1550 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. MARcH 2, 

Mr. EDMUNDS. I beg pardon of my friend from California; I did 

not know he held the floor. I will ask him then to yield the floor so that I may make that motion. I think the public interest .requires an executive session. 

Mr. FARLEY. With the understanding that the public interest so demands, and with the further understanding that I may conclude 

my remarks to-morrow, I consent to yield the floor now. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. Certainly, the Senator will have the floor when 

the consideration of the bill is resumed to-morrow. 

:lrir. FARLEY. Very well. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER, (l\fr. GARLAND in the chair.) The 

question is on the motion of the Senator from 'Vermont, that the 

Senate proceed to the consideration of executive business. 

The motion was a~reed to; and the Senate proceeded to the con- _ sideration of executive business. After one hour and twenty minutes spent in executive session the doors were reopened, and (at four 

o'clock and fifteen minutes p.m.) the Senate adjourned. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 

THURSDAY, March 2, 1882. 

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

F. D. POWER. 

The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. 

SUSAN MARSHALL MASSIE. 

Mr. PHISTER. I ask unanimous consent that the Committee of 

the Whole House on the Private Calendar be discharged from the 

consideration of the bill (H. R. No. 4283) for the relief of Susan Marshall Massie, and that it be now taken up and put on its passage. I 

think no member will "object. It is a bill which ought to be passed 

immediately. 

The bill was read, as follows : 

Be it enaA:ted, cfc., That the United States pension agent for paying pensions at Louisville, Kentucky, be, and is hereby, authorized and required to issue to Susan 

Marshall Massie, of Mason County, Kentucky, a duplicate of his check for $1,466.67, 

dated June 30, 1881, and payable to the order of said Susan Marshall Massie, after 

said Massie shall furnish to him sufficient proof of the loss and non-reception by her and non-payment of said original check; and said duplicate shall be paid to her, or order, as if the original was presented. 

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the consideration of this 

bill f The Chair hears none. 

M:r. PHISTER. The generallaw.authorizes the issue of duplicate 

checks for amounts less than $1,000--

Many MEMBERS. All right. 

The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was ac- cordingly read the third time, and passed. 

Mr. PHISTER 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. 

DISTRICT COURT AT WICffiTA1 KANSAS. 

Mr. RYAN. I ask unanimous consent to have taken from the 

House Calendar and considered now the bill (H. R. No. 429) to provide for holding a term of the district court of the United States at 

Wichita, Kansas, and for other purposes. This is a bill affecting the 

administration ofpnblicjustice; and a8 it has been approved unan- imously by the Judiciary Committee, I think there can be no objection to it. 

Mr. HOLMAN. Let the bill be read. 

The bill was read, as follows: 

Be it enacted, clc., That there sha.ll be one term of the United States district court for the district of Kansas held at Wichita in each year, on the first Monday of September, from and after the passage of this act; but no causeJ action, or pro- ceeding shall be tried or considered in the court herein providea for unless by consent of all the parties thereto or order of the court, except as otherwise hereinafter provided. The clerk, marshal, and district attorney for said district of 

Kansas shall perform the duties pertaining to their offices resP-ectively for said 

court, and the clerk and marshal shall appoint a de_puty to reside and keep their 

offices at Wichita, who, in the absence of the principals, shall do and perform all the duties appertaining to their said offices respectively. But the city or county authorities shall provide a suitable building, without expense to the United States, in which to hold said court. SEc. 2. That all that part of the Indian Territory lying north of the Canadian 

River and east of Texas and the one hundredth meridian not set apart and occu- pied by the Cherokee, Creek, and Seminole Indian tribes shall, from and after the passa~e of this a~t, be annexed to and constitute a J,lart of the United States judi- cial district of Kansas i an.d t-he United States district conrts at Wichita and Fort 

Scott, in the district or Kansas, sha.ll have exclusive original jurisdiction of all 

offenses committed within the lim.it.q of the territory hereby annExed to said district of Kansas against any of the laws of the United States now or that may hereafter be operative therein. 

SEc. 3. That all that portion of the Indian Tenito:ry not annexed to the district 

of Kansas by this act, and not set apart and occupted by the Cherokee, Creek, 

Choctaw, Chickasaw, and Seminole Iridian tribes, shall, from and after the passa~e 

of this act, be annexed to and constitute a part of the United States ,iudicial diS- trict known as the northern district of Texas; and the United States district court at Graham, in said northern district of Texas, shall have exclusive original jurisdiction of all offenses committed within the limits of the territory hereoy annexed to said northern district of Texas against any of the laws of the United States now or that may hereafter be operative therein. 

