1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 669 

tion bills are obvious items that nobody could object to because it is 

supposed that we will put them on for the reason that they are such. · 

That is intolerable. 

It is not the debatable items in many cases that are left off, but it is 

the items about which,. no man can make demur, about which: no question can be raised, such as the item covered by the amendment of the 

Senator from Connecticut, that are left off bills on purpo_se as we fear, 

that seeing how urgent they are, how undoubted the strength of their 

claim, the Senate must put them on. I repeat, sir, it is intolerable. 

Now, it is for the Senate to decide . • If the Senat-e takes this attitude 

and undertakes to carry it out there will never be a case where there 

will not be a :Qardship, there will never be a case where -it will not 

grind somebody. I am sorry it grinds the constHuent of the Senator 

from Connecticut; but this other practice has been grinding us ever 

since I have been a member of this body and a member of this commit~e, and there is no good reason why in considering the estimates 

which are made by the Departments after proper auditing and scrutiny, 

and after proper certification showing that there has been adjudication 

in the most solemn forms, these appropriations should be left off the 

bills that originate in the other end of the Capitol. There is ·no good 

reason why it should be so. Debatable questions enough will arise where the two Hou.;es will be 

in honest antagonism, and where the Senate will seek to put.upon appropriation bills subjects that are objectionable to the committees of 

the House and to the entire body; but there is no sense, there is no 

justice, it is, I say again, intolerable that items upon which there is no 

dispute should be left off for no reason whatever that can be given. 

And every particle of testimony, every one of the reports "!Jpon which 

_!.he Senate committee act being before the House committees when they · 

consider the subjects, and all information that is at our door being at 

their door, it is intorerable, sir, that we should be continually confronted with such items being left off; and t·he Senate committee have 

recommended that the Senate take its stand here. It is for the Senate 

to decide what it will do in the matter. The committee has done its 

do.ty. 

Mr. STEW ART. :Mr. PreSident, I do not see why the Senate should 

be dishonored by not. paying a debt acknowledged to be due, because 

somebody else will not do its duty. How can we escape the responsibility? It seems to .me it is our duty to put on all legitimate amendments. Here is a case where a debt is acknowledged and there is no 

question of it. I do not think we should be a party to bad faith or to 

teaching the public that the Government of the United States will not 

keep faith with its creditors and pay its debts. I would put on every 

claim about which there was no question, where there was an honest 

debt due, and I would pass the bill. If anybody else wanted to repudiate at the other end, the responsibility will not 1·est on us. I believe 

in taking a stand right now. 

The case made by the Senator from Connecticut is absolutely plain; 

it is a shame to let the matter stand longer. The case is perfect, and 

it·is dishonoring the Senate to pass a bill and omit that claim. Send 

it back to the House and let them repudiate it if they will, but not us. 

The country will :find out who has done right and who has done wrong. 

All we have to do is to take care of our own consciences and do right 

here. I am in favor of the amendment, and I am in' favor of every 

proposition as clearly right as that, and I hope the Senate will put it 

on and will stand by the bill in that form. The country is intelligent 

and will :find out who is right and who is wrong. Because others say 

·we are extravagant we should not be scared from doing our duty in 

that regard, and I hope that the amendment of the Senator from Connecticut will prevail. I want to vote for it. I hope the Senate will 

stand by it. 

Mr. PLATT. 1\Ir. President, I do not know that I ought to delay 

the Senate any longer with this discussion, but I sympathize very 

much with the position which the Senator having this bill in charge 

has taken in this matter. I agree that the situation is intolerable, 

and I have felt it in past sessions and I feel it now. But it seems to 

me that we ought not to draw the line on this item, and I will tell the 

rea8on why I think we onght not to d'o so. 

This is for a debt which the Government owes where it has had the 

material. As my colleague says, it has sold the material, not used it, 

got the money for it, and the money is in the Treasury of the Urrited 

States, and our constituents need that money. They are not rich men; 

they can not afford to wait. It seems to me that we lflay draw the. 

line at another class of cases when the House refuses to make appropriations for deficiencies to carry on the Government in the future. 

There, I think, we might take our stand. We mightsaytot,heHouse, 

"If you will not appropriate for what is necessary to carry on the Government during the rest of the fiscal year, we will accept the situation, 

and the Government works and the Government needs shall not be 

attended to;" but I do not think we ought to go so far as to say that 

we will not pay a debt about which there is no question, where the 

Government has the money; and, indeed, I think, in this particular 

thing the Committee on Appropriations may very fairly assume that 

the House overlooked it, that it made a mistake. - Mr. 'HALE. The same documents which have been referred to were 

before the Honse committee which were before our committee. There 

is not a particle of additional information here that was not there. 

~fr. PLATT. But just look a,.t it. This deficiency bill th;tt came 

from the House last year included this as being an item which it was 

necessary to appropriate for in order to carry on the 'Government until 

the end of the fiscal year,· which was June 30, 1887. Here are the 

three items in the old bill, which the proper Department estimated 

would be required to carry on the operations of the Governmmt until 

June 30, 1887. That was in :March, 1887. It comes over here, it js. 

the print of the House bill which contains that, and now it can not be 

possible that the Committee on Appropriations in the House, _having 

recomm~nded that an appropriation should be made to carry on that 

work, and knowing, as the Senator says,. that notwithstanding the failure of the appropriation it had been done, and that the Government 

owed for it, would deliberately leave it out. 

Mr. HALE. Just what has been done. 

Mr. PLATT. I do not believe that it was deliberate; I think it 

must have been a mistake. t should scarcely feel justified in standing 

here and assuming that the House Committee on Appropriations and 

the House itself, having estimated for this matter as one wb,.ich was 

necessary to carry on the operations of the Government nearly a year 

ago, knowing that the work had been performed and that the Government owed every cent of it, and that there was no doubt about the 

amount that it owed, has now deliberately left it out. It is a pretty 

violent presumption, and I think the better way is to assume that in 

the haste of g~tting this deficiency bill over here, it is not the desire of 

the House and of its Appropriations Committee to refuse to pay the 

debts of the Government due more than seven months, that they overlooked this item, and the moment their attention is called to it they will 

gladly and joyfully put it in. · Mr. HALE. Several Senators have notified me of other amendments 

they wish to propose to this bill. It is very clear, therefore, t.hat we 

shall not be able to finish it to-night. 

.Mr. HA WI. .. EY. Let u.s have a vote. 

Mr. HALE. I move that the Senate do now adjo n. 

The PRESIQENT pro tempore. The Senator from .Maine moves that 

the Senate do now adjourn. Before putting the qu~tion on that motion, the Chair lays before the Senate the regular order, which is the 

bill (S. 371) to aid in the establishment and temporary support of common schools. The question is on the motion to adjourn. 

The motion was agreed to; and (at 4 o'clock and 35 minutes p. m.) 

the Senate adjourned until to-morrow, Wednesday, January 25, 1888, 

at 12 o'clock m. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 

TUESDAY, January 24, 1888. 

The House met at 12 o'clock m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. W. 

H. MILBURN, D. D. • The Journal of yesterday's proceedings was read and approved. 

INDUSTRIAL HOME, UTAH TERRITORY. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following mes· 

sage from the President of the United States; which was read, with the 

accompanying papers referred to the Committee on the Territories, and 

ordered to be printed: 

To the Senate ana How;e of Representat'tt•es: 

I transmit herewith the first report of the board of control, created by the act of Congress appro'\"ed August 4, 1886 (24 Stat., 252), for the management of 

the industrial home in the Tenitory of Utah, containing a statement of the ac- tion of the board in establishing the home, and an account of exper.o.'litures from 

the appropriation made for that purpose in the act G~OVE~nt,~E~AND. 

EXECUTIVE 1.\'!ANSION, January 23, 1888. 

DEFICIENCIES, COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY. 

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

the Secretary of the Treasnxy, transmitting an estimate from the Superintendent of the Coast and Geodetic Survey, of appropriations to sup- . ply deficiencies for expenses of that bureau for the current fiscal year; 

which was referred to the Committee on .Appropriations, and ordered 

to be printed. 

DEFICIENCY, REVENUE-CUTTER SERVICE. 

The SPEAKER pro te1npore also laid before the llouse a letter from 

the Secretary ofthe Treasury, transmitting an e.c;timate of deficiency in 

appropriations for the expenses of the revenue-cutter service for the 

current fiscal year; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed. 

ESTABLISHMENT OF LIGHTS, ETC. 

The SPEAKER pro temp01·e also iaicl before the House a letter from 

the Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting estimates from the LightHouse Board of appropriations for the e..c:tablishment of light stations, 

lights, etc.; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, 

and ordered to be printed. 
670 CONGRESSIONAL JlECORD-HOUSE. JANUARY 24·, 

T.A.RIFF ON CHAMP .A.GNE. 

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

the Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting correspondence in relation 

to the tariff on champagne, etc.; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means, and ordered to be printed. 

PRIVATE LAND CL.A.IM1 NEW MEXICO. 

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

:the Secretary of the Interior, transmitting, with a letter from the Acting Commissioner of the General Land Office and inclosures, a report of 

the su.n:_eyor-general for New Mexico upon the private land claim of 

Las Padillas or El Tajo tract; which was referred to the Committee 

on Private Land Claims. 

SURVEY OF THE GAULEY .AND MEADOW RIVERS. 

The SPEAKER p1·o tempore also laid before the House a letter from 

the Secretary of War, transmitting, with a letter from the Chief of Engineers, a report of the examination and survey of the Gauley and 

Meadow Rivers, West Virginia; which was referred to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors, and ordered to be printed. 

CLOTHING FOR NON-COMIIIISSIONED OFFICERS, ORDNANCE BUREAU. 

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

the Secretary of War, transmitting a letter from the Chief of Ordnance, 

with inclosures, recommending that an allowance of clothing be made 

to certain non-commissioned officers of the Ordnance Department; 

which was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs, and ordered 

to be printed. JEKYL ·.AND 1\IOSQUITO CREEKS. 

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

the Secretary of War, transmitting, with a letter from the Chief of 

Engineers, reports of examinations and surveys of Jekyl Creek, Geor- gia, and a part of Mosquito Creek, South Carolina; which was referred 

to the Committee on Riv~rs and Harbors, and ordered to be printed. 

LEAVE OF .ABSENCE. 

By unanimous &nsent, 1eaYe of absence was grunted as follows : To Mr. WEST, for one week, on account of business. 

To Mr. LAIDL.A. w, until Monday next; on account of sickness in his 

family. . To Mr. CocKR.A.N, extension of leave heretofore granted for ten days. 

To Mr. SPINOLA, indefinitely, on account of sickness. 

To Mr. CARLTON, indefinitely, on account of :sickness. 

To Mr. STRUBLE, for this day, on account of important business. 

WITHDRAWAL OF PAPERS. 

By unanimous consent, leave was granted to Mr. MILLIKEN to withdraw permanently from the files of the House papers filed by A. K. Choate with the Committee on Invalid Pensions in the Forty-ninth Con- gress upon which an unfavorable report was made. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

The SPEAKER p1·o tempore. The Chair will now call the committees for reports. · 

BILLS OF LADING CONCLUSIVE EVIDE ~CE. 

Mr. OATES, from the Committee on the Judicia.ry, reported back 

favorably the bill (H. R. 1527) to make bills of lading conclusive evidence in certain cases; which was referred to the House Calendar, and, 

with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

UNITED STATES WAR STEAM-SHIP HARTFORD. 

::M:r. WHITTHORNE, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, reported 

back favorably the bill (H. R. 1237} providing for the repair of the 

United States steam-ship Hartford; which was referred to the Commit- tee of the Whole House on the st..'l. te of the Union, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

BUILDING FOR SIGNAL OFFICE! WASHINGTON. 

Jllfr. MILLIKEN, from the Committee on Public Buildings and 

Grounds, reported back favombly the bill (H. R. 435~) for the purchase of a site, including the building thereon, and also for the erection of the necessary store-houses for the use of the office of the Chief Signal 

Officer of the Army, at the city of Washington, D. C.; which was re- ferred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, 

and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

WILLIAM P. THORNE. 

M:r. LANHAM, from the Committee on Claims, reported back favorably the bill (H. R. 2365) for the relief of William P. Thorne; which 

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

JOHN SNODDY. 

Mr. LANHAM also, from the Commrttee on Claims, reported back 

favorably the bill (H. R. 2974) for the relief of John Sn~dy; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on th~ .Private Cal- endar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

JOHN C. WE.A. VER. 

Mr. O'NEALL, of Indialla, from the Committee on War Claims, reported back with a favorable recommendation the bill (H. R.l08) for 

the relief of John C. Weaver; which was referred to the House Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Th_e call of committees for reports has 

been completed. 

CHANGE 0~ REFERENCE. 

:M:r. OWEN. I rise for the purpose of securing a proper reference for 

a bill which seems to have been improperly referred. I understand that 

it is not the rule that a bill improperly referred shall be sent by the 

committee which receives it to its proper committee. 

The SPEAKER pro tempo1·e. The Chair would say'"it is. 

Mr. OWEN. On the 9th of this month I introduced a. bill for the 

erection of a public building at Logansport, Ind. By some mistake it 

got into the box for private bills. This morning the clerk of the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds tells me that committee bas 

not yet received it. 

The SPEAKER pro ternp01·e. A public bill should go through the 

regular ch~el of presentation in the_House. If there be no objection, 

the change of reference desired by the gentleman from Indiana will be 

made. 

There was no objection. 

TERl\I OF COURT AT QUINCY, ILL. 

Mr. ADAMS, from the Committee on the Judiciary, reported back 

with a favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 1312) to provide for a term of court at Quincy, Ill. ; which was referred -to the Committee 

of tfie Whole House on the state of the Union, and, with the accom- panying report, ordered. to be printed. 

REWARD! ~G ESQUil\fAUX. 

Mr. DAVIS, from the Committee on Commerce, reported back with a fuvorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 1528) to reward theEsquimaux natives of the Arctic Ocean for acts of humanity to shipwrecked 

seamen; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to 

be printed. 

CLERK TO COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS. 

~fr. GRIMES. I desire to present a privileged report from the 

Committee on Accounts. 

The resolution referred to the committee (on motion of l\fr. CRISP) 

was read, as follows: ' 

Resolved, That the Committee on Elections be allowed a clerk, to be paid out 

of the contingent fund of the House, until June 30, 1888, at the rate of S'J,OOO per 

annum; and that the Committee on .Appropriations be,and hereby is, instructed to provide for an annual clerk to the C'-ommittee on Elections for the next fiscal 

year in the legislative, executive, and judicial appropriation bill at the rate of 

S'2,000 per annum. 

The report of the committee was read, as follows: 

The Committee on .Accounts has had under consideration a resolution referred 

by the House, providing that the clerk of the Committee on Elections should 

be an annual instead of a session clerk, and report as follows: 

By an act approved March 2,1887, it is made the duty of the Clerk of the House 

to open the sealed packages of testimony in contested-election cases and cause the srune to be printed and indexed. No provision is mu.de for compensation to any clerk for the labor thus imposed. Necessarily this labor must be done 

during the vacation between the adjournment of Congress on the 4Lh of Match 

and its reassembling in December following. Your committee learn from the 

Clerk of the House that he was personally engaged last spring and summer for 

months in reading proof from the Printing Office of the testimony in contestedelection cases and preparing indexes thereto. Your committee believe that 

this duty should not be imposed upon the Clerk of the House without giving him some clerical assistance, and it seems appropriate that the clerk of the 

Committee on Elections should render such service. Your committee has pre- pared an amendment requiring the clerk of the Committee on Elections to do 

this work under the direcLion of the Clerk of the House, and, thus amended, the passage of the resolution is recommended. 

PROPOSED AliiENDMENT • 

.Add : "Resolved further, That the clerk of the Committee on Elections· shall, under the 

direction of the Clerk of the House, aid and 'assist in the preparation and indexing of the records in contested-election cases." 

Mr. GRIMES. I think that the report of the committee explains itself, and unless some gentleman wishes to ask a question, I desire a vote 

upon the resolution and amendment. . The SPEAKER p1·o tempore. The :first question is upon the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia (.Mr. GRil'!IES]. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I desire to make a parliamentary inquiry. 

· The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it . .Mr. TOWNSHEND. I desire to know if we are in the hour for the 

consideration of reports of committees. 

The SPEAKERR 11ro tempore. We are not. The gentleman from 

Georgia made this as a privileged report from the Committee on Accounts. .Mr. HOLMAN. I call for the reading of the amendment again. 

The amendment was again read. 

Mr. CUTCHEON. Gentlemen about me were not aware that this was a matter for action and did not listen to the reading of the report. 

For one I should like to hear some explanation of it. ::M:r. GRIMES. I can only ask that the report be read again. It ex- plains itself. · 
• 

1888. .CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 671 

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

The report was again read. • The amendment proposed by the committee was agreed to, and the 

resolution as amended was adopted. , Mr. GRUfES moved to reconsider the vote by which the resolution was adopted; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. ~ 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will now recognize gentle- men who were not in their seats when their committees were called for 

reports. 

PROTECTION OF GIRLS IN THE DISTRICT. 

Mr. HEMPHILL, from the Committee on the District of Columbia~ 

reported a bill (H. R. 5870) as a substitute for the bill (H. R. 1496J 

to amend the Revised Statutes relating to the District of Columbia for 

the protection of girls and for the punishment of the crime of rape; 

which was read a :first and second time, referred to the House Calendar, 

and, with the aecompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

RECORD OF WILLS IN THE DISTRICT. 

Mr. HEMPHILL also, from the Committee on the District of Columbia, report.ed back with a fav_ora?Ie rec?~~ndation the bpl (H. _R. 

1514) relatinO' to the record of Wills rn the D1stnct of Columb1a; which 

was referred to the House Calendar, and, with the accompanying re- port, ordered to be printed. 

JOliN FARLEY. 

Mr. STONE, of Kentucky, from _the Committee on War Claims, re- ported back with a favorable ~ecommendation the bill (H. _R. 241) for 

the relief of .John Farley; which was referred to the Comm1ttee of the 

Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying 

report, ordered to be prj,nted. 

LUCINDA l\I1GUIRE. 

l'IIr. STONE of Kentuc1.ry, also, from the Committee on War Claims, 

reported a bill' (H. R. 5871) for the relief of Lucinda McGuire; which 

was read a :first and second time, referred to the Committee of the Whole 

Home on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, 

ordered to be printed. 

MARTHA L. RUSSELL AND OTHERS. 

Mr. STO:NE, of Kentucky, also, from the Committee on War Claims, 

reported back with a favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 565) 

for the relief of 1\iartha. L. Russell, Mary A. Howse, and Luta H. 

Howse· which was referred to the Committee of the Whole Honse on 

the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be 

printed. 

ESTATE OF FRANCIS lll. 1\IURRAY. 

Mr. STONE, of Kentucky, also, from the Committee on War Claims, 

reported back with an amendment the bill (H. R. 251) for the relief 

of the estate of Francis 111. Murray, deceased; which was referred to 

the Committee of the Whole Honse on thePrivate Calendar, and, with 

the amendment and the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

JAMES S. CLARK & CO. 

Mr. STONE, of Kentucky, also, from the Committee on Claims, re- ported back with a favorable recomm~ndation the bill (H. R. 3500) for 

the relief of James S. Clark& Co.; which was referred to the Comimttee 

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

QUARANTTNE STATION, CAPE CHARLES, VIRGINIA. 

Mr. WISE, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. 5872) to 

establish a permanent quarantine station at or near Cape Charles, Virginia; which was read a :first and second t:Jme, referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and ordered to be prmted. 

BAPTIST COLLEGE, LEXINGTON, 1\10. 

Mr. THOMAS, of Wisconsin, from the Committee on War Claims, 

reported back with an amendment the bill (H. R. 2601) fortherelief of 

the Baptist Female College of Lexington, Uo.; which was referred to the 

Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the 

accompanying report, ordered to be printe.d. 

ALFRED H. THOl\IAS. 

Mr. THOMAS, of Wisconsin, also, from the Committee on War 

Claims, reported back with a favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 

1067) to amend the war record of Alfred H. Thomas, deceased; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

FANNIE B. RANDOLPH AND DORA L. STARK. 

1\Ir. THOMAS, of Wisconsin, also, from theCommitteeon War Claims, 

reported a resolution referring the claim of Fannie B. Randelph and 

Dora L. Stark to the Court of Claims; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar. The report also 

recommended that the bill (H. R. 2411) for the relief of Fannie B. 

Randolph and Dora L. Stark be laid on the table. 

GEORGE W. SAULPAW. 

Mr. THOMAS, ofWisconsin, also, from the Committee on War Claims, 

reported a bill (H. R. 5873) for the relief of Georg~ W. Saulpa~; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Pnvate Calendar, and, with t.he accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH AT CHATTANOOGA. 

111:r. HIESTAND, from the Committee on War Claims, reported back 

with a favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 1073) for the relief . of the Roman Catholic Church of St. Peter and St. Paul at Chattanooga, Tenn.; which was referred to the Committee o_f the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanymg report, ordered 

to be printed. . 

AGREE:MENT WITH GROS VENTRE AND OTHER TRIBES. 

?!fr. HARE, from the Com.J.Ilittee on Indlan Affairs, reported back 

with a favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 1956) to ratify and 

con:fi.rm an agreement with the Gros Ventre, Piegan, Blood, Blackfeet, 

and River Crow Indians in Montana; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, and, with the 

accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

. HEIRS OF F. I. WHEELER. 

Mr. BROWER, from the Committee on War Claims, reported a bill 

(H. R. 5874) for the reliefof the heirs of the late Francis I. Wheelm;; 

which was referred to the Committee of the Wpole House on the Pnvate Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

STEA.J\-IER PLANTER. 

Mr. BROWER also, from the Committee-on Wa,r Claims, reported 

back with a favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 3580) for the 

relief of the pilot and crew of the steamer Planter; which wa,s referred 

to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Ca,lendar, and, 

with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

JAMES PRICE. 

Mr. BROWER also, from the Cm:p.mittee on War Claims, reported 

back with a fuvorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 3805) for the 

relief of James Price; which lVM referred to the Committee of the 

Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying re- port, ordered to be printed. · 

JAMES H. GILBERT. 

:1\fr. KERR, from the Committee on Claims, reported back with a favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 2067) for the relief of James 

H. Gilbert; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered 

to be printed . 

PAY 0 F CUSTOM-HOUSE E1IPLOYES. 

Mr. KERR also, from the Committee on Claims, reported back with a favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 2068) authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury to pay certain citizens of Chicago, employes of 

the custom-house, for extra time and service; which was re1erred to 

the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with 

the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

DISCHARGES, ETC., IN THE PUBLIC PRINTING OFFICE. 

.Mr. RICHARDSON, from the Committee on Printing, submitted the 

following report: 

~· Wherea.S it is reported that a considerable ~mmi?er of employes have been 

recently discharged from the force of the Public I_'nnter, and that others. have 

been granted involuntary furloughs, thereby reducmgthe force employed 1n the 

office of the Public Printer: Therefore, · ·• Resolved That the Public Printer be directed to report to this House whether 

he has rece~tly discharged or furloughed any of his force, and if so, how m11;ny, 

and for what reasons such discharges and furloughs have been made at a hme 

when the printing ordered by this House is largely in arrears. "Also whether in making such discharges and furloughs regard has been had to secti~n 1754 of the Revised Statutes,-by giving the preference to honorably 

discharged soldiers and sailo!s." . . . The committee have considered the resolutiOn, and direct It to be returned 

with the recommendation that it pass. 

Mr. RICHARDSON. I demand the previous question on the anoption of the resolution. 

The previous question was ordered, and the resolution w~s agreed to. 

Mr. RICHARDSON moved to reconsider the vote by wh1ch the reso- lution was agreed to; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be 

laid on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

PRINTING FOR CO)UUTTEES. 

Mr. RICHARDSON also, from the Connnittee on Printing, submitted 

the following report: . 

