.125 

Albuquerque, N . Mex ........................................... 2, 315 

Amsterdam,N. Y .......................................... :....... -9,466 

Batavia, N.Y........................................................ 4,845 

Canandaigua, N. Y................................................ 5, 726 Corning,N. Y........................................................ 4,802 

CortLaud,N.Y...................................................... 4,<X>O 

Geneva. N. ·Y........................................................ 5, 878 

Glens Falls, N.Y...................... ............................ 4, 900 

Gloversville, N.Y..................................... ........... 7, 133 Horuellsville,N.l:' .......................................... -... 8,195 

Hudson, K. Y........................................................ 8,670 

Little Falls, N.Y................................................... 6, 910 1\liddletown,N. Y................................................. 8,49 l 

Olean,N. 1........................................................... 3,036 

Oneida,N.T......................................................... 3,262 

Plattsburg. N. Y ............................................ ...... 5, 245 Port Jervis, N.Y................................................... 8, G78 

Rondout, N.Y .............................................. - ......................... .. Seneca Falls, N.Y................................................. 5, 80 Charlotte, N.C ....... :.............................................. 7, 094 

Delaware, Ohio..................................................... 6, 894. 

Lima, Ohio ........................................................... 7, 567 

l'.Iassillon, Ohio..................................................... 6,836 

1\Iou nt Vernon, Ohio............................................. 5, 2-19 

~~;;!fu~J~fd:::::::::::::::::~::::::::::::::::: ::::::::~::::::: ~: ~ Painesville, Ohio.................................................. 3, 841 

"\VoosteT, 

~!~~~i·i~:·:·:·:·::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Ohio...................................................... t 

5,84.0 

~ Xenia, Ohio........................................................... 7, 026 

Bethlehem, Pa ...................... ....... :... ..................... 5, 193 Lock Haven, Pa.. ....... .... .. ............ ...... ...... ...... ...... 5, 845 Corry, Pa................. ............................................ 5, zn 

Franklin, Pa. .......... .......... ............ ............ ...... ...... 5, 010 Huntingdon, Pa.................................... ............... 4 125 Johnstown, Pa. ..................................................... 8, 380 

Lebanon, Pa.................................... ..................... 8, 778 

1\Ieadville, Pa....................................................... S, 800 New Castle, Pa....................................................... 8, 418 

Oil City, Pa............................................................ 7,315 

Titusville, Pa.. ................. ....... ...... .................. ...... 9, 04G Warren, Pa .......................................................... 2,8t0 West Chester, Pa.................................................. 7,046 

~:~tt~e~~~~~::::.:::~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~:::: ~: ~ 

lltfi.;.[\t~ili:ii~ilii~llll=.iilf=ijlli=iiii II ~~£~:i~~~~~;;;;;;:::.:;;::::;::::::::::::::~;::::;:::~: 1: m 

10,Sl7 

15, 61.8 11,458 

lO,&"'J 

14.,963 

16,169 

19,249 

10,41l 

10,425 

1L,SOO 

13,441 

11,265 

14.,901 

13,36.3 

17,160 

10,911 

13 500 

12:537 

10,603 

10,587 

11,979 

16, 90l 10,957 

JO, T'l>6 13.~l7 

l3, 787 12,M6 

14,41.3. 

12,024 

10,88') 

10,ll2 

11,4.71 

10,'78S 

13,759 

15,083 

12,6&1 

14,241 

10,231 

10,232 

14,621 

10,-454 

11.813 

1Q,920 

10,319 

10,713 

10,410 

11, O-l7 11.010 

11,100 

10,16.2 10,157 

10,421 

13,248 

12,096 

16,487 

11,873 

1.3,07, 

16,060 

17,195 

14,160 

10 400 u:209 

11,627 

17,931 

13,111 

14,626 

11,457 

12,466 

14.~ 

15,983 

10,564 

12,204. 

13,'752 

10,847 

17,489 

15,286 

According to census or 1880, one hundred and thirty-one offices; estimated in 1885, one hundred and fift.y offices. 

List of cities that had 10,000 population under the cen.sua of 1880, and $10,000 and leu 

than 20,000 gross revenue for fiscal yea.r ended June 30. 188!. 

Name. 

.Alexandria, Va ................................................... . Aurora, 111 ........................................................... . Chester, Pa ......................................................... .. Chillicothe, Ohio ................................................ .. Cohoes, N.Y ....... ~ ............................................... . Columbia, S.C .................................................... .. Columbus, Ga. ..................................................... . Cumberland, Md. ................................................ . Danbury,. Conn ........................................... ...... .. Dover, N.H .................... ..................................... .. Hamilton, Ohio .................................................... . Jacksonville, Ill ................................................. .. Joliet, Ill ............................................................ .. Kingston, N. Y ..................................................... .. 

~tfsk~~~.t~~t-.:·.~:::::::::::::.:·:::.:::::::::::::~:::::::::~::: New Britain, Coun ............................................. .. New London, Conn .. - ....................................... .. Newb~ryport, 1\Iass ............................................ . 

Population, 

census1880. 

13, 6.')9 

11,8i3 

14,997 

10, 938 

19,416 

10,03·j 

10,123 

10,693 

11,666 

ll,fXrT 

12,122 

10,927 

1L,657 

18,344 

11,198 

11,262 

11,800 

10,537 

13,538 

Gross revenue, 

1884. 

$13,9;)'"7 

16,087 

13,753 

13,404 

11,519 

17,C'Iil 

17,060 

ll,OOT 

14,32-5 

11,52'J 

14.620 

16,413 

19,168 

10,229 

13,942 

19,119 

19,7H 

19,4.06 

14,182 

. 
\ 

1885. OONGRESSIONAL RECORD-·'HOUSE. 1579 

List of cities tllat had 10,000 population under the censm of 1880, &:c.-Continued. 

Name. 

North Adams, 1\fass ....................................... ~ ..... . Northampton, 1.\.L'\SS ............................................. . 