SEC. 4. That nothing cont.ained in this act shall be construed to afl:'ect in any 

-

manner any action or1roceeding now pending in the circuit or district court for 

the western district of rkansas, nor the e!(ecution of any Jlrocess relating thereto ; nor shall anything in this act be construed to give to said district courts of Kansas 

and Texas, respectively, any greater jurisdiction iu that part of said Indian Territory so as aforesaid annexed, respectively, to said district of Kansas and said 

northern district of Texas than might heretofore have been lawfully exercised 

therein by the western district of .Aikansas; nor shall anything in this act con- tained be construed to violate or impair in any respect any treaty provision what- ever. 

Mr. MANNING. I hope this bill will be passed at once. Mr. HOOKER. I object w the consideration of the bill now. It 

is too important a bill to be passed in this way. 

Mr. MANNING. It has been examined and approved by the Judiciary Committee. 

Mr. HOOKER. I insist o~ my objection. 

PORTS OF DELIVERY ~ MISSOURI. 

On motion of Mr. FORD, by unanimous consent, the bill (S. No 

740) to extend the provisions of sections 2990 and 2998, inclusive, of 

the Revised Statutes of the United States to the ports of Kansas 

City and Saint Joseph, Missouri, was taken from the Speaker's 

table, read a first and second time, and referred to the Committee on Commerce. 

H. K. BELDING. 

Mr. DUNNELL. I ask unanimous consent that the bill (H. R. N6. 

839) for the relief of H. K. Belding be taken from the Private Calendar and "%A.uJht before the House for consideration. 

Mr. HOL . Let us hear the bill. 

Mr. ATKINS. I rise to a question of order. Gentlemen sitting 

right here in front cannot hear a word that the Clerk reads. 

The SPEAKER. The point is well taken. Business will be sus- pended until the House is in order. 

l\Ir. DUNNELL. I desire to say that this bill has twice passed 

the House of Representatives in former Congresses, and at this ses- sion has been reported unanimously from the Committee on Claims. 

I trust there will be no objection to its consideration now. TherQ 

is a report, which can be read if called for. 

Mr. ATKINS. No one, I imagine, except the gentleman from Minnesota, [Mr. DUNNELL,] knows what the bill is. 

The SPEAKER. The bill will be read. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Be it enacted, clc., That there be paid by the Secretary of the Treasury, out of any money not otherwise approp;riated, the sum of $1,566 to H. K. Belding, of Minnesota, the amount due him for carrying the mails of the United States between 

the years 1858 and 1862. 

!Ir. ATKINS. I object to the consideration of the bill;, and I 

would like to give my reason for objecting. [Cries of" Oh, no!"] 

The SPEAKER. Debate is not in order. 

JAMES CARROLL. 

l\fr. ARMFIELD, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. 

No. 4753) granting a pension to James Carroll; which was read a first and second time, referred to the Committee on Invalid Pensions, and ordered to be printed. 

STEAM-PLOW MACffiNERY FREE OF DUTY. 

:Mr. KASSON. By direction of the Committee on 'Vays and l\Ieans, 

I ask leave to report, as a substitute for House bill No. 3562, a bill 

(H. R. No. 4754) to admit free of dnty certain steam-plow machinery now at the port of San Francisco. This substitute consists of but a few lines; and I will take the liberty of asking the House to hear 

it read, as I think there will be no objection to its immediate passage, and there is special rea.son for action now. The substitute was read, as follows: 

A bill to admit free of duty certain steam-plow machiner)' now at the port of San 

Francisco. . 

Be it enacted, &c., That all the steam-plow machinery ordered by M. C. Fisher 

for his own use, prior to the expiration of the time limited by section 7 of the act approved .Tune 6, 1872, a.nd now in the public stores or bonded warehouse at San 

Francisco, sha.ll be delivered to him free of duty, and subject only to the other 

charges provided by law. 

Mr. KASSON. A single word of explanation. The Ways and 

:Means Committee of the last Congress reported a bill of similar purport to this--

Mr. SPRINGER. I reserve the right to object after we understand 

what the bill is. 