Resolution to authorize certain committees of the House to print documents 

and papers for the use of said committees, ~ith. the following !'ubstitute: 

Resolved, That the Committee on the Terr1tones, t~e Committee o~ ~he Public Lands the Committee on Agriculture, the Comm1ttee on the Jud101ary! the Committ~es on Indian Affairs, on Labor, on Milita~·y Affairs, and the Comnuttee on Rivers and Harbors be authorized to have prmted and bound such papers and documents for the use of said committees as theY_ may fin~ necessa!y.con- nected with subjects respectively considered by ~he said committees.durmg the ' presentCongress: Provided, The amount to be pnnted _by the Comm1tt~e on the Territories shall not exceed the sum of $500 ; the Committee on the Pubhc Lands, not to exceed $100 ; lhe Committee on Agriculture, not to exceed $100; the Com-
.. 

I • 

672 CONGRESSIONAL RECOR:p~HOUSE. · JANUARY 24, 

mittee on the Judiciary, not to exceed $200; the9ommitteeonlndianAffairs, not to exceed $100; on Labor, not to exceed $500 i.~ on Military Affairs, not to exceed 

$500; on Rivers and Harbors, not to exceed 1t000. 

Mr. RICHARDSON. I wish to say that in each case the Committee on Printing conferred--

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The House will come to order, so that 

the remarks of the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. RICHARDSON] may 

be heard. 

Mr. OATES. I wish to ask the gentleman from Tennessee what 

business there is before the Committee on Labor to authorize so much 

larger an expenditure for the printing of that committee than for many 

other important committees, for instance the Committee on the Judiciary. 

Mr. RICHARDSON. Ur. Speaker, I was about to say that the Committee on Printing1 in all these cases, conferred with the chairmen of 

the respective committees named in the .-esolution and the report, and 

while a limit is placed upon the amount which each committee will be 

permitted to expend, that limit is only fixed by our committee upon 

C?nsultation with the chairman of the committee indicated and upqn 

his statement that the amount named would be. ample for his com- mittee. It is not expected in each case that the entire amount allowed 

will be consumed. I move the previous question on the adoption of 

the report of the committee. 

The previous question was ordered; and under the operation thereof 

the substitute reported by the committee was agreed to, and the reso- lution as amended by the substitute was adopted. 

1\fr. RICHARDSON moved to reconsider the vote by which the re3olution as amended was adopted; and also moved that the motion to r.e- consider be laid on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

GEORGE W. BARR. 

Mr. CUTCHEON, by unanimous consent, report.ed back with amendments, from the Committee on Military Affairs, the bill (H. · R. 935) to 

grant an honorable discharge to George W. Barr from the Army; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

AGRICULTURAL REPORT FOR 1887. 

Mr. FUNSTON, by unanimous consent, introduced a resolution to 

print 1,000 copies of the report of the Commissioner of Agriculture for 

the year 1887; which was read a first and second time, referred to the 

Committee on Printing, and ordered to be printed. 

CHINESE IMMIGRATION. 

:Mr. BELMONT. I ask unanimous consent that the reference of a bill (H. R. 5659) introduced yesteraay, and which relates to the subject of Chinese immigration, be changed from the Committee on the 

Judiciary to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. If there be DO objection, the change of 

reference will be made. · 

T~ere was no objection, and it was ordered accordingly. 

FORT BROWN MrLITATI.Y RE3E&Y ATION, TEXAS. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I call for the regular order. 

The ~PEAKER pro tempore. The regular order is the call of com- mittees for one hour for the consideration of bills heretofore reported 

from committees. The hour commences at twelve minutes before 1 

o'clock; and the call rests with the Committee on Military Affairs. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I call up forpresentconsiderationaresolution 

of inquiry addressed to the Secretary of Wa.r in relation to the purchase 

of Fort Brown military reservation, Texas. I ask that there be some understanding between those who are in favor of this resolution, which 

has been reported by the Committee on Military Affairs, and those who 

oppose it, with reference to length of debate. I would like very much 

to have the debate closed and the resolution acted on to-day. I wish 

to be perfectly fair toward those representing each side of this question 

and therefore I propose that the time be divided equally. I sugO'est 

that thirty minutes be allowed ·each side for debate. The whole thlrty 

minutes on the side of the committee will probably not be consumed, 

because, as I hav~ said, we wish to have a vote to-day. 

Mr. RANDALL. Let the resolution be read. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The resOlution will be read as a matter of course. The Clerk read, as follows: 

Wh~reas it appears by an act passed March, 188J, the sum of $160,000 was ap- propru~;ted to enable the Secretary of War t.o acquire a good and valid title for th~ t[mted ~tates to the Fort Brown reservation, Texas, and to pay and extinguish all claims for the t1se and occupation of said reservation, provided that no part of this sum should be paid until a complete title be vested in the United 

States; 

Whereas it is alleged that disputes have arisen between the claimants as to their respective shares of this appr.opriation, and that the Secret..'lry of War bas not paid r..ny part of said amount; ~hereas by an act of Congress passed in 1875 the sum of $25,000 was appro- pna~ed for the purchase of the grounds and payment of the said Fort Brown, and 1n the report of General Sherman as to the sufficiency of the said sum it is 

alleged that the payment of $160,000 therefor would be a fraud on the Go,~ern- ment; . 

Whereas it is alleged that it will appear from the documentary evidence in 

the War Department, the Quartermaster-General's Office also the evidence of 

officials now in Washington who have served at said po~ likewise the testi- mony of ot.her citizens which can be obtained, that the sum' of $'50,000 would be 

a large price to pay for said reservation, including rent for the use and occupa- tion of the same: Therefore, • Resolved, That the Committee on Military Affai.rs be instructed to investiaate 

the subJect-f!1at.!-er herein named, with authority .to sen.d f01: persons and pap~rs; also to Inqtllre Into and report as to what necessity eXlsts, if any, for a military 

post at said point, and the cost to the United States of said post since 1865. Resolt·ed, That the Secretary of 'Var be directed to withhold the payment of any part of said sum of$160,000 for the grounds and rents of the said Fort Brown reservation. • . -

The report of the eom·mittee on Military Affairs was Tead, as follows: 

1\lr. TOWNSHEND, from the Committee on M ilitary Affairs, submitt.ed the following report (to accompany Mis. Doc. 70) : . 

The Committee on Military Affairs, to whom was referred the resolution re- lating to the Fort Brown, Texas, reservation, have considered the same and 

recommend its adoption, with the following amendment: Strike out the word 

"directed " .and insert the word "requested " in lieu thereof. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I yield ten minutes to the gentleman from 

Nebraska. (Mr. LAIRD]. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair understood the gentleman 

from Illinois to make some proposition about dividing the time. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. The time will be equally divided. I have ar- ranged that with the gentleman from Texas [Mr. CRAIN]. 

Mr. CRAIN. Are we to understand that the debate will close today? 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I stated that I desired to have the debate close, so that we might take action on the resolution to· day, if such is the 

will of the Hoose. If the question is not disposed ofto-day, it will of course go over until to-morrow, and we shall have another hour for its 

consideration. · · 

11'Ir. CRAIN. I understand there is to be an equal division of time. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I wish to be perfectly fair toward those opposing the resolution, and will divide the time equally. For the present, I yield ten minutes to tbe gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. LAIRD]. 

Mr. CRAIN. Before the debate commences, I would like to be informed whether an amendment is in order now. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Whenever the gentleman obtains the 

floor for that purpose au amendment will be in order. The gentleman 

from lllinois [Mr. TOWNSHEND] now holds the floor, and has yielded 

ten minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. LAIRD]. 

Mr. LAIRD. There are two questions presented by the resolution: 

First, whether the sum of $160,000 appropriated (this sum of $160,000 

under discussion was an item tacked on to the sundry civil bill in the 

second sessign of the Forty-eighth Congress without the knowledge of 

the Hoose and without diseussion. This bill carrying this it.em was approved March 3, 1885. It was to enable the Secretary of War to ac- quire good and valid title for the United ·States to the Fort Brown military reservation, Texas, to pay and extinguish all clarms for the use and 

occupation of said reservation by the United States. See United States 

Statutes at Large, vol. 23, page 507) March 3, 1885, as an item in the 

sundry civil bill of the second session of the Forty-eighth Congress is 

au unreasonable sum to pay for the use and occupation of Fort Brown, 

Texas, from 1846 to 1886, forty years, and for the title to said Fort 

Brown and the reservation, in all, 358 acres of land. 

Second, whether it is desirable to continue Fort Brown from this time 

forward as a military post. 

If the House should decide that it was not desirable to continue Fort 

Brown longer as a military post, then so mt:tch of the item of $160,000 

appropriated as was to be applied to the purchase of the site and reser- vation can lYe deducted from the principal sum, without any unneces- sary discussion of the question of the value of the fee to the 358 acres 

of land now used or reser>ed by the military authorities of the United 

States, in which case the question would be simply what is reasonably 

due from the United States for the rent of the Fort Brown reservation, 

358 acres, from 1846 to the present? 

Fort Brown is a point on the .Rio Grande River in the State of Texas. 

It is opposite to and about one mile distant from Matamoras, Mexico. 

The present site and reservation has been in the possession of the United 

States since 1846, when it was taken possession of as an act of war by 

General Taylor, commanding the army of the United States on that 

portion of the Mexican frontier. 

The title to the reservation has never been acquired by the Government, although the question of so doing seems to have been often discussed by military officers. Formerly the prevailing opinion among 

them seems to have been favorable to the purchase of the site; latterly 

the clear weight of opinion is against its purchase at any price, and 

against its longer maintenance as a military post. 

The nearest approach to a settlement of the purchase-price of this 

property on the part of the United States, which I have been able to find, 

is the report of the boa,rd of Army officers convened un!ler the authority of an act of Congress :M:arch 3, 1873, the same being an act to 

provide for the purchase of land by the Secretary of War for the United 

States, in the State of Texas, for the sites of forts and military posts. 

(17 United States Statutes at Large, p. 614; act limited to three years 

from passage.) 

This board of officers reported January 16, 1874, in favor ofthe purchase of the site and reservation of Fort Brown for a military post, and 

state that they are of the opinion that $25,000 is a fair valuation for 

the same. · This recommendation is approved by General Sheridan, 

commanding the Army; by Mr. Belknap, then Secretary of War, and 

• 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 673 

by General Grant, then President. The report of that board, together 

with the indorsements, is as follows: 

FORT BROWN, TEXAS. 

SAN ANTONIO, TEX., January 16, 1874. 

Sir.: At a meeting of the board convened under authority of act ofrcongress 

approyed March 3, 1874, held this day, the following resolution was passed: "Resol~ed. That if the United States have nota valid claim thereto, the board recommend the purchase of the tract or parcel of land lying upon the Rio Grande 

River, adjacent to the city of Brownsville, Tex., upon which the post of Fort Brown is situated, and known as the military reservation (containing320 acres, more or less), for the use of the United States for said military post. The board is of the opinion that $25,000 is a fair valuation for this tract." · . The southern portion below old Fort Brown is of little or no value, but it is deemed advisable toinclude it in the recommendf\,tion by reason of its location. 'l'he property just mentioned is in litigation, but a receiver has been appointed 

by t Llc district court, who is authorized by special order to rent or sell it, and re- ceive the moneys therefor. The land upon which the national cemetery at Brownsville is situated was purchased in this way. Very respectfully, S. B. HOLABIRD, 

Deputy Quartermaster-General, U. S . .Army. A. P. MORROW, MaJor Ninth Cavalry. W. T. GENTRY; 

The AssiSTANT ADJUTANT-GENERAL, Captain Nineteenth Infantry. 

Headquarters Department of Tezas, San Antonio, Tex. 

[Indorsements.] 

HEADQ.UARTERS DEPARTMENT OF TEXAS, 

San .Antonio, Te:u., January 26, 1874. 

Approved and respectfully forwarded to the a!!si5tant adjutant-general, Mili- tary Division of the Missouri. C. C. AUGUR, 

Brigadier-General, U. S • .Army. 

HEADQ.UARTERS MILITARY DIVISION OF THE MISSOURI, 

Chicago,lll., February 26, 1874. 

Respectfully referred to the assistant inspector-general, Military Division of the lissouri. 

By command of Lieutenant-General Sheridan. R. C. DRUM, 

.Assistant .Adjutant-General. 

HEADQ.UARTERS :MILITARY DIVISION OF THE MISSOURI, ASSISTANT INSPECTOR-GENERAL'S OFFICE, 

Chicago, ]farch 20, 1874. 

Respectfully returned to the adjutant-general of the division, having been ex- n.mined and content-s noted. 

A. BAIRD, A~sistant Inspector-General, U. B. Army. 

HEAD~UARTERS MILITARY DIVISION OF THE MisSOURI, 

Chicago, March 20, 1874. 

Approved and respectfully forwarded to headquarters of the Army. . P. H. SHERIDAN, 

Lieutenant-General, Ocmmanding. 

ApproYed and respectfully submitted to the President. WM. W. BELKNAP, 

WAR DEPARTIIENT, Aprill3, 1874. Secretary of Wa~. 

Approved. 

Official copies. 

EXEcuTIVE MANSION, .Apr-il14, 1874. 

U.S. GRANT. 

WAR DEPARTMENT, ADJUTANT-GENERAL'S OFFICE, 

Washington., .April20, 1874. 

E. D. TOWNSEND, 

.Adjutant-General. 

An act of Congress, March 3, 1875 (vol. 18 U. S. Statutes at Large, 

part 3, page 391), was passed appropriating the sum of $25,000 for the 

purchase of this property, pursuant to the recommendation of this 

board, but nothing came of it, owing, so far as your committee is able 

to ascertain, solely to the fact that the title was-so in dispute that no 

satisliwtory conveyance could be given to the land. This act expired 

by its own limitation in three years after its pa,ssage. · 1. The first question presented under the resolution of inquiry is, what 

is a reasonable rental for this property from 1846 to 1886? 

In 1869 W. A. Wainwright, captain and asSistant quartermaster, 

United States Army, reports by letter February 20, 1869, addressed to 

Quart!3rmaster-General United States Army, giving it as his judgment that $1,000 per year would be a just allowance for the rent of the 

reservation ground at Fort Brown. In part, the letter of Captain 

Wainwright is a follows: OFFICE ASSISTANT QUARTERlllASTER, U.S. ARMY, 

BrownsviUe, Tex., FebrttanJ 20, 1869. 

GE:NERAL: I h!\ve the honor to hand you, per express, the papers in Cavazos' claim, received .January 26, 1869, and to submit original letters in answer to my request .as to the fair amount due as rent for the military reservation at this post, and my. report and opinion on the same. 

Abstract of valuation for rent of land on which Fort Brown (United States military reservation) is situated, at Brownsville, Tex., containin_g 358 acres. 

Per annum. .John McAllen values at 51.50 per acre.................................................... ~37. 00 Samuel P. Gelston values at $1.50 per acre............................................. 537.00 R. Dalzell..................... .. . . .. . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . .... .. . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . .. . . .. . . ... . . . . . . . . 1, 000. ()() A. Werbiski values at $10 per acre......... ................................................ 3, 580.00 S. A. Belden ............................................................................................ 15,000.00 

The reports or statements of Messrs. McAllen, Gelston, and Dalzell are below 

what I consider a fair rental value, though from conversation with these gen- tlemen I am convinced that their valuation is based upon the best of reasoning, especially that of Mr. 1\IcAllen, who shows forth in his letter that he would be willing to rent his lands at the same, or less, and refers to the little value of Brownsville and its surroundings were it not for the military reservation or 

XIX-43 

post at this place. From this springs a question upon which rests the whole matter ofthe rent of the land. It is claimed by 1\lr. Trainer, the agent, t.hatmy 

report should embrace a certain amount of money for rent per year, or so many years from the time the Government first took possession, and an increase as the town increased in size. I contend that if any difference is made in the amount of rent per year, it should be a decrease, for was it not for the military 

post at this place there would be no Brbwnsville, and it is firmly believed that . a donation of1,000 acres in as good a position as this could be had if it would be the means of retaining the post, provided the Government intended abandon- ing this. . From experience of one year at this post, I feel that:J: am prepared to say that four-fifths of the money circulated here is expended by the Government, and that when the present buildings of the post are finished and nothing is left but to take'care of the property here the trade of the city will greatly decrease. The transient people, mostly Jews, will take residence at some other points, and the business will settle down to its former level. While it is the intention of this of- fice to be just to claimants, and at the same time not forget the interests of Gov- ernment, it does appear like systematic peculation to present and endeavor to collect such an account against the Government as the bill inclosed with the papers in this claim shows, being nearly five times as much as the value of the land itself. There is from the reservation line to the lagoon, on the northwest side of the reservation, 120 actes of fine land, and could it be settled that the town would increase without the reservation, same would be valuable-say, near the estimate of Mr. Belden-the remainder is nothing but sediment, a fine, 

soft, washy sand that is o{ no value whatever, and is only used for corrals and such purposes as does not require any extra soil. 

By reference to a plan of the reservation and line of the Rio Grande River, in 1846, forwarded the Quartermaster-General from this office .January 31, 1869, it will be seen that much ot the ground has beeu lost, and it still continues to lose. 

Action is now being taken to save as much of it as possible, but only to pro- tect and save that which is most valuable. The papers in this case are very voluminous, and it is not deemed necessary to lengthen this report; and, in conclusion, I would state that the sum of $1,000 per annum, it is believed, would be a just amount for the rent of the United States military reservation grounds at this post. . I have the honor to be, general, very respectfully, your obedient servant, W. A. WAINWRIGHT, 

Capta·in and .Assistant Qua1·termaster, United States Ar-my. 

Bvt. Maj. Gen. M. C. MEIGS, · Quartermaster-General, U.S . .Army, Washington, D. C. 

In May, 1869, Oa.ptain Wainwright writes commenting on his letter 

of February 20, 1869, and therein explains the apparently exorbitant 

estimate for rent made by Mr. Werl>iski, showing that his estimate of 

$10 an acre, supposed to be for rent, was in reality his estimate of the 

value of the fee in the land. This letter is as follows: 

OFFICE AssisTANT QUARTERMASTER UNITED STATES ARMY, 

BrownsviUe, Tex., May 29, 1869. 

GENERAL: I have the honor to return herewith copy of my letter to you dat-ed February 20, 1869, with memorandum of remarks on same attached, made by you in reference to the claim for rent/etc., of the United States military reser- vation at this post. In reply to yom· first interrogatory I would state, that the 358 acres occupied 

by the post of Fort Brown, and known as the United States military reserva- tion, is a portion of the original grant known as the "Potrero Espiritu Santo," the boundaries of said grant being minutely described in ''Wallace's Reports. 

United States Supreme Court, volume 6, Cavazos vs. Trevenie, page 773."· I inclose herewith a small tracing showinlf the boundary of this extensive tract 6r grant known as the" Agostadero" or 'Potrero Espiritu Santo." Secondly. The original grant did include the city of Brownsville and this 358 

acres occupied by Fort Brown, but the title to the incorporated city limits of the city of Browns'Ville, including this reservation, is now and has been, since 1853, in litigation; and I can find no record or information relative to this United States military reservation being in any way set apart as the share of the pres- ent claimant (Maria Jose fa Cavazos), as her share. of the original grant. 

Since the receipt of the copy of my letter with your remarks attached thereto, I have given this case close attention. In reply to the interrogatory "What land in that region is now or was when the Uniteq States forces captured Browns- ville worth $10 per acre?" I w_ould state that there was none and is none st present, except town lots; and it is fair to presume that had not the United States Government selected this site as a military reservation and improved it as it is for permanent occupancy, it could now be purchased of the bona. fide owners (if there are such) at a price not to exceed $2 per acre for fee-simple. The United States military reservation has made Brownsville what it is, and without it Brownsville would soon be numbered and spoken of as a town that once existed. Brownsville in itself has no natural advantages,tmd the idea pre- • sented by the claimant, that the United States military reservation encroaches upon and thereby contracts the limits of the town is absurd; the town has and will always seek the reservation, and the benefits to be derived ft·om it. Almost any oftlle lands adjoining the city can be bought for from 50 cents to $2 per ~& • 

In regard to my former report as to a reasonable rent to be paid for the use of these grounds per year, Mr. Werbiski informs me that he was mistaken in the intent of my communication to him; that the price he gave, namely. $10 per acre, was int-ended as his valuation of the premi!res-for title in fee-simple, and not $10 per acre rent per annum. I inclose a copy of my communication to various parties requesting their opinion, which is considered to be plain, and could not have been misunder- stood. 

This last statement of Mr. Werbiski will take the place of the one previously forwarded you with my report. On afurtherexaminationandconsideration of the case in question, I think Mr. Samuel A. Belden may be indirectly interested in the premises, he having been, I find, a party at interest in a number of law- suits relative to title of a number of tracts of land embraced in this original ex- tensive land grant, and is still a heavy land-holder in this vicinity; conse- quently a large price for the reservation grounds would increase the value of his lands. I therefore consider that his statement should not be taken into con- sideration. - 1\:Ir . .John McAllen is an old resident, a man of vast property and good sound judgment. I consider that. his opinion should have great weight in the adjust- ment of this claim for rent. Mt·. Gelston is also a man of extensive acquaint- ance; knows this frontier in every respect; is a man of much experience and excellent judgment. These men are both disinterested parties, as also Mr. Werbiski, and all men of wealth and standing in thls community. 

* •t. * * * * I have the honor to be, general, very respectfully, your obedient servant, W. A. WAINWRIGHT, 

Gaptain and Assistant Quartermaster, United ,states Army. 

Maj: Gen. M. C. MEIGS, 

Quartermaste1·-General, U. S . .Army, Washington, D. C. 

.. 
-' 

674 OONG;RESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. . JANUARY 24, 

A letter from John McAllen, a citizen of Brownsville, Tex., explaining his reason for the estimat-e for rent which .he makes, accompanies the report of Captain Wainwright, and I make this letter, togetherwith the ono from Mr. Gelston on the same subject, a part of my 

remarks: BROWNSVILLE, Febl"'lary 5, 1869. 

Srn: I have lbe bon o-r to acknowledge the receipt of your esteemed note wishing my opinion in regard to the annual rent of the land known as .the Govern- ment reserve at the aforesaid post. In my opinion it is worth $1.50 per acre, as I should be happy to have the opportunity to rent to the Government the lands 

ali Edinburgh or any other place along the Rio Grande where I am owner or agent, and should consider myself well paid at t-his rate or less, for, if Fort Brown 

had not been established where it is -now, the land of Brownsville and surroundings would have been oflittle value. 

I have the honor, sir, to be, your most obedient, 

JOHN McALLEN. 

Oapt. W. A. WAINWRIGHT, 

United Etales Qua1·Jermaster, Fort Brown, Texas. 

BROWNSVILLE, TEX., February 16,1869. 

DEAR Sm: In answer to your communication of the 5th instant, asking my opinion as to a reasonable amount for the United States Government to pay as a rent for the lands now occupied by the Government as a military reservation at this place, etc., I have the honor to state that in my opinion $1.50 per acre per annum would be a f::tir and just compensation for said lands. 

Very respectfully, your obedient servant, SAM. P. GELSTON. 

W. A. WAI:!'."WRIGHT, Esq., Captain and Quarte1·master, U. 8. A., F01·t Brown, Texas. 

Quartermaster-General Meigs, in a letter dated July20, 1869, and addressed to the then Secretary of War, Hon . .John A. Rawlins, put the 

just annual rent of this property at $500, and sa,ys, commenting on that 

sum: "If it i.ssetat$500 a year itwillfarexceedanyreasonableinterest 

upon the capital which represents the value of the land; indeed, will 

exceed this probable total actual ca.pital." I give here the entire letter: QUARTERMASTER-GENERAL'S OFFICE: 

Washingt~n, D. a., July 20, 1869. 