New Albany, Ind ................................................. . Nashua, N.H ......................................................... .. 

~~~~~~~~:.~:.:.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::.:·.:·: Ogdensburg. N.Y ............................................... . Orange, N.J ....................................................... . Port mouth, Ohio .............................................. .. Rock Island, ill. ................................................. .. Rome, N.Y ............... ,. ......................................... . Rutland. Vt .............. ; ..................... ...................... . Sagiuaw,l\Iicll ..................................................... . Schenectady, N.Y ............................................. .. Stnmford, Conn .................................................. .. Steubenville, Ohio ............................................. . Stockton, Cal. .................................................... .. Vic·ksburg, l\Iiss ................................................. .. lValthn.m, l\Iass .................................................. . Winona, l\Iinn ...... ~ ............................................. .. Woonsocket, R. I ............................................... .. 

Population, 

census i1880. 

10,191-

12,172 

16,423 

13,397 

• 13 063 17,166 1 

10:341 

13,207 

11,33.1 

11,659 

12,194 

1!!,149 

10,525 

13 655 11;297 

12,093 

10,282 

11,814 

11,712 

10,208 

16,000 

Gross revenue, 

.1884. 

314,105 

15,522 

I2,301 

17,459 

18 221 12:155 

11,860 

11.802 

12,709 

16,096 

17,894 

17,131 

10,597 

I6,852 

15,718 

13,673 

18, 7'24 17,693 

14,494 

19,GOO 

11,848 

PoST-OFFICE DEPA RXMENT, 

OFFICE OF THE FIR '1' AsSISTANT POSTlllASTER-GEN.ERAL, 

FREE-DELIVF..RY. DIVISION I 

Washington, D. C., February 7, 1885. 

Sm: I have the honor to transmit herewith, in compliance with your request, a list of free-delivery cities, with their population as shown by tho census of 1880. This, ·though misleading in regard to most, if not all, of tllem, is the be.st !f<>Urce of infon:nation available at present, tile population h:n·ing largely increased since that date (1880). 

Very respectfully, 

Ron. CHARLES R. SK.INNER, 

R. W. GURLEY, SltJ~crintendent Free-Delit·e''Y S·ystern. 

Home of Representatives. 

Population of free-delivel'y cit·ies, ct'flsu.s of1880. 

.Akron, Ohio ................. :.......... 16,512 Jackson, Mich........................ 16,105 

Albllny,N.Y..................... ...... 90,903 Jacksorn·Wc,Fla................... ~~.~. 

Allegheny,Pa ........................ 78,681 JIUD.estown,N.Y-.................. "~ 

.Atlanta,Ua, ............................. 34,398 JerseyCity,N.J ..................... I20,7~8 

Auburn,N.Y .......................... 21,924 Kalamazoo,l\lioh ................... 11,037 

.Augusta, Ga............................. 23,023 Kansas City, 1\Io .................... 55,813 

AnA.tlguistason',MKea.n"s".·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·. 8,665 Keokuk,lowa .................... ... 12, ll'i cll 15, 106 Knoxville, Tenn ...... ........ ...... 1

9

4 

.. ~~ 

.Allentown, Pa .................. ...... 18,063 La Crosse, 1V'is....................... vv..1 

.Alto.ona, Pa..... ........................ 19,716 La Fayette, Ind...................... It, 860 Austin, Tex ........ :.................... 10, !l60 Lancaster, Pa ......................... 23,700 

Baltimore, 1\ld......................... 332, 1!l0 Lansh1g,l\Iich........................ 8, 319 Bangor, l\1e. ............................. 16,857 L:1--wrencc, 1\Iass...................... 39,178 

Bay City, 1\Iich........................ 20, 693 Leall"l"'ille, Colo....................... 14,820 

Binghamton.N. Y.................... 17,315 Leavenworth Kans............... 1G,5!JO 

Bloomington, lll...................... 17,184 Lewiston, Me ............... -...... 19,083 

Bost 1\Iass { 362,535 Lexiugton,Ky .. ..................... 16,(;:".>6 on, ........................ 99,510 Lincoln,Nebr.............. .......... 13,004 

Brid~_port, Conn..................... 29,148 I.ittlc Rock, Ark ................... 13,1 5 Bl"'OOKJyn,N. Y ......................... 500,689 Lockport,N. Y....................... 13,522 Bu:fl'alo, N. Y ........................... 155, 137 Los Angeles, Cal.................... 11, 3U Burlington, Iowa..................... 19,450 Louisville, Ky........................ 123,645 

BurUngton,;vt........................ 11,364 Lowell,l\Ias .......................... 59,485 

Brockton, Mass........................ 13,608 Lynchburg, Va....................... 15,959 

Camden,N.J........................... 4l,G58 Lynn,l\lass. ........................... 38,284 Canton..t Ohio .... -..................... 12,2.38 1\Iaeon, G-a .. :........................... 12,748 Cedar .wtpids, Iowa.................. 10,104. 1\hdi.son, Wis. .................. -... 10,3'~ 

Charleston, S.C........................ 49, m 1\l:.mchester, N. IL................... 32,6.'l0 

Chattanooga, Tenn................. 12,892 l\Iansfield, Ohio...................... 9, S.59 Chioago,Ill .............................. 503,304 1\Iemphis,Tenn..................... 33,:>93 

Cincinnati, Ohio..................... 2.'>5, 708 l\Ieridcn, Conn....................... 18, 340 CleYeland, Ohio....................... 160, 143 Milwaukee, 1Vis........ ............ 115, 578 Columbus, Ohio...................... 51,66.3 Minne..'\polis,Minn................. 46, 887 Concord, N. H......................... 13, 888 Mobile, Ala............... .. .......... 31, 205 Council Bluffs, Iowa ... ............ 18,059 l\[ontgomery, Ala.................. 16, 714 Covington, Ky .. ."..................... 29,720 1\'asllTille,Tenn..................... 43,461 

Dllllns,Tex .............................. 10358 Newark,N.J .......................... 136,400 

Davenport, Iowa..................... 2l;83-t New Bedford,Mnss...... ......... 26,875 

Dayton, Ohio ........................... 33,677 Newburg,N.Y...... ......... ...... 18, 000 Decatu:r,Ill.............................. 9,547 NewH.aven,Conn.................. 62, 2 

DDesen~l\I·e rnCoesl,oi.0 .. w ... a ...... ·.--.. ·.·.·.·.·-.. •.· .. ·.· .... .. · 3·,630 New Orleans, La.................... 216,140 22, 408 Newport, B. !......... ...... ......... I5, 693 Detroit,l\Iich ........................... 116, 342 ~ewYork,N.Y ..................... 1,206,590 

Dubuquo,Iowa. ....................... 22?:')4 Norfolk,Va. ........................... 21,966 

Easton, Pa. ....... "..................... 11:9-.24 Norwich, Conn....................... 21,141 East Saginaw, Mich................ 19,016 Oakland, Cal.................... ...... 34,556 Ean Claire, Wis....................... 10, 118 Omaha, Nebr.......................... 30, 518 Elgin, Ill................................. 8, 787 Oshkosh, Wis............... ......... 15,749 

Elizabeth, N.j........................ 28,229 Oswego, N.Y.......................... 21.,117 

Elmira, N.Y........................... 20,541 Ottumwa, Iowa. ................. :... 9, 004 Erie,Pa................................... 27,730 Paterson,N.J........................ 50,887 Evan ville, Ind........................ 29,280 Pa'\'1-tucket,R.I............... ...... 19, 030 Fall River, 1\fass ..................... 49,006 Peoria, Ill.............................. 29,315 

Fitchburg, Mass .... , ................. 12,405 Petersburg,V:l>...... ...... ......... 21,656 Fort Wayne, Ind...................... 26,880 Philadelphia,Pa............. ........ 846,984 Fort Worth, Texas.................. 6, 663 Pittsburgh, Pa...... ........ ......... 156, 381 Gale burg, lll.......................... 11,44.6 Pittsneld, Mass....................... 13,367 Gahreston, Texas..................... 22, 253 Portland, Me......................... 33, 810 Gloucester,l\Iass..................... 19,329 Portland,Oreg....................... 17,577 Grand Rapids, Mich............... 32,015 Pottsville, Pa......... ............... 13,253 

Hannibal, l\Io .......................... 11,074 Pough keep ie, N.Y............... 20, 2ffl Harrisburg, Pa.. ......... ............. 30, 762 Providence, R. L ........ ....... ..... 104, 850 

Hrutford,Conn........................ 42,553 Quincy,Ill ........................... " 27,275 

Haverhill, Mass....................... 18,4.75 Racine, Wis........................... . 16,031 

Hoboken,N.J......................... 30,999 Raleigh,N.C.......................... 9,265 

Holyoke, Mass........................ 21, 852 Re:uling, Pa........................... 43, 280 Houston, Tex........................... I8, 646 Richmond, Ind....................... 12,743 

lndianapolis,Ind .................... 75,074 Richmond,Va........................ 63,803 

Pop-ulation of free-deli'flf!Ty cities, cen.rus of 188()-Continued. 

Rochester,N. Y .................... . Rockford, lll. ..................... .. Sacramento, Cal .................. .. Saint Joseph,l\Io ................... . Saint Loms,l\Io ................... .. Saint Paul, Minn .................. .. " alem, Mass .......................... . San Antonio, Tex ................ .. Sandusky, Ohio .................... . San Francisco, Cal. ................ . San ;Jose, Cal ........................ .. Saratoga Springs, N.Y ......... .. Savannah, Ga. ....................... . Scranton, Pa. ......................... . Seda.lia.,J.\Io ............... , .......... .. Sioux City, Iowa .................. .. South Bend, Ind .................... . Salt Lake City, Utah ............ .. Sp1'ingfield, TIL .................... . SpTingfielll, 1\Inss ................. . Springfield, Ohio ................. .. 

89,363 

13,136 

ik1:l 

3-:>0, 522 41,498 

27,598 

20, 561 15,838 

233 956 12:567 

10 822 

30:681 

45,850 

9,561 

7,366 

13,279 

20768 

I9:746 

33,~40 

20,729 

Syracuse, N.Y ....... - ............. .. Taunton, :1\fnss ..................... .. Terre Haute, Ind .................... . Toledo, Ohio ............................. · Topeka, Kans ...................... . Trenton, N.J ........................ . Troy, N.Y ............................ .. . Utica\N. Y ........................... .. Washington, D. C ................. . Waterbury, Conn ................. . Watert-own, N.Y ................. .. Wheeling, W.Va .................. .. Wilkes Barre, Pa ............ : .... .. Williamsport. Pa .................. . Wllrnington, DeL ................. . Wilmington, N.C .................. . Worcester, Mass ............. ~ ... .. Yonkers, N.Y ...................... .. York,Pa. ... ........................... .. Yotmgstowu, Ohio ............... .. Znnes-ville,Ohio .................... . 51.,791 

21,213 

26,040 

00,143 

15,451 

29,910 

56,747 

33,913 

147,307 

20,269 

10,697 . 31,266 

23,339 

'18,93-i 

42,499 

17,361 

38,290 

18,892 

13,~ 

'15,-431. 

18,1.20 

Totlil population,1880, 10,197,983; estimated population, 1885,12,000,000. 

Free-delivery offices,Fel>ruary 7,1885, 177; carriers, 4,337. 

THE FREE-DELIVERY SYSTEJII. 

This system was in operation during the year at one hundred and fifty-i>ur offices (including forty-two newly established ones), and employed in the agg.re- ga.te 3,680 carriers. The total appropriation for this sen·ice was $3,200,000, including a. special -ap- propriation of $200,000 to carry out the provisions of the act of August 2, 1882,.an 

inereaseof.$575,000 oYer that of the preceding year. The total cost of the service was $3,173,336.51,lea•dng an unexpendcll balance of $26,663.4.9. The increase of cost oveL' the preceding year was $5ro,073.77. This was owing to the extension of the serviee to forty-two additional cities in different sections of the oountey, 

employing in the aggn~gate two hundred and twenty-two carriers, to the ap- pointment of three hundred and forty-three additional carriers in the older free- deli ve1·y cities, to the increased pay of auxiliary carriers from S.JOOto S600,.and to the promotion of carriers from the lower to the. next higher grade at the expira· lion of one year's service, as required by the act of August 2; 1882. 

POSTAGE ON LOCAL MATI'ER. 

The postage on local matter at the yarious offices amounted to $!,195,230.52, an increase over the preceding ,·ear of $378,654.43, and over the total oost or the serdce of $1,021,894.01. This increase in postage on local matter was ~..D'l per cent., while t-be increase in the oostofthe ~vice was 20.96 per cent., mainly at- tributable to therequirementsoftheact of August2, 1882. The average oos\per 

pieoo for handling matter was-2.4. .mills, an increase of one-tenth mill as com- pared with last year. The average cost per carrier, including incidental ex- pl'oses, was $8.59.95, an increase-or $9..4.20 over the preceding year. The number of mail letters deli\.•ered during the fiscal yea-r was 342,'l13,750, an increase of 14.66 per cent. over the preceding year; mail postal cards 'delivered. 86, 13!::,2'>...8, an increa<>e of 20.49 per cent.; local letters, 10!,437,146, a-n increase of 16.03 per cent.: loca.l postal cards, 60,472,193, an increase ofl8.75 per cent.; regis- tered letterR dclivercd,.2,830,203, an increase of I0.86 per cent.; newspapers"deliYered, 200,568,00.3. nn increase of 26.60 per cent. The number of letters collected was 3-15,317,803, au increase over last year of 4.90 per cent.;· postal cards collect-ed, ll5,113,531, an increase of 15.78 per cent.; newspapers collected, 64,751,842, au increase of 4.90 percent. The whole number • of pieces handled during the year was 1,32!,637,701; an increase over last year or 15.8.3 JJer cent., and the average number handled by each carrier was 359,955, n. decrease of 1.99 per cent. 

REVIEW OF THE SERVICE. 

The free-delivery service was inaugurated July 1, 186.'3. A summary of its business durlng the period which has since elapsed may therefore not be inappropriate, though in. its earlier yeax:s its statistics vrere not as complete as they a1-e at present-. · 

Statcm~nt of the free-delivery service s-ince organization. 

..... '0 t S::..!o .... 0 ' 'O ·§i Oc:S 0 .,; 4i <Ji 4) 4l.a rtl :~-a "'"' rtl "''" ltl. rtl...; 

Year. 4)0 .: .8·~ ._o be- ~8 ~~]k ,Oc:.l 

~ ~·~ c~al. 

~~ s~ .... c:~~o~ 

c:.l ltl04l :;sO M ~OOQI s:: :::lc:.l 0 0 .... ~ 

~~-- .. z ..... z 0 P-1 ~ --------

I86.1-'64 ... 66 685 $317,061 22 . ...................... .................... ····--·········---··· 1864-'65 ... 45 757 44.8, 664 51 ....................... . ................... ...................... 1865--'66 ... 46 1 863 589,236 tl ....................... ....................... ............ _. ........ 18GG-'G7 ... 47 1 943 699,934. 34 ····················· .................... ......... .-. ........... 1867-'68 ... 48 1 1, l98 995,034 59 . .................... .................... ....................... 1868-'69 ... 48 0 1,24G 1, 183,.915 31 ····················· $548;2i5 '15" ···················· 1869-'70 ... ' 51 3 1,362 1, 230, 079 85 . $681, 864 70 .... ._ ............... 1870-'TI ... 52 1 1,419 1, 353, 923 23 758,120 78 595,802 45 ·········-··· ....... 1871-'72 ... 52 0 1,4!3 1, 385, 965 76 007,351 93 4.78,613 83 ···················· IS'i2-'73 .... 52 1,499 1,422, 4!);) 48 1, l12, 25t 21 310,244 27 ·····a.4········--···· 1873'-'74 ... 87 35 2,049 I, 802, 606 41 1, 611,481 66 1.91,214 75 .. "S67;'5'r7 .. 55 1874-'75 .... 87 2,195 1, 880, 041 99 1,947,559 54 . .................. 1875-'76 .... 87 2,269 1, 981, 186 51 2, 065, 561 73 . ..................... 84,875 22 1876-'77 .... 87 2,265 1, 893, 619 85 2, 254, 597 83 ................... 360,977 98 1877-'.JS .... 87 2,275 1, 824, I66 96 2, 452,.2.51 51 ·················· 628,084 55 ISi&-'79 .... 88 1 2, 359 1, 947,706 61 2, 812, 523 86 . ................. 864,771 14 1879-'80 .... 104 16 2,688 2,363,693 ~4 3, 068, 797 14 .................... ,. 705, 104 00 1830-'81.. .. 109 5 2,861 2, 499, 9ll 54 3, Z73, 630 39 ........•......... 773,718 85 1881-'82 .... 112 3 3,115 2, 623,262 74 3, 816, 576 09 . ................. 1, 193, 313 35 1882-'83 .... 154 42 ' 3,680 3,173,336 51 4., 195, 230 52 ................... *1, 021, 891 01 I883-'84 .... 159 5 3,890 3, 504,206 52 4., 777,454 87 .................. I, 273, 278 35 

*The apparent reduction in excess of postage on local matter for the last yea..r is accounted fo1· by the increased expenditure (83,173,336.51} required by the act of August 2, 1882. Number of free-delivery offices February 7, IB85; li7; increase since ISM, 18; whole number of carriers, 4,337. 

REPORT OF THE rQ3TMASTER-GE~~. 

In 18&1-'65 the cos~ per letter for delivery at nine of the principal cities was U cents each, as against 2.4 mills for the delivery and collection of each piece-of mail matter in one hundred and fifty-four cities in 1882-'83,·a. reduction of 8.6 mills per piece. The report of the superintendent of free deli~·ery rontains other interesting information in regard to the working of the system. 
1580 OONGRESSIONAL REOORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 12, 

Statement of the excess of postal receipts and expenditures of the · United States by States. 

1882. 1883. 188{. 

States and Territories. Excess of receipts I Excess of expend- Excess of recejpts I Excess of expend- Excess of receipts Ex o es s of ex- over expendi- itures over re- oYer expendi- itures over re- over expendi- pendituresover tures. ceipts. tures. ceipts. tures. receipts. 

1\IRine................................................................. Siw.,084 54 .............................. ~,618 76 ............................................. 1.·s·,"oos""''.fi\' ············14···8··'·328······81··· New Hampshire................................................ 72,047 74 .............................. 63,065 20 .............................. .., .,.., Vermf>nt............................................................ 19,59569 .............................. 12,33006 ............................................................ 33,90975 

Massachusetts.................................................... 1, 080,588 10 .. . ....... .. ... ... ...... ...... 1, 111, 461 12 ... ............... ...... ...... 916,906 62 .......................... . Rhode Island...................................................... 15-1,641 41 ............................. 149,618 51 .............................. 124,638 22 .......................... . Connecticut ............................................. ;.......... . 2{)1, 910 39 .. ....... ...... ...... .. ....... 238,548 23 . ........ ...... ....... ........ 135, 4.63 91 ......................... .. New York.......................................................... 2,601,409 90 .............................. 2,813,729 82 ..................... ,........ 2,312,695 24 .................. , ....... . New Jersey........................................................ 174,214. 85 .............................. 24!),603 62 .............................. 143,517 59 .......................... . Pennsylvania...................................................... 1,017,~9 55 .............................. !l87,170 58 .............................. 560,677 81 .......................... . 

~ela1nr~ ................... v............ .......................... 19' 9 65 ............... i!2:1i~"60' ............... ~~:~~ .. ~~ . ............. a..;,n;73i'!~o· ................ ~:~~: .. ~ ............ 'i25,'862'44 

~i~?;~i~~;::::::::::::::::::::::::::::-:::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: t~:~~ ~ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~:~ ~ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~;~ jig North Carolina................................................... .............................. 135,698 37 ......... ............... ...... 155,481 23 .............................. 207,191 96 SOuth Carolina................................................... .............................. 104,657 65 .............................. 109,758 18 .............................. 159,693 86 Georgia .................................................................................. ,......... 208,045 47 .............................. 198,968 98 .............................. 320,202 31 Florida ........................... ,................................................................. 111,174 01 .............................. 103,357 50 .............................. 133,294 45 Ohio ........................................................... H....... .............................. 240,494 41 .............................. 430,160 28 .............................. 845,404 4.2 

rr:dfll~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::: 34.g:~ fg ::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::: .............. ~:~ ~~.. .............................. 39,461 62 .......................... . 

Wf:c~:;~·:::·::.:::::::·.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: m:= ~ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: r1o1;1:, 854 4

3

68

19 

;k1

5

2 :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.~ •. ·.:.~.:~.:.:.:_:.~.~.:.~ ••• ·:.~.~.:.:. :.:.:.:.:.:.:.: ••• ·.: •• •• ·:.:.~.:.:.7 .... :.~.:00 .. :.:.:.~.:.:.:.: ............. ~37. 001.:,:;-~6 002. Iowa ......................................... : ..................... -. 14.6,373 35 .............................. ~~ Missouri.............................................. ............... ......... ...... ............... 107,973 18 ........................ ...... 103,471 45 ..................... ......... 480,383 04 

~:~:;t::::::::::::::::::::·:::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::·:.: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~:!~ ~ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~i:i~~ ~i :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Ui:m ~ Alabamn............................................................. .............................. 183,4.30 24 .............................. 177,202 65 .............................. 238,4.94 ~ 

~:~f..~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::·::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::·::::: 1~;!~ · :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: i~:~: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~:~ ~ Louisiana ... _... ........... ... . .. . .. ... . .. . . .. .. . .. ... .... . . ..... .. ...... .. . . .. . .. .. .... .. .... . .. 75, 379 04 .. .. .. ..... . .. . .. . .. .. .. . .. .. . 79, 487 59 .. • .. •.. •• .. ...... .... .. ... ... 120, 66() 75 

Texas.: ...................................... ." .... : .................... :............................ 459,019 34 .............................. 302,437 67 .............................. 431,334 03 

California. ... .. . .... . ... .. . . . ........... .............. ......... .. .... .. ............... ......... .... 508, 35l 28 .. • .. .... .. .. .. .. . .. .. . .. . .... ·271, 016 91 .. .. ............. .... .. ... .... 417, 188 81 

~l~~~ta:·::::·:.::~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ............... 22;496.02' 123' 

981 01 ................ 5;004"i8' ............... ~~:.:~.~.~~. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~:= ~ Kanscs .......................................................................................................... 250;'i67'21' .............................. 283,084 56 .............................. 362,276 4.2 

Nebraska ... .......................... ...... ........... ............. ....... ........ ...... ......... 501, 801 79 ...... ... ...... ....... . ....... 54.5, 451 59 .. . ............ ............... 596, ill 89 Nevada............................................................... .............................. 137,935 11 .............................. 106,720 00 .............................. 113,108 91 Colorado.......................................................................................... 179,23-1 87 .............................. 145,600 10 .............................. 277,615 85 Uto.h .. . ...... ...... .. ........... ... ..... . ..... ......... .......... ..... .. . ............ ........ ....... 230, 210 53 ...... .............. .......... 154, ~ 19 ..... ... ...................... 180,996 73 New .1.\Iexioo ......................................................... -......................... 68,417 37 .............................. 51,803 57 .............................. 111,366 59 

~!l:.~.~.::::::::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~:~~ ~ ............... 21;175'86' ............... ~:.:~.~~. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~;?: ~ .A.rizona .................................. ~.......................... .............................. 225,320 51 ..................... ........ ll8,019 35 .............................. 149,819 77 Idaho.................................................................. .............................. 141,712 55 .............................. 88,488 87 .............................. 105,3M 20 

=-~:=~:::::::::·:::::.:::::::::·::::.:::::::::::::::::::::·.:·:::.::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 1::~ ~ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::~ ~ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~:~ ~ Alaska............................................................... 160 33 .. .... ..... .. ........ ......... 230 73 ...... ... ...... ...... .. ....... ............... ......... ...... 1, 600 83 · District of Columbia............................................ ...... ...... ... ...... ......... 58,003 26 ......... ...... ......... ...... 69, 358 12 ............... ............... 109, 141 4.3 Indian Territory.............................................................................. 84,300 78 .............................. 35,143 44 ........................ :.... 42,086 96 

Total......................................................... 6, 740, 25-& 48 1 5J 184,996 58 I 7, 122,402 15 4, 707,271 85 1 4, 606,982 69 8, 291,942 40 

5,184, 996 58 ........ : ..................... ! 4, i07, 277 85 .............................. .............................. 4, 606,982 69 

Net excess................................................. 1,555,257 90 ,.............................. 2,4.15,124 30 .............................. , .............................. ~ 3,684,959 71 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I raise the point of order against the gentleman's amendment and submit it without discussion. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair sustains the point of order for the reason stated by the gentleman from New York. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

For rent, light, and fuel, $!90,000. That hereafter the Postmaster-Genera) may lease premises for use for post-offices of the first and second classes at a. reason- able annual rental, to be paid quarterly; but no lease shall be made for a term exceeding five years; o.nd wheneyer any building or part-of a building under 

lease becomes unfit for use as a post-office, no rent shall be paid until the same shall be put in a satisfactory condition by the owner thereof for occupation as a post-office, or the lea e may be canceled, at the option of the Postmaster-General; and a lease shall cease and terminate when ever a. post-office can be moved 

into a Government building. 

1\Ir. ANDERSON. Jtfr. Chairman7 I move to insert in li.tle 447 after 

the word " second," the words "and third;" so that it will read~ 

· That hereafter the Postmaster-General may lease premises for use for post- offices of the first and second and third classes, &c. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I make the point of order upon that amendment that it changes existing law without retrenching expenditures. 

Mr. ANDERSON. But it might frequently retrench expenditures. 

Leases can be made for long periods at less rates than for short ones. Mr. TOWNSHEND. There is no law allowing leases to be made for 

third-class post-offices. There is no allowance made for them. 

:Mr. ANDERSON. But in the very nature of things it is evident that a saving could be effected in many instances where the privilege was given to make a lease for a long period. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. It is clearly subject to the point of order. 

Mr. ANDERSON. Let it be voted upon by the committee. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I must insist upon the point of order. 

Mr. HISCOCK. Is it any more subject to the point of order than 

the whole paragraph which has just been read and which changes ex- isting law? If that pamgraph is to be acted upon by the House any 

amendment that is germane to that must be in order. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. The geJftleman of course can make the po~t 

of order upon it if he ('.hooses · 

Mr. HISCOCK. I do not. 

Mr . .ANDERSO~. Nor do I. 

Mr. IDSCOCK. But when a provision is once before the Housewhen a clause or pamgmph of this character is pending in a bill-it is 

subject to amendment. 

Jt!r. TOWNSHEND. Provided the amendment does not change ex- istinglaw. 

Mr. HISCOCK. Whether it does or does not is not a question that 

enters into consideration. If it be a subjectoverwhich the committee 

has jurisdiction the amendment to that subject is in order. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is of opinion--

Mr. BLOUNT. I understand the argument of the gentleman from 

New York to be that whenever you get in one proposition that changes 

existing law you may put in just as many as you please. 

Mr. HISCOCK. No, that is not the argument; but when you once get before the committee a subject over which the committee has jurisdiction, then you can perfect it by amendment, and the only question 

with reference to the amendment is whether or not it is germane to the 

subject-matter. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Allow the ru1e to be read. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is ready to decide the question of 

order. 

Ur. ANDERSON. Let us have a decision. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is of opinion that the point of order 

is well taken. Although the clause or section in question may itself 

have been subject to thepoint of order, stillnopointoford.erwasmade 

upon it; and the Chair understands that while the clause does contain 

some new legislation in it, yet it does not affect the question as to the 

authority to lease buildings for post-offices of the third class. That 

general law not being affected bythe clause in question, the amendment 

does change existing law in that respect and authorizes payment therefor. Therefore to that extent it changes existing law and does increase 

expenditures, and is clearly subject to the point of order, which is sus· tained. 

Mr. ANDERSON. Then I move an amendmeu~ to include the third-
1885. CONGRESSIONAL· RECORD-HOUSE. 1581 

class offices, where the provision for their lease will reduce expenditures in the amount of rent paid. 

J,Ir. TOWNSHEND. Let the amendment be reported from the desk. 

I do not believe it is in order. 

Mr. ANDERSON. I will not insist upon the amendment. 

Mr. SKINNER, of New York, by unanimous consent, was granted 

le.ave to _print some remarks. 

The CHAlRl\IAN. The amendment is withdrawn. 

The Clerk proceed to read as follows: 

For office furniture1\Ir. IDSCOCK. I desire to call the attention of ihe gentleman in 

charge of this bill, before we pass from this section, to the language in 

the torty-fifth and forty-sixth lines: 

And no lease shall be made for & term exceeding five years. 

That, I think, should be amended to read: 

But & lease may be made for o. term not exceeding five years. 

As it now stands it is a sort of negative way of giving authority. 

Un.der the law as it stands to-day, as I understand it, leases ron not be 

made for more than a year. If you propose to extend this period, why 

not extend it in terms and not leave it a matter of dispute? 

Mr. RYAN. I think that had better be done. 

1\fr. TOWNSHEND. I have no objection. 

1\Ir. illSCOCK. Then I move that the paragraph be so amended. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Strike out, in lines 45 and 46, the words " and no lease shnll be made for & term exceeding five yea.ril" and insert" but & lease may be made for a term not ex- ceeding five years." 

The amendment was agreed to. 

1\Ir. HEWITT, of Alabama. I move to strike out the last word for 

the purpose of asking a question of the gentle;m_an in charge-of-this bill. · I would ·like to ask the gentleman if he has any objection ro inserting· an .amendment that will requir~ the Postmaster-General upon the fail- ure of the Government to comply with its part of a contract for the lease 

of a post-office building to surrender the lease to the party making it. 

I have a constituent of my own who leased a building for post-office 

purposes under a contract that be should be paid quarterly for the use of it. He complied with every condition of the lease upon his part, 

and the Government held that lease for over a year before it ever paid 

him a. cent, and refused to surrender the premises upon demand, notwithstanding the fact that the Government it~elf, or the PostmasterGeneral, after having made the contract in writing to pay quarterly, 

lu1.d not done so, or complied in any way with its part of the contract. 

Now, I should like to know if there is-any objection to inserting in 

the law a requirement on the part of the Postmaster-General where the 

Government fails to eomply with its part of the contract to surrender 

the lease to the lessor. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I see no necessity for the amendment the gentleman from Alabama suggests, and I certainly object to it. The matter under this bill is left entirely discretionary with the PostmasterGeneral, and I have no doubt there will be judicious action on his part. 

Mr. HEWITT, of Alabama .• What I object to is its being left ·discretionary with the P<_>Stmaster-General. I will put the question·tothe 

gentl.emanfrom Mississippi [Mr. MONEY], who is chairman of the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads, whether such an amendment 

ought not to be made; whether the Government ought not to be re- quired, when it fails to pay according to the contract, to surrender the 

lease? 

The pro forma amendment was withdrawn. 

Mr. HISCOCK. For the purpose of having the provision read properly, in viewofthe amendment I suggested and which was accepted, I now ask that the semicolo~ after the word "quarterly," in line 45, be 

stricken out, that the words' '' but no lease shall be made'' shall also be 

stricken out, and that after the word ''term" the word "not" be inserted. With these changes the sentence beginning at line 43 will read 

properly and smoothly. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I have .no objection to these changes being 

made. 

The CHAIRMAN. If there be no objection the verbal amendments 

suggested by the gentleman from New York [?tir. HISCOCK] will be 

made. · 

There was no objection. 

The Clerk read the following paragraph. 

Office of the Second Assistant Postmaster-<kneral: For inland mail transportation, namely: For transP.ortation on railroad routes, $15,265,000; and if' any railroad company shall fall or refuse to tr&nsport the mails, when reqnll'ed by the Post-Office Dep&rtment, upon the. fastest train or trains run upon said roadJ 

said company shall have its pay reduced 50 per cent. of the amount providea bylaw. 

1\Ir. ROWELL. I make the point of ~rder. . 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. The whole proposition has not yet been read 

through. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk has read one paragraph. 

1\Ir. ROWELL. I wish to have the opportunity of making the point 

of order on each paragraph relating to this whole subject down to line 

153. 

The CHAIRMAN. The bill has been read only to line 66. It has 

not·yet been read to line 153. 

Mr. ROWELL. I want to make the point of order now, this matter 

being divided into sections and paragraphs, so that the point shall cover each of the paragraphs. I do not wish to lose the opportunity of making 

the pQint of order on each of the paragraphs. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will treat the whole subject as one paragraph. The various clauses down to line 153 seem all to relate to 

the same subject. It seems to be one matter. . Mr. CANNON. I want to be heard on that. I do not think the first 

paragraph necessarily stands with the ·second. But if it be understood 

that no rights are waived, of course there is no objection to reading a.1l 

the paragraphs relating to the whole !'Ubject. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair understands the gentleman has re- served all points of order on the provisions of the bill down to line 153. 

The Chair directa the Clerk to read down to that point. 

Mr. CLARDY. I desire to offer an amendment to come in after 

line 66. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I rise to a point of order. Until the entire 

proposition is read through I insist that no amendment is in order. I 

The CHAIRMAN. This amendment is offered to come in at the end 

of line 66. The- Chair is of opinion it is in order now if the gentleman 

from 1\fissouri insists upon it. 

Mr. BLOUNT. I ask the gentleman from Missouri to withhold his 

amendment until I can make a request for unanimous consent that all 

points of order may be reserved on a.ll the paragraphs relating to ~ 

compensation until they are read through. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair understands that all points of order on those paragraphs have already been reserved. 

Mr. BLOUNT. I did not understand that they could be reserved in 

that way unless by 1manimous consent. · _ Mr.- WA.RNER,- of Ohio. _.-: It is understood the reservation of. points 

of order covers the whole subject. · _ .. _ -- • 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair has so stated. The Clerk will re- port the amendment proposed by the gentleman from_ Missouri [Mr. 

CLARDY]. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Amend by adding after line 66 : "The Postmaster-General is authorized to pay out of' appropriations for trans- portation on railroad routes for special'niilro&d service between the Union depot in East Sa-int Louis, Til., and the Union depot in S&int Louis, Mo., a sum not ex- cee<Ung the lowest rate which f>rivate individuals, express companies, or others 

may· pay for transportation between said points, but not to exceed for any fiaca.l 

year the sum of$25,000, including allowance fQr depot room and transfer seivice at each terminal." · 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I wi11 say to the gentleman from Missouri that 

that is now the Jaw., and it is not affected by t~ bill. In the last 

Post-Office appropriatiorraetweused langnage-.which makes this a per7 manent law and renders it unnecessary to have it re-enacted. That 

is the law to-day, and will remain the law until repealed; and this 

present bill does not affect it in any way. . 1\Ir. CLARDY. That· was my own opi:irion. Bat this is the identical provision contained in the two bills of the last Congress as well as in the ·bill of the iirst session of this Congress. 1 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Has the gentleman read the language in the 

last Post-Office appropriation act? 1 

Mr. CLARDY. I have read it, and it occurred to me it was not nec- essary this amendment should be offered. I applied, however, to the 

Second Assistant Postmaster-General; and in answer to my question 

he states: 

The appropriation should be made for the Saint Louis bridge the same 88 heretofore. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. That, perhaps, is true, that the approprit.tion 

should be made as heretofore. But the appropriation is embraced in 

the aggregate amount of $15,265,000. It will be paid out of the~ 

gate appropriation for this service. My friend from Missouri will see 

the telegram does not apply to the question of the necessity for this 

amendment. 

1\fr. CLARDY. If that is the construction the committee place upo:ft 

it, and if that is the reason the provision is omitted, I withdraw the 

amendment. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read the remaining paragraphs 

relating to the subject of inland mail tranSportation. 

The Clerk read as follows: · 

That the Postmaster-General is authorized and directed to readjust the com- pensation to be paid for the transportation of the mails on railroad routes upon the condition and at the rates hereinafter mentioned, and which shall take effect 

July} }885; I 

Firsl. That the m&ils shall be carried upon any troin at the request of' the Post- master-<kner&l ; and railroad companies shall provide necessa.ry depot-rooms, with heat and light for the same, shall receive the m&ils from and deliver tho 

mails to the Post-Office Dep&rtment at depots, shall put the mails into and out ol the cars, shall transfer the mails between trains at depots and shall trans- port the superintendent and assistant superintendents of the railway mail 

service and post-office inspectors upon the exhibition of their credentials~ and 

railway postal clerks over the lines upon which they may be assigned to auty2 Second. That the compensation for carrying closed mails in baggage-ca.rsan<l 

for railway post-office service, the minimum car width in every case being 

hereby fixed at eight feet an~ six inches (insid~ meast1fi?ment)i or. its eq~va· lent in floor-space, shall not exceed the :tollowmg rates, name y: For closed 

mails, 5 mills per linear foot of space (inside measurement) per mile run; and 
1582 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 12; 

for two hundred pounds of mail or less the equivalent of six linear inches shall be required, for five hundred pounds one foot, and for each additional five hundred pounds one foot. For railway p(>st-oftice service. at a rate of speed of 

twenty or le miles per boer from terminus to terminus, 5 mills per linear foot 

of space (inside measureinent) per mile run; and for each additional two ~niles 

per hour t.o and including thirty miles per hour one-tenth of a mill, and for each 

additional mile per hour one-tenth of a mill. And the adjustment of space by linear feet for railway post-office ser•ice shall be as follows: For a daily aver- age of from twenty-five to five hundred pounds, not to exceed thirteen feet; 

from fivQ hundred to 1,000 pounds, not to exceed fifteen feet; from 1,000 to 2.000 

pounds, notto·exceedtwenty-fivefeet; from 2,000to 4,000 pounds, not to exceed 

forty feet; from 4,000 to 5,000 pounds, not to exceed forty-five feet; for 6,000 

pounds, fifty feet; 8,000 pounds, sixty feet; the weight to be ascertained by a weighing of not Iess than twenty-eight consecutive days; and in nll railway post-offices the load shall not exceed double the greatest weight for the respective lengths as herein provided ; and for any gross weight, if carried on two or more trains daily, the space may be subdivided upon the basis of amounts of space for lower weights as the nature of the service may require; and no additional space shall be required or paid for unless found to be necessary: Provided, 

ThAt the pay for the transportation of mail& upon any railroad route for .six round trips per week shall not be less than S35 per mile per annum ; and at any po t-office contiguous to a railroad route, nnd where;t(rains donotma"ke regular 

stops, the Postmaster-General may require that the mails shall be exchanged directly with the railway post-office. at the nearest available ·point upon the 

track; and in the case of all special mail.trains no more time shall be consumed at terminal points in transferring mails between di1ferent lines of railroads at such terminal points than is absolutely necessary for such purpose, and there 

shall be no delay in departure of any special mail-train after receiving the~il 

from the connectin~ line than is absolutely necessary; and at post-offices located not more than one:fourth of a mile from roilroad stations railroad companies shall also provide for carrying the mails as often as may be necessary between 

such post-offices and railroad stations; but the Postmaster-General may pro- vide mail·messenger or contract service at terminals: Provided further, That 

railroad companies whose railroads were constructed in whole orin part by land 

grant made by Congress, on the condition that the mails should be transported over their roads at such price as Congress should by law direct, and the railroad 

companies incorporated under the provisions of an act entitled "An act to aid in the constru~tion of a railroad and telegraph line from the 'Missouri River to the Pacific Ocean, and to secure to· the Government the use of the same for 

postal, military, and other purposes," approved Jnly 1,1862, shall hereafter re- ceive for the transportation of the mails over their respective railroads only 

80 per cent. of the compensation authorized by this act; and the said. act ap- proved July 1, 1862, and all acts amendatory thereof, are hereby amended to con- form to the foregoing pro,-isions: but the right of the United States to further 

amend said act, or any act amendatory thereof, is expressly reserved. All acts and parts of :wts inconsistent or in con.ftict with the provisions of this act are hereby repealed. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Before further action is taken I desire to have 

action on some amendments su&,aoested by the committee in order to 

perfect the text of the bill. 

M.r. ROWELL. Mr. Chairman, I suppose that the point of order 

ought to be made before the amendments are acted on. . ?t!r. TOWNSHEND. Notuntilwehaveperfected thetextofthebill. 

?t!r. ROWELL. I do not so understand. 

The CHAIR?f!AN. The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. TOWNSHEND] 

in charge of the bill desires to move some amendments to the text before the point of order is entertained by the Chair. That can only be 

done by unanimous consent; from the fact that, pending the point of 

order, the section i8 not before the committee for amendment. But it can be done by unanimous consent. 

Mr. BLOUNT. a.nd Mr. ROWELL. I object. . Mr. BLOUNT. Mr. Chairman, I desire to raise the qnestionoforder on these two paragra~hs. 

Mr. ROWELI.. Mr. Chairmun, I want to understand who has made 

the point of order. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair does not Ullderstand that any point 

of order has yet been made. The gentleman from Georgia. [Mr. 

BLOUNT] now states that he desires to make a point of order on these 

two paragraphs, and thegentlemanfromlllinois (Mr. ROWELL] stated a while ago that he thought the point of order ought to be made, but 

did not-state what the point was. Mr. ROWELL. I said that I reserved the point of order, and I rise 

now-to state. it. · 

The CHA.IRMAN. The Chair understood the gentleman to say that 

he desired to reserve the point of order on the parts of the bill that had 

not been read, but of course the gentleman did not in that way obtain 

any right to the floor. · Mr. ROWELL. I understood the Chair to say that I would be rec- ognized for that purpose when the point of order could be raised, and 

I desire now to be heard. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair understood the gentleman to reserve all points of order on that portion of bill, but it was not then before 

the committee, and the point of order could not be entertained until 

the paragraph had been read. The Chair did not know what point of 

order the gentleman desired to make. 

Mr. ROWELL. Then I misunderstood the Chair. I now claim the 

l!r. BLOUNT. If I had not been interrupted the Chair would have 

understood it, because I was presenting the point of order. My po~t 

is that this provision changes existing law and does not retrench expenditures, and that the change is proposed to be made upon an appropriation bill. 

The CHAIRMAN. Does the point of order apply to all these clauses? 

Mr. BLOUNT. It applies to all that relates to changing the mode 

of paying the railroads for the transportation of the mails-the whole 

scheme. I will read a part of clause 3 of Rule XXI: 

Nor shall any provision in any such bill, or amendment thereto1 changing 

existing law be in order, except such as, being germane to the sUbJect-matter 

of the bill, shall retrench expenditures by the reduction of the number and sal- ary of the officers of the United States, by the reduction of the compensation 

of any person paid out of the Treasury of the United States, or by the reduction 

of amounts of money covered by the bill: Provided, That it shall be in order 

further to amend snch bill upon the report of the committee having juri diction 

of the 1mbject-matter of such amendment, which amendment, being germane to the subject-matter of the bill, shall retrench expenditures. 

Now, :Mr. Chairman, in order that gentlemen may appreciate the 

force of this point of order, it becomes necessary to state the present 

law as to the mode of compensating railroads for transporting the mails. 

The provision in the act of 1873 is in the following language: 

On routes ~rrying their whole length an a•erage weight of mails pex:_ day ot 

200 pounds, $50; 500 pounds, Si5; 1,000 pounds, SLOO; 1,500 pounds, $L25; 2,000 

pounds, $150; 3,500 pounds, l$175; 5,000pounds,$200; and$25additionalforevery 

additional 2,000 pounds; the average weight to be ascertained, &c. 

This act was amended in 1876 by reducing these rates 10 per cent., 

and later on, in 1878, by a 5 per cent. additional reduction. 

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. 

The committee rose informally; and Mr. 1\IONEY having taken the 

chair as Speaker p1·o tempore, a message from the Senate, by :Mr. McCooK, its Secretary, announced that the Senate insisted upon its amendments to the bill (H. R. 8039) making appropriations to provide for 

the expenses of the goYernment of the District of Columbia for the 

fiscal year ending June30, 1886, and for other purposes, disagreed to by 

the House of Represent.<ttives, agreed to the conference asked by the 

House on the disagreeing votes of t,he two Houses thereon, and bad appointed as ronferees on the part of the Senate M:r. PLUMB, Mr. DAWES, 

and lffr. CoCKRELL. 

The message further announced that the Sena~ had agreed to the 

amendments of the House of Representatives to the joint-resolution 

(S. R. 92) authorizing and requiring the Secretary of War to deliver to 

the Eighth New York Heavy Artillery Association the regimental col- ors which belonged to said artillery aud which were now in the custody 

of the Secretary of War. 

The mes.'iage further annoimced that the Senate had passed a bill (S. 

2571) to authorize the Merchants' National Bank. of Little Rock, Ark., 

to change its name to the First National Bank. of Little Rock. 

The message further announced that the Senate had passed a bill (S. 

R. 635) to permit Thomas 0. Osborn, minister resident and consul~ 

general of the United States at Buenos Ayres, to receive a symbolic 

shield from the Argentine Republic. 

The messa~e further announced that the Senate had passed a. joint 

resolution (S. R~ 121) to authorize the return to the Government of 

Great Britain of the Arctic relief steamer Alert. 

The message further announced that the Senate had passed a joint 

resolution (S. R. 122) authorizing the Secretary of War to loan twelve 

hospiW tents and outfits to the American Society of the Red Cross for use in New Orleans. 

POST-QFFIOE .APPROPRIATION BILL. 

The committee resumed its session and continued the consideration 

of the Post-Office appropriation bill 

Mr. BLOUNT. Recurring to the ad of 1873 it appears by calculation that for 200 pounds $5() is allowed, making the rate $25 per hundred pounds; on 500 pounds additional, $15 per hundred; .on a thousand pounds additional, $10 per hundred; on 1, 500 pounds additional, 

eight dollars and a fraction per hundred; on 2,000 pounds additional, 

$7.50 per hundred; on ~,500 pounds additional, $5 per hundred; on 5,000 pounds additional, $4.50 per httndred. 

The Clerk has just read the provision of this bill as to the mode of 

compensation., but as it is short I will again read it: 

For railway post-office service, at a rate of speed of twenty or less mil.es per hour from terminus to terminns, 5 mills per linearfootofspace (inside measure- ment) per mile run ; and for each additional two miles per hour to and including 

thirty miles per hour one-tenth of a mill, and for ea{!h additional mile per hour 

one-tenth of a mill. 

right to make the point of order. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is of opinion that it is unnecessary for 

Mr. BLOUNT. Mr. Chairman, I desire to make a point of order on the gentleman to show that the provision of the bill is a. change of ex- these two paragraphs. . isting law. 

TheCHAIRMAN. Thegentleman:fromGeorgi.a(l\fr.BLOUNT]rises Mr. BLOUNT. l\Iyobjectwas to show not alone that it change<l 

to make a point of orderwhichhewillstate; afterwhich the Chair will existing law-- . 

hear the gentleman from Dlinois [Mr. RowELL]. The CHAIRAIAN. The Chair will takeitforgranted that it changes 

lffr. BLOUNT. I wish to call attention to a provision contained in existing law without further reading from the provisions of the law or Rule XXI-- the bill. 

The CH.A.IR.M:A.N. The gentleman "\\ill please· make his point of I l'tlr. BLOUNT. The Chair does not apprehend my purpose in readorder, and argue it afterward. The Chair does not yet nnderstand what ing. I have no donbt that any man would be with me on the proposithe point is. tion that this bill changes existing law.· I am not addressing myself 
1885. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1583 

to that point at all. The object I had in reading the old law and the 

prvposition of this bill wM to show that it does not appear from the 

bill itself that there is any retrenchment of expenditures. If the 

Chair is with me on this point I have nothing more to say. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is very glad to hear the gentleman, 

but supposed he was reading the bill to show that it differed from the 

existing law. 

Mr. BLOUNT. I had that purpose, but it was subordinate to my 

other purpose to show that it does not appear from a comparison of these 

acts there is any reduction. But I will not take up further time of the 

Chair or of the committee in reading the provisions of the bill; I take 

it that its terms are understood. 

Now the rule declares that a provision changing existing law must, 

to be in order, retrench expenditures in one of several ways, eitherBy the reduction of the number or !mlarles of the officers of the United StatesIt is clear there is no proposition of that sort hereof~~etl.U;t~~d~~~~ the compensation of any person paid out of the Treasury 

I think it equally clear that it does not appear that there is any re- duction in this respectOr by the reduction of amounts of money covered by the bill. 

There is nothing in tlie term of the bill making a reduction in this 

respect. The pronso added to the rule is in this language : 

Provided, That it shall be in order further to amend such bill upon the report of the committee having jurisdiction of the subject matter of such amendment, which amendment, being germane to the subject-matter of the bill, shall re- trench expenditures. 

Now, I do not understand that the Committee on the Post-Office and 

Post-Roads! having charge of this subject, has o1fered this proposition. 

But if it were so, still there is no retrenchment of expenditures appearing on the face of the bill, but. on the contrary it is a debatable question whether there will be under this proposition any reduction of ex- pense. It seems to me, reading the percentages of decrease under the 

old law in connection with the terms of this bill, without going into 

details, that this provision certainly amounts to an increase of expenditures. One gentleman argues, and very properly perhaps, that it will- increase expenditures; another argues that it will decrease expenditures. It is a matter of calculation. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Nobody will say that the provision of the bill as we now propose it will increase expenditures. 

1t1r. BLOUNT. It was onlytheotherdaywhen my friend from Illinois [:Jit!r. TOWNSHE11.1)] and my friend from Michigan [Mr. HORR] were disputing each other's calculations as to the compensation of one of these railroads. 

M:r. TOWNSHEND. Yes; on one line. . Mr. BLOUNT. And that one line is a part of the calculation in as- certaining the firuil result. If my friend from Illinois should be mistaken as to the amount to be paid to that one road--

1\fr. TOWNSHEND. I was not mistaken. 

Ur. llLOUNT. . I trust my friend will not interrupt_ me. · I will take 

back any allusion to him, and will suppose that some other gentleman 

has made a calcnlation as to the effect on a given line of railroad and 

ascertained to his satisfaction that the figures showed on that line an increase, while someother gentleman upon another calculation has satisfied himself to the contrary. ·In order for the Chair to ascertain whether or not the general result is to retrench expenditures it is incumbent on the Chair to make a calculation as to every line of railroad. Now, I 

submit that no gentleman who has ever examined the rules, or sat under 

their operation in this Honse, will undertake to say that the Chair was ever charged with any such duty.. It must appear from the terms of 

the bill, as a legitimate and logical result, not as a mere matter of calculation to be made by this and that member of the committee, that 

there is a reduction. It must affirmatively appear that the provision 

does retrench expenditures, and if it does so arpear the proposition 

must have come from a committee charged with the subject-matter, 

which is not the case here. 

l\Ir. Chairman, this question was ruled on first by Mr. Kerr, when 

Speaker of this Honse; and I am apprised that the present occupant of 

the chair is familiar with that ruling, having been present at the time 

it was made, having frequently referred to it since, and having had oc- casion to rule on this very question several times. I shall not, therefore, take up time in citing rulings of the present occupant of the chair or any other presiding officer of this House, but will conclude my re- marks. 

The CHAffi.MAN. The gentleman from illinois [Mr. RoWELL] desires to state a point of order, and the Chair will hear him. 

Mr. ROWELL. Mr. Chairman, the point I deo-ired to submit .is substantially the same as that submitted by the gentleman from Georgia 

[Mr. BLOUNT], with the additional remark that this bill on its face 

shows possibilities, not of diminished expense, but of largely increased 

expense. This provision for compensating railroads for carrying the 

mails goes upon the theory that weight, space, frequency, and speed are 

all to enter into the determination of the compensation. 

The old law goes upon the theory that weight is to be considered ex- cept in C:lS(' where space to the extent of a full car is required. But 

speed does not enter into the computation at all except in certain instances. 

Now, there are possibilities of increased expenditures in this bill beyond what the oommittee has dreamed of, and which would satisfy the 

gentleman from Colorado [Mr. BELFORD] in his desire to open the doors 

of the Treastuy. This bill provides for increased compensation where 

the frequency of service is increased without any necessary additional 

expense to a railroad company, because on the roads where a large weight 

of mail is carried, where it requires two or three cars for the aecomnw- dation of the mails if they .are all carried on one train, it ia to the destruction of it as a passenger tra.in. Where divided up into three trains 

it is not only for the accommodation of the people but for the accom- modation of the railroad company _and diminution of its expense. But 

in the large number of railroads in the United States, where two passenger trains are run each day each way, there is but a single mail. 

This bill provides, although it is a light mail, that mail may be divided 

and be required to be carried on the two trains. When that is done 

there comes an immediate doubling-up of expense, and it shows it on the face of the bill. With three-fourths of the railroad companies in 

the United States pressing for such service and daily working up public 

sentiment all along the lines of these roads to press for that enhanced 

service, without an additional dollar of expenses to the· rnilroad com- panies, and with the power to enhance it contained in the bill, we have 

doubling-up of compensation to be paid to railroad companies in threefourths of the railroads of the United States. 

.Again, this bill provides for enhanced compensation according to increased speed. Not because it costs the railroad companies any more, 

for those trains which run twenty-two, twenty-four, and thirty miles 

per hour ordinarily are so run to accommodate the passenger traffic and 

the connections of the roads, and not to accom,rnodate the mails. Where. they are run specially for the accommodation of the mails we have special 

trains. But here is a gratuity in this bill provided for railroad companies 

who could not diminish the speed of their trains if theywould andretain their passenger traffic. . So for frequency required which acoommodates the company, for increased speed, and that the company must contain to retain its business, we are providing a .gratuity without exacting of the railroad company 

any additional expen...~ for carrying the mails. 

But if any gentleman will take the trouble to figure and take up 

these roads which car_ry two and three mails a day under the compensation provided in this bill, he will find from one-third to double the 

present cost will come out of the Treasury. .And if he will take the railroads which now run two passenger trains each way daily, but carry . one mail, whichdividethatmailand carryiton twopassengertrains, he 

will find ago in under the rating of this bill a largely increased expense. 

It is the possibility shown upon _the fa~ of the bill to take money out 

of the Treasury to pay railroad companies I object to, and it is for that reason I prefer to see this section go out on a point of order. 

1t1r. TOWNSHEND. :Jitlr. Chairman, ifthispropositionwouldresult 

in increasing the compensation for railway mail tranaportation, every one in this House who is acquainted with my colleague on the subcommittee, the gentleman from Indiana [:Jitfr. HoLMAN], and myself, 

would say we would be the two last membet'S of Congress in, favor of 

it. I say now if I could be convinced this scheme would result in increasing the enormous, unjust, and extravagant appropriations made 

for the railroad service of the country, I would go as far us he who goes 

farthest in denouncing and seeking to defeat this propositi~n. 

At the last session of Congress iny attention was called to this, and , I feared it might result in an increase rather than in a diminution of 

the expenditures for that service. But since then I have had opportunities of consulting with those who know far more about this service 

than myself-who know far more about this service in my judgment 

than any one who holds a seat upon this floor-and they have con- vinced me beyond all possibility of doubt this proposition will -result, as it stands in the bill, in saving to the Government over one million 

and a half of money a year. .And in view of the great saving we are convinced will be accomplished by this proposition the Committee on Appropriations have reduced the amount of the estimates $1,000,000. 

Now, as to the facts. Congress in 1883, authorized the appointment 

of a commission to consider this question and ascerlain. what would be 

the best method for compensating railroads and also do justice to the 

Go.vernment. In pursuance of that law three of the best experts which 

could be found in the Post-Office Departll).ent were selected. One Mr. 

Elmer, the late Second Assistant Postmaster-General; another, Col.W. 

B. Thompson, late chief of :railway mail transportation service, and pressent Second Assistant Postmaster-General; and the third a gentleman 

by the name of Slater. These three gentlemen were furnished with 

clerks and all the means of thorough investigation. They had at their 

command the best experts in the Department and summoned to their 

aid the best experts in the country. They obtained information from 

every source open to them. . Thesemen labored on this proposition for a period of eight months, 

and they labored patiently, industriously, conscientiously, and I believe most intelligently. They reached the conclusion that the saving 

to the Government would be at least $1,600,000 if the proposition now presented in the shape it is here presented in this bill should be adopted. 
1584 <JONGRESSIONAL REOORD-HOUSE. . FEBRUARY 12, 

The present Postmaster-General in his annual report indorses the I want to make one further point. As I understand we are not to 

findings of this commission and recommends the adoption of this pro- be confined to the language of the bill for proof of economy. I hold in 

vision as the law. Now, what amazes me is to find, after so much time my hand the report of the Second Assistant Postmaster-Genernl. He 

has been bestowed upon this subject, after so much patient labor and states on page 105 that under the present system more than half a mill· 

investigation on the part of experts and intelligent men acquainted ion dollars of t.he public money is unnecessarily expended every year. 

with the subject which they have been investigating, that there is so I hold also in my hand a report made · by Mr. Lyman, the Second 

much wisdom in some of the gentlemen on this floor that they are able Assistant Postmaster-General, to the Committee on the Post-Office .and 

to sit down during a few hours of a few evenings, notwithstanding Post-Roa.ds, in which this language occurs: 

their other engagements, and make such calculations and investiga- Under the plan proposed compensation would be made according to the 

tions as enable them., upon a multitude of matters before the House, to nmount and character of the service rendered in each case, and the resultdiscover that all of the experience and all of the investigation and all Mark the languageof the knowledge and all of the information of these experts.are worth would pc to decrease the cost of transportation by railroad per annum ~U,687,980. nothing, and that they-know better than those who have devoted so much labor and time to the consideration of the question; And he further says: 

Mr. Chairman, wherein is the economy shown·upon the face of the Even if we relieve railroads of what is known as side-service or side-messeDproposition now before us? In the first plaee, under the present law ger service we should still save to the Government $1,000,000 a year. 

the closed mail service of thtl Government, or what is known as the Mr. BLOUNT. Will the gentleman permit me to ask him a ques-

'' sealed pouches,'' are carried in baggage·cars, to which no more atten- tion? . tion is paid than to an ordinary piece of baggage. Under the presmt 1\Ir. TOWNSHEND. I should like my friend to wait till I get 

law we are paying as much for carrying that mail as we do .or carty- through. 

ing the mails upon the splendid postal ears, furnished at lavish ex- I say to you gentlemen if you succeed in defeating this proposition 