:Mr. KASSON. And the present bill is reported unanimously. The 

fact to which I wish to call attention is simply this, that by the act 

of June 6, 1872, two years were allowed for the importation of cer- tain steam-plow machinery free of duty. There was reclamation of 

land on a large scale going on in C~lifornia, and this gentleman or- dered a steam-plow and machinery during that period. It ~rrived 

after the expiration of the period. It remains subject to duty in consequence of ita late arrival. The Legislature of California has memorialized as a matter of public interest to this EUtd. Tile delegation 

from California, one of whom is by my side, and who introduced this 

bill, tells· me they have by simple kindness of the customs officer 

saved the steam-plow and machinery from sale to give Congress time 

to act. As there is no objectionin the committee, and none known 

elsewhere, why he should notberelievedofwhatwasamisfortunein 

the machinery arriving too late t-o avail himself of the previous law, 
' 

1882. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--HOUSE. 1551 

we have recommended he be allowed to take the machinery out subject only to other charges incidental to its storage in warehouse, &c. 

Thatisthe bill. If there be no objection, I :find the delegation from 

Californin. deem it important it should beaded on this morning. 

Mr. HUTCHINS. I ask the gentleman from Iowa why the com- mittee does not report a general bill for the admission free of duty in 

the future of steam-plows f 

Mr. KASSON. It was proposed as a general bill, but it was found 

there was objection tQ its consideration at this moment. 

Mr. HUTCHINS. I object to any special bill. 

Mr. KASSON. This was introduced because of its exceptional 

cha.racter. 

Mr. HUTCHINS. I object to a special bill. 

Mr. KELLEY. Mr. Speaker--

Mr. HUTCHINS. I obj'Mt. 

Mr. KASSON. Let it go to the House Calend:u, then, and be 

printed with the accompanying report. 

Mr. CARLISLE. That bill ought to go ta the Committee of the 

Whole House, a£ it proposes to remit certain duties on an imported 

articlE>~. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair is of opinion, on the statement made 

by the gentleman from Kentucky, the bill should be referred to the 

Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, and it will 

be so referred, and ordered to be printed, if there be no objection. 

There was no objection, and it was ordered accordingly. 

LOCATIO:N OF MILITARY WARRANTS. 

Mr. COBB. Mr. Speaker,· I ask to have House bill No. 277, to 

authorize the Secretary of the Interior to ascertain and certify the 

amount of land located with military w arrantt~ in the States described 

therein, and for other purposes, which wa-s reported from the Committee on the Public Lands to this Honse and placed on the House 

Calendar, transferred from that Calendar to the Committee of the 

Whole House on the state of the Union, to which it ought to have 

gone, and that it take its place there as though it had been referred 

properly at the time, and not to the House Calendar. · The SPEAKER. The Chair hears no objection, and it is ordered · accordingly. 

STEAM-PLOW FREE OF DUTY. 

Mr. HUTCHINS. I understand, Mr. Speaker, that unless this is 

done before the 27th of March it can be of no offect, and therefore I 

withdraw my objection to the bill reported by the gentleman from 

Iowa, [Mr. KAssoN.] I sincerely hope, however, that committee 

will report a general bill admitting all steam-plows free of duty. 

Mr. AIKEN: .I object. 

Mr. KASSON. The gentleman's objection comes too late. · Mr. AIKEN. I called out" Mr. Speaker" at once. If the Chair 

will require members to occupy their seats in the Hall we will have 

better order. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair does not think the gentleman was too 

late. 

Mr. AIKEN. I object. I rise now to a parliamenta.ry inquiry. 

If any bills are asked to be presented and put on their passage I object to them, and I wish it understood that I object unless gentle- men 1ise from their seats and introduce their bills. Those of us who 

remain in ourseatscannothearwhatisbeingdone. Andagreatdeal 

of legislation is being done by members getting in front of the 

Speaker and having their bill introduced in a surreptitious manner- their voices are not heard, and they are stolen through the House, as it were. If the Speaker will require gentlemen to occupy their seats we can all hear what is going on. I shall object to every bill that 

is asked to be put upon its passage, unless the member rises in his own seat. 

Mr. WASHBURN. I demand the regular order of business. 

UTAH CONTESTED-ELECTION REPORTS. 

Mr. CALKINS. I desire to know whether it is necessary for a special order of the House to have reports of committees printed in excess of the number ordinarily ordered f 

The SPEAKER. It is. 

Mr. CALKINS. I ask, then, that 2,000 additional copies of the 

reports _in the case of Campbell vs. Cannon be printed, as they are being rapidly called for. 

The SPEAKER. A resolution of that kind would have to be introduced and referred to the Cemmittee on Printing under the law 

where the expenditure is of a certain sum. Mr. CALKINS. I ask by unanimous consent that may be done this 

morning. 