Sm: I have the honor to i:eturn the papers in the case of the claim for damages to and rent of the site of Fort Brown, near Brownsville, Tex., since its first 

occupation during the Mexican war, amounting to $130,416. The case has been carefully examined, and the full abstract prepared in this 

office brings me to the following conclusions: 

The value of the lands, some 358 acres, embraced within the reservation does not now exceed on the average $2 to $10 per acre in fee-simple. ·were the post abandoned, n. new site in as healthy a locality and equally com- manding the river could be purcha!Oed for from 50 cents to $2 per acre. (See 

report of Captain Wainwright, pages 16 and 17, report and abstract herewith.) The claim for $50,726.20for damages to crops, fences, etc., arising during the war with Mexico, is clearly not within the competence of the Quartermaster's 

Department to settle. 

The just annual rent which should be paicl for the use of the 358 acres, em- braced within what has been called the military reserve of Fort Brown, is very small. If it is set at $500 a year, it will far exceed any reasonable interest upon the capital which represents the value of the land; indeed, will exceed this 

probable total actual capitnl. The Attorney-General, upon the papers heretofore submitted to him;has decided that it would be safe to consider Mrs. Cavazos as the owner so far as to settle with her for rent from the 20th of November, 1853, to date. 

For rents accruing before the 20th November, 1853, the other heirs have equal legal rights with her, her interest amounting to only one nndivided third part 

of the whole tract. But since this case wa.s before the Attorney-General certain papers have been 

received, principally through Captain Wainwright, assistant quartermaster, etc., 

which show that legal proceedings are still in progress affecting the title to the 

land in question. - I recommend that the case be again referred to the Attorney-General, with 

request that he will advise the War Department what effect, if' any, these papers may hn.ve upon the status of the case. The assertion that -a former Secretary of War, Mr. Conrad, had rendered a decision fixing the amount of rent that should be paidl seems to be disproved by the papers herewith. (See page 23 of the report ana abstract.} The assertion that a contract was at any time made, fixing the rate of rent by 

any competent officer of the Army, seems equally disproved. (See pages 3 and 4 of said report and abstr::tet.) I am of opinion that it would pot be safe for the War Department, in the pres- ent status of the case, to pay rent to any one for this land, and for the payment of the rents charge<lfor so many years past there has been no appropriation 

made by Congress. The existence of snch a. claim was unknown to the Quartermaster-General 

until within a few months, and no item for its payment was included in the es- timates submitted to Congress. Out of the appropriations for the present fiscal year a. rent of 1:500 for the cur- rent year might be paid, provided the Secretary does not, in view of the whole case, think that too much. 

I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant, M. C. MEIGS, Quartermaster-Genera~ and Brevet Mad or-General, U. 8. A. 

Ron. JoHN A. RAWLINs, 

Secretary of War, Washington, D. C. 

The same act of Congress w.hich authorized the purchase of Fort 

Brown in 1875, and appropriated $25,000 therefor (act of March 3, 

1875, vol. 18, U.S. Statutes at Large, part 3, p. 391), also authorized 

the purchase of Ringgold Barracks at $10,000, Fort Dunca.n (Eagle 

Pass) at $10,000, and directed the Secretary of War to accept title to 

the site and reservation of Fort Mcintosh free. Fort Mcintosh, which 

was so donated to the United States, is located at Laredo, a city of 6, 000 

inhabitants, on the Rio Grande, 125 miles above Ringgold Barracks; 

and has two railroads crossing at that point into Mexico. 

It is understood that the sum of $10,000 paid for Ringgold Barracks 

included all charges for use and occupation. Ringgold is also on the 

Rio Grande, at what is called Rio Grande City. It is a place of considerable importance, and was occupied by the United States about the 

same time that Fort Brown was. I 

As a circumstance to be considered in estimating the value of the use 

of the land near BrownsVille on which Fort Brown is located, it is to 

be remembered that the census of 1880 shows a decrease in the population of the city from 1870; and further, it appears from a letter of the 

Acting Secretary of the Treasury to the House of Representatives, in 

ans~er to its resolution passed in the first session of the Forty-ninth 

Congress (see Executive Document No. 238), that there was for the year 

1886 $22,438.70 of customs duties collected at Brownsville, Tex., at a 

cost to the Government of $42,428.50, or a cost of $1.89 in expense for 

every dollar of duties received. 

As a circumstance reflecting light on the question of the value of the 

fee to the land in question and rental thereof, it appears in a statement of .John D. M. Call, acting comptroller of the State of Texas, 

that the average assessed value of land in Cameron County, Texas, that 

being the county in which Fort Brown is located, for the year 1886 was 

461.8 cents per acre. 

2. Th~ second proposition of the resolution has to do with the purchase of the site and reservation of Fort Brown. 

This is purely a ·militaryquestion. 'I he United States certainly does 

not want 358 acres of real estate at Brownsville, Tex., for any other than 

military purposes, and if it does not want land there for that purpos~ 

it does not want it at all. , 

In his report for the year 1882, Geneml Sherman, commanding the 

armies of the United States, uses this language in reference to the post 

under consideration: 

Fort Brown is subject to overflow, and during this year has been a:fllicted 

with yellow fever in its worst form. I advise its absolute abandonment. 

Ringgold Bn.rracks being the property of the United States, and with reason- ably good barracks, sliould be held a few years until the extension of the railroad down the valley of the Rio Grande from Laredo will enable us to d,ispatch 

troops to any threatened point promptly, when Ringgold Barracks may also be 

allowed to p!lss away. .The strategic points of. the Texas frontier are: San Antonio, 1\Icintosh, and 

Duncan on the Lower Rio Grande; Fort Davis, with Presidio and CamP. Rice, on the Upper Rio Grande; and FortBlis . (Forty-se\·enth Congress, second ses- sion, Ex. Doc. 1, part 2, p. 11.) 

The General of the Army, in the further consideration of the s-qbj ect 

of obsolete military posts, declares the post of Fort Brown to be obsolete, and recommends the abandonment of the same. 

The following military posts arc obsolete and ought to be abandened. To ac- complish this end Congress should be asked for authority to dispose of all the 

buildings and materials which can not be moved, and to sell the reservations, or to transfer the same to the Interior DetJartment for sale or grant under existing laws for the disposition of the public domain, namely: 

* * * * * * * Fort Brown, Texas. 

(Same document as above.) 

Previous to this report, namely, February 10, 1880, General Sherman recommends the renewal of the appropriation of 1874 for $25,000 

for the purchase of Fort Brown, and that it be tendered the holders of 

the title, and if refused, then that the post of Fort Brown, Texas, be 

dismantled and the garrison removed to Ringgold Bar:tacks. He sa.ys: 

Fort Brown has been held by United States troops since 184G; is located op- posite the somewhatimportantl\Iexican town of Matamoras; is only important for that-reason and no other. 

The text ofbis letter is here given: 

HEADQUARTERS OF THE ARliiY, 

Washington, D. a., February 10, 1830. 

Respectfully returned to the honorable Secretary of War, recommending that 

he submit it t-o the proper committee of Congress, asking a renewal of the ap- propriation of $25,000; that if such appropriation be made the sum be tendered 

the devisee of Senora Cavazos, or the real owner thereof, <O.nd if this price be 

refused, that the post of ForM Brown, Texas, be dismantled and the garrison re- moved to Ringgold BarrackS. 

Fort Brown has been held by United States troops since 1846; is located op- posite the somewhat important Mexican town of l\1atamoras; is only important 

for that reason and no other. . There are some valuable buildings there needed for the shelter of troops, but 

in a military sense the site has no more l!trategic value than any other mile on 

the Lower Rio Grande. 

The Adjutant-General will send n. copy of til is paper and indorsements to the 

department commander, General Ord. 

W. T. SHER'\IAN, GeneraL. 

General Sherman makes a further reference to the matter .T anuary 

24, 1881, saying, ''I understand that the Rio Grande is rapidly cutting 

away the bank" (American bank), "endangering the site of Fort 

Brown. This may be the reason why the owners of the ground are so 

anxious to sell to the United States." 

The text of this letter is also given. 

HEADQUARTERS OF THE ARliiY, 

Washington, January 24, 1881. 

Respectfully submitted to the Secretary of War. 

I understood Colonel Otis, 'l'wcntieth Infantry, recently brought to Fort 

Leavenworth from Fort Brown, to say that the Rio Grande River was rapidly 

cuttin"' away the bank endangering the site of Fort Brown. This may be the reaso; why the owner~ of the ground are so anxious to sell to the United Stales. 

V{. T. SHERMAN, Gencmt. 

In April, 1883, General Sherman again refers to this subject, this 

time in a letter calling the attention of the Secretary of War ton letter 

from Geneml Sheridan. He says: 

General Sheridan confirm& what I have heretofore repeatedly reported, that 

the new railroads of Texas have entirely left out Fo1·t Brown, and that it will 

be unwise to buy the site or expend any money thereon henceforward. 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 675 

Letter of April25, 1883, to Secretary of War. This is indorsed by 

Secretary Lincoln as follows: 

The views of the General are concurred in, 

The following is the letter in full: 

ROBT. T. LINCOLN, 

Secretary of TVar. 

HEADQUARTERS OF THE ARMY, 

Washington, D. 0., .April 25, 1883. 

This letter is respectfully submitted to the honorable Secretary of War, in- viting his special attention thereto. General Sheridan confirms fully what I h:n·e hitherto repeatedly reported, that the new railroads of Texas have entirely left out Fort Brown, and that it will be unwise to buy the site or expend any money thereon henceforward. W. T. SHERMAN, General. The views of the Genernl axe concurred in. ·ItOBERT T. LINCOLN. 

WA:n. DEPARTMENT, April 28,1883. 

Secretary of War. 

The letter of General Sheridan to General Sherman, which called 

forth these comments, is in part as follows: 

The ground on which some of it (Fort Brown) is built is being cut out by the :river, and will eventually be washed away, from present indications, and I 

think it would be about as well to let the washing go on. * * * The old post has served its purpose and we should not spend any more money on it. No money from the appropriation for the defense of the Rio Grande frontier should be spent in acquiring title to Fort Brown. '£his point has been left be- hind by Forts Mcint-osh, Duncan, and Bliss. ' 

The following is the letter in full: 

HEADQUARTERS 1\!ILITARY DIVJSION Oil' THE MISSOURI, 

Chicago, IU., Apf"i.l23, 1883. 

1\IY DEAR GENERAL SHERMAN: While I did not go to Fort Brown on my re- cent trip to Texas, I accumulated as much information about it as I could. There is no harbor there, and probably never will be at the mouth of the Rio Grande. Brazos Santiago is a fairly good harbor for Texas, but the present rail- road system in Mexico cuts it off, and diminishes the commercial value of !\lata- moras and Brownsville, and Fort Brown is of importance only as a revenue- post in the commerce between those points. Two companies are sufficient there; it probably will never be a base of military operations, and it is in the yellow fever zone. The ground on which some of it is built is being cut out by the river, and will eventually be washed away, from present indications, and I think it would be about as well to let the wa-shing go on. The ground does not belong to us, and our loss would be very little. We never get much for aban- doned posts any way. The old post has served its purpose, and we sho.uld not spend any more money on it.. No money from the appropriation for the defense of the Rio Grande frontier should be spent in acquiring title to Fort Brown. This point has been left behind by Forts Mcintosh, Duncan, and Bliss. I am, my dear General, yours, truly, P. H. SHERIDAN, 

Lieutenant-General. 

Ina letter to theSecretaryofWar,ofJune2, 1884, GeneralSheridan, 

referring to this matter, says: 

The present site of Fort Brown is. in litigation, and there is also danger of its being washed away, and while I will now consent that there should be a two- company post there, I doubt the advisability of purchasing the present site, and would prefer that in the future a new one1 near Brownsville, be selected. 

The letter is as follows: 

HEADQUARTERS 011' THE ,ARMY, 

Washington, June 2, 1884. 

Respectfully submitted to the honorable Secretary of War. The present site of Fort Brown is in 1itigation, and there is also danger of its being washed away, and while I will now consent that there should be a two-company post 

there, I doubt the advisability of purchasing the present site, and would prefer that in the future a new one, near Brownsville, be selected. 1 P. H. SHERIDAN, 

LWutenwnt-General. 

Article V of the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, executed February 2, 

1848, fixes the middle of the deepest channel of the Rio Grande, or the 

Rio Bravo del Norte, as the boundary line between the two countries, 

and as a consequence, if it be decided to pm;chase and maintain Fort 

Brown this country will have to appropriate money to defend the site 

from the action of the river, or it may find itself in the awkward posi~ 

tion of having purchased a site and established a military post which 

under the dual operation of the treaty and the river may become the 

property of Mexico. 

.Mr. Speaker, the question to be answered by the House in ordering 

this investigation is whether 358acres of wild, uncultivated land, use- less for any purpose, save gmzing, covered with grease-wood and mesquite brush, and which doubtless cost less than $1,000, original capital, 

is worth in fee and rent for forty years $160,000. 

The committee are willing to find a reasonable value, as an investment, for the land aud allow a reasonable interest on the amount as the 

rental, and no more. 

We see no reason why the Government should be mulcted in $160,-

000, either through the carelessness of Congress or the ignorance or indifference of its military officers. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Mr. Speaker, how much t'"rme is remaining? 

The SPEAKER pro te-mpore. Forty minutes of the time remain. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. The gentleman from Nebraska consumed only 

ten minutes. 

.The SPEAKER pro ten~pore. But the gentleman from Illinois withdrew his call for the regular order and allowed some time to expire. 

1\fr. TOWNSHEND. I did not understand that that was to be t-aken 

from the time allowed for consideration. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will deal liberally with gentlemen in reference to time, as there was a misunderstanding, and will assume that forty-five minutes yet remain. 

- , 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I yield twenty-eight minutes to the gentle- man from Texas [Mr. CRAIN]. 

Mr. CRAIN. I desire first to submit an, amendment which I send 

to the desk. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Amend the resolution by striking out the following words~ 

"Also to inquire into and repott as to what necessity exists, 1f any, for a mil- itary post at said point, an~ the cost to the United States of said post since 1865." 

1t1r. CRAIN. Mr. Speaker, I desire to yield five minutes of my time 

to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. ScoTT], and I hope when 

I shall have consumed the 1·emainder of the time allotted to me the 

Chair will notify me, so as to reserve that portion for him according to 

my promise. 

~M.r. Speaker, it seems to me that the question of an investigation of 

the amount to be paid for the site of Fort Brown comes up at a very late 

day. It strikes me as very singular that the Cerberus of the Treasury 

and the chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs, both of whom were members of the Committee on Appropriations which made this 

appropriation in t.he Forty-eighth Congress, should not then have discovered the reasons why the Government of the United States ought 

not to pay the amount which was appropriated by the act which they 

recommended and which that Congress passed. I excuse the gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. LAmn] because, although it is a familiar 

principle of law that ignorantia legis nemine1n excusat, he is not familiar 

with the facts in this case except in so far as some individual has 

made himself a siphon between outside individuals and the gentle- man fl'Om Nebraska. 

Why is it that the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HoLl\IAN], when he was a member of the Appropriations Committee that recommended the 

appropriation for the expenditure of this sum of money~ did not raise 

his voice in the committee in opposition to the amount, if, a.s he alleges, 

it was too 1arge? Why is it that he did not, in consonance with that 

reputation which he has made for himself throughout the country as the watch-dog of the Treasury, oppose the passage of the approprL~tion 

act which provided that the owners of the site of Fort Brown should 

receive the sum which was recommended by the committee? Why was it, I ask further, that the gentleman who has the distinguished 

honor of adorning and animating the chairmanship of the Committee on Military Affairs did not, when a member of the Committee on Appropriations which recommended this item and asked the House to 

adopt it, oppose the measure instead of sitting silently by and permitting the House of Representati vea of the Forty-eighth Congress to pass 

without comment the item appropriating this amount for the purchase 

of the fort? · 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Does the gentleman desire an answer? 

Mr. CRAIN. Certainly. 

l\fr. TOWNSHENp. While I am under obligation to the gentleman 

for the compliment which he has paid to the chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs--

Mr. CR.All'f. Do not take up too much of my time. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I wish to say distinctly that my reco1lection 

is clear that as a member of the Committee on Appropriations I opposed the appropriation of the enormous sum which was propose-d to be 

employed in this purchase. 

I stood then where I stand to-day, in the belief thu,t it was an exor- bitant sum, and I ha\·e great doubt in my mind whether there is any 

need whatever for a fort at that point. 

Mr. CRAIN. The gentleman from Illinois does not &tand to-day 

where he stood then. He may have opposed it in committee, but today he opposes it on the floor of the House, and he did not oppose it on the floor of the House t.hen. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I did not occupy then the position. I do now on the Committee on Military Affairs. 

Mr. CRAIN. I suppose if th·e gentleman did not occupy that position now he would not take the stand he does to-day. 

Nearly four years after the passageofanact, which waseither recom- mended by the members of the Committee on Appropriations or tacitly 

acquiesced in, ,we have two members of that committee coming before 

this House and telling the House that the appropriation for the purchase ofthispropertywasexcessive, if not fraudulent. And upon what 

basis does the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HOLliiAN]-who is not in 

his seat now, but was a moment ago, when I commenced to discuss this 

proposition-upon what basis does he present this resolution to the 

House? Sir, he presents it upon vague, general, indifferent allegations, 

and I will tell the gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. LAIRD] that this 

question was discussed, and fnlly discussed, in the Senate of the United 

States. Objection was made to this item in the Senate of the Fortyeighth Congress, and after an extended and exhaustive debate upon the 

very question which is raised on this resolution the Senate coincided 

with the House, and the approprL1.tion item became a law. 

Bnt, 1\Ir. Speaker, I oppose, not the investigation in reference to the 

price to be paid, although Fort Brown is in my district and although 

the Forty-eighth Congress has appropriated this sum of money, which is 

pronounced to be less than the propeny is worth, not for the site alone, 

but for the use and occupation for more than forty years. I am not 

opposed to an investigation of this question. If by any accident, if by 
676 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. JANUARY 24, 

any negligence of the Committee on Appropriations, or of the gentle- man. from Indiana [Mr. HoLl\fAN], the Forty-eighth Congrees passed a law appropriating mor-3 money for this property and its use and occu- pation fo! over. forty years than they were worth, then I, as a representathd •f the people of this country, do not propose to stand in my 

place here and oppose any investigation of that question. ·, If the price 

is either excessive or fraudulent, the people of this country ought not 

to be compelled to pay that price. . I do not oppose any investigation of the question whether $160,000 was too much or not for the fee of the property and for its use and occupancy 

since the year 1846, when the fort was erected by General Taylor; but 

I do oppose, Mr. Speaker, the extension of the rights of this special com- mittee of investigation to inquire into the necessity for the continuance 

of Fort Brown. I do it, first, because the history of this country shows 

that such an investigation is unnecessary and useless. Suppose that 

the gentleman from Nebraska and the other distinguished gentlemen on the Committee on Military Affairs were to bring in a report to this 

liouse saying the continuance of Fort Brown was a necessity, and as 

against that I produced letters from the commanding general of the 

Department of Texas and the commanding general of the Army, what 

would the gentleman do? And I a.<>k the gentleman from Nebraska, I ask 

him to answer the question now, if that subcommittee is appointed will 

you not inquire from the commander-in-chief of the Army and from 

the commander of the Department of Texas whether it is necessary to 

continue Fort Brown opposite the city of Matamoras? The gentleman, 

if he pleases, will answer the question right now. Mr. LAIRD. I find General Sherman in his report and letters--

Mr. CRAIN. The gentleman will please answer my question. If 

that committee is appointed wonld you not roll on General Sheridan 

and General Stanley, the commander-in-chief of the Army and the 

commander of tlie department of Texas, to testify whether it is neces· sary to continue that fort? Or would you act on your own judgment? 

:Mr. LAIRD. I would act on mi.J,itary authority. The military au- thority is against the continuance of the post. We have letters from 

General Sherman and others. 

Mr. CRA.IN. General Sherman is not in command of the Army now. Mr. LAIRD. He was in his time. 

Mr. CRAIN. I have a letter from General Sheridan, in which he asserts that the continuance of Fort Brown is a necessity. I will read h. 

HEADQUARTERS ARMY OF THE UNITED STATES, 

Washi'l1gton, D. C., January 11, 1888. 

SIR: In reply to your letter of the 9th instant,.! have the honor to inform you that I have been familiar with Fort Brown, Texas, since 1854. It is situated on the east bank of the Rio Grande, near Brownsville, Tex., and opposite the Mex- ican town of Matamo1·as, and during the war with Mexico was a very important 

station. It is now connected by rail with Point Isabel,22 miles distant, on the 0 ulf of l\Iexico, but has no railway connection with other points in the United 

States, aud there are no other railroads in that section of Texas. It is the principal trading town for thR.t region of the State, and thro.ngh it much of the com- merce of Northeastern Mexico finds its outlet to the Gulf. Matamoras, 1'!1exico, 

bas a population of about 20,000; Brownsville, Tex., of about 6,000, and between 

them and near the present post the changes in the channel of the Rio Grande 

through the action of the periodical overflows is continually Jiable to transfer 

territory from this country to Mexico, or the reverse, with all the possibilities 

of confusion and trouble consequent upon such conditions. For these Yarious reasons I believe a garrison should be maintained at Fort Brown, and nwst likely for a long time to come. The presence of a. large force 

is not necessary, but ill will probably always be advantageous to keep there about two or three companies for such emergencies as might arise, as, owing to its 

rat.her isolated position, troops can not readily be assembled there, and I also esteem it of great imp01·tunce to continue the post as a check on smuggling, 

which is very prevalent along that portion of the Rio Grande. 

Very truly, yours, 

Hon. W. H. CRAIN, , 

House of Re1)1·esentatives. 

P. H. SHERIDAN, 

Lieutenant-G neral. 

Now, the gentleman has told us that if this subcommittee were appointed it would look to the Geueral of the Army for information 

upon the question whether this post should be continued or not, and 

when I produce and read upon this floor with the acquiescence-nay, 

with the consent, because I asked the General of the Army for his con- sent-when I produce and read upon this floor a statement made by him 

officia11y, to the effect that it is necessary to continue the post, why, I 

nsk, ought this House to authorize the Committee on Military Affairs 

to make a special investigation on tbe subject? I repeat what I have 

&'lid, that I do not oppose an investigation in 1·egard to the price for the 

fee, or for the use and occupancy, and if the gentleman from Nebraska 

[Mr. LAIRD] will pe1·mit me to state the proposition that be and the 

gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HoLl\UN] made to me---

Mr. LAIRD. I will. 

Mr. CRAIN. I have the permission of the gentleman from Nebraska 

to make this statement. When the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. 

Hor.l\t:AN] and the gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. LAIRD] approached 

me on this subject in the last Congress, I told the.m both that indi- •·idually I was perfectly willing there should be an :investigation of 

this charge of excess in the payment, but that I would oppose an inquiry as to the necessity of the continuance of the post, and they then 

made the proposition to me, both of them together, that they would 

strike out of the resolution the part which provides for an investigation 

of that question if I would agree that the other part ~fit _ should pass. 

To that I did agree; but, as the gentlemen know, obstacles were inter-. 

posed at the other end of the Capitol which prevented the carrying out 

of the agreement, or quasi agreement, made between them and me. If 

they were willing to submit that proposition to me then, I ask them 

why they do not accept the amendment which I have proposed? In 

addition to the statements made in the letter from the Lieutenant-General which I have just bad read, I have a letter from the commander 

of the Department of Texas upon the same subject, and I doubt not 

that the Committee on Military Affairs and this House will regard his 

testimony as competent as perhaps the best testimony that can be adduced upon this question, because I believe that the House would prefer-! say it with all due respect to the ex•milit..<try gentlemen on the 

Committee on Military Affairs-I believe that this Honse would prefer 

the evidence of gentlemen in the active service of their country to-day 

to any testimony which might be given either by civilians or by gentlemen who have made their army records in the past history of this 

country. 