pense ~d all ·of the conveniences, comforts, and appliances that the you will practically go band in hand with the railroads in obtaining 

postal cars are :fitted up with, and on which our postal agents travel. for them from a million to a million and a half of dollars more money 

What do we do here by this provision? We simply chang~ the rate of from the Government than they would obtain if this proposition is 

compensationfortheclosedmail byreducingittoone-halfoftheamount . adopted. I do not wish to ~gue the question further than to say I am allowed for mails carried on postal c:1.rs furnished with agents, 1ight, convinced this proposition will reduce the expenditures . . fuel, and other oomforts and conveniences. We make them carry the Mr. HoLMAN and 1\Ir. HoRR rose. closed pouches or bags of mail at about the same rate of compensation The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. HoRR] 

they receive fQr carrying ordinary baggage, and they certainly ought desire to sustain the point of order? 

not to receive more. Itinvolves nomoreexpenseupon them, and they Mr. HORR. I desire to sustain it. The gentleman from Illinois 

furnish no better facilities. My friend from Georgia [Mr. BLOUNT] [Mr. TowNSHEND] has just been opposing it. 

and my colleague from ·Illinois (Mr; ·ROWELL] want us to return -to the The CHAillMAN. ·The Chair has heard two arguments on that side. 

old law, and ·pay as-much for-earryingthe closed bags as-for the con-' He will now-recognize the gentleman from Indiana. [Mr. HOLMAN.] 

veyance of the mail on postal cars, :fitted up, as I have said, with every Mr. HOLMAN. I intend. to speak but for a moment on this:quescomfort and all of the paraphernalia of the present postal system of the. tion, as it is confined to a single point. It is conceded the provision of 

country. That, I claim, is one of the great savings proposed in this this bill changes the law. There is no doubt about that. The on1y 

bill. That is where hundreds of thousands of dollars are saved to question is, does it retrench expenditures? If it does retrench expendthe Government. itures, that fact can be shown but by two substantive facts or two that 

That mail is· treated like baggage and carried like baggage; wherein, I know of. The only question is whether those facts can be sufficiently 

therefore, lies the justice of demanding that the Government shall pay shown or not. 

the same terms that passengers pay for all of the luxurious accommo- In the :first place this provision does itself reduce the amount of the 

dations now supplied to the traveling public? appropriation. The appropriation made by the present law is some- There is another saving towhicblwishto call attention. This prop- · thing over $16,000,00~and the estimates of appropriation for the presosition dispenses with the payment for postal ears, which aggregates ent year are $17,571,000. lfow, that the provision reduces the amount 

about $1,625,000 pe:t: annum. Take for instance this: We appropriated to· be appropriated will be readily conceded. · . for the current year $1; 600,000 to pay for postal-car service. ' This bill Mr. BLOUNT. Will my friend from Indiana allow me a question? 

dispenses with that altogether. Thttt item is. stricken from the bill, M:r. HOL1tiAN. Certainly. 

and we do not appropriate a dollar for postal ears; and why? Been use :Mr. BLOUNT. I wish to ask the gentleman if it does not happen 

the new scheme, as you are pleased to term it, does away with the neces- almost annually that the estimate of the cost of the railway-mail service 

sity for it; in other words, in making up the great aggregate of what is as made by the Committee on Appropriations, and as enacted into law 

needed for the working of the postal-mail service, it is determined by by the two Houses falls short of the actual results? . these gentlemen that no extra allowance shall be made for postal cars. M:r. HOLMAN. I concede that. · · Now, then, thereis asaving-inthisitem ofover$1,~00 000. What fur- Mr. BLOUNT. Allow me to proceed a step further. With great 

ther saving do we accomplish? In the bill passed at the last session of deference to my friend's opinion, I ask him if ihat be true can he argue 

Congress. we appropriated $250,000 for special mail facilities upon cer- thap the :figures he puts _in this bill are a sequence of the language he 

tain railroads. We have stricken that item out of the present bill. uses changing the law? 

In my judgment, there is no n~ity for qne· dollar being appro- Mr. HOLMAN. :rhat is just what I am coming to. I stated as my 

priatec:tfor special mail facilities. Why? Because one of the features first proposition that the provision itself reduced the amount of the apofthis new scheme is to furn.isn sufficient inducements to the railroads propriation some $2,000,000. 

toquickentheir time and supply fast-mail facilitieswithoutextra com.. Mr. BINGHAM. Simply on its faee. 

}>ensation .or special appropriation for it. That item, therefore, was Mr. HOLMAN. Upon its face it Q,oes. But I do not regard that as stricken out. sufficient. I freely concede-the Chair has so intimated a hundred 

What further appears? If you glance over the rate of compensation times-that if that be sufficient, all you have to do is simply to reduce 

paid to the railroads of this country, you will find that the minimum the amou.nt and attach the provision coupled with that amount. On 

amount paid to any road does not fall below $42.75 except in some its face there is a reduction of expenditure; but at the same time it will 

half dozen instances. Now there are 1,600 railroads in the'country, be readily seen that taking the whole thing together, the amount indiand the majority of them, I believe-and I speak now in general terms- cated, the sum named, may not be the true sum. are the small roads, to which we are now paying $42.75 a mile per an- J.fr. DIBBLE. Will the gentleman yield to me for a question? num. We by an amendment I shall offer to this bill reduce the amount Mr. HOLl\fAN. For a question, certainly. 

of compensation, or rather fix the amount of the minimum limit of Mr. DIBBLE. It is this: Suppose that every road which is now run- $40amile,saving to theGovernment$2.75·permileupon most of these ning at a .certain rate under this new act should increase its speed five 

roads. The bill in its present shape :fixes the m.jnimum limit at. $35 miles an hour, would not that produce an increased expenditure which 

per mile, which is a saving of $7.75 per mile; but in order to P!Otect would do away with all your calculations? 

these roads we have established the limit at $40 a mile. Mr. HOLMAN. It would not do away with all the calculations. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, I think we have witnessed. rather a singular state Those are elements entering into the cost. 

of affairs in this House. My friend from Michigan [Mr. Hoxx], if the Mr. DIBBLE. Does not that increase your present estimate? 

amendments we have reported from the committee, but which have Mr. HOLl\IAN. Not at all. That is one of the elements you have 

not yet been insetted in the bill, are adopted, says those amendments. to consider in a...C~Certaining the amount. 

will cause the compensation to railroads to fall far below the present I trust I will have the ear of the Chair for a. moment. I am suggestlaw, and in reducing the compensation will do railroads great injustice. ing that while this reduces the amount of the approprintion, that 

On the other hand, my friend from Georgia (Mr. BLOUNT), who I know perhaps is not sufficient. Now, what additi~nal evidence would be 

is an economist and who desires to bring about economy,. and who, if requisite to show that. the plan proposed as it stands now in the bill he believed as I do about this proposition, would be the first on the without any amendment. has the effect of retrenching expenditures 1 

11oor to advocate it, is operating to defeat it from an entirely different What else ean be relied upon with the exception of the official statestandpoint-from the belief in his mind that the proposition will re- ment? · I submit that. the argument of the gentleman as to the probsult in increasing the aggregate in the appropriation. able result.<J amounts to nothing upon a question like this, where you 
1885. ·coNGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1585 

have to lay down different premises ~m ~hich to draw your co~ch~­

srons. That, I say, amounts to nothing ill such a case, because 1t 1S 

purely argumentative, ·and the reduction or retrenchment of expenditures must be a fact established by some statement that does not depend 

npo)i a mere deduction. Now, Mr. Chairman, the only additional fact 

that (!an be presented showing that this is really a retrenchment of ex- penditures is the official statement.. That statement. i~ embodied in 

quite a number of documents, but ill no other place 1s 1t presented so· tangibly or concisely as in a communication addressed to the chairman 

of the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads last session by the 

Post-Office Department. The communication was dated February 14, 

1884, and was signed by the Second Assistant Postill:l.Ster-General, one of the commission appointed by Congress to inquire into this service 

and report some plan to adjust and regulate the transportation of the 

mails. The language of that official statement is as follows: 

Under the plan proposed, compensation would be made according to the amount and character of the service rendered in each case, and the resu It would be to decrease the costoftransportation .by railroad perannum$1.,687,980. From this deduct the cost of delivery of mails to the offices recommended by the com- mittee, $687,980; net saving per annum, Sl,OOO,QOO. 

Mr. BINGHAM. Will the gentleman permit me to ask him a question? -

Mr. HOLMAN. Wait a moment. Allow me to complete my sen- tence. 

Mr. BINGHAM. I merely want to knowthe gentleman'sown position on this bill. That is all. 

Mr. HOLMAN. Now, 1.\llr. Chairman, computation by figures for the 

purpose of showing a certain result is a fact. It may be what is called a verbal fact, but still it is a fact. The official statement before the 

Chair and before the House is that the plans proposed by this commission and put into this bill would retrench expenditures to the am~mnt 

of a million dollars per annum. Mr. ~IONEY. Six hundred and eighty-seven thousand dollars. 

~- HO~IAN. No; a million dollars. 

Mr. MONEY. But the provision which has been cut out of the bill 

reduces the saving to $687,000. 

Mr. HOLMAN. But we have cut that out. That would still further increase the expenditure. I am now taking this official statement. It is proposed by this Committee on Appropriations, instead of 

taking the plan which would reduce the cost a million dollars, to re- duce that amount 20 per cent.; that is, to reduce the first element in 

the cost from 5 mills down to 4 mills, which is a. reduction of 20 per 

cent. . Now, I have this to say, in addition to what I have said already, that 

if an official statement as to the results of a proposed amendment of the 

law, coupled with an actual reduction of the appropriation, is sufficient 

to show a retrenchment of expenditure, then a retrenchment to the ex- tent of a million dollars and 20 per cent. more is shown by the amendment now submitted. I admit that the question is not free of doubt. 

I think no questionoftbe kind can everbeentirelyfreeofdoubt. But 

it does seem to me (and I have urged this view upon former occasions) 

that upon a question of expenditure, inasmuch as the Departments of 

the Government make their estimates and Congress acts upon those estimates and has a-cted. upon them for a hundred years, as the basis for 

legislation a.s to public expenditures-in view of that fact it does seem to me that the official statement may be taken into account in determining the question whether a given provision oflaw does or does not 

retrench expenditures. 

Mr. BLOUNT. j\{r. Chairman, I rise to a parliamentary inquiry. 

Mr. BINGHAM. I want to ask the gentleman from Indiana a question. 

MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT. 

The committee rose informally; and Mr. 1\Io:YEY having taken the 

chair as Speaker pro tempore, a message in writing from the President 

of the United States, by Mr. PRUDEN, one of his secretaries, informed 

the House that the President had approved and signed ·a bill·andjoint 

resolutions of the following titles: 

An act (H. R. 7577) making appropriations for the support of the 

Military Academy for the fiscal year ending J nne 30, 1886, and for 

other purposes; 

Joint resolution (H. Res. 323) for the printing of the eulogies delivered in Congress upon the late William A Duncan; and 

Joint resolution (H. Res. 327) providing for printing the eulogies delivered in Congress upon the late John H. Evins, late a Representative in the Forty-eighth Congress from the State of South Carolina. 

POST-OFFICE APPROPRIATION BILL. 

The Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union resumed 

its se...c;sion. 

Mr. BLOUNT. I simply·want to call attention to the fact that this same provision is contained in another bill pending in the House-a bill 

reported from the-Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads. 

Mr. HORR. As •I understand this question of order it embraces but 

one point. The fact that the provision in this bill changes the law is 

of course admitted by every one. This provision is certainly out of order 

XVI-100 

unless upon its face yon can ascertain that it reduces expenses. Now, 

if the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HOL1\:IAN] will give me his attention I wish to read what he said upon this point on the day before yesterday: 

But the plan is strongly recommended. It is recommended by the superin- tendent· of railway-mail transportation, and by this commission it is recom- mended-n. commission appointed under tlle authority of Congress-a. commission of very competent gentlemen. · 

Now m..'ll'k this language: 

And yet I am compelled to say for myself that I do not believe it can be stated 

with reasonable certainty what will be the cost tmtil the effect of the poposition shall be determined by actual experience. 

That, j\fr. Chairman, was wisely said. Why, sir, this bill as originally framed by my friend from · illinois [Mr. TOWNSHEND] and the 

gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HOLl\IAN] provided for5millsperlinear 

.tbot. The commission that they talked so much about agreed upon 5 

mills per linear foot. Let the gentleman tell me how he and his colleague on the COillffiittee happened to take water on this proposition for 

5 mills and change it to 4 mills. You did it because I. demonstrated ·to the subcommittee that in all proba,bility it would increase the pay 

of the railroad companies. • Now, Mr. Chairman, no man can tell whether the proposition as now pending will increase or decrea.se the aggregate cost of this service. I 

defy any one here to tell me how many roads under this plan will get more than they at present receive and how many less. I 'do know that 

the compensation of the small roads which now get only a small portion of the money-$42. 75 a mile up to $60-by this rule will be decreased. I do know 1;;bat the compensation of a large number ofroads 

Iunning from New York city, carrying frequent and heavy mails, will 

even under the 4-mill rate be largely increased. 

Is there any use in ~cussing this question when upon the very face 

of the provision it is utterly impossible to tell what will be the cost of 

this service under that provision? It can not come within the rule. 

What is the use of undertaking by our rules to exclude legislation on 

appropriation bills if we can admit a provision of this kind, where even the experts themselves do not agree as to the result? 

Mr. TILLMAN. The probabilities are that it will result in an increase, because there is a premium offered for speed to the large roads 

that can make additional speed, and also a premium for frequency. 

lli. HORR. Undoubtedly there is a large discretionary power under 

this provision; and that is what the gentleman from Indiana meant 

when he said that no man could tell what the result would be until the 

experiment should be tried, because nobody can tell how many trains 

will be permitted to run; nobody can tell to what extent the roads will 

increase their speed. It is utterly impossible to get at any definite re- sult at this time. Therefore I say the point of order is well taken. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair has heard gentlemen on both sides, 

and is ready to decide the point of order. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. One word in reply to the last point made by 

the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. BLOUNT]. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair does not desire to hear any argument on that subject. 

l'rlr. ADAMS, of illinois. Before the Chair gives his decision I desire to ask a question. 1 All this debate has been upon the entire provision. If the Chair should overrule4he point of order, then I should 

desire to make a point of order as to a particular part of t~e provision 

to which the argument thus far made does not directly apply. I desire to reserve that right in case the point of order should be overruled. 

The argument up to this time has applied to the entire paragraph, yet 

it was clearly understood that points of order were reserved not only on every distinct paragraph but on every part of a paragraph. 

Mr. BAYNE. I submit that for the purpose of expediting the public 

business all points of order should be made and settled now. I can see the drift of affairs here. I want these points made and decided so that we may get through with the public business. If there is any 

point to be made, I ask that it be made now and I ask a proper decision ft·om the Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would prefer to hear the point of order 

now. Mr. ADAMS, of Illinois. I desire to make the point thattheclause 

beginning in line 123 with the words '' and in case of all special mail 

trains'' down to the word ''necessary,'' inline129, is subjeettoapoint 

of order under the third clause of Rule XXI, inasmuch as it changes 

existing law and does not 1·etrench expenditures in any of the three 

ways indicated by that rule. . ~.TOWNSHEND. The proposition must be taken as a wholeyou can not single out a particular line. . . 1\Ir. ADAMS, of Illinois. That is exactly what we reserved the nght 

to do. · 

. Mr. CANNON. I ask the point of order should run, and therefore I 

make it, to the whole of the second paragraph, commencing in line 83 

and closing with line 153. · 

The CHAIRMAN. The same point of order has been made by the 

gentleman from Georgia. · 

Mr. CANNON. I do not desire to detain the Chair further than to 
1586 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 12, 

state that as I read Rule XXI, this being a change of la'Vf it must re- trench expenditure, first by reduction of the number or salary of of-

:fioers-and that this does not pretend· to doj second, by reduction of 

the compensation of any person paid out ofthe Treasury of the United 

States. There is where the claim comes in, and I deny it. 

The gentleman from Indiana has made the only plausible argument, 

if it can be called plausible, against the point of order. He says you are remitted to the opinion of a bureau officer of the Governmentthat is, the Speaker is-whether or not a proposition is in order. I 

could play off against him the Postmaster-General lately in charge. 

Mr. Gresham expr~ly refused to recommend this. 

Jt1r. TOWNSHEND. The gentleman is mistaken. He is not able 

to put his finger on a line of Mr. Gresham's to that effect. 

Mr. CANNON. I am stating what the fact is. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. You can not show a line. 

Mr. CANNON. He never recommended it, for the reason it would 

increase expenses. · 

lli. TOWNSHEND. Let me cotrect the gentleman. If he will read 

Mr. Gresham's report he will :find that he says that he does not recom- mend it because he did not study it. "Mr. CANNON. I only wish to say a word in conclusion. There is 

only one safe construction to this rule, and that is, where new legislation is proposed it must clearly appear on ita face to the eye of the 

Speaker and to the Committee of the Whole it does retrench expenditure in one of the three ways mentioned in the rule. Otherwise you are at sea and any and all legislation is proper on appropriation bills. 

Thesurm.ises of any clerk or head of bu:reauor any other person amount 

to nothing. • . Mr. ADAMS, of Illinois. I thought my method of stating this point 

of order was in the interest of the expedition of public bru.inuss, because we can not assume the Chair is going to sustain or overrule the point 

of order. If the Chair does sustain the point of order there will be 

nothing more for me to say, but if the Chair is going to pass upon my 

point of order I now desire to l)e heard upon it. 

TheCHAIRMAN. TbeChairisreadytodecidetbequestion. [Cries 

of" Decision!"] The gentleman frorrr Georgia [Ur. BLOUNT] makes 

the point of order on the part of the bill read by the Clerk that it is new legislation and does not retrench expenditure. He bas cited clause 3 

of Rule XXI as that t6 which this provision is obnoxious. The Chair 

desires to call attention to that part of the rule applicable to this case: 

Nor shall any provision in any such bill or amendment thereto changing ex- isting law b& in order, except such as, being germane to the subject-matter of 

the bill, shall retrench expenditures by the reduction of the number and salary of the officers of the United States, by the reduction of the compensation of any pel'Son paid out of the Treasury of the United States, or by the reduction of amounts of money covered by the bill. 

It is admitted this provision does change existing law. The only 

question for the Chair to decide is whether it retrenches expenditure 

in one of the ways pointed out. If it does reduce the compensation of 

any person paid ontof the Treasury it would not be subject to the point 

of order. A corporation is a person and receives compensation for car- rying the mail, and if that is reduced by the provisions of this bill the 

point of m·der can not be well taken. 

How is the Chair to determine whether the compensation to be paid 

to rail.roa.ds in this clause is reduced? The Chair does not understand 

that reduction must appear on411b.e face of the bill itself. The present 

occupant ofthe Chair heretofore in deciding questions of this kind has 

held the Chair might take into consideration every fact which a court 

could take intoeonsideration in determining similar matters, and could 

take into consideration not only the face of the bill but;. previous.appropriations for this purpose under existing law, and also official re- ports of the Departments of the Government. 

The question whether there is reduction is one of fact, and the Chair 

concedes that can not be determined here by taking evidence on either 

side, bnt must appear in some official way and be brought to the attention of the Chair and committee from reports submitted by the Departments. 

From the law passed at the last session for the same purpose it appears there is a reduction of expenditure by this bill, and the Chair 

therefore to that extent overrules the point of order. · Now, in reference to the question of order raised by the gentleman 

from illinois on the left [Mr. ADAMs], as to whether a certain clause 

of detail here is in order or not, the Chair does not see that that clause 

is in order under the rule. Jie can not see that it relates to the question of reduction in any wayj and is inclined to hold, if the point of 

order is made upon it, that it should go out of the bill. As there are many clauses in the bill, however, they must of course be taken altogether in consideration by the Chair in detemiining the point of order. 

The Chair overrules the point of order. 

Mr. HOLMAN. Thel'e was an additional point of order. 

Ur. BLOUNT. I made an additional point of orde:r that there was 

a bill of the same nature and substance pending. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Georgia made an additional 

point of order--

Mr. TOWNSHEND. It strikes me that, the question having been 

submitted to the Chair and ruled upon, it is too late to .raise a new question of order. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair thinks the point of order was made 

in time. The gentleman from Georgia made the further point of order 

that this provision is not in order because it is the substance of a pending bill. That point would be well taken if the proposition now before 

the committee were moved as an amendment. • The rule provides, clause 4 of Rule XXI: 

No bill or resolution shall a' any time be amended by annexing thereto 01' 

~fu~~t~~~~:.rewith the substance of any other bill or resolution_ pending 

This is not an amendment, but a provision in an original bill; and 

the Chair has before it two bills, coming from two different committees, 

containing the same substance; but the Chair is not to say whether one committee or the other was entitled to report the same, but finds them 

here as original bills, and therefore not being an am~dment to the 

pending bill, the point of order is overruled. 

:Mr. BLOUNT. I desire to appeal from the decision of the Chair as to the first point of order raised. 

The Ca-AIRMAN. The gentleman from Georgia appeals from the 

decision of the Chair on the first question of order. 

The question is, Shall the decision ofthe Chair stand as the judgment 

of the committee? . 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Let the question be stated. . The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Georgia appeals from the 

decision of the Cba.ir upon the point of order made by him, to wit, that 

this proposition is new legislation and does not retrench expenditures. 

Jtfr. NICHOLLS. That point came too late. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair thinks not, and will entertain the ap- peal. . 

Before submitting the appeal the Chair desires to state that there is 

some doubt as to the propriety of the ruling, but the Chair has uniformly held that it was proper t<> rnle such doubt in favor of submitting the proposition upon ita merit-a to the committee, believing the 

committee to be the bet.ter judge of the proposition than the Chair; 

and hence the Chair will not exercise the arbitrary power of ruling out 

the proposition where any element of doubt exists. 

The question is, Shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment 

of the .committee? 

The question was tak~n; and on a division there were-ayes 30, noes 53. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Let us have tellers. 

The CHAIRMAN. A quorum not having voted, the Chair will appoint tellers. 

Jtfr. TOWNSHEND and Jtlr. BLOUNT were appointed tellers. 

The committee again divided; and the tellers reported-ayes 52, noes 94. 

So (no further count being demanded) the judgment of the Chair was overruled and the point of order sustained. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair desires to state that on this point of 

order which has been sustained by the committee all that part of the 

bill from line 67 down to and including line 153 goes out. 

Mr. NICHOLLS. I wish to submit an amendment. 

Mr. HORR. Before passing from this section I desire to offer the 

proper amendment-a which are made necessary by going back to the 

present plan and striking this provision out of the bill. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Georgia has been recognized to offer on amendment. 

Mr. HORR. I presume the gentleman from Georgia desires to offer an amendment to this section w.rtich should first be perfected. 

Mr. NICHOLLS. I will withdraw for the present. 

Mr. HORR. The gentleman from Illinois will observe that I shall move to strike out the words "for inland mail transportation" 15,-

265,000, and insert $14a010,000. I shall also move to insert after this 

clause '' for railroad ana. postal-car service '' $1,765,026, these being the 

estimates of the Department for the expenses under these two items 

under the rule that now exist-a. 

The CHAIRM~AN. The gentleman will send his amendment to the 

desk. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

In lines 61 and62 strike out "815,265,000" and insert. "SH,OlO,OOO," and at the 

end of line 66, for railroad postal-car service 1,765,026. 

~1r. TOWNSHEND. lli. Chairman, we are now about to vote upon a question of taking over half a million out of the Treasury. It is proposed to insert an item in this bill which will effect that result. I do 

think the. committee ought to listen to whatever reason may be shown 

for it as well as what answer may be presented against it. 

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will be in order and public business will be suspended until order is restored upon the floor. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I shall yield to hear the gentleman from Michigan befol'e pl'Oceeding to oppose the amendment. 

Mr. HORR. At the request of the gentleman from Illinois I desire 

to state to the House that the two sums I have :fixed upon are precisely 

the amounts that the Post-Office Department estimates it will take for 

this branch of the service under the present rule, omitting the Pacific 

mi.lroads as they have been omitted in the past. I wish to say to the 

committee that this is an item which I .am not strenuous about, because 

it is not determined at all by the amount we appropriate. Lalit yea1. 
1885. ·coNGRESSION"AL RECORD-· HOUSE. 1587· 

~e appropriated a good deal less than the gentleman from illinois well 

knows it was going to take to run that service. There is a deficiency 

already of $875,000 or $75Q,OOO, I am not sure which. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Eight hundred and fifty thousand for that serv- ice. 

Mr. HORR. Yes, $850,000 is what the service costs more than was appropriated last year. 

Mr. BLOUNT. Is that for the year 1884? 

1\!r. HORR. No, sir; it is for this fiscal year, being within a few 

dollars of the amount the Post-Office Department said it would re- quite in their estimates. But the gentleman from Illinois and the gentleman from Indiana succeeded in cutting it down, and now we have to 

make it up by a deficiency. 

M.r. TOWNSHEND. We gave the estimates of the Department. 

Mr. HORR. I beg your. pardon. Thegentlemanwasmistakenyesterday, and he is mistaken now. This was one of the items we cut 

down. 

M.r. TOWNSHEND. We reduced the item a million because the 

Department said we could do so if this scheme was adopted. 

Mr. HORR. I am talking about the appropriation made last year. 

l'here is a deficiency for the current year of the amount I have named. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. That is correct as regards the estimates of last 

year. 

Mr. HORR. I :fix this amount in my amendment because it is the 

amount' which the parties best able to judge say the service will take. 

Now, it does not make any difference whether yon appropriate $6,000,-

000 or $16,000,000 or $20,000,000. It has got to bepaid anyway, and 

to be paid according to the law upon the weight that the railroad com- panies carry, so that yon will not cripple the service by refusing it. I can not appeal to you on that ground. But if yon want to makealaw so that there will not be a deficiency to provide for next year you will 

have to vote the sum I have named. Ir yon prefer to cut it down a million dollars, and then next year appropriate a million to make up 

the deficiency, simply for the purpose of making this bill look smaller 

than it really is, you can do that. There is no law to prevent it; no- body can prevent it. · But this is not a year, 1\Ir. Chairman, that we need to make such appropri:rtion bills. Last year in the -discussion of these bills we were told repeatedly that "this year'' this thing ought not to be done. Bu.t now we are in another year. We are entering upon a new era. The 

distinguished gentleman who is to occupy the Presidential chair the 

next four years has not called upon me yet to give him any advice as to his Cabinet or policy. ..I do not know why he has not done so. [Laughter.] · 1\Ir. TOWNSHEND. He will call upon yon. 

Ur. HORR. If he should, I could tell him there is one gentleman 

in this Ho~e who understands the Post-Office business and has shown 

it in this debate; and I am glad to find there is one Democrat who not 

only understands it, but who is willing to stand up and declare his 

views upon it here on the floor of the House. 

\Mr. TOWNSHEND. I hopei will not be interruptedduringthefive 

minutes I am entitled to on this amendment. The gentleman from 

Michigan [Mr. HoRR] bas said rightly we have inaugurated a new era. We have done so right here and now, and it is an era of extravagance, 

of unnecessary appmpriation of the people's money; and I quote the 

language of the officials of the Post-Office Department in saying so. When the .pro-position that was ingrafted upon this bill was stricken 

out the Treasuryoftbe United States lost, accordingto the amendment 

of the gentleman from .Michigan, over half a million of dollars. .And 

the position of the Post-Office Department and of the Committee on Appropriations and the argument used by the gentleman from Indiana 

and myself could not have been more quickly sustained by its adversaries than it has been sustained by the motion of the gentleman from 

Michigan. 

:Ur. BROWN, of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, .I rise to a question 

of order. The gentleman from Illinois is lecturing the Committee of 

the Whole House on the state of the Union for what it has done. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I decline to be interrupted. 

The CHAIR.M:AN. The gentleman from Illinois will proceed. 

l!r. TOWNSHEND. The Committee on Appropriations in this item 

of $15,265,000 gave every dollar that was estimated by the Department, taking out an appropriation for the Pacific :railroads, which the 

gentleman from Michigan admi.ts must come out of the bill. N-ow, as soon as this provision is cut out of this bill the gentleman from Michigan, who insisted this system would increase rather than cn.t down ex- penditures, comes to the front with a proposition increasing the appropriation to the service over half a million dollars, and perhaps this 

House will sustain him in it. That is the logic of it. Our proposition 

in the bill gives the Post-Office Department every cent that was asked 

for. We gave the full estimate of the Post-Office Department. 

Mr. HORR. I will ask the gentleman does theamountfixedinthis 

bill under either plan show at all what the real expenditure will be? 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. No, sir; but the Postmaster-General says if 

we give his estimates we will give every dollar that is needed. And 

the Second Assistant Postmaster-General says now, '• If yon give us .our estimates and adopt this new scheme, then yon may deduct from this 

amonnt$1,000,000. 17 That is just what the .Appropriations Committee 

did. The gentlemen who opposed the proposition all insisted that our scheme was increasing the expenditures) and now upon t~e heel of that 

declaration one of the principal oppo.nents of the proposition comes in 

and asks that we shall give an additional sum of over half a million 

dollars. Was a.a i.n&tance ever .seen where the champion of the opposition has so quickly and so readily confessed that his opponent was right? By his action he now admits we were right in declaring that 

the scheme brongh t about economy and reduction instead of an increase. 

The gentleman is compelled to take the back track; be is compelled to 

go back upon his argument, for we in our scheme gave every dollar the 

Department asked. And now you come in and demand, after that provision has been stricken out, that we shall give over half a million more. Now by striking out that provision, according to the confession of 

the gentleman from i\Iichigan [lt!r. HoRR] himself, the Treasury loses over half a million dollars that will go down into the pockets of the 

stockholders of the railroad companies, and the Second Assistant Postmaster-General brands the appropriation as "an unnecessary use of the 

public money." I leave it for this committee to determine whether 

they will adopt the gentleman's amendment or not. 

l!r. BAYNE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out the last word of 

the amendment. I want to be heard for a few moments at this point. 

There are now six appropriation bills, large ones, pending, and four 

ofthem in the hands of subcommittees: The fortification bill, which 

appropriates over $7,000,000; the naval appropriation bill. which has 

just reached the full committee, and which appropriates 30,000,000; 

the sundry civil bill, wbicais in the hands of a subcommittee, and which 

appropriates $32,QOO,OOO; the deficiency bill, appropriating $8,000,000, 

also in the hands of a subcommittee; the legislative, judicial, and ex- ecutive appropriation bill, which is on the Honse Calendar and not 

acted upon; the Post-Office appropriation bill, now under consideration; 

and the other appropriation bills in the Senate and not sent to the President-only one little bill appropriating $310,000 having yet gone to 

the President. 

There· are but sixteen legislative days remaining in which to act upon 

these bills. In the last Congress it took nineteen days to pass the num- ber of bills now unacted upon here, and yet we are frittering away our time and necessitating an extra session of Congress. 

Mr. HORR. What of it? 

Air. BAYNE. And, Mr. Chairman, it looks to me, although disclaimers have been made, as _if there is a contrived plan here to force an extra session. It looks to me as if it were the purpose of the men who are delaying the appropriation bills to dump them in on the Senate 

at the end of the session, too late for action and then try to put upon 

the Senate the blame of making an extra sessi~n necessary. Where is 

the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations found urging this 

legislation? What bas;aeome of the pwmises made before the session 

began, that the Committee on Appropriations would sit before the con- vening of Congress and during the recess, so as to perfect the appropriation bills and have them ready for the action of the House? Nothing ready, nothing acted upon; yet we spend hour after hour here in 

endless discussion. 

Here is your Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads proposing new legislation, when you know that the Senate will strike out every bit of new legislation that you put into th. bill-everything that changes 

existing law. Yon have-that notice, and yet you introduce this new 

legislation into this bill. Why do you introduce it? I can see no other purpose lying back of this than a design on the part of the Democratic members of Congress to delay legislation so as to remain here and 

be in Washington when the new President takes his seat, so that they 

may go to him and make appeals for appointments to office, and thus 

avoid the necessity of pilgrimages from their homes under circumstances 

which might make it less likely that they would be granted the favors 

they seek. I see in this action a determined purpose on the part of the 

majority of the House to force an extra session of Congress; but the 

country: does not want an extra session, and the country will hold this 

Democratic ·majority responsible if there shall be one. Mr. TOWNSHEND. The gentleman is unnecessarily alarmed; there 

will be no extra session. There is no danger of it. 

1\ir. BLOUNT. Mr. Chairman, I regret to have occasion to say one other word in reference to this bill; but my friend from Illinois [Mr. 

TOWNSHEh-n] has, I think, been doing great injustice to his colleagues on this floor. The gentleman from .M:ichigan [Mr. HoRR] moves· that 

the amount estimated by the Post-Office Department as necessary for 

the next fiscal year shall be inserted in this bill. That estimate was 

made under the law .of 1873; the rates in that law were reduced 10 per 

cent. on the·motionoftbegentlemanfromindiana [Mr. HoLMAN] during a period of great financial distress in 1876, and that reduction was followed, upon the recommendation of the Committee on Appropriations (I having charge of the bill) 1 by an additional reduction of 5 per 

cent. That is the law that Congress w:u; content to act under in aperiod..of great financial pressure, and we have gone on with it from that 

time until the present; and now at this late hour, when we are embarrassed from laek of time to.consider properly a proposed revolution in 

the mode of compensating the railroads, the result of which, as to the 

amount of expenditure it would involve, is certainly debatable, m:r 

_, 
1588 CONGRESBIONA1l1 RECORD •. ~ HOUSE. FEBRUARY 12, 

friend from illinois [Mr. TOWNSHEND], assunlinghis own conclusions 

to be absolutely correct, and ignoring and contemning the conel1I8ions 

of honest and reputable associates upon this floor, stigmatizes them as seeking to squander the public funds. .Mr. TOWNSHEND. The gentleman is entirely mistaken. I never made any such expression. 

Mr. BLOU~T. Well, I will withdraw that remark for the sake of 

being allowed -..l go on without interruption. 

Now the gentleman from Micillgan offers an amendment in the terms 

cf the estimate. It has rarely happened that gentlemen on either side, 

when in control of legislation here, have asked for the amount of the 

estimates, and on this item, so far as I know, they have always gone 

below the estimate. But the gentleman from Illinois, refusing to follow his own practice upon the subject and the practice of both sides of 

the House, prefers to let the estimate stand, to magnify the accusation 

against his associates on this floor. I submit that the gentleman is not 

dealing liberally and kindly with us. If he thinks the amount estimated for is too large and will ask to reduce it, I will co-operate with 

him. 

The gentleman from .Micillgan has repeatedly stated that the law 

fixes the compensation to be paid to the railroads; there is no room for 

any discussion upon that point. It is a matter of weight-so much 

per pound. If the railroads do not carry enough to earn the whole 

amount appropriated, the money will be unexpended. If the appropriation should not be sufficient to pay for the amount actually car- ried, the Government will be bound to recognize the deficit in a de" 

ficiency bill . . :Mr. HOL~llN addressed the Chair. 

The CHAffiMAN. Debate on pending amendments is exhausted. 

As the Chair understands; the pro forma amendment is withdrawn. 

Mr. HOLMAN. Mr. Chairman, I renewtheproforma amendment. 

I think the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. BLOUNT] does not present 

tills case exactly as it should be presented. Of course· there may be some :fucts which are not generally understood. There was a fixing of 

compensation of railroads in the ad of 1\Iarch 3, 1873, but \hat act, 

in the face of reduced wages of labor an·d a general reduction of prices 

'throughout the country, increased enormously the rates to be paid to 

the railroad corporations-increased those rates beyond the compensa-. tion paid during the whole period of the war and the era of inflation 

immediately following. The only effect of the acts of 1877 and 1878 was a reduction of 15 per cent. upon the previous extravagant rates, 

the fhst act making 10 per cent. reduction and the second 5 per cent. 

reduction. · · Mr. BLOUNT. Will the gentleman allow me a moment? 

Mr. HOLMAN. I have but little time, but I must yield to my 

friend. 

'lllr. BLOU~T. The gentleman himself had charge of the appropriation bill in 1876, and-asked for a reduction of only 10 per cent.; and 

it was conceded. 

Mr. HOLl\IAN. There was a retluction of 20 per cent.; and that was a compromise between the two Houses. 

1\Ir. BLOUNT. Not at all; my friend reported it from the Committee on Appropriations as an original proposition. 

Mr. HOL~I~~. I think the gentleman will find it was 20 percent. 

that we compromised on then. 

Mr. BLOUNT. Oh, no. Mr. HOI..~IAN. ·well, after a lapse of ten years I will not underta'ke to ~y who is correct in this matter. 

Mr. BLOUNT. I will. 

Mr. HOLl\IAN. Well, I will run the risk myself, if the gentleman is so confident. [LaughteL] But I like to be cautions in my statements. 

Now, 1\Ir. Chairman, the fact is manifest that the increase for the 

coming year over the present year, if we appropriate on the basis of the 

present year, must be over $3,000,000. I think gentlemen have not 

looked into this subject of the increase in the cost of transporting mails 

by railroad. I wish to call attention to the amounts paid during the 

last four years. For 1882 the appropriation for this service was $10,-

914,282; for 1883, $12,681,000; for 1884, $13,275,000; for 1885, $14,-

375,000. The estimate for the coming year is $17,559,205, an increase 

of $3,184,205 over the present year; so that, according to this rate of 

increase, the appropriation which weshall .be called upon to make next 

year for this service will be more than $20,000,000. Gentlemen must see that this incr~ase of expenditure must be arrested. Certainly we lmow that this is not a legitimate and honest increase. 

Gentlemen must certainly be aware, if they will take the weighing over any road of willch they have knowledge, that the great defect is the one we have been trying if possible to correct. From this system frauds 

upon the Government have resulted. Uy attention is called to the case 

ofn single road where, upon a recent weighing, the weight was run up 

from 5,000 pounds to 18,000 pounds per day, although there was no 

reason to suppose any very material increase of business since the last 

weighing; and on the basis of this increased weight that road is now being paid. I desire to arrest in some small degree this extraordinary 

increase in the charges for this service. We are now paying $25 per 

mile per annum for the transportation of each 2,000 pounds of mail 

matter daily over and above 5, 000 pounds. 

I ask the committee to consent to reduce that to $20 per ~e. Gentlemen will see the enormous increase is on the great trunk lines. I 

know when they do a large amount of business they can afford to carry 

the largely increased body of mails on a lower basis than a less amount. 

I hope the committee will consent to reduce that excess of 2, 000 pounds 

of daily transportation over and above 5, 000 pounds from $25 down to 

$20-that at least ought to be insisted upon by my colleague on this 

committee-and limit the amount paid to any railroad corporation w 

$600 per mileperyear. ·The basis:fixedafewyearsagowas$300. This 

act of the 3d o£ March, 1873, removed that limitation of $300 per mile 

and le.ft us without any limit, so that you are paying beyond $1,000 

per mile per annum. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman's time has expired. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I offer as an amendment the following. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair understands the pro forma amendment is withdrawn. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I desire to offer my two propositions together, 

which I ask to be read. 

The CHAIRMAN. Is this offered as a substitute? · 

Mr. HOLMAN. No; but as an amendment in addition to thepen<ling amendment. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Provided, however, That the pay per mile for transportation of the mails by nilroads shall not exceed $20 for each additional 2,000 pounds transported in addition to the 5,000 pounds of mail matt~r transported daily by any raih·oad under 

the provisions of section 4002 of the Revised Statutes, and the pay for transporting the mails by any m.ilroad shall not exceed $600 per mile per annum, and the 

second clause of said section is amended accordingly: Providedfurther, That 

railroad companies whose railroads were constructed in whole or in part by land 

grants made by Congress, on the condition that the mails should be transported over their roads at such price a s Congress bylawshoulddirect,and the railroad 

companies incorporated under the 'provisions of an act entitled "An act to aid 

in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the Missouri River to the Pacific Ocean, and to secUl·e tv, the Government the use of the same for pos- tul, military, and other purposes, ' appr\)ved July 1,1862, shall hereafter receive 

for the transportation of the mails over their respecti\'"e railroads only SO per cent. of the compensation authorized by this net; and the said net approved July 

1,1862, and all acts amenda tory thereof, are hereby amended to conform to the 

foregoing proYisions; but the right of the United States to further amend said 

net, or any act amenantory thereof, is expressly reserved. AU acts and parts of acts inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of this act are hereby repealed. 

~Ir. HOLMAN. I wish to call.attention, if gentlemen will allow me~ 

to the fact that this last proposition simply extends the postal laws to 

the Union Pacific Railroad. It puts that railroad undet the same law 

which regulates the tmnsportation of mails over the other land-grant 

railroads. , . 

1\Ir. REAGAN. ·1\Ir. Chairman, I desir~ to say in r~aard to the :first 

amendment of the gentleman frof!l Indiana I am disposed to fuvor it, 

and under his explanation the second proposition too. Up to 1873 the 

maximum rate paJd to first--class railroads for carrying the mails was $300 per mile per annum. When night service was performed on such 

rate 20 per cent. nright be added, so that.no road for any service could 

receive more than $375 per mile per annum for tills service up to 1873. 

That year the Ia.w was changed and a different mode was adopted for 

compensating tpe railroad companies for transporting the mails. Under tba.t law the compensation t~ some of the first-class roads reached 

$1,000, and more than $1,000, a mile, which was a change in a slll.gle 

year. ·. 

I remember, in an investigation made by the Committee on Expenditures in the Post-Office Department during the Forty-fourth Congress, soon after this change was made, it was developed a single road south 

of the lakes, carrying mails for $75 a mile, was under that act given $750 a nrile for carrying the mails. , Other changes subsequently took place in the law, and each time we 

have been told in the interest of economy. Now the maximum paid 

to the largest of these roads I am infOl'med is over $2,000 a mile. So in 

eleven years the rate of compensation has been increased nearly foilrfold. Fortunately for the country, I think, on a question of order an- other change was stricken from the bill this morning that would have 

greatly augmented the pay of these first-class roads, and in my judgment would have increased it to not less than $3,000 per mile per an- num. . I thjnk the amendment offered by the gentleman from Indiana is in 

the. right direction, and it is the right thing that the House shouldsu.stain i~. Certainly $600 a mile ought to be sufficient compensation. 

Under the new plan of compensation it is arranged to have a minimum 

rate of speed, and to increase the compensation if the speed is increased. 

It is proposed, too, to fix as part of the basis the car-space occupied and 

the number of trips. 

Mr. BINGHAM. That is out on a point of order. 

Mr. REAGAN. · lit is in the existing law. 

Mr. BINGHAM. They are simply paid on weight. 

Mr. REAGAN. Various kinds oi ingenious machinery are used to 

multiply the price of railroads for carrying the mails. They ought to 

be properly compensated. I know it has been said in justification of 

this that improvements have been made in the servi~ by pr~ding 

postal railway clerks whose duty it is to distribute the mails as they 

pass along without the necessity of delaying them by distribution at 

various points: There is an advantage in that, and due allowance ought 

to be made for it. But I undertake to say that there is no railway in 
I 

1885. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1589 

this country carrying passengers or merchandise of any kind that cn.n earn $600 a mile per annum carrying one, two, or three cars. '[Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. HORR. The gentleman is mistaken; if he will figure it out he 

will find he is mistaken. 

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman lulS expired. 

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Chairman-- . The CHAIRMAN. TheChairwillreoognizethegentleman to oppose 

the amendmen~ o the gentleman from Indiana. Mr: CANNON. That was my purpose in rising. 

The CHAIRMAN. This, being an amendment to an amendment, is 

subject to ten minutes' debate, and the Chair recognizes the gentleman 

for five minutes in opposition. · Mr. CANNON. I was temporarily absent, Mr. Chnirman, when this 

nmeudment was proposed by the gentleman. I have noticed it, however, at the Clerk's desk, and I see it contains a provision that the pay 

of no milroad for the transportation of the mails shall exceed $600 per 

mile per annum. If gentlemen present will11nderstand what the law is they will find 

that this amendment is not in the direction of economy but is absolutely in the direction of extravagance; and I can demonstrate it in~ 

moment. Section 4002 of the Revised Statutes pro-..ides what the com- pensation of railroads shall be up to 5,000 pounds per mile per annum, or at the rate of $200 per mile. Then for every· 2,000 pounds of mail 

matter in excess of 5,000 pounds provision is made for paymentat the 

rate of $25 per ton per mile per annum. In other words, you pay for 

the additional matter not more. than one-fourth of what is paid for the 

first 5,000 pounds. 

Now, the result of the adoption Of the amendment of the gentleman 

from Indiana will be to take these mails and distribute them among 

the various roads at the highest price; whereas if you allow the mails 

to seek the roads where they would natmally go, the ro!l.ds being willing (not all the time, but generally) to carry them, you get the bulk of 

your mail carried at the lower rate, or $25 per ton per mile per annum. 

llr. HOLMAN. Will the gentleman from Illinois allow me a mo- ment? I ask if that can be done without the connivance, and the dishonest connivance, of the railroad officials? 

Mr. CANNON. Another thing: There are many" gentlemen who 

want an appropriation for special mail facilities under the present law 

to roads which get all of the compensation that is provided by the statute to which I have referred. You ta,ke $250,000 to get fast-mail facilities from New York city south. Nearly ev1ry dollar of that appropriation is spent 011 Southern roads. 

Take this ~il train from New York west to Chicago, to Milwaukee, 

to Minneapolis, to Portland, Oreg., to Omaha, and to San Francisco, and 

you get fast mail there without a dollar expended for special mail facilities; and how? Simt;1ly owing to the fact that the Post-Office Department masses the mail at _the cheaper rate on a ~ven line of road. 

The Department says to the railroad companies, ' Take this mail and 

give us a certain speed, and we will mass the mail on your road." The 

Department can save money by the operation, and although by mass- ing the mail on a ·given line of roa6 at the cheaper rate it may increase 

thepa.y of the road $1,000 or $2,500 !Jer annum, still the entire bulk of 

the mail is carried at the cheaper rate, and the Department gets fastmail facilities without the expenditure ~ a dollar. On the contrary, 

it saves the expenditure of large sums of ml)ney. 

In other words, under wise administration it is cheaper to give fastmail service to the people than it is to give slow service and divide the 

bulk of the mails among the different parallel lines of railway. But 

the moment you cut the appropriation down to $600 per mile per an- num good-by to your cheaper carriage, and good-by to your fast-mail 

trains. It cuts the service up by the roots. Now I am not in fuvor of 

reducing their pay so as to compel them to accept an unfair price. I 

doubt whether generally they get too much or any too large a price for 

the service now; but I want to pay for the service what it is fairly worth. 

In conclusion, I do beg of gentlemen that they will not come here and 

seek to cripple the service that has been settled by wise administration 

under existing law for nearly fifteen years without sufficient investigation, because when they do they will find that great damage is done to 

the country at large. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I move to strike out the last word. .The CHAIRMAN. The debate upon this amendmenttotheamend- men t is exhausted. The Chair can not entertain any other amendment 

until the pending amendments are disposed of. There is an amendment in the second degree pending unless the gentleman from Indiana 

withdraw if.. [Cries of" Vote!" "Vote!"] Mr~ TOWNSH»~D. Let us have a vote. 

The CHAIRMAN. The question is upon the amendment to the 

amendment submitted by the gentleman from. Indiana. 

The question was taken; and on a division there were ayes 22. Before the negative vote was counted, 

· Mr. HOLMAN said: I will not insistnponafurther count, as I think 

the sentiment of the House is manifestly against the measure. 

So (no further count being demanded) the amendment to the amendment was not agreed to. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I now Mk the House, and I suppose there will be no · objection to it, to adopt the last provision of the amendment, putting 

the Union Pacific system on the same footing as the other land-grant 

roads in this country. I think even my friend from Michigan will not 

object to that. 

Mr. HORR. Why, it is the most useless thing in the world to do, 

and the gentleman knows it. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I offer it then as a separate proposition. The gentleman knows as well as any other gentleman upon the floor, that we have no law imposing any limitation whatever upon the transportation 

of the mails on the Union Pacific system of roads. 

Mr. BINGHAM. We have a decision of the Supremo Court in the 

last week. 

:Mr. HOLMAN. .And the decision of the Supreme Court, as well as the Court of Claims, is to the effect that we have not extended the system to embrace these roads; in other words, that we hav~ no law which 

applies to them in -this respect. 

The CHAIRUAN. The Chair is of opinion that it is not now in 

order for the gentleman to offer the proposition which he has just submitted, since it has been already rejected by the committee. 

Mr. HOLMAN. Not that proposition, Mr. Chairman, but combined 

with another. This proposition is simply a part of the proposition formerly submitted. 

The CHAIRMAN. The committee rejected both propositions by the 

vote on the question which was submitted. The gentleman could have 

called for a. division of the propositions but he did not do so. They 

were both submitted to the committee and were both rejected. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I was not bound to call for a division. Does the 

Chair decide that when a proposition is submitted, which contains two 

substantive propositions, and they are voted down together, you can not 

offer as an amendment any portion of the matter voted down? I submit that that is done every day. 

The CHAIR~. The Chair holds that when two substantive propositions are submitted to the committee in one vote and they are voted 

down, it is not in order to submit one of them again. It was in order 

to demand-and the rules provide for a division of substantive propositions if demanded; but the gentleman from Indiana failed to ask for ilia~ ·. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I. do not appeal from the decision of the Chair, be- cause the matter is not of sufficient moment, perhaps, to justify an ap-

~l . Mr. TOWNSHEND. I move to strike out the last word. 

I do not think my usually well-informed friend from Pennsylvania 

(Mr. BAYNE] was advised ofthe amount of work that the Committee on Appropriations have already accomplished, or of the condition of the 

busj&ess of the House or of the Senate either, when he sought to make an attack upon the action of that committee. This Post-Office appropriation bill has been pending before this House over ten days. It was kept back during all last. week by the bill the gentle~n himself has 

been pressing. I think that he him~lf owes it to the House to give an explanation of what ha.c:; occurred in keeping back an important appropriation bill such as this in order to push the river and harbor bill. 

Mr. BAYNE rose. Mr. TOWNSHEND. I do not want to be interrupted. 

Mr. BAYNE. But I desire that the gentleman shall not misrepresent me. I voted against my own committee to take up this bill. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I am glad to hear that the gentleman appreciated the importance of this bill. But what I want. to sa~ is this: 

We have now two bills before the House, the present Post-Office appriation bil~ and the bill making appropriations fol' the legislative, 

judicial, and executive expenses of the Government. The bill I have 

last mentioned is the most voluminous bill that comes from our ·com- mittee. [Cries of" Vote!" ''Vote! "] It has more items in it and more pages in it than·any other bill. I hope these demands fora. -vote 

will not come out of my time. 

I want to let the gentleman further undersmnd that the Committee on Appropriations have sent to the Senate two bills that they have not 

yet taken any final action upon. So the Senate has abundance to do 

in disposing of those appropriation bills whilst we are maturing this 

bill. 

The .COmmittee on Appropriations is pre&Sing every day for action 

upon this bill. DIDing the last two days the time of the House has 

been frittered away in my judgment by very frivolous motions and pretexts. 

.A. MEMBER. Mr. Cleveland has been counted in. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. The Committee on Appropriations is doing its 

utmost to press action upon its bills. I ~nt to say about the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan[~. HORR] that I intended no reflection on any member of this House by the remarks which 

!..made to which the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. BLOUN"I'] took exception. I am satisfied, :h.[r. Chairman, if the gentleman from Georgia 

had understood that proposition as I believe I understand it, and as I 

believe the officers of the Post-Office Department do, I would have found 

in him a. strong and potent champion of it on this floor, because I am 

satisfied he would have been impelled by his love of economy to s<;;ek. 

it.s adoption. 
1590 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 12, 

I wish also in say that the amendment of the gentleman from :Michl- the Honse is entitled to go on and do this yror what it did last; but I 

gan is not so far out of the way as I feared it was at the start. The may be mista1."'en about that, for if there is anything that I know less 

defeat of the proposition stricken out of this bill does render necessary about than another it is what is permissible under our roles. [Laugha large increase in the appropriation, provided you desire to give the ter.] 

estimates ofthe Department. The Committee on Appropriations pro- Mr. TOWNSHEND. Mr. Chairman, I want simply to state that 

vided every dollar the Depa.rtment estimated for. That was the point this amendment was put upon the same ground last year that it is 

I wanted to make. We took the estimates of the Department, and placed upon now; so that it comes before the Chair up.der the same cirunder the advice of the DeJ?artment we cut down those estimates cumstances as last year. The year before last an appropriation had 

$1,000,000, provided this proposition should be adopted. been made for this purpose, and it was in the b~f that year; yet, 

The pro forma amendment was withdrawn. when this point was made upon the amendment last year, and the same Mr. BROWNE, of Indiana. I desire to make a parliamentary in- reasons were urged against it that are urged now, the Chair decided, as quiry. 1 the gentleman from Michigan [Ur. Hmm] admits, that as the amendThe CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state it. ment was new legislation, and was not in the interest of economy, it 

!tfr. BROWNE, of Indiana. I want to know if the committee talks must be ruled out. Then the bill went to the Senate, and there the 

all of the time, and does not vote at all, whether we can avoid an extra amendment was put on. The appropriation of the current year is con- session of Congr . fined to the current year; it makes no law for the future. 

The CHAIRUAN. That is notaparliamentaryinquiry. Theques- The CHAIRMAN. The Chair has some hesitation in deciding on tion is on the amendment submitted by the gentleman from Michigan questions of order.of this kind from the fact-

[Mr. HoRR]. Mr. DIDBLE. If the Chair will permit me, I desire to say a word 

l\.fr. HISCOCK. I submit that in the discussion which shall take as to the point of order. Under the third paragraph of the rule, no place on this bill in the future gentlemen should be confined to the bill amendment is in order upon a general appropriation bill providing for 

Rnd not be allowed to discuss the question whether their side of the any expenditure not previously authorized by law "unless in continHouse or the Senate is responsible for delay. nation of appropriatio~ for such public works and objects as are already 

Mr. WARNER, of Ohio. Orthat side of the House. in progress." Thatis one oftheexceptions. Now, this is a continuaThe CHAIRl\IAN. The question is on the amendment of the gen- tion of an appropriation for a public object, which is already in prog.:. 

tleman from Michigan. ress. And, besides, what is the existing law, Mr. Chairman? Why, 

Mr. HOLMAN. I ask that it be read again. the Posbnast..er-General has the right to contract, and make expendiThe Clerk read as follows: tures, for necessary and special facilities on trunk lines. He has that 

In lines 61 and 62, strike out" $15,265,000" and insert" $1.4,010,000." power to-day, .and this is a continuation of the appropriation for that 

AI o, at the end of line 66. insert the following: ·• For railway postal-car serv purpose; and if there was no general law which said that he might do 

ice, $1,765,026." that, still, until that annual provision is repealed, it constitutes from 

The amendment was agreed to. year to year an existing law; and when it was passed it repealed any 

:rtfr. NICHOLLS. I offer the amendment which I send to the desk. implication to the contrary that might exist from absence of specific 

The Clerk read as follows: provision in the general law. Therefore there is nothing in existing law inconsistent with such an appropriation . .After line 153, insert: . "For necessary and special facilities on trunk lines, $"266,764." The CHAIRMAN. The Chair was about to state that he felt some hesitation in passing upon "points of order of this kind from the fact 

