1886. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 165 

SENATE. 

WEDNESDAY, December 15, 188{). 

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

The Journal of yesterday's proceedings was read and appro\ed. 

PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS. 

Mr. MILLER presented a petition of farmers of the town of Cambridge, N. Y., praying for the pa.<ssage of the bill establishing agricultu'ral experiment stations; which was referred to the Committee on .Agriculture and Forestry. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. I present the petition of James H. Mandeville, of 

this town, a member of the bar, which sets forth that in respect of the 

Las Pocitas land grant matter in California the Land Department has 

done great injustice to his clients and a large number of pre-emptors by 

assigning the land to the Central Pacific Railroad Company when it belonged to these pre-emptors, and asking for certain relief, together with 

sundry papers, being maps and opinions of the Commissioner, &c. I move that the petition be referred, with the accompanying papers, to 

the Committee on Public Lands. 

The motion was agreed to. 

J.fr. D.A WES presented the petition of Thoma-s F. Barker and other 

citizens of Hinsdale, Mass., praying for the passage of the agricultural 

experiment station bill; which was referred to the Committee on .Agriculture and Forestry. 

Mr. FRYE. I present a memorial of the Bath (Me.) Board of Trade, 

remonstrating against the enactment of a law for the admission of foreign-built ships to American registry. The memorial is from an important board of trade and is brief. I ask that it may be printed in the 

REcoim, and referred to the Committee on Commerce. 

The memorial was referred to the Committee on Commerce, and or- dered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: 

To ihe Senate and House of Representatives . of the United States of .Ame,.ica in Congress assembled: 

Respectfully memorialize and represent your petitioner, the Bath Board of 

Trade, whose membership includes the representative business men of our city, that we view with alarm the-possibility of the passage by your honorable body of the (so-called) Dunn bill, providing for the admission of foreign-built ships to an American register. Keenly alive to the wants and necessities of our mer- chant marine, we have st.ruggled for years to maintain its prestige, hoping for 

such legislative relief as would enable us to meet a bold and aggressive foreign competition. From the foundation of our Government it has been the distinctive 

American policy to encourage the building and sailing of ships by American 

citizens. To protect and strengthen Lhis important service, and the many in- terests dependent thereon, Congress has in the past granted with generosity 

much needed legislation. Now at the moment when we can discern some ray of light we are met with a proposition which, ifiteverripensintolaw~ will com- pletely and forever paralyze an important industry whose prosperity ts synony- mous with the desired materjal prosperity of ourwholeland. The far-reaching results of such unwise and cruel legislation are fearful to contemplate. The 

jmmense capital invested in our merchant marine might partially save itself 

when the death blow is struck, but the immense labor interest involved will be 

crKShed beyond all hope of recovery. The traditional policy of our Government 

has always encouraged the building of shipR. Under its benignant influence a vast army of skilled mechanics and artisans have grown up, a clean, bright, and 

intelligent factor in our body-politic. Foreign competition and aggression now reach out a grasping hand and would 

rob our labor of its long established source of maintenance; and more, it would use the law-making power of an American Congress to crush and forever annihilate an important branch of American labor. To what depths of weakness 

and imbecility have we sunk when we surrender to England ourJast bulwark 

of national hope and national defense, and cowardly permit her cheap mate- rials and cheaper labor to masquerade under the Stars and Stripes, doing the 

little carrying trade that still remains to us. We hope, urge, and pray that our Congress will not adopt a policy so shortrsighted and pernicious that a great industry that has founded and maintained so many happy homes, the corner- stones of our Republic, the abode of honest and well-regulated labor, shall not look in vain to its own legislation for protection againstforeignamp-ession, that we may still be permitted to float an American flag over an American bottom, 

constructed by American capital, skill, and labor. · FRANCIS W. WEEKS, 

Eecretary Bath Board of Trad.e, Bath, Me. 

Mr. COCKRELL. I present the affidavits of Logan J. McWhorter, 

A. J. Adams, and Joshua. W. Brown, to accompany the bill (S. 1321) 

granting arrears of pension to Richard H. McWhorter. I move that 

the papers be referred to the Committee on Pensions, where the bill is 

pending. 

The motion was agreed to. 

REPORTS OF CO::lll\ITTTEES. 

Mr. BLACKBURN. I ask unanimous consent at this time to submit a written report to accompany the bill (S. 729) for the relief of RearAdmiral Carter, reported at the last session of Congress, by order of the 

Committee on Naval Affairs. 

The PRESIDENT p1·o tempore. The report will be received and or- dered to be printed. 

lli. WILSON, of Iowa, from the Committee on Post-Offices and PostRoads, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 5878) to amend the act entitled "An act to modify- the postal money-order system, and for other 

purposes,'' approved March 3, 1883, reported it without amendment. 

Mr. CONGER, from the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads, 

to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 7536) to extend the free-delivery 

system of the Post-Office Department, and for other purposes, reported it without amendment. 

He also, from the same committee, to whom was r:eferred the bill 

(H. R. 8346) authorizing the employment of mail-messengers irf the 

postal service, reported it with amendments. ' 

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

(H. R. 91Ss) for the relief of James R. Marrs, reported it without 

amendment. 

Mr. S.A WYER, from the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads, 

tow hom was referred the bill (H. R. 3909) for the relief of Harry Fisk, 

reported it without amendment, and submitted a report there?n. 

BILLS INTRODUCED. 

Mr. MILLER (by request) introdu~ a bill (S. 2989) to extend the 

term of the patent granted to Walter Youmans on the 12th day of November. 1872, for fifteen years; which was read twice by its title, and 

referred to the Committee on Patents. 

Mr. GRAYintroducedabill (S. 2990)tomusterEdwardG. Pendleton as lieutenant of infantry into the service of the United States, and to 

pay him for his services from .August 31, 1861, to July 10, 1R64, inclusive; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee 

on Military Affairs. 

Mr. CALL introduced a bill (S. 2991) to appropriate $100,000 to 

deepen and widen the inner and outer. bars of Pensacola Bay, so as to 

afford easy and safe entrance for the ·largest sized vessels; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Commerce. 

He also introduced a bill (S. 2992) to make Tampa, Florida, a part 

of entry; which was read twice by its title. 

Mr. CALL. In introducing this bill I merely desire to ask immediate consideration of it by the Committee on Commerce, and to state 

that there is now a large foreign commerce carried on at Tampa, which 

imperatively requires that it should be made a port of entry without 

delay. I move that the bill be referred to the Committee on Commerce. 

The motion was agreed to. 

Mr. SPOONER introduced a bill (S. 2993) to quiet the title to cer::: tain land in the city of Washington, District of Columbia; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on the District 

of Columbia. 

Mr. VANCE introduced a bill (S. 2994) to repeal chapter 27 of acts 

of 1883, relating to civil service; which was read twice by its title, and 

referred to the Committee on Civil Service and Retrenchment. 

Mr. COCKRELL introduced a bill (S. 2995) for the relief of Lazarus 

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

Mr. CAMERON introduced a bill (S. 2996) granting a pension to J. 

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

Mr. BLACKBURN introduced a joint resolution (S. R. 88) authorizing the printingof2,500 extra copies of the report of the health officer 

of the District of Columbia; which was read twice by its title, and-referred to the Committee on Printing. · 

PAPERS WITHDRAWN AND REFERRED. 

On motion of Mr. DOLPH, it wasOrdered, That Alexander McNary have leave to withdraw his petition and 

papers from the files of the Senate, for the purpose of being referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs of the House of Representatives. 

On motion of Mr. WALTHALL, it was 

Ordll1'ed, That the Committee on Commerce be discharged from the further 

consideration of the memorial of the board of supervisors of Harrison CountyJ Mississippi, for the removal of the quarantine station from Ship Island, ana that the memorial be withdrawn for reference to the Secretary of the Treasury. 

MISSOURI RIVER APPROPRIATIONS. 

Mr. HOAR. I rise to move to proceed to the consideration of the bill 

(S. 512) known as the civil-tenure bill. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. Before that is done I should like to offer a res- olution . . Mr. HOAR. I yield, of course. The PRESIDENT pro te-mpore. The resolution submitted by the 

Senator from Nebraska [lli. VANWYCK] will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read the resolution, as follows: 

Whereas in the appropriation in river and harbor bill of 1886 for the 1\Iissouri · River it was required that work should be continued at Omaha, Plattsmouth, 

Eastport, and Brownsville, in Nebraska and Iowa: 

Resolved, That the Secretary of War be directed to inform the Senate in what manner the l'tfissouri River Commission apportioned said money so appropri- ated, and whether any portion was ordered to continue the work at the points above mentioned as provided in said river and harbor bill, and if the Secretary 

of War approved the refusal of the board so ~o continue work at the above 

points. 

The Senate, by unanimous consent, proceeded to consider the resolution. 

Mr. INGALLS. Mr. President, there was appropriated in the bill 

for the improvement of certain rivers and harbors to which the resolution of the Senator from Nebraska refers saoo,ooo, to be expended not 

only at the points named in the Senator's resolution, but also at certain 

other points in Kansas, includin_g .Atchison, where I reside, Fort Leavenworth, and perhaps one other point. I have been informed that the 

entire amount of $300,000 has been by order of the Secretary of War 

directed to be expended at two points in Missouri, to wit, $75,000 at 
166 OONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. DECEMBER 15, 

the city of Saint Joseph and .$225,000 at Kansas City. I am not positively informed that this is correct, but I have received information· 

which leads roo to believe that the entire amount of $300,000, which was specifically directed by the act of Congress to be apportioned among 

certain points named in Kansas. Nebraska, and :Missouri, has been so disposed of by order of the Secretary of War. If that is the case, it is 

a direct violation not only of the intent .and understanding of those 

who voted for that appropriation, but of the direct letter of the law 

itself. 

Mr. COCKRELL. Will the Senator let me usk him a question? 

Mr. INGALLS. Yes, sir. 

!fr. COCKRELL. He speaks of the expenditure at Saint Jo and 

Kansas City, and also says that Atchison was named. Now, is not the 

expenditure on the Missouri River at Saint Jo as much for the benefit 

of Kansas as the expenditure at Atchison would be; and is not also 

the expenditure at Kansas City as much for Kansas as for 1lfissouri? 

Tbe river is the dividing line, and is not either side of the river as 

much benefited as the other? 

Mr. INGALLS. Take the case of Fort LeaYenworth, for instance, 

where the danger that threatens is not to the navigation of the stream, 

but the destruction of a bridge erected at that point by authority of 

Congress, und which is liable to be thrown inland in consequence of 

the depredations of this stream. That being the particular emergency 

which was sought to be guarded against by those who 'foted that appropriation, in reply to the Senator from Missouri I will ask what good or advantage or benefit will it he to expend $75,000nt Saint Joseph, 

50 or 60 miles above that point, to prevent the depredation I have complained of at Fort Leavenworth? 

Mr. President~ either the Senator from Missouri does not understand 

the objects and purposes for which this appropriation was made, or his . question is intended to divert public attention f.rom the action of the 

Secretary of War that I have reason to believe has already been taken. 

It; appears to· me that the Secretary of War has inverted the statute so far as its practical operations were concerned and holds that it rested 

with him only to sa.nction the distribution of thiB money as designated 

by the ]')1issouri River Commission, instead of holding, ashe ought, that 

he has the primal power in the matter aud should make the assignment, and that the .Missouri River Commission should famish the plans 

and estimates for .:my assignment that may be made by him. 

I wish to have the resolution amended so that it may include the 

other points named in tbeact, in order that the attention ofthe Secre--

tary of War may be attracted to the very point in controversy, and 

that we may learn whether $300,COO having been appropriated 1orthis 

purpose the whole amount, contrary to the design of Congress, is to be 

expended at two points named in my previous observations. 

Mr. VEST. Mr. President, the Senat;or from Kansas is under an entire misapprehension as to the provisions of the act. I am a member 

of the Committee on Commerce, and paid particular attention to this 

section in the river and harbor bill. The position came originally 

from the coll~ue of the Senator from Kansas, which was mandatory 

upon the Missouri River Commission to expend so much money at the 

pointS named specifying particularly the Fort Leavenworth Military 

Reservation and tqe town of Atchison. The Commerce Committee declined to make that provision mandatozy, and, on the other hand, 

against my objection, I may say, without violating any parliamentary 

rule as to what took place in committee, made the following provision, 

which is now the law: 

Improving Missouri River from ita mouth to Sioux City; Continui.og improvement, including necessary work at Omaha, Atchison, Saint Joseph, Fort Leo.venworth Reservation, Arrow Rock, Kansas City, Plattsmouth, Browns- ville, and Nebraska. City, $375,000; to be~xpended under the direction of the 

Sec1·etary of War. in a~rdance with plans and estimates to be furnished by 

tbc ~issouri River Com.ll.lission. 

It will be noticed from the buguagc of this provision that it is en~ 

tirely within the discretion of the War Department, acef)rding to plans 

and estimates to be furnished by the Missouri River Commission, as to 

what is neces&'\I'Y for the completion oftheseworks. · There is nothing 

mandatory in the section at all. It says that 375,000 shall be appropriated to "improving M'U!SOuri River from its mouth to Sioux City: 

Continuing improvement;" that is, th~ improvement of the whole 

Tiver. · 

Mr. INGALLS. What is the section? 

J,!r. VEST. It is on page 19 of the pamphl6t copy of the river .and 

b.ar bor act. 

!I.r. INGALLS. Wlw.t is the section? 

Mr. VEST. There seems to be but one section foy trot matter. It 

is on page 19. 

1\Ir. INGALLS. Yes, there are six sections in the bilL 

I\1r. McMILLAN. It is found in the section containing the items of 

nppropriations. . Mr. VEST. The porli<>n of the act to which I refer is not divided 

into sections, but paragraphs. I am quoting from the pamphlet oopy 

which just says "Be it enacted," &c., and then puts in the different 

items of appropriation. It is not sectionized at all. 

As I was proceeding to say, it will be seen that it is within the discretion of the War Department-of the Bureau of Engineers-to deterrome whether this work is necessary or not, and that is the law as :i:t 

stands now upon the statute-book. They have first to determine whether 

the necessary work exists at these points, and in the second place, the 

Missouri River Commission is to furnish the plans and estimates. 

I have intended to visit the Bureau ofEngiueers and ascertain the 

truth as to bow these appropriations were being expended. All I-1lave seen has been in the newspapers; and whether the assertion of the Senator from Kansas :is to the whole amount being expended at Kansas 

City and at another point in Missouri is true I am not able now to state. 

I do know that the work at Kansas City if left in its present condition 

will result in the destruction of the bridge, a most important one at 

that point, and will entirely ruin the harbor at that city, now rapidly 

improving. 

As a. matter of course I do not want and I do not expect that injustice 

shall be donetootherpointsnpon the Missouri River. I live at Kansas 

City, and I undertake to say for those people and the people of the en-. tire State of Missouri that we want no unjust discrimination. We want 

the whole river improved, and we recognize the fact that when the river 

is improved at any portion of it it inures to the benefit of the people of 

Kansas City and of the people of the entire State. 

li'Ir. INGALLS. There has been, as I unden;;tand it, not less than 

$300,000 heretofore expended at Kansas City. The Senator from Missouri speaks well of the great importance of that point and of the ne- cessity of the expenditure of money there. But in addition to what I 

have already said about Fort Leavenworth I may refer to the need of 

the river at Atchison. There is a bridge there which cost a million 

dollars, which affords facilities for ttansit to eight different railroads, 

and which .is of immense consequence to the business and convenience 

of a great many hundred thousand people. I have been advised, and 

I believe, that unless .something is done to prevent the encroachments 

of the river upon the }.li&;ouri shore upon which tho eastern end of tha~ 

bl'idge abuts, within twelve months from this time it will be cut off so that a portion of the stream at least will pass by the east end of the 

bridge and lea>e it entirely worthless. 

One h1mdred aud twent-y thousand doll.ai's has already been expended 

at that point for this •ery purpose. In order to oomplete the work it 

is necessary to e.xpend a small amount more. There are other members 

of this body who know o.b.out this matter, and some who do not live iQ 

either Missouri or Kansas. I submit that the action of the Secretary 

ofWar, if, as I am adviscdJ he has directed an expenditure of the appropriation exclusiveJy at those t o points, is iu violation ab olutely 

of the intent of Congress whmt the money was appropriated, for I know 

that the towns of Atchison and Fort Lea.venworth were inserted by the 

Senate on my motion on \Ote. 

I tis, in my judgment, :proper tbatt.he resolntionshouldbe soa.mendecl 

as to call the attention ·of the Secretary of War to all the points named 

in the act, so tbat we may know definitely what has been done. 

Mr. ALLISON. Let the resolution be Yean again. . 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The resolution will be again reacT. ~ 

The Chief Clerk read the resolution. 

Mr. VAN WYQK. I ask the clerk to insert in the resolution the 

places designated by the SenatoT from Kansas. 

]')lr. INGALLS. The points are Atchison, Saint Joseph, Fort Leavenworth reservation, Arrow Rock, and Kansas City. 

Mr. ALLISON. I suggest. in lieu of the pb:raseology JITOposed by 

the Senator. from Kansas, that the resolution be amended so as to direct 

the Secretary of War to furnish to the Senate in detail the manner of 

expending the appropriation, so that we may 1."1low not only the places 

named, but all the points on the Missouri Ri•e.r at which money has 

been expended. 

Mr. McMILLAN. On the npper part of the river tlte money is not 

expended under the direction of the liissonri River Commission. 

1\fr. SAULSBURY. I desire to call attention to tl1e phraseology of 

the preamble, which sets out whereas certain money was require<! to 

be expended at the points n..'l.med. If I understood the language read 

by the Senator from Missouri there w.a.s no such provision in the act. 

Why shonld we pass a preamble to a resolution asserting a fad which 

is not sustained by the act itself? · Mr. VAN WYCK. I will explain that ro the Senatm. 

]')lr. lliGALLS. Let me read the language of tlle paragmpb. 

Mr. VANWYCK. Certainly. 

Mr. INGALLS. The language is: 

Imprm·ing Missouri River from its mouth to Sioux City: Continuing improvement, including nooe sary work at Om ha. Atch:iBon, So.int Josepb, Fort Lea•enworth Resen-ation. Arrow Rock, Kan5R3 City, Plattsmouth, Browns- nile, and Nebraska City, S375,000. 

I ask the Senator from Delaware if any Ja.w of inte:rpTetation under 

the language of that statute, when those places are specially mentioned and the work declared to be neces~'lry, would jnstify the Secret..'Uy of War or the lissouri River Collllllission in expending the 

$375,000 entirely nt one single point named in the par.agraph of the 

ad? . .Mr. SAULSBURY. I will answer tbe Senator f1·om Kansas thn.t I 

understand the appropriation was fur the whole river. 

1\Ir. INGALLS. T.be Senator do not undel'Stand anything :nbont 

it, because the next paragraph makes a.n appropriation for the whole 

river, and this is for specific places on the river. 
1886 . . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 167 

Mr. SAULSBURY. From the mouth of the river up to a certain 

other point. ~ t Mr. INGALLS. Oh no, no. Mr. SAULSBURY. That is my understanding of it. 

Mr. ING.ALLS. The next paragraph is, "Improving the Missouri 

River from Sioux City to Fort Benton," and so on. Mr. SAULSBURY. If the Senator from Nebraska will pardon 

meMr. VAN WYCK.· Certainly. 

Mr. SAULSBURY. As I understand the language it applies to all 

points from the mouth up to Sioux City. 

Mr. INGALLS. .All the points named. 

Mr. SAULSBURY. It applies to the whole river. The appropriation was for the whole river, and the Secretary of War could have expended it at any of the points on the river which the Missouri River 

Commission designated according to the terms of the a-ct. I say that the 

Secretary of War, in my opinion, was bound up by the recommendations of the Missouri River Commission. He must expend the money in 

accordance with the plans and reconi.mendations of that commission, 

and it was not optional with. him. 

Mr. INGALLS. I ask the Senator from Delaware if the Missouri 

River Commission is not bound by this statute? 

Mr. SAULSBURY. I do not hold with the Senator from l(ansas 

that the Secretary of 'Var was bound under the terms of the act to ex- pend a single dollar at Atchison or Leavenworth or at any particular 

point on the river unless it fell within the recommendations and specifications of the commission ? 

Mr. INGALLS. What I ask the Senator from Delaware is whether 

the Missouri River Commission under the terms of this statute are not 

required to make their estimates and plans for the necessary work at 

the points named? 

Mr. SAULSBURY. I do not believe they were required to make 

any recommendation to expend the money at those points any more 

than at any other points; and I have no doubt that the Secretary of 

War has exercised--

Mr. INGALLS. Thenletmeask the Senator why these towns were 

specifically named in the acfJ by Congress? 

Mr. SAULSBURY. It includes those points as well as other points on the river, but it does not mean to include those points to the exclusion of other points on the river. 

Mr. INGALLS. They were put in for recreation, I presume. 

Mr. SAULSBURY. It is a very easy matter to :find fault with the 

Secretary of War; but I have no doubt he has exercised a very wise 

discretion in the expenditure of the appropriations made by Congress 

for that river, as at all other points. He has no special interest in one 

point on the river more than another; and I do not think it is fair, 

upon the simple presentation of a resolution of inquiry, to rise here 

and denounce the action of the Secretary of War in this manner. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Nebraska [Mr. 

VAN WYCK] is entitled to the floor. . 

Mr. VAN WYCK. The Senator from Delaware will allow me to say 

that be is entirely mistaken as to the purport, intent, and motive of the 

resolution. It is not to cast any reflection upon the Secretary of War 

in the least, because when the Secretary of War answers the resolution, 

if the Bureau of Engineers report properly, he will no doubt say that 

he was required to do what be did; that he only had the power of ac- quiescence; that it belonged to the Missouri River Commission entirely 

to carry out the provision of the law or to nullify it, and that he was powerless in the matter. That, I understand, is the position which 

will be taken by the Secretary of War; and there, in my judgment, he 

is in error. The Senator from Missouri and the Senator from Delaware will 

remember that in a previous Congress, when the river and harbor bill 

wa.'i under consideration, an effort was made to accomplish what has 

been placed in this act. It was done by the Senator from Kansas upon 

my left [Mr. PLUMB] insisting by amendments that certain points in 

Kansas should be incorporated in the bill and by myself insisting that 

points in Nebraska and Iowa should be placed in the bill, but the Committee on Commerce opposed it at that time, and theyrefused to allow 

any amendments of this nature to be incorporated in the bill. The 

result was that the discussion was continued so long upon those amendments that the river and harbor bill failed at that time. I say the 

river and harbor bill failed at that session because the points now designated in the act were not incorporated in that measure. 

At the last session of Congress there was a provision made to include 

these same points. As far as the Nebraska points are concerned, I introduced an amendment, and had it referred to the Committee on Commerce. The CommitteeonCommerceapproved two of the points, Omaha and Nebraska City, and they reported the bill including those 

two points. When the bill was up for consideration in the Senate I 

proposed an amendment as to the two additional points in my original amendment, and it was adopted by the Senate, and tlie points in 

Kansas and Saint Joseph, in Missouri, were also inserted, but particularly the points in Kansas were incorporated in the bill. 

With the statement of fact that at a previous session the river and 

harbor bill failed in the Senate because of the unwillingness of the 

Committee on Commerce to allow these very amendments, and that at 

the last session, when the bill wus passed, it included some of these 

wints with the concurrence Qf the committee and all of them by the 

action of the Senate, there is no discretion further than as to the amoun1; 

of necessary repaiis. 3he language of the statute is impemtivej it iu an appropriation for the 1\.fissonri River; and that there shallne no mistake, to meeb what ca.used the defeat of the river and harbor bill at 

a previous session, Congress expressly designated that work should be 

continued at these points, and made appropriation for continuing work 

there. The only matte1· of discretion with the commission was as to the 

amount of necessary work; hut that they had authority to array themselves against Congress is a position which certainly can not be sus- t.'l.ined. 

It was first made known by the public prints that the Missouri 

River Commission had resolved to expend all the money (with the ex- ception of a little at Saint Joseph) at Kansas City or between Kansas 

City and the mouth of the river, when this matter had caused the collision in the previous session of Congress, but Congress having in the 

succeeding session determined this very question. Probably nearly 

the only act ever done by the Missouri River Commission was to determine that whatever money should be appropriated by Congress for the 

Missouri River should be expended between Kansas City and the month 

of the river. That was done before the previous session of Congress, 

and hence it was that when it was determined in advance that what- ever money was appropriated for the Missouri River should be expended 

only between Kansas City and the mouth of the river, it made it nec- essary that the Senator from Kansas on my left and myself and some other Senators should determine that question. Therefore, as I said, 

when the Committee on Commerce refused to allow the amendment it was the cause of the defeat of the bill at that session. 

I desire my friend from Uissouri to bear in mind that fhct. There 

was a difference of opinion between the commission and certain mem- bers of Congress, and hence the refusal to paB3 the bill at that session, or certainly at least because of an unwillingness to yield this money to 

the entire control of the Missouri River Commission the bill failed at 

the {lrevious session. ' 

Mr. VEST. I should like to ask the Senator from Nebraska a question. . The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from Nebraska 

yield to the Senator from Missouri ? .Mr. VANWYCK. Certainly. 

Mr. VEST. After this provision was enacted, referring to the law as. it now stands, did the Senator support the river and harbor bill? 

Mr. VAN WYCK. I voted for it, I think. ·, 

Mr. VEST. Did not the Senator oppose it in debate here on the 

floor of the Senate as it was reported from the committee? 

Mr. VANWYCK. In many things I did object to it, and I suppose 

I opposed the whole bill. 

111r. VEST. I think the RECORD will show that both the Senator 

from Kansas [Mr. INGALLS] and the Senator from Nebraska [Mr. 

V .AN WYCK] opposed the bill persistently. 

Mr. INGALLS. :Mr. President, I voted for the bill with alac1·ity. 

Mr. VEST. Then the Senator spoke one way and voted the other, 

for I very well recollect a most eloquent speech that he delivered here 

against the whole bill. 

Mr. INGALLS. I opposed certain features in the bill with a good 

deal of vigor; but when it was subsequently reduced, on the motion of 

the chairman of the committee, 25 per cent. I gave it my cordial adhesion. 