Under date of January 14, 1888, General Stanley, in command of the 

Department of Texas, writes as follows, in response to a letter from me inviting his opinion as to the necessity for the continuance of the post 

at Fort Brown : 

Sm: In answer to your letter of the 19th instant I have the honor to state that 

the post of Fort Bl'Own is built upon a reservation of 35~ acres of land immediately adjoining the town of Brownsville, Tex., and situated on the Rio Grande 

River, by river route 65miles and by land 22 miles above the mouth of that river. It is the most southern post of the United States, excepting Key West, Fla. It is connected with Point Isabel and ocean navigation by a narrow-gauge railroad 22 miles in length. Immediately opposite is the Mexican city of Matamoras, 

which is fortified with earthworks, and where the Mexican Government usually keeps two regiments of troops, and the headquarters of a brigadier-general. 

The post was established in 1846 by General Taylor, at the outbreak of the Mexi- <>.an war, and has been occupied by United States troops ever since, excepting the interval of the civil war, when it was held a-S a very important post by the 

Confederate authorities. The improvements on the reservation consist of about 

fort-y buildings of more or less value. Of these, twel ~·e are of brick and substantial; the remainder offrame, in fair condition, lmt needing repairs. Fort Brown, as a military station, i'l an absolute necessity, and occupies a very important 

point g-eographically and strategically on our Mexican frontier. Granting that we have no desire for Mexican territory, and hoping that we may never again 

ha>e war with Mexico, the necessity for this post still remains. 

There you have the testimony of the commander of the Department 

of Texas, in conjunction with the tes~imony of the Lieutenant-General 

ofthe Army. 

General Stanley continues: 

The nearest military post to Fort Brown is Fort Ringgold, 100 miles by land, 300 by river, and on the left bank of the Rio Grande. The frequency of thefts 

of horses and cattle and of crimes of violence to persons and robberies of store!l 

and ranches on the frontier between Ringgold and Fort Brown hag made it nec- essary to keep up two special stations with a detachment of troops at each, one at Santa Maria, 25 miles from Fort Brown, and one at Edinl;)Urgh, 58 miles from Fort Brown. Matamora~, opposite to Fort Brown, has a population of 18,000, and is the 

principal city in the State of Tamaulipas, which has a population of 120,000. 

This State of Tamaulipas is noted for the turbulent, warlike, and aggressive 

character of its people. His safe to sny that one-half the revolutions that have 

disturbed the Republic of Mexico since their independence in 1822 have had 

their origin in this State. The great revolution that placed the present execu- tive ofMexico in power had its beginning right nt Matamoras and Brownsville. 

The central government of Mexico hold a large force of soldiers in Tamaulipas, 

and yet not a year passes without rebellions, •·obbe1·ies by wholesale, and invariably when intimidated the discomfited party flee to our side of the Rio 

Grande in a mood to appropriate anything they c..'l.n lay their hands upon. For these reasons alone Fort Brown must continue a military post; its facilities for transportation and the improvements already made upon the reserva- tion make it preferable to any point on the Lower Rio Grande filling the neces- sary conditions. · Yours respectfully, D. S. STANLEY, 

Brigadier-Geneml, U.S. A., Comnumding Department of Texas. 

I have another letter to the-same effect from the commander-in-chief 

of the Army, dated yesterday. 

TheSPEAKERprotempore. The gentleman from Texas [Mr. CRAIN] 

has now five minutes of his time remaining. He intimated to the Chair 

that he desired to give five minutes to some other gentleman. 

Mr. CRAIN. Mr. Speaker, before taking my seat I want to call at.-

tention to one other matter. In the first place, there are $75,000worth 

of buildings on that site. If the reservation be abandoned, those buildings belong to the owners of the prope1·ty. In the next place, there is a cemetery there; and in a letter from the commander-in-chief of. the 

Army it is stated that 3,000 soldiers are buried there. Now, since I 

hav.e been a member of this Honse I have seen large appropriations 

made here for the maintenance of national cemeteries. I have voted 

cheerfully for those appropriations, because I believed them to be right. 

Side by side as they fell in the moss-covered dell We have tenderly laid them at rest. Who shall tell us to-day the blue ft·9m the gray By the sods t.hat lie cold on their breast? 

Bloom the roses as red on the moss-coverecl bed 

And the mocking-bird carols as fi·ee ; Droops the willow as low on friend as on foe; 

Sigh the zephyrs as soft as the sea. 

' * * * • * * Lightly h·ead o'er the gt·ave where we've buried the brave; 

Scatter roses and garlands o'er all. 

, 'Vere they 1·igbt, were they wrong, 'tis to God they belong; 

'Tis His to reject or receive. 

Ours to honor the clay of the blue n.nd the g1·ay; 

Doubly ours to forget and forgive. 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 677 

If it be true, Mr. Speaker, that we should appropriate money for 

the maintenance of national cemeteries where Union soldiers are 

buried, where Confederate soldiers are buried, does not the same reason apply to the maintenance and continuation of the cemetery at Fort 

Brown, where 3,000 graves attest the fact that their inma:tes died in 

the service of their country? [Applause.] · 

· The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas has two 

:::ninutes of his time remaining, which, as the Chair understandB, the 

gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. ScoTI] proposes to occupy. 

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, it would be impossible in the time allotted to me, two minutes, to even briefly discuss the resolution before 

the House, or to make any statement in connection with the same 

going into the merits of the case. The whole discussion appears to 

have turned on the question whether we shall maintain a military 

post at Fort Brown regardless of the equities involved in the bill, 

which passed this House in the Forty-ni~th Congress, in connection 

with the military reservation at Fort Brown, or whether the parties 

from whom the land was taken are entitled to a just compensation for 

the same or not. 

Briefly, the facts are substantially as follows: General Taylor, under 

the direct orders of the Secret.ary of War, about the year 1845, took 

possession of 360 acres of land, upon which the present Fort Brown is 

erected. Under the direction of the Secretary of War condemnation 

proceedings .were begun on the part of the Government in the courts of 

Texas, and an award was made in favor of the owners of the land for 

about the sum of $40,000. 

After this award had been made the legal authorities of the Government endeavored to have the award set aside as being excessive; 

and this application was refused by the cour~ before whom the appeal 

wag made. 

Over forty years have now passed and the Government has remained 

in possession of the land taken under t-hese condemnation proceedings, 

and not one cent has ever been paid by the Government under the 

award. During this long period· the original owners of the land have 

been paying the taxes upon it, as I am informed, and have been subject to other expenses. It was not till the Forty-ninth Congress, after 

a. careful hearing before the committees of the two Houses and a full 

discussion of the merits of the case in the Senate and in the House, that 

a bill to compensate the original owners for the land so taken was 

passed. It was not till after the passage of this bill, appropriating the 

sum of$160,000 to pay the original owners, thatanyadverseclaimants 

appeared as owners of this property. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. SPRINGER. I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from 

Pennsylvania [Mr. ScoTT] be allowed five minutes additional, not to 

be taken out of the hour. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I stated at the opening of the debate that I 

would like to have action on this resolution to-day. If the hour can 

be extended, I have no objection to the request of the gentleman from 

Illinois [Mr. SPRINGER]. If there is to be an extension, let it be understood that the hour be extended ten minutes-five minutes for the 

opposition and five minutes for the committee. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. If there be no objection, the hour will 

be extended ten minutes. The Chair hears no objection. 

Mr. SCOTT. And it was only aft.er the bill to compensate these owners had passed the Forty-ninth Congress that adverse claims as to 

the title were raised. The proper law officers of the Government admitted that these adverse claimants had only a shadow of title to the 

land in dispute, but declined certifYing to the Secr~tary of War that 

the title of the parties from whom this land was taken was absolutely 

perfect, and required the original owners of the land to remove these 

shadows of claims upon it. By legal proceedings taken in the courts 

of Texas during the year 1887 the title of the original owners was declared absolutely perfect, thereby removing the only objection that the 

Attorney-General had to certifying the title of the land in the parties 

from whom it was taken; and on the day just prior to the meeting of 

the present Congress the AttOrney-General certified to the Secretary of 

War that the title proposed to be conveyed by the original owners or 

the heirs or assigns of Cavazos was a perfect title. 

The resolution introduced by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HoLMAN] and which has now been reported by the Committee on Military 

Affairs, and which is now under consideration, looked merely to the 

question of whether the amount appropriated by the last Congress was 

an equitable and just sum for the land so taken. I do not understand 

that the gentleman from Indiana raised the question of whether the 

present occupation of Fort Brown was a military necessity to-day or not. 

The Government has been in undisputed possession of this tract ofland 

for over forty years. It has expended large sums of money in the erection of forts and Government buildings. They have never paid one 

cent compensation to the owners of the land taken for this purpose· 

and as I have said, during this long period the original owners or the~ heirs or assigns have been subject to a large expenditure of money in 

their efforts to procure a just compensation for the lands so taken and 

in other incidental expenses in connection therewith. 

But after the lapse of thirty or forty years, when military emergencies had ceased to exist that required this land to be taken for mill-

• 

r 

tary purposes, after ail award had been made by what we can not but 

infer an impartial jury, where not only the Government but the owners of the land were heard, certain Government officials have directed 

e.-r; parte examinations and reports to be made as to the value of this 

property, and it is upon these ex pm·te examinations and reports, very 

largely, that the resolution of the gentleman from Indiana has been introduced, claiming that the amount authorized to be paid under the 

bill which passed the Forty-ninth Congress is in- excess of the value of 

the land taken. 

Now, Mr. Speaker, taking the amount of the original award in favor 

of the owners of this property, allowing 5 per cent. interest on the 

amount so awarded, and adding thereto the t.'l>xes and other expenses 

that these claimants could justly ask the Government to pay, the 

amount of money that they would be entitled to to-day would be fully 

three times the amount provided to be paid them under the bill which 

passed the last Congress; and at this late day is the action of the last 

Congress to be'reconsidered by this Congress, and are these clai~ants 

to be kept out of their jU:St dues? 

What can any investigation possibly show or prove that is not now 

·known? The low valuation put upon this land by the Government 

experts, or a fair rental for same during the time the Government has 

occupied it, including a reasonable rate of interest and other expenses 

to which the originall)wners have been subjected, and which should 

be paid by the Government, would exceed the sum appropriated at the 

last Congress of $160,000. In my judgment, the sum of $160,000, 

covered by the bill passed in the last Congress, is not in excess of the 

amount to which these claimants are justly entitled. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Mr. Speaker, I merely want to say that these 

arguments upon the part of the gentleman from Texas [Mr. CRAIN] 

and the gentleman ft·om Pennsylvania [Mr. ScoTT] seem to be based 

upon a wrong impression of the facts as they exist. They seem to be 

laboring under an apprehension that the committee has already made 

an investigation under the orders of the House. That is not the true 

condition of affairs at all. The only question before the House is this: 

Is there a sufficient statement of facts presented to us to warrant the 

House to. order the investigation? After that investigation is made the 

remarks of the gentlemen may be appropriate; but it is certainly premature now to discuss the merits of the question. 

The only question presented is as to the probability of the truth of 

the information, which would warrant the House in making the investigation so as to prevent a fraud from being practiced on t.he Government, and also in order to ascertain whether it is proper to abandon or 

keep up what might be demonstrated to be an entirely useless post. 

I yield now five minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. 

RANDALL]. 

M:r. RANDALL. I do not know that I shall want that much time. 

Allusion has been made to the action of the Committee on A ppropriations in connection with the subject of the pending resolution. I was 

a member of the Appropriations Committee which first considered this 

matter. It came to the attention of the committee by a bill which Mr. 

Ochiltree, of Texas, introduced on the 17th day of April, 1884, and 

which proposed to appropriate $160,000 as payment for this property. 

The committee referred that bill to the War Department, and the War 

Department reported that $160,000 should be paid. 

It will be remembered that this property was occupied as far back, 

I think, as 184.6, and if I am wrong in that some one will, I hope, correct me. 

Mr. HOLMAN. The Government took possession of the property in 

1846, but no purchase was ever made. 

Mr. RANDALL. There never was for many years any one to give 

a clear title to the property. However, in 1884, the question came up, 

and the Committee on Appropriations by a majority vote placed in the 

deficiency bill not ,$160, 000, as recommended by the War Department, 

but about $121,000, and I think the reduction to that sum was based 

upon the ground that the United States was not bound to pay any interest or anything whatever in this connection during the four years of 

the civil war. The House approved, and the proposition went to the 

Senate. 

Mr. CRAIN. How much did it appropriate? 

Mr. RANDALL. I can give the gentleman the exact figures. I have 

them here. 

Mr. CRAJN. The ronnel numbers will answer. 

Mr. RANDALL. The exact figures are $121,684. 

Mr. CRAIN. So that the Committee on Appropriat;ions admitted 

that the property was worth that much? 

Mr. RANDALL. A part of the committee. 

Mr. CRAIN: Well, the majority? 

Mr. RANDALL. Yes; it passed the committee. 

1\fr. CRAIN. And ·the House adopted the same view, did it not? 

Mr. RANDALL. The House passed the item in that shape, but the 

Senate rejected it. It got into conference, and the committee of con- ference on the part of the House receded from the amendment, and from 

the payment of anything, if I am correct in my J:ecollection. 

It again appeared the second time in the Forty-eighth Congress, second session, and the committee again passed it, and so did the House . 
678 CONGRESSIONAL REOORD-HOU.SE. JANUARY 24, 

I am able to say, by reference to the record of the Appropriations Committee, that my own vote was recorded against it. 

Mr. CRAIN. But the committee was for it? . _Mr. RANDALL. The committee was for it. I thQughb the price was excessive, and that was the ground of my opposition to it. It went 

to the Senate and the Senate amended it by reducing the sum to $75,-

000, which was the amount reported by the Senate committee to the 

Senate. And that· re<)uction I remember very well was ind need by the 

fact that the then Secretary of War, :Mr. Lincoln, agreed to the view 

wP,ich I have suggested, that the amount waB excessive a-nd that he 

could buy the property for $75,000. That is my present recollection. 

Mr. CRAIN. Will the gentleman allow a question? 

Mr. RANDALL. Certainly; for if I am wrong I should be glad to 

be corrected. 

Mr. CRAIN. Of course I know the gentleman would not willfully 

mislead the House, but I will read a. letter from_ the then Secretary ef 

War, addressed to the gentleman from Pennsylvania., the chairman of 

the Committee on Appropriations: 

WAR DEPARTMENT, Washinut01~ Oily, May 3, 1884. 

Sm: Acknowledging the receipt of the telegram of yesterday's date requesting that the information called for by letter from the Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives, of the 22d ultimo, in relation to H. R. 6625, "A bill tQ appropriate the snm of ~136,000 to pay the owners of the Fort Brown res- ervation in 'l'exas for 1·ents dc.e the1·eon by the Government from 1846 to 1884," be furnished to-day if possible, I have the honor to state that the Quartermaster-General of the Army, to whom the subject was referred, reports under date of the 30th ultimo, as follows: "In the opinion of the Quartermaster-General the rental value of the site of Fort Brown from 1846 to 1866 was at least equal to $2,500 per annum, which for twenty yea.rs makes a sum of $50,000. There is no question in his mind that from 1866 to date the value of the rental, <lonsidered relatively to prices paid for similar property in the State of Texas, was and isatleast$3,600per annnm, which for eighteen years gives a sum of $64,800, or a total sum of $114,800. The differ- ence between this calculation and the sum named in the bill, namely, $21,200, is a fair, equitable amount to offset deferred payment and the natuTal differences of opinion that arise in determining values of this land. It was alleged in 1873 and 1874 that the property was taxed at or about $1,000 per annum. Estimates of the value of this s!te have varied from $25,000 to $75,000." 

Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

ROBERT T. LINCOLN, 

Hon. S. J. RANDALL, 

Chainnan of the Committee on Appropriations. 

Secretary of War. 

HOtLSe of .Rep)·esenta..tives. 

Mr. RANDALL. I do not think the Secretary in his letter, which 

the gentleman has just read, controvertB the position that I think, as 

well as my memory will permit, he took before the committee of the 

Senate that $75,000 was an adequate sum. There was added to the proposition the proviso of which I have a copyhere: · 

That no part of this snm shall be paid until a good title is vested in the United States and the full amount of said sum shall be paid directly to the owners of the property. 

There was a controversy as to the parties to whom the money should 

go, and therefore the Senate made the provision that it should go directly to the owners of the property; that is, those person..<~ who would 

give title. When that proposition was amended by the Senate com- mittee it was after a discussion, as the gentleman states, and the original sum, $160,000, was inserted by the Senate. That has never changed 

my mind on this subject., because P.argued in the committee and everywhere else that this amount was excessive, and therefore I shall vote 

for any proposition which looks to the equitable fixing of a price for 

this property. I concede the owners ought to be paid rental. 

As to the other question, whether the Government of the United 

States now needs this property or not, I am not so competent to give 

advice to the House as I am on the first branch of the subject. But I 

conceive the Militaiy Committee of the House, in conjunction with the 

military officers of the Government, might have that discretion given 

them. 

The gentleman from Nebraska has just handed me a.lettersigned by 

General Sherman, and asks me to read it. 

Mr. CRAIN. That has been read already. 

Mr. LAIRD. Oh, no; this is different. 

Jl.fr. RANDALL. I hope the House will adopt the recommendation 

of the committee. It is the safe course to pursue. If there i.s any 

fraud in this matter let us develop it. I do not know that there is any 

fraud, but simply believe the price is excessive; and I hope the House 

will permit an investigation in that direction. 

[Here the hammer iell.] 

1lfr. TOWNSHEND. How much time have I remaining? 

The SPEAKERpro.tempore. The gentleman has eight minutes re- maining. I 

1\Ir. TOWNSHEND. I desire to yield three minutes of that time to 

the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HOLMAN]. 

M:r. CRAIN. I should like to have two minutes. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I can only yield for a question. 

Mr. CRAIN. Then I desire to ask the gentleman a question. 

1\fr. TOWNSHEND. I will yield for a question, but not for a speech, as I have only eight minutes left. I a.m willing, however, that the time 

shall be extended. 

JI.Ir. CRAIN. Then I desire to make a parliamentary inquiry. 

The SPEAKER pro tempo1·e. The gentleman will state it. 

Mr. CRAIN. I wish to know how it is that the chairman of the 

Committee on Military Affairs has so much time? He obt.:'lined unanimous consent to extend the time of the gentleman from Nebraska. ten 

minutes, of which the gentlemanfromNebraskaoccupied five minutes 

and thegentlemaufromPennsylvania [Mr. ScoTT] five minutes. Now, 

he claims eigh~ minutes more. ..., 

ltfr. TOWNSHEND. Let the Chair make a statement as to the time. 

The SPEAKER p1'o tempo1'e. · The Chair undertook to divide the ex- tension of the time equally, and has been doing so. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Of my cight minutes I yield three to the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HoLMAN]. 

Mr. HOLMAN. There is no embarrassment in this matter in con- sequence of any purchase made by the Government. The land was never bought by the United States. The military forces of the United 

States took possession of it in 1846, and have remained in possession 

ever since, except during the late war. An attempt was made years ago 

to condemn the land for Government use under the laws of Texas, but 

the proceeding from some cause was a. failure. 

In the closing hours of the Forty-eighth Congress this sum of $160,-

000 was appropriated by way of an offer for the land if a. good title could 

be given. If a good title could be given at any time in the past to the 

land it was only within a. very recent period .. In 1875 the sum of $25,000 was .appropriated to purchase the land, 

which was then deemed the full value of it. The gentleman from Texas 

is mistaken in assuming that there have been any laches or negligence 

in this matter on my part or of any member of the Committee on Appropriations. The bill passed appropriating the $160,000 in the closing 

hours of the Forty-cighth Congress on very unsatisfactory stnJements. 

Mr. CRAIN. As is usually the case with the deficiency appropria--

tion bills. -

Jl.fr. HOLMAN. It is something very unusual, I think; but ib oc- curred in this instance. A portion of the members of that committee 

resisted the measure, among them myself. 

In the next Congress, the Forty-ninth, as soon as the facts could be 

ascertained, I introduced in the House a resolution, the same as the one pending, and reintroduced it this session, and it has been pending 

here substantially from the first session of the Forty-ninth Congress to 

the present. 

JI.Ir. CRAIN. Will the gentleman permit me one moment? 

Mr. HOLMAN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. CRAIN. ·Did you not propose to me in the last Congress to accept the amendment which I have offered to-day? 

Mr.· HOL~:'lAN. I will not say that I did not. I would not like to 

put my memory against that of the gentleman from Texas; his mem- ory might be more reliable than mine. I do not recall the fact, but I 

wish to have it stand as he puts it. I would. not question his recollection of the fact. 

But I think both questions should be considered. The first is as to 

what is a fair value of this land. The Government, if it retains the land, 

should pay a fair value, with interest on that value. I ·am confident 

from the information I have that the $160,000 is beyond all measure in excess of the value of the property, t..'l:king rents and all into account, 

and that matter should be investigated. But the other question, 

whether the property should be retained as a military post, is one which 

should be inquired into notwithstanding the opinions which have been 

expressed. 

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

TOWNSHEND] is entitled to the floor. 

Mr. CRAIN. Mr. Speaker, with the consent of the chairman of the 

Committee on :Military Affairs, I ask the House to allow me two minutes more. Mr. TOWNSHEND. I am willing that the request of the gentleman from Texas shall be granted if the time be extended two minutes 

on the other side. 

The SPEAKER pro tempo1·e. Unanimous consent is asked for an 

extension of the time for two minutes on each side. Is there objec--

tion? 

There was no objection, and it was so ordered. 

Mr. CRAIN. I do not think, Mr. Speaker, that the gentlema.n from 

Pennsylvania[Mr. RANDALL] fullyunderstood thenatureofmy proposition. I agree with him that it is right that there should be an investigation of the question whether we are paying too much for this 

site or not; but my amendment simply proposes that the comtnibtee 

shall not undertake to investigate the question of the necessity for the 

continuance of the post, because the only evidence, or the best -evidence, upon -which they could determine that question is all·eady before the Honse, in the nature of letters from the Lieutenant-General 

commanding the Army and from the major-general commanding the 

Department of Texas, and both those officers state it is absolutely nec- es...."3ry tha.t the post should be continued. 

Jl.fr. RANDALL. We have nothing to fear there. 

Mr. CRAIN. No, we have nothing to fear, but, as a retrencher and 

reformer, I am opposed to appropriating the people's money for the 

purpose of enabling a committee to investigate a question which is settled in ad vance. Mr. TOWNSHEND. How much time have I left, Mr. Speaker? 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 679 

The SPEAKER P'I"O tempore. The gentleman has six minutes left. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I yield two minutes to the gentleman from 

• Michigan [Mr. CUTCliEON]. 

Mr. CUTCHEON. Mr. Speaker, as has been already said by the 

gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. RANDALL], the safe thing to do in 

this case is to investigate. There appears to have been a very excessive appropriation for the purchase and quieting of the title of t-he Fort 

Brown resetvation. ·I heard the present Lieutenant-Genernl of the 

Army say, in the room of the Committee on ]>1ilitary Affairs, that, from 

the best information he had, he supposed this property was not worth 

to exceed $25,000; and, in the light of the letters read by the gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. LAIRD], and the st.1.tements made upon this 

floor, it seems to me that there is but one proper course for the Congress 

to take, and that is to investigate before they pay their money. It is 

not now a question whether we will abandon Fort Brown or not. The 

question is whether we will further inform ourselves before we pay 

over $160,000 of the people's money. I have been asked1 '• How in 

the world did this ever get into the sundry civil bill in 1885 ?'' W elJ, 

I do not know how it got in, but I know one thing, the },1ilitary Committee is not responsible for it. 

Mr. RANDALL. It got in by a vote of the House, against my op- . 

position. 