Mr. TOWNSHEND". I make the point of order on that amendment. that there is a great disposition on the part of members to decide such 

The CHAIRl\fAN. The gentleman from Illinois makes the point of a question as this npon its merits rather than upon the merits of the 

order on the amendment. He will please state it. point of order; so that the Chair may be overruled when he is right 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I ask that the ~mendment be read again. and the committee wrong. [Laughter.] 

The amendment was again read. .Mr. HAMMOND. J.rise to a question of order. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I make the point of order that there is no law The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state it. 

authorizing the appropriation and that it does not retrench expendi- Mr. HAMMOND. I desire to know whether itis parliamentary for 

tures. the Chair to undertake to state the reasons for the votes of members of 

.Mr. NICHOLLS rose. • the committee. 

The CHAIRMAN. The ChaiJ: will hear the gentleman from Georgia The CHAIRMAN. The Chair has not done so; but, if the gentleon the point of order. man desires, the Chair will withdraw any statement that may be re- Mr. NICHOLLS. That amendment is in the precise language of the garded as of that characteL As this question is not free from doubt, 

present law. In the last session a si:m.il.ar amendment was offered to and in order to give the committee an opportunity to pass upon the 

the Post-Office a.ppropria.tion bill and was ruled out upon the point of proposition on its merits, the Chair will overrule the point of order. 

order. The bill went to the Seriate, and it was there amended as had The question is upon the am.endment submitted by the gentleman 

been proposed in the House, and this amendment is in the precise Ian- from Georgia (.Mr. NICHOLLS.] · 

guage of the law·as it now.exists. Therefore, while at the last session Mr. UONEY. !tfr. Chairman, I desire to say a word upon this subthe point was probably well taken, yet surely it is not so now, becan.se ject of special mail facilities. The sums app-ropriated for this purpose 

this amendment is the law just as it stands. This increase is necessary. heretofore have been generally expended in the portions of the country 

There is no question about that. Unless this amendment be adopted where the railroads make very few trips and at a slow rate of speed, we get .o fast-mail service at the South. except the expenditure in the city of New York, where trains must go 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. · Mr~ Chairman, this same amendment was out carrying the mail and nothing else. Of course, where that is re- offered at the last session, and the same.point of order w~ made and quired there must be some extra.. compensation, or else the railroads was sustained. · would not consent to adopt the schedule of time and stoppages required 

Mr. NICHOLLS. But the law was not then as it is now. bythe Post-Office Department. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Theyearbeforeanappropriationhadbeenmade But.most of the expenditure for this purpose has been made at the 

for this service, and last year the question was raised and this amend- South, where trains are slow, where the towns are comparatively small, 

ment was decided to be out of order. and where it is desirable to have more rapid communication with the 

Mr. HORR. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is drawn word for word great commercial centers of the country; and I think it will be profitlike the existing law; it follows to the letter the law that is now upon able to the committee if they will permit me to read a statementofthe 

the statute-book. expenditures of this character in the present fiscal year. Only three 

Mr. :MILLS. But not for next year. road'3 at the North have received compensation from this appropriation. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I do not care to detain the Chair upon this The road between New York and Springfield, A:t:ass., has received 

point, but if he has any ~oubt w~tever about it I refer him to the $17,647, and the same road appears in another place to have received 

RECORD to show that at the last session the same proposition was sub- $25,000. The road between Philadelphia and Baltimore has received 

mitted, and was ruled out on the point of order. $20,000. This makes a total of something over $62,000 of this money 

Mr. NICHOLLS. But that was for the reason I have stated. The expended in the North. The expenditure of this qharacter is so small 

law was not then as it is now. in that section because the trains there generally run at a greater speed 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would like to see the decision that than in the southern portion of the country, and when yon get south of was made upon this point Uy the presiding officer at the last session. , Mason and Dixon's line you find that the balance, $185,000, has been exMr. HAMMOND. Mr. Chairman, I understand the fact to be that pended there upon Southern lines. The Southern lines upon which this 

the amendment was rnled out last year on the 'point of order. It was money is expended are those running from Bay View to Quantico, from 

then carried to the Senate, which never puts any new legislation on a Quantico to Richmond, from Richmond to Petersburg, from Petersburg 

bill, and there it was put upon the bill. to Weldon, from Weldon to Wilmington, from Wilmington to Florence, 

Mr. :NICHOLLS. I have stated that faot. from Florence to Charleston Junction, from Charleston Junction to Sa.-

:ftfr. HORR. Mr. Chairman, I admit that my friend from Illinois vannah, from Savannah to .Jacksonville, and from Baltimore to Hagers-

[.Mr. TOWNSHEND] is correct in saying that this was stricken out of town. 

the bill last year; but I doubt if it was done on the same ground. It This is a recapitulation in brief of the expenditure of this particular 

went to the Senate and they put it in the bill, and then it was voted sum appropriated for extra~rdinary facilities on trunk lines. I think 

npon nad indorsed IJy this House by a large majority. Now~ I t4ink this is money well expended. I know it is money well expended if yoo 
1885. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1591 

consider the commercial interests involved in the rapid conimunication 

between great commercial centers. I nope the House will give its approval to the amendment. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Mr. Chairman, would it be·a crime for me to 

say a word in reply in behalf of the Treasury? I have but little hope 

of preventing any increase of ex:penditnre sought to be made on this 

bill; but I shall at least keep my record consistent, and give the reasons why I think this appropriation ·ought not to be made. 

In the first place, Mr. Chairman, there is not another line of railroad 

in the Union on which a single dollar of extra compensation is asked 

for fast-mail facilities. We get fast-mail facilities in the West; you 

get them in the Southwest; and they do not cost the Treasury a single 

dollar additional. But on this Atlantic line the demand comes up every 

year that we shall vote over a quarter of a million of dollars in addition 

to the enormous pay these roads already .receive forcarryingtlle mails. 

I have made a computation of bow much is received per mile by these ro~ that are now begging for this additional pay for furnishing fastmail facilities. The link from New York to Springfield, Mass., gets 

$872 a mile under the present law. Yettbatline, among others, comes here and says it wiH. not carry the mails fast unless we make this additional appropriation. 

Air. BINGHAM. How many trains a day are there on that line? 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. The line from Philadelphia to Baltimore-the 

Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad...._receives $656.66 

per mile; yet we are asked to giveadditionalcompensation to this rich 

corporation for fast-mail facilities. Why, sir, the roads running clear 

through from New York to San Francisco give us fast-mail facilities 

without one dollar of extra compensation. 

Mr. MONEY. Does the gentleman know the rate of speed on that 

line? 

Mr. TOWNSHEl-1~. I hope you will let me go on. ~!r. MO~"EY. Will you allow me to ask--

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I will not allow any interruption. 

We have fast mails from Baltimore to Saint Loo.is, for which we pay 

nothing extra. We have a fast mail from New York to Saint Louis, 

for which no extra pay is allowed. The Baltimore and Potomac Railroad Company, one of the wealthiest corporations in the country, says 

it will not give us fast-mail facilities unless extra. pay be allowed. That 

road is now getting $655.75 per mile for carrying the mails. Yet we must allow extra compensation to this poverty-stricken road. 

Mr. FINDLAY. Will you allow me a question? 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. No, sir. . 1\fr. FINDLAY. I simply wish to know where you get your figures. 

lli. TOWNSHEND. From the report of the Postmaster-General. 

l!r. FJNDLAY. Do you go to the Postmaster-General's report for an account of the financial condition of the Baltimore and Potomac Railroad? 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I hope the Chair will protect me from inter-

-ruption. 

Mr. FINDLAY. It is a most extraordinary place to get such information. · 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I hope the Chair will give me protection. 

Mr. FINDLAY. I think you need protection in makingsnchastatement. 

The CHAIRMAN. The ChairrequeststheCommitteeofthe Whole 

to be in order. The gentleman from Illinois must be permitted to proceed without interruption. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. The report of the Postmaster-General has ac- companying it a table giving the amount of niail compensation paid 

to every railroad in the United States. This report shows that last 

year the Government paid the Baltimore and Potomac Railroad $655.75 

per mile for carrying the mails. So it runs throughout. It-will be seen by the tables that many railroads in the West furnish fast-mail 

facilities and pay less dividends to their stockholders than the roads I 

ha-ve mentioned. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

lli. McCOMAS. I hope my friend will bear with me. [Cries of 

"Vote!' ] I have rarely taken up the time of this House, and only ask 

for three minutes. 

The CHAIRMAN. T"ne gentleman will proceed. Does the gentle- man submit an amendment? 

Mr. McCOMAS: Yes; I move to strike out the last word. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will proceed. 

Mr. McCOMAS. Mr. Chairman, I would be glad to see the plan of 

ganging payment of railway mail transportation by speed, weight, and 

space tested. 

The gentleman from Indiana [lli. HOLMAN] who strongly opposed 

this plan one year ago now reports it favorably. It is an experiment, 

of which the very strong argument by the gentleman from Michigan (~!r. HoRR] should make us critical. But this committee have taken 

one step backward in cutting off the appropriation of$250,000 for special mail fucilities. Ev-ery inv-estigation of them testifies to the value 

of these special fast m.a.ils. . 

'!'he commission of experts who recommended the new system Of paying for rail way mails, the Postmaster-General and Second Assistant Postmaster-General who advise the new system, all insist that the special 

mail facilities we now have be preserved in connection with the new system. · The report of the commission says that the Postmaster-General of 

Great Britain has power to call on any railway to run trains exclusively 

carrying mails,withsuch stoppages andspeedas hemaydesignate,pay- ' 

ing higher special rates therefor, and adds that the day is not fur distant when our country will do the same thing. . ........ \. , The commission say it is now only practicable for our P08ta1Department to contribute its share in maintaining trains as nearly as possible 

similar in character. ~ 

Postmaster-General Gresham, justly praised on the other side of this 

House, strongly recommended these special mail facilities and arranged 

their schedules for the benefit of more than half the States of the Union. 

The present Postmaster-General recommended the new system for paying for railway mails, but recommends with it the continuance of these 

special mail trains, which he says should be extended rapidly. · Second Assistant Postmaster-General Lyman, who is the special advocate of the new system, advises that $266,764.50 be appropriated for 

special fucilities this year. 

Colonel Thompson, one of the commission who recommended the new system of payment, as Second Assistant Postmaster-General, insists that we must also retain the special mail facilities we have.· The special fast mail gives us a coast-line service from Halifax and 

Boston to New Orleans, and the short span of eighty-seven miles paid 

for between Baltimore and Hagerstown afford a. fast-maillineto Roanoke, 

three hundred a.nd twenty-seven miles long, whence is afforded direct 

connection with Memphis and New Orleans. 

This branch of the postal service is one of the most important factors in the stimulatien of trade, the letters and papers conveyed con- cerning lands, merchandise, and business of every kind, and the interchange of information being followed by interchange of persons and 

commodities. 

It is proposed suddenly to take away all this, though interlinked 

with the life and business of half of the States of our country and 

though enjoyed by the people since 1873. It costs but $250,000 andrepays in value to millions of our people tenfold. If we appropriate it we know exactly where it will be applied, and if there be any abuse of 

the system those who oppose it ought to point out what -part of this 

service can be dispensed with, and wherein the uniform support of 

those special mail facilities by the Department is wrong. 

The distribution of the mail under this system is more complete than 

any ever had through the Atlantic and Gulf States and a vast interior 

COlffitry by close connections now made to reach places remote from 

special lines under schedules arranged by Postmaster-General Gresham. 

I have succeeded in having the branch of it from Baltimore to Hagerstown investigated in its actual workings last week. I hold in 1l\Y hand a report of Postmaster Adreon, of Baltimore, giving the result of Supervisor Bailey's inspection of that route . .... The special mail train leaves Baltimore at 4.40 a. m., arrives at Hagerstown, Md., at 7.45 a.m., whence it is carrried to Roanoke, Va., at 

6 p. m. It carries mail from all mail-rontes centering at Baltimore 

and arriving on the previous night, the mails from Boston, Providence, 

New Haven, and New York leaving that city at 9 p.m., andPhiladelphia leaving that city at midnight. Along with these go all malls oi 

Baltimore received between 3.30 p.m. and 4.10 a.m. For three hundred and twenty-seven miles of Maryland, West Virginia, and Virginia, which it traverses, it furnishes mail six hours earlier than before. 

Coming nortbwarJ, the special mail train gathers the mail from the 

Memphis and Charleston, the East Te~essee, Virginia and Georgia, 

the Selma, Rome and Dalton, theN orfolk and Western, the Chesapeake 

and Ohio Railways, and from their numerous branches and feeders. 

It saves from the long delay before experienced the ma.il from Corinth 

and Meridian, Miss., Decatur, Selma, and Birmingham, Ala., Knoxville, and Chattanooga, and Memphis. 

All these reach Baltimore at noon in time for close eastern connec- tion with fast-mail trains, which thus, for $15,000 only, connect the 

South and Southwest with the North and Northeast. The expense is 

trifling, the benefit far-reaching. To abandon it is to retrograde in the 

mail-service, and to deprive the people who receive little of direct Government aid of the little they have enjoyed, and which they can not 

part with except by loss to trade and commerce. This is one unusual 

branch of it which the railway ad vantages (in direct and lateral connec- tions) of Hagerstown, Md., enable the Government to reach many States 

by obtaining a special train on the Western Maryland road between 

Baltimore and Hagerstown. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

Ur. WASHBURN. I renew the formal amendment to strike out the 

last word for the purpose of asking a question. Why is there any more propriety for paying for this fast mail under discussion than for the fast 

mail from New York to theW est? · . • · 

lli. HORR. Simply because the mails going West aggregate three 

and four times and in some plaees twenty times, as they do going over 

these Southern roads, and they can afford for the price they now get to 

give extra speed. They can not do it for a smaller amount. 

Mr. BINGHAM. They are always sure of a fhllload. 

Mr. MO:NEY. Mr. Chairman, I wish to correct a statement made 
1592 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 12, 

by the honorable chairman of the subcommittee in charge of this bill 

[Mr. TOWNSHEND]. I intended to.do it when he was upon the floor 

for fear some one might attach some importance to it. I was unable 

t do it then and will do it now. He said we had a fast mail by the 

Pacific railroads with an average speed of eighteen miles an hour. We 

did appropriate three years ago $200,000 for the purpose of establishing a fast mail to San Francisco, but the Postmaster-General had that money 

covered back into the Treasury, because these roads said they could not 

afford to give it to us at that rate. That is the reason why we have not a fast mail there. 

We have a slow mail there, a very slow mail; and.I submit to the 

Honse when the commercial benefits derived are so much in excess of 

the expenditure, we can not with any propriety to the business of the 

country restrict it. [Cries of "Vote!" "Vote!"] I withdraw the 

formal amendment. 

:Mr. TOWNSHEND. I Wish to correct the gentleman from 1t'Iississippi. The Postmaster-General in his report, which I have before me, 

alleges be bas secured fast-mail service from New York by way of Chicago to San Francisco without the cost to the Government of one single 

dollar. He states that he puts the mails down in San Francisco, by 

arrangement made with the Union and Central Pacific Railroads, one day in advance of ordinary time of travel, without the payment of a single extra dollar. 

The question recurred on Mr. NICHOLLS's amendment. 

The committee divided; and there were-ayes 89, noes 31. 

So the amendment was agreed to.· The Clerk read as follows: 

For inland transportation by star routes, $5,700,000. 

Mi. HORR. I move to strike out " seven ',. and insert " nine." 

(Cries of" Vote!" ''Vote!" ] If the committee wants to vote, all right; 

I will not detain it. 

The committee divided; and there were-ayes 88, noes 36. 

Mr. HOLMAN. No quorum. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I hope my friend will withdraw the point of no quorum. 

Mr. HOLMAN. At the gentleman's instance, I do. 

So the amendment was agreed to. 

'The Clerk read as follows: 

For railway post-office cle1·ks, $-!,482,300. 

Mr. HORR. I move to strike out" $4,482,300" and insert "$4,682,-

300." 

Mr. W A.RNER, of Ohio. Before tlle vote is had on that let us know 

whether that increase is for an increaseofthenumber of postal clerkS or of the salaries of the number now provided by law. 

Mr.HORR. It is the amount needed to put sufficient service on the new roads which have been already built and will go into operation during the next year. 

}lr. W A.RNER, of Ohio. And is not to operate to increase salaries? 

Mr. HORR. No, sir. ThePostmaster-.Generalestimatesthatitwill 

take every -dollar of it to provide for the increase in the service for the 

coming fiscal year. 

Mr. RYAN. The salaries are already fixed by law in amount, and can not be increased. 

The CHAIRMAN. The question is on agreeing to the amendment 

of the gentleman from Michigan. . Tbe.qnestiori. was taken; and on a division there were-ayes 95, noes 51. 

So the amendment was 3.1¥eed to. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Office of the Third Assistant Postmaster-General: For manufacture of adhesive postage-stamps and of newspaper and periodical stnmps, $174,000. That 

upon all matter of the first class, as defined by chapter 180 of the law of Congress approved March 3, 18i9, entitled "An act making appropriations for the 

service of the Post-Office Department for the fiscal year ending June 30,1880, and 

for other purposes," and by th!l.t act declared subject.to postage at the rate of 3 cents for each half ounce or fraction thereof, postage shall be charged, on and 

after the 1st day of July, 1885, at the rate of 2 cents for each ounce or fraction 

thereof; and upon all matter of the second class as defined by said act, and by that act-declared subject to postage at the rate of 2 cents for each pound or fraction thereof, shall be charged, on and after the lstday of July,1885, except as pro- vided in section 25 of said act approved March 3, 18i9, 1 cent for each pound or fraction thereof; aud all acts, so fa r as they fix a different rate of postage than 

herein provided upon such first and second class matter, are to that extent hereby repealed on and after July 1,1885. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. On the part of the Committee on Appropriations, and by diiection of the committee, I am authorized to submit the 

amendment whic.h I send to the desk. The Clerk read as follows: 

On page 9, after the word." thereof," in line 192, strike out all that follows 

down to and including line 202 and in lieu thereof insert : ' 'That upon all publications of the second class, except as provided in section 25 

of said act, when sent by the publisher thereof and from the office of publication to bonafide subscribens, o when sent from a news agency to actual subscribers 

thereto1 or to other news agents, shall, on and after July 1, 1885, be entitled to tmnsm1ssion through the mails at 1 cent a. pound, or fraction thereof, such postage to be prepaid, ns now provided by law: Provided, however, That publishers of second-class publications may mail sample copies of such publications at the rnte of 1 cent for each four ounces, or fractional part thereof, to be prepaid by or- dinary stamp1 !l.ftixed thereto, and all acts, so far as they fix a different rnte of 

postage than herein provided upon such first and second class matter are to that extent he!~ by repealed on and after July 1, 1885." 

Mr. LONG. I will ask the gentleman from Illinois. whether he will 

accept the following amendment to the amendment which! am requested 

to offer. It simply authorizes the sender of a newspaper or other publication tomark any artiQle to which particular attention is desired. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the amendment proposed 

by the gentleman from Massachusetts. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Add at the end of the amendment just read: 

"And any article or item in any newspaper or other publication may be marked 

for observation, except by written or printed words, without increase of postage." 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. For my own part I have no objection to that. 

Mr. LONG. · The Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads have no objection to it .. 

Mr. BINGHAM. That is right. 

Is an amendment now in order? 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair thinks this amendment to the a.mendment should be voted upon separately. 

Mr. WARNER, of Ohio. Before that question is put I wish to be 

heard a moment upon it. 

The CHAIR:UAN. The Chair is of opinion thai! the amendment just 

submitted must be voted upon separately by the committee, as the 

gentleman from lllinois states that he has no authority to accept it. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I am not authorized by the committee to do so. The CHAIRMAN. The question is on agreeing to the amendment 

to the amendment. 

The amendment to the amendment was agreed to. , Mr. WARNER, of Ohio. Now, before the vote is taken upon the 

amendment of the gentleman from Illinois, I wish to say a word or two. I do not know but that the amendment submitted by the gentleman in charge of the bill is sufficiently restrictive as applied to 

ne'Yspapers and periodicals sent to actual subscribers on which it is 

proposed to reduce the postage. So far as the reduction on such matter 

goes I have no objection to it. But a vast deal of rubbish is sent 

through the mail under the guise of newspapers and periodicals, and 

to this class of matter the reduction ought not to extend. I think we should guard against letting in anything but established newspapers 

sent to regular subscribers and periodicals regularly issued to actual 

subscribers. The proposed change reduces transportation on papers to 

$20 per ton across the continent, w bile for letters it amounts at the rnte 

of 2 cents per ounce or fraction thereof to $640 per ton. T~e difference 

is very great, and it seems to me the reduction on letters is sustained 

by better reasons than the reduction upon newspapers. 

Before taking my seat, Mr. Chairman, I wish to say a word in re·- sponse to the opinion expressed by the chairman of the CoAimittee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads in his report on this question, and to dissent in toto from the opinion expressed by him therein. I read from 

that report: 

That postage upon written and printed matter is not a pay for service by the 

Government, but a tax, le"-ied as Imposts and excises are, for the general purpose of revenue. 

I ask the gentleman under what clause of the Constitution a tax of 

that kind could be levied? Certainly not under the clause providing 

for the-apportionment of direct taxes, nor under the uniformity clause. 

It is in no sense a tax:. It is compensation for a specific service; and I 

think that the co"mpensation ought to be sufficient to pay on the aver- age the cost of the transportation whether of newspapers and periodicals or anything else. I do not believe in taxing one industry or one business to give more.profit to another. On the assumption, theref~re, 

that 1 cent a pound will cover the cost of mail transportation of regularly issued newspapers and periodicals-- [Cries of " Vote ! '·' 

"Vote!"] 

I shall not be taken off the floor by a call for a vote from that side of 

the Honse. Yon will require to have a quorum to do it. 

Mr. WHITE, of Kentucky. I rise to a question of order. 

The CHAIRl\1AN. The gentleman from Ohio [Mr. WARNER] is in 

order, and the committee is out of order. 

Mr. WARNER, of Ohio. I have occupied no time on this bill before, and I deem this an important matte:·, especially as expenditures for 

postal service already largely exceed tbe postal revenues. . The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. WmTE] 

states that he rises to a question of order. He will state it. ( 

Mr. WHITE, of Kentucky. It is due to every gentleman while 

speaking to have the attention of this House; and I make the point that 

there shall be order while the gentleman is speaking. · The CHAIRMAN. The Chair has so decided. , Mr. W A.RNER, of Ohio. I have no desire to take up time, but I do 

not propose to be taken off my feet by the demand of anybody for a vote. But I have said all I desire to say; and believing the amendment 

of the gentleman from illinois who has charge of the bill imposes sufficient restriction, I do not desire to say any more. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. The 

question is on the amendment submitted by the gentleman from lllinois [Mr. TOWNSHEND] on behalf of the Committee on Appropriations. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I submit on behalf of the Committee on Appropriations another amendment which I send to the desk. 
1885. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1593 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Aft.er the amendment last adopted add the following: "That at the future lettings of contracts for the manufacture of postage-,s.tamps, 

stamped envelopes, postal cards, and other postal securities, the SecrE:tary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, required to submit bids for the manufa~~ure of said stamps, stamped envelopes, postal cards, and other postal secur1t1es, by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing of tlle Treasury Department, which bids shall be considered in competition with bids from private parties; but provided that tlle Postmaster-General mny reject any and all the bids of private parties and award t.he contracts, or any of them, upon the bid of the Secretary of the Treasury, if in his judgment it shall be for the best interests of the Governmen.t." 

The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by 

the gentleman from lllinois [Mr. ToWNSHEND]. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. If there be no objection to it, let it be adopted 

without debate. 

The amendment was adopted. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I ask to have printed in the RECORD a_ letter 

from the Third Assistant Postmaster-General in relation to this matter. 

There was no objection. 

The letter is as follows: POST-OFFICE DEPARTMENT, 

OFFICE OF THIRD ASSISTANT POSTMASTER-GENERAL, 

Washington, D. C., FebnJ.aT1J 2, 1885, 

Sm: I am in receipt of yours of the 31st ultimo, and have to thank you for the prompt and favorable manner in which you have acted upon the suggestions con tamed in my letter of the 29th ultimo. I am glad to know that you are already prepared to manufacture tlle adhesive postage-st-amps and postal cards, the contracts for which expire on the 30th of June next, and that you think that the stamped envelopes, which are under con- tract until September 30, 1886, can be included in my general plan of having all JIOstal securities done by your bureau, provided the same can be performed as cheaply as by responsible private parties. :r.Ir. Sullivan and Mr. Casilear, who were kind enough to respond to my request made of you on the 29th ultimo for a personal conference, and to whom I suggested the propriety of including the envelope~ .. were somewhat doubtful as to whether you would provide facilities for this piu-ticular work, ·and your letter therefore proves to be more gratifying than I had been led to expect. In answer to your inquiry as to whether there is "any present law which will prohibit this (your) bureau, with the consent of the Postmaster-General and the Secretary of the 'fteasur::r, from submitting bids at the next letting," I beg to say that. under the p~es.ent ~tatutes I do not ~no~ of ~nything that "!ould prevent you from subiDJUmg b1ds, or that would Just.lfy this Department m re- fusing to consider such bids in competition with those of private parties. So far from that, when the proposals for the contracts were advertised for, nearly. four years ago,! strongly urged upon your predeeessor and other officers of the bureau that the bureau enter into the competition. 1\Iy suggestions, however, were unheeded, for the reasons given in your letter. You will also remember that I most cordially entered into the movement made by yourselflsome two years since, looking to the procurement of the work, .nnd tha.t I gave you all needed facilities for examining into the requirements of the conh-acts and for arriving at the pmbnble cost. . I am ,-ery glad to h~ar you say now that "in any event I (you) ehall feel it my (your) duty,'withtlle consent of the Secretary and Postmaster-General, to sub· mit estimates, in the nature of bids, of the cost of executing such classes of postal 

securities, as invitations for proposals shall be advertised from time to time." Notwithstanding thjs assurance, however, I think, and doubt not you agree with me, that it would be better to have legislation making the matter compul- sory upon the Treasury Department. In tlle face of the reasons so strongly 

urged byyou.for gh-ing the bureau a monopoly of the work, I still adhere to the opinion l expressed to 1\lr. Sulliva~nd Mr. Casilear, that you should come in merely as a competitor, and that the work should not be given to you absolutely. 

Admitting the justice of much of what you say in supportofyour.position1Iam yet disposed to regard the question somewhat from the standpoint of the mter- csl of this Dc.p!lrtment, separately considered. 'Vhilc not disputing the grounds of public policy laid down . in favor of your bureau, and admittina- the security and possession of facilities claimed in your favor, still I believe t·llat there are some private concerns, notably the leading bank-note companies, who could with all reasonable safety be intrusted with the work. In the case of any such concern I do not concede your proposition that if the contract be taken "at a sacrifice of its pecunia1·y interests" there •• would be a constant inducement to reduce the standard of the work, and the sn.feguards which are necessary to the proper protection of the interests of the Government." To a reputable concern holding a Government contract there are indirect benefits-in the way of obta.ining work in the line of private and corporate securities and obligations, and also Government work for foreign countries-that I think this Department is justly entitled to take advantage of in providing for its work. Such advantage would inure not only to this Department, but to the General Government, if the work should be done more cheaply than you could do it. In the case of such concern as I have mentioned, there could be no inducement to slight the work in an artistic point of view, since the same is undertaken for the sake of the credit it carries with it, and bad work would'be hurtful rather than beneficial in the way of realizing the indirect benefits which I have sug- gested. The same would be true of the more material part of the work, of what- ever nature it might be. 'Vith regard to the security to the Government, any reputable concer~ may, I think, be 1·clied upon to use its utmost efforts, through the best system of checks attainablel toward safely guarding the large monetary values represented on the face ot the work, since, independently of the heavy penalty fixed by -the bond, it would result in utter ruin to have any serious misadventure occur with the securities while in private custody. Moreover, if you will pardon the sug- gestion, it would be likely to serve as a wholesome incentive to enterprise and economy on the part of your buxeau to be placed in competition with the better class of private concerns engaged in similar work to that done by you. And I think if your bureau were required to compete for the work it would be product- ive of wholesome competition, not only in securing fair offers, but in preventing combinations among private bidders with the view to securing the contract upon their own terms. The bureau and private concerns will hold eachotherincheck, and t.he result in any case is bound to be to the.advantage of this Department in securing JDod- erate prices. In any event the amendment proposed by me leaves the matter wholly in the hands of t.he Postmaster-General, and he may order the work to be done by your bureau without reference to the bids of other parties; and in my opinion he will be likely to do this if you are not found to be too much in 

excess of other responsible bids. I run free to say that there are reasons looking to relief from official responsibility that would incline me to give preference to your bureau, but not at too great an expense to the postal revenue. Noting your suggestion that "the true and wisest course would be to transfer thE" work to the bureau without going through the unnecessary form of advertising and receiving bids"-" upon the ground of public policy, leaviug mat- ters of price and other details to be adjusted between the officers of the two Departments," I can only say that it might assist the officers of this Department in .fixing the price to ascertain thl'ough bidsreceh-ed upon public advertisement what is considered by competent authorities to be a jusi, compensation. If I may ask you to pardon another suggestion, it might prove useful also in de- termining whether or not work of this character can be.done as cheaply and as well by the Government as by private parties; a. question which, I believe, hAll been seriously disputed, and concerning the merits of which I do not preteDd to be advised. Upon further consideration, I have modified my proposed amendment some- what, so as to read as follows: . "Provided, That at the future lettings of con tracts for the manufacture of postage-stamps, stamped envelopes, postal cards, and other postal secutitics, the 

Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, required to submit bids for tho manufacture of said stamps, stamped envelopes, postal cards, and other postal securities by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing of the Treasurr Deparftment, which bids shall be considered in competition with bids from prtvate par- ties; but provided that the Postmaster-General may reject any or all the bids of private parties, and a ward the contracts, or any of them, upon tlte bid of the Secretary of the Treasury, if, in his judgment, it shall be for the best interests of the Government to do so." . The modification, as you will observe, does not affect the position previously taken with reference to your bureau, being essential only in expressly author- izing the Postmaster-General to discriminate among the bidd of private parties. In view of the important character of the work, involving, as it does, the high- est style of art, and underlying the very foundation of the entire postnl reve- nues, only the bids of the most thoroughly responsible and fully equipped con- cerns should be considered at all, and even these latter are left to be re;ected in favor of your bureau, absolutely at the discretion of the Postmaster-General. Acting upon your aftirmative response to my letter of the 29th ultimo, I shall take immediate occasion to lay the subject before the Postmaster-General, with the recommendation that, with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, he request favorable action upon my proposed amendment in the Post-Offi.ce ap- propriation bill now pending before the House of Representatives. I shall also -request him to inclose copies of this co.rrespondence with his recommendation, so that your proposal, as well as mine, if this latter be approved by him, may be considered by Congress. . Before closing, I can not forbear exp.ressing my extreme gratification at your statement "that all who are a.t all familiar with this work recognize the fact that the rates now paid are extremely low." I am glad to know that the faet is 

recognized by others than myself, tha not only are prices in the present con- tract very low, but that there have been great reductions in the cost of supplies furnished to this office since the beginning of my administration of its atfa.irs; on the 1st of July, 1877. As an evidence of the fact, I beg to submit the following table, prepared some time since, showing tlle number and cost of article."! fur- nished during the fiscal year ended June 30, 1884, as compared to the number and cost of those furnished during tL."e year ended June 30, 1877, namely: 

(k).nlpamtive statement of supplies furni8hed by the office of the Third Assistm1t Post- master-General. 

Articles. 

I I Year ended June 30, 1877.jYear ended June30, 1884. 

Number fur- nished. Cos<. I N'::L..~~- Cost. 

------------------1--------1---

Postage-stamps ...... : ............. . Postal cards ......................... . Stamped • envelopes and wrappers .......................... . 704,836,524 $110,189 59 1, 469,209,996 $135,974 47 170,015,500 226,463 94. 362,876,750 197,466 33 

185, 401, 895 428, 224 63 324.,043, 650 619,!!31. 21 Registered package, post- . office, dead-letter, and official envelopes ....... .......... ···, __ 1_5_, 3_l_o_, 7_oo_i,_5_2_, 504 ___ 1_1_, ___ 39 __ , 02_-_1_, _960_,_1_02_, sao __ ss_ 

Total.. .......................... ll, 075,564,619 817,382 Z7 !2,205,152,356 11,005,502 ~ 

Comparison.. 

Increase in . l fcr cent .. of Per cent- number fur- Increnseu~ 1ncrease 1n a.ge of 

n· d. cost. uu~~:£ur- ~:~~ Articles. 

Postage-stamps. .................... 774,373,472 $?-5, 784 88 -- 109.8 --- 23.4 Postal cards..... .................... 192,861,250 *28, 997 61 113.4 *12. 8 Stamped envelopes and 

wrappers ... ..... ....... . ..... ...... 138, 641,775 191, 006 58 1 74.7 44. 6 Registered package, postoffice, dead-letter, and offi- cial envelopes............ .. ....... 22,711,260 50,326 77 154. 8 95.8 

Total .......... ...... .... ·······l-L,-1-29-,-sg;-, 7-37-l-.238-,-1-.20-62-, 105.0 I 29.1 

* Decrease. 

It will be observed that for the year ended June 30, 1877, the total mvnber of the various articles furnished-postage-stamps, postal cards, stamped envelopes and wrappers,registered-packa.ge,post-office, dead-letter, and official envelopes- was 1,075,564,619, costing $817,382.Z7; while for the year ended June 30,1884, the number of ,articles furnished was 2,205,152,356, costing $.1,055,502.89-being au in- crease of 1,129,sg;,737, or 105 per cent. in the number of articles furnished, and of only $238,120.62, or 29 per cent., in the cost of the same. Taking the different articles separately, the increase of posta.ge-stamps wa, 774,373,472, or 109.8 per cent., in number, and $25,784.88, or 23.4 per cent., in com.; of postal cards, an increase of 192,861,250, orll3.4 per cent. , in number, and a de- crease of $28,997.61, or 12.8 per cent., in cost; of stamped envelopes and wrap- pe«"S, a.n increase of< 138,641755, or 74.7 per cent., in number, and ofS191,006.58,or 44..6 per cent., in cost; and of registered-package, post-office, dead-letter, and offima.l envelopes, an increase of 23,711,260, or 104.8 per cent., in number, and of $.."0,32G.77, or 95.8 per cent., in cost. • The subject of the great reduction effected in the cost of supplies for this office was touched upon in my annual report for the year ended June 30, 1882, in con- nection with the mention of a new contract, then recently made, for the supply of stamped envelopes and• newspaper wrappers for the four years beginning 

vctober 1, 1882, as follows: "The prices in the new contract (for staQlped envelopes and wrappers) aver- age a. reduction of nearly 7 per cent. f1·om those in the old one. The law requires 

• 
• 

1594 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-·HOUSE. FEBRUARY 12, 

that stamped envelopes shall be sold at the cost of procurement, as nt>ar as may be, and accordingly a new schedule of prices has been adopted for the le of the 

em·elopes to the public at reduced rates. The present reduction follows one of 

about 20 per cent. four years ago, under the contract then made. Under the new schedule the best quality note size envelopes will be sold, exclusive of the postage v-alue, at $1.60 per 1,000; of full letter size, at $2 per 1,000; of commercial size, at $2.20 per 1iX>O; of extra. letter size, at $2.40 per 1,000; of official size, at $3.60 per 1,000; and or extra-official size, at $4 per 1,000. The second quality envelopes are sold at 20 cents per thousand less than -those prices, and the third quality envelopes at 20 cents per thousand less than the second quality, for corresponding sizes.. 

"The full letter and extra letter sized ungummed envelopes for circulars are sold at SL20 and S1.40, respectively, and the newspaper wrappers at $1 per 1,000, 

in addition to postage. "To illustrate the great reduction in the :price of tamped envelopes during the pa.st.few years, a letter-size envelope,whtch in 1869 was sold at $4.80perl,OOO, is now furnished in equally good if not better grade at $1.80 per 1,000. An extra. letter~ize envelope, which then sold at S6 per 1,000, can now be furnished in as good quali ~ at $2.40. The official size, then sold at .60 per 1,000, is now offered · in an equ(l]ly good quality at S3.40 per 1,000. The public has received the pecuniary benefits of these reductions, the envelopes being sold by the Department, as before stated, at the cost of procuring them. Equally great reductions have been 

attained in the cost of other supplies. Adhesive postage- tamps, which in 1869 cost 2il cents per 1,000, are now obtained at9.19 cents per 1,000; and po tal cards, 

first· introduced in1873, and then costing $1.391- per 1,000, are now procured at54.43 cents per 1.000." 

Again thanking you for the prompt and courteous manner in which you re- sponded to my suggestion of the 29th ultimo, I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

A.D. HAZEN, 

Third Assistant Postmaster-General. 

Hon. T. N. BURRILL, 

Ohitf of Bureau of Engmving and Printing, 

Treasury Department. 

:Mr. BINGHAM. I desire, and. I think the committee will make no objection, to amend the bill by striking out from line 181, after the word 

"dollars," to line 192, including the word " thereof," and inserting 

what I send to the desk, in order that the section in the bill may be 

epnsistent with local postage as well as domestic. It simply makes the 

bill consistent. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Strike out all after the word "dollars," in Line 181, down to and including the 

word" thereof," in line 192, and insert the following: "That on nnd after the first day of July,"l885, upon all matter of the first class as defined by chapter 180 of the Jaws of Congress, approved March 3, 1879, en- titled' An act making appropriations for the service of the Post-Office Depart- ment for the fiscal year endrng June 30, 1880, and for other purposes,' except 

postal cards and drop-letters, postage shall be charged at the rate of 2 cents for 

each ounce or fraction thereof; drop letters shall bema.iled'at the rate of2cents 

per ounce or fraction thereof, including delivery at letter-carrier offices, and 1 cent for each ounce or fraction ~hereof where free delivery is not e tablished; 

and postal cards shall be transmitted through the mails at a postal charge of 1 cent each, including cost of manufacture." 

Mr. HORR. That is righb. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I desire to reserve the point of order on that proposition until the effect of it is seen. I desh·e to ask a question in regard 

to it. I apprehend the effect of it is this: Under the present system in 

view of the advantages given to the cities having free delivery they 

pay something for the benefit of that free delivery. 'The effect of this 

is to relieve the cities having the benefit of the free delivecy from the· payment of additional compensation. Is that the effect of it? 

:Mr. TOWNSHEND. As there will be debate on this amendment I 

ask the gentlen:uu:i from Pennsylvania [Mr. BINGHAM] to yield to me for a motion .that the committee rise.· It is understood we are to have a night session. ~Ir. BINGHAM. This is so clearly in consistency with your own proposition that I thinlr it will be unnecessary to debate it. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND.. I ask the gent an to yield to me for a mo- tion that the committee rise. 

1t1r. BINGHAM. Very well. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I move that the committee rise. 

The motion was agreed to. 

The committee accordingly rose; and the Speaker pro tempore having 

resumed the chair, Mr. SPRINGER reported that the Committee of the 

Whole House on the state of the Union having ha.d under consideration 

the bill (H. R. 8138) making appropriations for the service of the.PostOffice Department for tlie fiscal year ending June 30, 1886, and for 

other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon. 

:l\IESSAGE FRO'll THE SENATE. 

A message from the Senate, by Mr. McCooK, its Secretary, announced 

that the Senate insisted on its amendments disagreed to by the House 

to the bill (H. R. 7851) making appropriations for the consular and 

diplomatic service of the Go>ernment for the fiscal year ending June 

30, 1886, and for other purposes, agreed to the conference asked by the 

House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses, and had appointed as conferees on the part of the Senate :Mr. ALLISoN, Mr. HALE, and 

:Mr. BECK. 

The message also announced that the Senate insisted on its amendments disagreed to by the Ho~ to the bill (H. R. 7785) making appropriations for the payment of invalid and other pensions of the United 

States for the :fiscal year endjng June 30~1886, and for other purposes, 

agreed to the conference asked by the House on the disagreeing votes 

of the two Houses, and had appointed as conierees on the }>art of the 

Senate Mr •. ALLISON, Mr. DAWES, and Jtlr. CALL. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

1\Ir. TOWNSHEND. I move that the House take a recess until 8 

o'clock to-night. 

:Mr. WILLIS. I desire to ask the gentlelJlan from Illinois a question. Is it understood that at the close of to-night's ession, in pursu- ance of the order of the House, he will make a motion for a recess until 

10 o'clock to-morrow? 

1\fr. TOWNSHEND. I am perfectly willing to do so, or that the 

gentleman from Kentucky [l\1r. WILLIS] should do so. l\1r .. WHITE, of Kentucky. I do not understand there is any uru:m- imous consent to meet to-morrow at 10 o'clock. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. That has been ordered by the House. 

NEW ORLEANS EXPOSITION. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pending the question on the motion 

for a. recess the Chair submits a communication from the President of 

the United States. · 

The Clerk read as follows: 

To the Senate and House of Representatives : 

I transmit herewith a copy of the report of the board ofmanaget'S of the ·world's 

Industrial and Cotton Centennial Exposition, dated February 2,1885, r equesting an additional appropriation to extinguish a deficit in its accounts, and asking authority to reopen the exposition during the winter of 1885-'86. A failure on the part of the management to carry out the original intent in re- gard to the expo ition might reflect on the honor of the United States Govern- ment. since twenty-one foreign governments and forty-six States and Territories 

have joined in the enterprise through faith in the sanction of the Government. In view of this fact, and in consideration of the value of the exposition to the cause of matexial progress and general education. I respectfully submit there· 

port mentioned for the favorable consideration of Congress. 

CHESTER A. ARTHUR. ExECUTIVE 1\.JANSION, 

Washington, D. C., February 12,1885. 

The message of the President was referre9. to the Committee on .Ap- , 

propriations, and ordered to be printed. 

NAVAL .ADVISORY BOARD. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House a. letter from the 

Secretary of the Navy, with an inclosure, in response to a resolution of 

the House calling for information as to expenditures of the naval advisory board; also as to any changes in the plans for hulls, boilers, ma- chinery, &c., in the ships Chicago, Boston, Atlanta, and Dolphin. 

Ur. RANDALL. I do not see the chairman of the Committee on Naval .Affairs-present, but I move that the communication be referred 

to that committee, and be printed in the RECORD. 

It was so ordered. 

The communication is as follows: 

NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, Februaryll,188.3. 

Sm: This Department has received a copy of the resolution adopted by the House of Representatives on the 3d of Feoruary, as foJlows: 

".Resowed, That the Secretary of the Navy be requested to inform this House the amount that has been expended by the naval advisory board as the cost of 

the board; the nnru ber of employes, and an10unts paid each; the amount of 

salary drawn by tlle civilian members of id boardl and from what appropri- ation it was drawn; a.nd the amount paid each memt>er of the board as travel· 

ing..mileage, or oll1cr expenses; also, what changes, if any, have been made from 

the original plans i n hulls,boilers, machinery, &c., by the Secretary of theNavy and the advisory board, of the ship Chicago, Boston, Atlanta, and Dolphin, and 

the cost of such change in each case." · The advisory board has expended no money and has no power to expend 

money. All expenditures on its .account have been made by the Department. The board was organized October .24., 1882, and during the two and one-fourth 

years of its existence there has been expended for furniture, stationery, drawing materials, and petty micellaneous objects for its use the sum of $5,830.83. The 

board has no employes, but certain necessary assistants have been borne on the 

rolls of the Bureaus of Construction and Repair and Steam-Engineering, and as- signed to duty with the board, six being now so employed. The sums affixed to the following names are the amounts of compensation paid such assistants to February 4: C. R. Hanscom, draughtsman, $3,380; C. Hemje, draughtsman, $2,-

763.50; A. Becker, draughtsman, 83,397; W. H. Scott, draughtsman, $508; ·L. Eidlitz, draughtsma.n, $164.50; D. Zevely, writer, .,.924; W, G: Cobnrn, writer, $813. Me rs. Hanscom and Hemje were previously-in theemployoftheDepartment, and were assigned to duty under the bl>ard. · The duties of the board have included, in addition to those on the new cruis- ers, much labor on the plans of additional vessels and for the double-turreted 

monitors and mtich experimental work, all required by law. 

There have been employed as assistants to the inspectors of materials at the 

steel works, with total compensation as affixed to their names: .J.H. Davidson, $1,570; C. W. Boggs, $231; J. C. Calderwood, Sill; A. B. Russell, $90; F. I'. Streeter, $566.50. These ~e no longer employed. There are borne on the rolls of the Bureau of ConStruction and Repair, and 

assigned to duty at Chester, Pa., under the inspectors of hulls of the new cruis- ers, preparing finished and other drawings of the vessels, with total compensasation as affixed to their names, the following : 

J. A. Hargan, draughtsman .................................................................... ~. f178 00 

George P. Frothingham, draughtsman........ .......................................... 1, 635 00 

r ji;!~~~t:~\!~~i~=~··:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:-::-:-:-::·:-::·:-:::::-~·:::::::-::-~·:::·:·:·::·:·:·:·:·~·:·:·:·~·:::: ~: ~ ~ F. L. Dubosq, assistant draughtsman ..................................................... 1,117 61 

:.·fl:feerS::~~~~:.~~::.~.~~.:.~~.::::::::::::::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.·::::::: ~I~ ~~ A very small proportion of the amount paid the foregoing employes is due to the existence and maintenance of the naval advisory board, as the work done 

has J>een ~sential to the designing and construction of the vessels and to carry out the lawAofCongress, and would have been equally necessary if there had 

be~.nH=~eers. as civilian member, has been allowed a salary of 55,000 per 

year, -and has received for salary.and expenses 12,084.58. 1\Ir. Miers Coryell was allowed the same salary, and was paid for salary and expenses up to the time of 

his resignation, October 1, 1884, 88,112.58. These amounts were, by authority of 
• 

1885. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD=-HOUSE. 1595 

law, paid from the appropriation for the new steel cruisers. The ex-penses paid the o~her members of the board have been only for traveling mileage, as follows : 

Rear--Admiral R. W. Shufeldt (former president)................................... $129 « Rear-Admiral Edward Simpson............................................................ 513 04 

~~:-~nf.»~~!il~.~~~-~~~.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 1,~ ~ Lieut. Commander F. M. Barber........................................................... 1,450 41 Naval Constructor F. L. Fernald............................................................ 1, 698 92 

Lieut. Edwq W. Very (former member)............................................. 301 76 

Accompanying this communication are transmitted statements showing the changes made from the original plans ofthe Chicago, Boston, Atlanta., and Dol· phin, and the cost of such changes in each case. The statements do not include those ordinary minor changes in details which have been found expedient and have been authorized and made from time to time as the work has progressed, 

without increased cost or any loss to the Government; but they do include aU material changes and all changes involving any variation in the cost. They also embrace all additions of requisites not contemplated by the original designs nor included in the contracts and specifiootions, but which it has been deemed nec- essary to have furnished by the contractor in order to seasonably complete the ships for service and to add to their efficiency. The contr.lct cost of each ship, the cost of changes and additions to date, and the percentage of the increase of the contract cost for changes and additions are as follows: 

Chicago. Boston. Atlanta. Dolphin. 

Contract cost .............................. $889,000 00 $619,000 00 ~17, 000 00 $315,000 00 Cost of changes and additions to date_........................................ 31, 550 50 20, 955 75 21, 991 93 15, 880 !Y1 Percentage .................... :............ 3l 3t 3t 5 

After making allowances, in considering the above figures, for the additions which were not included in the original contracts, and of .course were not con- templated by the contractor in making his bids, it will be found thnt the changes 

have been fewer and their cost less 'han could reasonably have been expected in designing and building the first steel cruisers for our NaVY. Certain changes require special mention. Before work was commenced on the machinery of the Chicago a change was made in its general arrangement. The condensers were placed under the beam-centers instead of outboard, the stroke of pist-on being made the same for both the high and the low pressure cylinders, and increased to My-seven inches. The valves were placed on the outboard instead of the inboard side of the cylinders, making them more accessi- ble~ These ·changes were made with a view to increasing the efficiency of the machinery, and do not affect the cost of construction . . The "substitution of eight blowers for four large ones," the "drilling instead of punching rivet-holes," and part of the" ventilators of engine and boiler- rooms" were required because of a change in the arrangement of the boilers and some modifications of the specifications. The change was made after the work had been commenced. The weight of the boilers in the new arran~ement of five double-ended and two single-ended boilers with four fire-rooms m- stead of fourteen single-ended boilers with two :fire-rooms was reduced, and the cost was thereby lessened; but the value of the work already done which had to be abandoned was equal to the reduction; and no allowance was made either way. This change does not alter the type of boiler, and brick furnaces and ex:· ternal firing are retained, but the greater subdivisions of the fire-rooms admits of a. more advantageous application of forced draft;· and an arrangement of br~ge-wall and combustion chamber which gives more effective combustion of fuel. 

Careful e:x:amjnatio_n and test of the fractured part and other length of the •steel shafting of the Dolphin caused serious doubts as to the reliability of the shafts of the other ships, which, being similarly manufactured, were liable to the same faults, and raised the question whether the art of forging steel shafts from single ingots has been so developed in this country as to make the results sufficiently trustworthy. To avoid all doubt and risk and to prevent the delays 

which would become necessary while applying a series of adequate physical tests to the steel shafts, it was finally determined by the Advisory Board and the Department· to ailow the contrnctor t-o put into the vessels iron shafts of ap- proved manufacture which, if they stand durin.~r the trial kips and final trials, are to be accepted, the contractor, however, to allow the Government the differ- ence between the cost of making the iron and the steel shafting. 

Such steel shafting as has been already made is to be subjected to all reason- able tests for determining its strength, and those parts which stand such tests are to be taken by t.he Government and paid for as duplicate shafting at their cost to the contractor. If any parts are broken by reason of any extraordinary tests which could not be fairly insisted on for proof, considering the existing 'conditions of steel manufacture in this country, the GovernmenL is also to pay the cost of such parts. · ,.. The ultimate cost of this change to the Government is not yetknown. It was undoubtedly a fair, wise, and prudent; arrangement. In this connection occa.- sion is taken to repeat the suggestions of the annual report of the Department: · "The law requiring the shiifs to be built of steel of great tensile strength and ductility has been complied with, and rigid chemical and physical tests applied to the material, causing much difficulty and delay and extra expense to the contractor, owing to his losses from rejected material, which, as in the case of the broken steel shan of the Dolphin, wM imperfect only because of the inex- perience of our steel manufacturers in producing metal of prescribed strength and ductility combined. Pa.tience1 forbearance, and liberal treatment of the manufacturers are necessary in oraer to encourage them to undertake the de- velopment of the production in this country of steel plate and armor for naval 

vessels and ingots for heavy cannon." Very respectfully, 

Ron. J. G. CARLISLE, 

W. E. CHANDLER, 

Secretary of the Navy. 

Speaker of the House of .Representatives. 

Statement of cost of changes ·made" -in and additions to the original pltms of the 

United Statu srea·mer Chicago. 

[NoTE.-ltems in italics are credits; *denotes additions; other items are changes.] 

Object. 

Hull: .. Increasing thickness of inner bottom ...•......•...•...•. ·-···· Engine foundation and strengthening of double bot- • tom ......................•.....................•.• ; ................... ~ ........ . Changes and additions to fire-room hatches ...........•..... Additional coat-scuttles* .............................................. . 

Amount. Approved by Department. 

$922 00 April21,1884 

2, 796 10 l\Iay 23. 1884 6, 990 53 Sept. 6, 1884 ,1, 60 Sept. 6, 1884. 

Statement of cost of changes ma<k in. and additions fQ the original plam of the United 

States sreamer 0 hicago-Continued. 

Object. 

Water-t.ight doors in coal-bunkers ...••.•......................... Wire panels in ward-room and store-1·oom doors, &c.* Armory on gun-deck ani:\ casing to ward-room skylight* ................................................... ·-··················· Light-box: to fixed-ammunition room .......................... . Armory workshop, with work-table, &c.*·················· Additional labor and material to secure engine-bed ..... Inclosures_around engine-hatches between gun and spar decks ....................•...•......................................... Change of doorway No.U .....•.................................•.... Extension oftixed-ammunition room (forward} .......... . Sixteen hinged lights in-engine-hatch inclosure*········· 

Ventilation of engine and boiler rooms ...... ~··············· Ventilator for steering engine* .................•.................. Additional beams on or lop-deck ............................ ·-····· 

Machinery: 

Substitution of eight blowers for four large ones ......... . Utilizing pump taken from Dolphin .••...................•..••.••... Twonewcondensers,costoverandabovetha$required 

by specifications ...... - .............................. .....•.............. Additional piping and labor ..... _ ......•....•.•.....••.............. Two additional screws; solid cast-iron, $1,250 each ..... . One compartment pump in eachengine-roominstead of three (total) .........................................................•. Two combined air and circulating pumps, $675 each, 

purchased by Bureau of Steam-Engineering ..•...... _. 

Boilers: 

Am t Approv oun · Department. 

$504 00 Sept .. s. ~ 

'106 00 Sept.13,1884 

350 00 Nov. 29,18Si 158 00 Dec. 11, 1884 140 00 Dec. 11~ 1884 66 84 Dec. 11. 1884 I 

1,191 00 Dec. 11, 1884 61 27 Dec. 11, 1884 118 00 Dec. 11,1884 560 00 Dec. 11,1884 

5, 380 00 J a.n. 13, 1885 206 ()() Jan. 13, 1885 

170 00 Jan. 13,188.> 

20,79464 

2,000 00 1.,062 50 .Tune 7,1884 

&pt. 12.1B84 

200 00 Sept. 17,188! 37500 Sept. 17,1884 

2,500 ()() Sept. 'Zl, 1888 

425 ()() Oct. 10,1884 

1,350 00 Sept. 17,1884 1-----1 6,850 ()() 

Additional cost for drilling instead or punching rivetholes ..... ·-··········-··································..................... 3, 000 00 Sept. 20,1884. Loss to contractor by rejectien of annealed plates...... l, 968 36 Sept. 20,188-i 

"4,968 36 

' 

RECAPITULATION. Changes, &c.: 

~~e~it:::·::·:::::·:·::::::::·:·:::::::::::::::::·:·:::::::::::::::.:_::::::::::::-::~:.:_:_:_::.:_:_:··$t":i"gg S20, ~ 64 

. --- 5,'M750 :Boilers ................•.......................................................... :................. 4, 968 .'36 

----- Total .. . ................ .. .. ..... ........ ... .. . ...... ........... ...... ... ... ...... ... ..•... ...... 31, 55Q w 

Statement of cost of changes m~t:.t: ~==!tr~~~ the original plans of the Unikd 

[NOTE.-Items in italies are credits; *denotes -additions; other items 1lre changes.] 

Object. 

Hull: 

Increasing thickness of inner bottom. ......•................... One anchor davit. complete* ........................................ . Two hatches to engineers' store-room ......................... . CQtting a-qd fit;ting hatches from magazines and shell-rooms ................................................................ . Vertical stringers to bulkheads at both ends of super- structure-deck ........................................................... . Extra bulwarks ........................................................•... Thirty-eight life-line stanchions* ................................ . Twelve coaling-port doors* .............................. : ........ _. Four shiftinjf coal-chutes* ............................................ . Twelve coalmg chutes attached to trunks* ......•........... Hinging of three anchor-davits ...................... ._ ......... _ .Twenty-two additional air ports* .............................•.•. Ten additional coaling scuttles* .................................. . Ventilators to shaft-alley ......................•...................... Change in chart-house as per corrected drawing No. 75 ...........................................•.................................... Change in pilot tower as per corrected drawing No. 69 .............................................................................. . 

Tile floor for seamen's head .....• ·············~················ ······ Refrigerators, ward-room lockers, &c* ......................... . Wire-panels in store-rooms* .. ~ ..................••..•............... Light-box t-o forward fixed-ammunition room ............. . Twenty-two hinged lights in berth-deck hatch-casings* ................... ··············-··· ..•.•. ····-··········· ....... ······- Changes in fire-room hatch bulkheads .................•.....• Electric bells* ...... .: ....•...•.............................................. 