Mr. VEST. Exactly. As the bill ca.me from the Committee on Commerce it appropriated $500',000 for the Missouri River, which I 

contended in committee and in the Senate was a. ridiculously low appropriation for that long river, the longest on the continent. But the 

Senator from Kansas says now that with all his zeal for scattering 

these appropriations up and down tho river, from its mouth to Sioux 

City, be voted for the bill only when that appropriation was reduced 

to $375,000; and so the Senator from Nebraska voted for that decrease 

against my protest in behalf of the Missouri River and all the towns 

along it. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. I think I may state to my friend that I vo~d for 

the bill. Generally the river and harbor bill is so full of abominations 

that a man must necessarily oppose it to some extent, and he is justified 

almost in voting against it entirely~ but my impression is that the REc- ORD will show that finally I voted for this bill. I will say to my friend, 

however, that at a previous session the river and harbor bill was defeated because the commission had declared in advance that any and all 

moneys appropriated by Cvngress for that river should be expended between Kansas City and the mouth of the river, and becau e the repre- sentatives of the Missouri River on this floor were determined that that 

should not be done if they could prevent it-that other portions ofthe 

river should be protected equally with that between Kansas City aud 

the mouth. It was that which caused the defeat of the river and harbor bill at the previous session. That was an issue clean cut, and everybody understood it. The Engineer Department understood it; the Mis- souri River Commission understood it; the Committee on Commerce of 

this bo<ly must have· understood it, for it was a clean-cut m!l.tter of dif-
168 ·CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. DEOEl\IBER 15, 

ference bet ween the river com mission and Congress as to the disposition 

of the money to be expended on the "?!'lissouri River. 

Mr. VEST. Now, as the Senator goes along it is just as well to have 

matters put right. I can not permit the statement he has just made 

to go, because I know personally that it is not in aecordance with the 

real state of the case that occurreiJ here when that river and harbor bill 

failed. I may appeal, I think, to the almost unanimous memory of 

this Senate, certainly of the Committee on Commerce. The river and 

harbor bill which failed antecedent to the passage ofthe bill weare now considering, came over from the House of Representatives to the Senate within three days of the end of the session. It was simply physically impossible for us to consider it in that time; but we took it up in 

the Committee on Commerce, and we found that we should be com- pelled to sit up the entire night and then to come in without opportunityfordebateinordertopresent it to the Senate as the verylastmeas- nre for consideration. We knew that UQder the circumstances it would 

be impossible to pass any bill. .One objection would have destroyed it. 

Every one of my colleagues on that committee knows this to be the fact. 

As to this issue between the Missouri River Commission and the 

Senate, or the commission and the House, I never heard of it, and I 

undertake to say it was not presented before that committee at all. 

But again, if the Senator will permit me a word further, I will not 

interrupt him again. He says now this issue was made sharply and 

distinctly between the Missouri River Commission and the friends of 

these different ports or places that were left outside of the appropriation in the last river and harbor bill as it came here. What was the 

fact at the last session of Congress? The House of Representatives 

struck out the Missouri River Commission. They took all power from 

that commission. The bill came from the House to the Senate in 

that condition. Then the issue was made whether the Missouri River 

Com~ission should still remain in existence or not, and upon that question the Senate sustained the commission. These are the facts, and 

by this bill, which has become a law, the Missouri River Commission 

is left intact, with the same power it had under the act which originally created it. 

That does not comport with the statement of the Senator from Nebraska. It shows that the Senate determined, with all the antecedent 

facts before them, to keep the commission in existence, and they did so. 

:Mr. VANWYCK. Ur. President, what may have been the understanding in the committee-room I know not; certainly the secret was not an open one that it woul<l be impossible to pass the bill. Of course we are at a loss to know, or even to conjecture, what may have produced that impression. I merely spoke of the fact that has passed into 

history, and not of the implied or secret understanding of the Committee on Commerce on that matter. 

Mr. McMILLAN. Will the Senator from Nebraska allow me to 

make a statement ? 

Mr. VAN WYCK. Certainly. 

Mr. McMILLAN. The Senator from Missouri[.M:r. VEST] is correct 

in his statement, and a written report was submitted by the Committee on Commerce, stating that the time was not sufficient to permit the 

consideration of the bill and that the matter could not be presented in 

time for consideration by the Senate. There is no doubt about that, 

and we had no discussion at all in the Senate, or elsewhere, about any 

of the items. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. That may be. I have no sort of doubt that the 

committee came here with an apology as to the late day in which that 

bill was presented. That is undoubtedly correct. We all know that. :M:r. McMILLAN. We did not present any apology. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. Prreented an apology to the country by the re- port which he says they made. They were apologizing to the country 

to show thatthe delayor neglect was not wit.h them, but was with the 

other House.· That that bill came here only a few days before the end 

of the session is true. They did seek to pass that bill. Did not the 

Senator present the bill to the Senate and seek to pass it? I ask the 

chairman of the committee. 

Mr. McMILLAN. No; we reported that we could not consider it. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. Did you not actually seek to pass the bill by 

the Senate without regard to the report? What does the chairman 

say? . . . 

Mr. McMILLAN. We made a report that we could not considerit, 

and left the whole matter to the Senate without recommendation. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. Did not the committee present the bill here and 

seek to pass it, I ask the chairman? 

Mr. McMILLAN. No, if I understand the question. 

lli. VAN WYCK. Then I will say to the Senator that I have arrayed against him several pages of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD which 

I suppose he will acknowledge is hist.ory-several pages of the CoNGRESSIONA:L RECORD which show that the committee stood here seeking to pass that river and harbor bill which they now say they knew 

they never could pass as they had only three days in which to con- sider it. 

I know the time was short, and that was the only reason why we defeated the proposition of the Missouri River Commission. We knew 

it; we knew it was an open secret when the committee of this House 

allied themselves with the Missouri River Conimission and insisted 

that that money when it was appropriated should only be spent between Kansas City and the mouth of the river; and we antagonized the 

bill which was here pressed. The Senator from Michigan [Mr. CoNGER] had it in charge and he pressed it with all the zeal and all the 

ability and all the eloquence which he can and does command. 

Mr. CONGER. The utterances of the Senator from Nebraska pass 

into history, and it becomes an important fact that they are of record. 

It therefore may be proper for me to make a statement in regard to 

that matter. 

The statement of the Senator from Missouri was a correct one and 

the only correct one. The river and harbor -bill which I was very 

anxious, as other Senators were; to have considered and to have passed, came from the Honse of Representatives to the Committee on Com- merce and was printed for the use of the Senate committee only two 

days, I think, before the adjournment of Congress ~t the session before 

last, and there was no possibility of examining that bill as it ought to 

have been examined and reporting it to the Senate. The committee 

met and discussed the question and came to the conclusion that they 

could not, in justice to themselves and to the country, report that bill 

favorably to the Senate with the short time for examination which they 

had. That fact and that statement was reported, if I, remember aright, 

by the chairman in writing. It is part of the RECORD and it is reported 

there, and our whole discussion, as I recollect,-was an assent to the propriety of that report. The Senator from Nebraska has confounded 

other bills and other times with the biJl of the session of two years 

ago. That is my recollection of it and I do not want it to go to the 

country in any other shape. It is also the recollection of every mem- ber of the committee, I will venture to say, who will speak upon the 

subject. 

Mr. VAN WYCK. I have no doubt the committee is confused 

about the date of these different bills. 

Mr. CONGER. No, Mr. President, the committee is not confused, 

and it does not intend to be confused, as far as I am concerned, by the 

wild statements of the gentleman from Nebraska. r 

Mr. VAN WYCK. Certainly we are getting into the RECORD now, 

whether we got there two years ago or not. I will suggest to the 

gentlemen of this committee it would have been better to have stated 

that at the outset and withdrawn the bill when they were satisfied 

they could not pass it; but the bill was certainly antagonized for the reason I have stated. 

I a>er that there was an understanding about it, because I myself, 

and my friend from Kansas, on my left, dissented from the proposition 

of the Missouri River Commission. They had in advance determined 

that whatever money was appropriated by Congress for the benefit of 

the Missouri River, should be expended between Kansas City and the 

mouth of the river. With that declaration in advance, of course the 

States lying along that river which were deeply interested in the protection of its commerce, necessarily came to the support of the interest<:~ 

which they represented, and thereforeitwastbatwewere brought squarely in conflict with the Committee on Commerce, because without intending it, their action sustained the Missouri River Commission. The river 

commission boldly sa.id to us in Congress, "Gentlemen, you may appropriate what you please, but we will spend it between Kansas City 

and the mouth of the river/' and they came here with that declaration, and when the committee proposed the expenditure of several hundred thousand dollars withontquaJi1Ying the manner of its distribution, 

it left it in the hands of the Missouri River Commission; and hence it was that the Senator from Kansas and myself antagonized that proposition, and we had amendment after amendment, several amendments, on that question, and I had reportsforyearsfrom theEngineerDepartment of this Government showing the necessity of the expenditure of 

the money at the points indicated, which would be wiped out and ignored by the action ofthe Missouri River Commission. We discussed 

here long into night, untU midnight and probably beyond it, these very 

questions, and it was only because of the shortness of the time that we were enabled to defeat that river and harbor bill. I suggest to the gentlemen of the committee that they will find it interesting reading to 

refer back to the RECORD and see the history which they made, and 

which the Senate made on that occasion. 

The refusal of the committee on that occasion to allow amendments 

such as they did allow in the bill oflast session defeated the river and 

harbor bill of two years ago. That was the fact which I stated, and 

I will say to my friend from Missouri that I am not only sustained 

by current history, but by the pages of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 

That is the history to start with. There was the position of the com- mission. Here, by the way, if this committee will allow me, I will 

refer to the fact that the: Senator from New York [Mr. MILLER] also 

antagonized that bill. He desired some amendments, just what I do 

not know, which helped of course to defeat it in the last hours of the 

session; But the bill was seriously antagonized by these amendments. 

The Senator from New York, the Senator from Kansas, and the Senator from Nebraska, were all united in defeating that bill, which now the members of the committee very innocently say they knew they 

could not pass and did not have any idea that.they could pass jt when 

they presented it for the action of the Senate. 

Having some knowledge, as they evidently had, as to the necessity 
1886. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 169 

of expenditures at these different river points because the other bill had 

failed, the very question came up last session on this bill clean cut, as I say, the question whether the commission should control the disposition of all this money appropriated, or whether Congress should interpose and make some suggestion about it; and hence it was before that · bill was reported the amendment which I have spoken of, including two 

points in Nebraska, was presented for the consideration of the committee, and they included them. When the bill was considered in the 

Senate the other two points were inserted, and the points suggested by 

the Senator from Kansas were also tlien inserted. 

What then ? The gppropriation bill is passed, and the next thing we hear is that this Missouri River Commission, in the nlenitude of their 

power, had met together, after the appropriation bill was passed, andresolved to do what they han resolved to do two years ago-that all the 

money substantially should be expended between Kansas City and the 

mouth of the river. This was a startling assumption of power on their 

part. I took the liberty to write to the Secretary of War, and I think 

from what I saw in the papers the Senator from Kansas on my left [Mr. 

PLUMB] did' the same thing, calling the attention of the Secretary to· the fact that Congress had said something about the disposition of this 

money. 

A few days ago I dropped into the Engineer Department and I said: 

''Why is this?'' ''The Missouri River Commission has recommended 

it,'' I was told. ''On what ground?'' I inquired. ''Well, they thought 

if the money was expended at those points it would be thrown away." 

"Well," I said, "the chances are that the whole of it if thrown into 

the Missouri River between Kansas City and the mouth will be thrown 

away also." What right had they to sit and speculate as to whether 

the money would be thrown away, when it was appropriated for the improvement of the river, Congress even designating the points at which 

the money should be expended? Then it was suggested that this was to be expended like money appropriated to be used under the direction 

of th~ Mississippi River Commission. But there is a vast difference between the authority given to the Mississippi _River Commission and to 

the Missouri River Commission. However absolute the authority of the 

former may be, and was intended to be by Congress, such great powers were not given to the Missouri River Commission, nor were they intended to be. The Missouri River Commission is under the· control and 

direction of the Secretary oTWar, and his attention probably not being 

called to that fact, he felt it to be his duty to approve in form its action 

whether he really in his own judgment approved of it or not, and to 

give the approval of his office to whatever the commission might suggest or recommend. 

If this order is carried out, it will be an ignoring of the direction of 

Congress and a denial of ita authority. The engineers are directed 

to continue the work. That direction is as emphatic as is the appropriation of the money for the improvement of the river. It is for continuing the work at the points designated, for the necessary improvements 

there, and the only jurisdiction of the commission is to say how far it 

may be necessary to go, and how much money it isneedul to expend in 

doing what Congress has directed to be done. 

Mr. President, I have offered this resolution, not in any spirit of captiousness or fault-finding with the Secretary of War, but to test the 

question whether a commission or any other department of this Government, after Congress, having the law-making power, has appropriated 

money and designated the manner of its expenditure, shall have it in 

its discretion to thus arbitrarily repeal an act of Congress. 

Mr. PLUMB. Mr. President1\fr. CULLOM. I rise to make a conference report. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Kansas [Mr. 

PLUMB] has the floor. 

Mr. PLUMB. Does the Senator from Illinois want to call up his 

report now? 

Mr. CULLOM. Not to call it up at this time. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair will receive the conference 

report. · INTERSTATE CmiMERCE. 

Mr. CULLQM. Mr. President, during the last days of the last ses- sion of Congress a conference was appointed by the two Houses upon 

the bill (S. 1532) to regulate commerce. The conferees on the part of 

the Senate have instructed me to make a report, which I send to the 

desk. 

The PRESIDENT pro tmnpm·e. The conference report will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the House of Representatives to the bill (8.1532) to reg·· late commerce having met, after full and free conference, have agreed to recommend, 

and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows- · 

Mr. CULLOM. The conferees report an amendment to the Senate 

bill in the nature of a substitute, and, as the Senate will remember, the 

bill is a pretty long one, and as it is not my purpose to ask the Senate 

to vote upon it to-day, because I think it is due to the Senate that every 

· member should have an opportunity of seeing what it is, I do not know 

that it is necessary to have it read. I ask, therefore, that the report be 

printed and laid upon the table for action hereafter. 

Mr. ALDRICH. I would like to suggest to the chairman of the 

committee that as this is an important bill, and contains important 

provisions affecting vast material interests which have never been con- sidered by the Senate, a day certain be fixed for it-s consideration after 

the holiday recess. Mr. HOAR. I hope the Senator from Illinois will not call it up before the holidays. _ :Mr. CULLOM. It is my purpose to ask that the report be printed, as it is in the ·nature of a new bill, laid upon the table, and then to 

call it up on J.Ionday or Tuesday of next week. It may be possible, if 

it is desired on the part of the Senate to discuss it at length, that it 

may go over the holidays; I do not know how that may be. I hope 

not, but I am perfectly willing to give fair opportunity for discussion, as the Senate has a right to it whether I were willing or not, but I 

hope no Senator will insist upon a motion to postpone until after the 

holidays. 

Mr. HOAR. The Senator will allow me to make a suggestion to him. 

This is a matter in which my constituency as that of every other Senator-there is nothing peculiar in my condition-has a very deep interest 

indeed, and it is a bill containing, as I nnderstac.-d, a new scheme in 

part, which demands not only profound study on the part of the legislators who are to vote upon it, but also demands that tne business interests of the country should have an opportunity to see it and to make 

their communications to their representatives here, because everybody 

kno"\fs that this is peculiarly one of those cases in which the suggestions that will be made by pra-ctical business men will be extremely 

instructive to legislators. Next week is a time when the holidays are likely to begin, and a day or two before those holidays is always a bad 

time for the consideration of important measures. I hope the Senator will now, in order to save any trouble, get the Senate to agree that 

this measure may be assigned for the second day after the holidays. 

Then .we shall be sure of what is going to happen. 

Mr. CULLOM. I do not know that Congress is going to have any 

holidays, so far as an adjournment is considered. All I desire now is 

to have this report laid upon the table and printed. It is within tho 

power of the Senate to postpone the consideration of it, if it desires to 

do so, until the :first part of next-week, when I shall seek to call it up. 

I think that the probability is that, if there is a desire for discussion, 

it may then go over further, but I would prefer not to agree to that at this 

time. I desire to add to my motion that the report be printed; also 

that the Senate bill, as it passed the Senate, shall be printed with the 

amendment proposed by the conference committee to the Senate bill 

in italics, so that every Senator can see exactly what changes are proposed in the Senate bill. 

Mr. HARRIS. I desire to suggest to my colleague on the committee that he give notice at this time, the bill being printed as it will be 

under the order of the Senate made this morning, "that on Monday next 

he will call up the report. Of course a majority of the Senate will determine then whether it will consider it or not; but I think that will 

give ample time to every Senator to examine the report, examine the 

bill, and be prepared to act npon it as well then as at any later day. 

Mr. CULLOM. That is my purpose. 

1\Ir. PLATT. Mr. President, as this reportMr. CULL01ti. 1\Iy present motion is that this report be printed 

and· that the Senate bill as passed by the Senate be also printed again, 

with the amendments proposed in italics, so that every Senator can see exactly the changes made in the Senate bill. I desire that motion to 

be acted upon by the Senate, after which I shall ask the indulgence of 

the Senate simply to make a statement of fact as to the changes in the 

bill. 

The PRESIDENT pro temp01·e. The Senator will have to make his 

statement before that action is taken, or otherwise, t,he report being 

laid on the table, it would not be debatable. 

Mr. ALLISON. I wish to make a suggestion to the Senator from 

Illinois respecting the printing of this bill and report. - I think the Senate is entitled to each successive step respecting this 

important matter, and that the :first thing. to be printed is the Senate 

bill, and that then the amendment the other House made, a single 

amendment to that bill, should be printed, and then the Senate bill 

should be printed wibh each and every amendment proposed by the 

conference committee, these amendments being in capital letters, so that we may not make a mistake in respect to what the conference com- mittee propose. In that way we shall have the text of the original 

bill, the amendment of the House in italics, and the Senate bill with 

the amendments proposed by the conference committee in capital letters. 

Then let us also have the substitute by itself, so that we may know exactly how the bill will read if passed as reported by the conference 

committee. 

Mr. CULLOM. In answer to the Senator's suggestion I will say that 

there is very little in the proposed_bill that is the.language of any part 

of the Honse bill. 

Mr. ALLISON. Very well. 

Mr. CULLOM. I am not able to seemyselfthatwe should get very 

much information by printing in any particular form the Senate bill as 

it passed the Senate, and then the House bill as jt passed the House, or the substitute for the Senate bill now reported. 1\Iy judgment is that 

Senators will be able to know all about the changes that occur by 
170 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. .DECEMBER 15, 

- printing tbe Senate bill as it passed and then the proposed amendments 

of the conference committee in italics. 

I suggest to the Senator that printing in capital letters, as I understand from some gentlemen who knctw something abou_t printing, 

would probably be a diffieult matter to do. Hence I think it is not 

necessary to have it printed in capitals because italics will answer just as welL 

lt1r. ALLISON. Very well. I do not care about that; I presume 

capital letters are scarce; but I think in connection with this bill we want the House measure printed -in some fon:U. 

.Mr. CULLOM. I have no objection to that. 

Mr. ALLISON. That may be done by way of a supplement if you 

please. 

Mr. CULLOM:. I do not want so much printed that yon will never :find out what is before you. 

Mr. ALLISON. Verywell. 

Mr. CULLOM. Before action on trlY motion, I desire to make a statement of the changes in the bilL The 1ollowing is a statement of the 

changes in the bill as passed by the Senate which have been agreed to 

and are recommended by the committee of conference: 

Section 1 is Amended by inserting the words ''or the District of Columbia" after the words u United States" where they occnr in lines 

8 and 9, to make it plain that the act will apply to n-ansportation between the States and Territories and the District of Columbia, as well as between the States and Territories. 

I am making this statement that Senators :ma.y from the RECORD 

immediately get an idea of the changes that are proposed; and hence I 

ask their attention. 

The term "railroad" is defined in this section, beginning with line 

24, ~ including '' all bridges &nd ferries used or operated in connection 

with any railroad;" and to these words the following have been added: 

".And al&> all the road in use by any corporation operating a railroad, 

whetiber owned or operated under a contract, agreement, or lease." 

Sections 2, 3, and 4 of the Senate bill, prohibiting discriminations, 

contained provisions in relation to the recovery of damages. These 

have been stricken out of said sections. and have been grouped together 

in one section, which is made section 8 of the committee bilL Except as to this rearnmgement, subatantially the only change made has 

been the addition of the provision of the House bill that" a reasonable 

eonnsel or attorney's fee" shall be allowed by the court in every case of the recovery of damages. The parts of said sections which a-re stricken 

out in consequen~ of the rearrangement referred to are all of section 2 

after the word ''unlawful,'' in line 13, all of section 3 after the word 

" business," in line 18, and lines 23 to 27, both inclusive, in section 4. 

No other change is made in section 2. 

Section 3 is also amended by striking out the words ''and proper,'' 

in line 12, :md substituting therefor the words ''proper and equal, '' so 

ns to require railroads to afford "equal" as well as ''reasonable and 

proper'' faeili ties to connecting roads for the interchange of traffic. Also, 

by striking out the words ''but no such common carrier shall be re- quired to give the use of its tracks or terminal faeilities to another car- rier .engaged in like business," and by substituting therefor the following: ''And .shall not discriminate in their rates and charges between 

such ronneeting lines; but this shall not be construed as requiring any 

such common carrier to give the use of its tracks or terminal facilities 

to another carrier engaged in like business.'' 

Section 4 of the Senate bill is amended by striking out the words 

"and from the same original point of departure or to the same point 

of aiTival," in lines 7 and 8, and inserting in lieu thereof the words 

"the shorter being included within the longer distance; " also, by inserting after the words "in special cases," in line 13, the words "after 

inv-estigation by the commission." 

This section is further amended by striking out the following words 

in relation to the power of the commission to suspend the operation of 

the section, beginning in line 16: 

Make general rules exempting such designated common carrier in such special cases from the operation of this section of this act; and when such excep- tions shall have been made and published, they shall, until changed by tho 

commission or by la.w, have like force and effect as though the same bad been 

specified in this section. 

And by substituting therefor the following words: 

Prescribe the extent to wbi.ch such designated common carrier may be l'elieved from the operation of this section of this act. 

Section 19, requiring au immediate investigation by the COIQ.mission 

of the necessity of legislation upon the subject of pooling, has been 

stricken out, and section 5 of the committee bill contains the provision 

of the House bill prohibiting pooling, with some modifications of the 

language. 

Section 5 of the Senate bill has been replaced by section 6 of the com- mittee bill, which combines most of the provisions of the Senate and 

House billi upon the subject of publicity of rates. Section 5 made it· the duty of the commission to secure publicity of rates as far as might 

be found practicable;. not only the rates between points on each railroad, but rates over connecting lines as welL The new section re- quires each railroad to make public the rates between points upon its 

own line, and in addition the commission is directed to secure publicity 

of rates over connecting lines so far as may be found practicable. 

Section 9 of the committee bill is an addition tQ the Senate bill, and 

provides that persons claiming to be damaged by the vioL'\tion of the 

act by any common carrier may either llll\ke complaint to the com- mission as provided in the Sena.te bill, or may institute suits for the 

recovery of damages in their own behalf in the district or circuit courts 

of the United States. 

For section 7 of the Senate bill, providing for the criminal penalty, 

section 10 of the committee bill has been substituted, which, though. 

in different terms, is Sllbstantially the same in effect. 

Section 8 of the Senn.te bill has been changed so as to provide that 

the terms of the commissioners first appointed shall run for two, three, 

four, :five, and six years, respectively, from January 1, 1887, without 

regard to the time of their appointment. 

Section 9 of the Senate bill is amended by n.dding to the provisions 

for compelling officers of railroads to testify, when summoned by the 

commission, the following: 

The claim that any such testimony or evidence may t-end to criminate the per- son giving such evidence shall not excuse such witness from testifying; but 

such evidence or testimony shall not be used against such person on the trial· of any criminal proceeding. 

Section 15 of the Senate bill is amended by making the words "all 

necessary traveling expenses," in line 16, read as follows: "all neces7 

sary expenses for transportation.'' 

Nine· sections of the Senate bill have not been changed in any respect, 

except as to the numbering, namely: Sections 6, 10, 11, 12,13, 14, 16, 

17, and 18. 

s~ction 20 of the Senate bill has been amended by inserting the following after the word "religion" in line 8: ' 

Nothing in this act shall be construed to prevent railroads from giving free 

CIUTiage to their officers and employM, or to prevent the principal officers or any ra.ilroad company or companies from exchanging po.sses or tickets with 

other railroad compa-nies for their officers an.d employes. 

Also, by striking ont all after line 9, and su.bstituting therefor the 

following: 

Exi ting at common law or by statute, but th-e provisions or this act are in 

o.ddition to such remedies: Pro1Jided, That no pending legislation shall in any 

way be affected by this act. · 

The following has been added as a new section: 

SEC. 24.. That the provisions of sections 11 and 18 of this net, relating to the ap- pointment and organization of the commission herein provided for, shall take 

effect immediately,· and the remaining provisions of this act shall take effect 

sixty days after its passage. 

This statement I have deemed it proper to make to go into the REcORD, so that if Senators desire to look at it, so as to ascertain what 

changes have been made from the Senate bill, it mo.y be some help to 

them in determining what they are. I yield now to the Senator from 

Connecticut. 

ltfr. PLATT. Mr. President, as the report of the conference committee was not fully read, even the concluding formal part of it being omitted in the reading, the Senate was not informe<l by the reading of the 

report that I did not concur by my signature in the conclusions at which 

the conierees arrived. It is therefore, perhaps, proper that I should say 

at this time that I was unable to bring my mind to the signature of this 

report, and it is also perhaps fair that I should state, to some extent, 

the ground upon which I withheld my signature. 

I think I should, though with great reluctance, have consented to all 

the provisions and recommendations of the report but one. I should 

have bad great reluctance in subscribing to tb.e recommendation for the 

change of the Senate provision relating to short hauls and long hauls; 

but if it had been necessary to get an agreement I think I would not 

have withheld my assent to that change. But I was unable to. agree 

to the surrender of the provision in the Senate bill directing the com- mission, when it should be appointed, to make an immediate investigation of what is known as pooling between railroads and to report their 

conclusions and recommendations thereupon to Congress, and substitute 

therefor the absolute prohibition under penalties of a thousand dollars a day for non-compliance, with the provision which was contained in 

the House bill or the House amendment to the Senate bill. 