:Mr. SPRINGER. What is the amount! 

Mr. CALKINS. I ask that 2,000 extra copies of the report in the case of Campbell vs. Cannon be printed by unanimousconsentofthe 

Rouse. 

Mr. SPRINGER. Reports of the Committee on Elections! 

Mr. CALKINS. Yes, si.r. 

Mr. SPRINGER. The gentleman may ask to have it reprinted, 

and that means the usual number. 

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will read an extract from the Revised 

Statutes on the subject of printing. 

The Clerk read as follows : 

All motions to print extra copies of any bill, r~port, Ol' other public document, 

shall be referred to the members of the Commitree on Printing of the Honse in 

which such motion is made.- .Revised Statutes, section 3793. 

The SPEAKER. This is a statute, and not a rule of the House. 

Mr. SPRINGER. That is for publishing extra copies; but if the· gentleman makes his resolution in the shape of a motion to reprint,. then he will accomplish his purpose. 

Mr. WILSON. I understand the rule is that all printing which 

does not cost more than $500 can be by a resolution of the House; in excess of that sum, it must go to the Committee on Printing. · Mr. CALKINS. Then I submit this resolution, and ask its reference to the Committee on Printing. 

The Clerk read as follows : 

Resolved~ That 2,000 copies of House Report No. 559, first session Forty-seventh Congress, oe printed for the use of the Committee on Elections. 

The SPEAKER. The resolution will be referred to the Committee on Printing. ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michiuan. Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact 

that the committees were called yesterday for reports, I venture now to move to dispense with the morning hour of to-day, my object 

being to proceed to the consideration of the consular and diplomatic 

appropriation bill. 

The House divided; and there were ayes 115, noes not counted. 

So (two-thirds having voted in favor thereof) the motion to dispense with the morning hour was agreed to. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I now yield to the gentleman. from Massachusetts, who desires to introduce a bill for printing and. 

recommitment. CONSTRUCTION OF WAR VESSELS. 

Mr. HARRIS, of Massachusetts, by unanimous consent, from theCommittee on Naval Affairs, reported a bill (H. R. No. 4755) authorizing the construction of vessels of war for the Navy of the United 

States, and for other purposes; which was read a first and second 

time, recommitted to the Committee on Naval Affairs, and ordered. 

to be printed. ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair desires at this time to submit a mes- sage from the President of the United States, and certain executiYecommnnications for printing and reference. 

CHEROKEE INDIAN LARDS. 

The SPEAKER laid before the House the following message, with 

accompanying papers, from the President of the United States . 

which was read, referred to the Committee on Indian Affairsr and 

ordered to be printed : 

To the Senate and House of Representatives: 

I transmit herewith a communication, dated the 28th of February, 1882, from the 

Secretary of the Interior, with accompanying papers, in relation to the request. of 

the Cherokee Indians of the Indian Territory, ·for payment for lands belonging te· them in said Territory; ceded to the United States b~e sixteenth article of tlieir 

treaty of July 19, 1866, for the settlement of friendly cJ:kag~]n~ A.. ARTHlJR. 

ExECUTIVE MANSION, March 1, 1882. 

SILVER BULLION PURCHASED BY TREASURY DEPARTMENT. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the House a lettoc from the Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting a report from the Director of the 

Mint, in response to a resolution of the House of January 25, 1882, 

relative to the silver bullion purchased by the Treasury Department, 

and the number of standard dollars coined each month from March, 

1878, down to and including December, 1881 ; which was referred to 

the Committee on Coinage, Weights, and Measures, and ordered to be 

printed. OFFICIAL EMOLUMENTS OF CUSTOMS OFFICERS. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the Honse a letter from the Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting an abstract of the official emoluments and fees received by customs officers during the year which. 

ended June 30, 1881; which was referred to the Committee on Ways 

and Means, and-ordered to be printed. 

SETH M. WHITTEN. 

· Mr. BROWNE, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H~ R. No. 

4756) for the relief of Seth M. Whitten; which was read a first and 

second time, referred to the Committee on Invalid Pensions, and 

ordered to l>e printed. 

PUBLIC LANDS L.~ ALABAMA. 

Mr. BERRY, by unanimous consent,from the Committee onMines 

and Mining, reported, as a substitute for House bill No. 19, a bill (11 .. R. No. 4757) to exclude the public lands in Alabama from the operation of the laws relating to mineral lands; which was read a first. and second time, referred to the Committee of the Whole House on 

the state of the Union, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to 

be printed. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

Mr. NEAL. I demand the regular order. 