~~~*:::::~::~:::::~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Strengthening of {}.inch gun ports ...•..................•....•... 

Amount Approved by • Department. 

$226 ()() April21,1884 900 ()() Aug. 30, 1884 320 00 Aug. 30, 1884 

300 ()() Aug. 30,1884 

615 60 Sept. 6,1884 266 ()() Sept. 6,1884 258 60 Sept. 6,1884 

1,584 00 Sept. 6,1884 530.00 ·Sept. 6,1884 

912 00 Sept. 6,1884 

1,200 00 Sept. 6,1884 

935 00 Sept.. 6,1884 

491 ()() Sept. -6,1884 5000 Sept. 6,1884. 

308 ()() sept. 18, 1884 

2,31.3 10 Oct. 4.1884 ?:i750 Oct. 21884 661 40 Oct. ·.:1884 371 25 Oct. 14,18S4 156 70 Nov. 8,1.884 

7i0 00 NoT. 26.1884 424 75 Nov. 29,1884 830 ()() Jan. 211884 720 00 Jan. 2,1884 

787 ()() Jan. .2,18M 212 80 Jan. 21, 1884 

16,420 70 

Machinery: Additional cast-iron screws*......................................... 1,872 00 June 6, lA84. 

Changes in steam-pipes of fire-rooms........................... 599 23 Oct. 4, 1884 Two additional blowers,1 in each fire-room................. 2, 725 00 Dec. 'Zl, 1884 

Reducing size of safely"'><:es on superheater-pipes, $400 •• ··-·-·········· Dec. 15, 1881 One combined air a.nd circulating pump, purchased 

by Bureau of Steam Engineering.............................. 775 00 Sept.17, 188i 

5,971 23 

• 
1596 OONGRESSION:AL~ RECORD~HOUSE. FEBRUA-RY,_ 12, 

RECAPITULATION. 

Changes, &c. : Hull ................................................................................................. .. $16,420 70 

=h~d7t:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::·.:: ::::::::::::::::::::::::~:::::::::::: 85, ~ : 5,571 23 

Total ...................................................................................... . 21,991 93 

Statement of cost of changes made in and additions to the original plans of the Ulliled 

States steamer Boston. 

[NoTE.-Items in italics are credits; *denotes addition»; other items are changes.] 

· Approved by Object. Amount. Department. 

Hull: 

Increasing thickness of inner bottom ......................... .. One anchor davit complete* ......................................... . Cutting and fitting batches from magazine and shell- • rooms ......................................................................... . Two batches to engineers' s~reroom ......................... .. V eltical stringers to bulkheads at both ends of super- 1 structure-deck .......................................................... .. Extra bulwarks ........................................................... . Thirty-eight life-line stanchions* ............................... .. Twelve coaling-port doors* ............ :' .......................... .. Four shift;ing coal-chutes* ........................................... .. Twelve coaling chutes attached to trunks* ................ .. Hinging of three anchor davits . .' .................................. . Twenty-two additional air.ports* ................................ . Ten additional coaling scuttles* ................................. .. Ventilators to shaft-allt-y* ........................................ --· Change in chart-house, as per corrected drawing No. • '15 .............................................................................. .. Change in armored pilot-t-ower, as per corrected dra.w-

$226 00 A..pril21, 1884 900 00 Aug. 30,1884 

300 00 .Aug. 30,1884 320 00 Aug. 30,1884 

615 60 Sevt. .6,1884 

266 00 Sept. 6,1884 258 60 Sept. 6,1884 

1,584 00 Sept. 6,1884 530 00 Sept. 6,1884 

912 00 Sept. 6,1884 

1,200 00 Sept. 6,1884 935 00 Sept. 6,1884 

491 00 Sept. 6,1884 

5000 Sept. 6,1884 

308 00 Sept. 18, 1884 

~~gfl!~~ ~!~8;;;;;;;~-;;.-~·ke~d.·.:·:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Refrigerators, ward-room lockers, &c.* ...................... .. Wire panels in storerooms* ........................................ .. Light-box to forward fixed-ammunition room ............ .. Twenty-two hinged lights, berth-deck hatch casings* .. Change in fire~room hatch bulkheads ......................... .. Fire-alarms* ................................................................. . Elect-ric bells* .............................................................. . 

2,313 10 Oct. 4,1881 277 50 Oct. 2,1884 6tn 40 Oct. 4,1884 

391 87 Oct. 14,1884 

156 70 Nov. 8,1884 

77000 Nov. 26,1884 

349 75 Nov. 29,1884 

720 00 .Jan. 2,1885 830 00 Jan. 2,1885 

----

15,366 52 

Machinery: 

Additional cast-iron screws*......................................... 1, 890 00 June 6, 1884 

Change in steam-pipes of fire-rooms............................. 59'J 23 Oct. 4, 1884 

Reducing the size of safety-valves on superheater pipes, • $400 ............................................................................................... Dec, 15,1884 Two additional blowers, one in each fire-room............ 2, 725 00 Dec. 27,1884 

One combined air and circulating pump, purchased 

by Bureau of SteaOl Engineering.............................. 775 00 Sept.17, 1884 

5, 989 23 

RECAPITULATION. 

EFEi~:.:~~~~~~~~:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::·$5:~·~ $15,366 52 

5,589 23 

Total............................................................................................. 20, 955 75 

Statement of cost of changes made in and additiOns to the original plaru of the Unile<Z 

States stean~.er Dolph#t. 

[NOTE.-ltems written in italics are credit.s; * denotes additions; other items are changes.] 

Object. 

Hull: 

Raising deck-houses seven inches in the clear ........... .. Change in location of steerage-hatch .......................... . Iro~ .bulkhead between magazine and fi.xed-ammu- r· rub on room .............................................................. .. Horizontal stitfener around engine-hatch* ................. . Change from iron to wood in sheathing of wing-passage, 

.Amount. 'Approved by Department. 

$482 00 Feb. 23,1884 

220 00 l\lar. 28, 1884 

11200 

200 00 April 5,1~ 

April 5, 1884 

t t2() .............................................................................................. .. April 5,1884 

April10, 1884 

May 9,1884 

Change in Hotchkiss-gun towers................................. 1, 840 00 Door from engine-room t-o passage............................... 69 oo· Coal-pocket for emptying coal-bunker over after-

\ b-oilers ...................................................................... .. Alteration in bunker, forward fire-room, port side ..... . Alteration in pump-bed .............................................. .. Three water-tanks and one sand-tank"' ....................... . Changes and additions to forecastle deck-rails, stanch- • ions, and ladders, &c ................................................. . Two refrigerators, at $160 each* .................................. .. Forty-two lockers for crew* ........................................ .. Two side-lights complete, $60 each* ........................... .. One prison complete* .................................................. . Lowering plate-beam in after fire-room ..................... .. Iron caps for Dolphin's masts, and altering mast-

' heads* ...................................................................... .. Svpplying and fitting armory* ................................... . Two screen-doors to coal-bunkers ............................... . Four sliding-doors to coal-bunkers ............................ .. .Additional sluice-valves* ............................................ . Ventilator for shaft-alley* .......................................... .. Mahogany table for after deck-house• ..................... , ... . Extending forw~rd end of engine-room one frame , space, &c., including all chanf.es and fittings .......... .. 

A~~!I:;;\~o~~t~~.~~-~.~.~~-~ .. ~~.~~;~:~.~~~-~.~~~ .. 1 

48 00 May 9, 1884 

42 00 1\Iay 9, 1884 35 00 May 9, 1884 532 00 June 9,1884 

125 00 320 00 168 00 120 ()() 

100 ()() 

4() 00 

30800 

145 00 

9000 

8000 

140 00 

130 00 40 ()() 

85700 

462 00 

June25,1884 

June 25,1884 June 25, 1884 .June 25, 1884 June 25,1884 

July 9,1884 

July .24, 1884 

Aug. 1,188! 

.Aug. 29,1884 

Aug. 29,1884 

Sept.l2, 1884 

Sept.17, 1884 

Sept. 22, 1884 

,Oct. 24, 1884. 

Statenunt of cost of changes ·made in and additiom to tile original plana of the Unilell Btatu steamer Dolphin-Continued. . 

. 

Object. Amount. Approved by 

Depa.rtmeut. .. $125 00 Nov. 3,1884 608 00 Nov. 8,18Si 

460 00 Dec. 22,1~ 

1,773 00 Dec. 28,188{ 

Fitting oil-lamps to cabin and wardroom electroliers .. Sheathing of engine deck-house ............................... .. Changes and additions to topgallant forecastle .......... .. Changes and additions in steering gear ..................... .. 

9,671 60 

1,050 00 

700 00 May 9,1884 

882 00 Aug. 22, 1884 

2,300 00 Oct. 24.~ 

547:r7 Jan. 20, 188! 

1\Ia.chinery: 

One extra scre,v, solid cast-iron* ............................... .. Larger columns and additional braces for engines ..... . Changes and additions in hand-reversing gear,-and 

levers for steam-reversing gear ................................ . One new blower, with engine, dampers, fittings, nnd 

connections ............................................................. .. New throttle-valve, with changes in main steam-pipe, &c ............................................................................ .. 

5,479 :n 

One Blake pump .......................................................... . 750 00 

6,229 :n 

RECAPITULATION. 

Changes, &c., hull ............... ........................................................... : ......... $9,671 60 

Lesscredit............................................................................................... 20 00 

9,651 60 Changes, &c., machinery ........................................................................ 6,229 :r7 

Total. ........................... .................................................................. 15,880 f¥1 

RECAPITULATION. 

_________________________ j_c __ h_ica. __ g_o_._

1 

__ B_o_s_to_n_. __ 1 __ A_t_la_n_ta. __ ._

1

_D __ oJ_p_h_i __ ~~-

Contract cost. ........ ..................... '$389,000 00 $619,000 00 $617,000 00 $315,000 00 

Cost of changes and additions to date.......................................... 31,550 50 20, 955 75 21,991 93 15, 880 97 Approximate percentage of con- tract cost for changes and additions.................................... 3~ 

CHIN ESE Il\11\IIGR.A.NTS. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House a letter from the 

Secretary of the Treasury in response to a. resolution of the House calling for information as to what regulations and instructions have been 

issued by that Department relating to the right of ·Chinese to enter 

America.. and the authority therefor; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and ordered to be printed. · 

REP AIRS, ETC. 1 OF PUBLIC BUII,DINGS. 

The SPEAKER pro ternpore laid before the House a. letter from the 

Secretary of the Treasury, asking for an appropriation for the repair and 

preservation of public buildings for 1881-'82, and for heating, ventilating, &c., of public building.:; for 1883-'84; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed. 

OOTTON EXPOSITION, NEW ORLEANS. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House a letter from the 

Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting an estimate from the board of 

United States Executive Departments for additional appropriations for 

participation in the World's Industrial Cotton Centennial Exposition 

at New Orleans; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed. 

INTERPRETER AT OS.AK.A1 JAPAN. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House a letter from the 

Secretaryofthe Treasury, transmitting an estimate from the Secretary 

of State to pay draft:8 of the United States consul at Osaka and Hiogo; 

Japan, for the salary of the interpreter at the consulate; whichwasreferred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed. 

1\IISSOURI, KANSAS .AND TEXAS RAILROAD CO::\iP.ANY. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House a letter from the 

Secretary of the Treasury; transmitting a claim of the Missouri, Kan- sas and Texas Railroad Company, allowed by the Sixth Auditor; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be 

printed. JAMES R. CARTER. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House a letter from the 

Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting an estimate from the Secretary 

of War of an appropriation to pay claim of James R. Carter, of Fauquier Springs, Ya.; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and· order\'~~ to be printed. 

ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED. 

Mr. N¥ECE, from t:q.e Committee on Enrolled Bills, reported that :they had examined a.nd_.fou,nd truly enrolled bills with the following titles;iwhen'~e Spea,kel' pro tempore si~ed the same: -Join'Vr"esolution' (S:lli!92) authorizing ·and requiring the Secretary 
1885. CONGRESSIONAL-, REOORD~HOUSE. 1597 

of War to deliver to the Eighth NewYorkHeavy Artillery AssOciation AFTER RECESS. 

the regimental colol'S which belonged to said artillery, and which are The recess having expired, the House reassembled at 8 o'clock p. m., now in custody of the Secretary of War; and and was called to order by Hon . .JoHN B. CLARK, .Jr., Clerk of the 

A bill (S. 1705) to provide for the issue of duplicate checks. House, who directed the reading of the following: 

JANE D. BRENT. 

Mr. WOLFORD, by unanimous consent, from the Committee on Pensions, reported favorably a bill to increase the pension of .Jane D. Brent; 

which was ordered to be placed on the Private Calendar. 

SPEAKER'S RooM, HoUSE OF REPRESEWTATIVES, 

Washington, D. C., February12, 1885. 

Sm: Hon. RicHARD P. B~n is designated as Speaker pro tempore for this 

evening's session. · J. C. S. BLACKBURN, 

Spealrer pro Unlpore. 

Hon. JoHN B. CLARK, Jr., ELVffiA BLISS SHELD_QX. Clerk House of RepreseniaUt:es. 

Mr. CUTCHEON, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. BLAND). The recess having ex- 8185) granting a pension to Elvira Bliss Sheldon; which was referred pired the House resumes its session. 

to the Committee on Invalid Pensions, and ordered to be printed. 

. ORDER OF BUSI.YESS. 

~Ir. TOWNSHEND. I call for the regular order. 

Mr. WHITE, of Kentucky. I move that the House do now adjourn. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The regular order is called for, and the 

question is upon the motion of the gentleman from Illinois (l\Ir. TowNSHEND] that the House now take a recess until 8 o'clock; pending which 

the gentleman from Kentucky [l\Ir. WHITE] moves that the House do 

adjourn. The question is upon the latter motion. 

The House divided; and there were-ayes 51, noes 97. 

Mr. WHITE, of Kentuck-y. No quorum, l\Ir. Speaker? 

The SPEAKER pro te:mpore. A quorum is not needed on a motion 

to adjourn. The noes have it, and the House refuses to adjourn; and 

the question recurs upon the motion of the gentleman from Illinois 

[Mr. TowNSHEND] that the House now take a recess. until B. o'clock 

this evening. 

Several :MEl\IDERS. Regular order ! 

Mr. LEFEVRE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to make a favorable report from the Committee on Pensions. . The SPEAKER pro tempore. The regular order is demanded, and 

the question is upon the motion of t.he gentleman from illinois [1\Ir . . TOWNSHEND). 

The House divided; and there werer-ayes lH, noes 36. 

Ur. WHITE, of Kentucky. No qnorum. 

The SPEAKER p1·o tempore. The gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. 

WHITE] makes the point that there is no quorum -voting. The Chair 

appoints tellers, and designates the gent.leman from Illinois, :Ur. TowNSHEND, and the gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. WHITE, to act as tellers. 

Mr. ROBINSON, of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise to a point of 

order. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it. 

Mr. ROBINSON, of New York. Uypoint is that, the House having 

already voted to take a recess until to-morrow at 10 o'clock, it is not in 

order now to reconsider that vote. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Cha.irwillstate to the gentleman 

from New York [Mr. Rom ... ~soN] that the resolution adopted this morn-· ing was that at the conclusion of this day's proceedings 'the House 

would take a recess until 10 o'clock to-morrow. The proceedings of 

this day are not concluded until the House determines to end them. 

?tlr. REED, of Maine. But I submit, Mr. Speaker, that lf the House 

should adjourn that would cut off the recess. The SPEAKER pro tentpore. The Chair has no doubt of that. 

Ur. REED, of Maine. So that I do not see that that vote of the 

House amoWited to anything. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. There is no motion to adjourn pending 

before tpe House: There ~ pending a motion to take a recess. Mr. WHITE, of Kentucky. I call fortheannouncementofthevote. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The tellers report 101 gentlemen voting in the affirmative and 16 in the negative. 

Mr. WHITE, of Kentucky. No quorum. I move that the House 

do now adjourn. Itistwentyminutes to 6o'clock, and weare to meet 

at 10 o'clock to-morrow. 

Mr. BROWNE, of Indiana. I move a call of the House. 

Mr. WHITE, of Kentucky. I second the motion. We ought not 

to proceed without a quorum. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The motion does not need a second. 

The question is on the motion of the gentleman frQm Indiana [Mr. 

BROWNE] that a call of the House be ordered. 

The motion was agreed to. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. A call of the House is ordered. The 

Clerk will proceed to call the roll. -

The Clerk proceeded to call the roll. 

Mr. HISCOCK (beforetheroll·call was concluded). I ask unanimous 

consent that the House take a recess till 8 o'clock this evening. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LA:\IB). The gentleman from New 

York asks unanimous consent that a recess be now taken tillS o'clock 

this evening. Is there o'Qjection? The Chair bears none. 

Mr. WHITE, of Kentucky. I move to amend by making it 10 o'clock 

to-morrow morning. [Cries of" Too late!"] 

TheSPEAKERprotempore (at5o'clock and50minutesp. m.) . . The 

gentleman is too late. The Chair put the motion _of the gentl~~from 

New York [1.1r. HISCOCK], and there was no objection. The House is E.Ow in recess till 8 o'clock this evening. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

Ur. WILLIS. I rise to .a privileged motion-that the House at 10 

o'clock to-night take a recess to meet to-morrow morning at 10 o'clock. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I do not know that I understand the object of this 

motion. What was the action of the House on this subject this morn- •ing? .. 

Mr. WILLIS. The House, byanalmostunanimousvote, decided that 

at the close of to-day's session it would take a recess until to-morrow 

morning at 10 o'clock; but in making my motion I did not fix the hour 

at which the recess should be taken, because I wanted the Committee 

of the Whole to continue the consideration of the appropriation bill till 

5, 6, or 7 o'clock, as members might see :fit. . 1 

The question being taken on themotion by Mr. WILLIS, it was agreed 

t~ . 1.Ir. WILLIS moved to reconsider the vote just taken; an~ also moved 

that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

Mr. TOWNSH:&..~D. I movethatthe Houseresolve_itselfintoCommi ttee of the Whole on the state of the Union, for the purpose of resum- ing the consideration of the Post-Office appropriation bill. . . · Mr. ANDERSON. .Is there not a call of the House pending? 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. When the Honse took its recess this 

evening it was proceeding with a call of the House. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I move that further proceedings under the call 

be dispensed with. 

The motion was agreed to. 

J,EA VE OF ABSENCE. 

:Ur. ANDERSO~. I ask unanimous consent that my colleague [Mr. 

MoRRILL] be e;xcused fi·om attendance at this evening's session, on ac- count of sickness. 

There being no objection, leave was granted. 

Mr. Down, by unanimous consent, obtained leave of absence for this 

evening, on account of sickness. 

POST-OFFICE APPROPRIATIOX BILL. 

l\Ir. TOWNSHEND. I now renew my motion that the House re- solve itself into Committee ofthe Whole on tbe state of the Union for 

the purpose of resuming thetconsideration of the Pos!i-Offi_ce appropriation bill. 

The motion was agreed to. 

The House accordingly resohed itself into Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union (1.Ir. SPRINGER in the chair), and resumed 

the consideration of·the bill (H. R. 8138) making appropriations for the 

service of the Post-Office Department for the :fiscal year ending June 

30, 1886, and for other purposes. 

The CHAIRMAN. The pending question is U:P.on the amendment 

offered tl:tis afternoon by the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. B~GHA:ll]. . 

The amendment was again read. 

Mr. TOWNSH:&~D. I wish to reserve a point of order on this 

amendment. . :Mr. HOLMAN. That has already been done. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I would like to hear the gentlema.n from Pennsylvania state exactly what changes this amendment proposes to make. 

1.Ir. BINGHAM. The object of my amendment is simply to carry 

out that which is doubtless the purpose of the subcommittee that framed 

this bill and of the Committee on Appropriations. It simply makes the 

basis of weight of a letter one ounce, instead of half an ounce. Under 

the phraseology of the bill . as submitted to the House this would 

apply merely to what are designated by -the Department "domestic 

letters;" that is, letters from one section of the country to anoth{lr. r 

desire the ba&is of an ounce weight to apply to local letters in a city as well as to letters going from one section of the country to another. 

Now, I took the proviso that is in the bill and submitted it the Attorney-General for the Post-Office Department, stating to him t~e purpose of the committee~ was to make the minimum basis of weight in the 

future one ounce1 and asked him to examine the statutes, in order that. 

it might be consistent with reference to the d9mestic letter as well as 

to the local letter. The amendment I have sent up is the amendment 

the Post-Offi(!e Department submitted to me. I examined it myself in 

connection with the statutes and approved of it thoroughly and wholly. 

It carries out what is theintention 9f the committee, that the minimum - we~ght of a letter shall bt'J one ounce instead of ba.lf an ounce. 
1598 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-ROUSE. FEBRUARY 12, 

?tir. HOLMAN. This proposition affects the free-delivery cities. Of ·course that is the pt11J>are of it. Now, I suggest to the gentleman from 'Pennsylvania that we pass over this amendment for the present, leav- 'ing the point of order stand as it is, and come back to it again. It is 

proposed this evening for the :fu:st time. . Mr. BINGHAM. I am perfectly willing to accept that suggestion, 

Bnd I am sure when the gentleman from Indiana. examines it he will 

Bee that my statement is correct. 

The CHAIRMAN. If there be no objection, the committee will pass over this part of the bill with the understanding that before the bill is 

concluded the committee will return and take up the amendment of the 

gentleman from Pennsylvania, subject to the point of order. 

Mr. ANDERSON. In what part of the bill? 

The CHAIRMAN. After the word "dollars," in line 181, down to 

and including the word " thereof," in line 192. 

Mr. HOLMAN. It is concerning letter-postage. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair hears no objection, and this part is 

passed over for. the present, to be returned to he:reaft.er. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I wish to make a verbal amendment to the 

amendment adopted this evening-striking out the word "upon." 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair hears no objection, and itis ordered 

accordingly. 

• Mr. GEORGE D. WISE. After the word ''thereof," in line 199, as it stands in the bill, I wish to move an amendment. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. That has been stricken out. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will hear the gentleman's amendment. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

.A.nd prO'I!ided further, That the rate of postage on second-class publications deposited in letter-carrier offices for delivery by the carriers of the office shall 

be 1 cent for each pound or fraction thereof. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I reserve the point of order against that amendment. 

• Mr. BLOUNT. I suggest to the gentleman from Virginia we pass 

this paragraph and the amendment on the same condition as in the case of the amendment of the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 

BINGHili], to be returned to hereafter. 

Mr. GEORGE D. WISE. I have no objection 'to that. 

Mr. SKINNER, ofNewYork. I desiretoinserta.ftertheword "dollars," in line 181, what I send to the Clerk's desk to be read. 

The Clerk read as.follows: 

The Postmaster-General is authorized to issue return postal cards, or two postal cards attached, one for use by the sender and the second for reply, in such quan- tities and under such regulations as he may prescribe, provided tha.t the same shall be sold at the post-offices of the country a.t the rate of 2 cents for each sucll return card. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I make the point of order against that amendment that it changes existing law and does not- retrench expenditure. 

1\Ir. SKINNER, of New York. I hope the gentleman will waive that 

until I make an explanation. 

.Mr. TOWNSHEND. I can not do it. [Cries of "Regular order!"] 

Mr. SKINNER, of New York. I do no! desire to argue this amendment at all. It speaks for itself. It conforms to the custom of almost 

every other great country. When you write a posta~ card you can not 

inclose a stamp for reply. This simply folds another one with it, on. which the correspon~ent can write his answer. M:r. WARNER, of Ohio. I hope the point of order will not be made 

again tit. . M:r. SKINNER, of New York. I ask unanimous consent. 

:Mr. BINGHAM. I think the gentlemanhad better accept that. It 

increases no expense, and is simply a matter of personal convenience. 

It will not increase your bill one penny. 

lli. WARNER, of Ohio. The Government will lose nothing. 

?tir. BINGHAM. It will increase revenue. 

:Mr. WARNER, of Ohio. It will increase the revenue instead of decreasing it. · Mr. BINGHAM. It will not incommode ~he Department, while it 

will add largely to the convenience of the people. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I do not feel justified in accepting the amendment. 

Mr. WARNER, _of Ohio. Is it liable to the point of order? 

Ur. BLOUNT. I rise to a question of order There is a point of or- der pending made by the gentleman from Illinois, and I hope we will 

have ·a ruling. 

:Mr. MONEY. The law already provides for returned postal cards. 

1\Ir. BINGHAI\I. They are not furnished by the Department. 

Mr. MONEY. I think there is a law which provides for all these 

things. It also provides the Government shall-not pay royalty for any 

of these patents. · 

·- Mr. SKINNER, of New York. I would like .simply to say this in 

reference to the point of order on this amendment, that I believe it is 

in the interest of economy, because economy is traced to an increase of 

business of the Govenunenfi llpon which there is a profit. That is all 

I have to say, except that I urge this amendment in the interest of the 

convenience of the-public. · 

Mr. HORR. It is evident, Mr.- Chairman, that it will increase the 

receipts of the- Government by increasing the sale of postal cards. A 

I.arger·number of cards will be sent in order to receive a return reply 

than are at present used, which will necessarily increase the revenue of 

of the Government in this direction. There ia no additional expense 

involved and I believe it will result in economy. 

The CH.AIRM.AN. The Chair is ready to rule upon the point of 

order. 

.Mr. ANDERSON. I wish to be heard for a moment upon the point 

of order. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will recognize the gentleman for that 

purpose. 

:Mr. ANDERSON. As I understand this amendment it will reduce 

expenditures of the Government, and while it may change existing law, 

yet by reducing the expenditures of the Government it will be in order 

under the rule. That· I affirm to be the fact for the reason that it is 

cheaper to print two postal cards on one sheet than it is to cut the 

sheet in two and print on each of the two separately. This will enable 

the Government to obtain 2 cents' wo'rth of postal cards at a less cost on a double card than if it was required to have the double card split 

and printed on both ita faces~ asia done at present. That is the first 

point. 

Now I wish to suggest also to the Chair that in addition. to the saviltg 

to the Government in reference to the cost of printing the cards, it will 

reduce the 'expenses of the Government by increasing the number of 

postal cards used. It will have precisely the same effect which has always followed a reduction of postage; that is, by giving to the corre- spondent additional facilities yon will derive a largerrevenue from the 

double than you now have from the single eard. For these two reasons I suggest that the amendment is in order because, as I have said, though 

it may change existing law yet it does upon its face, and will in fact, 

reduce the expenses of the Government. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. The Committee on Appropriations has been 

very liberal in making changes in existing law. It strikes me that we have gone as far in that ·direction as we can safely go without more mature consideration. This proposition has not been before the com- mittee; they have not considered such a proposition, and to spring it 

upon the House now I think ought not to be tolerated. · It seems clear to me that it is obnoxious to the point of order. There are three things requisite to bring anamendmentwhich changes existing law. within the rnle: that it shall reduce the amount of the appropriation, or that it shall reduce salaries, or else reduce the nll1Dber of 

persons paid out of the Government Treasury. This proposition does 

neither. It does not retrench expenditures in any one of the three manners which I have suggested. It is, therefore, obnoxious to the 

point of order, and I insist upon a rnling by the Chair. 

1\Ir. ?tfONEY. 1\Ir. Chairman, this proposition does not change any 

existing law. 

lli. HEWITT, -of Alabama. Then why do you want to adopt it, if 

the law is in force? 

1\Ir. MONEY. I am not speaking upon the merits of the proposition, but simply as to tlle point of order. I say that the law already 

provides for this. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Does the law provic:Te for return postal cards? 

Mr. MONEY. Yes, sir; it provides for return postal cards andreturn envelopes and letter sheets, and the only reason that it ia not in use to-day by the Government is because of the provisions--

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Well, turn to the law. 

Mr. MONEY. Please do not interrupt me now. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Just point to t4e statute upon that point. 

Mr. MONEY. I have requested to be permitted to proceed without 

interruption. ThenPray thee, take pain 

To allay with some cold drops of modesty Thy skipping spirit. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I think the gentleman should take his own drugs. . . Mr. MONEY. And the only re~n why this has not been i.e. general use by the Government is because of th~ provision in the statute 

which says the Department shall 'pay no royalty for the use of it. 

lli. TOWNSHEND. I hope the gentleman will not address himself 

tome. 

Mr. MONEY. As you seem to need more information than any other 

person in the House, I was addressing you in particular. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I call for a ruling by the Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. The·Chair is compelled to hold that the point of 

order is well taken. 

Mr. GREENLEAF. I offer the amendment which I send to the 

desk, to come in immediately after the last amendment adopted. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

And upon all seeds and bulbs embraced in the fourth class by the said act, and 

by that act subject to postage at .the rate of 1 cent. for each ounce or fraction 

thereof; shall be charged, on and after the let day of July, 1885, a half cent on each ounce or fraction thereof. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I reserve the point of order until the gentle- man can be heard upon this- amendment. 

Mr. GREENLEAF. l offer this 'alllendment not only in the interest 

of 4the eeedsm.en, florists, and agriculturists all over this country, but 
1885. CONGRESS~ONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1599 

also in the interests of the Government itself. Under the operation of 

existing law seeds are now charged at the rate of 1 cent per ounce for 

all kinds. 

The result of this is, as I am credibly informed, that express com- panies have the cream of the business and do the principal part of car- rying short distances-that is, to the cities this side of Omah~r-and the 

Government gets only what is left and carries these seeds only the long 

distances. 

I hold in my hand a letter of one of the principal seedsmen in the 

country, known, I presume, by name to every member of the House, 

which gives some facts in explanation of this subject. I ask that it 

may be read for the information of the House. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

RoCHESTER, N. Y., No?Jember 30, 1883. 

DEAR Sm: Referring to onr Tecent conversation, I desire now to hand you a few facts concerning express charges from Rochester. I may state that we re- ceive the largest number of orders from those States named first in order on the list sent herewith. Last winter Postmaster-General Howe sent a letter to Congress (w.\l.ich letter was printed in the CONGRESSIONAL REcoRD) recommending that the rate of 

postage on fourth-class matter be reduced, as, after a careful examination of all 

fourth-clas.s matter leavin~ New York city post-office, he had found th&t about 65 per cent. was delivered ·.east of Buffalo, about 75 per cent. east of Cleveland, 

about 90 per cent. east of Chicago, and about 97 per cent. east of Omaha.. 

It may be possible that these figures are not exactly those quoted by the Post- master-General, as, having lost my copy of the CoNGRESSIONAL RECORD I am compelled t-o rely upon my memory. But, in the main, I feel confident of their correctness. From these facts I think it is clearly demonstrated that by continuing the high rate of 16 cents per pound the Government is driving the cream af the package traffic into the hands of the express companies, and the Post-Office obtains only that share of the mail intended for the far W'est or to points on long runs where the express companies have no offices, or where the postage is lower 

than the express charges. 

Yours, truly, 

Hon. H. S. GREEll.TLEAF, Washingto~, D. C, 

JAMAS VICK. 

Mr. GREENLEAF. Now, Mr. Chairman, a word with regard to the 

express rates on seeds from Rochester, N. Y.-known as the "Flower 

City "-to several of the principal cities of the country east of Omaha 

{which rates I think correspond with the rates to other Eastern cities), 

and it will be clear, a.S I understand the subject, that it will be for the 

interest of the Government, as well as for the interest of the agriculturist and horticulturist, that this amendment be adopted. I hold in my 

hand a list of express rates which will explain itself, and which I ask 

to h~ve entered in the RECORD. 

This list I have obtained at considerable trouble, and is as follows: 

E."Cpre s rates on packages. 

From Rochester toNe,vYork ............................................................................ .. Philadelphia ......................................................................... . 

&~~~:~ir:::.::::·::::::::.:·.::·.:·.:::::::::::::::::::::::·::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Omaha .................................................................................. . The postage at 16 ce.nts per pound ........................................ . 

3-pound 4-pound 

package. package. 

f()25 

40 

35 

35 

60 

48 

~25 

40 

35 

35 

60 

64 

The CHAffi:M:AN. The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. ToWNSHEND] 

reserved the point of order subject to an explanation of the amendment. 

Mr. WARNER, of Ohio. If the Government admits seeds at all to 

get through the mails, I think the rate of 8 cents a pound is enongh; 

and I believe the reduction of rate would increase the revenue rather 

than diminish it. If the Government can afford to transmit papers for 1 

cent a pound, it can, I think, afford to carry seeds at Scents. I am in 

favor of the amendment, and hope the point of order will not be made 

if it lie. I hardly think it will lie against the amendment. 

Mr. MONEY. If there is no point of order to be made against the 

amendment, I wish to say a word on it. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. If it does not provoke debate I am willing 

the amendment should be voted on, and shall not make the point of 

order. 

:Ur. BLOUNT. I make the point of order on the amendment. 

The CHAIRMAN. What is the gentleman's point of order? 

1\fr. BLOUNT. The point of order is that it chang~ existing law. 

It changes the rate of postage on seeds and bulbs, and therefore is new legislation; and it does not retrench expenditureS in either of the modes 

designated as legitimate in amendments to appropriation bills. It 

does not reduce the compensation paid to any person, nor does it reduce 

the number of employes, nor does itreduce the amount carried by the 

bill. And I may remark that I do not know it is· strictly a matter of 

postal service to be sending bulbs andseeds through the mails. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is of opinion the point of order is well 

taken:. The Clerk will read. 

The Clerk read the following paragraph: 

For transporting the mails of the. United States ·in American steamships be- tween any port of the United States and any foreign port, or between ports of 

Ule Atlantic and ports of the Pacific touching at any foreign port, an amount not exceeding $600,000 of the net revenues of the Post-office Department of the 

United Sta.tes on mail-matt~r sent to foreign countries during the fiscal year next preceding the date of the contract for said service: Provided, That the con- tract for said service shall be entered into by the Postmaster-General only ailer 

legal advertisement, with the lowest responsible bidder, for a term not exceed· ing four-years, and at a rate not to exceed 50 cents per mile on the trip each way of actual nautical miles traveled between terminal ports for each trip actually 

made, which shall not be increased on account of expedition or increased num· ber of trips: ProfJided further, That the general laws regulating the transportation of inland mails shall be applicable to such contractshexcept as herein pro- vided: And promdedfurlher, That vessels engaged in t is service shall be of 

American registry, a.nd shall, in time of war, be liable to chart-er or purchase by 

the United States at reasonable rates; and all laws and parts of laws in con1lict 

with the provisions of this act be, and the same are hereby, repealed; and this act shall take effect from and after July 1, 1885. 

Mr. McMILLIN. I reserve the point of order on that paragraph. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I rise to make the point of order on this pa.:ra.gl&J.?h. 

I wish to call the attention of the Chair to the state of the law. I ask 

that the Chair direct to be read sections 4007, 4008, and 4009 of the 

Revised Statutes, as bearing on this question and showing the preilat 

state .of the law. · . The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read the sections of the Revised 

Statutes which the gentleman has indicated. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

SEc. 4007. The Postmaster-General may, after advertising for proposals, enter int{) contracts for the transportation of the mail between the United States and any foreign country whenever the public interests will thereby be promoted. 

SEc. 4008. The mail between the United States and any foreign port, or be- tween ports of the United States t-ouching at a foreign port, shall be transported 

in steamships; bnt the Postmast~r-General may have such transportation per· formed by sailing vessels when the service can be facilitated thereby. 

SEC.4009. For transporting the mail between the UnitedStatesandanyforeign 

port, or between ports of the United States touching at a foreign port, the Post- master-General may allow as compensation, if by aU nited States steamship, any sum not exceeding the sea and United States inland postage; and if by a foreign 

steamship or by a sailing vessel, any sum not exceeding the sea postage on the mail so transported. 

:Ur. HAMMOND. Will the gentleman from Indiana allow me to 

suggest that he should also have read section 3976? 

:Mr. HOLMAN. That is the section, I believe, which w~repealed. 

Mr. HAMMOND. It was repealed, tb,e repeal to take effect next 

.April; but it is the law now. I think the gentleman had better have 

it read. 

1t1r. WARNER, of Ohio. But it would not be the law when this 

takes effect. 

Mr. HOLMAN. It occurred to me that that section was repealed. 

I ask that section 3976 be read. It appears it is still the law, for the 

repeal has not yet taken effect under the statute of last session. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

SEC. 3976. The master of' any vessel of the United States bound fromany port 

therein to any fo~gn port, or from any foreign port t-o any port of the United 

States, shall, before clearance, receive on boa.rd and securely convey all such 

mails as the Post-Office Department, or any diplomatic or consular officer of the 

United States abroad shall offer; and he shall promptly deliver the same, on arriving at the port of destination, to the proper officer, for which he. shall re- ceive 2 cents for every lett-er so delivered; and upon the entry of every such 

...-essel retnrning from any foreign port, the master thereof sh·an make oath that 

he has promptly delivered all the mail placed on board said vessel before clear- ance from the United States; and if he shall fail to make such oath the vessel 

shall not be entitled to the privileges of a vessel of the United States. 

. Mr. HOLMAN. The point of order I desire to present I think is 

substantially; so far as the present state of the law is concerned, based on section 4009. The Chair will perceive that the substance of that 

section is that the Postmaster-General may enter into contract with 

American vessels for the transportation of foreign mails at a compensation including both the inland and the ocean postage, which would be 

5 cents a letter, being the entire postage on the mail which the vessels 

shall carry. Where the contract is made with a foreign vessel or with a sailing vessel, then the Postmaster-General shall only pay to the ves- sel transporting the mail, the foreign vessel or the sailing vessel, the ocean postage. That is the present state of the law. To that extent 

contracts are authorized to be made. 

The pending proposition changes that law entirely, and repeals it. 

It provides as follows: 

For transporting the mails of the United States in American steamships be- tween a.ny port of the United States and any foreign port, or between ports of 

the Atlantic and ports of the Pacific touching at any foreign port, an amount not exceeding 3600,000 of the net revenues of the Post-Office Department of the 

United States on mail matter sent to foreign countriesAll mail matter, as the Chair will perceive; notthe mail matters€mt 

by a particular ship, but all the mail matter sent to foreign countriesduring the fiscal year next preceding the date of the contract for said service : Provided, That the contract for said service shall be entered into by the Post- master-General only after legal advertisement, with the lowest responsible bid· 

der, fora term not exceeding fonr yearsA new featureand at a rate not to exceed 50 cents per mile on the trip each way of actual nau- tical miles traveled between terminal porta for each trip actually made, which 

shall not be increased on account of expedition or increased number of trips. 

The change in the law, Mr. Chairman, is very manifest. The present 

law would pay those vessels the inland postage as well as the ocean 

postage on the mail carried. If the inland postage and the ocean postage on that mail would amount to $20,000 the vessel would receive it 

all, or at least such a contract is now authorized to be made under sec- tion 4009 of the Revised Statutes. 

As-affecting the subject of. appropriations I desire to read the term& 
'I600 OONGRESSIONAL· RECORD~HOUSE. FEBRUARY 12, 

in which the. law of the present year appropriates the sum of $~,000. I have not that lawathand;but hayesent forit.~It qUite_important 

·the Chair should have before it the exact terms of the'law for the pres-

. en~ year, being the same except in _the amount of appropriation as for :many years past. When the Ch'air s~all come to examine this provision it will find that there has been appropriated for the present year ·$425,000 for foreign mail service. Under this appropriation, as the 

Chair Will perceive, the Postmaster-General could contract with foreign 

1

vessels for the transportation of the mails for the ocean postage only, 

and could contract with American steam vessels for the transportation. 'of .the mails, paying them under the. provision of the law the entire 

amount of postage, inland as well as ocean, to the extent of the $425,000. 

Now, the amount paid during the last fiscal year to .American ves- 'sels was :l.bout $55,000. This bill, instead of appropriating $425,000, :appropriates $370,000 (being $55,000 less than the amount appropria.tal Jor the cun-ent year) for the transportation of mails on foreign 

ships. The language of this bill is: 

For transportation of mails on foreign steamships, and for foreign ~Jdministration; for intermediary, territorial, and sea transit of foreign mails, S370,000. 

Now, the corresponding appropriation for the present fiscal year is in 

the following language: 

For transportation of foreign mails, $425,000. 

Of course the whole oi this could be· applied by the Postmaster-General under section 4009 of the Revised Statutes, paying one class of ves- sels the sea postage, the other class of vessels-American vessels-sea 

as well as inland postage. 

This biJl, in the paragraph upon which the point of order is now made, proposes to change the entire law, not by a decrease in the amount 

appropriated, but byan increase to theamountof$545,000; and itprovides that instead of payment being ma~e on the basis of the inland 

and sea postage, these vessels sh:ill. be paid at a rate not exceeding 50 

cents per mile both ways. There is the point of difference. Then it r,epeals all conilicting provisions of law: now in force, including, of 

course, &ction 4009. The concluding proviso of the paragraph is in 

thesewords: · 

That vessels engaged in this service shall be of .American registry, and shall, 

in time of war, be liable to charter or purchase by the United States at reason- able rotes~ and all laws and parts of laws in conflict with the provisions of this net be, nna the same a.re hereby, repealed; and this act shall ta.ke effect from 

and after July 1, 1885. 

Mr. MILLS. Is that the provision of the existing law also? 