I do not at this time deem it necessary to give at length the reasons which made it impossible for me to assent to this recommendation of 

the committee of conference. If the matter should be discussed, as I 

suppose it will be in the future, I should hope to be able to satisfy the 

Senate that those reasons were weighty, and that they were such as fully justified me in the somewhat unusual course of withholding my 

signature t.o the report of the conference committee. 

I will say now, however, that I think the public prejudice, if there 

be one, existing against pooling by railroads is largely the result of 

ignorance on the part of the po.blic as tow h:1t railroad pools really are. 

The Senator from Vermont [Mr. EDMUNDS] suggests "want of information." I do not know that the public is ever ignorant, but I do 

believe that there exists a very great deal of misapprehension in the 

public mind as to the nature, the effect, the result upon the general 

welfure of the country of pooli.ug contracts between railroads; and I 

believe, as I thought the Senate believed, that the bill as it was pas ed 

by the Senate was calculated to cure whatever evils had grown out of 
1886. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 171 

the y.stem of railroad pooling, so that before tho :report <>f the oommis- . Ir. fcPHERSON. I .should like to offer a l'esolntion asking for 

sion· which was provided for in the Senate bill upon this .su.bjeet :shfinid papers. 

be made, the people w-ould have become convinced that the evils which The PRESIDENT pro tempont. This quf!Siion has not yet been disthey supposed to restilt from the pooling of freights by railroads were posed of. 

either imaginary or bad been cured by the operation of the bill which Mr. CULLOli, I hope it will be disposed of before' other business W:lB passed by the Senate. , is recei vetl. 

1 was not unmindful of the fact that all interstate commerce, so far Mr. SABIN.- I desire to supplement the request and the srotements as relates to freight, is to-day transacted under pooling arrangements of the Senator from Massaclmsetts and the Senn.-tor from Rhode Isla.n.d 

by the ;railroads, and that an absolure prohibition of pooling was to in reference to this bill, and I appe.1:l ro thechaionan of the committee 

break up at once, or, as the bill now reads, within sixty days after its to consent to the setting of a day :aftru: the recess, and that that day 

passage, e•ery arrangement by which the interstate commerce business shall not be fixed .sooner than at least fom o:r .five days or a week after 

of this country is :at present conducted. It seemed to me, with my the proposed recess of Congress. It will be impossible for me to be 

knowledge of the history of the management of railroads, and with my present here on Monday next, the day which he suggests, or to be presknowledge .of legislation upon this subject, that the resnlii wonld be":an ent from that day u:ntil.after the recess; and I presume there is not a. immediate mte-war by .aU the railroads of the United States. At least constituency in this country that has more vital interests at stake in 

that was my apprehension, and I believed 'that the -evils an_d conse- th~ provisions of this bill than the constituency in Minnesota which I 

quences which would result from that would be very mnch greater in have the hono:r in part to represent. I have already been flooded with 

their injurious effects upon the public, upon the pr~perityof the coun- telegrams from shippem and ear.riem a:Sk:ing for copies of the report of 

try, than any evils which now exist by reason 'Of what are k:rulwn as the oonference committee. IexJI8clto see a number of those interested 

pooling contracts. parties 'llpon my risit to my .home during the recess, and I wish to con- I do not desire to .say more at this time. fer ith them in :reference w the provisi~ns agreed on by the conferMr. CULLOU.. Mr. President, I did not expect to say anything on ' ence co.mmittee. There probably has not been a bill before Congress 

tlle general subject of the bill, and I shall only add a word to what has for many years that has elicited a warmer and deeper interest from the 

been stated. business interests of the eountry than the bill which it is proposed to 

I think that my coll~ooue on the committee is probably laboring nn- consider at tbe time that may, be fixed. 

oer unduefearofthe consequencesofthe passa.geofthisbill ona.cconnt I appeal .again to the cbairman to :fix a day; a.nd make it at least a. 

of the prohibition of pooling. One of the purposes of the bill itself by week after the reassembling of Congress on the expiration of the prOtrequiring publicity of rat-es and preventing change of rates t9 a higher posed holiday reooss, which I presume will be taken. 

schedule, excepb on ten days' notice, is to bring about that stability of Mr. CULLOM. There is only one motion before the Senate, !tfr. 

rates whicll the railroad companies themselves are .appealing tons to President, and tha~ is to lay on the table and print. 

have brought .about, because under the system of :pooling they have The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Illinois moYes 

not been able to bring it about. that the report of the committee of conference be printed with the bill 

So, in my judgment, the apprehension -of the senator from Connecti- <Of the Sen"3.te, the amendment of the House, and the amendments now eut that it is going to be injnrious to the business of the country will reported by the oonferen.ee committee, in the order named, and that 

prove to be unfonru:led; at least I hope tmd I believe so~ I think every the report lie on the table. . _ Senator will bear me out in saying that I have not been ili8posed to 11~ M:o~ULLAN. What number of oopies will be printed under 

coment to anything going into this bill t-hat was nnreasonn.ble, at least the general motion? 

in my own judgment. .As I said a moment ago, I would not have The PRESIDENT pr<> tempore. The question is on the motion of 

consented to the provision of the bill prohibiting pooling if I believed the Senator from Illinois [1\lr. Cmo.:u]. 

that it would bring upon the country that sort of trouble hich the The motion was agreed to. ' 

Senator from Connecticut indicates that he apprehends. Every one Mr. CULLOM.. I move now tlu'lt 5, 000 eopies of the bill as reported 

k"Dow that the railroad companies themselves havefinallybeeome roo- from the conference committee be printed for the use of the Senate. oneiled to some DAtional1eg1slation., because they have not been able to Mr. ALDRICH. l·would also suggest that the bill .as reported be 

protect; themselves, one from another, and I think that the provisions printed in the RBCOliD. 

of this bill in relation to publicity, and the other provisions to guard The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Tbe motion ro print the extm copies 

against various wrong-doings .on their part, will have very .great force will be referred to the Committee on Printing. 

and ~ffect in bringing about that sort o( stability which it has been Mr. ALDRICIL I suggest that the bill as amended be printed in 

the DStensible purpose at least <Of pooling to secure. I hope, my- to-morrow morning's RECORD. 

self, that when this bill comes up fo:r consideration we shall. have fuir The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Rhode Island 

consideration of it, fair discussion of it, and I believe that the Senate, moves tbat the bill as .amended bo printed in the RECORD. Is the1·e 

if it is going to :agree to any ibiU at all o.n this so.bject, ought to talu> objection? The Chair hears none1 and that oxder will be made. 

the oonferenee report. ' The ~nferenee report is as follows: 

:Every one knows that this question hns been bandied bout here The <COmmittee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houlres on 

from one Congress to another fo:r many years, and Congress has never -the amendment of the House -of Representatives to the bill {S. I.Sa2) to regulate 

yet done anything on the subject. The Supreme Court of the United .commerce~ having met. after full :and free conference have agreed to recom.- . • "' , _ _ mend. and do reoolllm_end, to their respective Houses as follows: Sta~ Within tue w.::~t two or three months, has made a decision which That the House recede frnm its amendment and agree to the bill of the Senthrows upon Congress the unquestionable duty of legislation regulat- ate, with the following amendment thereto, in the nature of &_Substitute, and 

ing interstate commerce if we believe it ought to have any regulation. that the Senate agree to 'the same: 

While th~ bill is not exactly .as I wanted it, while it is not exactly the AmmD:mmT. 

bill of the Senate, yet except as to .the provision in regard to pooling Strike out an after the enacling clause and insert the following: 

it is pmctieally the Senate bill, and I hope that Benatom when the time Th.at the provisions of this act shall apply to any common carrier or mrriers 

eomes for its consideration will allow the zeport to be concurred;., engaged in th~ transportation of passengers or property wholly by railroad, .a-u. or partly by railroad and partly by wat~r when boilLare used, under a common Mr. ALDRICH. Mr. President, I wish to express my surprise that control, management, f'r ~trrangement, for a. continuous .carriage or shipment, 

the cbai.rman of the committee shotdd refuse to accede to what seems from one State or Temtory of the Umted States, or the District of Coltimbia to any other State or Territory of the United States, or the District of Columbia' or to me the reasonable request of Senatms, that this bill may go over and from anyplace in the United States to an Adjacent foreign country, or from ,ky be set down for a day certain after the coming recess. place in the United States through a. foreign country to any. other place in fue 

The proposition of the chairman of the committee is thls, that this United States, and also tot~ transport-alion in like DllUltler of property shipped 

bill shall be print..v! which will take at least until Friday, and then from any place in the United States to a foreign .country a.nd carried from such vu., vaee to a portoftra.ru!shipment, or shipped from a for~ign country t.o anyplace he proposes to call it up on Monday, hich will give Senafurs one day 1n the United States and carried to such pl!lCe from a. port of entry either in the 

to understand the elaborate and complex provisions of a bill affecting United States or an adja.cent foreign country: Provided, lwwewr, That the proeveTV -ru~rson in the United States. It will rrive us twenty-'h.,,. hours visioll8 of thls act shall not apply to the transportation of passengers or prop- -., r~ o-- ~· ...... erty, or ·to the receiving, delivering, stomge, or handling of property, wholly to consider the bilL within •One State, and not shipped to or from a. foreign country from or to a11y 

I do not propose 11<t this time to discuss the bill, but I will .say that State or Territory as aforesaid. 

so fur as I understand the report its egsential promo-1-.ns are .SU"has·n·e· The term" railroad" as llSed in this act shall include all bridges and Ce:rries • '"'u.~ " ltll! nsed or operated in connection with any railroad, and also all the road in use Senate has refused to accede to, or they are propositions which have by any corporation operating a railroad, whether owned or operated under n. 

never been discussed in the Senate at all That beine:trnA it seems t.o contmct, agreement, or lease; and the term "transportation" shall include all 

hat . ~ . n h ~ -..., iustrwnentalities of shipment or carriage. me t m Jalrness to a t e interests concerned the chairman of the All chuges made for any servioe rendered or to be rendered in the transporcommittee should assent to having the bill set down for a day ~rtain tation of passengers or property as aforesaid, or in connection therewith. or for 

after the recess. As the Senator from Massachusetts has verywellsug- thereceiving.delivery.storage,orhandlingofsnchproperty.shall be reasonable 

gested there are a great many important interests to be considered. the :~~A~~~ t!vbery~~~~nreasonable charge for such service is prohibited 

representatives of those interests should have -a right to see this bill in S:oo. 2. That if any common carrier 8llbject to the provisions of this act shall, 

print more thaa twenty-four hours, as well as themembel:S of Congress directly or indirectly, by any special m~. rebate, drawback. or other device, 

be1i lLetl . ' charge, demand, collect, or receive from any person Qr persons a. greater or less ore we areca upon to vote on It. • compensation for a.ny service rendered, or oo be rendered, in the transportation 

Of cou.nre, I ha.~e no control over the action of the chairman of the of pa.sBINlgers or property, subject to the provisions of this act, than it charges, 

committee, but it seems to me tha.t he shotdd not .show what it !Seems ' demands. collects, or receives from any other person or persons for rloing for 

to • d .... __ • him Ol' them a like and oontempo.raneousservice in thetmnsportationofa like m~ IS nn · ue ~te 1n. a. matter of this importance. kind of traJti.e nnder substantially similar circumstances and conditions, such 
172 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. DECEMBER 15, 

common carrier shall be deemed gnllty of unjust discrimination, which is hereby 

prohibited and declared to be unlawful. 

SEC. 3. That it shall be unlawful for any common carrier subject to the pro- visions of this act to make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person, company, firm, corporation, or locality, or any particular description of traffic, in any respect whatsoever, or to subject any particular person, company, firm, corporation, or locality, or any particular 

description of traffic, to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage 

in any respect whatsoever. · Every common carrier subject to the provisions of this act shall, according to their respective powers, afford all reasonable, proper, and equal faci1ities for 

the interchange of traffic between their respective lines, and for the receiving, forwarding, and deliveringofpassengersa.nd property to and from their several 

lines and those connecting therewith, and shall not discriminate in their rates and charges between such-connecting lines; but this shall not be construed as requiring any such common carrier to give the use of its tracks or terminal 

facilities to another carrier engaged in like business. 

SEc. 4. That it shall be unlawful for any common qarrier subject to the pro- visions of this act to charge or receive any greater compensation in the aggre- gate for the transportation of passengers or of like kind of property, under 

substantially similar circumstances and conditions, for a shorter than for a longer 

distance over the same line, in t.he same direction, the shorter being included 

within the longer distance; but this shall not be construed as authorizing any common carrier within the t~rms of this act to charge and receive as great com- pensation for a shorter as for a lon~er distance: Provided, however, That upon application to the commission appomted under the provisions of this act such common carrier may, in special cases, after investigation by the commission, 

be authorized to charge less for longer than for shorter distances for the trans- portation of passengers or property; and the commission may from time to time 

prescribe the extent to which such designated common carrier may be relieved 

from the operation of this section of this act. . • SEC. 5. That it shall be unlawful for any common carrier subject to the pro- :'\risions of this act to enter into any contract, agreement, or combination with any other common carrier or carriers for the pooling of freights of different 

and competing railroads, or to divide between them the aggregate or net pro- ceeds of the earnings of such railroads, or any portion thereof; and in any case of an agreement for the pooling of freights as aforesaid, ea-ch day of its contin- uance shall oo deemed a separate offense. . SEc. 6. That every common carrier subject to the provisions of this act shall 

print and keep for public inspection schedules showing the rates and fares and 

charges for t.he transportation of passengers and property which any such com- mon carrier has established and which are in force at the time upon its railroad, as defined by the first section of this act. The schedules printed as aforesaid by any such common carrier shall plainly state the place11 upon its railroad be- tween which property and passengers will be carried, and shall contain the 

classification of freight in force upon such railroad, and shall-also state sepa- rately the terminal charges and any rules or regulations which in any wise - change, affect, or determine any part of the aggregate of such aforesaid rates and 

fares and charges. Such schedules shall be plainly printed in large type, of at least the size of ordinary pica, and copies for the use of the public shall be kept 

in every depot or station upon any such railroad, in such places and in such 

form that they can be conveniently inspected. - A.ny common carrier subject to the provisions of this act receiving frei~ht in 

the United St.a.t.es to be carried through a foreign country to any place m the Unit~d States shall also in like manner ~rint and keep for public inspection, at every depot where such freight is received for shipment, schedules showing 

the through rates established and charged by such common carrier to all points 

in the United States ooyond the foreign country to which it accepts freight for 

shipment; and any freight shipped from the United States through a foreign 

country into the United States, the through rate on which shall not have been 

made public as required by this act, shall, before it is admitted into the United 

States from said foreign country, oo subject to customs duties as if said freight were of foreign production; and any law in conflict with this section is hereby 

repealed. 

· No advance shall oo made in the rates, fares, and charges which have been 

established and published as aforesaid by any common carrier in compliance with 

the requirements of this section, exceptaftertendays' public notice, which shall 

plainly state the changes proposed to be made in the schedule then in force, and 

the \ime when the increased rates fares, or charges will go into effect; and the 

proposed changes shall be shown by printing new schedules, or shall be plainly 

indicated upon the schedules in force at the time and kept for public inspection. · Reductions in such published rates, fares, or charges may be made without 

previous public notice; but whenever any such reduction is made, notice of the same shall immediately be publicly posted and the changes made shall immediately be made public by printing new schedules, or shall immediately be plainly indicated upon the schedules at the time in force and kept for public inspection. . A.nd when any such common carrier shall have established and published its 

rates, fares, and charges, in compliance with the provisions of this section, it 

shall be unlawful for such common carrier to charge, demand, collect, or receive 

from any person or persons a greater or less compensation for the transportation 

of passengers or property, or for any services in connection therewith, than is 

sl)Ccitied in such published schedule of rates, fares, and charges as may at the 

time be in force. · Every common carrier subject to the provisions of this act shall tile with the 

commission. hereinafter provided for copies of its schedules of rates, faresJ and 

charges which have been esta_blished and published in compliance witn the 

requirements of this section~nd shall promptly notify said commission of all 

changes made in the same. '· ~very such common carrier shall also file with said 

commission copies of all contracts, agreements, or arrangements with other common carriers in relation to any traffic affected by the provisions of this act to which it may be a party. A.nd in cases where passengers and freight pass over continuous lines or routes operated by more than one common carrier, 

.and the several common carriers operating such lines or routes establish 

loint tariffs of rates or fares or charges for such continuous lines or routes, 

copies of such joint tariffs shall also, in like manner, be filed with said com- mission. Such joint rates, fares, and charges on such continuous lines so tiled as aforesaid shall be made public by such common carriers when directed by 

said coq~.mission, in so far as may, in the judgment of the commissio~t be deemed 

practicable; and said commission shall from time to time prescribe tne measure of publicit.y which shall be given to such rates, fares, and charges, or to such 

part of them as it may deem it practicable for such common carriers to publish, 

and the places in which they shall be published; but no common carrier party to any such joint tariff shall be liable for the failure of any other common car- l'ier party thereto to observe and adhere to the rates, fares, or charges thus made 

and published. 