Mr. CUTCHEON. Yes, it got in by a vote of the House. It went 

from the House to the Senate. The Senate Committ.ee on Appropriations recommended an amendment which will be found in the RECORD 

of March 3, 1885, page 2350, reducing the amount from $160,000 to 

$75~ooo. The chairman of the Senate committee, Mr. ALLISON, urged 

the adoption of that amendment. It was opposed, as will be seen by 

reference to the· RECORD, by Senator CoKE, of Texas, and by Senator 

Maxey, of Texas: 

Mr. CoKE. Mr. President, ·r hope the amendment of the committee will not 11e concurred in. I make np objection to the proviso. I simply object to strik- ing out $160,000 and inserting in lieu thereof $75,000. 

.Again he said: 

I submit that the amendment of the committee should not prevail, and that the sum of $160,000 should be paid for this land. 

lrir. 1\Iaxey said: 

I submit the question in the hope that the Senate will not concur with the action of the Committee on Appropriations. l\Iy point, as was made by my colleague, advises only non-concurrence in the stl·ilring out of $160,000 and the insertion of$75,000. • . 

:Ur. ALLISON said: 

After what has been said by the two Senators from Texas, I shall occupy .only s. moment. As the Senators from Tex:J.S say, this is an old matter. In the first ' place, it has no business on this bill. It is purely a private claim, and it is a private claim that so far as I know has never been considered by any of the standing committees of this body. * * * What I object to is that this ques- tion comes in here from the House of Representatives this year on an a;ppro- priation bill for the purchase of the property at $160,000, when last year it came in the same appropriation bill for 1·ent at $121,000. * "' * I submit to the Senate that the proposition t.o pay $160,000 for the property with no further information tthan we now have respecting it would be an un- just payment from the Government of the United States to th~ persons who have been claiming this property from 1853 to 1879. 

* * * * * * * The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the recommen- dation of the Committee on Appropriations. Mr . .ALLISON. I will modify the amendment of the committee. I do not want even by implication to say that we are obliged to pay $75,000. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question now is on the first amendment of the Committee on Appropriations, in line 2027, striking out "$160,000 11 and in- serting "$75,000. 11 

Mr. IIARRIS. I ask for the yeas and nays. The yens and nays were ordered; and being taken, resulted-yeas 15, nays 20 ; as follows: 

Allison, 

Blair, 

Cameron of Pa. Cameron of Wis. 

Chace, 

Dawes, 

Edmunds, 

Harrison, 

YEAS-15. 

Hoar, 

Mcl\Hllan, 

Miller ofN. Y. Mitchell, 

NA.YS-20. 

Plumb, 

Sewell, 

Wilson. 

Brown, Hampton, Jones of Nevada, Vance, 

Call, Harris, 1\lcPherson, VanWyck, 

Coke, Jackson, Mahone, Voorhees, 

Fair, Jonas, Manderson, Walker, 

Gibson, Jones of Florida, Sawyer, Williams. 

~Ir. TOWNSHEND. Mr. Speaker, I wish again to impress upon the 

House that the only question now is as to whether an investigation 

shall be made or not. The investigation will not be an expensive one, 

because the officers oi'the Wax Department, who will be called upon 

to testify, are in the city, and they will doubtless be the main source 

of information on the subject. Besides that, there are other persons 

now in the city from Brownsville who are cognizant of all the facts, 

gentlemen who have been residents ofthe town for many yeru:s. 

I will say further, Mr. Speaker, that the Committee on Military 

.Affairs have no great desire to investigate this matter. 

All they wish is that the House may have an opportunity to protect 

the Treasury jrom what is regru:ded by many good men as a fraud about 

to be perpetrated upon it. This resolution did not originate with the . Committee on Military .Affairs; it was introduced in this House andreferred to that committee, and we have simply .responded to the reso- lution by saying that there does seem to be a state of facts sufficient to 

warrant an investigation. General Meigs, who investigated the value 

of this property in 1869, reported that a fair rental for the property 

would not exceed $500 a year. In addition to that., officers who have 

beeri quartered at Fort Brown nave told me that, in their judgment, the 

property was not worth more than $25,000. Now, Mr. Speaker, I demand the previous question. 

Mr. CRAIN. I do not object to investigation. All I object to is an 

investigation as to the necessity for continuing the post. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Then we are all agreed. 

Mr. CRAIN. Yes; except as to my amendment. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. Mr. Speaker,-I ought to have state4 that the 

majority of the committee have authorized me to say that they are in 

favor of permitting the gentleman from Te as to offer his amendment. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The amendment will be read. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Amend the resolution by striking ont the following words : '·Also to inquire into and report as to what necessity exists, if :my, for a. mili- tary post at said point, and the cost to the Unit.ed St·ates of said post since 1865." 

The SPEAKER pro te-mpore. The gentleman from illinois [Mr. 

TowNSHEND] demands the previous question on t~ bill and the amendment. 

The previous question was ordered. . 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I ask unanimous consent that the hour be ex- tended until this resolution is disposed of. 

The SPEAKER 1J1'0 tempm·e. If there be no objection, that arrangement will be made. The Chair hears no obj ect:ipn. The first question 

is upon the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Texas [Mr. 

CRAIN]. 

The question being taken on the amendment of Mr. C~UN, there 

were-ayes 36, noes 129. · 

Mr. CRAIN. I call for the yeas and nays. 

'l"he yeas and nays were not ordeted. 

So the amendment was not agreed to. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND. I now ask for a vote on the amendment reported by fhe committee . 

The amendment of the Committee on :Military Affairs was read a.s ·ollows: 

Strike out in the first line of the resolution the word" direcwd" and insert "requested." 

The amendment was agreed to. 

The resolution as amended was adopted. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND moved to reconsider the vote by which the resolution was a-dopted; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be 

laid on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

RAILROAD BRIDGE ACROSS THE MISSISSIPPI AT 1\IEMPIIIS. 

Mr. PHELAN. I ask unanimous consent to call up forprese'ntcousideration the bill (H. R. 2927) to authorize the construction of a bridge 

across the :Mississippi River at Memphis, Tenn. 

Mr. DUNN. Let the bill be read and a statement made, subject to 

objection. 

The SPEAKER pro te1npore. The gentlem~ from Arkansas [Mr. 

DUNN] reserves the right to object. 

The bill was read, as follows: · 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of Amer-ica in Congress assembled, Tqat the Kansas City and Memphis Railway and Bridge Company, a corporation created and organized under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Arkansas, its successors and assigns, be, and the same are hereby, authorized and empowered to erect, construct, and maintain a bridge over the l\iississippi River, from or near the town of Hopefield, in the State of Arkansas, to o1· near the taxing district of Shelby County, commonly known as the city of Memphis, in the State of Tennessee. Said bridge shall be constructed to provide for "the passage of railway trains, and, at the option of the corpora- tion by which it may be built., may be used for the passage of wagons and ve- hicles of all kinds, for the transit of animals, and for foot-passengers, for such reasonable rates of toll as may be approved from time to time by the Secretary ofWa.r. 

SEC. 2. That any bridge bniltunderthis act and subject to its limitations shall be a lawful strueture, and shall be recognized and known as a post-route, upon which also no higher charge shall be made for the transmission over the same of the mails, the tl·oops, and munitions of war of the United States than the rate per mile paid for the transportation ove.r the railroad or public highways lead- ing to the said bridge, and it sh.aJl enjoy the rights and privileges of .othe.r post- roads in the United States. - - SEC. 3. That the said bridge shall be made with unbroken and continuous spans. The two middle or channel spans thereof shall not be less than 600 feet in"length in the clear, and no span shall be less than 450 feet in length in the clear. The lowest part of the superstructure of said bridge shall be at least 65 feet above extreme high-water mark, as understood at the point of location, and the bridge shall be at right angles to o,nd its piers parallel with the current of the river. No bridge shall be erected or maintained under the authority of this act which shall at any time substantially or materially obstruct the free naviga- tion of said river; and if any bridge erected under such authority shall, in the opinion of the Secretary of War, obstruct such navigation, he is hereby author- ized to cause such change or alteration of said bridge to be made as will effect- ually obviate such obstruction; and all such alterations shall be made and a.ll such obstructions be removeq at the expense of the owner or owners pf said bridge;-- and in case of any litigation arising from any obstruction or alleged ob- struction to the free navigation of said river caused or alleged to be caused by- said bridge, the case may be brought in the circuit court of the United States within whose jurisdiction any portion of said obstruction or bridge may be located: Provided further, That nothing in this act shall be so construed as to repeal or modify any of the provisions of law now existing in reference to the protection of the navigation of rivers, or to exempt this bridge from the opera- tion of the same. . SEC.· 4. That all railroad companies desiring the use of said bridge shall have and be entitled to equal rights and privileges relative to the passage of :railway 
--

680 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. JANUARY 24, 

trains or cars over the same, and over the approaches thereto, upon payment of 

a·reasonable compensation for such use; and in case the owner or owners of 

said bridge and the several railroad companies, or any one of them, desiring 

such use shall fail to agree upon the sum or sums to be paid, and upon rules and 

conditions to which each shall conform in using said bridge, all matters at issue 

between them shall be decided by the Secretary of War, upon a hearing of the 

allegations and proofs of the parties. 

SEc. 5. That any bridge authorized to be constructed under this act shall be 

built and located under and. subject to such regulations for the security of navigation of said river as the Secretary of War shall prescribe; and to secure that 

object Lhe said companies or corporations shall submit to the SecretaryofWar, 

for his examination and approval, a design and drawings of the bridge and a 

map ofth\)location, giving, for the space of2 miles above and 2 miles below the 

proposed location, the topography of the banks of the river, the shore-lines at extreme high and low water, the direction and strength of the cun-ents at all . stages, and the soundings, accurately showing t.he bed of the stream, the location of any other bridge or bridges, and shall furnish such other information as may be required for a full and satisfactory understanding of the subject; and 

until the said plan and location of the bridge are approved by the Secretary of War the bridge shall not be built; and should any change be made in the plans 

of said bridge during the progress of construction, such change shall be subject to approval of the Secretary of War. SEc. 6. That the right to alter, amend, or repeal this act is hereby expressly 

reserved, and the right to require any changes in said structure, or its entire 

removal, a.t the expense of. the owners, whenever Congress shall decide that 

the public interests require it, is also expressly reserved. 

SEc. 7. That it shall be the duty of the Secretary of War, on satisfactory proof 

that a necessity exists therefor, to require the company or persons owning said 

bridge to cause such aids to the passage of said bridge to be constructed, placed, 

and maintained at. their own cost and expense, in the form of booms, dikes, piers, or other !;.Uitable and proper structures for the guiding of rafts, steam-boats, and 

other water-craft safely through the passage-way, as sha.U be specified in his 

order in that behalf; and on failure of the company or persons aforesaid to make and establish such addiHonal structures within a reasonable time, the 

said Secretary shall proceed to cause the same to be built or made at the ex- pense of the United St-ates, and shall refer the matter without delay to the Attorney-General of the United States, whose duty it shall be to inst-itute, in the name of the United States, proceedings in any circuit court of the United States 

within whose jurisdicHon such bridge or any part thereof is located, for there- covery of the amount so expended by the Government and all costs of suc~proceedings ; and all moneys accruing from such proceedings shall be covered 

into the Treasury of the l:Tnited States. 

SEc. 8. That if the construction of the bridge hereby authorized shall not be 

commenced within one year from the time this act takes effect and be com- pleted within four years after the same date, then this act shall be void, and all 

rights hereby conferred shall cease and determine. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the present con· sideration of this bill? 

Mr. DUNN. I desired to reserve objection until the gentleman from 

Tennessee [Mr. PHELAN] had made a statement. 

The SPEAKER pro tem1Jore. Objection will be reserved. 

Mr. PHELAN. Mr. Speaker, I can meet the objection of the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. DUNN] by reference to a letter which may 

either be read or, by unanimous consent, published in the RECORDa letter addressed to me by General George H. Nettleton, president of 

the Kansas City, Springfield and Memphis Railroad Company, who 

will be one of the chief incorporators of this bridge. In this letter he 

.incloses a circular letter addressed to all the roads centering at Memphis, offel'ing each of them equal and fair participation in the construction and management of this bridge. 

Mr. DUNN. In order to facilitate an understanding of this matter, 

I will state that I have always insisted that any new charter for a bridge at that point should contain a provision securing to all roads 

centering there the right to participate fully in the construction, ownership, and management of the bridge, so that no one railroad company 

should have a monopoly in this matter. As a provision of this kind 

does not appear in this bill, I have desued the gentlemen from Ten- nessee to place upon record a statement which shall satisfy the House 

that this right has been secured to the roads interested. In my judgment, the right ought to be secured by a provision in the bill; but the 

gentleman, as I understand, says an arrangement has been made which 

is satisfactory to all the roads interested. I make this statement that 

the House may judge for itself as to the sufficiency of this security. 

Mr. PHELAN. I will state that the representatives of the various 

roads appeared before the Committee on Commerce and gave their full 

consent to the passage of this bill as in nowise affecting them injuriously. 

l'rlr. WEAVER. All the roads? 

Mr. PHELAN. Yes, sir. I will state further that the public at 

Memphis has had full information as to this bill, and it has been heartily 

indorsed by the Merchants' Exchange, the Cotton Exchange, by the 

business men of that city, and by the people on both sides of the river. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the present con- sideration of the bill? 

Mr. DUNN. Let the document to which the gentleman has referred 

be read. 

Mr. RANDALL. It occurs to me that there should be in the bill 

some provision covering the point raised by the gentleman irom Arkansas. 

Mr. PHELAN. I will state to the gentleman that this bill has already 

been passed once by the Senate, and has twice been approved by the 

Committee on Commerce of this House. In it all interests are protected, and the roads concerned are themselves satisfied. 

Mr. RANDALL. I think parties who have heretofore objected held 

similar rights under an act of Congress. 

Mr. PHELAN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. RANDALL. The parties objecting heretofore wel'e parties .to 

whom, according to my recollection, a charter had been granted. I · think the agreement which the gentleman from Tennessee has stated 

should be in corpora ted in this bill, so that no monopoly may be created. ~ 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the present con- sideration of the bill? 

:M:r. DUNN. Let the letter to which the gentleman baa referred be 

read, before objection is withdrawn, because it is the very essence of 

this matter. 

The Clerk read as follows: KANsAS CITY, Mo., January 17, 1888. 

DEAR Sm: In reply to the following question, asked in yours of the 8th in· 

stant, "Are yon willing for the roads east of the river each to name an incor• 

porator and to have the privilege of subscribing to what part of the capital 

stock of said company?" I send with this a. copy of form of letter prepared by me to be sent by the treasurer of the KansaS City, Springfield and Memphis 

Railroad Company to each of the railroad companies terminating at Memphis, 

which I think will satisfactorily answer your question. 

As soon as I learn that the letters have been sent out I will inform you. I have received several letters from Mr. Van Benthuysen, copies of which I 

have sent to Colonel Learnard. 

Very truly, yours, 

Ron. JAMES PHELAN, M. C., 

Washington, D. 0. 

GEO. H. NETTLETON, 

President. 

OFFICE OF THE K.ANSli.S CITY, SPRINGFIELD 

AND MEMPHIS RAILROAD COMPANY, 

Boswn, Mass., January-, 1888. 

In 1883 this company completed its railroad to the city of Memphis, Tenn., 

and since that time all its passenger and freight cars to and from that point have 

been transferred across the Mississippi River by ferry. The management has 

for some time felt that the increased traffic on its road demanded better facilities for transfer than boats could furnish, and realizing that this need would 

constantly grow more urgent, and as this company is at present more largely 

interested in the matter than any other, it has during the past year obtained from 

the State of Arkansas a charter for a railway and bridge company, and has 

caused surveys, borings, soundings, and estimates of the probable cost of a bridge 

and approaches to be made, and bas also taken steps to obtain the consent Of 

Congress to the building of such bridge. It having been suggested that it would be for the interest of all the railroad 

companies entering Memphis to participate in the ownership and operat-ion of 

such a bridge, the management of this company hereby invites the co-operation 

of other railroad companies referred to in its construction and in obtaining the consent of Congress thereto. The following is, in br-ief, an outline of what has 

occurred to us as the proper basis of a scheme to carry out the purpose of the 

subscribers: · First. The necessary funds to be provided by issuing bonds and a small amount of stock. Each company interested in the enterprise to subscribe and pay for an equal amount thereof, the latter to be secured by mortgage on the property. 

Second. Each associate company to be entitled to representation in the directorship of the bridge company . . Third. All companies using the bridge to . pay tolls therefor, which shall bo 

fixed by the directors of the bridge company so as to amount as near as may be to a sum sufficient to pay the interest on all the bonds outstanding and all the e.xpense connected therewith, a.nd for the maintenance and repairs of the bridge. If at the end of any six months the amount of tolls falls short of the sum re· quired for the purposes above specified, then the associate companies shall pay to the bridge company on demand the amount of such deficit, each company paying to the bridge company on demand the deficit in the same ~roportion as that in which they may have contributed to the earnings during sa1dsix months. 

If the amount of such tolls exceeds the sum so required, the excess shall be 

repaid to the associate companies in the same proportion as above, it being 

the intention that the tolls shall amount to no more than is needed to pay the 

ordinary expenses of maintenance and interest on the cost of construction, and 

that any surplus interest shall be redistributed to the companies (members of the 

bridge company) furnishing the traffic which produced it. It is proper to state that the surveys and estimates referred to were under Mr. George S. Morison, civil engineer, of New York City, who estimates the cost of 

the bridge and approaches at $'2,000,000, which interest during construction and 

land at Memphis would probably swell to $2,500,000. 

If your company desires to participate in the enterprise, I shall be glad to 11ave you so state at an early day. , A copy of this invitation has been sent to each of the following companies: 

Louisville and Nashville Hailway Company, Louisville, New Orleans and Texas Railway Company, Mississippi and Tennessee Railroad Company, Lit.lle 

Rock and Memphis Railroad Company, Chesapeake, Ohio and Southwestern 

Railroad Company, Memphis and Charleston Railway Company, Kansas City, 

1\Iemphis and Birmingham Railroad Company, Missouri Pacific Railway Com- pany. Yours, very truly, ----Treas.:.rrcr. 

To----,--. 

The S.PEAKEI{ pro tempore. Is there objection to the present consideration of this bill? 

:M:r. DPNN. I suggest to the gentleman from 'l'ennessee that he obtain unanimous consent for the consideration of the bill, and then prepare a short amendment providing that all the companies named shall 

participate in the construction and use of this bridge on the terms 

stated in the communication which has been read. If such a provision were incorporated, the bill could no doubt pass at once. I do not desire 

to obstruct the passage of a proper bill, but I do not want to consent 

to the passage of a measure which does not protect the public interests 

in the commerce which is to pass over that bridge. When those interests are saved I am content. 

l'rlr. PHELAN. If the gentleman, having the power under the rules 

of the House, insists on that, I will yield. 

Mr. DUNN. I hope the gentleman will not consider it in that light. 

I have simply made a suggestion to him, and if he understands the 

rules of the House he will know that, haYing unanimous consent to 

consider a bill, it must then be disposed of. 

Mr. PHELAN. Will there be unanimous consent to consider it? 

· Mr. DUNN. That is what I suggest. 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 681 

Mr. PHELAN. I ask, then, for unanimous consent. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. There is no objection, and.the bill is 

before the House. 

Mr. DUNN. If the gentleman will prepare the proviSo himself.--

Mr. PHELAN. No; I will let the gentleman from Arkansas prepare the proviso, and when he has submitted it I will ask a vote ofthe 

House on it. 

Mr. DUNN. I call for the reading of the report. · The Clerk read as follows: 

Mr. PHELAN, from the Committee on Commerce, submitted the following re- port, to accompany bill H. R. 2927: • The Committee on Commerce, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 2927) to authorize the Kansas City and Memphis Rail way Bridge Company to construct a. bridge across the Mississippi River at Memphis, Tenn., having had the same under consideration, respectfully report as follows: 

This bill contains substantially the same provisions contained in the bill introduced in the House of Representatives on May 24, 1886, and reported with 

amendments on July 17,1886. The amendments made by the Committee on Commerce to that bill have been incorporated into the body of this bill. The 

only point-s of difference between the amended and reported bill of July 17 

1886, and the present are as follows: "The Kansas City and Memphis Railroad 

and Bridge Company" has been changed to "The Kansas City and 1\lemphis 

Railway and Bridge Company." 

The second section of the bill of July 17,1886, contains the following words, 

which follow the words "post-route, upon which also.no higher charge shall be 

made for the transmission over the same of the mails, the troops, and the mu- nitions of war of the United States," namely, "or for passengers or freight 

passing over said bridge." In section 4 of the bill of July 17, 1886, which refers all matters at issue in re- gard to the use of the bridge to the Secretary of War, is the following proviso, 

namely: 

"Pro11ided, That the provisions of section 2 in regard to charges for passengers and freight across said bridge shall not govern the Secretary of War in determining any question arising as to t-he sum or sums to be paid to the owners of 

said bridge by said railroad companies for the use of said bridge." 

These two clauses simply negative each other, and are stricken ont. The 

words in section 2 are useless and would make it impossible to_construct and 

operate the bridge, and the proviso in section 4 is merely added in order to destroy an impossible condition or limitation. 

The report upon the bill as originally introduced in the first session of the 

Forty-ninth Congress, July 17, 1886, says: "The bill, as introduced, contains provisions similar to an act of Congress 

approved February 26, 1885, authorizing the Tennessee and Arkansas Bridge 

Company and the Tennessee Construction and Contracting Company to con- struct and maintain a bridge across the Mississippi River at or near Memphis, 

in the State of Tennessee. By provisions of that act a bridge not less than 65 

feet above extreme high-water mark, with continuous spans, two of which 

should not be less than 500 feet in length in the clear, and none less than 300 feet ' in the clear, was authorized. "In the amendments presented by the committee to the present bill it is re- quired that any bridge constructed under the provisions thereof shall be of con- tinuous spans, the two middle or channel spans to be not less than 600 feet in 

length in the clear, and none to be less than 450 feet in length in the clear. 

"The bill contains all the safeguards which it has been deemed prudent to incorporate in this class of legislation and such a.s were and are embraced in the act of February 26, 1885, authorizing the construction of a bridge at this point. 

''The only objection urged to the passage of the bill is that two bridges should not be erected at this point, and there being already provision for one, no other 

should be authorized. .As against this objection it is said that the parties holding the prior charter have no interest in the city of Memphis or any of the lines 

of railroad running to or from the same; that they have no approaches and no right of eminent domain by which to acquire same; that they have no money with which to construct and have taken no visible steps towards the construc- tion of the same though they have bad eighteen months in which to begin. Your committee bas not undertaken to settle these respective claims. There is 

and can be no doubt but that the interests of commerce demand the construc- tion of a. bridge across the !\fississippi at this point, and that the same should be 

constructed at an early date. 

"The question is,who ca.n,will, and ought to construct the same. The parties 

seeking the present charter are the only ones inte1·ested directly in the con- struction of the bridge. The Kansas City and Memphis Railroad and Bridge 

Company asking the present right is practically identical with the Kansas City, Fort Scott and Gulf, and the Kansas City, Springfield and Memphis Railroad 

Companies, which own and operate the line from Kansas City to Memphis, 487 

miles in length, and tributary Jines in Missouri and Kansas. a total of over 800 

miles. They are also constructing on the east of the river a .line from Memphis to Birmingham, Ala.., a distance of about 250 miles. ''In view of these facts, your committee are of opinion that the present appli- cants should not be denied the right to construct a bridge simply because other 

parties bad previously been granted a right. The policy of those who have no interest in the construction of a bridge, receiving and holding a charter, to the 

exclusion of those who need and desire it, is not a good one, and certainly such a c;b,-rter should not be permitted to stand in the way of those who desire to construct-the same in the interest of commerce." . Since this report was made the line from Memphis to Birmingham, .Ala., has 

been practically completed. In addition to this,since the above report was made, a new line of railroad from Bald Knob, Ark., on the Iron Mountain Railroad, has been constructed to a point opposite Memphis. Other roads are under survey, their construction being in a. large measure dependent upon the building of a bridge across the Mississippi River at Memphis. - At tQe second session of the Forty-ninth Congress this committee made a unanimous report in favor of the amended bill of July(17, 1886. When the bill was under consideration during the first session of the Forty-ninth Congress 

representatives of the Tennessee and Alabama Bridge Company and the Ten: nessee Construction and Contracting Company appeared before the committee 

and gave positive assurance that they intended to build, that negotiations for 

the necessary funds had been entered into and would be successful, that traffic contracts had been made for the transportation of freight across the bridge, and 

that if the bridge were not in process of construction before the second session 

of the Forty-ninth Congress the said companies then holding the grant of charter 

would not further oppose the granting a charter to another company, On the 

strength of these representations several members of the committee signed a minority report, in which t-hev say: __., 

"Without passing any opinion on the statements made before the committee, we desir.ed, in~tead of the bill report~d by the majority of the committee, to have a bill which should allow the bridge company now having the authority of Congress to build a bridge a reasonable time in which to show their ability and determination to construct a bridge, with the provision that if it :failed to do so, then the Kansas City and Memphis Railroad and Bridge Company should 

be authorized to build a bridge at that place. 