Mr. HOLMAN. No, sir. Noneoftheseprovisionsarein the existing 

law. This is entirely new legislation, as the gentleman will perceive. 

It repeals section 4009; adopts an e11,tirely new basis of compensationnot the simple ocean and inland postage, but a compensation not ex- ·ceeding 50 cents per mile. 

My attention is called to the further fact that the paragraph embraces new legislation in this provision: 

That the general law regulating the transportation of inland mailsNot sections 4007, 4008, 4009 of the Reyised Statutes, 

shall be applicable to such contracts, except as herein provided. 

There is a provision also for contracts for a term not exceeding four 

years, while the present law contains no such provision. · I call attention also to that portion of the paragraph reserving to the 

Government the right to purchase these vessels. This, of course, is new legisla.tion. Bnt the main feature of the paragraph is the repeal 

of section 4009 and the substitution of a new basis of compensation. 

I trusttheChairwill indulgemeasinglemoment further. Thefust 

portion of clause 3 of Rule XXI is simply an old rule, which came down to us from former times, and has reference not to any change of 

law, but to appropriations in continuation of public works already in 

progress. It was designed to apply to such works of national importance as have been authorized and were in progress before the adoption 

of this rule: 

No appropriation shall be reported in any general appropriation bill, o~ be in 

order as an amendment thereto, for any expenditure not previously authorized 

by law, unless in continuation of appropriations for such public works and objects-

"Works" and "objects" being manifestly synonymous termsas are a.lrea.dy in progress. 

That provision has no reference to a change or repeal of existing law. 

· Nor shall any provision in any such bill or amendment heret~ changing ex- isting law be in order .except such as, being germane to the subject-matter of 

the bill, shall retrench expenditures by the reduction of the number and salary of the officers of the United States, by the )"eduction of the compensation of any 

person paid out of the Treasury of the United States, or by the reduction of runounts of money covered by the bill. 

The pending ·proposition increases the amount of the appropriation 

$545,000. It does so by the repeal of section 4009 of the Revised Statutes, by the incidental repeal of other provisions of the statutes, sections 4007 and 4008, and also by the enactmeht of new legislation not now in force. These are the grounds on which I predicate the point oforder. · · Mr. HEWITT, ofNew,York. 1\Ir. Chairman, it is not often that I 

take the time of the oommittee .on a point of order. I have been a member of this House for· a good 'many years, and I have usually been 

in pursuit of information as tO what was in oider·and what was not in 

order, but this particular measure is of such far-reaching importance 

that I have beeninduced to give some attention to the question of order 

which it involves. I take it that any objection made upon the ground 

that the amount of money to be taken from the Treasury under the 

operation of this provision will exceed the amount which has herlltofore 

beeh paid to foreign mail service ~ill have no weight with the Chair 

if ·it can be shown that existing law makes provision for payment for 

foreign mail service. It is the function of the In.w to say what shall be 

done; it is the function· of Congress to provide the means; and the 

necessity for annual appropriation bills consists in this, that the exigencies of the nation change with the rolling years, and that the appropriation bill is to accommodate itself to the carrying condition; 

sometimes granting more money, sometimes granting less money than 

has been found necessary during previous years. I shall not spend any 

time, therefore, in enlarging upon this very obvious point. But if the 

proposed legislation should be found to change existing law, and then 

the amount appropriated should exceed the amount heretofore applied 

to this ptupose, I acknowledge that the provision would be open to the 

point of order. 

The first question, then, to be settled is whether this provision in the 

bill which we have under consideration changes existing law. Prior to 

the passage of the act commonly known as the Dingley bill rurquestionably this provision of the bill would h~ve changed existing law. But 

by that bill, in section 23, it is provided thatSections 3976 and 4203 of the Revised Statutes of the United States and all 

other compulsory laws and parts of laws that oblige American vessels to carry 

the mails to and from the United States arbitrarily, or that pr~vent the clearance 

of vessels until they shall have "ta.ken mail matter on board, be, and they are hereby, repealed; but such repeal shall not take effect until the 1st day of .April, 1885. 

Now, section 3976 of the Revised Statutes required American vessels 

bound from any port in the United States to any foreign port to take on board the mails and convey them for a compensation of 2 cents per 

letter; under which provision, as the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. 

HOLMAN] has propeM.y stated, a very small amount of money has an- nually been paid-! think he said $50,000 or $60,000. 

1\Ir. HOLMAN; Fifty-five thousand dollars. 

1\Ir. HEWI'Y.r, of New York. To increase that amount by the s1un of 

$600,000, unless that section had been repealed, would have made this 

provision subject to the point of order. But the section is repealed, and 

there is no provision left upon the statute-book which requires American vessels to carry the mails for a compensation which in the aggre'· 

gate amounted, as the gentleman [Mr. HoLUAN] says, to $55,000. 

But we are told that tha~ repeal only takes effect on the 1st of .April 

next, and that therefore this provision of the statute is not yet re- pealed, that it is existing law, and tbat therefore this provision of this 

bill contravenes existing law. :Mr. Chairman, the Dingley bill is ex- isting law. That is the law of the land to-day. In that law the pr~ 

vision is that ~fter the 1st day of .April next these American vessels shall 

not be bound to cany the mails. 

This provision in the bill ·reported bythe committee comes before the 

House for the reason that the obligation to can;y the mails will cease on the 1st day of .April next. ThiS bill is to take effecil on the 1st day.9f 

July next, and thus does not go into effect until after the repealing clause 

of the Dingley bill shall have become a fixed fact and the ob1igation 

to carry the mail under section 3976 shall have ceased. It seems to me; 

not being much of a lawyer, but only a plain man of business, that if I 

had to deal with the question as the Chair will deal with it, from a common-sense point of view, I should tal{e knowledge of the 1act that on the 1st day of .April next I should be left without any provision for 

carrying the mails, and! would proceed, as a good businessman, to prepare for this contingency in time1 and that is what this House is a ked 

to do. · 

Mr. RANDALL rose. Mr. HEWITT, of New York. Does the gentleman desire to ask a question? · 

:Mr. RANDALL. I want to reply. I thought you had finished. 

Mr. HEWITT, ofNew York. Oh, no; Ihavenotbegunonthcpoint 

of order. I am only approaching it by slow degrees. 

1\Ir. RANDALL. I thought you were touching on the me1-its of the 

question? 

1\-Ir. HEWITT, of New York. I have strictly avoided the merits of 

the question. I have not touched upon them, and I do not propose tO 

touch upon them, and I may as well say now that nothing will fall 

from my lips in the discussion of this point of order which will indicate 

whether I am in favor of thiS provision of the bill or not. I am only 

discussing the point of order, and I shall not go outside of it. 

Now, if I am right in saying that this bill makes provision for the 

cessation of mail facilities which will occur on the 1st day of .April next, 

then we are brought to the question as to what the existing Jaw does 

provide. Theexistinglawinsection4007, whichisnotrepealed, is this: 

The Postmaster-General may, after advertising for proposals, enter into con~ tract· for the transportation of the mail between the United States and any foreign country whenever the public interests will thereby be promoted. 

There is the broad authority for the Postmaster-General to advertise and enter into contract for the carriage of the mails between the 

United State~ and any foreign country. Is there any limitation upon 
1885. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1601 

that power? Do the statutes anywhere provide any limitation? Yes. 

In· section 4009 there is this provision : 

For transporting the mail between the United States and any foreign port, or between ports of the United Sta.tes tou<'hing at a foreign port, the PostmasterGeneral may allow as compensation, if by a. Unit-ed States steamship, any sum not exceeding the sea and United States inland postage, and if by U' foreign steamship or by a sailing vessel, any sum not exceeding th&sea postage pn-the 

mnil so transported. · 

Now, by tbe first clause section of 4009 the Postmaster-General, if 

be sends the mail by a United States steamship, may allQw as compensation the sea and the United States inland p~stage. He may take 

the whole of the sea postage and the whole of the United States inland 

postage-:ill that he has got. 

He may advertise and make a contract, paying all the sea and inland 

postage be receives. I know that is a startling proposition. 

Mr. HORR. · And that amounts to $1,800,000. 

Mr . . HEWITT, of New York. I do not care anything about the 

amount now. I am dealing with the law as I find it. I did not make 

this law, but I find that as the law now stands the Postmaster-General 

may make this oontract by which the steamships carrying t.he mails 

shall receive the whole of the sea and inland postage . . Gentlemen may 

say that is an absurd construction. Let us see what the second clause 

of section 4009 says: 

And if by a. foreign steamship or by a sailing vessel, any sum not exceeding the sea postage on the mail so transported. 

On a foreign ship be is limited to sea postage "on the mail transported." But that limitation is not applied to a United States steamship. And by the very fact that it is applied to the one and not to the 

other it becomes a negative pregnant, and therefore gives to the Postmaster-General, as I said before,- power to enter into contracts which 

shall absorb the whole of the sea and inland United States postage 

money on foreign letters, whatever the amount may be, and be is· limited only by this amon.ut. · I confess··! should . every reluctant as Postmaster-General to take 

the responsibility of giving that construct4on to the statute, but such 

it seems to be. 

Mr. HISCOCK. What other construction could you give it? 

Mr. HOLMAN. How could you give it any such construction? 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. Mr. Chairman, I oncewasontbecom- mi~e which framed the Electoral Commission. There were thirteen 

lawyers, and I was the only layman. They told me that bill was con- stitutional, and I took their word for it, and I was abused afterward for 

having done so. I now leave my colleall'ue from New York [Mr. HiscocK] and the gentleman from Indiana ['Mr. HoLMAN], both eminent 

lawyers, to fight out the legal question. 

I simply take this statute as I .fiml it, ~ith the ordinary common 

sense with which I try to C..'U'ry on not only my own bn.siness, but my 

sl.lare of the business of this House, and I say the particular proposition seems to be true that the Postmaster-General by existing law may 

enter into contracts for carrying the mail, :md that the only limitation 

upon his power to contract with United States ves8els is tl.le amount of 

the sea and the inland postage he bas in his possession to deal with. 

Now, then, if this position be true the provision of this bill is a limitation upon that power, for the amount he has to deal with is about 

$1,800,000 and the amount limited by this bill is $600,000. This, 

therefore, does not change existing law and does ret:rencb expenditure 

in that it limits the expenditure from the sum of $1,800,000 and bri.Dgs 

it down to the sum of$600,000. Therefore, as the provision stands I 

think it is entirely within the rule of the House from the fact it does 

not make new legislation and does retrench the expenditure allowed 

by t he existing la..w, although retrenchment is not necessary to bring it 

within the rule since the repeal of section 3976. 

Mr. H A 1.MO~D. Mr. Chairman, suppose the Dingley bill had declared that it should not go into force until 1895, would it not be the 

hw now? The gentlellli1ll from New York admits it is not repealedthat the DinglC'y bill does not go into effect until April, 1885. We 

ha.ve not arrived a t that date, and therefore 3976 and the other section, 

forty-two hundred and something, are existing law. W4etber the 1st 

day of April will ever come, and with it the continued life oftbe Dingley bill, are thing8 in the future. And the rule is applicable to e.'{isting law; that is the language of it, and we may before this committee 

rises to-night xepeal t he Dingley bill so that it•sball never go i~to effect. 

But it is noli the law now_ Therefore, .the first point taken by the 

gentleman from New York is not well taken, even if it related only 

to the two sections affected by the Dingley bill. 

But sections 4007, 4008, and 4009, which have been cited by the gentleman from Indiana, are certainly existing laws, and this provision 

in the bill is inconsistent with every one of them. 

The gentleman from New York, assuming be bad gotten rid of the 

existing law, undertook by a specious argument to say on the faee of 

this bill, by a certain knowledge of business be had, be oould demonstmte it wn.s a reduction of expense. The language of the rule is, shall 

red nee the amounts in the bill. So far from this reducing the amount 

in the bill, it appropriates a certain sum of money. 

Mr . .JlEWITT, of New York. It is not the amendment-it is in the 

bill itself. 

Mr. HAMMO~D. It is useless for me to read the rule. The Ian-. 

XVI-1{)1 

guage js, no amendment nor any provision of the bill. Th~committee 

can no more put in a section changing existing law, unless it changes it 

in one of three ways provided· in Rule XXI, than I can do it. Otherwise the committee can do what it pleases. It would be a chartered 

libertine, and could do what it would take unanimous consent of the 

Honse to do without the sovereign permission of the committee. 

If it does not change any existing law, why does anyone want it here? 

Is there any law now declaring what sum of money the Po..<~tmasterGeneral shall contract for and with what vessels he shall t-'Ontract for ·the carrying of the mails? 

The gentleman from New York has said that if he chooses to bind 

himself by contract to ship only by American vessels, and ~y to the 

limit prescribed in 4009, it would be more eipensive than the amount 

laid down in this bill. But this very same section declares that he 

may allow that to an American vessel or he ma.y employ a foreign· vessel at so much per letter. ~fuy he not contract for the lower amount as well as for the higher amount; and if he may, does t~'3 decrease ex- penditures? The existing la..w allows him to contract up to a certain 

figure on an American vessel; this changes that law and it may increase 

the expenditure-! do not know; tbe gentleman from New York says 

ittloes not, that it decreases it; but you do not know. That is a. matter 

dependent upon outside figures, but not appearing in this bill. 

Is there any law now giving a subsidy to American ships other than 

that, limited, which he bas read, with respOnsibility attaching to the 

Postmaster-General of making such a contraet as would be ruinoUE 

perhaps when other shiJ>li! would for less sums do the same service and 

equally well? This law "now before us declares a new rule between any 

port of the United States or any foreign port, or between ports of the 

Atlantic and ports of the Pacific touching at any foreign port. It makes a new rule as to the liniitation of contracts-four years; it makes a new ~nle as to the rate per mile on ench trip each way; it makes a new rule as·to applying all the general law of inland transportation to sea tronsportation; _it makes· a new rule in declaring that in time of war the vessels employed to carry this mail may be chartered or purchased by the 

United States at reasonable rates, and also in repealing all laws in con- flict with this act. This law itself put in here is not at all necessary 

to running the mail service. of the United States. It is foreign to the 

whole business. It is simply a declaration that in order to encourage 

American vessels you will change the postal law as to carrying the mail 

on American vessels. 

Would it be within the competency of this committee to report a provision allowing greater compensation for carrying the mails on a car made in Massaehusetts than on one made in Oceanica? Would it not 

be utterly foreign to the busines..c:; of appropriating· money to carry the 

mails? · · 

I am not arguing the question whether such laws would be good l::l.ws or bad laws .. I am only saying they would be new laws, and laws that 

do not upon their face decrease expenditures by diminishing the num- ber of officers, by a reduction in their salaries, or the amount reported 

in the bill under discussion. I have made myself undel'Stood by the 

Chair and ought not to consume any further time. It is to me a mar- vel that any gentleman ca.n suppose this me..1sure not obnoxious to the 

point of oruex under the provisions of Rule XXI. 

Mr. OATES. :Mr. Chairman, I only wish to speak to one branch of 

the point of order, in which I th.ink the distinguished gentleman from 

Georgia is in error. His position assumes necessarily for its mainte- nance that the Chair must be blind to everything on the statute-books 

except those which are presented here in argument. · He assumes that 

this amendment necessarily changes existing 1:1w. If the Chair puts 

out of sight the act known as the Dingley bill, that is true; but this I assume the Chair will not do. · 

What operation then, or effect, does the Dingley bill have or propose 

to have a.t a future period upon the statute read by the gentleman from 

New York [Mr. HEWITT]? It repeals it, but not unt.il April next. 

Now, bec..1.use that repeal is postponed until that date, the gentleman 

from Georgia assumes that it is existing law and that this amendment 

would work a change in the existing law. 

Why, sir, the very bill upon which this amendment is proposed can not have any force or effect as a 1a w until the 30th day of June, a period 

afte:r the other, the Dingley bill, goes into operation. Now, inasmuch as the Dingley bill can not repeal thiS section or these sections to which 

he refers mitil the time named in that bill, then, by parity of re..'lSoning, the present aet proposed to be amended can not operate or have 

effect or become a. law until the time named in which it is to become 

operative. Then, applying the language of the rule wherein be maintains that it changes existing law, the Chair, to maintain that position, 

must assume that this law will continue to exist up to and a.ftel' the 

period when the law proposed to be amended is to go into operation. 

This, l\11'. Chairman, is an unsound position. . The rule invoked against this amendment must have a sensible interpretation. The repeal of existing law is immediate, if the bill to which 

the amendment is oftered is at once to go into operation; but if it is to 

go into operation at a time fued in the future, the Chair will look and 

see whether that law which is interposed and which it is contended is an existing law that it will opemie to repeal will also have no exist-: ence when the present act goes into operation. .As the Chair sees and 

. 
1602 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 12, 

knows th by the terms of the Dingley act this existing law which 

will be changed will not be law at that time, that part of the gentleman's argument necessarily falls to the ground. 

1\Ir. RANDALL. There is no occasion for confusing the point of 

order, as made under the rule of the House, with other matters. The 

question simply is this, Is there existing 'law which authorizes the appropriation contained in this paragraph? 

The prior law, subsequently repealed by the Dingley act, prescribed 

the amount to be paid for ocean postage; and the sum provid"ed for in 

this act is in excess of the provisions of that law. The next question 

is, Did the repealing clause in the Dingley act create any new law which 

authorizes such an expenditure as is provided in this paragraph? I 

submit that therecannotbecitedanylaw, and thatnoconstrnction can be placed upon any existing statute growing out of the repeal as con- tained in the Dingley a-ct, which authorizes under the rule the making 

of this law unless it is in the direction of economy. And so far as I 

know there is but one gentleman on this :floorwhohasmaintained that 

the paragraph here will reduce the expenditures. When we appeal to 

common sense we might as well at the same time appeal to truth, and we know perfectly well no man can stand up here and truthfully say 

that this provision of $600,000 does not greatly increase the expenditures of the public money. 

1\Ir. HISCOCK. Will the gentleman from Pennsylvania yield to me 

for R question? ·1\Ir. RANDALL. In a moment. Now I maintain first that this 

provision does change the law as it ~xisted prior to the enactment of 

t4e law known as the Dingley act; and it is not material when that 

goes into effect, because the Dingley a-ct itself provided no law in substitution, conceding that it changed the other law which authorized 

this expenditure. · · 

Mr. DINGLEY. Mr. Chairman, there has been a misapprehension on this point. The assumption has been in all this discussion that tlte 

twenty-third section of the shipping act, approved on the 26th day of 

J nne last, repealed all the legislation providing for compensation to 

American steamships carrying United States mails. This is not true. 

There were two provisions of statutes that existed at the time that bill 

went into effect. First, one which authorized the Postmaster-General 

without contract to require any American Yescrel to take the mails of 

the United States and deliver them, for which it was to receive 2 ce:nts 

per letter. This was the compulsory statute. But alongside of this, 

and still remaining the statute to-day, there was another provision of 

law contained in sections 4007 and 4009 of the Revised Statutes, which 

also authorized the Postmaster-General to enter into contract with the owners of American steamships for the purpose of carrying the mails of 

the United States, for which the Postmaster-General might pay to 

American vessels the sea and inland postage. 

Now, it makes no difference, 1\Ir. Chairman, whether the twentythird section of the shipping act repealing the compulsory provision is 

in force to-day or not, the Postmaster-General under the law as it ex;-

ists to-d...-.y is authorized to contract with the owners of American steamYes els to carry the mails of the United States, with the only limitation 

that the sum paid shall not exceed the sea and inland postage. But 

the revenue from sea and inland postage during the past year, as appears 

officially by the report of the Postmaster-General, was $2,172,000, and 

the Postmaster-General to-day by the law as it exists, and by the law as it existed last June before the twenty-third section of the shipping 

a-ct was enacted, is authorized if he chooses to contract with American 

ships to carry the mails and expend $"2,172,000. 

The provision introduced into this bill limit.s this expenditure to 

$600,000. It is in effect as if the language of the provision was that 

the Postmaster-General should expend only one-third of the sea and 

inland postage. 

Now, 1\fr. Chairman, it seems to me that in this view, takingthelaw as it stands, this provision reported by the Commit;tee on .Appropriations 

does limit the expenditure which the Postmaster-General may make to 

about one-third of the sum which he may expend to-day under the law. 

But the inquiry is made, Why, then, this legislation? Because, in the 

first place, the appropriation which has been made has not been sufficient for the purpose of carrying out the limitations of law; and in the 

second place, because the practice has been to use the compulsory provisions of law enforced upon American vessels and not enforced upon 

foreign vessels; and to-day with these compulsory provisions unre- pealed American steamships have simply the same chance that foreign 

steamships ha\e, the right to accept or reject an offer of the Government. And now with the law as it exists and as it may be enacted in 

this prorision, limiting the amount to one-third of the sea and inland 

postage, it seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that this provision is clearly in 

order. . 

1\Ir. HISCOCK. As I. understand the argument which is advanced 

by .the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. H.lliMO~"'"D] and by the gentleman 

from Indiana [Mr. HoLMAN], it is that the repealing clause in the 

Dingley ad does not operate upon the two compulsory clauses until 

the -1st of April, and therefore they are existing law within the mean- ing of the rule. Now suppose the Dingley act had repealed those two 

compulsory clauses, to take effect the 1st day of April next and ·had 

enacted e\ery provision in the pending bill excepting t~at appropriating 

money to take effect upon the 1st day of April next-Ibope I am understood-suppose the repealing clause took effect as a compulsory clause on the 1st P-ay of April, and they had put into their statute the provisiom 

in this pendillg bill excepting the one appropriating the money-I meau the provisions regulating what shall be paid and so. on-I ask gep.tle- men under what provisions of the statute would yon have made your 

appropri.'ttion? Would you have said that the clauses of the statute 

that a-re to be repealed and wiped out on the lst day of April nextwould yon have said that they were the existing law for the purposes 

of this appropriation? Would that have been your position? Yet yon 

are forced to that position if yon are right on this point. You are forced 

to say that under this rule yon would be compelled to make appropriations to be expended under laws which are repealed as of the"lst day 

of April next, before the time when the money is to be disbursed, and 

that yon could not make your appropriation with reference to the provisions of law which will be in force at the same time with the law 

under which the money is to be expended. 

I have said this much for the purpo. e of illustrating the fallacy of 

the position taken by gentlemen· here. The law under which you must 

make your apprppriation, the law referred to by the rule, is the law 

under which the money is to be expended, and none other. 

One word further now-and I am aware that I shall be traveling 

O\er the ground which has been so well occupied by the gentleman 

from Maine [Mr. DINGLEY]-! ask these gentlemen if these sections 

that are repealed as ~f the 1st day of April next are in force-if they are actually in force to-day? Can yon compel the Postmaster-General 

to .have the mails carried under those sections? It is true that the 

PostJl}aster-General can compel these vessels to take the mails under 

that law, but there is nothing in the statute which compels him to en- force the law. 

But, on the other hand; you have the sections that are referred to 

here under which the Postmaster-General has a right to make con- tracts. I ha\e not examined those sections veqcritically, but mynnderstandingof them is that they are provisions of law designed to meet a present necessity. A ship is in port; it is desirable to haye the mail 

carried upon that ship; possibly there is no contra-ct with her, and ina case of emergel).cy the PostlllaSter-General under this statute can call 

upon that vessel to carry the mail. They are 'emergency statutes; 

nothing more nor less. It was not contemplated that contracts for the 

carrying of the mails permanently should be made under those statutes,. 

One point further, and I have done. There is a class of cases in which 

yon are compelled to go outside of the statute to find out whether ex- penditures are reduced or not. In the rule we have this provision: 

Nor shall any provision in any such bill or amendment thereto changing ex- isting law be in order·, except such as, being germane to the subject-matter of 

the bill, shalL retrench expenditures by the reduction of the number and sala.rt 

of the officers of the United States1 by the reduction of the compensation of any 

person paid out of the Treasury or the United States. 

Now, sir, whel;le.ver the amount which is to be paid to a person or to a corporation om1 6f the Treasury is not fixed by statute you are com- pelled to go outside of the law to find out whether by the proposed measure expenditures are reduced or not. Take a case in which the 

compensation is to depend upon the amount of service rendered; in such a case you are compelled to go outside of the law and to look up the 

facta in order to find out whether expenditures will be reduced under 

the bill which yon are considering. If it is a salary or if the statute declares the amount of money, the specific sum. which can be paid, then 

yon look to the bill; but where the amount is dependent somewhat 

upon the amount of serrice rendered and yon have got to ascertain the 

amountofservice which is rendered before yonknowhowmnch money 

yon will pay for the service, in all such cases as that yon are compeUed 

of necessity to go outaide of the act to find whether yon are reducing 

expenditures or not. In this case, as I understand it, there will be a large reduction of expenditure. Under the law as it stands a million 

and a half or two millions of dollars may be paid out, but by this provision the expenditure is limited to a much less sum than that, and in 

deciding upon this question yon are compelled to look up the facts to 

find out whether there will be a reduction of expenditure under the 

bill. 

1\Ir. BAYNE. Mr. Chairman, in my opinion this provision is very 

clearly subject to the point of order made against it. It is subject to 

the point of order because it changes existing law and does not reduce 

expenditure, bn.t, on the contrary, very largely increases expenditure. 

In the first place, there is no existing law now authorizing the Postmaster-General to make a contract for five years for carryingthe mails 

either in American or ;in foreign ships, or on anyofthe railroads of the 

country, or by any other method whatever. Yet this proposition is to 

enable the Postmaster-General to make a contrad for carrying the :mail 

for fi"\"e yea.rs. . ?rlr. DINGLEY. Four years. 

Mr. BAYNE. Well, for four years. Now, there is no such provision as that in the R-evised Statutes, nor can it be found anywhere in 

existing law. Therefore I say this does change existing law in thatrespect. Moreover, it makes a preliminary appropriationof$600,000, and 

if this contract may be made for one year at 600,000, four times $600,- 
J.. 

I 

1885. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1603 

000 is $2,400,000. The argument strangely announced by my friend 

from Maine that because the inland postage co t $1,200,000, or $2,000,-

000 and thls provision a-ppropriates only $600,000, therefore this is a 

retr'enchment of expenditures, is an argument for '!'hich I can see n_o 

foundation at all. It appears to me to haYe no logtcal force or application. 

:Moreover the cxistiu()' Jil.w requires the inland postage to be paid on the mails tr'ansported. '"'The amount of mail matter is the measure of 

compensation. There is nothing in the law to-day that does not regulate the compensation by the amount of service rendered!-<> the Government. But this provision proposes to pay 50 cents a m1le _thoug~ ~e 

ship may carry but one letter. Yet gentlemen say that this proviSion 

does not change existing law! 

A ship may start from New York to Brazil having, as was the case a 

few years ago, only one bag ofmail:matter. In suchaca:se under !his 

pronsion that vessel would be entitled to 50 cents a mile from New 

York to Brazil and 50 cents a nrilefor anotherbagofmail-matter from 

Brazil to New York, although the cost of that transportation. according 

to the rates fixed by section 4009, would probably be only 50 cents for 

the round trip. Yet it is said this does not change exist_ing law! It 

manifestly changes existing law in sever~ r~pects. It 1S a d~parture 

from the policy of this Government, which 1S _to pay for ser:n~s ren- dered a fair compensation and no more; and JUSt so far as 1t IS a departure from that policy the idea of subsidy enters into it. Th~ provision not only changes exisiting law, but changes the whole policy of 

this Government. I, for one, will never consent to any proposition 

that looks to taking ta:Xation from the people and paying it to particular ship-'Owners in order to build up a fic?-tious system of marine ser_vice when such things should come according to natwa,l causes, and will 

co~e in due time if our people will be a little patient. 

Mr. FIND~AY. Mr. Chairman, I dislike very much to occupy the 

attention of the House at this late hour in discussing a point of order; 

but being a member of the Shipping Committee, which has had this 

matter under consideration, I feel some interest in it, and was very 

much gratified when the Appropriations Committee reported their bill 

embracing this provision. . . ' The question before the Comnuttee of the Whole 1s whether or not 

this provision changes existing _law; for I take it. if it does not, t~e qu~­

tion whether it retrenches or mcreases expenditures becomes liDIDaterial. The language of Rule XXI is: 

Nor sha.ll any provision in any such b~ll or amendment ther~to changing ex- ist.ing law be in order, except such as, bemg germane to the subject-matter of the 

bill, shall retrench expenditures- ·. 

In one of several specified methods. So that the vital, the fundamental question to be determined in this case is whethe~ the provision 

changes existing law. If it does not, all that has beensa1d on the question of retrenching or reducing -expenditures falls to the ground. 

I maintain that it does not change existing law. The bill itself recites that ''this act shall take effect from and after July 1, 1885. '' What 

law will be changed by the paragraph now under consideration?' Not 

the section which has been repealed by the "Dingley bill," which goes 

into effect on the 1st of April, 1885; for on the 1st of July, 1885, that 

will be gone and out of the question. . An intimation was made by the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. HAM- 1\IO~] that it is not to be assumed but that that_protision_oflawma_y 

be re-enacted, if you please, before the 1st of April. That 1S not a farr 

presumption upon which to argue this question. The presumption is 

that it will not be re-enacted, because it has been repealed. 1. Mr. HAMMOND. The gentleman from Maryland will permit me 

to say that I made no such presumption. 

Mr. FINDLAY. I understood the gentleman to say so. 

Mr. HAMUOND. No, sir. 

I\Ir. FINDLAY. Yerywell; if the gentleman makes the correction 

let it stand. I simply misunderstood him. . There are others who understood him the same way. 

Mr: HAMMOND. I corrected the gentleman from Maryland, not 

myself, us to what he understood. 

Mr. FINDLAY. I am simply saying I misunderstood you. 

Mr. HAMMOJ\TD. I thought you said I corrected myself. 

Mr. FINDLAY. I simply said I misunderstood you; and there are 

others who understood you in the same way. 1\lr. HlliMOND. I am very glad you made the mistake, as it gives me this opportunity of making them understand me correctly_. · Mr. FINDLAY. I th~k we understand each other now; and as this 

is not very germane to the discussion I shall proceed with what I have 

been saying. Having made my apology to the gentleman, I do not 

think it necessary to go further. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, what is the state of the case? On the 1st of 

April, 1885, the existing law now on the statute-book passes out of ex- istence. Then there come April, May, and June, three months during 

which there isnolawupon this subject. Then on the 1st of July,1885, 

this provision, if enacted, comes into existence. It can not come into 

opera~on by its own terms until that date. If the law with which this 

provision is in conflict should be in force on the 1st of July, 1885, when 

this bill proposes to go int<> effect, there would be a change of the law 

existing at that date; but as the law will not then be in existence, the 

law having been repealed three months before, there will be at that date 

nothing to change. 

1\lr. HAMMOND. . Will the gentleman allow me a question? . Mr. FINDLAY. Yes, sir. 

1\Ir. ~11\IOND. Assuming to be true what the gentleman bas al· 

ready said; will not this provision of the section be a change of existing law: · 

That vessels engaged in this service shall be of American registry, and shall, 

in time of war, be liable to charter or purchase by the Unit-ed States at reason- able rates; and all laws nnd parts of Ia ws in conflict with the provisions of this act be, and the same are hereby, repealed. 

Mr. FINDLAY. I understood the gentleman to rest the weight of 

his argument upon . the first point I was discussing. If he n.bandons 

the first point, if he thinks that point answered, and now feels com- pelled to fall back on his second point, I will meet him .there. 

Mr. HAl\BIOND. I 'do not abandon my first point, although the 

gentleman assumes that I do. 

Mr. FThTDLAY. I said "if the gentleman abandons it." I did not 

make the a...o;sumption; but it seemed to me the gentleman did abandon it. 

Now1 Mr. Chairman, the gentleman has asked whether or not the 

last proviso which he has just read does net cha~ge existing law. I 

say no; it does not change existing law; it simply adds to thelawsomething not now in existence. It makes new law and does not change the 

old. If we are to go outside of the statute and into the principles of 

the law I do not admit it makes any change of principle,. because in the 

exercise of the right of eminent domain the Government of the United 

States can take these vessels now and use them in time of war. This simply says that the vessels engaged in this service shall be of 

American registry and shall in time of war be liable to charter or purchase by t,p.e United States at reasonable rates. It simply gives it a 

power-embodies it here in the statute-which it has without the em- bodiment of that power in the statute. Therefore it does not change 

the law in that sense. But in another sen..-.e it is not a change of existing law. It only adds something to law where it is now defective. 

And so I say to the gentleman from Georgia his seoond line is no better 

than his first. 

I\Ir. I\llLLS. I hope the committee will rise. 

:Mr. MONEY. I hope not, as I ·wish to be heard on this question. 

Mr. THOMPSON. I desire to submit an additional point. 

Mr. :MONEY. Had we not better dispose of one at a ~me? 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair prefers to hear all the points raised. 

Mr. THOl\'lPSON. I will state the additional point. It see~ to 

be conceded, 1\Ir. Chairman, by all that the provision ingrafted on the 

bill by the Committee on Appropriations is an entirety. I submit to 

the Chair this paragraph is an entire proposition. It seems to be admitted on all hands that eaeh of the provisos is of itself a change of 

existing law. For instance, the bst gentleman who addressed the 

House, the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. FnrnLAY], admits the 

provision h~re that vessels engaged in this service shall be of American 

registry, and shall in time of war be liable to charter or purchase by 

the United State~, is a change of existing law. It is further admitted 

that proviso does not retrench expenditure either in the reduction of 

the number of men employed by the Government or in the amount of 

pay given out of the public Treasury. And that last clause is clearly 

within the provision of clause 3 of Rule XXI. So it is admitted by 

all the gentlemen who haYe argued the point of order that each one of 

the other provisos comes within the range of the rule. · The point I submit to the Chair is thi.;;: That where any portion of au amendment, which is an entirety, is subject to the point of order the 

whole provision must be stricken from the bill. It has been so ruled 

constantly by various-speakers of the Honse. I will only cite the Chair. to the decision made by Mr. Speaker KEIFER in the Fol;ty-seventh 

Congress (Journal Forty-seventh Congress, page 1704), that whenever. any portion of a proposed amendment submitted is out of order in any 

part it is sufficient ground for rejection of the entire proposition. I 

ask the Clerk to read that decision. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

1\lr. BELliiOll."T, also, by unanimous consent, submitted the following reeolu· 

tion, namely : · "Resolved, That a special committee of seven members of this House be. ap- pointed with authority to report upon the causes of the decline of the Amertcan 

merchant marine, and to recommend to the House at its next session what 

changes in existing laws are needed to secure a revival of this interest." 

Ordered, That said petition and resolution be referred to the Committee on Commerce. 

Audthen, On motion of l.'t!r. BrNGHAlii, the House proceeded to the consideration of the 

bill of the House (H. R. 8-59) regulating rates of postage on second-class mail matter at letter-carrier offices. . Mr. ToWNSHEND moved to amend by adding thereto the following as additional sections, namely: · · ''SEc. 6. Strike out the word 'three' and insert ' two,' on the eighth line of 

section 3903 of the Revised Statutes. l 

'' S.Eo. 7. Strike out sections 3905 and 3906 and insert ' that the postage on~ 

ond class mailable matter be, and the same is hereby, abolished., and that such' 

mail matter shall be conveyed in the mails of the United. States free from postal ' 

charges.' " . I. ltlr. PEELLE ma~ethepointof order thatthesaidamendmentwas not in order, not being germane to the subjectrmatter of the bill. • Mr. MotrEY made the further point of .order that the said amendment, being 
1604 CON~RESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 12, 

the substance of a bill referred to the Committee on the Post-Office and PostRoads, was not in order under clause 4 of Rule XXI. 

After debate on said points of order, The Speaker sustained. the same, and held that where any portion of a proposition submitted waa out of order it wns sufficient ground for the rejection C1C 

the entire proposition. 

Ur. THOMPSON. Now,l\Ir. Chairman, I hold that this proposition 

is an entirety, and that the Committee on Appropriations have no more 

power to ingraft upon an appropriation bill a proposition of this ~ind than 

we have by an amendment offered in the House. I hold that they stand 

enctly in the same rel:1tion to the House, and under Rule XXI have 

the same power as we have, and no more. I hold further that the proposition brought in here, being an entire proposition, parts of which are admitted on n.ll hands to be subject to the point of order, that necessarily the entire proposition is subject to the point of order if ~sisted 

upon, and I do insist upon it. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I move that the committee do now rise. 

· The motion was agreed to. 

The committee accordingly rose; and MI·. BLAND having taken the 

chair as Speaker pro ternpore, Mr. SPRINGER reported that the Commitr 

tee of the Whole on the state of the Union having had under consideration the Post-Office appropriation bill had come to no resolution 

thereon. LEAVE OF ABSE~CE. 

By. unanimous consent, leave of :;tbsence was granted a!'! follows: 

To Mr . .AD.urs, of Illinois, indefinitely, on account of sickness. 

'I'o .Mr. GoFF, until February 16, on account of sickness. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

:?.Ir. TOWNSHEND. I ask unanimous consent that the House may 

now take a. recess until10 o'clock to-morrow, as provided for by a pre-

·vious order, without waiting until the hour of 10 o'clock to-night. 

There was no objection; and accordingly (at 9 o'clock and 55 miuu.tes p.m.)· the H~ took a recess until10 o'clock .a. m Friday~ 

AFTER RECESS. 

The recess having expired, the House (at 10 o'clock a. m., Friday, 

February 13, 1885) resumed its session. 

UNLAwFuL OCCUPANCY OF THE PUBLIC LANDS. 

, Mr .. P-.AYSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to a privileged motion. 

· The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it. 

Mr. PAYSON. I move to concur in the amendments of the Senate 

to the bill (H. R. 5479) to prevent the unlawful occupancy of the public lands. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Senate n,mendments will be read. 

The seveml amendments of the Senate were reported. 

Mr. PAYSON. I move to concur in the amendments of the Senate. 

Ur. HEWITT, of .Alabama. I would like to ask the gentleman from 

Illinois a question: whether this bas been ·considered by the Committee 

on Public Lands? 

1\Ir. PAYSON. Yes, sir; and unanimously reported by the committee with that recommendation. · 

I suggest, Ur. Speaker, unless-a separate vote be desired on some of 

these amendments, that the vote be taken in gross upon concurring in 

the Senate amendments. 

There being no separate vote demanded, the Senate amendments were 

concurred in. 

Mr. PAYSON moved to reconsider the vote by which the Senate 

amendments were concurred in; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. 

'Ihe ia.tter :motion was agreed to. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

1t!r. WILLis. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House resolve itself into 

Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, announcing 

that my object is, if possible, to call up the river and harbor appropriation bill; and pending that motion I move that all debate on the pending section and amendments thereto be limited to one hour and a half, 

with the unde1-standing that the opponents of the bill shall have one hour, and the friends one-half hour of this time. 

1\Ir. REED,· of Maine. Ur. Speaker, I rise to a question of order. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it. 

·Mr. REED, of Maine. Imakethepointoforderthat under therules 

of the Honse debate can not now be limited on the section. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will read the clause of the 

rule applying 'to tl1is subject. 

Mr. REED, of Maine. If the Chair desires, I should like to be heard 

upon the point of order. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. As, soon as the rule shall have been 

read. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

6. The Bouse may, by the vote of a majority of the members present, o.t any time aft~r the five minutes' debate has begun upon proposed amendments to any section or paragraph to a bill, close all debate upon such.scction or para-- graph, or,at.itselectionJ upon the pending amendments only_; but this shall not preclude further amenament, to be decided without debat~. 

Mr. ·REED, of Maine. As I understood the proposition of the gen-

-tleman, it is to close debate not only upon the particular paragraph 

under discussion at the time the committee rose, but also to close it on the rest of the section which has not yet been read. 

In order that the importance of the decision upon this point may be 

fully appreciated, I desire, :first, to say that debate would be closed 

upon that portion of the bill whieh especially needs exemplification and 

discussion. It will be remembered that at the beginning of the debate 

on this bill the time was absorbed by the committee who have it in 

charge under the direction and action of the House, _ and the committee, 

with the exception of the very luminous remarks of the gentleman from 

.Arkansas [1\Ir. BRECKINRIDGE], gave us very litt}.e satisfaction on the 

subject of the Mississippi River irupro•ements, which are involved, or liable to be involved, in the matter now in hand. 

The Chair will also recollect that we had this question raised for the 

only time, at least during my membership of the House, in ~he discussion on the t:.uiff bill in 1883. One side of this House was exceedingly anxious to pass the House tariff bill, the other side was exceedingly anxious that it should not be passed, and bene~ every provision 

was discussed at length-was discussed in the light of amendment and 

in every way-and it became apparent that if tha~ discussion was to go 

·on the majority of the House would have grave difficulty in passing 

the bill prior to the close of the session. Thereupon the motion was 

made to close debate on the section, which substantially included the 

wholo bill; and I have no doubt the Chair will recollect the remarks 

which he u.s an individual made at that time, and I trust that his view 

in the chair may be the same u.s the view he took upon the floor and as 

the view which wa.s taken by the permanent ~cupant of the chair. 

I think it will be found that I did not participate in that debate 

upon the point of order. If my recollection serves me I did not; probn.bly because I did not agree with my party friends as to the question. 

Bnt in any event the proposition was then •ery strenuously opposed. • 

Now let me suggest to the Chair that in a parliamentary body all the 

presumptions arc in favor of full and · complete debate, and that it refJ_nires an absolute, positive rule of the House to justify the closing ofdebate. I say it is absolutely necessary to start with the idea that a 

closing of debate on the part of the House is a measure against which 

all tl1c presumptions lie. In other words, there must be a positive rule 

of the House to justify the action in closing debate, because the normal 

pond.ilion of a deliberati\e assembly ;s that of debn.te; a proposition 

needs to be fuUy discussed. There never has been a case where, upon 

objection being made, so far as I know, this proposition of the gentleman from Kentucky [.1\'lr. WILLIS] 'has been sustained.· On the-contrary, it has been the experience of every man in this House that a bill 

like this is discussed point by point and paragraph by pn.ragraph; and 

this arises from the \ery nature of the bill, because each item is a separate cxpendittire, governed by separate and different reasons, and it 

is in1possible to close discussion upon a whole section without closing 

it upon a multitude of subjects at once. So that the practical effect of 

such closure is to oblige discussion to :range over a great number of snbjectst whereas the rule and the principle of the rule has always been, 

and the practice under it the same, to have each item involving a separate appropriation discussed thoroughly or discussed at any rate by 

members of the House. And the rule provides, in order that there may 

certainly be discussion, that not until after discussion has been commenced can it be closed, thus insuring at least five minutes of discussion on eithe1· side of each proposition. 

Now I know the language of the rule is that debate may be closed on 

the section or paragraph, and the question is whether that refers to different kind'3 of bills or whether it refers to the same kind of bills. I 

admit also that it will be found when you go back to 1860, when the 

rule started, that the debate would indicate that in the minds of those 

who participated in that debate, or, more exactly, in the mind of the 

propose1·, the House was to have the alternative power. But I call the 

attention of the Chair especially to this principle enunciated by the 

permanent occupant of the chair. 