If any such common carrier shall neglect or refuse to tile or publish its 

schedules or tariffs of rates, fares, and charges as provided in this section, or any part of the same, such common carrier shall, in addition to other penalties 

~~~~n~cg~I~Jst!~l~~ !;:ea.j~d\~~ ~~:~1!~~~~i~e.,ts!~~1n~paa~~:il:n~~ said common carrier is situated or wherein such offense may be committed, 

and if such common carrier be a foreign corporation, in the judicial circuit 

wherein such common carrier accepts traffic and has an agent to perform such 

service, to compel compliance with the aforesaid provisions of this section; 

and such writ shall issue in the name of the people of the United States, at the 

relation of the commissionei'S appointed under the provisions of this act; .and 

failure to comply with its requirements shall be punishable as and for a con- tempt; and the said commissioners, as complainants, may also apply, in any such circuit court of the United States, for a writ of injunction against such common carrier, to restrain such common carrier from receiving or transporting 

property among the several States and Territories of the United States, or be- tween the United States and adjacent foreign· countries, or between ports of 

transshipment and of entry and the several States and Territories of the United 

States, a.s mentioned in the first section of this act, until such common carrier 

shall have complied with the aforesaid provisions of this section of this act. SEC. 7. That it shall be unlawful for any common carrier subject to the pro- visions of this act to enter into any combination, contract, or agreement, ex• pressed or implied, to prevent, by change of time schedule, carriage in different cars, or by other ineans or devices, the earriage of freights from being continuous 

from the place of shipment to the place of destination; and no break of bulk, 

stoppage, or interruption made by such common carrier shall prevent the car- riage of freights from being and being treated as one continuous carriage from th~ place of.shipment to th;e place of. destination, unless such break, stoppage, or mterrupt1on was made m good fatt-h for some necessary purpose, anc:\ with- out any -intent to avoid or unnecessarily interrupt. such continuous carriage or to evade any of the provisions of this act. SEc. 8. That in case any common carrier subject to the provisions of this act shall do, cause to be done, or permit to be done any act, matter, or t.hing in this act prohibited or declared to be unlawful, or shall omit to do any act, matter, or t-hing in this a-ct required to be done, such common carrier shall be liable to the person or persons injured thereby for the full amount of damages sustained in consequence of any such violation of the provisions of this net, together with a reasonable counsel or attorney's fee, to be fixed by the court in every case of re.- covery, whick attorney's fee shall be taxed and collected as part of the costs in 

the case. 

SEc. 9. That any person or persons claiming to be damaged by any common carrier subject to the provisions of this act may either make complaint to the 

commission as hereinafter provided for, or may bring suit in his or their own behalf for the recovery of the damages fot· which such common carrier may be liable under the provisions of this act, in any district or circuit court of 

the United States of competent jurisdiction; bnt such person or persons shall not have the right to pursue both of said remedies, and must in each case elect 

which one of the two methods of procedure herein provided for he or they will 

adopt. In any such action brought for the recovery of damage!! the court before which the !'lame shall be pending may compel any director, officer, receiver, 

trustee, or agent of the ·corporation or company defendant in such suit to attend, appear, and testify in such case, and may compel the production of the 

books and papers of such corporation or company party to any such suit; the 

claim that any such testimony or evidence may tend to criminate the person giving such evidence shall not excuse such witness from testifying, but such 

evidence or testimony shall not be used againt such person on the trial of any criminal proceeding. 

SEC. 10. That any common carrier subject to the provisions of this act, or, when- ever such common carrier is a corporation, any director or officer thereof, or any receiver, trustee, lessee, agent, or person acting for or employed by such cor. poration, who, alone or with any other corporation1 company, person, or party, shall willfully do or cause t-o be done, or shall willingly suffer or permit to be 

done, any act, matter, or thing in this act prohibited or declared to be unlaw- .ful, or who shall aid or abet therein, or shall willfully omit or fall to do any act, matter, or thing in this act required io be done, or shall cause or willingly 

suffer or permit any act, matt~r, or thing so directed or required by this act to be done not to be so done, or shall aid or abet any such omission or failure or shall be guilty of any infraction of this act, or shall aid or abet therein, shali be 

deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall, upon conviction thereof in any district court of the United States within the jurisdiction of which such offense was committed, be subject to a fine of not to exceed 85,000 for each offense. 

SEc. 11. That a commission is hereby created and established1 t-o be known· as the interstate commerce commission, which shall be composeaoffivecommissioners, who shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. The commissioners first appointed under this act shall 

continue in office for the term of two. three, four, five, and six years, respectively, from the 1st day of January, A.. D. 1887, the term of each to be designated by the 

President; but their successors shall be appointed for terms of six years, except 

that any person chosen to till a vacancy shall pe appointed only for the unex- pired term of the commissioner whom he shall succeed. Any commissioner may be removed by the President for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance 

in office. Not more than three of the commissioners shall be appointed from 

the same political party. No person in the employ of, or holding any official 

relation to, any common carrier subject to the provisions ofthis act, or owning 

stock or bonds thereof, or who is in any way pecuniarily interested therein, shall enter upon the duties of or hold such office. Said commissioners shall not enga~e 

in any other business, vocation or employment. No vacancy in the comml.Ssion shall impair the right of the remaiiling commissioners t-o exercise all the powers of the commission. 

SEc.12. That the commission hereby created shall have authority to inquire 

into the management of the business of all common carriers subject to the pro- visions of this act, nnd shall keep itself informed as to the manner and method 

in which the same is conducted, and shall have the right to obtain from such common carriers full and complete information necessary to enable the com- mission to perform the duties and carry out the objects for which it was created; 

and for the purposes of this act the commission shall have power to require the 

attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of all books, pape.rs, tariffs, contracts, agreements, and documents relating to any matter under investigation, and to that end may invoke the aid of any court of the United 

States in requiring the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the produc- tion of books, papers, and documents under the provisions of this section. 

And any of the circuit courts of the United States within the jurisdiction of 

which such inquiry is carried on may, in case of contumacy or refusal to obey a subprena issued to any common carrier subject to the provisions of this act, or other person, issue an order requiring such common carrier or other person to appear before said commission (and .produce books and papers if so ordered) 

and give evidence touching the matter m question; and any failure to obey such 

order of the court may be punished by such court as a <'.Ontem~t thereof. The 

claim that any such testimony or evidence may tend to crim.1nate the person giving such evidence shall not excuse such witness from testifying; but such 

evidence or testimony shall not be used against such person on the trial of any criminal proceeding. 

SEc.l3. That any person, firm, corporation, or association, or any mercantile, 

agricultural, or manufacturing society, or any body politic or municipal organ- ization, complaining of anything done or omitted to be done by any common carrier subject to the provisions of this act in contravention of t-he provisions 

thereof, may apply to said commission by petition, which shall briefly state the 

facts; whereupon a statement of the charges thus made shall be forwarded by the commission to such common carrier, who shall be called upon to satisfy the 

complaint or to answer the same in writing within a reasonable time, to be 

:E!li~!kbt r~~~~fu:~!~b:e ~~':;~k';!i~ h!~!eb"e:;;~~~:.h~f~~~::~~~ifi be relieved of liability to the complainant only for the particular violation of law 

thus complained of. If such carrier shall not satisfy the complaint within the 
1886. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE. 173 

time specified, or there shall appear to be any reasonable ground for investigating said complaint, it shall be the duty of the commission to investigate the mat- ters complained of in such manner and by such means as it shall deem proper. Said commission shall in like manner investigate any complaint forwarded 

by the railroad commissioner or railroad commission of any State or Territory, at the requ~st of such commissioner or commission, and may institute any inquiry on its own motion in the same manner and to the same effect as though 

complaint bad been made. · No complaint shall at any time be dismissed because of the absence of direct 

damage to the complainant. 

SEC. 14. That whenever an investigation sba.ll be made by said commission, H shall be its duty to make a report in writing in respect thereto, which shall 

include the findings of fact upon which the conclusions of the commission are based, together with its recommendation as to what reparation, if any, should be made by the common carrier to any party or parties who may be found to have been injured; and such findings so made shall thereafter, in all judicial 

proceedings, be deemed prima facie evidence as to each and every fact found. 

All reports of investigations made by the commission shall be entered of rec- ord,and a copy thereof shall be furnished to the party who may have com- plained, and to any common carrier that may have been complained of. 

SEc. 15. That if in any case in wWch an investigation shall be made by said 

commission it shall be made to appear to the satisfaction of the commission, 

either by the testimony of witnesses or other evidence, that anything bas been 

done or omitted to be done in violation of the provisions of this act, or of any law cognizable by said commission, by any common carrier, or that any injury or damage has been sustained by the party or pa.rties complaining, or by other 

parties aggrieved in consequence of any such violation, it shall be the duty of 

the commission to forthwith cause a copy of its report in respect thereto to be 

delh·ered to such common carrier, together with a notice to said common car- rier to cease and desist from such violation, or to make reparation for the injury so found to have been done, or both, within a reasonable time, to be speci- fied by the commission ; an if, within the time specified, it shall be made to appear to the commission that such common carrier has ceased from such violation of law, and bas made reparation for the injury found to have been done, 

in compliance with the report and notice of the commission, or to the satisfaction of the party complaining; a. statement to that effect shall be entered of rec- ord by the commission, and the said common carrier shall thereupon be relieved 

from further liability or penalty for such particular violation of· law. 

SEC. 16. That whenever any common carrier, as defined in and subject to the 

provisions of this act, shall violate or refuse.or neglect to obey any lawful order or requirement of the commission in this a{lt named, it shall be the duty of the . commission, and lawful for any company or person interested in such order or requirement, to a:pply, in a summary way, by petition, to the circuit court of the 

United States sittmg in equity in the judicial district in which the common car- rier complained of has its J?rincipal office, or in wWch the violation or disobedi- ence of such order or reqwrement shall happen, allegin~ such violation or disobedience, as the case may be; and the said court shall have power to hear and 

determine the matter, on such short notice to the common· carrier complained 

of as the court shall deem reasonable; and such notice may be served on such common carrier, his or its officers, agents, or servants, in such manner as the court shall direct; and said court sha.ll proceed to bear and determine the mat- ter speedily as a. court of equity and without the formal pleadings and proceedings applicable to ordinary suits in equity, but in such manner as to do justice 

in the premises; and to this end such court shall have power, if it think fit, to direct and prosecute, in such mode and by such persons as it may appoint, all 

such inquiries as the court may think needful to enable it to form a just judg- ment in the matter of such petition; and on such hearing the report of said 

commission shall beprimafaci~ evidence of the matters therein stated; and ifit 

be made to appear to such court, on such hearing or on report of any such person or persons, that the lawful order or requirement of said commission drawn in 

question has been violated or disobeyed, it shall be lawful for such court to issue a writ of injunction or other proper process, mandatory or otherwise, to restrain 

such common carrier from further continuing such violation or disobedience of 

such order or requirement of said commission, and en~oining obedience to the same; and in case of any disobedience of any such wr1t of injunction or other properyrocess, mandatory or otherwise, it shall be lawful for such court to issue 

writs o attachment, or any other process of said court incident or applicable to writs ofinj unction or other proper :process, mandatory or otherwise, against such common carrier, and if a corporat1on, against one or more of the directors, officers, or agents of the same, or against any owner, lessee, trustee, receiver, or other person failing to obey such writ of injunction or other proper process, mandatory or otherwise; and said court may, if it shall think fit, make an order 

directing such common carrier or other person so disobeying such writ of injunction or other proper process, mandatory or otherwise, to pay such sum of money not ex.ceedmg for each carrier or person in default the sum of f500 for every day after a. day to be named in the order that such carrier or other per- son shall fail to obey such injunction or other proper process, mandatory or otherwise; and such moneys shall be payable as the court shall direct, either to the party complaining, or into court to abide the ultimate decision of the 

court, or into the Treasury; and payment thereof may, without prejudice to any other mode of recovering the same, be enforced by attachment or order 

in tho nature of a writ of execution, in like manner as if the same had been 

recovered by a. final decree in personam in such court. When the subject in 

dispute shall be of the value of $2,000 or more, either party to such proceeding 

before said court may appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, 

under the same regulations now provided by law in respect of security for 

such appeal; but such appeal shall not operate to stay or supersede the order 

of the court or the execution of any writ or process thereon; and such court may, in every such matter, order the payment of such costs and counsel fees as shall be deemed reasonable. Whenever any such petition shall be filed or pre- sented by the commission it shall be. the duty of the district attorney, under tne dh-ection of the Attorney-General of the United States, to prosecute the same; and the costs and expenses of such prosecution shall be paid out of the appropriation for the expenses of the courts of the United States. For the purposes of 

this act, excepting its penal provisions, the circuit courts of the United States 

shall be deemed to be always in session. 

SEc.l7. That the commission may conduct its proceedings in such manner as will best conduce to the proper dispatch of business and to the ends of justice. A majority of the commissiOn shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of busi- ness, but no commissioner shall participate in any hearing or proceeding in 

which be has any pecuniary interest. Said commission may,fromtimetotime, 

make or amend such general rules or orders as may be requisite for the order - and regulation of proceedings before it, including forms of notices and the.serv- ice thereof, which shall conform, as nearly as may be, to those in use in the courts of the United States. Any party may appear before said commission and 

be heard, in person or by attorney. Every vote and official act of the commission shall be entered of record, and its proceedings shall be public upon therequest of either party interested. Said commission shall have an official seal, 

which shall be judicially noticed. Either of the members of the commission may administer oaths and affirmations. 

SEc. 18. That each commissioner shall receive an annual salary of $7,500, pay- able in the same manner as the salaries of judges of the courts of the United 

Stat-es. The commission shall appoint a. secretary, who shall receive an annual 

salary of $J,500, payable in like manner. The commission shall have authority to employ and tix the compensation of such other employes asH may find necessary to the proper performance of its duties, subject to the approval of the Secretary of the Interior. 

The commission shall be furnished by the Secretary of the Interior with suitable offices and all necessary office supplies. ·witnesses summoned before the ·commission shall be paid the same fees and mileage that are paid witnesses in 

the courts of the United States. All of the expenses of the commission, including all necessary expenses for transportation incurred bythe commissioners, or by 

their employes under their orders, in making any investigation in any other 

places than in the city of Washington, shall be allowed and paid, on the presen- tation of itemized vouchers therefor approved by the chairman of the commission and the Secretary of the Interior. · SEc. 19. That the principal office of the commission shall be in the city of 

Washington, where its general sessions shall be held; but whenever the con- venience of the public or of the parties may be promoted or delay or expense prevented thereby, the commission may hold special sessions in any part of 

the United States. It may, by one or more of the commissioners, prosecute any inquiry necessary to its duties, in any part of the United States, into· any matter or question of fact pertaining to the business of any common carrier 

subject to the provisions of this act. SEC. 20. That the commission is hereby authorized to require annual reports 

from all common carriers subject to the provisions of this act, to fix the time and 

prescribe the manner in which such reports shall be made, and to require from 

such carriers specific answers to all questions upon which the commission may need information. Such annual reports shall show in detail the amount of cap- ital stock issued, the amounts paid therefor, and the manner of payment for 

the same; the dividends paid, the surplus fund, if any, andthenumberofstockholders; the ftmded and floating debts, and the interest paid thereon ; the cost and value of the carrier's property, francWsesr and equipment; the number of 

employes, and the salary paid each class; the amounts expended for improve- ments each year, bow expended, and the character of such improvements; the 

earnings and receipts from each branch of business and from all sources; the 

operating and otbe.r expenses; the balances of profit and loss; and a complete 

exhibit of the financial operations of the carrier each year, including an annual 

balance-sheet. Such reports shall also contain such information in relation to rates or regulatioushconcerning fares or freights, or agreements, arrangements, or contracts with ot er common carriers, as the commission may require: and 

the said commission may, witWn its discretion, for the purpose of enabling it 

the better to carry out the purposes of this act, prescribe (if in the opinion of the· commission it is practicable to prescribe such uniformity and methods of keeping accounts) a. :period of time within which all common carriers subject to the 

provisions ot thl8 act shall have, as near as may be, a uniform system of ac- counts, and the manner in which such accounts shall be kept. , . SEc. 21. Tba.t the commission sl1all, on or before the 1st day of December in 

each year, make a. report to the Secretary of the Interior, wWch shall be by him 

transmitted to Congress and copies of which shall be distributed as are the other 

reports.issued from the knterior Department. This report shall contain such information and data collected by the commission as may be considered of value 

in the determination of questions connected with the regulation of commerce, togethel'wit.hsueh recommendations as to additiona.llegislation relating thereto as the commission may deem necessary. SEc. 22. That nothing in this act shall apply to the carriage, storage, or bandling of property free or at reduced rates for the United States, State, or municipal governments, or for charitable purposes, or to or from fairs and expositions 

for-exhibition thereat, or the issuance of mileage, excursion, or commutation passenger tickets; nothing in this act shall be construed to proWbitany com- mon carrier from giving reduced rates to ministers of religion; nothing in this act shall be construed to prevent railroads from giving free carriage to their own officers and employes, or to prevent the principal officers of any railroad com- pany or companies from exchanging passes or tickets with other railroad com- panies for their officers and employes; and nothing in this act contained shall 

in any way abridge or alter the remedies now existing at common law or by 

statute, but the provisions of tWs act are in addition to such remedies: Provided, 

That no pending liti2"ation shall in any way be affected by this aet. SEC. 23. That the sum of $1.00,000 is hereby appropriated for the use and pur- poses of this act for the fiscal year ending June 30, A. D. 1888, and the intervening time anterior thereto. 

SEc. 24. That the provisions of sections 11 and 18 of this act, relating to the apo. pointment and organization of the commission herein provided for, shall take 

effect immediately, and the remaining provisions of this act shall take effect 

sixty days after its passage. S. :M. CULLOM, 

ISHAM G. HARRIS, 

M anage1·s on the part of the Senate. 

JOHN H. REAGAN, 

CHARLES F. CRISP, 

A. J. WEAVER, 

Managers on the part of the Holtse. 

Mr. INGALLS. Mr. President, the report of the committee of con- ference on the interstate commerce bill now Jies on the table, and I un- derstand according to the pract.ice of the Senate it is subject to he called 

up at any time. It is unquestionably the most important subject that 

has been before this session of Congress, and in it.s bearings upon com- merce hereafter is entitled, I think, to very deliberate and free discussion. I have not bad the opportunity of examining the report, but I 

understand that several of the positions thn.t were taken by the Senate, 

after protracted debate, have been abandoned by tlle report of the com- mittee of conference, and I think there ought to be some definite understanding now as to the time when this report is to be called up for con- sideration. And if I am authorized, or can obtain the floor for that 

purpose !!OW, I wish to submit a motion that the consideration of this 

report be postponed until the second Monday in January next, whlch 

will be a few days after the ordinary reassembling of Congress for the 

customary holiday recess. Mr. CULLOM. I gav~ notice that I would not call up the report 

during this week, and not until Monday or Tuesday of next week. In 

the mean time it will be printed, so that every Senator will have an opportunity to see what it is. If, when the time comes for calling it 

up, it is the judgment of the Senate that it can not be considered before the holidays, or only in part, so far as I am concerned I shall not 

be disposed to undertake to crowd the measure through the Senate before giving the Senate ample time for proper consideration. But it 

seems to me that the Senator's motion could be made on Tuesday of 

next week, when I shall hope to call the report up, if it shall be determined in the mean time to call it up on that day. It may be that 
174 CONGRESSIONAL REOORD-SENATE. DECEMBER 15,-

the circumstances of the Senate will be such that I shall determine not 

to call it up until after the holidays, but I prefer now to give notice to 

the Senate that on Tuesday next at 2 o'clock I will call it up for con- sideration. When that time comes, if the Senator insists or thinks it 

ought to be postponed he can make his motion at that time. I think 

that would be the better course. 

l\1r. INGALLS. I presume that we all know now as well as we shall on Tuesday next that this bill and the report of the committee of con- ference will not be finally acted upon before the 1st of January. 

Mr. CULLOM. I do not know whether that is so or not. Nobody 

knows. 

Mr. INGALI..S. My impression is that we do know that the questions nvolved are of such magnitude and importance that the action 

of the committee of conference, if I am correctly informed, has been so in opposition to the expressed determination of the Senate upon some very important points involved in this subject, that with the waning 

numbers that are liable to occur from this time onward there is no human likelihood or probability that this matter will be considered before the lst day of Jan nary. · 

The Senator from Illinois says it is not certain that we shall have a holiday recess. Of course it is notr bnt it is more than probable; and 

it is certain that, whether there is one or not, the members of this body 

will in large numbers depart during that festal season. On Tuesday 

next it is more than likely that I shall be absent myself. I know others 

intend to be; and therefore I 8ay it is wise and just aud proper, and 

in accordance with justice, that this great measure should not be left 

hanging up in the atmosphere in this way; that we should all be enabled to see definitely that nothing will be done about it until after 

there has been time for debate and consideration. which will not occur before the first day of January. 

I wish, therefore, the Senator from Illinois-and I can not conceive 

his reason to be contrary-would consent, for the convenience of us all, 

for the advantage of debate which will occur in the public prints and 

elsewhere that we may be enlightened and illuminated, to allow this 

thing to pass over, as I think the concurrence of a majority of his associates wo1Jld suggest. 

Mr. CULLOM. 1 One word further, Ur. President. As I said a while 

ago, this subject has been before Congress now for a great many years, 

and session after session we have failed to pass any law relative to the 

question until the country has got to believe that we do not intend to 

pass any law on the subject. This session, as the Senator knows, is a short one. It is only necessary to defeat a measure to postpone its con- sideration a few times and the session is gone by. I am perfectly 

willing to consent ·to any understanding or agreement that will not 

jeopardize the passage of the bilL After a decision of the Supreme 

Court has been made throwing upon us the onus of regulating interstate commerce, if we pretend to be in favor of any regulation we cannot afford to allow this session to go by without passing some proper 

bill, and I say simply that I desire to call the bill up on nextTuesday 

for consideration. I do not expect that we are going to pass it in a day; 

but unless we begin its consideration nobody can tell whether we shall ever pass it or not. If the bill is allowed to come up on next Tuesday, 

let Senators who desire to talk upon it talk, and if we have a recess that comes in l1efore the proper consideration of the bill is disposed of we can take the recess and the bill will go over until after the holidays 

ha>e passed by. But unless we do press the bill forward with a view 

to getting it through this branch of Congress and allowing the other 

branch to ha>e an opportunity to consider it as well-and if we disagree to it we have got to have another conference and perhaps a further 

one-the result will be, if we do not go on with it as rapidly as possible, that we shall not reach a conclusion at all by which we shall get 

any legislation. 

So I trust any motion which is made now to set the report down for 

the second Monday or whatever day the Senator names in January will 

be voted upon with the understanding that I shall call it up on next 

Tuesday, and if the Senate is prepared to go on and consider it we can 

do so at that time. 

Mr. CALL. Mr. President, I hope the Senate will not postpone the 

consideration of this bill until after the holidays. The country cer- tainly demands the passage of this bill or something akin to it, and it 

will not be passed if we postpone it until after the holidays, when there 

will be not over two months of practical working time. 

The bill is certainly one of the most important that could be presented to Congress and one of the most necessary to be passed, and 

passed without delay. I am not prepared to say that I approve the 

provisions of the conference report, and some time is needed to con- sider it, but certainly not longer than the Senator from illinois proposes before a commencement of the consideration of this bill shall be 

had. I hope, therefore, that the Senator from Illinois will insist on 

taking up this bill and commencing the considerntion of it at the earliest 

possible day. 

J\.Ir. SABIN. Mr. President, I am unqualifiedly in favor of pressing this bill or some other bill, having in view the objects which it is 

intended to cover by the measure now before the Senate. It may be 

that on consideration and examination I shall be unqualifiedly in favor 

of this bill as agreed upon by the conference committee. But I do not 

believe that the interests of this great country will. suffer by a ten da.ys' 

postponement of this bill as much as they will suffer by a hasty and 

ill-advised consideration of it. 

I can not see why the chairman of the committee should insist upon 

calling the bill up on next Tuesday, when certainly it is obvious to me, 

as it must be to every member of the Senate, that it is going to elicit a very warm and protracted discussion, and for myself I wish very much 

to be present when that discussion commences, and to be here during 

its continuance. 

If there is any prospect of the bill being called up on Tuesday next, 

I desire and propose to be here, but it would be a matter of very great 

inconvenience to myself, and I think it would be to many other mem- bers of the Senate. I do not believe that the bill will be hastened or that the objects for which it is intended will be served by pressing the 

consideration of it at this time. I certainly wish that the motion of 

the Senator from Kansas may be adopted at this time. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair did not understand the 

Senator from Kansas as making any motion, but as mnking a suggestion. Does the Senator make a motion? 

Mr. INGALLS. I submitted to the Chair the parliamentary ques- tion whether in the present state of the bill I could make that motion. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair is of opinion that the 

Senate may proceed now to consider the bill It is on the Calendar, 

having been simply laid on the table, and is jpen to a motion. 

111r. INGALLS. I understood the action of the Sennte to be to lay 

the bill on the table by motion. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It is laid on the table, but a motion 

to proceed to its present consideration the Chair thinks is in order at 

this time, it being between 1 and 2 o'clock. 

Mr. INGALLS. I think on deliberation I will let my motion lie over until Tuesday. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempo1·e. The Calendar is now in order. 

:Mr. HOAR. Before this matter passes--

Mr. PLUMB. I thought I bad the floor. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Kansas has .the 

floor on the resolution offered this morning. 

Mr. HOAR. I ask what number of copies is it proposed to print? 

The PRESIDENT pro tempo1·e. Five thousand extra copies; and that 

resolution has gone to the Committee on Printing. 

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. 

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

Clerk, announced that the House had concurred in the amendments of 

the Senate to the bill (H. R. 1418) for the relief of Henry Martin. 

The message further announced that the House insisted upon its 

amendments to the bill (S. 9.) to fix the day for the meeting of the 

electors of President and Vice-President, .and to provide for and regulate the counting of the votes for President and Vice-President and the 

decision of questions arising thereon, agreed to the conference aslced 

by the Senate on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon, and 

had appointed Mr. CALDWELL, Mr. EDEN, and Mr. COOPER the man- agers at 'the conference on the part of the House. 

The message also announced that the House had passed the following bills; in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate: 

A bill (H. R. 9110) to amend sections 5191 and 5192 of the Revised 

St.c'l.tutes of the United States; and 

A bill (H. R. 7648) for the relief of the estate of the late John How, 

Indian agent, and his sureties. 

APPROPRIA.TIO!iS FOR MISSOURI niVER. 

~Ir. PL U.MB. I am not surprised that the Chair in the lapse of time 

from the moment I yielded the floor to the Senator from illinois [Mr. 

CULLOM] should have forgotten that I was entitled to be recognized; nor do I desire at this time to say Yery much about the matter that 