"It seemed to us unjust not to allow a !"easonable time to the present bridge 

company to construct a. bridge. And it see~ed to us, also, that it would be un- just to the Kansas City and Memphis Railroad and Bridge Company to subject 

that company to unreasonable delay in building a bridge." 

.At the second session of the Forty-ninth Congress the bill of the previous ses- sion was again reported to the House, but was obstinately opposed by t-he friends 

of the outstanding charter, and they were again successful in preventing its passage. Nearly a year has elapsed, and the holders of the outstanding charter 

have done nothing to redeem their pledges. The cono.lusion is natural and 

reasonable that those now holding it are unable to raise. the money necessary to build a. bridge, and that their intentions are more speculative than practical. 

Congress can not be justly asked to retard a great work of general necessity in 

aid of a speculative scheme. 

The committee recommend the passage of the bill. 

Mr. DUNN. I now move the following amendment: 

Provided, That the railroad companies whose roads now or may hereafter reach 

the taxing district of Memphis, Tenn., shall have the privilege of participating 

in.the construction, ownership, and control of said bridge on the terms and in 

the manner set forth in a letter of invitation addressed by the Kansas City, Springfield and Memphis Railroad Company to the Louisville and Nashville 

Railway Company, the Lomsville, New Orleans and Texas Railway Company, 

the Mississippi and Tennessee Railroad Company, the Little Rock and Mem- phis Railroad Company, the Chesapeake, Ohip and Southwestern Railroad Com- pany, the Memphis and Charleston Railway Company, the Kansas City, Mem- phis and Birmingham Railroad Company, and the MJssouri Pacmc Railway 

Company, dated J anmu-y -, 18-. 

Mr. PHELAN. · ·I should like to say in opposition that the amendment is immaterial and may be harmful; that the construction the court 

would necessarily put on that language is that those roads not included 

would necessarily be excluded. As I have drawn the bill all tberoads 

constructed or being conStructed are permitted to come in under its 

provisions. 

Mr. DUNN. I understood the letter of invitation to be addressed 

only to those which are cq,nstructed or being constructed. 

Mr. PHELAN. Also to those yet to be constructed. 

J\Ir. DUNN. I ask the amendment be changed in its phraseology to 

conform with the statement of the gentleman from Tennessee. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman modifies his amendment as he bas stated. 

11Ir. ENLOE. I would like to ask the gentleman from Arkansas how 

it is possible for a company in process of construction, or one not even 

yet organized, that may in the future come to Memphis, to be ex- pected to ·participate under the terms of that le~ter? 

Mr. PHELAN. That is just what I have asked. 

Mr. DUNN. The simple way would be to allow the roads to ask for an assessment of what their share would have Jleen had they exi'3ted at 

the time the bridge was built, pay it in to the other roads, and become 

thereby participants to that extent. Of course the amount could be 

easily ascertained. - Mr. PHELAN. Mr. Speaker, now so far as the amendment is con- cerned, it is rendered absolutely immaterial and useless by the language 

of the fourth section of the bill before the House; and with the permission of the House I will read that section:. 

SEc. 4. That all railroad companies desiring the use of said bridge shall have 

and be entitled to equal rights and privileges relative to the passage of railway trains or cars over the same, and over the approaches thereto, upon payment of a reasonable compensation for such use; and in case the owner or owners of said 

bridge and the several railroad companies, or any one of them desiring suc"Q. use, shall fail to agree upon the sum or sums to be paid, and upou rules and con- ditions to which each shall conform in using said bridge, all matters at issue be- tween them shall be decided by tb,e Secretary of War, upon a hearing of the al· 

legations and proofs of the parties. 

I defy human ingenuity to draw any amendment which will more thoroughly protect the rights of all participating roads, whether they are now established or may be established in the future, than is there 

presented in the use of that bridge. In other words, the a.mendment 

offered by the gentleman from Arkansas is immaterial and has no foundation even in a supposition of a possible evil yet to arise. 

I hope the House will not adopt that amendment. 

:Mr. DUNN. Mr. Speaker, one word in reply to the gentleman from 

Tennessee. The section he has read is one which has been incorporated in all railway-bridge bills passed by Congress. All raiJroads 

have a right to run over and across the tracks of other roads. That is 

a necessary part of the law of interstate commerce and its regulations. 

All bridges that are authorized by I a w to be built are open to all trains 

which may reach them on any roads, on the terms fixed by the com- pany happening to own the bridge, and subject to the regulations fixed 

by the proprietary company. 

The difference here is that an the roads being joint owners and joint 

participants in the regulation and control of the bridge can, as partners 

in that concern, secure their rights better than outside parties simply 

desiring a right of way and the privilege accorded to other companies 

to use the bridge. All will understand the difference in that important 

respect. 

Mr. PHELAN. Will the gentleman allow a question? 

Mr. DUNN. Certainly. 

Mr. PHELAN. Do not the letters which have been read fully cover 

the point in so far as that right is concerned? And does the gentleman know the name of one single road, or the representative of a single 

road, in opemtion to-day with its terminus at :Memphis, which bas re- quested him or anybody else to object to the passage of such a bridge 

bill before this House? 

Mr. DUNN. I do not know of any, · and certainly no one bas asked me to object. I am acting now, I will say to the gentleman, upon this 
682 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. JANUARY 24, 

question a.s I have ever acted, in what I conceive to be the public interests as affected by these bridge bills. 

That bridge must be common to all the commerce of the Southwest. 

It ought not to be in the hands of any one railioad company which can 

so regnlafe the use of the structure as to place all rival and competing 

companies at some measUfe of disadvantage if it sees proper to do so. 

I want to go a.s far .a.s possible to secure in this bill the public interests as involved in that matter. I understand and know that it is a very 

easy matter for the railioad companies to come to an agreement. That 

letter, with the obligation which it carries if carried into the bill, will secure all roads, and if they see proper to participate they can. If they 

do not, the other company can go on and build the bridge. ~Ir. PHELAN. I now yield five ·minutes to the gentleman from 

Indiana [Mr. BYNU1\I]. 

Mr. BYNUM. Mr. Speaker, I am not interested at all in the construction of this bridge, nor have I any constituents who have any interest in it. But last Congress I reported a similar bill, which was under my charge during the session, and I think the House should have a clear understanding of the trouble over the construction of this bridge 

at Memphis before action is taken here. 

The authority was first granted to another corporation, the Tennes- see and Arkansas Bridge Company, to build the bridge. That com- pany was composed of individuals who had no special interest in the 

construction of .the bridge, except in as far as they might be bene:fi ted 

by the tolls to be assessed upon those who ·used it. " In other words, 

they were not a railioad company which would have had use for it for 

the passage of trains. 

When this present bill came before the Committee on Commerce, the 

incorporators of the measure came forward and objected to the passage 

of the bill, saying that only one bridge was needed; and serious objections came from the company holding the old charter. The bill passed over the short vacation, the old company promising that if they did 

not do something towards the construction of the bridge before the 

next session of Congress no further objection would be made to its passage. Nothing was done during the vacation. It was claimed that 

nothing 90uld be done except during low stages of water. Nothing was done, however; but the same objection was made during the short 

session as wa,s made during the preceding session of Congress~ the old - company still interposing its opposition. Nothing has been done, I am 

informed, by that comp~y since that time. The only company that 

is directly interested in the construction of this bridge is the company 

which owns the road from Kansas City to Memphis. 

Mr. DUNN. The gentleman is incorrect. Will he allow me to cor- rect him? There are a number of railroads interested. 

Mr. BYNUM. There are a number of surveys, but the only line 

that crosses the Mi&,"'issippi River at Memphis is the Kansas City, 

Springfield and Memphis, which i., a line running down to Birmingham, Ala. There are a number of other lines which terminate at Memphis on this side of the river, and one which terminates on the other 

side, but none cross the river. None of these railroad companies have 

ever come forward and uttered a word of objection to the passage of 

this bill. They have never come forward and asked to be incorporated 

in this bill. They have never come forward and asked any measure of re- lief whatever. I think I am stating the question fairly, with due def- erence to all interffits, when I say that the only objection comes from 

the company holding the old charter. 

1\Ir. DUNN. Let me ask the gentleman from Indiana if the parties 

representing the Memphis and Charleston, and the Memphis, Arkansas 

and Kansas City Railroads had not a bill in the last Congress? 

Mr. BYNUM. I do not know as to that, but when this bill was con- sidered before the. committee they never came forward to a single member of the committee to utter a word of objection. They never appeared to ask any amendment to be adopted to this pill. 

[Here the hammer felL] 

Mr. PHELAN. I yield two minutes to the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. WHEELER]. 

Mr. "'WHEELER. The impre...c;sion of the gentleman from Indiana 

[Mr. BYNUM] that there has never been any objection to this bill is no~ 

altogether correct; and the error into which he has fallen calls for some 

explanation. 

There are other raill'oads interested in the traffic which crosses the 

MissU1sippi River at Memphis, to an extent quite equal to that of the 

Kansas City and Memphis Railway Company. 

The MemphisandCharlestonRailroad Company, which runs for two 

hundred miles through my district, having its western terminus at 

Memphis, on the Mississippi River, is controlled by the same interests 

which are now constructing the Memphis, Arkansas and Kansas Railroad, the eastern. terminus of which road will be at Memphis, thus 

forming a continuous line of railway communication (almost an air line) 

from the Southern Atlantic coast to the State of Karnsas, and the con- necting lines of railroad thence to the Padtic Ocean. 

It is manifest that the people of my district would be placed at a great 

disadvantage if the railroad traffic and travel through their homes to 

the great West and Northwest were subjected to discriminations and 

exactions from which the traffic and ·travel from other localities were free. To-prevent the possibility of such discrimination .and exaction, on 

the first call of the States in Congress, I introduc.ed bill H. R. 2014, which 

I hold in my ~and, authorizing the 1\Iemphis, Arkansas and Kansas 

Railway Cpmpany and the :Memphis and Charleston Railroad Company 

to construct, a bridge across the Uississippi River at Memphis. This 

would h.·we made a continuous line of the two railioads whose interests are identica.l, and would have protected the interests of my constituents-the object I had in view in proposing the measure. Subsequently · 

the bill now under consideration (H. R. 2927) was introduced by the 

gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. PHELAN]. . 

Negotiations were entered into by parties controlling the various railroads centering in Memphis, resulting in an agreement that the railroads desiring to unite in the construction of a bridge across the Mississippi at Memphis should be privileged to do so upon absolutely equal 

terms with the parties interested in the bill now before the House. 

I have two telegrams dated January 18, one stating that the understanding is that the Kansas City people promise tha.t all companies 

shall be admitted to participate in the construction and management of 

the bridge iftheirbill is passed. This telegram also says: 

~ In that event we would unite in support of their bill, but before doing so we desire confirmation of this agreement. . 

The other telegram, subsequently received, says: 

The understanding is perfect, and will assist in passing the bill desired by Kansas City people. 

The bill desired by the Kansas City people is the one we a.re now con- sidering, and the gentlemen who send these telegrams control the Memphis and Charlestol). Railroad and the Memphis, Arkansas and Kansas 

Railway, and they have a deeper interest in traffic and travel over the 

Mississippi River at Memphis than those connected with any other com- pany or corporation. 

It being evident from the telegrams to which I have called attention 

that the railioads mentioned in the bill introduced by myself-arid con- sequently the interests of my constituents-are fully protected, and 

deeming it of the utmost importance to the rapidly increasing commerce and manufacturing industries of the localities affected that the 

bridge at Memphis be speedily constructed, I withdraw all opposition 

to the bill and beg to urge its immediate passage. 

Mr. PHELAN. I move the previous question on the amendment ·and the bill. 

The previous question was ordered. 

The question being taken on the amendment offered by Mr. DUNN, . it was not agreed to. 

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time, and passed. 

Mr. PHELAN moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was 

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

table. • The latter motion was agreed to. 

.TAMES H. GILBERT. 

Ur. DUNHAM. I ask unanimous consent to discharge the Committee of the Whole House from the further consideration of the bill 

(H. R. 2067) forthe reliefof James H. Gilbert, and that it be put upon 

its passage. The bill has ·a. unanimous report of the Committee on 

Claims of this Congress and of the last Congress. 

The bill was read, as follows: 

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and is hereby, direct-ed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropziated, the sum of $4.{)8 to James H. Gilbert, of Chicago, Ill., the same being balance 

due him on salary as deputy collector and clerk in charge of inspectors at Chi- -cago custom-house. -

The SPEAKER pro tempo1·e. Is there objection to the present con- sideration of this bill? The Chair hears none; and the bill is before 

the House. 

Mr. DUNHAM. I ask that the bill be put upon its passage. 

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time, and passed. 

Mr. DUNHAM moved to reconsider the -vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the 

table. · The latter motion was agreed to. 

OLEOMARGARINE. 

111r. L~WLER. I introduced a matter into the House before the 

committees were appointed relating to the tax on oleomargarine. I ask now that it be taken from the table. It was'placed on the table merely 

because the committees had not been appointed. I desire to have it 

referred to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

Mr. HATCH. I object, and demand the regular order. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Missouri demands 

the regular order. 

Mr. HATCH. I objecttotherequestofthe gentleman from illinois, 

but withdraw the demand for the regular order. 

CONSOLIDATION OF CUSTOMS DISTRICTS. 

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE, of Arkansas, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. 5875) to authorize the consolidation of customs collection districts in certain cases, and to provide for the compensation 

of certain collectors and surveyors of customs; which was read a first 

and second time, referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and 

ordered to be printed. 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 683 

URIDGE AT LEXINGTS->N, MO. 

:Mr. WARNER. I ask unanimous consent for the present consideration of the bill (H. R. 2578) authorizing the construction of a bridge over the Uissouri River at or near the city of Lexington, !Io. 

. Mr. RANDALL. I think there must be some mistake about this. 

The bill does not appear on the Calendar. . Mr. WARNER. It was reported on Monday, and possibly it may 

not have been put on the Calendar. I twas ordered to be taken up with 

the other bill by the Committee on Commerce. · 

The SPEAKER pro te·rnpore. It does not appear on the Calendar. 

Mr. WEAVER. I will ask the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. WARNER] whether.. this is the m;·ual form of bill, and whether. it has re- ceived the approval of the Secretary of War? 

Mr. WARNER. The bill contains all the usual provisions. It has 

been reported back by the CGmmittee on Commerce with t4e statement 

that it meets all the- necessary requirements, and a recommendation 

that it do pass. 

Mr. HENDERSON, of Iowa. Is the report unanimous? 

Mr. WARNER. It is a unanimous report. 

Mr. WEAVER. Let the report be considered as read, then. 

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

WARNER] asks unanimous consent to take up this bill and consider it 

now. Is there objection? 

There was no objection. 

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time; and being 

engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time, and passed. 

Mr. WARNER moved to reconsider the vot-e by which the bill was 

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

table. · 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

LIGHT-HOUSE AT COB POINT BAR. 

Mr. COMPTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the 

Committee of the Whole House be discharged from the further consideration of the bill (H. R. 1523) for the establishment of a light-house 

at Cob Point Bar, att4e mouth of the Wicomico River, and that the 

bill be now taken np and passed. This bill comes here with a unani- mous report of the Committee on Commerce of this Congress; it was so 

reported to the last Congress, and it has been twice recommended by the 

Light-House Board. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 

gentleman from Maryland? 

Mr. RANDALL. Let us have the bill read. 

The bill was read, as follows: . Be it enacted, etc., That there be appropriat~d. out of any money in the Treas- ury not othet·wise appropriated, the sum of$15, 000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, for the establishment of alight-house at or near Cob Point Bar, at the 

mouth of the Wicomico River, in the State of Maryland. 

The committee recommended the following amendments: 

Strike out the words," there be appropriated out of any money in the Treas- ury not otherwise appropriated the sum of $15,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, for the establishment of," and insert the words "be established" 

in line 6, and, at the end of the bill, add "at a cost not to exceed $15,000.•' 

.Af3 amended the bill will read: 

Be i.t enacted, etc., That a light-house be established at or near Cob Point Bar, at the mouth of the Wicomico River, in the State of Maryland, at a cost not to exceed $15,000. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the present con- sideration of this bill? 

There was no objection. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendments 

proposed by the committee. 

The amendments were agreed to. 

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time; and be- in~ engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time, and passed. 

1\ir. COMPTON moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was · passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. 

The Jatter motion was agreed to. · 

JAMES H . YOUNG. 

1\fr. LONG. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Com- mittee on Invalid Pensions be discharged from the further consideration of the bill (H. R. 2467) to amend chapter 191 of the private acts 

of the Forty-ninth Congress, concerning James H. Young, and that it 

be now put upon its passage: 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 

gentleman from Massachusetts? 

l\Ir. RANDALL. Let us hear it read. 

t he bill was read, as follows: 

Be i t enacted, etc., Tbat chapter 191 of the private acts of the Forty-ninth Con- gress of the United States is h.ereby amended so fi.S to read as follows: "That the 

Secretary of t he Interior be, and is hereby, authorized and directed to place on the pension-roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws, 

the name of James H. Young, formerly captain of Company L, Fifth Regiment Kansas Cavalry Volunteers." SEc. 2. The provisions of this act shall take effect from the date of said a mended act. 

. Mr. SPRINGER. I wish to ask the gentleman from Massachusetts 

what is the nature of this bill. · 

Mr. LONG. Its only object is to correct an error of designation in 

the bill of last year. In the bill of last year 1\Ir. Young was described 

as of Company I, Sixth Kansas Volunteers. He did serve in that com· 

pany and re~iment, but his disabilities were incurred as captain of 

Company L, Fifth Kansas Cavalry Volunteers. 

Mr. SPRINGER. Is that all the change? 

Mr. LONG. That is all the change. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 

gentleman from Massachusetts? 

There was no objection. . The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time, and passed. 

Jlrlr. LONG. I ask unanimous consent that the title of the bill be 

changed by inserting after the words "Fortj-ninth Congress" the 

words ''passed in the second session thereof." 

The SPEAKER pro tempa're. In the absence of objection the title will be so amended. 

1\fr. LONG moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; 

and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. The latter motion was agreed to. 

ZEB WARD. . 

J\Ir. LANHAM, from the Committee on Claims, reported back with a favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 68) for the relief of Zeb 

Ward; which was referred to the Committee of the WhoJe House on the 

Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be 

printed. 

JURISDICTION OF COURTS IN INDIAN TERRITORY. 

Mr. ROGERS. I ask unanimous consent to have taken from the 

Honse Calendar and put on its passage the bill (H. R.1204) conferring 

ci vii jurisdiction in certain cases arising in the Indian Terri tory on the United States courts which now or may hereafter exercise criminal 

jurisdiction over said Territory. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? 

Mr. RYAN. I do not understand the chara-cter of the bill. Let .it 

be,.read, the right of objection being reserved. The bill was read, as follows: 

Be it enacted, etc., That the courts of the United States which now or may here· after exercise criminal jurisdiction over the Indian Territory, or any part thereof, or over any Indian reservation. under the provisions of any statute of the United 

States, shall have and exercise civil jurisdiction also within the limits of the 

judicial district in which said courts are held : Provided, That this act shall not be so construed as to vest said courts with jurisdiction over controversies be- tween Indians. 

SEC. 2. That all original mesne and final process issued by any United States court which now has or may hereafter have criminal jurisdiction in the Indian 

Territory shall extend to and be extended in said Territory in like manner as in 

the district from which the process issued. 

Mr. ROGERS. The report of the committee on this bill is very 

short, and I ask that it be read. _ The SPEAKER pro te-mpore. Is there objection to the present con- sideration of the bill? The Chair hears none. The report will be read. 

The report (by Mr. RoGERS) was read ~ follows: 

This bill was reported favorably from the Comm ittee on the Judiciary in t.he 

Forty-ninth Congress, and passed the House of Representatives. It in no way violates any treaty, and only goes to the extent of authorizing such civil juri'!· diction in the Indian Territory as the courts may rightfully exercise under the 

Constitution and laws of the United States. 

The committee recommend its passage. 

Mr. OGERS~ .Af3 appears by this report, this bill bas been twice 

considered and favorably reported by the Judiciary Committee of this 

House, and was passed by the House in ·the last Congress. Unless some further explanation be desired, I ask that the bill be at once put on its passage. 

Mr. PETERS. I wish ro ask the gentleman whether this bill simply extends to civil cases the jurisdiction of courts that now have jurisdiction of criminal matters in the Indian Territory. 

1\Ir. ROGERS. Certainly; that is alL 

There being no objection, the House proceeded to the consideration 

of the bill; which was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time; 

and being engrossed, it WaE accordingly read the third time, and passed. 

Mr. ROGERS moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was 

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

table. · 

The latteT motion was agreed to. 

DULUTH, RAINY LAKE RIVER AND SOUTHWESTERN RAILWAY. 

Mr. NELSON. I ask unanimous consent to have taken from the 

House Calendar and put on its passage now the bill which I send to the 

desk; and; before the question is put upon consideration, I ask that the 

report, which is brief, may be read. · The bill, as proposed to be amended by the Committee on ·Indian 

Affairs, was rea-d as follows: A bill (H. R.1584) granting the right of way to the Dul uth, Rainy Lake River 

and Southwestern Railway Company through certain Indian lands in the State 

of Minnes<tta. 