I made a point of order the other day that resolutions of inquiry 

which were reported back under the rule from committees were not 

under the rules privileged, so as to be discussed and decided at once, 

and the permanent occupant of the chair informed the House that if it 

were a new question he might decide otherwise ; but that a custom had 

grown up, a custom which has cert.:'linly not existed any more than two 

.COngresses, by which he should feel constrained to be governed. Now 

that custom has grown up, but without a single point of order within 

my recollection· ha\'ing been made on the subject. If, then, the custom 

is controlling in that, it certainly must be ~ntrolling in this; for for 

twenty-five years, so far as I know, this custom has obtained. I say so far as I know, for nobody can tell without having made a thorough 

search what there may possibly be in twenty-five years of the CoNGRESSIO:N.AL REcono and Globe. But I am very certain that during the 

eight years that I have been here the· custom bas been universal, and 

that no decision can be found by any presiding officer to the effect that 

debate can be closed on a provision of the bill which has not yet been 

read._ 

My m·gument then is this: that the normal condition of a deliberative assembly is one offree and untrammeled debate; consequently that 

it should be clear that-the rules of the Rouse permit the majority to 

limit the rights of individual members; and that the universal c~stom 
1885. OONGRESSIONAL · REOORD-· HOUSE. 1605 

of the House, the reason and sense of the situation, all show that this 

motion made by the gentleman froin Kentucky is out of order, and I 

trust the Chair will so rule: . The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will state the point of order 

raised by the gentleman from 1.:1aine, and the argument submitted by 

him would in the opinion of the Chair be very well ·directed to a general a:gpropriation or revenue bill. The river and harbor bill has been 

held more than once to be neither a general appropriation bill nor a revenue bill. The debate to which the gentleman alludes affecting the tariff 

bill, in the judgment of the Chair, does not apply in this case. If this 

were a general appropriation or a revenue bill the Chair would have no 

doubt as to the correctness of the views o~ the gentleman from Maine; 

. but as a river and harbor bill has never been held to be either one or the 

other, the Chair does not think the point of order is well taken. The 

Chair will ask the Clerk to read the sixth clause of Rule XXIII. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

The House may, by the vote of a majority of the members present, at any time 

after the five minutes' debate has begun upon proposed amendments to any sec- tion or paragraph to a bill, close all debate upon such section or paragraph, or, 

at ita election, upon the pending amendments only; but this shall not preclude further amendment, to be deCided without debate. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair is not disposed to bar the 

House ofits right to debate. The Chair-

:ltlr. HISCOCK. Mr. ·SpeakerThe SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair is now endeavoring to state 

its ruling, and will hear the gentleman later. The Chair has no disposition to bar the House of its right of debate. It is within the power 

of the House to continue debate upon this section, or the paragraph, as 

1ong as it pleases; but under the clause of the rule read by the Clerk, 

this being neither a general appropriation nor a revenue bill, it is clear 

fu the mind of the present occupant of the Clmir that it is competent for 

a majority of the members here present to limit debate upon the pending section. The Chair therefore overrules the point of order made bythe gentleman from Maine [Mr~ REED]. . · , 

Mr. REED, of Maine. I desire to take an appeal; but would it be too 

much to ask the Chair ro state the difference between this bill and a 

general appropriation bill. _ 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair has stated its opinion and 

made its ruling, and the gentleman from Maine [Mr. REED] appeals. 

Mr. WILLIS. I move to lay the appeal on the table. 

Mr. REED, of Maine. I do not mean to yield the floor unless I have 

to. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will not require the gentleman to do that, because it has not the power. 

Mr. REED, of Maine. Mr. Speaker, I have now made an appeal 

from the decision of the Chair. I have had too much experience in 

this assembly not to know how it is liable to act, but ·1 propose, for my 

part, .so far as I am able, to do my duty in r~ard to this ma~er. I desire to say to the House that this is establishing a precedent of a most 

astonishing character-a precedent which must necessarily recoil 011 

both sides of the House. 

:Ur. WILLIS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to know whether, in discussing this question, the House can be lectured? 

The SPEAKER pro te-mpore. The Chair will ask the gentleman from 

Maine [Mr. REED] to confine himself to the proper discussion of the 

question. 

Mr. REED, of Maine. Will the Chait be kind enough to point out w hel'ein I have deviated from parliamentary rules. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair hardly thinks that the gentleman is addressing himself to the appeal which he hasmadefrom the 

ruling of the Chair on the point of order that he submitted. 

Mr. REED, of Maine. Surely I IDary be allowed to speak of the importance of this matter. Surely that is legitimate discussion. 

The SPEAKER pro tempo1·e. The Ohair will snggest to the gentle- man from Maine [Mr. REED] that all discussion upon a point of order 

is in the discretion of the Ohair. 

?i.Jr. REED, .of Maine. Not npon an appeal, Mr. Speaker. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair admits that upon an appeal. 

the gentleman has a 1ight to discuss the ruling of the Ohair upon the 

point of order he has submitted--

1\Ir. REED, of Maine. Precisely. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. And the Ohair hopes that the gentle- man will do that. 

1\Ir. REED, of Maine. I shall certainly do so. I call the House to 

witness that the langnage I have used is legitimate and proper argument, and that it is not lecturing the House, because, among other rea- sons, the Honse has not yet passed upon this question. 

Here is a question which involves the freedom of debate, and I beg 

that this House will not, on acconnt of affection for any particular bill, 

deliberately establish a precedent which in its results, as I have said 

befoTe, is sure to recoil upon both sides of the Honse; is sure to deprive 

tbe House on some important occasion of the right to debate. I have 

endeavored to obtain from the Speaker now occupying the chair the 

gronnds on which he makes a difference between the bill now before 

the House and general appropriation and revenue bills, and I venture 

to say that it will not be possible for any member on the floor, or anywhere else, to state any real gronnd of ·difference between the bills 

under the· rule, the interpretation of which is in question, because the 

rule which was read by the Chair in its decision-expressly includes every 

bill-; and if it be true that this House can deprive a minority of the 

right-of di&cussion upon this bill, then it can do so upon every bill that 

comes before the' House. 

. Let me explain wbat I deem to be the great fallacy-! say it with perfect respect toward the present occupant of the chair and toward the 

Chair-theverygreatfhllacywhichseemstometolurkunderonesuggestion which has been made by the Chair, the proposition that this House 

need ·not close debate on the section unless it chooses. ·Just there is 

the mistake. I am not now struggling for the rights of the majority; 

I am struggling for the rights of the minority; and I say that, under 

the rules of this House, the majority of the House have not the rigM to 

close debate except under the rules, and that consequently .the ruling 

of the Chair, if sustained, does cut off the minority, provided the majority choose to exerctse that power if the House gives it to them. 

What is the rule? Let me read it agam for the information of the 

House: · 

Tlie House may by vote of a majority of the members ·present, at any time aft~r the five-minutes' debate has begun upon proposed amendments to any sec- tion or paragraph to a bill. · 

Now, certainly the word~' bill" there includes general appropriation 

bills; includes revenue bills, includes river and harbor bills, and all 

other bills that can be brought before the House or the Committee of 

the Whole. Consequently, if this ruling be sustained, the distinction 

made by the Chair can not be sustained. You will :find yourselves, and 

we shall find .ourselves, cut off from the discussion of tariff bills, cut off 

from the discussion of general appropria~on bills, and I would like to 

a8k what condition the House will be in then? 1t has no power to do 

general legislation now; under this ruling it can not discuss the river 

and harbor bill; it will not be able to discuss an appropriation ora tariff 

bill; and, if that is to be our condition, I sh-ould like to know why we 

meet at all. What would be the object of our coming together except 

to record without word or murmur the opinions of the temporary majority of the House? That isnottheobjectofadeli~rative assembly. 

That strikes a.t the very foundation of a parliamentary body. 

I had at my desk (but some one has taken it) the debate which occurred on this question in the year 1883, and I commend the reading 

of that to the majority of this House; That debate was participated 

in by the present occupant of the chair and by the permanent Speaker 

of this House. There is not one word in any of the remarks made by 

those gentlemen which is notapplicabletothepresent question. They 

were ·both of them very strenuously of the opinion th..1:t the majority 

of this House had not the right to deprive the minority of the power of 

discussion upon portions of a section which had never been read. 

Let the House consider for a moment the existing condition of things. 

One-half of n. section has been read; it has been commented on, paragraph by paragraph; and now it is deliberately proposed that all d~bate, 

except such as the majority choose to allow, shall be c~t off upon the 

rest of the section, which has not even been read to the House. For my 

part I can not conceive of a more singular and astonishing proposition. 

Let me further say to the House that this question becomes especially important on this very bill. We are coming· to sections which involve the expenditure of millions of money. There are three hundred 

and twenty-five men who have the right of discussion of those meas- . ures. The Mississippi scheme, the Hennepin Oana), and the Galveston 

Harbor appropriation are involved in this. · Yet it is proposed under 

this ruling to limit three hundred and twenty-five men to an hour and 

thirty minutes in the discussion of these questions, when the rules of 

this House give a right of five minutes' dis.cussion pro and con on every 

item; and the custom of the House gives a much less limited right of 

discussion. 

I am aware that what I have said would have beenverymuch illuminated by the remarks made on the occasion to which I4:tave referred 

by the gentleman who is now our pel'manent Speaker and by the present occupant of the chair; a,nd I am sorry that I am not able to present 

them. Perhaps some gentleman can favor me with the volume? Has 

the gentlemap. from Kentucky [Mr. WILLIS] the debate at hand? 

Mr. WILLIS. No; I have not. I have the Journal here. 

Mr. REED, of 1\Iaine. Has the Speaker that deb~te? 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair bas not the volume. 

Mr. REED, of .Maine. If be has I shall be very much obliged--

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair has not that debate at band; 

he has the ruling made on this question by the permanent Speaker of 

this House, which after a while the Chair will ask to have read. 

Mr. ~EED, of :Maine. By the present Speaker ofthe House? 

The SPEAKER pro te1itpore. By the present permanent Speaker of 

this House. 

Mr. REED, of·Maine. I yield five minutes to the gentleman from 

New York [Mr. HiscocK]. 

Mr. HISCOCK. l\Ir. Speaker, I shall make but a single suggestion on this question. We have in this House a custom, which I suppose has 

its authority in the construction of the mles-a custom under which we read a section or a paragraph, as the case may be,. to which amen~­

ments and discussion are to be directed. We read the s .!.Ction or para-

.f. 
1606 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 12, 

·graph before either amendment to it or discussion upon it is in order. 

If it had been the policy in the consideration of this bill to read this 

entire ection before receiving amendments or el\tertaining discussion 

upon it, I could "\"erywell understand how the ruling of the Chair might 

be proper and right under the rule._. 

My understanding is that all the matter upon which you would 

limit debate must be read in the committee before a motion. to limit 

debate upon it is in order. If in the consi~emtion of this bill we had 

read the entire section before receinng amendments or allowing discussion there would be, I concede, ground for the ruling made by the 

Chair. But we. have adopted an entirely d.i.fferent policy-a .policy 

and pra.ctice which have always obtained in this House, reading first 

a part of the section, the paragraph, and then receiving amendments 

to the paragraph and discu ... ~ing those amendments. 

It is entirely competent to limit the debate upon a part of the section 

which has been read and considered in that way, and upon all amendments which have been made to that paragraph. But when we go further than that, and attempt to limit discussion upon a part of a section 

which has never been read and which has not been before the committee, it seems to me, with all deference to the judgment of the distinguished occupant of the chair, we are violating every ·us..<tge of the House 

and Tiolating the spirit of the rnle. 

I submit is it competent, is it orderly, that we should go into Committee of the Whole and debate under the five-minute rule a section 

before that section has ever been read? 

I ask if the Chair were presiding in the Committee of the Whole 

House on the state of the Union whether he would allow discussion 

under the five-minute rule until the su'Qject-matter upon which general debate had been closed b order. of the House had been read and 

t.he section, paragrap~ or proposition was thus before the committee 

under the five-minute rule? 

Under the ruling appealed from, Ur. Speaker, I see no reason why it 

is not. entirely competent and proper to go into Committee of the Whole 

and have the gentleman who has charge of the bill, after general debate 

has closed, apply the five-minute rnle on the section before it has been 

read at all, and amendment be receive~ to it before it has been read, 

go then back into the House and cut off, if the House is of that min_d 

discussion entirely on the section which has nev~r been read at all and 

has not been before the House by the reading provided for in the rules. 

And in this way you may cut off the whole consideration of the bill. It 

is for this reason, Mr. Speaker, I have desired to enter myprote t against 

the rnling which has been made. · 

Mr. REED, of Maine. I will yield five minutes to the gentleman 

from Massa.<!husetts. 

Mr. LONG. Mr. Speaker, my interest in this point is not connected 

with the bill under consideration; .but it seems to me we are settling 

here a very important principle. As was suggested to me hy the gentleman from New York [Mr. BEACH], if the construction nowurged is 

to be carried out, the arrangement of a bill into sections being a mere matter of convenience, it will be in the power of any person or com- mittee reportiilg a bill to put that whole bill in one section and then 

immediately cut off the debate upon it. • The rule reads as follows: 

6. The House may, by the vote of a majority of the members p1·esent, at any time !lfter the five minutes' deba-te has begun upon propo ed amendment-s to any section or paragraph to a bill, close all debate upon such section or para- graph. . 

I call the attention of the Chair to the fact that this rule is two rules, 

not one; two rules are embraced in one formula. Those two rules are 

these: First, the House may, by the vote of a majority, &c., close all 

debate upon any section; s~nd, the Hoose may, by the vote of a ma- jority, &c., close all debate on any paragraph. The language of the 

rule is " section or paragraph; " in other words it is disjunctive, making two rules, the second of which, that as to a paragraph, giving the ame limitations and rights of de~te on a paragraph which otherwise, 

under the first, would be given only to a section. After the five minutes' debate has begun on a paragraph, that is, after it has been read 

and debate has begun upon it, the House by a majority ofits members 

may close debate -on that paragraph. So, too, after a section has been 

read and the five minutes' debate has begun on that section, then you. may close debate on that section. Therefore it follows that whenever any paragraph has been read and the five minutes' debate has begun, 

then and only then debate thereon may be closed. So, too, under the 

other part of the same rule, a section mast first be read in regular orderthe whole section; debate must begin on that section, and then and 

then only amotion is in order to close debate thereon. Until t},le whole section has been read, until the five minutes' debate has begun on that 

whole section, a motion is not in order to close debate; otherwise the 

rights of debate are cut off; otherwise, as the gentleman from New York 

has aid, any committee may report a bill in one section and deprive 

this House of debate. This principle is too important to be sacrificed. 

Mr. WILLIS. Can the gentleman from Massachusetts find any rule 

anywhere which would prevent the Committee on Rivers and Harbors 

of this House putting the bill making appropriations for the rivers and 

h:lrbors of the country into one paragraph? 

:Mr. LONG. I know of none; that is the very argument I ~ak . 

Mr. CUTCHEON. I rise to a parliamentary inquiry. 

Mr. REED, of Maine. I have the floor. How much time have 1 

left, Mr. Speaker? 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Maine ha thirtyfive minutes. remaining of his hour. 

Mr. REED, of .Maine. I will yield now five minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. YOUNG]. 

Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Speaker, I do not propose at this time to enter 

into any discussion on the point of order no~ before. the House. .My 

only desire at the present time is to say a word in the interest of the 

bill and suggest to my friend from Kentucky [Mr. WILLIS] who has it 

in charge that in all probability it might reach consideration in the 

llouse at a much earlier hour if this question a.s to limiting debate 

should be held in abeya~ce for a little time. The vote taken by the 

House yesterday evening on the proposition to enter upon the consideration of the bill at this hour indicated very clearly the friendly feeling of the House toward it. I believe if a fair discussion can be had, 

if a reasoll3.ble time be allowed for that purpose, and if the gentlemen 

who are opposed to certain provisions of the bill are permitted to offer 

such amendments as they deem necessary, that there will be little or 

no opposition manifested to it.s passage; and~ submit that it is due to 

those who have had no opportunity of being heard that they have some 

consideration shown them in this regard. 

There are many important provisions in this bill which have not yet 

been discussed. 1\fany members of tbis Honse think they have a right 

to be heard in the expression of their views against these provisions. 

It is just to the.J? and j u t to the constituency they ~present that they 

should have a reasonable opportunity at least to present their views to 

the House. None of them I am sure will urge any factious oppo~tion 

but merely endeaYorto protect the interests of their constituents, which 

they believe are now left without the protection which should be afforded 

under the provisions of this bill. 

And up to thi time it can not be denied, whether done purposely or 

not I will not undertake to say, that the committee having this bill in 

charge have occupied a very large portion of the time during which it 

has been under discu ion, and now to limit all further debate upon the 

relll!linder oft he bill to one hour nnd a half would be to deny to many 

members a right to which t}ley are entitled. _ 

During the whole time the bill was under consideration in the committee-room no member of the House, I believe, was permitted to lay 

his views before the ro1,11mittee. Since it has been before the House 

only a very small number of gentlemen who desired to speak ha.>e had 

an opportunity of discu sing it, or of C?ffering any amendment to it. 

This was unjust to them and muy result in leaving important interests 

wholly unproteeted.. 

Mr. REAGAN. Let me illterrupt the gentleman to st.ate that if he 

will remember, although the committee occupied the greater portion 

of the time, yet there were sev.eral members of the committee·who ad-

_dressed the House in opposition to the bill. . Mr. YOUNG. That may be. I do not know how that wa , nor am I complaining of the distribution of the time, but was only going to 

suggest to the gentleman in charge of the bill that it might be better to 

let the discussion proceed this morning, ascertain the feelin~ and temper of the House in respect of further discussion, and how many gentlemen yet desire to speak. Bypursl,ling this com'Se, in all probability 

by t{)-morrow or the next day he will be enabled to have the bill in 

such condition as to submit it to the House 1or final a-ction. I have no doubt that the House will cheerfully grant him for to-morrow and for 

the next; day the sam~ favor that has been acc-orded him to--day, in 

order that the bill may be fairly considered and that no gentleman 

may ha>e any just cause of complaint. If this suggestion is adopred 

and an opportunity given to the few gentlemen who entertain decided 

views and convictions upon this subject to express them, I have no doubt 

that in a very few d.'l>ys the bill may be finally acted upon by the House 

and go ro the Senate for its concurrence. 1\1r. REED, of 1\Iaine. I now yield three minutes ro the gentleman 

from Michigan [Mr. CUTCHEON]. 

Mr. CUTCHEON. I desire to submit to the Chair, ll1 the first in- stance, a parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER pro ternpqre. The gentleman "'ivill. state it. 

Mr. CUTCHEON. If the decision of the Chab.· should stand as the 

judgment of the House, and the motion of the gentleman from Kentucky [1\fr. WILLIS] should prevail, and the debate be limited thereunder, would it be in order to submit either an amendment or remarks 

upon paragraphs of the bill which had not been reached and read under this order? 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Amendments to the bill would be in 

order, but debate would be closed by order of the House sh9uld the mo- tion of the gentleman from Kentucky prevail. 

Mr. CUTCHEON. I do not understand the Chair to answer my question fully. . The SPEAJrER pro tempore. Possibly the Chair does not understand 

the gentleman's question. 

Mr. CUTCHEON. · Would it be in order to submit amendment or 

I, 
1885. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE. 1607 

debate upon a portion of this section of the bill until it had been reached 

in its regular order and read under this ruling of the Chair should the 

motion of the gentleman from Kentucky prevail? 

The SPEAKER pro temp01·e. The Chair will state in response to the 

gentleman that amendmentsmay be submitted and would be pendi.Iig 

should the motion prevail. But the gentleman from Michigan will perceive, under the ruling of the Chair, if on the appeal that .ruling shall 

be sustained and the motion of the gentleman from Kentucky prevail, 

that debate would be limited-upon this section and such amendments 

a ma.y be offered to the time indicated by him. 

Mr. CUTCHEON. Mr. Speaker, I submit that the Chair has not 

answered the question. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair has answered the gentleman 

as distinctly as he can. :Mr. CUTCHEON. I beg pardon of the Chair, but the point of my 

inquiry is simply this: We have before us a bill of some fifty pages. 

But ten of these pages have been read. Under this decision of the 

Chair, if it should be sustained and the motion of the gentleman from 

Kentucky shall prevail, the entire debate will be limited to the portion 

which has been read. Now, if the motion of the gentle:man from Kentucky shall prevail, I submit that it is manifest to every gentleman 

upon the floor that the entire hour and a half would be consumed in 

aebating probably a single proposition in that bill, and no gentleman 

interested in any other portion of the bill beyond page 13 would have 

any opportunity of debate whatever. Therefore I put the question to. the Chair, whether we could debate a proposition before it has been 

read in -the bill if this motion prevails? 

Mr. WILLIS. The whole section remaining will be read and be open ·to debate and amendment. The only.p(>int is that the debate will be 

limited to one and a half hours, one hour of which time will be devoted 

to the opponents of the llleasure and one-half to its friends. 

Mr. CUTCHEON. I make this inquiry more as a friend of the bill 

than as an opponent. I desire to see the bill in some proper form pass 

the House at this session and become a law, and I desire to see it put 

in a form in whicl;l it can pass and become law before the close of this_ session. ·. Mr. REED, of Maine. I now yield five minutes to the gentleman 

from.lllinois (Mr. CANNON]. 

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I listened to the ruling of the Chair 

as closely as I could, and I do not underst.and the Chair to hold, nor have I been able to find in the rules, any different provision as to general appropriation or revenue bills from those that apply to all bills, so far as the point of order is concerned. I do not believe that there exists 

any substantial differenCe, or that there should exist any; and I desire 

to read to the House very briefly from the remarks of th~ present 

Speaker of the Honse, Mr. CARLISLE, made upon the discussion of a 

similar question in the Forty-sixth Congress. · After reading clauses 5 and 6 of Rule.XXIII, he says: 

Mr. REED, of Maine. There was no vote. 

Mr. CANNON. Ido.not recollectthattherewasavoteuponit. But 

however I may have voted or not voted under these rnles, and in the 

light of this discussion I feel assured that the ruling of the Chair ought 

not to stand. The gentleman from · Massachusetts [Mr. LoNG] has; 

marked a passage,. which I will also read, from the remarks of the present t 

occupant of the chair, the Speaker pro t~pore. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. 

Mr. REED, ot Maine. I will read the passage to which the gentle- man from illinois has referred. . 

I desire to refer the Honse to the particular date of the debate whic.b. 

has been alluded to so that they may consult it. The debate in question occurred on the 17th day of FebrutU"y, 1883, and will be found ill 

volume 61 of the CONGRESSIO~ AL RECORD for the year 1883. 

The proposition was precisely the same as is made to-day, and it ex- cited indignation on the part of members on both sides. Th~_part which was taken in it by the permanent Speaker of the House has been read 

by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. CA~"TNON] and it is full and con- clusive on the subject. 

The gentleman from New York [Mr. Cox] also participated in the 

debate, and gave utterance to one very fruitful sentence: 

I answer him and the gentleman from Pennsylvania that these rules were intended for the minority, as a shelter agaisst the majority, against the mere whims 

and caprices of both the Speaker or lhe majority, that being the object of all 

rules and all must abide by them. 

I desire to add that that same gentleman protested against this identical doctrine. Mr. Robinson, of Uassachusett.s, now the governor of 

that State, then, as now, a Republican and ip favor of the bill which 

this proposed action of February 17, 1883, would have aided, makes very 

strenuous declaration agai.nst it on comm.on,-sense grounds. He says: 

Mr. Speaker, I 2hould like to -say something before the point of order f8 de~ cided. I do not believe this motion to be in order, and I do not think it would 

be a safe practice for the Ho~ of Representatives to entertain any such motion 

in the present stage of the business, and feeling that conviction sure, I can not 

allow myself to sit still and not express my view of the matter. 

Then he says further: 

If it is only printed in one section it. may be forced down the throats of mem· bers without an opportunity to debate or amend it. (Applause.] 

And the applause came from both sides of the House apparently. 

I want to speak here for myself and protest against such a position, 

It will be found that the gentleman from Pennsylvania [.Mr. RAN· 

DALL], an ex-Speaker of this House, and a distinguished parliamenta- . rian, in that debate expressed precisely the same views. And lest I 

may seem to do injustice to the present occupant of the chait, I will 

read some observations ~hich he made: ~ 

'£he gentleman from Kansas need not apologize for failure to cite precedents. Neither he nor any other man here or el ewhere can sue out a search warrant 

and find a precedent for the motion he makes. There never was a revenue bill or an appropriation bill considered in this House where it was ever attempted t~ close debate except upon the subject-matter which had already been consid· 

Now, we have i9-variably treated each separate and distinct clause of an ap- ered in the Committee of the Whole. 

propri.ntion or revenue bill as a paragraph; we have proceeded nP?n that rule And •t will b bse d th t th · limi"tati th to ra1 throughout the whole of the consideration of this bill, even up to the very mo- 1 e 0 rve a ere lS no on ere gene ment when the genUeman from Kansas submitted his motion that the commit- appropriation bills; it is no revenue bill and no appropriation bill of 

tee rise. any kind. 

Now I ask the particular attention of the House: Then the gentleman says again: 

His proposition now is to do what has never yet been· done or attempted to be · You may succeed in thus gagging the House, but you can not gag the Amer-' 

done in this House since the organization of this Government so far as I know; · ican people, and you shall not gag their Representatives without a pro~st being that is, togoforwardfromthestagetowhich theHousehasarrivedand close de- made before you do this thing after a fashion which is more adroit than it is bate upon paragraphs and clauses and subjects not yet reached, not yet read, or either honorable or manly. I will now yield to the gentleman from Georgia considered in any manner by the Honse and to which no a.mendm~nts havens ll\Ir. HAMMoND]. 

yet been offered. And if the gentleman from K.ansns can cite n. single instance A d h l · essed · . · l in the history of this body where such a motion as that has ever been entertained .. n t e gent el?-an from ~eor~ expr . hrmself at length m oppoI shall have nothing more to say. The gentleman knows that; no such propo- s1tion to the doctnne contamed m the ruling of the present occupant of 

sitiou can be entertained by the Chair under the rules of the House. the chair. So, then, in the only case which has been found of record 

Now observe this: by the distinguished gentlemen who have brought it to the attention 

He knows that when we had under consideration in the last Gongress the river of the House it appears that members upon both sides of the. House[ 

and harbor appropriation bill which consumed a great deal of time, a bill which with great forcibleness of language, repudiated the proposition, and it 

everybody wns anxious to reach, where all of the various expedients which are b d ed b · •~ th Th tte · · th admissible under the rules were resorted to with a view of taking it from the was a an on . Y 1'-"' au or. e ma: r never came up agam m e committee and bringing it into the House, he must remember that with all of House and was never passed upon. That abandonment is practically the anxiety that prevailed to get that bill passed no gent<eman upon this floor equal to a decision, and a decision of the most determining character, ' ever ventured to offer such a proposition as h.e now submits. on the part of the Honse. · 

So spoke the present Speaker of the House of Representatives when I beg leave now to reaffirm that there is no possible distinction behe stood with the minority, not only touching revenue bills and gen- tween'' bills" under the clause of the rule which has been read here 

eral appropriation bills, but touchingriverand harborbillsandall other more than once this morning, and that if this decision covers anything; 

bills. It occurred to me then and it occurs to me now that he spoke it has got to cover revenue and appropriation bills; but if the Honse 

well. And I hope this House will pause long before they will make a has determined to face this question and to cut off debate-in the Ian~ 

rule that does not now exist or make a distinction that does not stand gnage of the present occupant of the chair-to ''gag the Representatives 

in sound reason. of the American people," I do not suppose that anything I can say can It is much better that this river and harbor bill should be a few days prevent it. I yield to the gentleman from New York [Mr. HISOOOK]: longer delayed in its passage-than that a precedent should be made here Mr. HISCOCK. Mr. Speaker, I onlydesireamoment to impress upon 

which will return ro plague the House not only perhaps in this Con- this House the practice that we have always followed and to confront 

gress but in future Congresses. And I want to urge upon this side of the House with this startling proposition: that under this ruling you' .the House, as we are now in the minority and to continue in the mi- may bring in here at any time a bill covering a hundred or a thousand I 

noritynext Congress, that we owe it to ourselves to see that these rules paragraphs and millions of money, and, before one sentence of it has 

do not receive snch interpretation as will cut off fair debate. · been read, after general debate has been closed, you can take the floor' 

:M:r. BURLEIGH. I ask the gentleman from illinois how did he under the five-minute rule and limit debate upon all those paragmphs. 

vote at the time the matter was discussed? I appeal to the - esent occupant of the chair: If he was presiding in1 

Mr. CANNON. I do not recollect how I voted or whether any vo~ Committee of the Whole, would he entertain either an amendment to a.· was taken. section or an amendment to a paragraph) or debate upon a section or 
1608 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 12, 

debate upon a paragraph, until it had been read in committee? And 

yet this decision deprives tis of the power.of debate upon propOsitions 

which have not been read before tbeHouse. I do not knowthatthere 

is any affirmative rule of the House to sustain the decision; but many 

and many a time I have seen gentlemen rise here to debate a proposition or to offer an amendment to a section or paragraph before it has 

been read, and they have been called to order and required to take their 

seats. I do not know that the present occupant of the chair has so J"uled, but repeatedly we have seen it. It is within the experience of 

every gentleman present. No amendment, no debate, is in order until 

the proposition has been read to the committee which you desire to debate or to which you desire to offer an amendment, and you can not 

limit debate un·der the five-milmte rule until such debate is in order, 

and i.t is not in order except as the bill is read for amendments. 

Iremem ber the discussion that took. pia~ here, which has been referred 

to by the gentleman from Maine [Mr. REED] and the gentleman from 

Illinois [Mr. C.A.NNO~], and I know the views that I entertained on 

this question when it was then submitted to the House. It does seem to me that this House owes it to itself-both sides of the House-to 

continue to occupy the position it occupied when this question was then 

presented, and to reverse this decision of the Chair. 

Mr. REED, of Maine. I yield three minutes to the gentleman from 

Massa-chusetts [Mr. STONE]. · Mr. STONE. Mr. Speaker, it appears to me that upon a proper consideration of the rule now under discussion it will be seen that to con- strue the rule in such a way as to authorize debate to be cut off upon a section which involves the substance of the bill, would be a gross 

abuse and perversion of' the rule itself. I desire to ask the attention. of 

the ;House for a moment to the question: What is the object of going 

into Committee of the Whole? Why do you, by your rules, provide in 

respect to certain bills which involve expenditures of money that they 

shall be discussed in the first instance iJt Committee of the Whole ? 

Why do youdoth~t? Simply, becauseinCommitteeofthe Whole you can have a latitude of debate that is not to be had in the House;. be- cause in Committee of the Whole it is competent to discuss the matter 

at large; because in Committee of the Whole the right to caJl the previous question, the right to lay on the table, the right to reconsiderall those motions which affect and limit debate-are excluded. 

Now,. then, by the course indicated by the decision .of the Chair you 

propose to practically escape the eftect of. going into Committee of the 

Whole by making a construction of the sixth clause of Rule XXIII 

which will .allow the Ho~, before the matter goes into Committee of 

the Whole, to cut off debate by a. vote to the effect that debate shall be 

limited to five, ten, or fifteen minutes, as the·case may be, upon the 

section or paragraph under consideration. What is the proper construction of that phrase in the rule "section or paragraph?" - I submit that 

to adopt the construction which is contended for here is simply to a. void 

the effect of the other rule, which provides that all measures of this 

character which involve the expenditure of money shall be first con- sidered in Committee of the Whol~. If yon attempt, as you now propose, to give this effect tO the sixth clause of Rule XXIII, you pra-cticaJly control debate in Committee of the Whole by a previous vote on the part of the House, which is inconsistent with parliamentary rules 

and i..qconsistent with the very purp()se for which your Committee of 

the Whole is instituted. Therefore, 1\Ir. Speaker, I submit-and I have 

given some thought to this question-that this proposition is a gross 

perversion of the rule, and is an attempt, by means of a forced and un- fair construction, to avoid the effect of going into Committee of the 

Whole. 

[Here the hammer fell] 

Mr. REED, of Maine. How much time have I left, Mr. Speaker? 

The SPE.A:KER pro te-mpore. The gentleman has six minutes of his 

honr remaining. 

Mr. REED, of .Uaine. I yield two minutes to the gentleman from 

New York [1\Ir. Cox]. 

Mr. COX, ofNewYork. Mr. Speaker, Ipresnmethereasonoftherule 

which most of the gentlemen on this si~e in the Forty-sixth Congress vindicated is even stronger than the precedent then created. Precedents are sometimes determined more or less by the condition of parties, by 

the relations of majority and minority. I do not know how gentle- men on the other side stood then . . I know that many of us on this side, 

notably my friend from Illinois [.Ur. SPRJ:!\TGER] as well as the present Speaker of the House and others, believed that appropriation bills 

of all kinds, all bills taking money out of the Treasury, should have 

that full, free, and fair discussion and amendment which can only be 

had in Committee of the Whole. 

Hence the reason of t4e rule, which I think was well expressed at 

that time in the language of our present·Speaker, Jtfr. CARLISLE, not 

ro mention what was said by other members. I will a8k the Clerk to 

read as a very succinct statement of the rule to be applied to all approJlriation bills a portion of the remarks made at that time by the gentleman who is now the permanent Speaker of this House. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

• Mr. CARLISLE. Mr. Speaker, under the "Tules of this House, which have pre- 'Vailed ever since thi~ House was organized so far as I know, the Representa.- 'ivca of the people have a right to have all bills proposipg to impose a tax or to 

make appropriations of money read by clauses and each clause considered on its own D;lerits. By the practice of the House the gentleman in charge of the 

bill.has a right to move the committee rise and close debate on a pending pa.r- a.g.rhph and amendments thereto, but there is no rule or practice of this House by which the House can close debate or cut off amendments to clauses not yet read or coDBidered by the com1lllttee. 

[Here the hammer fell.] . 

~Ir. REED, of Maine. I now yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [~Ir. B.A. YNE]. · 

Mr. BAYNE. I yield one minute to "Wle gentleman from Massachusetts [1\lr. LONG). ·. 

Mr. LONG. I understand that a distinction has been d.ril.wn by the 

Chair between this bill and revenue and appropriation bills. The portion of our rules upon: which the decision of the Chair is based is the 

sixth clause of Rule XXIII. Taking thew hole rnle together, let us see what kind of bills come under that rule as enti tied to be considered in· Committee of the Whole, and therefore under this bill. The third 

clause of Rule XXIII provides: 

All motions or propositions involving a tax: 'Or charge upon the people i all pr~ceedings touching appropriations of money, or bills making appropriatiOns of money or property, or requiring such appropriation to be made, or authorizing payments out of appropriations already made, or releasing any liability to the United States for money or property, shall be first coDBidered in a Commit- tee of the Whole. 

[Here the hammer fell.] . 

Mr. B..A.YNE. I yield one minute more to the gentleman from Mas- . sachusetts. 

Mr. LONG. The fourth paragraph of Rule XXIII provides: 

In Committees of the Whole House, business on their Calendars shall be taken 

up in regular order, except bills for raising revenue, general appropriation bills. 

aud bills for the ~provement of rivers and harbors, which shall have preced- ence. 

These paragraphs of the rule clearly include all sorts of bills taking 

money out of the Treasury, and spechtllyname ''bills for the improvement of rivers and harbors." How, then, can the Chair hold that un~ 

der clause 6 of the rule any distinction is made in behalf of revenue' 

and general appropriation bills as against all oth.ers? 

Mr. "BAYN~. Mr. Speaker, I believe that theriver and harbor bill now pending ill Committee of the Whole can u.ildergo the discussion 

that it should receive by the rules, and can be fully consideredin avery 

short time. Most of the subjects which have excited discussion have 

been eliminated from the bill; and I belie-.e it can now go through 

with little difficulty or delay under the ordinary rules. As a friend of 

the bill I am in favor of that sort of consideration and discussion. 

Moreover, I believe it would be a. bad precedent to shut off in this case the customary debate, item by item, on an appropriation bill. I 

do not care whether this bill falls within the category of appropriation 

bills by name; it is an appropriation in fact; and the thing is always 

far greater than the name. 

I can not agree to the establishment of a precedent which w6uld cut 

off discussion upon this or any other bill involving appropriations out 

of the Treitsury of the United States. Bills of this character should be 

considered item by item. Each appropriation should on separate con- sideration be made, if justified by poljcy and law, or if not should be · refused. I do not see how the Committee of the Whole can be enabled 

to reach any just conclusion unless the separate propositions are discussed se1·iati1n. The method of consideration proposed by the chairman of the Committee on Rivers and Harbors will not permit, I think, 

tbe fair and candid discussio:a which there should be on this bill. . I regret exceedingly that the question. has assumed this phase, be- cause I believe that in the time already consumed upon this question we could have gone through a large portion of the bill .. The only.two 

propositions remaining in the bill which in my opinion are likely to 

excite anything like discussion are the appropriation for the l\Iississippi 

River arid the creation of a new board. The grounds of contest in re- gard to Galveston Harbor have, I believe, been removed; the proposition to eliminate Captain Ead.s has been agreed to. If we now go on and consider the bill in the ordinary way I think we can get through 

it without any considerable debate. 

The SPE.AICER pro tempore. The hour of the gentleman from Maine 

[Mr. REED] has expired. 

1\Ir. WILLIS. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Maine [Mr. REED] 

states that thi~ is a question of the liberty of debate. I say, with the 

fact'3 of the last five or six days before me, that it is a question of the 

license of debate and a limitation of that license. 

What is the practical proposition here? What are these rules? Are 

they intended to advance legislation or to defeat it? Are they a fraud 

and a farce, or are they an intelligent system by which we can expedite 

legislation, hear fair, honorable argument, close discussion, and come 

to a vote? Let these questions be answered in the light of the last 

week. . Who has been discussing this bill? Has there been any desire on the 

part of the gentleman from Maine to bring this bill to a vote? Will 

he avow before this Honse that such is his object? I challenge him to 

do it. No; but he proposes under techical rules to fritter away the 

time of this House. He may not, in his.wise statesmanship, be willing to make the amendment which is so full of suggestion and elo· 
1885. I CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1609 j 

quence to strike out the last word, but there are others who do it, and ·do it with his approval. 

Now, then, is there no remedy against this method of kicking·a bill 

to death? Are three hundred and twenty-five men to be bound up 

under tech.Iiical roles? Wasthatcommon sense? .Aprioriwould any man of common sense pretend these rules are to be so interpreted as to 

bring about such result as that? There is no bill on this Calendar with 

paragraphs in it that could not under this systelll be extended through 

four or five sessions of Congress. Will this House stultify itself by ac- knowledging it has bound itself hand and foot and thrown itself into 

the sea of legislation? - Gentlemen speak aboat abridging debate. Have we no previous 

question? Do we not day after day limit debate to <me minute or even one second when we desire it? What is this rule? What is the proposition? That, in the plaiD. language of the rules as they stand, this 

House shnll instruct the Committee of the Whole to limit debate not 

on the paragraph, but upon the whole section. 

What is the history ofthis rule? Up to 1860 the House had no rule 

limiting debate on either sections or p:u3c,o-raphs. It was the custom to 

go into the Committee of the Whole, as you, sir, know well,_ move to 

strike out the enacting clause and thus bring the bill back into the 

House, move the previous question, and cut off all debate. In order to 

prevent that the Committee on Ru1es brought in an amendment which 

read as follows: 

That the House may at any time, ·after five minutes' debate has taken place on proposed amendments to any section of a bill, close all debate on such section. 

What followed? The gentleman from V4'giiria, 1\Ir. Millson, said: 

I propose to amend the amendment by adding aft-er the word 11 section, the 

system of improvements shall continue. Upon that a.nd other matters 

of different minor questions in the bill we propose to give one hour to 

the opponents and thirty minutes to the friends of the measure. Gentlemen claim that the bill has not been read. If this order shall 

be made, while it is a purely technical objection, the Clerk will immediately proceed to read the entire section to the close of the bill, a.nd 

then amendment and debate will follow. in order. Where is the hardship of that? Where is any wrong to be done to any member of the 

House who desires to be heard? I regret, sir, that tiine does not permit of a more extended consideration, but in view of what has been said 

I think the time now proposed is ample, especially when we consider 

the lateness of the session; and I will yield now to the gentleman from 

Ohio [:1\Ir. KEIFER] for ten minutes. 

MESSAGE FRO:U THE SENATE. 

A message from the Senate, by Mr. McCooK, its Secretary, announced 

that the Senate agreed to the amendment of the House of Represen~ 

tives to the bill {S. 1751) to amend an net entitled "An act to provide · 

a building for the use of the United States circuit and district courts of 

the United States, the post-office, internal-revenue offices, and othel' 

Government offices at Erie, Pa.,'' and making a.n additional appropriation therefor. 

Also that the Senate hnd passed ·with amendments bills of the following titles; in which amendments the concurrence of the House of 

Representatives was requested, namely: · : 

A bill (H. R. 8120) making apprQpriations for the support of the Army 

for the fiscal year ending June 30,1886, and for other purposes; and 

.A. bill (H. R. 7004) to repeal all laws providing for the pre-emption of 

the public lands and the laws allowing entries for timber-culture. 

words " or paragraph ; " so it will read : "At any time after five minutes' debat-e bas taken place: upon proposed amend- ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

ments to any section or paragr~ph of the. bill," &c. . . Mr. KEIFER. Mr. Speaker, the point of order is that a motion~ 

That amendment was accepted by Mr. Washburn, of Maine, who was not in order to limit debate upon a section of a bill which is divided 

in charge of the rules. He said he was surprised the committee had .into paragraphs. I know how difficult it is in the limited time allotted 

not thought of it before. to me by the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. WILLIS] tounderta.k&to 

Now, what did Mr. Millson say? · answer the many specious arguments which are made against the rul· 

I will ask the Clerk to read it. It will be seen from the reading of ing of the Chair u!x>n the point of order now pending. I will content 

that the House did not do the absurd thing the gentleman suggests, myself; however, by stating two or three general propositions in th~t 

pre"\'enting itself from controlling its own action, but left itself free time. .., l ~ ' 

under existing condition of things to determine bow much debate should The main point made against the power of the House to limit debate 

be had. in Committee of the Whole upon an entire' Section is that it is taking 

The Clerk read as follows: away from the members of the House· the right of free and full discusMr. MILLSON. I do not t-hink there wlll be any inconvenience, practically, sion. I wish to call attention to the fnct that prior to the adoption of 

from retaming what I have suggested. I do not p.ropose to interfere with the th t le' · •ts t .-. th h Id d e ercised rightoftheHousetoclosedeb&tenponthewholeeection,iftheyshallplea.seto e presen _ru ·mi · presen 1orm, epowerwas e an x do so; but the committee will observe that, when we are in the Committee of by the House to limit debate upon a.n entire bill. That existed up to 

the Whole on the state of th': Union with an a.pprop~·iation bill. und~r consi~- about the year 1860. · eration, we have a number of mdependent pa~agraphs m one se~ti!>n; t?deedt It The right under a practice that had grown· up in Committee of the 

very often happens that there is but one secbon of an appropriation bill, ana .a . . _ . . great many in dependant paragraphs. Now, sir, the case may occur that the ·Whole on a. motion to strike out the enacting clause of the bill brought committee are desirous of closing debate upon a whole section; but in other cases the bill back into the House where, under the operation of the pre- they may desire to close debate only upon a paragraph. I wish,.then, to leave · t' th h 1 bill' ld be .,.....,.,.,..;~ · th t d b te Th it optional with tbem to close debate either upon the section or the paragraph, V101L'3 W1es IOn, e W 0 e . COU ~ Wl • 0~ e a • en as may seem right at the time. a practice grew up under wh1ch the House could limit debate upon a • Mt. BocoCK. I will say to the gentle~an from Virginia that I ~m authorized section, which existed before the rules were amended so as to give the 

by at least two ~embers of the committee to ea.y that they are m favor of the -right to go into the House to limit debate upon paragraphs also. And 

amendment which he proposes. · d f h d · · f h Ch · · h · be' Mr. WASHBU.&'i, of Maine. You are so authorized by a majority of the com- mstea -o t e ecislOn o t e all' m t e pr~n~ mstance mg some- mittee. . . . . . thing new, som~thingthat is alimit.ationupon the poweroftheHouse, ~ Mr. Bococx. Then, a.s.a maJOrity of the committee authonzed It, the a~erid- it is simply carryinO' out that which was taking away power originaUy ment of my colleague Will be adopted as a part of the report of the comn.utt-ee. . o . -:- Mr. MILLSoN. Theamendmenthavingbeen accepted by the committee, it nee- held and exerciSed a long tune by the House. ! ~rily includes the following a~dition : . , It is claimed that the House only has power by a majority vote to limit 

;_ That the House may, at any time, afte,r five mmutes debate has. taken place debate upon each n.-1_rg0'1"l'Lph of a section of such bill after it is reached llpon a. proposed amendment, or any sect10n or paragraph of the bill, close the . . < r--o--. . . . debate upon such section or paragraph, or, at their election, upon the pending for cons1derat10n. Paragraph 6 of Rule:XXII!Is m the followmg words: 

amendments only." Th H b th te f · 't · fth b. t t t' l Now, it will be observed that the committee may sometimes desire to close e ouse ma:y, Y e YO o a majon Yo e mem ers presen , a any tme 

debate upon a. pending amendment or amendments without dosing it upon the afte~ the five mmutes' deb!lte has begun upon proposed am~ndments to any section, for the section may be a very long one, important in its provisions sechOJ? or pru:agra.ph of a btll, cl~se all debate upon such sect10n or paragraph, and needing amendment. The committee, however, may not be able to get on or, at Its electiOn, upon the pending. amen?ments only; but this shall not pre- beyond a. pending amendment so as to enable them to perfect the subsequent elude further amendment, to be dec1ded Without debate. 

partofthe section or paragraph. · 

:Mr. WIL~IS. It will be seen, Mr. Speaker, from whathasbeenread 

that at the very inception of this rule a sensible construction, not an arbitrary or absurd one, was given to its meaning. Under that con- struction the House by its vote can either limit debate to the whole 

section with all of its paragraphs, or it can limit debate to any one of a number of paragraphs at its option. Now, wherein under such a construction and practice is there any injustice to result? We know 

that there -were only three or four provisions incorporated in this bill, 

when reported to the House, to which serious objection was made. 