has been discussed so widely by my colleague and the Senator from 

Nebraska. The resolution of the Senator from Nebraska1 I belieYe, is 

the business before the Senate. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It is. 

Mr. PLUMB. I had something to do with the bill tha.t was :finally 

passed. The House of Representatives had failed to insert in it any 

appropriation for the continuation of the Missouri River improvement. 

I was in favor of discontinuing the Missouri River Commission and so 

>oted, but the Committee on Commerce having restored the provision, 

I sought to have it so amended that there might be an appropriation 

of money made for the improvement of the river at Fort Leavenworth, 

where the Government had large interests, and also where there are large private interests, as well as at Kansas City or elsewhere on that 

stream. I made a suggestion to the Senator from Missouri [Hr. VEST], 

in fact I offered an amendment, I think, carrying out my idea, which 

was presented to the Committee on Commerce. The committee did not 

report the amendment exactly as I sent it down, but made aproposi tion 

which I thought would not accomplish the purpose, and so a modification was agreed upon here. Subsequently, on motion of my colleague 

[Mr. INGALLS], Atchison was added, and on motion of the Senator 

from Nebraska [Mr. VANWYcK] certain towns in Nebraska were added also, and so a large nnmber of places were put upon the bill as 
1886. CONGRESSIONAL REOORD-SENATE. 175 

the places for which the money appropriated for the Missouri River 

should be spent. 

Lthought and still think that the amendment as agreed upon gave 

to the Secretary of War the antJ:lority to determine as to how the money 

should be spent, and that he was only required to consult with the 

Missouri River Commission in regard to the plan. He took a different 

view of the law. I wrote him on the subject last fall, and a few .days 

ago I went to see him about it. He stated to me the embarrassment 

which he was under in the construction to be put upon the law, and, 

while finally apparently yielding to the view which I took of the pro--

vision, said that he indorsed what the Missouri River Commission recommended, which, of course, put him in the attitude of doing that 

which I thought he ought to do, and that was assuming the responsibility for expending the money. Bothe said tome: ''Here, as I have 

$375,000 to spend, and six or seven or eight places are named on the 

river at which the money shall be spent, the Missouri River Commission said to me, what I on investigation believed to be true, that if I 

spent some of the money at each one of these places the money so spent 

would be thrown away and no useful purpose would be accomplished, no improvement would be completed or so nearly completed as that it 

would stand the spring floods, which would come down, as in other searsons, and take away imperfectly constructed works, which would result 

in. a useless expenditure of a portion of the money.'' 

He said the commission had st.ated to him that by spending $225,000 

at Kansas City that improvement would be made permanent and final; 

and that by spending 75,000 at Saint Joseph a similar result would be 

obtained there; and that he had adopted that plan for the expenditure 

of the money and still adhered to its propriety. As I understand, there are $75,000 of the money yet unallotted, and which can be expended 

at Leavenworth or any other place that the Secretary of War may determine. 

There is great force in what the Secretary says about the impropriety and impolicy of spending money where no good result will be 

accomplished; and if it be true, as he says, that to spend the money 

at each one of the places named in the bill would result. simply in 

throwing money uselessly into the river, then I think he is justified 

in spending it in the way decided on, though there seems to be an ex- press condition that he shall expend some of it at each one of these p~. ' . I do not know whether that is correct or not. I myself would take some exception to the location of at least a portion of the money. I 

think myself that some better distribution of it could have been made. 

But the Secretary bas directed the expenditure of the money upon 

what he believed to be evidence on the part of those spending it that 

the best results would be obtained for the expenditure. I have no doubt that if he. has made a mistake, as I rather think he has, he has 

at all events made it in the right direction; that is to say, in the direction of what he believes to be a saving of the public money. 

My own view, however, about the improvement of the Missouri River was that we ought to quit spending money on it at large, casting a little 

in here and a little there to be washed out by the ensuing flood; and, 

instead of that, limit ourselves to the protection of private property at 

important plaees like Kansas City, Leavenworth, Saint. Joseph, Atchison, and so on, until such time as Congress should, if it ever shall, ap- .propriate money enough to carry on a continuous improvement of the 

river designed seriously to make it suitable for navigation. It was with a view to stop this scattering expenditure that I moved that a portion 

of the money should be spent at Leavenworth, practically for the protection of the public property there and for the protection of private 

interests which are threatened by the mutations of the river. 

Now, if it be true that to take this pitiable sum of $375,000 and distribute it at half a dozen different points along the river would result 

neither in the preservation of public property or of private property, nor in the improvement of the navigation of the river, if it would be a simply useless expenditure of money, as he says he thinks it would be, 

he is j nstified in what he has done. I can not myself agree that he has 

made the best distribution of the money he did distribute. I think he 

might have spent money which it is his proposition to spend at Saint 

Joseph and at another place with a great deal betterresultto the public 

interests, and I think he might have taken the other $75,000 and put 

it at Atchison, Leavenworth, or some other of the points named, use- fully; but still, on the theory on which he operated, undoubtedly he was justified. 

Mr. CONGER. Mr. President, since making the remark which I 

did in regard to the river and harbor bill of two years ago and the discussions about it, I have sent for the RECORD of the session when the 

1Jill alluded to by the Senator from Nebraska was before the Senate 

and I ask his attention for a moment. ' 

The bill to which the Senator from Nebraska referred was not a bill 

making specific appropriations for rivers and harbors in detail. My 

remarks were in reference to such a bill, although I mistook the time· 

it was on a fo1·mer occasion when the House bill making appropriatio~ in detail, the usual river and harbor bill, failed to reach the Senate in 

time for consideration. · At the session two years ago the House sent us a river and harbor 

bill appropriating $5,000,000 in gross to be applied according to the 

provisions of the previous bill. The Senate Committee on Commerce 

increased that amount to $10,000,000, and in the last hours of the 

session the bill was considered and the amendments offered by the 

Senator from Nebraska were offered to that bill. I had mistaken the 

bill, and was speaking myself of a bill which had come in here making 

specific appropriations. Therefore I desire to state, with great respect, 

that the Senator from Nebraska, as I find by the RECORD, offered his 

amendments to the five million bill; 

Mr. McPHERSON. I wish to ofter a resolution. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. FRYE in the chair). The Chair 

will receive it. 

ARTHUR KILL BRIDGE. 

Mr. McPHERSON. I submit the following resolution: 

Resolved, That the Secretary of War be instructed to furnish the Senate with a copy of the report of a board of engineers United States Army, and accom- panying documents, made by said board on the location and construction of t.he 

proposed bridge over the Arthur Kill between New Jersey and Staten Island. 

As I want to look at the papers, !request immediate consideration of 

the resolution. 

The resolution was considered by unanimous consent and agreed to. 

ACCIDENT ON LIBRARY SITE. 

Mr. SAULSBURY submitted the following resolution: 

Resolved, That the committee for providing additional accommodations for 

the Library be, and they are hereby, instructed to inquire into the circumstances 

under which the accident occurred in removing the buildings on the lands con- demned for the use of the Library, by which it is reported several persons have 

lost their lives and others been seriously injured, and what'!. if any, provision should be made by Congress for the families of such deceasea :md injured per- sons. 

1\Ir. ll"TGALLS. What is the occasion for the introduction of the 

resolution? Will the Senator from Delaware explain? 

1\Ir. SAULSBURY. I understand that, a while ago, in removing some houses from land taken for the public library building the walls 

fell, and it is stateQ. that several persons have lost their lives and that 

others have been seriously injured. The object of the resolution is to 

ascertain if any provision should be made by Congress for the families 

of such deceased and injured persons. 

Mr. INGALLS. The Senator has no definite information about the 

factsyet? . Mr. SAULSBURY. I am advised that the accident has occurred, and 

I offer the resolution for inquiry. . Mr. INGALLS. It had better lie on the table until we ascertain the 

facts. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. Let the resolution be read again, so that we may 

know what it is. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The resolution will be read. 

The resolution was read. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection being made, the resolution 

will go over under the rules and be printed. 

Mr. MORRILL. I desire to say that I have j nst been informed that no Jives were lost., and that this work was done under contract with 

parties to take down the buildings and remove them. 

1\Ir. VOORHEES. .AB the Senator from Vermont has observed, I 

understand the work of taking down these walls is let by contract, and 

in doing so a wall was left standing. without any support on either 

side: which I happened to observe a day or two ago with a good deal of 

apprehension, which I expressed at the time. It has fallen, and I have 

been out into the grounds to ascertain the extent of the injury. I 

heard that three persons had been taken out badly injured; and 

whether or not there are others under the ruins who have been killed 

I think is a matter of uncertainty at this time. I think that is about 

the state ofthe case. 

TENURE-OF-OFFICE ACT REPEAL. 

!lfr. HOAR. I desire to be permitted to make a statement to the 

Senate. 

I had proposed to ask the Senate to take up in the morning hour 

immediately after the routine business, the bill in regard to the tenure: 

of-office act; but I learned that it was convenient to the Senator from 

Vermont [:Mr. ED:UUNDS] not to have that measure . taken up at this 

time, because he desired to make an investigation which he had not 

quite completed. Accordingly, I did not interpose in the debate that was going on by unanimous consent. Now the hour of 2 o'clock has 

arrived, and I desire to ask that that measure may go over until tomorrow 'vith the same rights that it has to-day; that is, as the unfinished business, with the understanding that I do not expect to interfere 

with the rights of the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. PLATT]. 

The PRESIDll"TG OFFICER. The Chair lays before the Senatethe 

unfinished business, which is the bill (S. 512) to repeal certain sections 

of the Revised Statutes relating to the appointment of civil officers, and 

the Senator from Massachusetts asks that it may go oyer informally until to-morrow, holding its place. Is there objection? The Chair hears 

none. 

EXECUTIVK SESSIONS WITH OPEN DOORS. 

Mr. PLATT. I now move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the first special order, which is the regular order at this t.ime. 
176 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. DECEMBER 15; 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut moveq 

that the Senate proceed to the consideration of a resolution which will 

be read. 

The Chief Clerk read the resolution submitted by :M:r. PLATT, January 29, 1886. 

The motion was agreed to. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The resolution is before the Senate. 

:M:r. PLATT. There is some morning busine."'S that the Senator from 

Virginia [Mr .. ltf.A.HONE] and the Senator from New York [Mr. EvARTS] 

wish to present. I yield for that. 

REPORTS OF CO)ll{ITTEES. 

Mr. MAHONE. I am directed by the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds, to whom was referred the bill (S. 910) for the en- largement, improvement, and completion of the public buildings now being erected at Harrisonburg, Va., to report it back adversely and to 

ask that it be indefinitely postponed, a bill hSlving already passed the 

Senate covering the same subject. 

The bill was postponed indefinitely. 

Mr. MAHONE. I am also directed by the Committee on Public 

Buildings and Grounds, to whom was referred the bill (S. 1573) to 

increase the appropriation for the erec_tion of a public building at 

Reading, Pa., to ask the same disposition for the same reason. The bill was postponed indefinitely. 

:M:r. MAHONE, from the Committee on Public Buildings_ and 

Grounds, to whom was referred the following bills, reported them adversely and moved their indefinite postponement; which was agreed to: 

A bill {S. 563) authorizing the partition of certain land in Louisville, 

Ky., belonging jointly to John Echols and the Government of the 

United States; 

A bill (S. 1374) to increase the appropriation for the erection of the 

public building at Roche.~ter, N.Y.; 

A bill (S. 1535) for the purchase of a site and the erection of a public 

building thereon in the city of La Fayette, Ind.; 

A bill (S. 2664) appropriating money for the completion of the public building at Greensborough, N. C.; 

A bill (S. 1427) to provide for the erection of a public building in 

Springfield, Mo. ; and · 

. A billtS. 1736) to provide for an addition to the United States building at Jackson, Miss. 

Mr.ltiAHONE, from the Cot;nmittee on Public Buildings and Grounds, 

to whom was referred the joint resolution (S. R. 44) authorizing and 

directing the Department of Justice to transfer certain rooms_ which 

have been occupied by the United States courts to the city of Jackson, 

Miss., reported adversely thereon, and moved its indefinite postponement. -~ -

Mr. GEORGE. I wish the Senator would ailow the joint resolution 

in reference to the public building at Jackson to go on the Calendar. 

I wish to examine the matter. · · ?llr. MAHONE. I believe I made a mistake about that. What is it? 

The Chief Clerk read the title of the joint resolution (S. R. 44). 

1tir. MAHONE. I asked the indefinite postponement because I have 

a joint resolution to report favorably coverii:Jg the same subject. 

Mr. GEORGE. Let it go on the Calendar. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. At the request of the Senator from 

Mississippi it will be placed on the Calendar. 

Mr. MAHONE. There will be no occasion for that. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Mississippi 

still make the request? 

Mr. GEORGE. No; iftbereisanother joint resolution to be reported on the same subject. ..... · · The PRESIDING OFFICER. The joint resolution will be indefinitely postponed. 

Mr. MAHONE, from the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds, ·to whom was referred the joint resolution (S. R. 51) authorizing and 

directing the Department of Justice to transfer certain rooms which 

have been occupied by the United States courts to the city of Ja-ckson, 

Miss., reported it without amendment. 

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

2303) for the erection of a public building at Chester, Pa., reported it 

without amendment. 

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

2901) to provide for the erection of a public building at Eastport, Me., · reported it without amendment. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair desires to call the attention of the Senator from Virginia to the bill reported to provide for 

the erection of a public building at Eastport, Me. 

Mr. MAHONE. I reported it with an amendment to strike out the 

preamble. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The present occupant of the Chair 

handed the Senator 1rom Virginia a bill to take its place. 

1\Ir. MAHONE. Then I withdraw that report for the present. I see I sent up the wrong bill. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The report will be withdrawn if there 

be no objection. . . Mr. MAHONE, from the Committee on Public Buildings and 

Grounds, to whom was referred the bill (H. ·R. 72~8) to amend an act 

entitled "An act for the erection of a public building at Chattanooga, . 

Tenn.," approved Febrnary25, 1885, reported it without amendment. 

Mr. HARRIS. I ask the Senator from Virginia to please withhold 

that report for to-day. There are some factB I want to submit in re· spect to that matter. 

Mr. MAHONE. .A.ll right; I withdraw the report. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The report is withdrawn. 

Mr. MAHONE, from the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds, 

to whom was referred the amendment submitted by :Mr. DAWES to 

the sundry civil appropriation bill providing for an appropriation for 

the erection and completion of a post-office building at New Bedford, 

Mass., reported it favorably, and moved its reference to the Committee on Appropriations, which was agreed to. 

1?U13LIC BUILDING AT SPRL.~GFmLD, 1\I.A.SS. 

Mr. MAHONE. The Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds 

instruct me to report back the bill (S. 263) providing f<?r the erection 

of a public building at Springfield, Mass., returned from the House of 

Representatives with an amendment, and to move that. the Sen.a.te disagree to the amendment and ask for the appointment of a committee 

of conference on that bill. 

The motion was agreed to. 

By unanimous consent the presiding officer ~as author~ed ~ appomt 

the conferees on the part of the Senate; and Mr. 1\f.A.HONE, Mr. DAWES, 

and Mr. CAMDEN were appointed. 

PUBLIC BUILDING AT FORT SCOTT, KANS. 

Mr. PLUMB. I move to take from the table the bill providing for 

the erection of a public building at Fort Scott, Kans., and ask that it 

may be referred to the Committee on Public Buildings and Grot;mds. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas asK.s unan- imous consent to. take from the table the bill (S. 1386) for the completion of a public building at Fort Scott, Kans., r~turned from the House 

of Representatives with an amendment, and have it referred to the Com-· mittee on Public Buildings and Grounds. That order' will be made if 

there be no objection. · 

PAPERS IN STATE DEPARTMENT . Mr. EVARTS. Mr. Presid,ent, I ask una~mous consent to take up 

Order of Bnsines No. 1825 on the Calendar and pass it at once. I will 

state to the Senate the nature of it. · · 

During t-he examination before the ~!xed commi¢on.with :u~~co 

a foreign subject, an Englishman resident in MeXico, presented his papers and claim. The commission of course rejected it as coming from a foreigner and not within the comprehension of the treaty. The papers were lodged in the _State Department, and it is necessary that a joint resolQ.tion should authorize the return of them to the executrix 

of this foreign subject. The resolution passed the House, and· was reported from the Committee on Foreign Relations here toward the end 

of the last session. It is of importance to private interests that these 

papers should be restored to their owners, and I ask that that resolution may now be passed. · · The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York asks 

unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the 

joint resolution (H. Res. 118) relative to certain papers in the State 

Department by error. · There being no objection, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, 

proceeded to consider the joint resolution. It is a direction to the Secretary of State to deliver to the personjustlyentitled to the possession 

thereof the papers in the claim of the late John Potts, a British subject 

residing in Mexico, presented to the United States and Mexican Claims 

Commission through the agency of a Mr. MacManus, also a resident of 

Mexico, said papers containing certain original documents isSued by 

the Mexican Government on the collectors of customs at sundry ports 

for the payment of moneys to John Potts, and which . moneys he had 

loaned to the Mexican Government, the papers having been deposited 

in the State Department by error. · The joint resolution was reported to the Senate without amendment, 

ordered to a third reading, read .the t~d time, and passed. 

HOUSE BILLS REFERRED. 

Tl1e bill (H. R. 9l10) to amend ·sections 5191 and 5192 of the Revised 

Statutes of the United States was read twice by its title, and referred to 

the Committee on Finance. 

The bill (H. R. 7648) for the relief of the estate of the late John How, 

Indian agent, and his sureties, was read twice by its title, and refened 

to the- Committee on Indian Affairs. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

Mr. PLATT. I ask the Senate to proceed with the 1·egular order. 

:M:r. BECK. The bill (S. 2578) being a bill to prohibit members of 

Congre...<:S from acting as attorneys or employ~ for railroad companies 

holding charters or having received grant of laad~ or pecuniary aid from 

the United States, was made a special order for last Monday, and I suppose it is in order now. I know of nothing to prevent its consideration. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. TheSenatehasjustdecided by aYote 
, 

1886. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-_ SENATE. 177 

to proceed to the consideration of a prior special order, the resolution 

relative to executive sessions. 

:M:r. BECK. I desire to give a notice-as the Senate is thin now-so that gentlemen who may desire to take part in discussing this bill may 

be here, that I will call it up to-morrow at 2 o'clock and ask the Senate 

to consider it or make some disposition of it. I do not want to take it 

up when the Senate is thin; I do not want to take advantage of anybody; but I do not wish the bill to lose its place. I simply want some day. to be fixed when we can do something with it. 

Mr. HOAR. I am the author of pne of the proposed bills on that 

matter, and I wish to say that I think the Senate is quite full to-day. 

Gentlemen have gone out for a few moments at this time, as they usn- ally do, but almost all the Senators are here, and I understand that the 

Senator from Connecticut [Mr. PLATT] does not expect to debate, but 

.only to have a vote on his resolution. The Senate by unanimous con- sent has just set a matter which is under my charge, the bill to repeal 

the tenure-of-office law, for to-morrow at 2 o'clock, and I hope the Senator from Kentucky will not antagonize that when he bas to-day. Why 

not have his bill come up now? 

Mr. BECK. I desire· to have it up now. Mr. HOAR. I hope that will be done after the vote on the resolution of the Senator from Connecticut. 

EXECUTIVE SESSIONS WITH OPEN DOORS. 

The PRESIDlL'fG OFFICER. The 'resolution of the Senator from 

Connecticut [Mr. PLATT] is before the Senate and the question is on · agreeing to the resolution which has been read. 

.Mr. PLATT. There is an amendment pending. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be read. 

The CHIEF CLERK. After the word" considered" it is proposed to 

insert" and acted upon," and at the end of the resolution to add "and 

so much of section 2, Rule XXX:.VI, and section 2, Rule XXXVTII, of 

the standing rules of the Senate as conflicts with or is inconsistent 

with the above is to the extent of sueh inconsistency rescinded.'' 

So as to make the resolution read: 

Resolved, That executive nominations shall hereafter be considered and acted upon in open session, except when otherwise ordered by vote of the Senate, and so much of section 2, Rule XXXVI, and section 2, Rule XXXVIII, of the standing rules of the Senate as conflicts with or is inconsistent with the above is to the extent of such inconsistency rescinded. 

Mr. PLATT. That amendmE)nt is only necessary for formal purposes. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the amendment. The amendment was a~reed to. 

Mr. PLATT. I think there is also pending another amendment, 

though I am not sure, submitted by the Senator from Vermont [Mr. 

MORRILL). 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont submitted an amendment which will be read. 

The CmEF CLERK. The proposed amendment is to strike out the 

words "executive nominations, 11 and insert in lieu thereof the words 

"reciprocity treaties, so called." 

l\Ir. l\IORRILL. 'rhe amendment whic.h I have proposed will en- able the Senate to consider reciprocity treaties in open session. They 

certainly ought to be considered in an open session as much as a tariff or a tax bill. 

I trust that the amendment will be adopted. I am opposE-d to going 

any further in opening the doors of the Senate as to executive matte.rs, 

but this at least I hQpe will be adopted. 

Mr. PLATT. Mr. President, there is an old sayin~ about the 

Greeks bE'..aring gifts. Now, whatever might be my views upon this 

particular question, as to whether the Senate should consider reciprocity treaties or purely commercial treaties in open session; I hope the 

amendment will not be adopted at this time, for it comes from an opponent of the proposition which was originally submitted by my reso- lution, and the effect of the amendment is to kill my resolution, substituting for it the proposition to discuss commercial or reciprocity 

treaties in open session. I do not think that is a fair way of disposing of the question raised by my resolution. 

If this were an independent question I am by no mE:ans sure that I 

should not be in favor of the proposition contained in this amendment. 

I think I should vote for it as an independent proposition; but when 

it is brought here, I will not say for the purpose, but with the effect, 

if adopted, of destroying the proposition which I ask the Senate to act 

upon, I must vote against it. 

.M:r. HOAR. Mr. President, is it in order to move to lay the whole 

subject on the table? 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is. 

Mr. HOAR. I move to lay the whole subject on the table. 

Mr. PLA.TT. On that question I ask for the yeas and nays.· 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from 1!1assachusetts moves that the resolution with the pending amendments lie on the 

table. On that motion the Senator from Connecticut asks for the yeas 

and nays. 

The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded to call 

the roll. 

XVIII-12 

The PRESIDING OFFICER (when Mr. HALE's name was called). 

My colleague [1lfr. HALE] is absent paired with the Senator from Kentucky [M:r. BECK]. 

Mr. VANCE (when his name was called). I am paired with the 

Senator from Michigan [Mr. PALMER]. 

The roll-call was concluded. 

Mr. MAXEY. I desire to announce that my colleague (.M:r. CoKE] 

is detained from the Senate by sickness, and is paired generally with' 

the Senator from Kansas [Mr. PLUMB]. 

Mr. MANDERSON. I am paired with the Senator from Kentucky 

[Mr. BLACKBURN]. 

Mr. PLATT. I think from what I know of the views of the Senator 

from Kentucky that the Senator from Nebraska would do no violence 

to his pair if be were to vote. · Mr. CONGER. My colleague [Mr. PALMER] is necessarily absent, 

and is paired on politicalquestions with the Senator from North Carolina ~Mr. VANCE]. • The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair announced the absence of 

his colleague [Mr. HALE], and that he was paired with the Senator 

from Kentucky [Mr. BECK]. The Senator from Kentucky has voted 

but it will make no difference, from the fact that my colleague would 

vote the same way if he were here. 

Mr. BECK. I wa,s not aware of his absence. 

Mr. RANSOM: (after having voted in the affirmative). I have just 

been advised by my friend from Illinois [Mr. CULLOM] of my pair with 

his colleague [Mr.· LOGAN], and I withdraw my vote. I should vcte 

"yea" to lay on the table if at liberty, and the Senator from Illinois 

if present would vote "nay." 

.Mr. CULLOM. The Senator from Colorado [Mr. TELLER] was paired a day or two ago wit.h the Senator from West Virginia [Mr. 

CAMDEN]. I do not see him here, and I do not know whether he con- siders the pair still in force or not. I am not aware how the Senator 

from Colorado would vote on this question if he were present. 

The result was announced-yeas 33, nays 21; as follows: 

Allison, 

Beck, 

Call, 

Oame1on, 

Chace, 

Cheney, 

Cockrell, 

Colquitt, 

Edmunds, 

Berry, 

Blair, 

Butler, 

Conger, 

Cullom, 

Dawes, 

Aldrich, 

Blackburn, 

Bowen, 

Brown, 

Camden, 

Coke, 

YEAC:-12. 

Evarts. 1\Iahone, 

Gorman, M:axey, Gray, Miller, 

Harnson, Morg&II, 

Hoar, l\lorrill, 

Ingalls, Pugh, Jones of Arkansas, Sabin, 

McMillan, Saulsbury, 

McPherson, aawyer, 

NAY8-21. 

Dolph, 

Eustis, 

Frye, 

George, 

Gibson, 

Hawley, 

)Iitchell of Oreg., ~litchell of Pa., 

Platt, 

Plumb, 

Sherman, 

VanWyck, 

ABSENT-22. 

Fair, 

Hale, 

Hampton, 

Harris, 

.Jones of }<'lorida, Jones of Nevada., 

Kenna, 

Logan, 

Manderson, 

Palmer, 

Payne, 

Ransom, 

Sewell, 

Spooner, 

Vest, 

Walthall, 

Whitthorne, 

Wilson of Md. 

Vo01·hees, 

'Villiams, 

Wilson of Iowa. 

Riddlcberger, 

Stanford, 

Teller, 

Vance. 

So the motion to lay the resolution with the pending amendments on the table was agreed to. 

Mr: HAWLEY. I beg leave of the Senate to say that I voted "nay" 

because I preferred a direct vote on the main question. I am against 

the resolution. · 

Mr. HARRIS. Mr. President--

Mr. BECK. I desire now to call up the bill (S. 2578). 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky calls up 

the next special order, which is the bill (S. 2578) to prohibit members 

of Congress from acting as attorneys or employes for railroad companies 

holding charters or having received grants of lands or pecuniary aid from 

the United States. 

Mr. HARRIS. I rose to address the Chair to record my vote. Has 

the result been announced? · 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The :result has been announced. 

Mr. HARRIS. I desire to say that if 1 had been present I should 

ha•e recorded my vote in favor of laying the resolution for open ses- sions on the table . 

RAIJ-ROAD ATTORNEYS. 

The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, proceeded to consider the 

bill (S. 2578) to prohibit members of Congress from acting as attorneys or employes for railroad companies holding charters or having received 

grant of lands or pecuniary aid from the United States. 

-The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the amendment 

proposed by the Committee on the Judiciary. 

Mr. INGALLS. Let the bill be read at length._ The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill will be read. 

The CbiefClerk read the bill. 
J78 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. DECEMBER 15, 

The bill was reported from the Committee on the Judiciary with an amendment to strike out all after the enacting clause and to insert: 

That it shall be unlawful for any member of either House of Congress to ac- cept employment as attorney at law, or payment for services of any kind, in 

-opposition to the United States, in any case to which the United SLates may be a party or in which its interests may be concerned; or from or against any railroad company which obtained its charter, or any grant of lands, or pecuniary aid from the United States, when measures specially affecting the interests 

of such railroad are pending before Congress; or from or against any bank or corporation, or other officer or agent thereof, which obtained its charter or any pecuniary aid from the United States; or from or against any corporation or company, its officer or agent, engaged in the business of interstate com- merce by land or water, or in the business of any interstate transportation, or in the transportation of United States mails; or from or against any corpora- tion, company, firm, or person, or officer or agent thereof, engaged in the pro- duction, manufacture, or sale in the United States, or in the business of import- ing into the United States from any foreign country, any article whatsoever 

upon the importation of which any customs duty is now levied, or shall at any 

time hereafter be levied; or from or against any manufacturer of any article on which an excise tax is now levied, or shall at any time hereafter be levied, 

by any act of Congress. SEc. 2. That any person who violates the provisions of this act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and may be punished by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by fine not exceeding S500, or by both, in the discretion of the court. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to this 

amendment. 

Mr. BECK. I desire to have the yeas and nays on that amendment. 

The yeas and nays were ordered. 

Mr. PLATT. May the amendment be reported once more? I do 

not think it is fully understood. 

:Mr. BECK. Before the vote is taken I desire to say a word. 

Mr. PLATT. I ask that the amendment be once more reported. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read the amendment .. l\fr. BECK. Mr. President, I am of course obliged to assume that 

the distinguished Committee on the Judiciary regard this proposition 

of theirs as wise legislation. Itwould not be proper forme to assume 

anything else. When I called up the original bill for consideration 

the question of reference to the Judiciary Committee was considered, 

and the Senate by a yea-and-nay vote decided against it. When the 

question was taken on the final passage of the bill, the Senate by a yeaand-nay vote decided to pass it by 37 yeas to 11 nays, and it was 

passed. The origin~! bill reads thus: 

Be it enacted, &c., That it shall be unlawful for any member of either House of 

Congress to accept employment as attorney-at-law, or payment for services of 

any kind, from any railroad company, or any officer or agent thereof, which 

obtained its charter, or any grant of lands, or pecuniary aid from the United 