Be it enacted, etc., That the right of way is hereby gran tell, as hereinafter set forth, to the Duluth, Rainy Lake River and Southwestern Railway Company, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the St.':\te of 1\finnesota, 

for railroad purposes, through the lands inN orthern Minnesota. set apart for the use of the 'Bois Forte band of Chippewas by treaty dated 1\pril7, 1866, commonly known as the Bois Forte Indian reservation, and through the unsurveyed lands 

belonging to the United States adjoining the southern boundary thereof; also 

through the Red Lake unceded Indian lands in the Sta~e of Minnesota, and 
684 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. J .ANU.ARY 24, 

through the unsurveyed lands belonging to the United States adjoining the northwestern bounda.ry thereof. . SEC. 2. That the line of said railroad shall extend from the city of Duluth, by the most convenient and practicable route, in a northwesterly direction, through the counties of St. Louis and Itasca., to the mouth of Rainy Lake River, south of the "Lake of the Woods,'' and at or near the boundary post on the highlands 

opposite to what is known as the l!~orte Louise reserve, on the Canadian side; thence northwesterly to or near the mouth of War Road River, thence south- westerly or westerly through the counties of Beltrami, Kittson, and Marshall, in the State of Minnesota, to the Red River of the North. SEc. 3. That the right of way through the said Bois Forte Indian reservation andRedLakeuncededindian lands, and the unsurveyed lands thereto adjoining, hereby granted to said company, shall be 75 feet in width on each side of the central line of said railroad as aforesaid; and said company shall also have the right to take from said lands adjacent to the lines of said road material, stone, 

earth, and timber necessary for the construction of said railroad, also ground 

adjacent to such right of way, for station buildings, depots, yards, machine- shops, side-tracks, turn-outs, and water-stations, not to exceed in qua.ntity 300 feet in width and 3,000 feet in length for each station, to the extent of one sta- tion for each 10 miles'of its road, except at its point at the mouth of Rainy Lake River aforesaid, in which case said company shall have the right to take 80 acres for station buildings, depots, yards, machine-shops, side-tracks, turn-outs, and water-stations, and other purposes. SEc. 4. Thc'l.t it shall be the duty of the Secretary of the Interior to fix the amount or-compensation to be paid the Indians for such right of way and lands, and provide the time and manner for the payment thereof; but no right of any kind shall vest in said railway company in or to any part of the right of way herein provided for until plats thereof, made upon actual survey for the definite location of such railroads, and including the points for station buildings, depots, 

yards, machine-shops, side-tracks, turn-outs, and water-stations, shall be filed with and approved by the Secretary of the Interior, and until the compensation aforesaid has been fixed and paid; and the surveys and construction and opera- tion of such railroad shall be conducted with due regard for the Indians and in aecordance with such rules and regulations as the Secretary of the Interior may make to carry out this provision. SEc. 5. That said company shall not assign or transfer or mortgage this right of way for any purpose whatever until said road shall be completed: Pro'!Jided, That the company may mortgage said franchise, together with the rolling-stock, for money to construct and complete said road: And provided further, That the right granted herein shall be lost and forfeited by said company unless the road is constructed and in running order within two years from the passage of this act. 

SEc. 6. This act shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage and publication. • 

The report ofthe Committee on Indian Affairs (by Mr. NELSON) was read, as follows : 

The Committee on Indian Affairs, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 1584) 

granting the right of way to the Duluth, Rainy Lake River and Southwestern 

Railway Company through certain Indian lands in the State of Minnesota, beg le~H·e to report as follows : This railway company proposes to build a railroad extending from the cit-y of Duluth, Minn., to a point on the international boundary where the Rainy Lake River empties into the Lake of the Woods, and thence in a southerly direction to the Red River of the North, on the boundary line between Minnesota and Dakota. 

The course of the road is mainly through a vast and unsettled w.ilderness, 

valuable chiefly for its timber and minerals, both of which, for want of such a road, are now wholly inaccessible, especially from the American side of the boundary line. The most valuable part of the timber is on the southern slopes of the R.ainy Lake River and its tributaries rising in Minnesota. This timber can now be floated by water down the Rainy Lake River into and through the Lake of the Woods, and thence down the ·winnipeg River to Rat Portage, on the Canada Pa{)ific Railroad, in the province of Manitoba, and this is undoubt- edly tbe course this timber will ~ke unless proper railroad facilities are soon furnished. 

The western terminus of the proposed road is in the center of the upper part of the fertile Red River Talley, an almost boundless prairie, thickly settled and rich in a~ricultnral resources, but practically void of t·imber. The chief minerals along the proposed line of road are rich and highly pro- d ucti ve iron ores, which are not available for industrial purposes till brought to the lake shore at Duluth. The main purpose and occasion for the propo13ed road is to carry easterly to the lake shore at Duluth the great wheat crop of the upper Red River valley and the valuable iron ores referred to above, and to carry the wood, lumber, and fuel, so abundant along the line of the road, to the people of the Red River valley, who are greatly in need of the same, thereby supplying their wants, and preventing the timber from being diverted to Canada. The proposed road will run through the "Bois Forte " Indian reservation, in the northeastern part of Minnesota. This is a small reservation of 107,509acres in area, and supposed to be occupied by some seven hundred Indians, who have 

bu,t fourteen dwelling-houses, and 25 acres under cultivation on the reserva- tion. In fact, the reservation is of little or no value for agricultural purposes, and the Indians live chiefly by hunting, fishing, and the gathering of berries, and roam all over the vast uninhabited expanse in Northeastern Minnesota. The course of the road will also run through the northern half of the Red Lake reservation in Northwestern Minnesota. This "reservation" is unceded Indian territory, covers an area of 3,200,000 acres, and is occupied by about eleven hundred semi-civilized Indians, who live around the shores of Red Lake in the southern half of the reservation, and who do a little farming, but live mainly by hunting, fishing, logging, and the gathering of berries. The object of this bill is to give the right of way through said reservations and through.adjacent unsurveyed public lands to said railway companies. So far as granting of right of way through the public lands is concerned, the provisions of the bill may be considered as surplusage, as this right exists and is conferred by chapter 152, volume 18, Statutes at Large, page 482, to as full an extt:nt as in the bill. · In respect to t.he right. of way t.hrough the Indian reservations the bill, when amended as hereinafter stated, is in all its details substantially like chapter 130, page 402, and chapter 336, page 545, volume 24, 5itatutes at Large-acts passed by the Forty-ninth Congress giving rights of way to certain railway {)Ompanies 

through certain Indian reser>ations in the Territory of Montana. These acts met the approval of the Secretary of the Interior and the Commis- sioner of Indian A.:ftairs, and were carefully and deliberately considered by Con- gress. There is nothing in the condition of these Indians and the country af- fected by this bill that could require or would suggest a fairer or juster mode of procedure. Those acts of the Forty-ninth Congress to which reference has been made have in practice been found to work well and satisfactorily to the Indians, as in both instances the rights of way have been long since secured and the roads are already built. . In order that the company may not speculate in this right of way, and may be required to speedily construct the proposed road, and in order that this bill may 

conform to the two acts cited above. your committee recommend that section 5 be amended so as to read as follows: ''SEc. 5. That said company shall not assign or transfer or mortgage this right of way for any purpose whatever until said road shall be completed: Provided, That the company may mortgage said franchise, together with the rolling· 

stock, for money to construct and complete said road : And provided further, That the right granted herein shall be lost and forfeited by said company unless the road is constructed and in running order within two years from the passage of this act." And that the bill when so amended do pass. 

The SPEAKER pro ternpore. Is there objection to the present con- sideration of this bill? The Chair hears none. Mr. NELSON. Mr. Speaker, unless some gentleman desires to ask a question, I think it is unnecessary for me, in view of the reading of 

the report, to enter into any explanation. 

Mr. SPRINGER. Has this bill been reported by the Committee on Indian Affairs? 

Mr. NELSON. Yes, sir; unanimously. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. It is on the Calendar ofthe Homie. 

There being no objection, the House proceeded to the consideration 

of the bill 

The amendments reported by the Committee on Indian Affairs were agreed to; and the bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the third 

time, and passed. 

Mr. NELSON moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the 

table. . The latter motion was agreed to. 

JOHN J. BROWN. 

Mr. SHAW, by unanimous consent, reported back favorably from 

the Committee on Claims the bill (H. R. 21) for the relief of John J. 

Brown; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and the accompanying report ordered to be 

printed. 

CAPT. JOHN BURKHART. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I ask unanimous consent to take from the Private 

Calendar for present consideration a bill which passed both Houses of 

Congress at the last session, but failed to reach the President in 'time 

for his approval, and which has been again reported favorably by the. Committee on War Claims at the present session. 

M:r. REED. Is this a private claim? 

Mr. HOLMAN. It is a bill proposing to pay a gallant officer two or three hundred doJ.lars for service rendered by him for which he has never received pay. The bill, as I have'stated, passed both Houses at 

the last session, but failed to reach the President. 

Mr. REED. This is one of the claims which the United States Government owes? 

Mr. HOLMAN. Yes, sir; one which ought to have been paid long 

since. 

The bill was read, as follows: . A bill (H. R. 2112) for the relief of Capt. John Burkhart. 

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of War be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay to John Burkhart, late captain of Company F, One hundred and forty-sixth Regiment Indiana Volunteera in the late war, out of any money appropriated for the pay of the Army, the pay and emoluments of second lieu- tenant of said company from the 25th day of January, 1865, to the 1st day of March, 1865, and also the pay and emoluments of captain of said company from March :I, 1865, to the 1st day of August, 1865, and also the sum of $64, being money expended by him in the transportation of 51 enlisted men of said com- pany from Brookville, Ind., to Sunman, Ind., by stage; deducting from the sum found due him as the pay and emoluments of second lieutenant and captain of said company for the periods above specified the sums of money that have been paid to the said John Burkhart for military service, either as a private or other- wise, rendered by him during the periods above specified. 

Mr. HOLMAN. Mr. Speaker--

Mr. STEELE. I shall have to object to the consideration of this bill 

unless we be allowed to offer an amendment providing similar relief in · the cases of all other persons who performed services of the &!lme character on commissions issued in violation of law. This officer, it appears, was commissioned in violation of the statute of March 7, 1863, 

and in violation of General Order 183, War Department, .June 30, 1863. 

Now, if an amend~ent be allowed providing that all officers or acting 

officers who performed similar services nnder similar conditions shall 

be paid, then I shall not object to the bill: 

Mr. HOLMAN. My colleague [Mr. STEELE] is the last gentleman 

I should expect to raise objection to the passage of n. bill of this kind. 

This bill passed the House last session by unanimous consent, and was 

also passed by the Senate, but failed to reach the President in time for 

his approval. The amount involved is only three or four hundred dollars, I think. This gallant soldier was not paid for services which he 

actually rendered. I hope my colleague Will not throw any obstacle 

in the way of so meritorious a measUie. 

Ur. STEELE. In order that I may secure the co-operation of my 

eminent colleague in favor of a general law covering c..-:t.ses of this kind, 

I shall have to object to this bill. 

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

STEELE] objects to the consideration of__!;he bill. 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL R.EOOR.l)-- HOUSE. 685 

Jrfr. HOLMAN. I do not think my colleague really intends to object 

to a bill of this kind, involving the just demands of a soldier. 

:Ur. STEELE. The necessity for this bill can only arise from the 

want of a general law on the subject, the passage of which I desire to 

secure. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I will co-operate with ·my colleague in' favor of 

• such a general law if one can be made applicable, or any other just measure in the interest of the Union soldiers. I have uniformly supported all such measures. But I do not think be can afford to object to 

this bill. 

Mr. STEELE. Wel1, I will try it. 

The SPEAKER pro te1npore. Objection being made, the -bill is not 

before the House. 

SALE OF NEW YORK lNDlAN LANDS, KANSAS. 

Mr. PERKINS. Mr. Speaker, I ask, by unanimous consent, to discharge the House Calendar from the further consi<leration of the bill 

(H. R. 1406) to provide for the sale of certain New York Indian ln.nds 

in Kansas, reported from the Coin:mittee on Indian Affairs with amendments. ... -

There was no objection, and it was so ordered. 

The bill was read, as follows: 

A bill to provide for the sale of cet·tain New York Indian lands in Kansas. 

IJe it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep1·esentatit:es of the United Slates of Ame1·ica in Oon(Jress assembled, That those persons, being heads of families or single persons over twenty-one years of age, who have made settlement and improvement upon, and are bona. tide claimant.s and occupants of, either in p ersoa o1· by tenant, the lands in Kansas which were allotted to certain New York 

Indians, and for which certificates of allotment, dated the 14th day of September, 1860, for 3~0 acres of land each, were issued to thirty-two of said~ndians, shall 

be, and hereby are, authorized and permitted to enter and purchase at the proper land office, at any time within one year f1·om the passage oft his act, said 

lands so occupied by them, in tracts not exceeding 160 acres, according to the 

Gove rnment surveys, at $1.25 per acre, payment to be made in cash at time of 

purchase; and the moneys arising from such sales shall be _paid into the Treas- ury of the United S~tes, in trust for and to be paid to said Indians, respectively, to whom said certificates were issued, or to their heirs, upon satisfactory proof 

of their identity to the Secretary of the Interior, at any time within five years from the passage of this act; and in case such proof is not made within the time 

specified, then the proceeds of such sale, or so much thereof as shall not have 

been paid under the provisions of this act. shall become a part of the public mone\'s of the United States. · SEc: 2. That any lands not entered by such settlers at the expiration of twelve 

months from the passage of this a ct shall be offered at public sale, in the usual manner, at not less than $3 per acre, notice of said sale to be given by public ad,~ertisementof not less than thirty days; and any tract or tracts not then sold 

shall be thereafte1· subject to private entry at $3 per acre. SEC. 3. '.fhat all acts and parts of acts inconsistent herewith are hereby re- pealed. 

The amendments of the committee were read, as follows: 

Lines 15 and 16, first section, strike out" one" and insert" two," and strike out "twenty-five" and insert·" fifty." 

Mr. SPRINGER. I ask that the report of the committee be read. 

Mr. PERKINS. I think all that is necessary will be to allow me to 

make a brief statement. The report of the committee is very long. 

Mr. RANDALL. All objections are reserved. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. That fhet will be noted. 

1\Ir. PERKINS. The report in this case is long, and, Mr. Speal{er, 

with the permission of the House I will make a brief statement, and 

if then it is desired to luwe the report read it may be done. 

In 1838 negotiations were had with New York Indians, in the States 

of New York and Wisconsin, looking to their removal west of the 

Mississippi River. A reserYation containing 1,824,000acres oflan·d was r~sen:ed. for them in what became the Territory of Kansas and whrrt is 

now the State of Kansas. The treaty which was entered into with these 

Indians gave them five years to go there. But few availed themsehes 

of that right; in fact it is claimed, with consistency, that none of these 

Indians availed. themselves of that right. On the other hand, it is 

claimed that a few Indians did avail themselves of their right. 

In 18;)8 the then Secretary of the Interior decided these were public land~; that the Indians had not gone there to avail themselves of the 

benefits accrning to them under the treaty, and hence they were public 

lands. That was · in 1858, ·and settlerS were then going into Kansas 

from MLc;:;souri and other States adjacent to it, and from the North and 

East, and settling on this and other lands. The condition-of these 

lands was brought to the attention of the Secretary of the Interior, and 

be held, as I have already said, that these were public lands, as the 

Indians had not applied for them under the treaty. 

Then in September, 1860, he issued his proclamation opening these 

lands to settlement. At last, a few Indians, some thirty in number, 

suggested to the Secretary of the Interior that they had applied under 

the treaty, and were entitled to protection. The Secretary of the Interior ordered two commissioners to go fo Kansas and investigate .the 

facts. They found upon investigation thirty-two Indians bad gone 

there in time to entitle them toO the provisions and benefits of the 

treaty. · 

Here, Mr. Speaker, us you will remember, is a tra-ct of 1,824,000 acres 

ofland. These commissioners found that onlytbirty-twoindians bad 

gone in time to avail themselves of the treaty. Under the direction of 

the Commissioner of Indian Affairs allbtments were made to these Indians. They were permitted to make their selection within the boundaries of that reservation, and in a~inost every inst-ance they selected 

land already occupied by settlers. Yet these commissioners, under the 

order of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, allowing allotments to be 

made to these thirty-two _Indians, recognized their :r:ightto make their 

selection anywhere they pleased within the boundaries of the reserva--

tioll. They were given allotment certificates for the lands which they 

bad selected, but these Indians from that time to this have not been in 

possession of those lands, but they have been occupied by white settlers. 

None of these Indians have ever been able to get control or possession of them, the settlers claiming the Indians did not go there in time 

to entitle them to the beuefit of this treaty. But the Department found 

these thirty-two Iridians bad gone there in time, and hence the allq~ 

ment certificates were issued to them. These lands have never been in 

their control or in their possession. The white settlers have occupied 

them all the time, cultivating them, making their homes there, doing 

what they could to improve these lands to make support and subsist- ence for themselves and families. 

Now, this bill is introduced for the purpose of giving to the settlers an opportunity of getting title to the land, and also giving to the thirtytwo Indians something for their claim. Thus far they have never been 

able to get anything, ant.l neither have they gotten•the lands. As an amicable adjustment, therefore, of the controversy between the settlers 

and the Ind.ians, this bill is proposed. . The same bill was reported in the Forty-seventh Congress by the Committee on Indian Affairs. In the Forty-eighth Congress it was also re- ported by the same committee, and again by the Indian Affairs Committee of the present Congress, and there never bas been a controversy 

between these parties on any feature of the bill except as to bow much 

these settlers should pay. · That bas been the only question that bas 

ever caused any confusion. 

:M:r. WEAVER. May I ask the gentleman a question? 

Mr. PERKINS. With pleasure. 

Jvlr. WEAVER. To whom do the proceeds of this sale inure? 

1\fr. PERKINS. The proceeds are to be paid into the Treasury of 

the United States for the benefit of these allottees, or their heirs, upon 

their identification to the Secretary of the Interior, and they are given 

:five years in which to do this. 

Mr. WEA. VER. You mean the thirty-two Indians? 

Mr. PERKINS. Yes, sir; or to their heirs where the Indiansthemsel ves have died. 

Mr. SPRINGER. Mr. Speaker, it is unnecessary to continue t,his 

controversy, as I shall be obliged to object to the consideration of this 

bill to-day. 

CAPTAIN JOHN BURKHART. 

Mr. HOLMAN. Mr. Speaker, my colleague [Mr. STEELE] withdraws biB objections to the bill which I asked consent a few moments 

ago to have considered in the Honse. 

Mx. STEELE. I will withdraw the obj~tion. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. This bill has been already read. 

Mr. HOLM:AN. The bill as reported by the committee directs this 

money to be paid by the Secretary of War. · I wish to amend by making it the Secretary of the Treasury. There is an additional amendment proposed to the bilL 

The SPEAKER pro te1npore. The Clerk bad better read the amendments. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

In the third line of the bill strike out the words "Secretary of War" and in- . sert ''Secretary of the Treasury.'' Also, in the same section, in the sixth line, 

after the word "money," strike out the words "appropriated for the pay of the 

Army" and insert "not otherwise appropriated." 

The amendments were agreed to. · The bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading; 

::mel being engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time, and passed. 

:M:r. HOLMAN moved to reco~ider the vote by which the bill was passed;- and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the 

table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

RALPH T. MOS.ES. 

Mr. SOWDEN. . Accounts. · I rise to submit a report from the Committee on 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

The Clerk will read it. 

The Committee on Accounts, to whom was referred the following resolution-

"Resolved, That the Doorkeeper be authorized to employ Ralph T. Moses as as- sistant folder in the seal-room of the House, at a compensation of $2.50 per diem 

for the present session, to be paid out of the contingent fund of t.he House. Compensat.ion to take effect from December 5,1887 "- having considered the same, respectfully report the following substitute, and 

recommend its adoption: 

Resolved, That the Doorkeeper be authorized to employ Ralph T. Moses as assistant folder in the seal-room of the House, at the rate of $2.50 per diem during 

this present session, to be paid out of the contingent fund of the Hous~ 

:Mr. RANDALL. I shall n9t object to that, but would like to inquire when the committee is going to ceas~ having the House force 

increased? • Mr. SOWDEN. In answer to my friend from Pennsylvania, I will 

say that under this resolution the force of the House will not be increased, because the same party was provided for by the resolution of Ja~mary 20, 1886, first session of the Forty-ninth Congress (see RECORD, 
686 OONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 

page 786); also in the second session of the same Congress by the resolu~ 

tion of January 31, 1887, which will be found on page 1204 of the 

RECORD. 

The Doorkeeper says that it is absolutely necessary to an efficient 

discharge of this portion of the public service that this person shall be so employed; and therefore I demand the, previous question upon the 

adoption of the substitute. · 

The previous question was ordered; under the operation of whieh the 

resolution as amended by the subs~itute was agreed to. 

Mr. SOWDEN moved to reconsider the vote by which the resolution 

was agreed to; and also moved that the motion to· reconsider be laid on the table.- The latter motion was agreed to. 

JOHN SNODDY. 

Mr. LANHAM. I ask unanimous consent to take from the Private 

Calendar the bill (H. R. 2974) for the relief of John Snoddy, and put 

it upon its passage. 

The bill was read, as follows: 

Be u enacted, etc., ~at the Postmaster-General be, and he is hereby, author~ 

ized and instructed to adjust a-nd settle the claim of John Snoddy, postmaster at Big Springs, Tex., for money-order funds, amounting to $220, remitted by him to the postmaster at Dallas, Tex., January 22,1887, and which sai<1 funds were stolen in transit by kain robbers. 

There being no objection, the bill -was ordered to be engrossed for a 

third reading; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the third 

time, and passed. 

Mr. IJANHAM moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the 

table. 

The latter motion ·was agreed to. 

JOHN HUMES. 

1\fr. DINGLEY. I ask unanimous consent to take from the Private 

Calendar the bill (H. R. 365) granting a pension to John Humes. 

The bill wns read, as follows: 

Be u enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the .Interior be, and is hereby, au- thorized and directed to place on the pension-roll, subject to the pension laws, 

the name of John Humes, father of George W. Humes, deceased, late a privat.e in Company E, Second Maine Cavalry Volunteers, Eliza Humes, the mother of 

said soldier, who was pensioned by act of Congress l\Iay 8, 1886, having died 

August ll, 1887. 

Mr. DINGLEY. The report is very brief and will explain the bill. 

I ask that it be read. 

The report was read, as follows: 

That Eliza Humes, mother of George W. Humes, late a private in Compa11y E, 

Second Maine Cavalry Volunteers, was pensioned by special act, M:a.y 8, 1886, as the dependent mother of said soldier; that said Eliza Humes died August 11, 

1887, and that the present applicant is the husband of said Eliza Hullles, deceased, ~md the father of the soldier, George W. Humes. The same facts which led to the granting of a pension to tlte mother of the soldier, now that she is deceased, 

apply to the fat.her, who is eighty-one years of age and in needy circumstances. 

The evidence of dependence was fully set forth in the report of the committee 

of the Forty-ninth Congress, and it seems unnecessary to reprint it. Your committee recommend that the bill be amended by strikin& out all after 

the word "volunteers," and wit-h this amendment recommend its passage. 

There being no objection, the amendment recommended by the com~ 

mi ttee was agreed to. 

The bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading; 

and being engrossed, it was accordingly rea-d the third time, and passed. 

Mr. DINGLEY moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and n.lso moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the 

table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

BOSTON NAVY-YARD. 

:M:r. 1\IORSE. I ask unanimous consent for the present consideration 

of the resolution which I send to the desk. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Raolved, That the Secretary of the Na.vy is hereby requested to appoint a board of naval officers to consider the practicability of selling a tract of land 

adjoining the navy~yard at Boston, Mass., known as the navy-yard coal wharf, 

consisting of about 131,712 square feet, and to estimate .the value thereof. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the present con- sideration of the resolution? 

J\1r. HERBERT. What is this about? 

M:r. MORSE. It is a mere inquiry. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair heal'S no objection, and the 

question is on the adoption of the resolution. 

Mr. McADOO. I desire to have the resolution again read. 

The resolution was again read. 

Mr. HERBERT. Has that been referred to the committee? 

:Mr. MORSE. As I have said, it is a mere resolution of inquiry. 

Mr. HERBERT. I think it ought to be referred to the committee. 

Mr. MORSE. I will amend it sothat theanswershall be senttothe 

Committee on Naval Affairs. 

The SPEAK.ER p1·o tempore. Does the gentlema,n from Alab~a ob~ 

ject? 

Mr. HERBERT. · I do; but I have no objection to the resolution 

being referred. · 

The resolution was referred to the Committee on Naval Affairs. 

Mr. STEELE. I move that the Honse do now adjourn. 

ENROLLED JOINT RESOLUTION. 

Pending the motion to adjourn, 

Mr. FISHER, from the Committeeon:E;nrolledBills, reported that the 

committee had examined and found truly enrolled a joint resolution of 

the following title; when the Speaker p1·o tempore signed the same: Joint resolution (H. Res. 72) relating to the invitation ot the British 

Government to the United States to participate-in the international ex~ .. 

hibition at Melbourne, to celebrate the founding of New South Wales. 

REPORT OF MILITARY ACADIDIY VISITORS. 

Mr. WHEELER. I desire to present the report of the Board of Vis~ 

itors of the Military Academy at West Point for the past year. 