Mr. KELLEY. I hope the gentleman will withhold his motion to 
1552 CONGRESSiONA'L RECORD-'HOU'SE. MARCH 2, 

-enable me to introduce a resolution from the Ccnnmittee on Ways 

and Mea.ns for reference to the Committee on Printing. The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from Ohio insist upon his 

demand for the regular order. 

1\Ir. NEAL. I do insist upon it. 

}1r. KELLEY. It is simply a resolution which I am instructed by 

-the Committee on Ways and Means to offer for reference, as to t~e 

_propriety of printing certain data; and I hope the gentleman will ·withdraw his demand for the regular order for the present. 

1\Ir. l\TEAL. Very well; I will withdraw it for the present. 

REPRINT OF CERTAIN PUBLIC DOCUMENTS. 

Mr. KELLEY. I am instructed by the Committee on Ways and 

]\leans to present the following resolution. 

The SPEAKER. The resolution will be read. 

The Clerk read n.s follows: · 

Resolved, That there be ;print-ed - copi~s of Sen a.~ ~ce~eous Docnm~nt 

No. 46 first session Forty-sixth Congress, bemg a compilation of lDlports and duties 

"from 1B67 to 1878 and the compiler of the same is hereby authorized to prepare the matter relating io the various tables included in said book for the fi.sciil. years •ended June 30, 1879, 1880, and 1881, respectively, and such additional tables as the ·Committee on W a.ys and Means may approve. 

The resolution was referred to the Committee on Printing. 

CO:NTESTED ELECTION-~1 DOWELL VS. GEORGE. 

Mr. JACOBS. Mr. Speaker, I desire to submit at this time a privijleged report from the Committee on Elections. 

The SPEAKER. The resolution will be read. 

The Clerk read as follows : 

.Resolved, That the ease of McDowell 'against George, "from the State of Oregon, 

be:di.smissed by this committee. 

Mr. SPRINGER. ~would like'to ~ear. that resolution read a~ain. From my understanding of the reading; It seems tha~ the committee 

propose to dismiss this ca e. It ought to be the. House and not "the 

committee. 

The resolution was again read. . The SPEAKER. Without objection, the change sug~ested by the 

gentleman from Illinois will be made, and the Clerk will report the 

resolution as modified. 

The Clerk read as follows : 

Resolved, That th-e case of McDowell against George, from the State of Oregon, ·be dismissed by this House. 

The resolution was agreed to. 

Mr. JACOBS moved to reconsider the yote by which the resolution ~as agreed to; 'and also iD.oved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. · The latter motion wa.a agreed to. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

Mr. SPRINGER. I desire, · Mr. Speaker, at this time, consent to :iptrodtice a jOint resolution in reference to :Printing and distributing ·'the official' recbrds 'of the war 'of the re hellion. 

Mr. STEELE. I demand the regular order. . Mr. SPRINGER. This is simply a resolution in regard to the dis- ·tributing of these records, and I hope the gentleman Will not object. 

Mr. STEELE. I must insist upon the demand for the regular 

-order. CONSULAR AND DIPLOMATIC APPROPRIATION BILL. 

Mr. BURROWS ofMic]lkan. ImovethattheHouseresolveitself 

into Committee of the Who1e on the state of the Union for the pnrIJJOSe Of considering the consular and diplomatic appropriation bill. 

The motion was agreed to. 

The House.accordingly resolved itself into Comn'littee of the Whole 

House on the state of.the Union, (Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts, in the 

Chair,) and proceeded to eoll.Bider the bill (H. R. No. 3830) making 

appropriaticms for the consular and diplomatic servic~ of the Gov-

-ernment for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1883, and for other purposes.. ~ . . Mr. BURROWS, of Miehi~an. I ask un,.'IDimons consent that the .first reading of the bill be dispensed with. 

There was :no objection; and the first and formal reading of the bill was dispensed with. 

Mr. 'BURROWS, of Michigan. I presume I shall meet the demands 

.of the committee, and I certainly shall reach the fulllimi t of my own .desires, by siniply stating wherein the bill under consideration differs 

from 1...he present law. 