States.; and any person who violates this provision shall be guilty of a misde- meanor, and, on conviction, be fined in any sum not exceeding $5,000, and imprisoned not more than one year, in the discretion of the court. 

When the bill was again before the Senate on a motion to reconsider the vote by which it passed, it was denounced by the leading 

members of the Committee on the Judiciary as an infringement on the 

right ofthe attorneys in this and the other House of Congress. They 

insisted that it should be referred to them for examination and consideration. They pledged themselves by their action if not by their 

language to submit a proposition such as they thought Congress ought 

to pass. The result of their labors is the substitutejust read. By it 

they have not only indorsed all that was contained in my original 

proposition, but they have added as an extension of it prohibitions 

against members of either House, which seem to me so absolutely 

unjust, and absurd that I am curious to know the ground upon which 

the members of the Judiciary Committee desire to pass their substitute. For example, they insist that no member of Congress shall 

appear as attorney or agent for " any corporation, company, firm, or pe:rson, or officer or agent thereof, engaged in the production, manufacture, or sale in the United States, or in the business of importing 

into the United States from any foreign country, any article whatsoever upon :the importation of which any customs duty is now levied, or shall at any time hereafter be levied; or for or against any manufacturer of any article on which an excise tax is now levied, or shall 

at any time hereafter be levied, by any act of Congress.'' 

That is the solemn proposition submitted by the Judiciary Committee as a wise thing for this Congress to do. :Mr. GEORGE. By a majority of the committee. 

Mr. BECK. A majority is the committee. It is no answer to say 

that they are, by their action, endeavoring to make a bill submitted 

for their consideration· absurd by carrying out such legislation to what 

they may call its legitimate consequences. If the bill as originally 

presented and submitted to them was a bill that ought not to pass, 

then it was their duty as one of the committees of this body to say so and to report against it; they had no right to make it more objectionable, by a substitute, and pretend to desire the passage of the more 

objectionable proposition. Therefore, I am right in assuming that the 

bill which they have now presented as a substitute for the bill which 

I introduce meets the concurrence of the members of the committee, 

and that they, in the face of the responsibility resting upon them as members of the Judiciary Committee, tell the Senate that in the interest of the American people the substitute they present ought to pass. 

I shall endeavor to maintain that the bill they present is a burlesque 

on legislation, and I can not help believing that it is so intended .by the 

chairman and the leading members of the Judiciary Committee. If 

-

they desire to contradict my assumption of their purpose, I wish to give 

them an opportunity; and if that is their purpose, then I insist before 

the Senate that the committee has come short of its duty to this body 

in substituting a bill which they intend to be a burlesque, in view of 

the efforts they made .. to have the -vote of the Senate reconsidered, and 

this bill referred to them for careful·consideration. 

It was, in my judgment, their duty, if the bill which I presented and 

which the Senate had passed was a bad one, to say so and r ecommend 

its rej ection, or to make it better, if it needed amendment. Instead 

of that, they have presented a confessedly ridiculous proposition, ~nd 

carried the prohibitions '!;o a point where nobody can vote for their measure. I venture to assert that even the members of the committee 

will oppose the measure they submit (and for that reason I called for 

the yeas and nays), unless they vote for it as a means of killing the 

o~ainal bill. I deny the justice and fairness of that mode of proceed-. 

ingin viewof the debates and proceedings had at the last session. 

When the bill was originally presented, after it had been read in the 

Senate, when every gentleman understood it (for there can be no pretenses as to any ambiguityordoubt aboutwhattheoriginal bill meant), 

the Senate, by a vote of 24 to 21, declined to refer it to its enemies on the Judiciary Committee, and upon the passage of the bill the following vote was cast-yeas 37, nays 11; as follows: 

Allison, 

Beck, 

Berry, 

Blair, 

Brown, 

Butler, 

Chace, 

Cockrell, 

Coke, 

Colquitt, 

Bowen, 

Cameron, 

Dawes, 

YEAS-37. 

Cullom, Kenna, 

Dolph, McMillan, 

Eustis, 1\fcPherson, 

Frye, l\f11.hone, 

George-, l'lfnxey, Hale, Miller, 

Harris, Morrill, Harrison, Payne, Hawley, Plumb, Jones of Arkansas, Pugh, 

NAYB-11. 

Ransom, 

Saulsbury, 

Sherman, 

Vest, 

Wbitthorne, 

Wilson of Iowa, 

Wilson of Md. 

Edmunds, 

Evarts, 

Hoar, 

Mitchell of Oreg., Sewell, 

Riddleberger, Teller. 

SaWYer, 

A motion to reconsider that vote followed, and among other things, 

without taking time now to redebatethequestion which I debated fulJy 

at that time, I desire to call attention to the objections made by some of the leading members of the Judiciary Committee to the bill I presented. On the 23d of June, as shown by the RECORD of last session, 

page 6044, the Senator from Alabama. [Mr. PuGH] said: 

Mr. President, I simply desire to say thnt I voted for this bill without examining it. Since the motion to reconsider it has been made I have examined it and 

satisfied myself that it is hasty, inconsiderate, and mischievous legislntion. I thoroughly indorse nll t.hat was so well said by my friend, the Senator from 

Florida [Mr. CALL). I shall vote to reconsider the vote by which the bill w::\S 

passed, and if that motion is carried I shall vote against the passage of the bill. 

That was fair and manly opposition. Yet that distinguished Sen- ator as a member of the Judiciary Committee unites with his colleagues now and says to the Senate that in his opinion as a committeeman the 

substitute which has just been twice read ought to pass, in which fines 

and other penalties are not only imposed on members of Clongress for 

acting as attorneys for land grant and subsidized railroads, but it goes 

to the absurd extent of preventing every man in either House from being attorney or agent for any man who may manufacture any article on which there is a tariff or excise tax; indeed it substantia11y prohibits members of Congress from practicing law at all. 

Mr. PUGH. Will the Senator allow me to interrupt him? 

J\Ir. BECK. Certainly. -.Mr. PUGH. I desire to say that I stated my position correctly in 

the remarks which I made in favor of a reconsideration of the vote by 

which the bill was passed. I am opposed to all legislation, such as is 

sought by the bill introduced by the Senator from Kentucky, and I 

shall vote in favor of substituting the amendment of the Judiciary 

Committee, if there is to be any legislation on the subject, but when 

the final vote comes upon the bill as proposed to be amended by the 

Judiciary Committee, I shall vote against its passage. That is my position. I am opposed to any legislation on the subject. Howeyer, I 

joined in the report of the Judiciary Committee as an amendment, 

and I shall vote for that amendment in place of the original bill, but on the passage of the bill as amended by the' reporb of the Judiciary 

Committee, I shall vote against it. 

Mr. BECK. That verifies what I said so far as one member of the 

Judiciary Committee is concerned, that the amendment reported is not 

offered in good faith, and I insist that it is not fair in a committee oc- cupying the high position the Judiciary Committee does to present any 

bill or substitute for a bill to the Senate which they oppose merely to 

avoid the responsibility of a direct -vote on the bill they seek to kill. 

The Senator from New York [Mr. EVARTS] was equally emphatic in 

his declarations against and denunciations of the original bill and of 

all the principles involved in it. I have his speech before me, in which 

he has said in substance that he regarded the effort to pass such a bill as I had offered and the Senate had approved as a stigma upon the great 

profession to which he belongs, and of which he is an honorable and 

an honored member. 

l'!Ir. PUGH. I can not feel that it is the purpose of the Senator from_ 
.... 

1886. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 179 

Kentucky to say that in voting for the report of the Judiciary Committee I acted or intended to act in bad faith. 

Mr. BECK. I do not know what other gentlemen consider bad 

faith; but I give my opinion as to a report made and submitted to the 

Senate for its passage to which the gentlemen who submit the report are themselves opposed. · 

lllr. PUGH. In the utmost sincerity and without anyqualification, 

I a&y that if there is to be any legislation it ought to be as comprehensiveasthisbillisintended to be made bythe3.!mendmentofthe Judiciary 

Committee, and I should really desire that amendment to become the 

law, because it is comprehensive enough to embrace every class, and to 

reach every evil, if there be an evil, intended to be corrected by the 

original bill. If there is to'be legislation I shall most sincerely vote for 

the amendment of the Judiciary Committee in preference to the original bill; but not believing that it is wise or proper to ~egislate at all on the subject in the way proposed to be done by the original bill or the 

amendment, I shall vote against the whole measure when the yeas and 

nays are called on itB final passage. 

Mr. BECK. The Senator from Alabama. has stated his reasons and 

his opinions; I have stated my opinion of such a report with such purposes, and the country can decide who is right and who is wrong. 

I repeat that the Senator from New York [Mr. EVARTS] was equally 

emphatic in his denunciation of the original bill; and without reading 

his speech I assert that he almost exhausted t.he English language in 

his denunciation of what he considered as an effort to cripple or curtail 

the rjghts of the members of the great profession of which, as I said, he 

is an honorable and an honored member. Yet he too unites in a report 

to the Senate and lays before this body a proposition which by his indorsement he tells Senators they ought to pass-a proposition not only 

going far beyond anything which was suggested in my bi1l, but which 

in fact proposes to prevent every member of the bar in either House 

from taking a fee to attend to any business for any ::nan engaged in 

the mannfadure of any article that is subject to tariff or internal-revenue taxation, or that may be subject to taxation. In other words, he 

submits a proposition which absolutely deprives every Senator and Representative who is a member of the bar from practicing his profession 

at all I should like him to tell the Senate whether he believes that 

iB good legislation or not. I do not believe he thinks so. I believe 

that he, too, as the Senator from Alabama has said, reported this substitute not intending to support it so as to . make it the law of the 

land, but to use it as a. method of killing a bill which the committee 

had not the courage to vote down rurectly and assert before the conntry that they were opposed to. That is my opinion for what it is 

worth. 

The Senator from Vermont [Mr. En:\ruNDs], the chairman of the 

committee, also made a speech, which I have in the RECORD before me, 

in which he, too, denounced the bill as presented . by me, and as it 

passed the Senate, and yet he offers this substitute to the Senate for 

its adoption. My word for it, he, too, will vote against his own bantling after it has accomplished the purpose for which it was intended, 

which is to defeat a measure they did not dare to vote down directly. 

All I as'k is that the Judiciary Committee will not trifle with us and seek to defeat the original bill by indirection. 

Let the question come on the yeas and nays directly upon the bill 

the Senate has once passed, and let the thirty-seven gentlemen who 

(against the eleven nays) voted for its passage tell the country why they 

have changed their opinions now, if any of them have so changed. I 

protest against doing by indirection what the committee would not 

venture to do directly. It is unfair opposition to substitute a bill for 

which nobody can vote, and thus relieve themselves from the responsibility of facing the fair, direct issue made in the original bill, which never would have been sent to the committee except on the most sol- emn assurances that it would receive fair treatment· and careful consideration. 

At the last session I avowed that the reason why I desired the bill to 

pass was because criminations and recriminations had been indulged in 

in this Chamber and elsewhere, year after year, on account of the immense power and inflnenceofthegreatland grant and subsidized railroad 

corporations. They stand in as different relation t-o Congressional legislation from the business of an ordinary importer of goods or an ordinary 

manufacturer of tobacco or producer of whisky or a national bank that 

has to pay taxes, as it is possible to imagfue. They hold empires of our land, in regard to the title and taxation of which we have to deal every 

session. \Ve have forfeited fifty million acres already, and there are bills 

pending now for the forfeiture of perhaps fifty million acres more. I 

deny that any attorney of these roads has a right to sit here with the 

money of those corporations in his pocket, employed, no matter upon 

what pretense, and vote upon these great questions. Thoseroadshave by 

their contracts to lay aside a sinking fund for the purpose of securing us for the money that we have advanced for them. Important measures are pending now, and made special ()rders, I believe, at this session of Congress for their consideration as to whether we shall extend 

their privileges and give them ti_me for thirty~ forty, sixty, perhaps • seventy years longer, or whether we shall hold them to their original 

contracts; and I insist that no attorney of theirs has a right in either 

Honse of Congress to vote upon those questions. 

Mr. MITCHELL, of Oregon. May I ask the Senator from Kentucky a question? 

lllr. BECK. Certainly. · 

Mr. MITCHELL, of Oregon. l'tly understanding is that an attorney at law is an officer of the court in theState where he is admitted. 

He is also an officer of a United States court if he has been admitt&l 

to practice in a Uruted States court. His qualificationstopracticelaw, as I understand, are prescribed 11y the law of th~ State and the rules 

of the courts, in so fll.r as he is an officer of a State coud, and by the 

law and the rules of practice of the Uruted States courts, in so far :l.8 

he is an officer of a United States court. 

What I wish to ask the Senator from Kentucky is, under what provision of the Constitution of the United States, under what grant of 

power, direct or inferential, does Congress get the authority to add to or take from the qualifications of an attorney of a State court to practice law in a St.ate court? That is the first question. 

Mr. BECK. Let me answer that one. If the Senator from Oregon 

will ask the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, or the distinguished Senator from New York, or the distinguished Senator from 

Alabama (and the Judiciary Committee is the high authority upon 

legal questions) where they get authority to prevent any man from 

practicing law or from acting as the agent of any person, firm, officer, or agent who is engage~ in the production, manufacture, or sale of 

any article whatever on the importation of which any customs duties are now levied, or may at any time hereafter be levied, or for or against 

any manufacturer of any article on which an excise tax is now levied, 

or may at any time hereafter be levied, by Congress, perhaps he will 

get a satisfactory answer from them. 

Mr. 1\UTCHELL, of Oregon. Will the Senator allow me? 

Mr. BECK. In one moment. I decline to be interrupted now until 

I am through with my answer. 

Tl1e PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentuc1.-y has the 

floor. 

Mr. BECK. I have said that any man who would seriously present a bill to prevent any lawyer from doing any of those things would be 

committing an indecent, improper, and needless outrage npon the profession. I do not propose to do that; but I will tell the Senator where, 

in my opinion, we get the authority to say that no man shall sit in either 

House of Congress with the money of a corporation in his pocket when 

he is voting upon questions involving millions of acres of land or 

$60,000,000 or $100,000,000 which the United States have loaned to 

those companies, and the question is how we shall best guard the interest 

of the people. We have the right to do whatever sound public policy 

requires; and when any man is acting as the agent of the U ruted States, 

either as the representative_ of a State or the people of any db--trict in 

a State, in dealing with questions involving millions of money and 

millions of acres of land which those railroads have obtained, some of 

which at least we say they are holding wrongfully, and we are about 

to test their right by legislative action, I insist that it is against public 

policy to allow the agent of the railroads or the attorney of the defendant to hM·e a vote in determining great public questions like these, 

and that all State constitutions and all State authorities recognize the 

fact that when a man takes a place as a judge on the bench to do impartial justice between suitors or between the people and corporations 

he shall cease to be an attorney. He can no longer l!old on to the 

money of his former clients as their lawyer and pretend to be an impartial judge. If he does, he can be impeached under any constitution 

and laws of any State. It is conduct like that which I propose to 

prevent-no more, no less. Our powers and duties are as sacred and 

ought to be as carefully guarded as if we were on the bench. 

Mr. MITCHELL, of Oregon. Will tlle Sena.tor from Kentucky allow me now to interrupt him? 

Mr. BECK. Yes, sir. 

lllr. MITCHELL, of Oregon. I do not intend that the Senator from 

Kentucky shall get away from the question by a speech which might seem to some demagogical in its nature. I asked the Senator from 

Kentucky as a lawyer a plain constitutionafquestion, and that is, where 

the a:uthor of the bill which was originally introduced into this body 

obtained his power (because he must get the power from the Constitution of the United States either by direct grant o-r by inference) to prescribe by act of Congress the qualifications of an attorney at law in a Stat~ court? The Senator from Kentucky, instead of answering the 

question, instead of attempting to answer the question, refers me to the 

chairman of the Judiciary Committee of this body, and suggests that I 

ask him or ask the members of the J ndiciary Committee for an answer to my question. 

I do not desire at this time to ask it of the chairman of the Jurucia.ry Committee or any member of the Judiciary Committee, but inasmuch as the bill originally prescribing qualifications to an attorney 

of a State court and limiting the powers of an attorney of a State 

court had been introduced by the Senator from Kentuc1.-y, and inasmuch as he had .very severely criticised a suggestion I had made by 

way of amendment to that bill, I thought I had a right to ask him the 

question. 

I repeat now, under what provision of the Constitution of the United 

States doa:J the Senator from Kentucky get the power to limit or pre-
180 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE~ DECEl\fBER 15, 

scribe or quali(y the rights, powers, or duties of au attorney at law of a State court? In all candor, I think that is a very serious question. 

The question i<; not whether some members· of Congress are standing 

here with hundreds of dollars or even $1,000 of railroad money in their 

pockets and voting this way, that way, or the other way. 

The question I submit now (we will consider other questions later) 

is as to-the power of Congress to do that particular thing, and it will 

not do for the Senator from Kentucl{y •to say that general policy re- quires it, or tliat the good of the country, requires it. That ;is no an- swer. Whatever we do here we must do either under so111e specific 

grant of power from the Constitution or under some grant that comes inferentially from a specific grant. ' 

Now, I ask the Senator from Kentucky in all candor where do we get the power to pass any bill here that will take from me, as an attorney of a State court, rights which I now possess under the laws of the 

State and under the rules of the court which admitted me to practice 

in that State? That is the question. 

Mr. BECK. l\Ir. President, I do not want to be interrupted again 

until I finish this answer. The Senator from Oregon introduced an amendment to this bill, which I shall read. He either introduced it 

in good faith or in bad faith, and he knows which. If introduced in 

good faith, he had doubtless carefully considered the authority unde.~; 

which he could sustain it and ask the Senate to pass it. If he did not, 

it is a little too late to ask me such a question now. If he introduced 

it in bad faith, let him confess it to the country. 

Amendment by l\Ir. MITCHELL, of Oregon. 

After punishing the offenses that I had prescribed in my bill, he adds: 

Or from any bank or other corporation, ·or officer o1· agent thereof, which obtained its charter or any pecuniary aid from the United States; or fi·om any cor- poration or company, its officer or agent, engaged in the business of interstate commerce, by land or wate~ or in the business of any interstate transportation, or in the transportation of united States mails; or from any corporation, com- pany, firm, or person, or officer or agent thereof, engaged in the production, man- ufacture, or sale in the United States, or in the business of importing into the 

United States from any foreign country, any article whatsoever upon the importation of which any customs duty is now levied, or shall at any time hereafter be levied by any act of Congress; or from any co1·poration, company, or person, its officer or agent, engaged in the manufactnre, product.ion, consumption, or sale of butter, oleomargarine, tobacco, whisky, or wines, or any other 

product or article whatsoever in any manner now taxable or subject to taxatioB. 

by any act of Congress; or of any company, firm, corporation, or person, its 

officer or agent, engaged in raising milch cows, or beef-cattle, or hogs, or in the 

manufacture or sale of butter, or of the oleo oil from which is manufactured 

oleomargarine. -

Now, was that offered in good faith or in bad faith? 

Mr. MITCHELL, of Oregon. Does the Senator want an answer? 

Mr. BECK. I do. 

Mr. ~HTCHELL, of Oregon. Mr. President, I disbelieve wholly in 

the power of Congress to pass any such bill as the Senator from Ken- tucky introduced. I believe there is no constitutional power to pass 

any such bill, but I have the right.as a member of this body, in view 

of the fact that the bill introduced by the Senator might pass and 

might become a law, to offer such amendments as I see proper in order 

to make it as reasonable as it well could be made, although unconstitutional in the end. 

Mr. BECK. Then the answer is that the amendment of the Senator fiom Oregon was offered in bad faith, and for the purpose of making the measure odious and defeating it. The Senator from Oregon comes in the same category with the distinguished Senators who represent the Judiciary Committee in my opinion in regard to their action. 

Not one of the~ wants to pass the bill. Then w by not meet the propositions of the original bill squarely, argue it upon its merits as I presented it, let those who oppose it vote against it, and let us all take 

the responsibility for the legislation, be it good or bad, before the conn- try? That is the manly way to do it; thatis the fair way to do it; and 

it, as I look at things, is the only honest way to do it. 

I am not criticising other men's ideas of honesty and fair play. I am oiving my own for what they are worth. I do not care at this tim~ to answer any more of the questions of the Senator from Oregon, 

after reading his own amendment and hearing his own avowal in re- gard to it, except perhaps I ought to &'ty, with proper respect for him, 

that it is not only the right but the duty of Congress, as it is of every 

court, as it is of every body of men, to prescribe n1les and regulations 

which shall secure impartiality in its members; which shall prevent 

scandal being brought upon it by its being honestly and fairly charged 

that interested men, pretending to be disinterested, constitute the tribunal which is trying the case; and I say that public policy gives to 

Congress the right to judge of the qualifications of its own members, 

and of what rights they '3hall give up when they see fit to aspire to 

places in this body, and it seems to me but reasonable to require 

that they shall not take pay from the people and the land-grant rail-. 

roads at the same time. They can not serve two masters whose interests 

are in direct antagonism. 

I read from the Revised Statutes, when this subject was up at the 

last session, provisions showing that the Congress of the United States 

had passed laws to the effect that members of neither Honse of Congress 

shall practice in the Court of Claims. That is a limitation upon the ,right of the lawyers in both Houses as strong as that I propose. The 

natural right argued for by the Senator from Oregon would extend to 

the right of a member of Congress to practice in the Court of Claims. 

Why was that enactment made? Because the United States is interested. Is not the United States as much interested in obtaining baek 

from these railroads millions and millions of acres of land, if it is held 

wrongfully, and in securing the $60,000,000 loaned to them, and for 

which we hold a mortgage on their property, as it is in the little matters that mn.y be involved in a case brought before the Court of Claims? 

'Vo have a contract with these land-grant roads that they shall carry our mails upon such terms as Congress may prescribe. Ought not 

those terms to be prescribed by a body ot impartial men and not have 

the attorneys of those railroads here dictating what the terms shall be? 

We have power and by law provide in those very charters that our troops 

and munitions of war shall be transported' by these land-grant roads 

free of charge, and they deny that we have any right -except to use the 

road-bed and putourown carsupon them if we like, and if we demand 

their cars they can charge for them; they are doing it now. .The 

settlement of that question may come at any time before Congress. We 

have a right to give our construction as to the true meaning of their 

obligation to transport our troops and our munitions of war, and we have a right to decide that and all other like questions without having 

any railroad attorney voting in either House. · I am not seeking to legislate on abstract propositions. There are other provisions under the Thurman act which I might read, showing 

that. there is every reason why the attorneys in land-grant cases should 

be excluded from our deliberations, but no reason can be given why 

every one of us should not be an attorney in a privabe controversy for a man who owns a milch cow or who is engaged in raising hogs or tobacco. Men who can not see the distinction between these two classes 

of cases are not the men I care to argue with. We have other provisions 

of law in the Revised Statutes which I read when the debate was last 

up, punishing with fine and imprisonmentEvery member of Congress or any officer or agent of the Government who, 

directly or indirectly, takes, receives, or agrees to receive, nny money, property, or other valuable consideration whatever, from any person for procuring, or aiding to procure, any contract, office, or place., from the Government or any 

Department thereof, or from any officer of the United States, for any person whatever, or for giving any such contract, office, or place to any person whom- soever, and every person who, directly or indirectly, offers or agrees to give, or gives, or bestows any money, property, or other valuable consideration whatever, 

for the procuring or aiding to procure any such contract, office, or place, and every 

member of Congress who, directly or indirectly, takes, receives, or agrees tore- ceive any money, property, or other valuable consideration whatever after his 

election as such member, for his attention to, services, action, vote, or decision on any question, matter, cause, or proceeding whlch may then be pending, or inay by Jaw or under the Constitution be brought before him in his official capacity, or in his plaoo as such member of Congress, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor. Such members of Congress so offending shall be deemed guilty 

of a. misdemeanor, and shall be imprisoned not more than two years and fined not more than $10,000. 

Double the amount provided in the bill which I offered is prescribed 

by law against any member of Congress who Will aid the humblest or most deserving constituent he has, no matter how much trouble be may 

be put to, in obtaining a post-office or a post-office contract, or in obtaining any claim from the Court of Claims, or in any way meddling 

with matters of that sort. Yet it is contended that limitations may be 

put upon the common right of the lawyer in regard to practice in the 

Court of Claims, in regard to all the little matters that his own con- stituents may need his bel pin; that is all right; that is law now. But 

it is argued that we are infringing the constitutional right of members 

of the bar if we tell them that as we have to deal with railroads which 

bold empires of our land and millions of dollars of our money, who are under contract to pay it back, who are under contract to carry our mails upon the terms we order, and to transport our munitions of war, 

and our soldiers free of charge, that they sball not sit or vote in either 

House of Congress if they insist upon acting as attorneys of those roads. 

1\'Ir. HOAR. I should like to ask a question of the Senator from 

Kentucky, if he will allow me, but I wish to assure him that I do not 

want to put it in any personal sense. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from Kentucky 

yield to the Senator from :Massachusetts? · Mr. BECK. The Senator from Massachusetts reported this substitute. He had better speak in his own time, and he will then be able 

to tell us whether he thinks in good faith that a lawyer who is attorney for a man who owns a milch cow or a pig ought not to be a mem- ber of Congress, but that he may be if he is an attorney for the North- ern Pacific, the Union Pacific, or the Central Pacific Railroads. He can do that in his own time. 

?lfr. HOAR. I understand the Senator does not want to be interrupted. 

Mr . . BECK. I would rnther not. I think the Senator will have 

enough to do to defend l1is bill and show wherein it is an improvement 

on the one I originally offered. 

Mr. HOAR. I will take some time when the honorable Senator from 

Kentucky feels good natured, as ! .wished to ask him a question. 

Mr. BECK. I am in perfect good humor, but I want to get the facts 

before the Senate. The Revised Statutes again provide: 

SEc.l782. No Senator, Representative, or Delegate, after his election and dur-· ing his continuance in office, and no head of a. Department, or other officer or clerk in tlle employ of the Government, shall receive or agree to receive any com- pensation whaterer, directly or indirectly, for any o;ervices rendered, or to be 
...... 1886." CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 181 

rendered, to any person, either by himself or another, in relation to any pro- ceeding, contract, claim, controversy, charge, accusation, arrest, or other mat- ter or thing in which the United States is a party, or directly or indirectly interested, before any Department, court-martial, bureau, officer, or any civil, 

military, or naval commission whatever. Every person offending against this 

section shall be deemed guilty of a. misdemeanor, and shall be imprisoned not more than two years, and be fined not more than SlO,OOO, and shall, moreover, by conviction therefor, be rendered forever thereafter incapable of holding any 

office of honor, trust, or profit under the Government of the United States. 

Is not that a limitation on the right of a member of Congress? He 

e.an not appear for his constituents, the men who have been his clients, 

in an honest case, and defend them before a court-martial or defend 

them on a charge or accusation before any of the bureaus of the Government, becauSe if he takes one dollar or accepts a fee for any service 

he may have rendered, however meritorious the case of his censtituent 

may be, he is to be forever deprived of holding any office of profit, 

honor, pr trust, and to be fined $10,000 and imprisoned for two years. 

That is the law now, and yet when I introduced a bill, because, as I 

said, all sorts of crimination and recrimination had been indulged in 

for years among the members of both Houses as to the powers and influence and interest these great railroads have in both bodies, I am told that I ain seeking to overthrow the Constitution. · Why, Mr. 

President, when the clerks in our Departments are dismissed or resign, 

those who may be lawyers cannot practice their profession in any of 

the Departments in wpich they were eng~ged for two years after that 

time. Is not that a limitation upon the natural right of the lawyer, 

of the man, to make a living? He accepts the office knowing that 

those limitations are imposed upon him. Worse than that, the Revised Statutes provide as follows: 

SEc. 3739. No Member of or Delegate to Congress shall, directly or indirectly, himself, or by any other person in trust for him, or for his use or benefit, or on his account, undertake, execute, hold, or enjoy, in whole or in part, any con- tract or agreement made or entered into in behalf of the United States, by any officer or person authorized to make contracts on behalf of the United States. 

Every person who violates thii section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, 

and shall be fined $3,000. · 

• * * * * * * SEc. 3741. In every such contract or agreement to be made or entered into, or accepted by or on behalf of the United States, there shall be inserted an express 

condition that no member of Congress shall be admitted to any share or part of 