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

STEELE] withhold his motion for that purpose? 

Mr. STEELE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. WHEELER. Mr. Speaker, in presenting the report of the pres~ 

ident of the Board of Visitors to the Military Academy, I desire to ask 

present action on the resolution which I send to the Clerk's desk. 

The high character of the distinguished president of the board must 

add much weight to th~ suggestions contained in the report. 

They are made by a man whose philanthropic generosity is not limited by the boundaries of municipalities, States, sections, or peoples, but 

extends beyond oceans, to races foreign to us in language, customs, and 

ideas; a man whose purpose in life is to do good to mankind, and "to 

help the weak and the lowly. 

The recommendations of such a man upon the subject treated of in 

the report can not be too widely disseminated. 

The report was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs, and 

ordered to be printed. 

The resolution submitted by Mr. WHEELER was read, as follows: 

Resolved, That the Public Printer be directed to print for the use of the House of Representatives 5,000 extra copies of the Report of the Board of Visitors to the Military Academy for the year 1897. 

Mr. WHEELER. That is the sa.me number that was printed last 

year. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The resolution will be referred to the 

Committee on Printing. 

l\Ir. WHEELER. I ask the present consideration of this resolution. 

It is the usual number printed for the use of the Honse. 

The SPEAKER p;·o tempo1'e. The gentleman from Alabama asks 

unanimous consent tor the present consideration of the resolution which 

has been read. 

Mr. BLOUNT. ·I think it should go to the Committee on Printing. 

That is the usual course. We can not have control over the printing 

unless through our committee. There have already been complaints 

by the Public Printer that the House bas been imposing too much on him. 

Mr. WHEELER. The gentleman from Georgia [Mr. BLOUNT] will 

observe.! have submitted the proposition in the form of a resolution, 

limiting_ the expenditure proposed to $500. 

If the expense to be incurred exceeded that sum, I should have sub~ 

mitted a joint resolution. It is not often that we have reports from a. gentleman like Mr. George W. Childs, whose grand sympathetic heart 

and bank account are always tuned to the same music, but as the gen~ 

tleman ·from Georgia [Mr. Br .. oUNT] insists that the resolution be re~ 

ferred to the Committee on Printing, and as the chairman of that com- mittee assures me it shall be reported back very promptly, I will inter~ 

pose no objection. • The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is made to the present consideration of the resolution. In the absence of objection, it will be 

referred to the Committee on Printing. · 

The motion of Mr. STEELE was then agreed to; and accordingly (at 

3 o'clock and 58 minutes p. m.) the Honse adjourned. 

PRIVATE BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS INTRODUCED AND R~ 

FER RED. 

Under the rule private bills and joint resolutions of the following 

titles were introduced and referred as indicated below: 

By Mr. C. R. BRECKINRIDGE: A bill (H. R. 5876) to remove the 

political disabilities of Thomas Jordan-to the Committee on the Judiciary. ' 

By Mr. ROGERS: A bill (H. R. 5877) granting a pension to James 

C. Wilkinson-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. VANCE: A bill (H. R. 5878) granting an increase of pension 

to Charles C. Fitts-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. . By Mr. CANDLER: A bill (H. R. 5879) for thereliefof George W. 

Hansard-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. ADAMS:· A bill {:S:. R. 5880) for the relief of James Uc~ 

Canley-to the Committee ou War Claims. 

By Mr. SPRINGER: A bill (H. R. 5881) for the relief of Edward 

T. Roe--to the Committee on Claims. 

By Mr. MATSON: A bill (H. R. 5882) for the relief of Hiram Foxto the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. SHIVELY: A bill (H. R. 5883) granting a pension to Joseph 

S. Lewis-to the Committee on Pensions. 

By Mr. A. R. ANDERSON: A bill (H. R. 5884) for the relief of Benjamin F. Raiff-tp the Committee on War Claims. 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE.' 687 

Also, a bill (H. R. 5885) for the relief of John Barlow-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. ' 

Also, a bill (H. R. 5886) for the relief of W. D. Kinser-tothe Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. LY.M:AN: A bill (H. R. 5887) granting a pension to Manncl 

Tibbs-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. RY A.N: A bill (H. R. 5888) for the relief of W. H. Boydto the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. W. C. P. BRECKINRIDGE: A bill (H. R. 5889) fo~ the 

relief of Oldham County, Kentucky-to the Committee on War Cla1ms. 

By Mr. TAULBEE: A bill (H. R 5'390) for the relief of J. ~L Fidler and .T. 0. Marrs-to the Commitliee on War Claims. 

Also, a bill (H. R. 5891) for the relief of John M. Fidler-to the Com_. 

mittee on War Claims. 

Also, a bill (H. R. 5892) for the relief of Thomas 0. Man·s-to the 

Committee on War Claims. , By lli. FINLEY: A bill (H. R. 5893) granting a pension to John 

:M. Sims-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

Dy Mr. BLANCHARD: A bill (H. R. 5894) for the relief of Mrs. Margaret Fuhr-to the Committee on Claims. 

Also, a bill (H. 'R. 5895) to confirm to Lucretia Williams the title 

to one square league of land in theState ofFlorida-tothe Committee 

on Private Land Claims. . By Mr. MILLIKEN: A bill (H. R. 5896) for the relief of Hiram F. 

Wordwell-to the Committee on Military Affairs. 

By lli. McCOMAS: A bill (H. R. 5897) for the relief of certain night 

inspectors "in the customs service of the United St?.tes at the ports of New 

York and Baltimore-to the Committee on Claims. 

By 1\1r. COLLINS: A bill (H. R. 5898) for the relief of Hugh Watt--

to the Committee on War Claims. 

Also, a. bill (H. R. 5899) for the relief of the American Postal Machines Company-to the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads. 

By 1\Ir. BURROWS: A bill (H. R. 5900) for the relief of Samuel G. 

Johnson-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By M:r. HEARD: A bill (H. R. 5901) granting a pelli3ion to Daniel 

Bills-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

Also, a bill (H. R. 5902) for the relief of the heirs of Hiram McGowan-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. BLAND: A bill (H. R. 5903) for the relief of Lewis Davis, a 

soldier of tbe war of 1812-to the Committee on Pensions. 

Also, a bill (H. R. 5904) for the relief of Mrs. Elizabeth Gardener-to 

the Committee on War Claims. 

By M:r. WARNER: .A bill (H. R. 5905) for the relief of William 

Cullen-to the Committee on War Claims. 

Ry Mr. GALLINGER: .A bill (H. R. 5906) for the relief of Frances 

MeN eil Potter-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. McKINNEY: .A bill (H. R. 5907) directing the Secretary of 

the Treasury to pay withheld bounties to certain non-commissioned officers of the Eighth New Hampshire Volunteers discharged as supernumeraries-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. FITCH: .A bill (H. R. 5908) to remove the charge of desertion 

against the name of James M. McNeil, alias James W. Gibson-to the 

Committee on Military Affairs. . 

.Also, a bill (H. R. 5909) to remove the charge of desertion against the 

name of Joseph .A.ttridge-to the Committee on :Military .Affairs. 

By Mr. FELIX CAMPBELL: A bill (H. R. 5910) to amend section 

6 of an act of Congress approved March 3, 1883-to the Committee .on 

Military Affairs. 

By 1\Ir. MOFFITT: .A bill (H. R. 5911) granting a pension to Elizabeth J. Hasca.ll-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. BACON: A bill (H. R. 5912) to provide for the payment to 

John Hunter of the award made to him for part of Hart Island in 

Westchester Conn ty, State of New York, condemned and taken for lighthouse purposes-to the Committee on Claims. 

By Mr. BLISS: .A bill (H. R. 5913) granting a pension to Thomas 

Shannon-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. NUTTING: A bill (H. R. 5914) granting a pension to Rosa 

M . .II'hompson and her children, the widow and children of George A. 

Thompson, deceased-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By 1\Ir. WILLI.A.l\IS: .A bill (H. R. 5915) for the relief of John 

Holmes-to the Committee on 1\.filitary Affairs. 

By 1\Ir. BOOTHMAN: A bill (H. R. 5916) granting a pension to 

Alfred Plummer, late of Company E, Thirty-eighth Regiment Ohio 

Volunteers-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By 11r. ROl\IEIS: A bill (H. R. 5917) granting a pension to Harry 

M. Carley-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Ur. BINGHAM: .A bill (H. R. 5918) restoring to the pension-roll 

the name of Florian Lischewsky-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

Also, a bill (H. R. 5919) restoring to the pension-roll the name of 

James Monohan, minor child of Richard Monohan, deceased-to the 

Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

Also, a bill (H. R. 5920) to increase the pension of Ellen 1\f. Mitchell-to the Committee on Pensions. 

By Mr. SCULL: A bill (H. R. 5921) granting an increase of pension 

to Hezekiah Hammer-tQ. the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

I . 

Also, a bill (H. R. 5922) for the relief of Terrence Delozier-to the 

Committee on Claims. 

By Mr. PATTON: A bill (H. R. 5923) to remove the charge of desertion from the military record of Amos Shirey-to the Committee on 

Military Affairs. 

By Mr. HALL: A bill (H. R. 5924) to increase the. pension of Samuel Schuler-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. . By lli. LEE: A bill {H. R. 5925) for the relief of Mary E. Stalcup, 

widow of Joshua Stalcup-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By lli. GUENTHER: A bill (H. R. 5926) for the relief of William 

H. Thomas-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By lli. HAUGEN: A bill (H. R. 5927) granting an increase of pension to Ernest Desjardins-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

Also, a bill (H. R. 5928) for the relief of Andrew .A. Kelly-to the 

Committee on War Claims. 

Changes in the reference of bills improperly referred were made in 

the following cases, namely: 

A bill (H. R. 891) granting a pension to Eliza Ann S~aver-Commi.ttee on Pensions discharged, and referred to the Comrruttee on Invalid 

Pensions. 

A bill (H. R. 1007) for the relief of Samuel .A. Sanderson-Commit- . 

tee on Invalid Pensions discharged, and referred to the Committee on 

War Claims-. 

A bill (H. R. 2135) granting a pension to David Gentry-Committee 

on Invalid Pensions discharged, and referred to the Committee on Pensions. 

A bill (H. R. 2268) to place the name of Robert Chawner on the pension-roll-Committee on Invalid Pensions discharged, and referr~d to 

the Committee on Pensions. 

A bill (H. R. 2894) for the relief of Lacon R. Tillman-Committee 

on War Claims discharged, and referred to the Committee on Claims. 

A bill (H. R. 3722) for the relief of Jennie D. Rice-Committee qn 

Invalid Pensions discharged, and referred to the Committee on Claims. 

A bill (H. R. 3851) granting a pension to Mrs. Mary Johnston-Committee ~:m Invalid Pensions discharged, and referred to the Committee 

on Pensions. 

PETITIONS, ETC. 

The following petitions and papers were laid on the Clerk's desk, 

under the rule, and referred as follows: 

By Mr. · J. 1\f. .ALLEN: Papers in the claims of John W. Stevens, 

jr., of Thomas W. Walker, of Benjamin Powell, and of Josiah Walker, 

of Mississippi-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. A. R. ANDERSON: Papers relating to bill for relief of Nancy 

J. Cline-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. ATKINSON: Petition of 65 citizens of the Eighteenth district of Pennsylvania, for prohibition in the District of Columbia-to 

the Select Committee on the Alcoholic Liquor Traffic. 

By 1\ll·. BACON: Memorial in the matter of the application of John 

Hunter,ofWestChester, Westchester County, New York, for relief-to 

the Committee on Claill}S . Dy M.r. BARNES: Resolutions of the .Legislature of Georgia, commending the National Colored Industrial Exposition-to the Committee on Appropriations. 

By 1\Ir. BELMONT (by request): Memorial of a committee of citizens of New York, David Dudley Field, chairman, urging upon Congress and the President a treaty with Great.Britnin to settle differences 

by arbitration-to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

By Mr. BLAND: Papers in the claim of Lewis Daviss, to accompany 

bill-to the Committee on Pensions. 

Also, petition and proof of Mrs. Elizabeth Gardner, ~ accompany 

bill-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By lli. BLANCHARD: Petition of John J. A. Martin, sole heir of 

Joseph Martin, of Natchitoches Parish, Louisiana, for reference of his 

claim to the Court of Claims-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. BOOTHMAN: Petition of T. F. Gillespie and others, for 

service pensions-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. BOWDEN: Papers in the case of William E. Cathart, of 

Norfolk County, Virginia-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. BOWEN: Petition of William Ball, of Lee County, Virginia, 

for reference of his claim" to the Court of Claims-to the Committee on 

War Claims. • 

Also, protest of citizens of Wythe County, Virginia, against theremoval or reduction of the duties on coal and iron ore-to the Committee on Ways and Means. . 

By Mr. J. R. BROWN: ProtestofcitizcnsofWytheCounty,Virginia, . 

against the removal or reduction of the duty on coal and iron ore-to 

the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. T. M. BROWNE: Petition of citizens of the District of Columbia, asking appropriation to improve streets in Meridian Hill subdivision-to the Committee on Appropriations. 

By Mr. BUCHANAN: Memorial of American Forestry Association, 

relative to timber lands-to the Committee on the Public Lands. 
688 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. JANUARY 24, 

By M:r. BUNNELL: Memorial of the American Forestry Congre~s 

and other citizens, relative to public forest lands-to the Committee on the Public Lands. · 

By Mr. BYNUM: Petition of John E. Balfe, for relief-to the Committee on Military Affairs. 

By Mr. CAREY: Petition of Peter Kenney, for special-act pensionto the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. COMPTON: Papers in the ca-se of Gerard Wood-to the Committee on l\fili tary Affairs. 

By Mr. CONGER: Papers to accompany bill for relief of Josiah M. 

Davisson-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. DORSEY: Memorial of the Farmers' Alliance of Nebraska, 

for the remo>a.l of taxes from the necessaries of life, etc.-to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. DOUGHERTY: Petition of...,,, E. Harris, C. L. Bittinger, 

R. G. Wright, and others, for an appropriation of $5,000 to improve · Blue Springs River, Florida, a tribnt.'lry of the Withlacoochee-to the 

Committee on Rivers and Harbors. 

By Mr. DUBOIS: Protest of Wool-Growers' Association of Nevada, 

Eastern Oregon, and Idaho, against reduction of tariff on wool-to the 

Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. DUNN: Petition of Mrs. Lizzie S. Harris, heir of William 

K. Sebastian, of Phillips County, Arkansas, for payment of her war claim-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. ELLIOTT: A bill for the improvement of Winyaw Bay-to 

the Committee on Rivers and Harbors. 

By Mr. FARQUHAR: Papers in the case of Alfred Breuer, for re- lief-to the Committee on Naval Affairs. 

By Mr. FITCH: Petition of Henrietta Collinda, for a pension-to the 

Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

Also, petition to remove the charge of desertion against Michael 

Pfoertner-to the Committee on Military Affairs. 

By Mr. GAINES: Protest of citizens of Wythe County, Virginia, 

against the removal or reduction of the duties on coal and iron ore-to 

the Committee on Ways and Means. . Also, papers in the claim of Benjamin F. Childrey, and of Peyton A. 

Linney, of Virginia-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. GLASS: Petition of C. P. ·winkler, administrator of R. H. 

Wood, executor, and Nicholas P. Bond, of Shelhy County, and of Jesse 

Hawkins, of Lincoln County, Tennessee, for paJment of their war claims-to the Committee on War Claims. 

Also, petition of William C. Martin, heir of W. D. Martin, of Lauderdale County, Tennessee, for reference of his claim to the Court of Claimsto the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. GIFFORD: Petition of H. C. Ayers and others, of Plankinton, Dak., that a portion of the surplus to amount of $10,000 be applied 

to the construction of a public building at said city-to the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds. 

By Mr. GROUT: Petition of 88 citizens of the Second district of Vermont-to the Select Coinmittee on the Alcoholic Liquor Traffic. 

By Mr. HALL: Petition of Merchants and Manufacturers' Association of Titusville, Pa., for lessening the dangers of navigation-t<O the 

Committee on Commerce. 

By Mr. HARE: Petition of sundry citizens of ~fontague and Sunset, 

Tex., asking that certain parties therein named be relieved from the 

payment of a certain bond-to the Committee on the Post-Office and 

Post-Roads. 

By 1\fr. HATCH: Petition of faculty of Christian University, Canton, . Ohio, for international copyright law-to the Committee on Patents. 

Also, petition of John Diamond, treasurer of the Missouri State Alliance, to increase usefulness of the Agricultural Department-to the 

Committee on .Agriculture. 

By Mr. HAUGEN: Petition of 78 citizens of the Eighth district of 

Wisconsin, for prohibition in the District of Columbia-to the Selec~ 

Committee on the Alcoholic Liquor Traffic. 

By Mr.-D. B. HENDERSON: Resolution of the Waterways Convention, held at Dubuque, Iowa, January 17 and 18, 1888, favoring appropriationfor the Upper Mississippi-to the Committee on Rivers and 

Harbors. · 

By Mr. J. S. HENDERSON: Petition by the president and faculty 

of the University of North Carolina, favoring the removal of the duty on imported books-to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. HOWARD: A bill making an appropriation to repair the 

Government levee at Jeffersonville, Ind. -to the Committee on Rivers 

and Harbors. · 

By :Mr. HUNTER: Petition of citizens of Greenville, Ky., for pro 

hibition in the District of Columbia-to the Select Committee on the _Alcoholic Liquor Traffic. 

By Mr. JACKSON: Petition of A. W. Acheron and 182 others, citi- zens of Washington, Pa.-to the Select Committee on the Alcoholic 

Liquor Traffic. 

By Mr. LEHLBACH: Petition. of Rudolph Haller, for relief-to the 

Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

_.By Mr. LODGE: Petition of 73 citizens of the Sixth district of Massachusetts, for prohibition in District of Columbia-to the'Select Committee on the Alcoholic Liquor Traffic. 

By Mr. McADOO: Petition of numerous florists of Hudson County, 

New Jersey, in favor of admitting flower bulbs free of duty-to the 

Committee on Ways and Means. · By Mr. McCREARY: Petition of H. S. Powell, of Jackson County, 

Kentucky, for relief-to the Committee on Claims. 

By Mr. McKINNEY: Papers to accompany Honse bills 5227 and 

3849-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. MACDONALD: Petition of Carleton College, ~Iinnesota, in 

favor of international copyright-to the Committee on Patents. 

By Mr. MERRIMAN: Petition of John H. Gleason, for pay for services as assistant assessor of internal revenue for the First district of 

Virginia-to the Committee on Claims. • By Mr. MORROW: Papers relating to claim of Philip Loney, late 

sergeant Company I, Ninth Regiment Infantry, for reimbursement of 

$553-to the Committee on Claims. 

By Mr. NELSON: Papers in the case of Anna W. Osborne, for reliefto the Committee on Claims. 

By Mr. NEWTON: A bill appropriating $5,000 for removing obstructions to and improving the navigation of Bayou Carnie, in North 

Louisiana, from Stern's Bluff to Shiloh, in said State-to the Committee on Rivers and liarbors. 

Also, a bill appropriating $10,000 for the cleaning out and improving the navigation of Bayou Cocodra, in North Louisiana-to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors. 

By Mr. O'DONNELL: Petition of 50 citizens of Vermontville, Mich., 

for prohibition in the District of Columbia-to the Select Committee on the Alcoholic Liquor Traffic. • · By Jt:lr. O'FERRALL: Petition of H. T. Hartman, for extension of 

patent right-to the Committee on Patents. 

Also, resolutions of Farmers' Alliance of Rockingham County, Virginia, for the passage of the pleuro-pneumonia bill-to the Committee on Agriculture. 

By Mr. PATTON: Petition for the removal of the internal tax on tobacco-to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. PEEL: Petition of heirs of Samuel B. Derryberry for ref- erence of bis claim to the Court of Claims-to the Committee on War 

Claims. 

By Mr. PHELPS: Petition of 74 citizens of the Fift,h district of New 

Jersey-to the Committee on the Alcoholic Liquor Traffic. 

By 1r. RICE: Petition of the St. Paul Jobbers' Union, for early ac- tion on bill known as the James bill, for abolition of taxes and licenses 

levied on commercial travelers-to the Committee on \Vays and 

Means. 

Also, petition of same, for amendment of the interstate-commerce law 

in its application to commercial travelers-to the Committee on Commerce. By Mr. ROMEIS: Petition of 50 citizend of Ohio, for prohibition in 

District of Columbia-to the Committee on the Alcoholic Liquor Traffic. 

By Mr. ROWELL: Petition for pension to John T. Emery-to the 

Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. ROWLAND: Petition for an appropriation to inclose Fort 

Johnson, N. C., to accompany House bill No. 5668-to the Committee -on Military Affairs. 

By Mr. C. A. RUSSELL: Petition of John E. Buckman and other 

citizens of Woodstock, Conn., in favor of prohibition in District of Colgmbi.a-to the Committee on the Alcoholic Liquor Traffic. 

By Mr. RYAN: Evidence in the case of W. H. Boyd, late of the 

Eleventh United States Colored Troops-to the Committee on War 

Claims. 

By Mr. SCULL: Papers ih the case of Adam ·Dennis, for relief-to 

the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. SENEY: Memorial of American Forestry Congress, respecting timber lands-to the Committee on the Public Lands. 

By Mr. SHAW: Memorial of American Forestry Congress and others, 

relative to timber lands-to the Committee on the Public Larids. 

Also, memorial of Minnie Lysles, widow of Alfred Lysles, for reliefto the Committee on Claims. 

By Mr. J. D. TAYLOR: Petition of Joshua C. Whitten and 127 

others, citizens of Mount Pleasant, Jefferson County, Ohio, against the 

admission of Utah as a State with polygamy-to the Committee on the 

Territories. 

Also, petition of W. J. Shafer and others, praying for a law pensioning every honorably discharged soldier, dependent parent, widow, and 

minor child of a deceased soldier-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. WHEELER: Petition of John H. Hundley, heir of John A. 

Hundley, of Limestone County, Alabama, for· reference of claim to 

the Court of Claims-to the Committee on War Claims. 

Also, petition of William Hamaker, of :Madison County, Alabama, for 

reference of his claims to the Court of Claims-to the Committee on 

War Claims. 

By Mr. S. V. WHITE: Papers in the claim of William Kendall-to 

the Committee on Claims. 

By Mr. J. R. WHITING: Petition ofM. N. Magan, C. U. Oldfi.ela, 

and 35 others, for the construction of a harbor of refuge at Port Sanilac, Mich.-to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors. 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENA'J:'E. 689 

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

Select Committee on the Alcoholic Liquor Traffic. 

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

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

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

Bend, ~eshoba County, Mississippi. ' 

By Mr. ARNOLD: Of citizens of Rhode Island. 

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

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

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

Louisiana. ' 

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

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

Carolina. 

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

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

and others, of Virginia. ' 

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

Heard County; Georgia. 

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

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

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

Zion, Campbell County, Virginia. ' 

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

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

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

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

Arkansas. 

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

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

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

Meigs County, Tennessee. ' 

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

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

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

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

County, North Carolina. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Licking County, Ohio. ' • ' 

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

SENATE. 

WEDNESDAY, January 25, 1888. 

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

The Journal ofye3terday's proceedings was read and approved. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATION, 

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

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

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

ordered to be printed. ' 

:MATTIE S. WHITNEY. 

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

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

PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS. 

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

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

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

XiX-44 

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

the Committee on Private Land Claims. ' 

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

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

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

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

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

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

on Finance. 

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

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

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

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

to ~he Committee on Territories. 

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

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

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

to the Committee on the District of Columbia. 

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

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

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

The motion was agreed to. 

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

manufacture of alcoholic liquor in the District of Columbia· which 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mr. SAWYER presented a resolution adopted by the Chamber of 

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

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

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

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

REPORTS OF Co:\IMITTEES. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

with amendments. 

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

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

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

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

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

form for the use of the Senate.