The amount appropriated for the fiscal year ending June 30 1882, was 1 ,210,955. The amount proposed to be appropriated by thl; bill 

lis 1,198,530; a reduction from the appropriAtion for the current year 

of $121425. TJie estimate of the State Department for the year end4Ilg June 30, 1883,'was 1,315,055. The'am(mntrecomme'n.ded by the 

bill is less than· the estimate by 116J525. In distributin~ this sl:rm, 

-while the c'ommittee h11.ve not lost sight of the diplomatic service, we 'have son~ht specially to sustain, encourage, and foster tne consular 

-service, tnat channel through which we hope to build up our trade 

with the nations of the ·earth. 

I desire now, in the briefes1; manner possible, to call attention to 

<the changes proposed by this bill. The· first change suggested is in 

the thirteenth line of the bill. I am authorized by the committee to 

offer an amendment to that c~use, to insert after the word "Brazil" 

the words "and Paraguay; '

1 so thatthe minister accredited to Brazil 

shall have diplomatic relations with Paraguay. At present we have a charge for Paraguay and Uruguay, which office we dispense with 

and impose upon the minister to Brazil the duties of the diplomatic 

service with Paraguay. They are very slight, trifling indeed, and our trade with that country pa-sses almost entirely throu~h Brazil. 

So we have imposed upon our minister to Brazil the duties of our diplomatic service with that country. . The next change is simply in title. At present we have a minister 

resident to Turkey, at a salary of 7,500. 

Mr. BLOUNT. In what line of the bill is thatt 

Mr. BURROWS, of :Michigan. In line 18. We simply raise the 

rank from minister resident to that of envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary. The next change is in the twentieth line of the bill. 

Mr. McLANE. Did I understand the gentleman to say that the 

minister resident to Turkey, with a salary of 7,500, is raised to the 

rank of minister plenipotentiary without an increa-se of salary f 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. Yes, sir; that is correct. His rank 

is advanced, but not his pay. 

Mr. McLANE. I am very·sorry to hear that. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. It is done for the purpose of giving him official position at that court. That is all. 

The next change in the bill is in the twentieth line. Under the 

present law we have a minister resident at Belgium and a minister 

resident a tthe Netherlands, with a salary of $7,500 for eaf h. We have 'united these countries and allow one minister, at a salary of 7,500 . Mr. McCOOK. What mission is that f 

Mr. BURROWS, ofMichigan. I am speaking of Belgium and the 

Netherlands. 

The CHAIR~UN. The committee will pledse come to order :\.nd 

preserve order. Gentlemen will be seated. · Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. The distance between Tho Hague 

and Brussels is less than five hours by rail, and either place can be 

reached any day from the other. The diplomatic duties at t.hese two 

courts are not large. During the fiscal year ending June 30, 1881, 

at The Hague and at Brussels there were issued four passports, two 

at each place, yielding to the Government a revenue of $20. For reasons which will be obvious it was ,thouaht we might unite both 

these coimtries under one minister and in doing that we should con- form to the practice of other countries. For it Will be found that 

Portugal has but one minister to Bru8sels and The Hague ; Ronmania 

has but one; Sweden one; Japan has but one minister to Belgium, 

Holland and Denmark; and I might name other countries who do 

the same thing. . . In the same line we have united Demark \vithNorway and Sweden. 

Norway and Sweden under the present law have but one minister 

resident, at $7,500, and there is a charge at Denmark with $5,000. 

We have dropped that officer, and united Norway and Sweden and 

Denmark under one minister at a salary of 71500. The inhabitants 

of those countries are essentially one people. . Mr. McCOOK. . Will the gentleman from Michigan allow me to 

ask him a question f .. Mr. BURROWS, ofMlcbigan. 'Yes sir. . Mr. 'McCOOK. I do 'not question the wisdom of the action of the 

committee in making a consolidation, put I ask the gentleman from 

whom ·they have received the information on which they have based 

their action f What is the reason why these missions should be 

united f Why'should Belgiumand theNetherlandsbeunitedf And 

why should Denmark, Norway, and Sweden pe united f 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michi~an. I have sought to state the reasons which influenced the committee. 

Mr. McCOOK. I did not hear the reasons; I simply heard the fact. 

MI·. BURROWS, ofMichigan. I stated the rea-sons and it is scarce- ly worth while to repeat them. 