such contract or agreement, or t-o any benefit to arise thereupon. 

It is an insult, according to the view of gentlemen on the other side, 

against every member of Congress and in the face of every contract . made to-day in the United States that he shall not have any interest 

in it. I should like to know, and I hope the Judiciary Committee will 

tell me, what they find to oppose in the bill which I presented, dealing 

only with corporations chartered by the United States; not seeking to 

interfere with those chartered by the States, not seeking to meddle 

with anything except the great questions that may come before us, 

when I insist public right, common decency, justice, and the honor of 

every member of this body and the body at the other end of the Capitol are involved, in having the world understand that a Senator or Representative is not here as the hireling or the retained attorney or 

the agent of any of the corporations with which we pre dealing. In 

doing that am I insulting this body or any member of it? I had no such purpose and no such thought. 

The first honest impulse of the Senate was developed by a vote on 

the yeas and nays of 37 to 11 that it was a fair and proper thing to do, so that when it was said we were under the influence of railroad cor- poratio·ns or had something to do with them, all of us could say to our 

maligners, ''Go to the courts; they are open to you; you can fine and 

imprison me if that is the fact; I deny it." Now they can make the 

charges, and because there is no way of punishing anybody we can all 

be smirched by the intimations given out, as I read when I spoke before, on leading members of this body that they were dealing with 

these questions as though they were interested. However, I do not care to go over that again. 

I never offered a bill in better faith since I have been a member of 

this body than I did this bill. I thought it was a bill for which every 

"Senator would be glad to vote and to have it become a law, so as to 

prevent suggestions that any of us are in the interest or pay of railroad 

corporations, and~ am amazed to find a bill now substituted for it that 

is going away so far beyond what I supposed any Senator in good faith 

would want to pass. I can but feel it is offered for the purpose of having it adopted as a substitute and then voted down by the very men who presented it. 

All I ask is to have the vote taken as it was before, upon the bill I 

presented, and let gentlemen who are opposed to it vote 3oon.inst it, and 

let those who are in favor of it vote for it; but I do not want to have 

it killed by indirection nor to have it thrown out of this body by any 

subterfuge or substitute, which the men who offer it avow, as I believe 

they all will, that they are themselves opposed to. 

l\1r. MAXEY. 1\fr. President, I voted for the bill presented by the 

Senator from Kentucky. There is no doubt whatever in my mind 

that the Congress of the United States, like any other legislative body, 

has a right to prescribe the qualifications of a person to be admitted as 

an attorney and counselor-at-law in the courts of the United States. 

The State Legislatures do prescribe that a man shall have a good moral 

character and be a man of honorable deportment, and that must appear tO the proper court-in my State from the county court-before 

he is permitted even to be examined for a license. . The Constitution of the United States confers upon each House the 

right to punish a member for disorderly behavior. Will any man say 

that the Senate of the United States would not ha.ve a right to punish a member whose .conduct was regarded by this body as casting an imputation upon the body, whatever might be the character of that con- duct? If the Senate regarded the practiceoftheprofessionofthelaw by' 

one of its members in the courts of the countr.y for a corporation created 

by the laws of the United States as a stain upon the character of that ·Senator, and thought it would bring him into suspicion before the people 

as being interested (because the lawyer in the old Senate Chamber 

and the legislator in this hall would be in an awkward attitude before 

the people), have w~ not the 1·ight in the protection of ourselves to say 

that such a man, if that man be a Senator of the United States, shall 

not be permitted to practice law in any court organized by the laws of 

the United States when he as a Senator may have to act on the rights 

of that corporation as a legislator? I think we hav.e a clear right to 

do that. That is my judgment about it, and I think we ought to do it. 

I admit that the bill so far as it attempts to prescribe qualifications 

for a lawyer in the State courts is beyond the power of this body. We can not prescribe the qualifications of a lawyer who practices in the 

State courts; but we can prescribe the qualifications of a lawyer who 

practices in the courts of the United States, and if we see proper to 

make such a provision we have a perfect right, in my judgment, to do 

it, and we can punish the man. Whilst the courts might not exclude 

him, whilst the court might say that this is a qualification placed upon 

the lawyer after he has obtained vested rights in the court by the is- suance of his license, yet the question is not a question for us as to the 

course of the courts, but it is, "Have we a right to protect ourselves?" 

If we regard the bill as a bill for the protection of the integrity of 

the Senate of the United States, if Congress should regard it as a bill 

for the protection of the integrity of the members of Congress, they 

have a perfect right, in my judgment, to pass the bill. About that I 

have no doubt, and believing that it would relieve this body and be 

regarded by all as a relief, and place them in a better position before 

the country to pass the bill, I voted for it. 

At almost every session of Congress we have questions arising in this 

body in which great corporations are directly and immediately con- cerned. Take, for example, the question of the forfeiture ofland grants, 

and there are many other great questions which spring up. One comes into this body and votes upon such a measure here, either for or against 

it. His client is immediately inter~ted in the vote which is taken, 

and it therefore is a protection to that man to provide that no one here 

shall have any employment which would interfere with his action as a member of this deliberative body. · 

1\!y colleague (Mr. CoKE], who is now confined to his room by sickness, as a member of the Judiciary Committee, and on behal( of the 

minority, had prepared an amendment covering not only the members 

of Congress but any civil officer of the. United States, limiting the 

provision to corporations created by the laws ofthe United States, no~ 

having anything to say as to what should be done in the State courts. 

In my judgment his amendment is directly in the right line, and I 

ask the Secretary to read it; and, at the proper time, I shall, on his behalf, if he ·is not able to do it himself, offer it as a substitute for the bill. 

The PRESIDENT pro . tempo1·e. The proposed amendme1;1t will be 

read. 

The SECRETARY. It is proposed to strike out all after the enacting 

clause of the bill and to insert: 

That it shall be unlawrul for any member of either House of Congress, or any civil officer of the United States, to accept employment as attorney-at-law, or payment for services of any kind, or any gratuity whatever, from any railroad 

company, or any officer or agent thereof, which ·obtained its charter, or any 

grant of lands, or pecuniary aid from the United States; and any person who 

violates this provision shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, a nd, on conviction, be fine~ in any sum not exceeding 85,000, and imprisoned not more than one year, in the discretion of the court. 

1\Ir. CALL. 1\Ir. President, when this bill was before the Senate for 

consideration at its former session I expressed my decided opposition 

to it for many reasons. First, because there is no necessity for such a 

bill. If the Senator from Kentucky knows of any case in which a 

Senator has been corruptly influenced, the remedy provided is by ex- pulsion from this body, and it is his duty to appeal to the Senate for 

the exercise of its judgment upon this subject. That is the tribunal 

which the Constitution provides for the preservation cf the purity of 

character and the propriety of conduct of members here. It is not a trial under criminal laws by a different tribunal to control the inde~ 

pendence of this body, not by submitting the members of the body to an inferior tribunal, to an inferior court, not even the Supreme Court, 

for accountability for their conduct in this body. 

The Senator from Kentucky refers to railroad grants and proceedings 

for their forfeiture as a reason f~r passing this bill. I and others who 

voted against this bill voted for the forfeiture of the Northern Pacific 

Railroad grant. The Senator from Kentucky voted against it. We 

were both honest, but how can he assume that Senators are influenced 

here because of sympathy with railroad corporations and vote in their 

interest when he finds that he himself, the advocate of this bill, was 
182 OONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. DEOEMBER 15, 

voting for the confirmation of that va.st approp.riation pf the ·public ate for his demeanor and conduct here. The bill of the Senator from 

domain while those who voted ao<73inst his bill voted for the forfeiture Kentucky says that although the Senate here has given him n ac- of that great railroad interest? In my opinion it is not possible to give quittal, although it has conformed its rules to what they regard to be a vote more in the interest of corporations and more against the inter- right and allow him to be a railroad attorney if he sees fit, yet the court 

ests of the people than the vote to confirm the grant of this vast empire shall punish him for doing that which he does in conformity with the 

of land in violation of the conditions of the grant, as I and many others I rules prescribed by the Senate. 

think, and yet no one doubts that those who gave this vote are infln- The right of expulsion, of course, is in each House. By the Constienced by no other than honest opinions, and we know that they are tution he is amenable to expulsion for wh::~.t? For t1ny conduct which 

not railroad attorneys nor interested in :railroads. the Senate. may deem a sufficient and proper cause. Now, it is no ar- But this bill is not needed by any existing evil, because if Senators gument to come and ask for the passage of a la.w when another body are to be bought they will not be prevented from being bought because has the constitutional power and authority to do complete and entire 

they can not be retained openly as attorneys. They will be bought as j~stice in the matter. Why refer this question to the courts? Is not 

much with the bill of the Senator from Kentucky and a. hundred such this body competent, is not this body of character enough, has not 

bills as they will be bought without it. If the Senate is so corrupt this body the purity of purpose to purge-itself of men who are cor- that it can not preserve the purity and character of its members, to ruptly retained and influenced by corporations ? The assumption of 

whom and to whose public spirit and sense of duty the Constitution has the bill is that there is not character enough in these Senators, the 

committed the entire supervision of their conduct, it is hopeless to sup- representatives of States and the people of the States, to preserve pupose that you can find any other tribunal in the country which can rity and uprightness and disinterestedness in this body. coerce them by the fear of penal conviction and punishment into the But that is not all, Mr. President. The Senator from Oregon [Mr. 

performance of their duty. There are a hundred ways in which mem- MITcHELL] very properly called attention to that feature of the bill 

bers of Congress may be bought if they are corrupt-much more effect- of the Senator from Kentucky which provides that a member of Conive than by retaining them as attorneys. I venture the assertion that gress shall accept no retainer or employment from any railroad cor- there is no member of this body who would accept employment by a poration which had a land grant from the United States in any conrailroad company which had interesta before this body for considera- tingency o:r under any circumstances, whether it had any interest in 

tion and ootion. And if they should the Senate would not allow it. the legislation of Congress or had none, and which punishes him and 

But, .Mr. President, the bill is clearly unconstitutional. There is not makes him a criminal. Where is the authority of this body to do that? 

tho shadow of a reason or a plausible ground upon which it can be The Senator from Texa.S [Mr. MAXEY] says that Congress has au- defended. The Senator from Kentucky goes to the Revised Statutes to thority to regulate the praetice of the law in the different courts, to 

find out what the Constitution is and what is its obligation upon us prescribe who shall be lawyel'S admitted to practice. But what of 

here. Let us go to the Constitution itself and see where he gets the that? This is not a question of practice in the courts; it is a question 

power to enact this bill by which a Senator of the United States is limited in the civil em- Mr. BECK. Will the Senator from Florida allow me to interrupt ployments in which he has a right to engage. It is a question whether 

him, so that he may argue the question more elaborately? the Senate or Congress have a right to say t<> me I shall pursue this, 

Ur. CALL. Oh, yes. that, or the other employment. It is a question whether Congress has 

Mr. BECK. I only want to present a case to give him a chance. a right to say what contracts a Senator may make. If corporations be 

On the 18th day of December, 1812, a good while ago, Congress pro- corruptly influencing his conduct here, the Constitution has made him 

vided by law, and the President approved it, that- responsible to you. If they are not, what right has Congress to say 

It shall not be lawful for any judge appointed under the authority of the what contracts a man shall make? , .. United States to e~ercise the _Profession or employment of counsel or atto~ey, A citizen of a State is amenable here to the grants of the Constituortobeengagedmthepra.cticeofthelaw. Andanypersonoffendingaga1nst t• t tedb th S 4-~ fj 0 •th 1 te ·bil•t the prohibition of this section shall be deemed guilty of n. bi,gh miademeanor 10n, a.s s a Y e enaiAJr rom regon, Wl comp e a 1 Y to . . · do everything not forbidden by the Constitution of the United States; 

Has no! ~ngress the sru;ne nght ~prescribe that lts mem~ers sh_all and where comes the. authority of this body to say what contract a. citnot. engage m t~e pro.fess;on of law on behalf of corporations With izen of a State shall make? If you limit it to a. Senator, the Oonsti· 

which Congress 18 dealing · tntion has said what shall be the qualifications of a Senator. If you Mr. C~L. Well, let us see. The bill of the Senator from Ken- divorce the senatorial character and make him a citizen a.s this bill 

tucky provides: . proposes to do, and prescribe what business relations h~ shall enter 

Thaht shall be unlawfulfor any member of e1ther ~ouse of Con&Tes to accept into there is no part or n~,.,.cl of the bill that has even a plausible employment as attorney-at-law, or payment for sel"Vlces of any kind, from any ' . . . .r-~ 

railroad con1pany, or any officer or agent the1·eof, which obtained its charter, ground of constitutionality. or any grant of lands, or pecuniary aid from the Unit;ed Stat;es; and any person Mr. BECK. Will the Senator :ill ow me again to make a suggestion? who violates this proviSion shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on con vic- Mr CALL Certainly tion, be fined in any sum not exceeding $o),OOO, and imprisonment not more than • · • . . . one year, in the discretion ofthe court, l'11r .. BECK.· I made the suggestion before I argued .the question. 

The Constitution of the United States provides who shall be a Sen- The nght of any man to trade, to sell or buy goods IS und~ubted; 

a tor and what his qua.li.fications shall be. The Senator from Kentucky yet whe~ General Grant sought to make the greatest merchant m New 

seeks by a statute to add another qualification to a Senator. He pro- York hiS. Secretary of the Treasury he was m:et by the fact th~t for 

poses to provide that the man who is a. Senator with the constitutional that particular office a man who was engaged m that sort of b~ess 

qualifications shall be guilty of a misdemeanor if, being a Senator, he could not act. as ~ecretary of the Treasru:r, ~nd he had to let ht~ go. 

does that which he has a lawful right to do, and, being convict-ed of a That was no infringement of Mr. Stew~ s nght to ~ve the par~cular 

misdemeanor, he then becomes subject to expulsion from the Senate. place, but he could not h?ld th~t place 1f engaged m that busmess. 

The very qualifications which the Constitution requires of him, and Now all I propose to say IS that if a lawyer. propos~ to be a Senator he--

says no other shall be required, are made by the bill of the Senator ~hall not b~ ~ a~mey for a land-grant railroad Wlth whom we have 

from Kentucky a cause of disqualification by conviction in a court. unporlant litigation. The Constitution says that- · Mr. CALL .. Exa.cily. The law ~as I?erfectly competent and alto- . 

· No person shall be a Senator who sha.ll not have attained to the age of thirty gether proper lD re~rd to. the qualifi.catwns of the Secretary of the 

years and been nine years a. citizen of the United Sta.oos, and who shall not, Treasury; but here lS the dtfference: The Senator from Kentucky says, when' elected, be an inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen. and says truly, he wants to pass a law that a Senator shall be some-

. Then thirty years of age, nine years' citizenship of the United States, thing else besides an inhabitant of a State and a citizen of the United 

and inhabitancy of the State from which he shall be chosen constitute States for nine years and thirty years of age; he wants a law that says 

the qualifications of a Senator of the United States. he shall not be a Senator if he is an attorney of somebody; and that is 

Mr. BECK. Does the Senator from Florida think that I seek to precisely the difficulty in the cnse. The difficulty is that the Senator 

change any of those qualifications? · wants a statute to provide an additional qualification for being a SenMr. CALL. Yes, I do. I think-- a tor or a Member of Congress, and one for which there is no necessity, 

Mr. BECK. Allow me to say that I have no idea of changing any except upon the assumption that this body and the other House are too 

qualifications of a Senator at all, but when a Senator with all those q uali- corrupt to purge themselves of men who abuse their public trust. 

fications comes here (and the law says now he shall not practice in the The office of Secretary of the Treasury of course is a creature of ConCourt of Claims, that he shall not take money to obtain offices, that he gress, and so aleo the office of judge may be regulated, though it is not 

shall not engage in any contract, that he shall not take a bribe), I pro- the creature of Congress, by criminal laws. 

pose to say that he shall not be an attomeyfo.r a land-grant road; that Mr. GRAY. So are corporations creatures ofla.w. 

is alL Mr. CALL. Certainly corporations are, but corporations are not 

Mr. CALL. The Senator unfortunately is not the law, but the bill Senators. Tbn.t is the difficulty in the case. 

he ha.s presented provides that if a man nine years a citizen of the Members of this body are both Senators and citizens of States. 

United States, thirty years of age, and who is an inhabitant of the As Senators, for their official conduct in this body, they are immediately 

State from which be has been chosen, in addition thereto is the attor- amenable to the Senate alone, and mediately to the people of the 

ney of a railroad corporation he shn.ll not be a Senator. That is the several States by whose Legislatures t;hey are chosen. They are not 

effect of the Senator's bill. The Constitution says that if he has these subject for their official conduct to laws which the other Honse of Con .. qualifications he has a right to be a Senator. The Constitution says gress and the President enact; neither House can confer on the other 

that he shall be subject to expulsion according to the sense of the Sen- or on the President any part of the power of expulsion, which is only 
1886~·· CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 183 

the power of ju9ging of the propriety of the conduct of a Senator as a 

Senator, and condemning him for it; a member of Congress as a mem- ber of Congress. As Senator he does not and can not practice. 

It is as a citizen of a State that he practices law and takes retainers, 

and makes contracts, and pursues one or another occupation. Now the 

bill of the Senator from Kentucky and the amended bill of the committee propose to enact a. law that a -citizen of a State being a Senator 

shaH not make a contract of one kind or another. It assumes authority 

and power over the citizens of States to declare what contracts they 

mayormay not make, authority and power in Congress to allow some and prohibit others. If Congress has power to declare what contracts 

the citizens of States may or may not make in one case it has it in all 

others, for there is no grant concerning it and no limitation or re.c;triction of it. These propositions are too plain for doubt or argument. , I presume the Senator from Kentucky, and all other Senators, will 

admit that you cannot make a law to indict, convict, and punish a. Senator because he entertains one opinion or another, because he advocates this or the otherside of any question, because he votes one way or another, because as a Senator he has conducted himself with propriety or impropriety, because he has acted from patriotic or unpatriotic motives, because he has acted from selfish, from corrupt, or incorrupt motives. Yon can not make a law to indict, convict, and punish a citizen of a State for making contracts lawful in his Sta.te, which the 

State alone can make unlawful, and which no one claims Congress has 

any right or power to legislate about. But the argument is that although you can not by law punish, regulate, or control a Senator or Member of Congress in his or their official conduct, and although Congress can not by law prescribe the conduct of a citizen or punish him 

for acts done in pursuance oflaws of his .State under their r:ightfnl 

power, yet by putting two things t<?gether, neither ofwhich you have 

any power to do, you in some way acquire the power. 

But, Mr. President, the whole of this subject is a reflection upon Congress, and that is the point of view in which it has its most serious 

aspect. It is a declaration by ourselves that we have not the virtue and 

the courage and the character to perform our constitutional function 

and duty here of keeping this body pure of corrupt motive and of 

purging it of men who unworthily perform their functions. That is the 

declaration of this bill, and, sir, it is not true. Whatevermotive,s may 

influence men in this body, as they do outside, of sympathy with, of 

indulgence towards great corporate interests, whatever convictions as to those great corporations there may be, I undertake to say that in this 

Q<>dy there has been no considerable influence ·exerted by a corruptly 

influenced opinion favorable to corporations. 

But, Ur. President, the amendment from the Judiciary Committee 

is equally objectionable with the orjginal bill. It is equally uncon- stitutional; it is equally unnecessary; and I shall propose, if it is 

proper now to do so, to strike out all after the word •' Congress'' on the eleventh line of the amendment. The difference is simply this: 

The bill of the Senator from Kentucky proposes to punish with fine 

and imprisonment "any member of either House of Congress" who 

acceptB "employment as attorney at law, or payment for services of 

any kind, from any railroad company, or any officer or agent thereof, 

which obt-ained its charter or any grant of lands or pecuniary aid from 

the United States." 

The amendment of the Judiciary Committee proposes to in.fl.ict a like 

punishmentwhen measures specially affecting the interests of such railroad are pending 

before Congress. 

A member of Congress is not punished under the amendment if he 

accepts a retainer when measures are not pending before Congress 

affecting that particular corporation. What possible reason can there 

be for prohibiting a man from practicing law as an attorney for any person because he is a member of either House, when there is no question 

concerning the person employing him in any respect whatever? - I subIQ.it, therefore, that to strike out all after that will t<> those who believe Congress has the power and believe that the two Houses are too 

corrupt to purge themselves of men who abuse their trust-those who 

believe those two propositions-that bill would answer all the purposes 

of the Senator from Kentucky. 

For myself, I believe that the proper power is in Congress, in each 

House of Congress, not by statute, but by expulsion; and whenever we become so degraded that we can not trust ourselves to perform our high 

constitutional functions, then we can not by sta.tute give power to some other tribunal to punish us for our own failure to perform our 

duty. 

I am prepared to vote for a rule of the Senate prohibiting Senators 

from acting as attorney of any corporation, or from having important 

interests before Congress. In my opinion that is the proper and only 

remedy, and a very complete and efficient one. Mr. HOAR. Mr. President, I suppose there will hardly be a vote 

on this matter to-night. I desire to say something on the question 

before a vote is taken. 

Mr. MORRILL. I will move an executive session. 

Mr. HOAR. I was about first to ask that the unfinished business 

for to-morrow be laid before the Senate, and then I will inove an exec- utive session. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Mass.:1.chusetts 

asks that the unfinished business for to-morrow be laid before the Senate. That action will be taken if there be no objection. 

The CHIEF CLERK. ''A bill (S. 512) to repeal certain sections of 

the Revised Statutes relating to the appointment of civil officers." 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Before the Senator makes his motion 

for an executive session, the Chair will lay before the Senate a message 

from the President of the United States. 

INTERNATIONAL COPYlHGIIT. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate the following 

message ·from the President of the United States; which was read: 

To the Senate and House of Representatives: 

I transmit herewith for your information a report from the Secretary of State, 

inclosing the correspondence which h as passed b etween the Department of 

State and 'he governments of Switzerland and France on the subject of international copyright since the date of my message of ~~b~~~6<J:£'i~~~~n. 

EXECUTIVE MANSION, 

Washington, DccembN' 15, 1886. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The message of the P.r.:esi.dent with 

the accompanying documents will be referred to the Committee on 

Foreign Relations, and printed. · . .Mr. HOAR. Has not the Committee on Patents charge of the copyright question? . The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The same subject-matter is before 

the Committee on Foreign Relations. 

TREASURY ACCOUNTS. 

Mr: HOAR. .I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of 

executive business. 

Mr. lll.ANDERSON. Will the Senator allow me to make a report 

from the Committee on Printing? 

Mr. HOAR. Certainly. ~Ir. MANDERSON. I am instructed by the Committee on Printing to report back the letter of the Secretary of the Tl'easury, transmitting, in compliance with law, the accounts rendered to and settled 

with the First Comptroller of the Treasury for the fiscal year ended · June 30, 1886, with a recommendation that the document be not 

printed. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore . . The Senator from Nebraska, from 

the Committee on Printing, makes a report recommending that the 

document referred to by him be not printed. It will be so ordered, 

unless objection be made. 

EXEL'UTIVE SESSION. 

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

of executive business. . 

The motion was agreed to; .and the Senate proceeded to the consideration of executive business. After five minutes spent in executive 

session the doors were reopened, and (at 4 o'clock p. m.) the Senate 

adjourned until to-morrow, Thursday, December 16, at 12 o'clock m. 

NOMINATIONS. 

E xccuiit:enominationsreceived by the Senate the 15th day of December, 1886. 

POSTMASTERS. 

Frederick A. Ross, to be postmaster at Tuscumbia, in the county of 

Colbert and State of Alabama, in place of John C. Goodloe, jr., sus- pended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth 

section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Charles H. Finley, to be postmaster at Modesto, in the county of 

Stanislaus and State of California, in the place of John E. Ward, re- signed. · 

Henry Fox, to be postmaster at Healdsburg, in the county of So- noma and State of California, ~n place of Leslie A. Jordan, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission 

expires on the 27th day of January, 1887. 

Luman A. Manchester, to be postmaster at Merced, in the county of 

Merced and State of California, in the place of' Samuel A. King, resigned. 

Bayard T. Smith, to be postmaster atPasadenn., in the county of Los 

Angeles and State of California, in the place of A. 0. Bristol, resjgned. 

Philip Stein, to be postmaster at Pomona, in the county of Los.Angeles and State of California, in the place of Theodore Rnth, resigned. 

Elia8 B. Hinckley, to be postmaster at Stonington, in the county of 

New London and State of Connecticut, in the place of James Pendleton, whose commission expired June 16, 1886; G. D. Stanton, who was confirmed July 3, 1886, having declined the appointment, and, therefore, not having been commissioned. 

Edward F. Meeker, to be postmaster at Bridgeport, in the county of 

Fairfield and State of Connecticut, in place of Julius W. Knowlton, 

suspended -under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixtyeighth section of the Revised Statutes ofthe United States. 

Lucius M. Monroe, to be postmaster at New Canaan, in the county 

of Fairfield and State of Connecticut, in place of Selleck T. St. John, 

suspended under the provisions of the se" enteen hundred and sixtyeighth section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Aaron C. Seeley, to be postmaster at Danbury, in the <J9unty of Fairfield and State. of Connecticut, in place of John Tweedy, suspended 
184 CONGRESSIONAL -REOORD-SENATF. DEOE:uBER 15, 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

George F. Thorpe, to be postmaster at West port, in the county of 

Fairfieldand State of Connecticut, in the placeofHenryP. Burr, whose 

commission expired August 7, 1886. 

Henry C. Tyler, to be postmaster at Deep River, in the county of Middlesex and State of Connecticut, in the place of S. ~f. Shipman, deceased. · 

James ·w. Forrest, to be postmaster at Georgetown, in the county of 

Clear Creek and State of Colornoo, in the place of Silas C. Bennett, re- signed. 

David Hammer, to be postmaster at Mitchell, in the county of Davi- son and Territory of Dakota, in place of George A. Silsby, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Frederick B. Smith, to be postmaster at C_olumbia, in the county of 

Brown and Terri tory of Dakota, in the place of John R. James, resigned. 

Jefferson B. Browne, to be postmast~r at Key West, in the county of 

Monroe and State of .Florida, in the place of Nelson F. English, whose 

commission expired July 6, 1886. 

M. R. Cooper, to be postmaster at Saint Augustine, in the county of 

Saint John's and State of Florida, in the place of William W. Dewhurst, 

whose commission expired July 18, 1886. · Hiram Hubert, to be postmaster at Quitman, in the county of Brooks 

and State of Georgia, in place of Samuel U. Griffin, suspended under 

the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United States. 

George W. Lamar, to be postmaster at Savannah, in the county of 

Chatham and State of Georgia, in place of Alexander N. Wilson, sus- pended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth 

section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Thomas B. Gess, to be postmasteratBoise City, in the county of Ada 

and Territory of Idaho, in the place of John A. Post, deceased. · James A. Able, to be postmaster at Auburn, in the county of San ga- m on and State of illinois, in the place of William W. Lowdermilk, 

whose commission expired May 16, 1886. 

Robert L. Allen, to be postmaster at Joliet, in the county of Will and 

State of Illinois, in place of John Woods, suspended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the Revised 

Statutes of the United States, and whose commission expires on the 2d 

day of ~larch, 1887. 

Ellis Briggs, to be postmaster at Roodhouse, in the county of Greene 

and State· of Illinois, in the place of John Roodhouse, resigned. 

EdwardS. Burns, to be postmaster at Hillsborough, in the county of 

Montgomery and State of illinois, in plac.e of John V. Coale, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

John Culbertson, to be postmaster at Delavan, in the county of Taze~ 

well and State of Illinois, in place of Rowland J. Beatty, suspanded 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth sec- tion of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Conrad Durkes, to be postmaster at Franklin Grove, in the county 

of Lee and State of Illinois, in the place of Thomas W. Scott, resigned. 

Edward Gardner, to be postmaster at Rochelle, in the county of Ogle 

and State of Illinois, in place of Henry H. Glenn, suspended under the 

provisions of the seventeen hundred and sL""rty-cighth section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United States. 

George W. Hess, to be postmaster at Evanston, in the county of Cook 

and State of illinois, in place of John A. Chilgs, suspended under the 

provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Charles W. Jones, to be postmaster at Griggsville, in the county of 

Pike and State of Illinois, in place of Abbie !tf. Lawton, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States-: 

William A. McCune, to be postmaster at Sterling, in th~ county of 