One of these was with reference to the improvement at Sandy Bay Harbor, and that has been stricken from the bill. Another was with ref- erence to having Captain Eads in charge of the Mississippi River improvements as supervising enginee1·. That-also has been eliminated 

from the bill. Another point of controversy was with reference to the 

improvements at Galveston Harbor. This House knows, because an 

amendment is pending, that the committee had adopted a.n amendment satisfactory to every member of the committee and satisfaetory 

to the members of the House, which has eliminated Captain Eads 

from the control at Galveston, and given to that implX)vement its 

proper proportion of the appropriations. Then there is nothing left 

but the Mississippi River, and the discussion as to whether this present 

It ought to be conceded that the literal reading of this part of Rule 

XXIII gives the right to the House, by a majority yote, after the five 

minutes' debate has begun on a section of a bill, to limit debate upon it as well as upon a paragraph of a section or bill, and the Speaker should 

not hesitate to so hold if there were not other matters to be considered 

in giving it construction. 

The,greater part of the debate upon the pending point of order has 

been dll·ected against the effect of entertaining and agreeing to suah a motion as this, rather than against the right to entertain the motion 

under the rules. It is a great mistake to suppose tha~ to entertain such a motion as this would be to give the House an unusual power over its 

business in the matter of passing laws, or over the proceedings of the 

Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. 

If we looked alone to general parliamentary principles and uniform 

practice on the subject of the power of this House over the Committee 

ofthe Whole House on the state of the Union, we should find that independent of restrictive rules the House could by a majority vote control any bill in committee or discharge that committee from its consideration altogether. The present rules of the House, intended to cover all im3c,ainable cases which may arise, however, assume rather than direct that the House has the power to limit general debate in Committee 

of the Whole House on the state of the Union upon any bill, yet such 
·1610 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY · 12, 

practice is unquestioned. Paragraph 5 of Rule XXIII contains these 

words: 

' "\Vhen general debate is closed by order of the House, any member shall be 

allowed five minutes to explain nny amendment he may offer, after which the 

member who shall first obtain the floor shall be allowed to speak five minutes 

in opposition to it, and there shall be no further debate thereon, &c. 

The rules nowhere authorize the limiting of general debate, but it is 

a.ssumed in the paragraph just quoted, and nowhere else, that that 

power exists; and so far as I have been able to examine and learn this 

power has existed throughout the historyofthe Congress of the United 

States. The matter of the consideration of a bill in Committee of the 

Whole on the state of the Union under the five-minute rnle is a wise 

parliamentary innovation, and comes in rather as a limitation on the 

power of the House to control the proceedings in the Committee of the 

Whole than in the nature of an exte~on of the power of the House 

over its committee. 

The present rules of the House came into force on the 2d of March, 

1880; but paragraph 6 of Rule XXITI, already quoted, is almost a literal 

copy of the provision added to Rule 60 of the old rules of the House. 

T~ addition was made March 19, 1860. Barclay, in his Digest, published in 1873, says of this proviso to Rule 60: 

It was adopted so as to enable the majority to get a bill out of the Committee 

of the Whole aft~r a reasonable time has been occupied in debating amendments, 

and was adopt~d at the same time as the amendment to the one hundred a.nd 

twenty-third rule, the effect of which was to prevent a practice of doubtful pro- priety, by which the friends of a bill were in the habit of taking it out of the Committee of the Whole by adopting a recommendation to strike out the enacting clause. · 

"The practice had grown up, prior to the amendment to the old rule, 

123 (Afarch 16, 1860), for the friends of a bill to move to strikeout the 

enacting words, which being carried took the bill back into the House, 

where, under the then practice, the bill could be taken up and passed. 

The amendment to the old rule, 123, provided th~t when the recommendation of the committee1 that the enacting words of a bill be stricken out, 

was disagreed to, the bill should stand recommitted to the committee 

for further action. This history of the rule upon which this point of 

order turns is important to determine the intention, or rather effect, 

which ought to be given to it. It seems clear that the central idea was 

to give to a majority of the House the right to limit debate in such way 

as to hasten an end to the consideration of a long bill, and e.gpecially 

where factious opposition was made to it. But prior to the adoption of 

th~ present rules of the House, at least from the year 1844, the House, 

by old R~e 104, was given the right by a vote of the majority of members present to ''suspend the rules and orders for the purpose of going 

into the Committee of fue Whole House on the state of the Union, and 

also for providing for the discharge of the Committee of the Whole House 

and the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union from 

the further consideration of any bill referred to it, after acting without 'debate on all amendments pending and that may be Qffered.'' 

It will thns be seen that the power of the House by a majority vote 

to limit debate was greater prior to the adoption of the new rules than 

now, even though it shonld be held t}lat it was in order by a majority 

vote in the House to limit debate on a section; for it had the right under 

the old rnles to discharge the Committee of the Whole House on the 

state of the Union from the fru·ther consideration of any bill referred to 

it and thus bring it back into the House, where, under the operation 

of the previous question, all debate on the entire bill and all amendments therefu might be cut off, except the thirty minutes allowed under 

paragraph 3 of Rnle 28. 

This reference to the past powers of the House is given as an answer to the claim that tO entertain this motion would be to inaugurate some- thing entirely novel and revolutionary in the history of the proceedings 

of the House. It appears that for above thirty years this House maintained the right by a majority vote to terminate all debate upon any 

bill in committee by simply discharging the Committee of the Whole 

House on the state of the Union from its further consideration, and under 

the operation of the previous question bring it to a final vote. , It is claimed th.at.general appropriation, tariff, and tax bills are con- sidered by clauses, while other bills are considered by sections. This _may be true in fact, though it has grown up merely as a practice, and . is not authorized or required by any existing rnle. It is, undoubtedly, a good practice, but too ~uch weight must not be given to it in giving 

construction to the plain language of the existing rnle. If the right ~xists to limit debate on a section of any bill it exists as to all bills. 

The most specious argument made in support of the point of order 

is, that before the House can limit debate upon proposed amendments, or a section or paragraph of a bill, debate must have oogun upon such 

amendment, section, or paragraph; and it is claimed that while tli.e 

House is considering p~o-raphs, and the paragraphs are not coextensive with the section of the bill until the entire E:ection is read through 

by paragraphs and considered subject to amendment, the motion to 

limit debate can not be entertained. It is very hard to see how it is 

possible for a paragraph of a section of a bill to be under consideration 

and debate and the section not be under consideration. 

There have been others in the form of motions to. amend the section 

under · consideration by striking out a whole paragrap1t or several 

paragraphs in one motion. There does not seem to be much difficulty 

in holding that debate has begun upon the pending section of the bill; 

and this is the only fact required by the rule 'to be ascertained before 

entertaining a motion to limit debate upon it. The claim so vigorously pressed, that to 3llow such a motion as this to oo acted upon by a majority vote of the House would be to take away from the minority the right to debate at all certain important paragraphs of a bill, is 

worth considering; but it must be remembered that it is no more severe than the application of the previous question, which has existed 

almost from the beg\nning of the Government to the present time, 

which cuts off (with theexceptionalreadystated) debate upon anybill or proposition to which it may be applied, no matter about its importance. 

The right of general debate upon _a, bill in Committee of the Whole 

House on the state of the Union was undoubtedly intended to be exercised before commencing the consideration of a bill by sections, or paragraphs, · or clauses;· and yet power is given to the House to limit this to a single minute. It must be kept in view that this motion is not a motion to preclude further amendment to the section, though such· aipendments would have to be d'ecided without debate if the motion should 

be entertained Nld agreed to by the House. It is a narrow riew to take 

to say that paragraph 6 of Rule XXIII waa only intendoo to gh·e the 

right to the House to limit debate upon an entj.re section of the bill, 

where the section consisted only of one p:tmgraph. The framers of the 

ru1es of the House, in debating them, could hardly be supposed to huve 

overlooked the fact that it would have been sufficient in such case to 

have given the power to the House to limit debate by a $jority Yote 

upon a single paragraph. For, if debate was limited upon a p~ragraph 

and that paragraph was an entire section of a bill, then it would be 

unnecessary to authorize a motion to limit debate upon a section. 

The doubt that arises grows out of the fact that after a section is considered through to the end by paragraphs it may yet he in order to 

add new paragraphs independent of those in the original bill. It might 

have 'been intended that the right to limit debate upon a section of a 

bill was only to be invoked when the section had been gone through 

by parngraphs, and it was proposed to offer further amendments to the 

section in the nature of new paragraphs, and on which debate would 

be asked for. But if the rule is to be overridden on the theory that 

every paragraph of a bill or a proposition should first be considered 

and debated before debate is limited upon it, it will readily be seen that the power to cut off all debate upon a section after the section has 

been read through by paragraphs and considered wonld be a power which 

wonld take away from the friends of the proposed new paragraphs absolutely the power of debate, and itwonld have as many objectionable 

features a.bout it as could a.pply to paragraphs already in the section. 

It is said' that there are no precedents for such a motion as this. 

This is a mistake. Precedents can be found which cover the present case. On the contrary; there are no precede~ts, so far as I am advised, 

against the right of the House, under the plain terms of the rule, to 

limit debate upon a.n entire section of a bill; and as I look upon the 

rule as a mere limitation upon the power of the House, in the absence 

of which there conld be no doubt about the right of the House to limit 

debate upon an entire bill, or any section of it, or, iQ. other words, to 

control the committee in its consideration of any bill as it might order, 

I think it wonld be unwise to undertake to put restrictions by mere con· struction upon what seems to be the plain reading of the rnle. 

It is fair to say that until the last session of the Forty-seventh Congress no point of order was made against the right of the House to 

limit debate upon a whole section of a bill in Committee of the Whols 

House on the St8,te of the Union. 

On May 11, 1872, during the Forty-second Congress, ?lfr. DAWES, of 

Massachusetts, moved to limit debate on an entire section of a bill, 

which was entertained by Speaker Blaine. Other like precedents are cited. It may be conclusively assumed that for nearly a quarter of a century after the rnle as it now exists was adopted no member even questioned the right of the House to limit debate on an entire section 

of any bill, as well as a paragraph of a section. 

The history of the adoption of the rnle which is embodied in the sixth 

paragraph of Rnle XXIll will make it perfectly clear that the original 

intention was to give the right to the House to limit debate upon the 

whole of a section to a bill, although it contain many paragraphs, or in .the discretion of the House to limit debate upon any one of the paragraphs. There was a general revision of the old rnles in March, 1860. Mr. 

Washburn, of Maine, then a member of the Committee on Rules, reported a large number of amendments to the rules in force at that 

time. Among other amendments he reported one in the nature of a proviso which read as follows: 

That the House may, at any time after five minutes' debate has taken plaoo 

upon any proposed amend,ments to any section of a bill, close nll debate upon 

such section. 

It will be found that during the last ten days of this session a large Pending the considemtion of the report of the Committee on Rules, 

number of amendments have been offered in effect to the section and Mr. Mil.lson, of Virginia, called the attention of Mr. Washburn to the 

not to paragraphs, as they were not propositions to amend paragraphs.~' ~ fact that the proposition of the committee to amend the rnles shonld 
- --- - ~--·--.~-

1885. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1611 

go farther, and provide not f>nly that the House should have the right 

to limit debate in Committee of the Whole House on the state of the 

Union upon a particular section, but also upon any paragraph of a. sec- tion, o that the House might have the benefit of limiting debate upon 

a paragraph when it did not desire to do so upon the whole section. 

This amendment as proposed by Mr. 1-fillson made the amendment of 

Mr.Washbum read as follows: 

rive:& and harbor bill heretofore has been passed without general de-' 

bate; but ther~ has been considerable general debate and also coQ.Siderable debate upon the different paragraphs in this section. 

Has any great hardship fallen upon the country by reason of the passage of these bills heretofore without extended general debate? I think 

not; and I think that with the light we have before us we shall have no 

reason to regret the early passage of this bill. 

Thnt the House may, at any time uft.er five minutes' debate bas taken place 

upon any proposed amendments to any section or paragrapl1, close the debate 

upon such section or paragraph, or at their election, upon the pending arn.endments only. 

It will be noted· tha( this is the language almost to a letter of the 

rule that we are now trying to construe. The then Committee on Rules, 

or a majority of the committee present on the floor, agreed to accept 

the amenclment of Mr. 1\Hllson, after he had stated the object of it, as 

follows: 

The bill has been in print, and has been read from beginning to end 

as well by every member of the House as by the Clerk from the desk, 

for by the unanimous consent given that the first reading of the bill 

should be dispensed with the legal effect of a full and complete reading was answered. We have been told many times, especially by the 

gentleman from Maine [l\Ir. RERD], that these rules are most unhappily constructed; that they are so arranged as to prevent action by the 

House instead of enabling us to go forw.ard with legitimate legislation. 

I do not propose to interfere with the right of the House to close debate upon the whole section, if they shall please to do so; but the committee will observe 

that when we are in Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union with an appropriation bill under consideration, we have a numberofindependentparagraphs in one section. Indeed, it very often happens that there is but one sec- tion of an appropriation bill, and a great many independent paragraphs. Now, sir, the case mny occur that the committee are desirous of closing debate upon a whole section, but in other cases they may desire to close debate only upon a paragraph of a section. I wish then to leave it optional with them to close deI have always believed, and I entertain the opinion more strongly this 

morning than ever before, that the majority of the House ought to control its action. I believe that they ought not only to control its action, 

but that they ought to take the responsibility therefor, and I am sure 

that the good sober sense of this House will justify the ruling of the 

Chair in this instance, whereby he maintains that the majority should 

control the Hou~ as they have to bear its responsibilities. 

bate, either upon the section or the paragraph, as may seem right at the time. ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

This will be found among the debates in the Congressional Globe, _Mr. WILLIS. Ur. Speaker, as I have promised that at five minutes 

page 1188, volume 10, part 2, 1859-'60, and of date March .15, 1860. to 12 I would move to adjourn, I11.mcompelled nowto move to lay the 

This view of the rule as it was proposed was accepted, and on a sub- appeal of the gentleman from Maine [Ur. REED] on the table without 

sequent day, to wit, 1\Iarch 19, 1860, the amendment was adopted with- further discussion. I make that motion. 

out a. division, and it has been from that time forward to the present a The SPEAKER pro tempore. In order that the House may underrule of this House. stand the question pending, after the elaborate discussion that has been 

Now, Mr. Speaker, one of the specious things that are stated upon the had, the Chair will restate it. The point of order was raised by the 

floor here is that no debate can be had, no consideration of a paragraph · gentleman from Maine [1\fr. REED]; it was overruled by the Chair 

or a section can be had, until it is read through." Why, Mr. Speaker upon the ground that this was neither revenue nor a general approprievery bill is read clear through in the Coriunittee of the Whole befor~ ation bill, supported by an elaborate opinion delivered by the present 

you proceed to consider it by paragraphs, unless by unanimous consent permanent Speaker of this House--

the reading of the bill be dispensed with; so that it is all read. And Mr. REED, of Maine. Mr. Speaker, if there is any new matter to 

it will not do for gentlemen to argue that when a paragraph has been be introduced--

read aud <leba ted, that is not the debating of so~e part of a section. The SPEAKER prfJ tempo1·e. The Chair will not introduce new matThe whole theory of the rule H seems to me is that the HollBe by a. rna- ter. 

jority vote shall have a right to limit debate, but not to limit amend- Mr. REED, of Maine. If any is to be introduced I shoul~ like to 

ments upon a section. I am surprised that some of my party friends have an opportunity to debate it. 

who differ with me on this point of order do so in the face of their po- The SPEAKER 'flrO tempore. The Chair will engage in no debate, 

sition hitherto in favor of allowing a majority of the House to control but claims the right to state the question. . all its business. Mr. REED, of Maine. But the Chair has no right to argue it. 

Some gentlemen full into tl1e idea that if debate is limited on an en- The SPEAKER pro ternpm·e. The Chair overruled the point of order 

tire section it cuts off the right to amend the section. It does not; fOl' raised by the gentleman from Maine [ltir. REED] for the reasons stated. 

by the express terms of paragraph 6 of Rule XXIII amendments may The gentleman from Maine appealed. That appeal has been debated. 

be offered wit.hout debate as long as members in the Committee of the The gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. WILLIS] now moves to lay that 

Whole House on the state of the Union desire to offer them. I know appeal upon the table, and the question is on that motion. 

it may be a hardship, a great hardship, to take away from members The House divided; and there were-ayes 102, noes 69. 

the right to debate a proposition that is important to them. But still, Mr. REED, of Maine. I demand tellers. . 

as I think, it is the rn1e. The p1ain reading of paragraph 6 of Rule Tellers were ordered; and Mr. WILLIS, and Ur. REED of Maine, were 

XXIII gives the right to limit debate upon a section as well as a pam- appointed. 

graph, and such was the view of its authors as has been shown. · Before the tellers took their places, 

And I wish to say, Mr. Speaker, that I do not see any distinction Mr. WILLIS. I demand the yeas and nays. 

between bills in the application Of this rule. Any bill that goes to the The yeas and nays were ordered. 

Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union under our Mr. REED, of Maine. Will the Chair please state the question that 

rules, I think, may have this rule applied to it. is to be voted upon? 

Mr. WILLIS. I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Illinois The SPEAKER pro temp01·e. The question is upon the motion of the 

(Mr. THOl\IAS]. . gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. WILLIS] to lay on the table the appeal 

Mr. THOMAS. The House is gravely informed by the opponents of taken by the gentleman from Maine [Mr. REED] from the decision of 

this measure that there are no precedents for such a ruling as that the Chair. 

which has ~ made by-the Chair, and it is argued therefrom that _ M:r. REED, of :Maine. And a vote in the negative is a vote ~aa.inst 

there are no reasons that the mind of man can suggest why there can the decisio.n. 

be a good and snfficientreason for the ruling. I have no patience with The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair has stated the question. 

that confined theory which binds us within precedents of other years. The Clerk will proceed to call the roll. 

Because no one had ever had the misfortune of having an apple fall on . The question was taken; and there were yeas 121, nays 103, not vothis head was Sir Isaac Newton to be prevented from investigating the mg 100, as follows: 

philosophy of the law of gravitation? Because no one had ever sailed ""i:"EAS-121. 

over the western sea was Columbus not to search out this American Aiken, Crisp, Halsell, con tin. ent? Because no one has her~tofore had the C8urasr& to come for- :~~~!~.der, Culberson, D. B. !~ntccoch wk, H ~ .L><.>fS ., Culbertson, W. W. .o.u , • • 

ward and have these rules construed by the Chai..runtil the gentleman Ballentine, Cullen, Henderson, T. J. 

from Kentucky [Mr. WILLIS] this morning comes forward boldly in Barbour, Dibrell. H~nley, 

the defense of right and asks that the Chair shall mark upon the map ::-~~le, ~fu:'!dge, ~~~ the course which the ship of this House shall sail, shall it be said we Blanchard, Ellis, · Hurd. ' 

shall not have this right.asserted? I think not. Bland, Ellwood, Jones, B. W. 

Although there has been no ruling, it is manifest under the rules; it ~~~f;~ · ~~~~ut, J~~:· f J,l· 

is manifest, upon the reasons given at the time the rules were adopted, Breckinridge, Fiedler, Keife~, · · that this House has the right to limit debate as well upon the section as Breitung, Follett, ~in~, 

upon. the paragraph, :;md the exceptio~ to _the paragraph was made at ~=t~d, ~~=Y.. La~~~r, the time of the adoptiOn of the ritles.Slmply for the greater convenience Cabell, Funston, Lanham, of the House; not as taking away from it the power to close debate upon Caldwell, Garrison, ~wis, 

the whole section. · Complaint is made that there is no opportunity for 8::Jl~~· J. E. 8":~; r..o~;y debate. The House will bear me witness that there has already been Carleton, Gibson. McMillin, more debate upon this bill than upon four-fifths of all the river and Cassidy, Glascock, :rtson. 

harbor bills that have ever been passed by Congress. Almost every ~~~. R. 8:~::,'· ~7. . 4 

1\:lills 

1\fitchell, 

1\Ioney, 

Morgan, Moulton, 

Muldrow, 

Muller, Murphy, Murray, Neece, 

Nicholls, Nutting, 

OchUtree, 

O'Ferrall, 

Paige, 

Payne, Perkins. Pettibone, Pryor, Pusey, 

~.'w. &Qbinson, W. E. 
1612 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. .FEBRUARY 12, 

Rogel'S, J. H. Seymour, 

Singlr.ton, 

Slooum, 

Snyder, 

Stewart, Charles 

Sumner, C. A. 

Swope, 

Atkinson, 

Barr, 

Bayne, 

Beach, 

Bennett, 

Bingham, 

Blount, 

Boutelle, 

Boyle, 

Brewer, F. B. 

Brewer, J. H. Brown, '\V. \V. 

Buchanan, 

Oampbell, J. M. 

Cannon, 

Clardy, 

Olements, 

Oonverse, 

Cq>'blgton, 

Cutcheon, 

Dru-gan, 

Davidson, 

Davis, G. R. Davis,R. T. 

Deuster, 

Dingley, 

Taylor,J.M. 

Thomas, 

Townshend, 

Tucker, 

Tully, 

Vance, 

Wallace, 

Ward, 

Evans, 

Everhart, 

Findlay, 

Fyan, 

Hammond, 

Hanback, 

Harmer, 

Hart, 

Haynes, Hemphill, 

Hewitt, A. S. Hewitt, G. W. 

Hiscock, 

Hitt 

Hollues, 

Hopkin!!, 

Horr, Honk, 

Howey, 

Hunt, 

Jame!'l, 

Kean, 

Kelley, 

Ketcham, 

LeFevre, 

Long, 

Warner, Richard 

Washburn, 

Weaver, 

Wellborn, 

Williams, 

Willis, 

Wilson, W. L. 

Winans, E. B. 

NAY-103. 

Lyman, 

- 1\IcCo.rmick, 

Millard, 

Morrill, 

Oates, ' O'Hara, 

O'Neill, Charles 

Parker, 

Payson, 

Peters, 

PMlps, 

Post, 

Potter, 

Price, 

Ranney, 

Ray, Ossian 

Reed, T. B. Re.ese, 

Rice, 

Rowell, 

Russell, 

Ryan, 

Shively, 

Skinner, C. R. Skinner, T. G. 

Smalls, 

NOT VOTING-100. 

Winans, John 

Wise,G.D. 

Wolford, 

Wood, 

Yaple. 

Smith, H. Y. 

Spriggs, 

Springer, 

Steele, Stephenson., Stone, 

Strait, 

Struble, 

Talbott, 

Taylor, E. B. Taylor, J. D. Tillman, Turner, ll.G. 

Turner, Oscar Van Alstyne, Van Eaton, . Wadsworth, 

Wait, Wakefield, 

Warner, A.J. 

White,J. D. Whiting, 

\Vilson, James York, Young. 

Adams, G. E. Dixon, Jones,J.Jr. Riggs, 

Adams, J. J. Dockery, Jordan, Robertson, 

Anderson, Dorsheim.er, Kello~, Robinson, J. S. _Arnot, Dunham, Lacey, Rockwell; Belford, Dunn, JJaird, Rogers, \V. F. 

Belmont, Eaton, Lawrence, Rosecrans, 

Blackburn, Elliott, Libbey, Seney, Bowen, Ferrell, Lovering, Shaw, 

Browne, T. M. Finerty, McAdoo, Smith, A. Herr Bru~, Goff, 1\IcCoid, . Spooner, 

Buckner, Greenleaf, McComas, Ste,·ens, 

Budd, Guenther, Miller, S.H. Stewart, J. W. 

Burnes, Hardeman, 1\IiJliken, Stockslager, 

Campbell, Felix Hardy, Morrison, Storm, 

Chalmers, . Hatch, H. H. l\Iorse, Sumner, D. H. Clay, Henderson, D. B. Mutchler, Thompson, 

Cobb, Hepburn, Nelson, Throckmorton, 

Oonnolly, Herbert, O'Neill, J. J. Valentine, 

Cook, Hoblitzell, Po.tton, '\Veller, 

Cosgrove, Holman, Peel, \Vemple, 

Cox,S.S. Holton, Pierce, Whitc,Milo 

Craig, Hooper, Polo.Dd, Wilkins, 

Curtin, Hutchins, Randall, Wise, J. S. 

Davis, L. H. Jeffords, Rankin, Woodward, 

Dibble, Johnson, Ray, G. W. Worthington. 

So the motion to lay the appeal on the table was agreed to. 

The following members were announced as paired on all political 

questions, until further notice: 

Mr. 1t!ORRISO:N with 1\Ir. JOHN S. WISE. 

Mr. SHAW with Mr. LAmD. . Mr. RANKIN with Mr. KELLOGG. 

Mr. CooK with Mr. ·LACEY, 

:Mr. HARDY with Mr. HEPBURN. 

The following pairs on this vote were announced: 

Jtlr. ROSECRANS with Mr. S~IITH, of Pennsylvania. 

l\Ir. DoCKERY with Mr. GUE:NTHER. 

l\Ir. ADAMS, of New York, wi~h 1\lr. ANDERSON. 

Mr. BUDD with l\Ir. McCom. 

Mr. DUNN with 1\Ir. STEVENS. 

The following pairs for this day were announced: 

Mr. JORDAN with Mr. HOLTON. 

Mr. Tl;lROCKMORTO:N with 1\Ir. DUNHAM . . l\Ir. COBB with Mr. ADAMS, of Illinois. 

Mr. RIGGS with Mr. Hrrr. 

Mr. McADoo with Mr. RocKWELL. 

The following pairs until Monday were announced: 

Mr. C~BELL, of New York, with l\lr. HENDERSON, of Iowa. 

Mr. STOR:l[ with Mr. CRAIG. 

Mr. HENDERSON, of illinois. I nsk unanimous consent that the 

reading of the names be dispensed with. 

1flr. REED, of Maine. I object; let the names be read. 

The SPEAKER pro tempo1'e. The gentleman from Maine objects to 

dispensing with the reading of the names. The Clerk will recapitulate 

the vote. 

The Clerk began to read the names of members voting. 

Mr. REED, of Maine. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my objection. 

The SPEAKERpro:tempore. The objection is withdrawn. If there 

be no further objection the reading of the names will be dispensed 

with. 

There was no objection. 

The result of the vote was announced as above stated. 

Mr. WILLIS moved to recqnsider the vote by which the appeal was laid on the table; and also moved to _lay that motion on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. -

Mr. WILLIS (at ll.o'clock and 59 minutes a.m.). Imovethatthe 

House do now -adjourn. . . The motion was agreed to; and the House-accordingly adjourned. 

PETITIO~S, ETC. 

The following petitions and papers were laid on the Clerk's desk, 

under the rule, and referred as follows: 

By l\Ir. BRENTS: Petition of the Board of Trade of Vancouver, 

Wash., for an appropriation to improve the Vancouver Harbor-to - the Committee on Rivers and Harbors. 

By 1\Ir. ERMENTROUT: Memorial of the Comm~rcial Exchange of 

Philade1phia, for the acquisition by the United States of the Portage 

Lake and Lake Superior Ship Canal-to the Committee on Rivers and 

Harbors. 

Also, petition ofYo1.mg :Men's Democratic Club, Brooklyn, N.Y., for . the arrest of the coinage of the silver doll_n,r-to the Committee on Coin· 

age, Weights, and Measures. 

Also, petition of the Western Pennsylvania River Improvement Association-to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors. 

By :.Mr. FORNEY: Petitions of Goorge Wester, of Rhodfl. Ewing, of 

Leonard F. Daniel, of Napoleon B. Leath, of Cynthia J. Helms, widow 

of John Helms, deceased; of Francis A. Harwell, of Clam Pinkerton, 

of Mrs. Malinda Angle, of John Rolater, and of William Drew, all of 

Che:rokee County, AL.1.1Jama, asking reference of claim for property 

taken and used by the United States Army during the late war to the 

Court of Claims under the provisions of the Bowman act-to the Committee on War Chims. 

Also, papers relating to the claims of Robert A. Clark, James Davis, 

George \Vester, Francis A. Harwell, John Helms, LeacyKirk, Leonard 

F. Daniel, Napoleon B. Leath, John Rolater, and WilliamS. Warren- -to tbe same committee. 

Byl\Ir . . GEDDES: Pape~ relating to the claim of Isaac N. Webbto the same committee. 

By 1\Ir. GUE~THER: Joint resolution of the Legislature of the State 

of Wisconsin, favoring the pm~hase by the United States of the Portage 

Lake and Lake Superior Ship Canals, and making the same free of 

charge--to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors. 

Also, petition by the State_ Grange of Wisconsin, asking for amendment of the patent laws-to the Committee on Patents. 

By l\Ir. HENLEY: Resolutions of the Chambers of Commerce of San 

Francisco aud 'Eureka, Cal., favoring the treaty with Nicaragua and 

tbe early construction of tbe Nicaraguan Canal-to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

By Mr. LAMB: Petition from 0. P. Morton Post, No.1, Grand Army 

of the Republic, of Terre Haute, Ind., asking that Congress purchase Mis.~ Ransom's portrait of General George H. Thomas-to the Committee on the Library. 

By l\Ir. LIBBEY: ?etition of David L. Scott, of Jessamine County, 

Kentucky, for relief-to the Committee on War Claims. 

Also, petition of A. H. Brooks, of New Jersey, asking compensation 

for services to Internal Revenue Bureau-to the Committee on Claims. 

By Mr. 1\IlTCHELL: Petitions of citizens of New Haven and Middletown, Conn., on the subject of civil service reform-to the Select 

Committee on Reform in the Civil Service. 

By Mr. l\IULDROW: Petition of W. Y. 'Varren, of Alcorn County, 

Mississippi, asking reference of claim for property taken and used by the 

United States Army .during the late war to the Court of Claims under 

the provisions of the Bowman act-to the Committee on Wa.r Claims. 

By Mr. NEECE: Petition of citizens of Illinois, asking legislation for 

the suppression ofMormonism-to-the Committee on the Judiciary. , By Mr. PAYN:E: Petition of several hundred citizens of Weedsport, 

N. Y., for legislation on the Mormon question_:;to the sa.me committee. 

By lfr. PIERCE: Petition of Paul C. Crafton, of Gibson COunty, Tennessee, asking reference of claim for property taken and used by_ the 

United States Army during the late war to the Court-of Claims-to the 

Committee on War Claims. · t 

By Mr. REAGAN: Petition of J. Taylor Wood, for the removal of his 

political disabilities-to the Committee on the Judiciary. · · By Mr. SPRIGGS: Petition of 100 citizens of Utica, N.Y., for action on the Mormon qllestion-to the same committee. 

By Mr. J. W. STEW ART: Petition of C. H. Dunton; of Poultney, Vt., 

and others of same State, for more effective legislation to suppress :Mor· 

monism-to the same committee. 

Also, petition of citizens of West Bolton, Vt., asking an increase of 

widows' pensions-to the Committee on Pensions. 

By Mr. J. M. Taylor: Petition of Jerre R. Wright, administrator of 

Nancy Wright, deceased, of McNairy County, Tennessee, asking reference of claim for property taken and used by the United States Army 

during the late war to the Court of Claims under the provisions of the 

Bowman rtct---to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. WADSWORTH: Petition of citizens- of New York, asking 

legislation for the suppression ofl\Iormonism-to the Committee on the 

Judiciary. 

By Mr. RICHARD WARNER: Petition of Joseph Adams, of Marshall County, Tennessee, asking reference of claim for property taken 
1885. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 1613 

and used by the United States .Army during_ the late war to the C!<>nrt 

of Claims under the provisions of the Bowman act-=-to the Commttt-ee 

on War Claims. 

The following petitions for the passage of the Mexican war pension 

bill with Senate amendments were presented and severally r¢erred to 

the Committee on Pensions; . - . By Mr . .ALEXANDER; Of citizens of Grundy, of Linn, of Livingston, and of Sullivan Counties, Missouri. 

By Mr. COSGROVE: Of citizens of Slater, Mo. . By Mr. CURTIN; Of citizens of Center County, Pennsylvama.. 

By Mr. DINGLEY: Of citizens of North Haven, Me. 

By Mr. H. H. HATCH; OfcitizensofUnionville, of Canton, and of 

Athens, Mo. 

By Mr. KLEINER: Of ex-soldiers of Petersburg, Ind. 

By Mr. MILLIKEN; Of Charles B. Ste'!art and ot~ers, of South 

China and of J. T'. Hawes and others, of Litchfield Plams, Me. 

By Mr. NEECE; Of Post 81, Grand .Army of the Republic, Department of illinois. 

By Mr. OSSIAN RAY: Of James Gorman and 32 others, of ~ndolph; 

of Daniel Cobb and 89 others, of .Ashland, and of H. E. Bliss and 65 

others, of Lebanon, ·N.H. 

By :Mr. STEELE; OfcitizensofGenoa, ofHuntington, ofBloomfield, 

of Hackleman, and of Jalapa, Ind. 

By Mr. J. W. STEWART; OfL. B. Kent and others, of Rochester; of 

J. A. Benedict and others, of Poultney; of J. W. Parkhurst and others, 

of Fair Ifuven; of Warren Gibbs and others, of Burlington; and of A. 

E. Ferris and others, of Forestdale, Vt. . Ey Mr. WEAVER; Of Thomas Wiles and 126 others, citizens of Plattsmouth, Nebr. 

By :Mr. WOOD: Of citizens of New ·waverly, of Galveston, of Logan~p<?rt, , of_ Rochester, a~~ of W~mac; ~nd. · 

SENATE. 

FRIDAY, Febr-uary 13, 1885. 

The Senat-e met a.t 11 o'clock a.m. Prayer by Rev . .A. J. PALMER, 

D. D., of New York city. 

The Journal of yesterday's proceedings was read and approved. 

- EXECUTIVE COIDIUNICATIONS. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair lays before: the Senate a communication from the Secretary of the Navy, recommending that the 

prime meridian of Greenwich be adop~ for all. nautical and astrono~­

iCal purposes, as recommended by the mternational conference held m Washington in October last. If there be no o~jection, the letter will 

be printed and refeqed to the Committee on :Na~al Affairs. 

M:r. MILLER, ot' Califgrnia. The subject of a prime meridian has 

had the attention of the Committee on Foreign Relations. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair was under the impression 

that, as the astronomy of the United States is confined to the Naval 

Observatory, the proper reference would be to the Naval Committee. 

The Chair will change the reference if there be no objection, and the 

letter will be referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate a communication from the Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting a recommendation 

of the Supervising Archit-ect to extend the limit of cost of the public 

building at Denver, Colo.; which, with the accompanying papers, was referred to the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds, and ordered to be printed. 

He also laid before the Senate a communication from the PostmasterGeneral, transmitting a letter from the Attorney-General relative to the 

importance of obtaining possession of certain records of the Post-Office 

Department of the late Confederate States pertaining to Southern mail 

contracts; which, with the accompanying documents, was referred to 

the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads, and ordered to be 

printed. 

managers at a meeting held in Cincinnati, Ohi?, on the 4th of Fe~ruary, 1885, protesting against the re~l of section 4419 of the ReVISed 

Statutes of the United States, relating to the control of safety-valves 

and steam-registers; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce. . · Mr. MITCHELL presented a petition of the Com~ercial Exchange 

of Philadelphia, praying for the p~rchase by the.Uruted States of the 

Portage Lake and Lake Superior .Ship Canals; which was referred to the 

Committee on Commerce. . Mr. MILLER of California. I present the petition of the Republican and Dem~tic county committees of Vallejo, California, praying that the workmen -and other employes of the Mare Island navyyar~ may receive compensation for time lost by.th~m d~g January, 

1885 pending the passage of the naval appropnation b1U. 

I ~so present a petition of workmen and other employes of th.e Mare 

Island navy-yard, California, not _addressed to Congress, but eVldently 

intended to be presented~ a petition to the Senate, to th~ ~me effect. 

I ask that it may be received, and I move that both petitions be re- ferred to the Committee on ·Appropriations. · The PRESIDENT pro tempore. If there be no objection the ~3;tter 

paper will be received as a petition to the Senate, and both petitions 

will be referred to the Committee on .Appropriations. 

Mr. HOAR presented the petition of Mrs. Sarah E. Bowker, of Cambridge, Mass., praying for an increase of pension; which was referred 

to the Committee on Pensions. -

REPORTS OF COIDIITTEES. 

Mr. MITCHELL. I am instructed -by the C_ommittee on Pensions, 

to whom was referred the bill (S. 2177) granting a pension to Henry 

Radford to report it adversely, as a House bill in that case has been 

passed. ' I move that the bill be indefinitely postponed. • 

The motion was agreed to. 

Mr. MITCHELL: I am instructed by the Committee·-on Pensions; 

to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 2520) granting a pension to Sally 

Ann Bradley, to report it adversely, ~nd to ask that it be placed upon 

the Calendar for consideration. · The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The bill will 'be placed upon the 

Calendar with the adverse report of the committee. • · Mr. :M:.ITCHELL, from the Committee on Pensions, to whom was referred the bill (S. 2057) granting a ~nsion to l\Iargaret Beyme~, submitted an adverse report thereon, which was agreed to; and the bill was postponed indefinitely. . ' 

He also from the same committee, to whom was referred the following bills, ;eported them severally without amendment, and submitted 

reports thereon: · 

A bill (H. R. 4189l gran~g a pens~on to Caroline Van ~o~on; 

A bill (H. R. 4837 grantmg a pens10n to Charles H. Phillips; 

A bill (H. R. 6835 granting a pension to Bernard Donohue; 

A billlH. R. 7773 granting a pension to William E. Ayers; 

A bill H. R. 7386) gmnting·a pension to Eliza :M:. Byers; 

A bill H. R 732) granting a pension to William Weddingfield; and 

A bill (S. 2437) granting a pension to Mrs. Mary Gordon. ' 

Ur. CULLOM, from the Committee on Pensions, to whom were re- ferred the following bills, reported them severally without amendment 

and submitted reports thereon: 

A bill (H. R. 1164) to restore to the pension-roll the name of Elenor 

Stough; · A bill (H. R. 3000) for the relief of William R. Miller, for pension; 

A bill (H. R. 5082) granting a pension to Jane Hilton; and 

A bill (S. 2262) granting a pension to Sedate P. Martin. 

Mr. CULLOM, fiom the Committee on Pensions, to whom was re- ferred the bill (S. 1960) for the relief of Mary Howard Farquhar, re- ported it with an amendment, and submitted a report thereon. · He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred the bill 

(S. 2074) for the relief of Mary Howard Farquhar, moved its indefinite 

postponement; which was agreed to. 

Mr. JACKSON, from the Committee ·on Pensions, to whom was re- committed the . bill (H. R. 2136) granting an increase of pension to 

Merlin C. Harris, reported it without amendment, aml submitted are- port thereon. · PETITIO.YS .AND MEMORIALS. He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred the bill 

Mr. SHERMAN presented a petition of the Ohio State Sanitary As- (S. 1325) granting an increase of pension to Merlin C. Harris, moved 

sociation, praying for the passage of the bill introduced by Senator its indefinite postponement; which was agreed to. 

PALMER for the prevention of the introduction-and diffusion of conta- Mr.· JACKSON. I am instructed by the Committee on Pensions, to 

gious and infections diseases into the United States; which was referred whom was referred the bill (H. R. 7997) to increase the pension of 

to the Committee on Epidemic Diseases. Mary E. Fillebrown, to report it adversely. I ask that it be placed 

Mr. PENDLETON presented petition.<:~ of the Lancaster Gazette1 of on the Calendar. ' 

Lancaster, Ohio; the German Publishing House, of Cleveland, Ohio; The PRESIDENT pro tem,pore. The bill will be placed on the Calthe Greenville Journal, 'of Greenville, Ohio; the Clermont Sun, of:Ba- endar with the adverse report of the committee. . tavia, Ohio; theOhioSta.teJournal, of Colnmbus, Ohio; the publishers . Ur. JACKSON. I am. also instructed .by the sru;ne comiDI~t~e, to 

of The Drugs and Medicines of North .America; the Gazette, of Ottawa, whom was referred the b1ll (S. 498) granting a: pens10n to Letitia Ty· 

Ohio; the Ohio Waisenfreund, of Columbus, Ohio; and the publishers ler Semple, to report it adversely. I ask that 1t be placed on the Calof the Ohio Sta.te Journal of Dental Science, of Toledo, Ohio, praying endar. 

for the reduction of postage on second-class mail matter; which were The PRESIDENT pro te-mpore. The bill will be . placed on the Calreferred t-o the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads. endar with the adverse reporb of the committee. 

He also presented a resolution adopted by steamboat owners and Mr. JACKSON, fro~ the Committee on Pensions, to whom were re-