The next change in the bill is the following: We have a minister 

resident to the Argentine Republic at a salary of 7,500. We had a charge to Paraguay and \Jrnguay at $5,000. I have already ex- plained that we have united Paraguay to Brazil. This bill proposes 

to attach, for di~lomatic purposes, Uruguar to the Argentine Republic. Communication is very easy; and m doing this we should 

follow in the line of other ~overnments. I believe the only two governm~nts' that have any di.nlon:iatic relations with Paraguay and 

Uruguay are Brazil and the Argentine Republic . In the thirty-second line of tbe bill we have made some changes in salary and some in title. To each of the following countries, Liberia, Hayti, Switzerland, and Portugal1 we send a minister resident. 

Under the law as it now stands we have a charge at Switzerland and 

Portuaal. We increase the rank Without enlarging the pay. 

In the thirty-fifth line of the bill we provide for a. minister resident and consul-~eneral to Ronmania, Servia, and Greece at a salary of $5,500. That IS a change from a charge d'affaires and consul-gen- eral at Roumania at $4,000 a year. We include Servia and Greece, and 

increase the rank and also the· salary to "$5,500. These are the principal changes in matters of consolidation. 1 Iu line 39 'of the bill·we have'niade another change. We have at 

St. Petersburg an envoy extraord..irtary and minister plenipotentiary._ 
I I 

1882. CONGRESSIONAL RECORP-HOUSE. 1553 

at a salary of $17,500 a year; a consul-general, at $2,000 a year, and a secretary of legation, at $2,625. We propose in this bill to unite 

the offices of secretary of legation and consul-general in one office, 

and to pay the one officer a salary of $3,500. There was a great 

demand for an increase of the salary of the consul-general at that 

point, but after examination of the matter we thought it wise to 

unite those two offices. 

Mr. BLOUNT. I would like to ask my friend from Michigan [Mr. 

BURROWS] if there will be any conflict of dutie.s by eombining these 

two offices 'I 

Mr. BUR~OWS, ofMichi~an. It has beenimpossible.forthecommittee to discover any con1l1ct. The two offices are uruted at Constantinople. Mr. BLOUNT. Has the proposed change been recommended by 

the State Department Y 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I will say in answer to the gentle- man that the same plan has been practiced at Constantinople, and 

with very great success. The duties of consul-general and secretary 

oflegation have been performed by the same person at Constantinople. Mr. ROBESON. The true answer to the question ofthe gentleman 

is this : the secretary of legation has nothing to do, and the duties 

of the consul-general will not interfere with him. 

1\Ir. BURROWS, of Michigan. I wasabouttosaythat wethought 

the duties were not so onerous but that one person might perform 

them. During the last year at St. Petersburg the legation issued 

twelve passports, or at the rate of one a month, yielding a revenue to the Government of 60. The consular fees at that place for the 

year amounted to but 499. 

The entire number of pieces of work done by the consul-general at 

St. Petersburg during the year amounted to only one hundred and 

eighty-three, countingeverydescriptionofservice. So far as the labor 

is concerned, unless there should be some conftict between the two 

offices, we thought the duties might be performei by one officer, and 

hence we have recommended this change. We propose the same change at Vienna and Rome, and believe it might be done with 

advantage at other places. 

There are some other changes to which I do not now care to call 

special attention, excepting one. By the law of last year there was appropriated for clerk hire the sum of $57,400, and the law designated 

the number of these clerks, fixed their salaries, and also designated 

the posts at which they were to be employed. This year the State 

Department asks for an additional sum of $16,400 for clerk hire, and a further sum of $6,000; making in all $79,800 for clerk hire. 

\Ve have been informed by the State Department that the desig-• 

nation of clerks at certain points and the fixing of their salaries was unwise in this particular; often the servic& of a clerk was un- necessary except for two or three months in the year. The Department claims that by makin~ an appropriation of a gross sum, and 

leaving the distribution of It to the discretion of the Department as it might be needed to meet the demands of the service, it would 

result in a saving of money to the Government and promot-e the 

efficiency of the service. We therefore, without distributing the 

amount, appropriate in gross the sum of 65,000. · In conclnsion, I desire to say that I have called the attention of 

the committee only to the main changes proposed by this bill. The 

diplomatic service of the country for the fiscal year ending J nne 30, 

1881, cost the Government 379,322.21; more than one-third of the 

entire appropriation for the consular and diplomatic service. And 

I will say in this connection that the fees derived from the diplomatic service were 5,132.14, leaving the net cost of our diplomatic 

service $374,190.17. 

The consular service is not only self-sustaining but yields a revenue to the Government varying from 25,000 to $75,000 annually. The 

purpose of the Committee on Appropriations in this bill has been, 

while not crippling or belittling the diplomatic service, to strengthen 

and uphold the consular service, through which we hope to extend our avenues of trade. I trust I have stated enough to advise the 

Committee of the Whole of the general features of this measure. Mr. MULDROW. I would like to ask the gentleman a question. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. Certainly. 