Whitesides and State of Illinois, in place of Charles M. Worthington, 

suspended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixtyeighth section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Frederick M:. Mead, to be postmaster at Marengo, in the county of 

McHenry and State of lllinoi8, in the place of John Q. Adams, whose 

commission expired December 20,1885. 

Julian S. Palmer, to be postma-ster at Duquoin, in the county of Perry 

and Stat~ of Illinois, in place of Isaac M. Neely, suspended under the 

provisions of -the seventeen hundred and sixty-6ighth section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission expires on the 29th day of January, 1887. 

Wilber C. Scanland to be postmaster at Normal, in the county of 

McLean and State of illinois, in the place of A. C. Taylor, resigned. 

Edward Smith to bepostmasteratCarrollton, in thecountyofGreene 

and State of lllinois, in place of James Lynn, suspended under the 

provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

John 1.1. Startzman to be postmaster at Savanna, in the county of 

Carroll and Stat~ of illinois, in place of Charles L. Howe, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth sec- tion of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

John W. Toler, to be postmaster at Carbondale, in the county of 

Jackson and State of Illinois, in place of Simeon Walker, suspended 

under the proviaions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Samuel P. Tufts, to be postmaster at Centralia, in the county of 

Mariqn and State of Illinois, in place of Samuel G. Kell, susvended 

under the provisions of the sevent~en hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Michael E. Tuohy, to be postmaster at Nokomis, in the county of 

Montgomery and State of illinois, in place of Dennis P. Brophy, sus- pended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth 

section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Charles Wiesemann to be postma-ster at Warsaw, in the county of 

Hancock and State of Illinois, in the place of John E. Johnston, sus- pended under the t>rovisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth 

section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Eli W. Brown to be postmaster at Columbia City in the county of 

Whitley and State of Indiana, in place of John W. Baker, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Edwin W. Callis to be postmaster at Martinsville, in the county of 

Morgan and State of Indiana, in place of James G. Bain, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

ofthe Revised Statutes of the United States. -

Noble P. Howard, jr., to be postmaster at Greenfield, in the county. of Hancock and State of Indiana, in the place of Henry C. Marsh, re-· signed. _ 

Sextus H. Shearer, to be postmaster at Huntington, in the county of 

Huntington and State of Indiana, in place of William H. Hessin, sus- pended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth 

section of the Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose com- mission will expire on the 16th day of January, 1887. 

Richard Burke, to be postmaster at What Cheer, in the county of 

Keokuk and State of Iowa, in place of Byron S. Brainard, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission 

expires on the 16th day of January, 1887. 

James P. Carleton, to be postmaster at Iowa Falls, in the county of 

Hardin and State of Iowa, in place of Thomas B. Knapp, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

.A)exander Charles, to oe postmaster at Cedar Rapids, in the county of 

Linn and State of Iowa, in place of William W. Smith, suspended un- der the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

James N. Davis, to be postmaster at Knoxville, in the county of Marion and State of Iowa, in place of William W. Craddick, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission 

expires on the 1st day of March, 1887. 

James Frey, to be postmaster at Sigourney, in the county of Keokuk 

and State of Iowa, in place of John Morrison, suspended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Richard L. Gidley, to be postmaster at Malvern, in the county of 

Mills and State of Iowa, in the place of Oscar H. Snyder, whose com- mission expired August 7, 1886. 

Alice H. Groves: to be postmaster at Afton, in the county of Union 

and State of Iowa, in place of Charles K. Ingham, suspended under the 

provisions of tJ;te seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of theRevised Statutes of the United States. 

Samuel L. Harvey, to be postmaster at Centerville, in the county of 

Appanoose and State of Iowa, in place of Eugene C. Haynes, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

John Hornstein, to be postmaster at Boone, in the county of Boone 

and State of Iowa, in place of Newton W. Simmons, suspended under 

the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Joseph H. James, to be postmaster at Sac City, in the county of Sac 

and State of Iowa, in the place of Robert II. Lamoneux, resigned. 

Thomas A. :Massie, to be postmaster at Logan, in the county of Harrison and State of Iowa, in place of Allen K. Grow, suspended under 

the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission expires on the 3d day of March, 1887. 

William H. Merritt, to be postmaster at Des Moines, in the county 

of Polk and State of Iowa, in place of John Beckwith, suspended under 

the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission expires on the 27th day of February, 1887. 

Frank P. Motie, to be postmaster at Odebolt, in the county of Sac 

and State of Iowa, in place of F. R. Bennett, suspended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Georp;e P. Neal, to be postmaster at Columbus Junction, in the county 

of Louisa an~ State of Iowa, in place of Charles M. Fulton, suspended 
1886. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 185 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission 

expires on the 12th day of February, 1887. 

George Paul, to be postmaster at Iowa City, in the .county of John- son and State of Iowa, in place of Jacob Ricord, suspended under the 

provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of theRevised Statutes of the United States. 

Ed ward K. Pitman, to be postmaster at Leon, in the county of Decatur and State of Iowa, in place of William J. Sullivan, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

George G. Rodman, to be postmaster at Washington, in the county 

of Washington and State of Iowa, in place of William B. Bell, sus- pended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth 

section of the Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission will expire on the 16th day of January, 1887. 

George C. Scrimgeon, to be postmaster at Belle Plaine, in the conn ty 

of Benton and State of Iowa, in the place of William A. Hunter, resi~ned. 

John F. Baker, to be postmaster at Ellsworth, in the cou~ty of Ellsworth and State of Kansas, in place of Geor~e Huycke, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Walstine P. Eddy, to be postma.s1er at Columbus, in the county of 

Cherokee and State of Kansas, in place of HughY. Gavigan, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

James R. Hall, to be postmaster at Howard, in the county of Elk 

snd. State of Kansas, in place of Adrian Reynolds, suspended under 

the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United·States. 

John E. Ireland, to be postmaster at lola, in the county of Allen and 

State of Kansas, in the pla-ce of Cyrus M. Simpson, resigned. 

John M. Landis, to be postmaster at Oswego, in the county of Labette 

and State of Kansas, in place of Littleton S. Crum, suspended undex 

the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Ephraim W. Lyon, to be postmaster at Cherry Vale, in the county of ~Iontgomery and State of Kans;lS, in the place of William M. Parks, 

whose commission expired August 7, 1886. 

John Q. A. Shelden, to be postmaster at Manhattal!, in the county 

of Riley and State of Kansas, in place of Albert A. Stewart, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Milton Burch, to be postmaster· at Georgetown, in the county of 

Scott and State of Kentucky, in place of Edward C. Barlow, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section ·ofthe Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission ex- pires on the 19th of February, 1887. 

Cecile Bailey, to be postmaster at Opelousas, in the county of Saint 

Landry and State of Louisiana, in the place of Louis Desmarais, whose 

commission expired August 3, 1886. · · James C. Soape, to be postmaster at Shreveport, in the county of 

Caddo and State of Louisiana, in the place of William McKenna, whose 

commission expired August 4, 1886. 

William J. Bradbury, to be postmaster at Fairfield, in the county of 

Somerset and State of Maine, in the place of William H. Emery, .... resigned. 

Henry Penniman, to- be postmaster at Winthrop, in the county of 

Kennebec and State of Maine, in place of Elliott Wood, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

John M. Corse, to be postmaster at Boston, in the county of Suffolk 

and State of l!Iassachusetts, in place of_ Edward S. Tobey, SUSP.ended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Walter L. Keith to be p~tmaster at Campello, in the county of Plymouth and State of Massachusetts, in the place of Albert Keith, whose 

commission expired April17, 1886. 

James Shevlin to be postmaster at Sandwich, in the county of Barnstable and State of Massachusetts, in the place of Fred. S. Pope, whose · commission expired August 7, 1886. 

Agnes J. Smith to be postmaster at Stockbridge, in the county of 

Berkshil"e and State of Massachusetts, in the place of Henry L. Plumb, 

whose commission expired October 14, 1885. 

Euchariste Brule to be postmaster at Lake Linden, in the county of 

Houghton and State of Michigan, in the place of Peter Primeau, re- signed. 

Ira B. Card, to be postmaster at Hillsdale, in the county of Hillsdale 

and State of Michigan, in place of Eli Van Valkenburgb, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission 

expires on the 19th day of February, 1887. 

Frank F. Cole, to be postmaster at Albion, in the county of Callioun 

and State of Michigan, in place of Martin Haven, suspended under the 

provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Daniel C. Johnson, to be postmaster at Ithaca, in thecountyofGratiot and State of Michigan, in place of Robert Smith, suspended under 

the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of 

the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Abner M. Moon, to be postmaster at Dowagiac, in the county of eass 

and State of Michigan, in place of C. L. Sherwood, whose commission 

expired December 20, 1885. , Hananiah D. Pugh, to be postmaster at Lansing, in the county.of 

Ingham and State of Michigan, in place of Stephen D. Bingham, sus- pended under the provisions of theseventP.en hundred and sixty-eighth 

section of the Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose com- mission ~xpires on the 7th of February, 1887. 

George C. Thompson, to be postmaster at Midland, in the county of 

Midland and State of Michigan, in place of John H. ;Kelly, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Louis P. Zent, to be postmaster at Sturgis, in the county of Saint 

Joseph and State of Michigan, in the place of Marcus D. Kirk, sus- pended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth 

section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Henry J. Dane, to be postmaster at Le Sueur, in the county of Le 

Sueur and State of Minnesota, in the place of John M. Farmer, whose 

commission expired July 18, 1886. 

Edward }"""ay, to be postmaster at Moorhead, in the county of Clay 

and State of Minnesota, in the piace of Benjamin F. Mackall, resigned. 

Ella L. Kempe, to be postmaster at Montevideo, in the county_ of 

Chippewa and State of Minnesota, whose commission expired August 

3, 1886. . Fred Puhler, to be postmaster at Ada, in the county of Nol"man and 

State of Minnesota, in place of Peter Ramstad, suspended under the 

provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United States. 

John·Stuart, to be postmaster at Pipe Stone, in the county of Pipe 

Stone and State of Minnesota, in place of Daniel E. Sweet, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Michael Sullivan, to be postmaster at Marshall, in the county of Lyon 

and State of Minnesota, in the place of Squire D. How, resigned. 

William Groome, to be postmaster at Vicksburg, in the county of 

Warren and State of Mississippi, in the place of John D. Tinney, whose 

commission expired October 15, 1885. 

Martha J. Tucker, to be postmaster at Okolona, in the county of 

Chickasaw and State of Mississippi, in the place of R. M. Tindall, 

whose commission expired August 4, 1886. 

James W. Clarke, to be postmaster at DeSoto, in the county of Jefferson and State of Missouri, in the place of Philip C. Zollman, whose 

commission expired July 27, 1886. 

Irvin P. Powell, to be postmru:ster at Montgomery City, in the county 

of Montgomery and State of Missouri, in place of Stephen D. Ham, sus- pended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth 

section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

JohnS. Preston, to be postmaster at Shelbina, in the county oi: Shelby 

and State of Missouri, in the place of John S. Chandler, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth sec- tion of the Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission will expire on the 20th of December, 1886. 

D. F. Whitsitt, to be postmaster at Pleasant Hill, in the county of 

Cass and State of Missouri, in place of Charles L. Mayo, suspen:ded 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

George W. Carlron, to be postmaster at Deer Lodge City, in the coun- ty of Deer Lodge and Territory of Montana, in place of Edward S. 

Stackpole, suspended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred 

and sixty-eighth section of the Revised Statutes of the United States, 

and whose commission exph·es on the 15th of February, 1887. 

Frank Campbell, t.o be postmaster at O'Neill, in the county of Holt 

and State of Nebraska, in the pla-ce of William D. Matthews, resigned. 

William F. Wolfe, to be postmaster at Friend, in the county of Saline and State (}f Nebraska, in place of Edward Whitcomb, suspended 

under the provisions ofthe seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

James C. Hagerman, to be postmaster at Reno, in the county of 

Washoe and State of Nevada, in pla-ce of Orlando Evans, suspended 

undertheprovisions ofthe seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

James P. Smith, to be postmaster at Elko, in the county of Elko and 

State of Nevada, in place of CharleS H. Sproule, suspended under the 

provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of theRevised Statutes of the United States. 

OrmondE. Colony, to be postma-ster at Keene, in the county of Cheshire and State of New Hampshire, in place of Asa Smith, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

William F. Harmon, to be postmaster at Great Falls, in the county 

of Strafford and State of New Hampshire, in place of Nathan Wentworth, suspended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and 

sixty-eighth section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. · 
"186 CONGRESSIONAL REOORD-SENATE. DECEMBER 15, 

Edwin Judkins, to be postmaster at Franklin, in thecountyofMenimack and State of New Hampshire, in place of Eunice G. Colburn, sus- pended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth 

section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Charles E. Mcintire, to be postp:mster at Lancaster, in the county of 

Coos and State of New Hampshire, in place of Charles E. Allen, sus· pended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixtyeighth section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Charles A. Morse, to be postmaster at New Market, in the county of 

Rockingham and State of New Hampshire, in place of Samuel H. 

Greene, suspended uncler the provisions of the seventeen hundred and 

sixty-eighth section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Bridget Lane, to be postmaster at Summit, in the county of Union 

and State of New Jersey, in place of Theodore F. Littell, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth sec- tion of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Eckford Moore, to be postmaster at Trenton, in the county of Mercer 

and State of New Jersey, in place of Charles H. Skirm, suspended under 

the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission expires on the 27th of February, 1887. 

Edgar M. Young, to be postmaster at Silver City, in the county of 

Grant and Territory of New Mexico, in place of Owen L. Scott, sus- pended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth 

section of the Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose com- mission expires December 28, 1886. 

Frank B. Brown, to be postmaster at Corning, in the county of Steuben and State of New York, in place of Ephraim P. Rogers, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Harlow E Bundy, to be postmaster at Oneonta, in the county of Otsego and State of New York, in the place of H. D. Nelson, resigned. 

Carlos E. Chafee, to be postmaster at Springville, in the county of 

Erie and State of New York, in place of Theodore B. Norris, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Andrew Dardis, to be postmaster at Cazenovia, in the county of :Madison and State of New York, in place of Fred. M. Taylor, suspended 

nuder the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission 

expires February 26, 1887. 

William H. Greenhow, to be postmaster at Hornellsville, in the 

county of Steuben and ·state of New York, in place of Francisco M. 

Cronkrite, whose commission expired July 1, 1886. 

Lillian C. Keyes, to be postmaster at Yonkers, in the county ofW estchester and State of New York, in place of Merwin N. Jones, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission 

expires on the 3d day of March, 1887. 

Orville F. Levalley, to be postmaster at Naples, in the countyofOn:.. 

tario and State of New York, in place of William R. Marks, suspended 

under tb.e provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Orville A. Manville, to be postmaster at Whitehall, in the county of 

Washington and State of New York, in place of .John F. Clark, sus- pended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth 

section of the Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose com- mission will expire on the 12th of February, 1887. 

Daniel J. McGrory, to be postmaster at Westchester, in the county of 

Westchester and State of New York, in the place of Joshua J. Mallett, 

whose commission expired August 7, 1886. 

Thomas A Riley, to be postmaster at Ticonderoga, in the county of 

Essex and State of New York, in place of Frederick Weed, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revi ed Statutes of the United States. 

Charles E. Rose, to be postmasteratPatchogue, in the county ofSuffolk and State of New York, in place of William H. Sharp, resigned. 

Michael Tierney, to be postmaster at Salem, in the county of Washington and State of New York, in the place of Robert Cruikshank, 

whose commission expired July 18, 1886. 

Francis A. Willard, to be postmaster at Boonville,. in the county of 

Oneida and State of New York, in the place of William H. Cole, whose 

commission expired August 7, 1886. 

George B. Aten, to be postmaste:rat Wellsville, in the county of Columbiana andState ofOhio, in place ofThomas W. Butler, suspended 

under tlie provisions of the se-venteen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

John Cooke, to be postmaster at Bridgeport, in the county of Belmont and State of Ohio, in place of John M. Todd, suspended under 

the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Russell T. Dobson, to be postmaster at Bowling Green, in the county 

of Wood and State of Ohio, in place of Julius D. Bolles, suspended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission 

will expire on the 2d of January, 1887. 

William H. Gillespie, to be postmaster at Dayton, in the county of 

Montgomery and State of Ohio, in the place of Abram D. Wilt, whose 

commission expired January 30, 1886. 

Egbert Green, to be postmaster at Medina, in the county of Medina 

and State of Ohio, in place of James H. Greene, suspended under the 

provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of t4e Revised Statues of the United States, and _whose commission expires on the 20th day of December, 1886. 

John W. Hingeley, to be postm3Ster at Barnesville, in the county of 

Belmont and State of Ohio, in the place of Samuel B. Piper, resigned. 

Guilford B. Keppel, to be postmaster at Tiffin, in the county of 

Seneca and State of Ohio, in place of Otis T. Locke, suspended under 

the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eight section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission expires on the 20th of December, 1886. · 

J. E. Lohmann, to be postmaster a1i Hamilton, in the. county of 

Butler and State of Ohio, in the place of Ferdinand Van Derveer, 

resigned. 

Basil Meek~ to be postmaster at Fremont, in the county of Sandus1..-y 

and State of Ohio, in the place of David Betts, suspended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the Revised 

Statutes of the United States. 

John R. Meloy, to be postmaster at New Lexington, in the county of 

Perry and State of Ohio, in place of J. F. McMahon, suspended under 

the provi<~ions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission expires on the 5th day of February, 1887. 

John C. Riley, to be postmaster at Cincinnati, in the county of Hamilton and State of Ohio, in the pla{)e of Smith A. Whitfield, whose com- mission expired January 31, 1886. 

Charles N. Schmick, to be postmaster at Leetonia, in the county of 

Columbiana and State of Ohio, in the place of Wilson W. Forney, re- signed. 

John Shaw, to be postmaster at Van Wert, in the county of Van 

Wert and State of Ohio, in place of David P. Dunathan, suspended un- der the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of 

the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

James Brady, to be postmaster at Washington, in the county of Washington and State of Pennsylvania, in p1ace of James S. Stocking, sus- pended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth 

section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

William M. Breslin, to be postmaster at Lebanon, in the county of 

Lebanon and State of Pennsylvania, in the place of Christopher W. Carmany, suspended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and 

sixty-eighth section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Charles T. Cooper, to be postmaster at Sewickley, in the county of 

Allegheny and State of Pennsylvania, in place of Andrew W. Woods, 

suspended under the pro-visions of the seventeen hundred and sixtyeighth section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Charles W. Gant, to be postmaster at Irwin, in the county of West· 

moreland and State of Pennsylvania, in place of Simon D. Lauffer, sus- pended undertheprovisions of the seventeen hundred andsixty-eighth 

section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Alexander Graff, to be postmaste:r at Kittanning, in the county of 

Armstrong and State of Pennsylvania, in place of Edgar A. Brodhead, 

suspended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixtyeighth section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

James C. Henderson, tn be postmaster at Media, in the county of Dela- ware and State of Pennsylvania, in the place of 1.frs. Miranda Williamson, whose commission expired December 15, 1885, and who has also 

resigned. · 

Daniel W. Neagly, to be postmaster at Millersburgb, in the county of 

Dauphin and State of Pennsylvania, in the place of Roland Freck, 

whose commission expired July 6, 1886. 

James Sweney, to be postmaster at Chambersburg, in the county of 

Franklin and State of Pennsylvania, in plac~ of Edward W. Curriden, 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth sectiOn 

of the Revised Statutes of the United State&. 

John H. Turner, to be postmaster at West Grove, in the county of 

Chester and State of Pennsylvania, in the place of Joseph Pyle, whose 

commission expired January 12, 1886. 

A. Bowman Weaver, to be postmaster at Clearfield, in the county of 

Clearfield and State of Pennsylvania, in the place of Samuel J. Row, . whose commission expired August 3, 1886. 

James Mulligan, to be postmaster at Central Falls, in the county of 

Providence and State of Rhode Island, in the place of George F. Crowningshield, deceased. 

Caroline A. Youngblood, to be postmaster at Chester, in the county 

of Chester and State of South Carolina, in the place of Thomas N. 

Youngblood, deceased; and the name of the office having been changed 

from ''Chester Court House'' to ''Chester." 

George E. Blake, to be postmaster at Fayetteville, in the county of 

Lincoln and State of Tennessee, in place of William B. Douthat, sus- pended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth 

section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Anna B. Cheatham, to be postmaster at Nashville, in the county of 

Davidson and State of Tennessee, in the place of Benjamin F. Cheatham: deceased. 
\ 

1886. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HQUSE. 187 

Mary B. Johnson, to be postmnster at Clarksville, in the county of 

Montgomery and State of Tennessee, in place of William F. Green, 

suspended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixtyeighth section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Julien :u. Byrnes, to be postmaster at Bl'eoham, in the county of 

Washington and State of Texas, in the place of James E. Shepard, re- signed.· 

Robertson I. Coons, to be postmaster at Albany, in the county·of 

Shackelford and State of Texas, in place of Samuel F. Stinson, sus- pended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth 

section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Benjamin Kowalski, to be postmast;er at Brownsville, in the county 

of Cameron and State of Texas, in the place of Joseph Hopk'ins, deceased. 

N. W. Noell, to be postmaster at Cisco, in the county of Eastland 

and State of Texas, in place of David Redfield, suspended under the 

provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of ·the 

Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Dudley C. Brown, to be postmaster at Brandon, in the county of 

Rutland and State of Vermont, in place of John L. Knight, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. ' 

.A.sa M. Dickey, to be postmaster at Bradford, in the county of 

Orange and State of Vermont, in the place of George E. Gaffield, re- signed. 

Warren L. Howard, to be postmaster at Fair Haven, in the county of 

Rutland and StateofVermont, in place of Harris Whipple, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission 

will expire on the 19th day of February, 1887. 

Moses B. Thrasher, to be postmaBter at Newport, in the county of 

Orleans and State of Vermont, in the place ofHenry S. Lawrence, whose 

. commission e~ired August 7, 1886. 

Oscar D. Den·, to be postmaBter at Roanoke, in the county of Roanoke and State of V4'ginia, in place of Alexander S. Asberry, suspended 

undertheprovisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

ofthe Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Michael Gierman, to be postmaster at Norfolk, in the county of Norfolk and State of Virginia, in place of JamesW. Long, suspended under 

the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United States. 

George G. McNamara, to be postmaster at Port Townsend.,. in the 

county of Jefferson and Territory of Washington, in place ofW. H. H. 

Learned, suspended under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and 

sixty-eighth section of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

James W. Verlander, to be postmaBter at Huntington, in the county 

of Cabell and State of West Virginia, in place of Ira R. Wood, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

John A~ Bardon, to be postmaster at Superior, in the county ofDon.glas and State of Wisconsin, in place of Sidney E. Tubbs, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Patrick H. Carney, to be postmaster at Waukesha, in the county of 

Waukesha and State of Wisconsin, in place of Elihu EnosJ suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. 

Jacob J. French, to be postmaster at Sparta, in the county of Monroe 

and State of Wisconsin, in place of Lewis S. FisherJ suspended under 

the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission will ex- pire on the 7th day of February, 1887. . Roderick McGregor, to be postmaster at River Falls; in tho county 

of Pierce and State of Wisconsin, in place of George E. Reed, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes, and whose commission will expire on the 4th 

day of January, 1887. 

James E. Jones, to be postmaster at Portage, in the county of Columbia and State of Wisconsin, in place of Charles C. Dow, suspended 

under the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section 

of the Revised Statutes of the United States. .T eremiah Sn.llivan, to be postmaster at Ashland, in the county of 

Ashland and State of Wisconsin, in the place of Ernest H. Wilson, re- signed. 

Carl Zillier, to be postmaster. at Sheboygan, in the county of Sheboygan and State of Wisconsin, in place of Nathan Cole, suspended under 

the provisions of the seventeen hundred and sixty-eighth section of the 

Revised Statutes of the United States, and whose commission expired on the 12th day of December, 1886. 

TERRITORIAL OFFICERS. 

Preston H. Leslie, of Glasgow, Kentucky, to be governor of Montana 

Territory, vice Samuel T. Hauser, resigned . . 

Henry E. Haydon, of Still water, Minnesota, to be clerk of the district court for the district of Alaska, vice Andrew T. Lewis, to be re- moved. · 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 

WEDNESDAY, Deoembcr 15, 1886. 

The House met at 12 o'clock m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. W. 

H. MILBURN, D. D. 

The Journal of the proceedings of yesterday was read and approved. 

SPRINGFIELD .ARMORY. 

The SPEAKER laid before the House a letter from the Secretary of 

War, transmitting a statement of expenditures at the Springfield 

Armory, and of arms fabricated, altered, and repaired at that armory 

during the fiscal year ended June 30, 1886; which wu.s referred to the 

Committee on Expenditures in the War Department, and ordered to 

be printed. 

PURCHASES FOR USE OF ARMY. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the House a letter from the Secretary of War, transmitting reports received by the Quartermaster-General of purchases for the use of the Army for the fiscal year ended J nne 30, 1886; which was referred to the Committee on Expenditures in the 

War Department, .and ordered to be printed. 

COUNT OF ELECTORAL .VOTE. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the House the following messnge 

from the Senate, accompanying the bill (S. 9) to fix the day for the 

meeting of the electors of President and Vice-President, and to provide 

for and regulate the co.unting of the votes for President and Vice-President, and the decision of questions arising thereon: 

IN THE SENATE, Dccnnber 14,1886. . 

Resolved, That the Senate disagree to the amendments of the }louse of Representatives to the bill of the Senate, No.9, and ask a. conference with the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon. 

Ordered, That Mr. HoAR, Mr. EDMUNDS, and Mr. PUGH be the conferees on the part of the Senate . 

The SPEAKER. If there be no objection, the request of the Senate 

for a conference upon the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on this 

bill will be agreed to. The Chair hears no objection. During the day 

the Chair will announce the appointment of conferees on the part of 

the Honse. 

The Speaker subsequently announced the appointment of Mr. CALDWELL, Mr. EDEN, and Mr. COOPERJ as the House conferees. 

A~""UES, ETC. 1 IN WASHINGTON, D. C. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the Honse the bill (S. 2938) regulating the use of avenues, streets, alleys, and reservations, in the city 

of Washington; which was read a first and second time, referred to the 

Committee on the District of Columbia, and ordered to be printed. 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE. 

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

To Mr. IKE H. TAYLOR, for two days, on account of sickness. 

To Mr. MITCHELL, for one week, on account of sick-ness in his 

family. 

WITHDRAW .AL OF P A.PERS. 

Mr. SMALL, by unanimous consent, obtained leave k withdraw 

from the files of the Honse papers filed by him with the bill (H. R. 

3667) for the relief of Walter D. Plowden, no action having been had on the bill. · 

Mr. BOUTELLE, by unanimous consent, obtained leave to withdraw 

from the files of the House papers in the case of Ella I. Small, filed 

with the bill (H. R. 1021). 

AMENDMENT, NATIOYAL BA~'X ACT. 

Mr. WARNER, of Missouri. ~1r. Speaker, I a.skunanimousconsenl 

to take from the House CalendaT for immediate consideration the bill 

(H. R. 9110) to amend sections 5191 and 5192 of_ the Revised Statutes 

of the United States, and put it upon its passage. 

The SPEAKER. The bill will be read, subject to objection. 

The bill was read, as follows: 

Be it enacted) &c., That section 5191 of the Revised Statutes be amended by 

adding to the list of cities named therein the following. namely: Nashville, 

Charle ton, Atlanta, Richmond, Galveston, Saint Paul, Indi&napolis, Kansas City, and Omaha.. SEc. 2. That section 5t9"2 of the Revised Statutes be amended by adding to the list of cities therein named the following, namely: Nashville, Atlanta., Galveston, Saint Paul, Indianapolis, Kansas City, and Omaha . 

Mr. BURROWS. It is difficult to unden."'tand exactly what this bill covers unless these sections of the Revised Statutes to which reference 

is mane are read. 

Mr. WARNER, ofl\Iissouri Ifthegentleman willpa.rdonme, !think 

I c..'ln make a brief explanation which will show the proprie~ of the 

passage of this act. 

Mr. BURROWS. That will be satisfactory to me. Mr. W .A.RNER, of Missouri. Section 5191 of the act creating the 

national banks provides that national banks located in sixteen cities 

therein named shall keep on hand, of the moneys of the Uil.ited States, 

a sum equal to 25 per cent. of the aggregate a1f1ount of the circulation 

of the bank and of its deposits. All other national banks are req nired 

to keep on hand only 15 per cent. of the aggregate amount of the circulation and· deposits. Section 5192 provides that the national banks, .