1\Ir. :MULDROW. I would inquire of the gentleman why we are called upon to maintain prison-houses for American convicts in Siam 

and Turkey and other places f 

1\Ir. BURROWS, of Michigan. l: will say to the gentleman that we had better postpone the consideration of that matter until we reach that clause of the bill. 

Mr. COX, of New York. I will answer the gentleman now. In some of the barbarous countries we have a jurisdiction which is judicial. We have courts and prisoners, mostly American sailors, who 

cannot be tried by foreign tribunals. It has been the custom from 

time imniemoTjal to have that sort of courts. 

Mr. MULDROW. Why cannot they be tried at home f 

Mr. COX, of New York. It would cost more than the gentleman 

would be willing to pay, if he is an economist. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I now yield to my colleague on the committee, the gentleman from Louisiana, [Mr. ELLis,] that be 

may address the committee in his own right. 

Mr. ELLIS. I had thought ofexpressingsomeviewson the foreign 

XIII-98 

policy of our Government and enunciartin(J' my desire that -a more vigorous policy should be pursued than has c\aracterized our Government for the last ten years. But I apprehend that a more appropriate 

occasion will soon be presented, and I will defer the remarks I desire 

to make until that occasion. I will now yield snch portion of my 

time to the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. WHITTHOR..""rn] !l.S he may see fit to occupy. 

Mr. WHITTHORNE. Sympathizing "\vith my friend from Louisiana [Mr. ELLIS] in his advocacy of a vigorous foreign policy by the 

American Government, I have to thank him for his courtesy which 

enables me at present to occupy the attention of this committee. ~Ir. Chairman, in the outset of the remarks which I propoae to 

make on the present occasion, I beg to call the attention orthe com- mittee to the following reference to the export and import trade in 

the commercial history of the United States for the last few years, 

which I take from the recent report of the Secretary of the Treasury: 

~~: /oifo~~· as contrasted with the imports during the last fiscal year, (1881,) 

Exports of domestic merchandise . _-.- ... __ -- ...... -.--.---...... -. $883, 925, 947 

Exports of foreign merchandise.·-- ........ -.. ·-·-.------- ... -.-.-.. 18,451,399 

Total ... ------- ...... ·--- .. ·--·--··--· ... ·---·-............... 902,377,346 

Imports of merchandise------ ................... ..... ----·--··--... 642,664,628 

Excess of exports over imports of merchandise . __ . -.......... -- -. - 259, 712, 718 

Aggregate of exports :md imports-----··---------·----··-···- I, 545, ~ 974 

Compared with the previous year there was an increase of $66,738,688 in the 

value of exports of merchandise, and a. decrea-se of $25,290,118 in the value of imports. The annual average of the excess of imports of merchandise over exports thereof, for ten years previous to J nne 30, 1873, was $104,706,922; but for the last 

six years there lias been an excess of exports over imports of merchandise amount- ing to $1,180,668,105-an annual average of $196,778,017. The specie value of the 

exports of domestic merchandise lias increased from $376,616 473, in 1870, to $883,925,947 in 1881, an increase of $507,3&9,474, or 135 per cent. The imports of 

merchandise have increased from $435,958,408, in 1870, to $642,664,628 in 1881, an increase of $206,'706,220, or 47 per cent. 

This is a most gratifying exhibit of commercial progress and 

prosperity. And when we compare this a~gregate of exports and· imports with that of the principal commercial powers of the world, 

and see from that comparison that we are now the peer of the greatest, Rave and except only the United Kingdom of Great Britain and 

Ireland; and reflecting that under the control and administration 

of that government there are quite two hundred and :fifty millions 

of people, we have just cause of pride in the miraculous growth and 

progreS& of the trade of our people. 

And, sir, as we reckon the vast amonnt of our agricultural and 

manufacturing produots, especially as shown in the grand aggregate 

of our increasing exports, all indicating the great wealth and prosperity which the recent years have given to our labor and industry, 

and when realizing the tremendous growth in our population we come to contemplate the possibilities of our national grandeur and resources and endeavor to grasp the consideration of the demands of our vast commerce in the near future-made urgent nnd necessary by 

increase of population, increase in production, and increase in domestic facilities to reach the markets of the world-we are brought 

directly and immediately to the reflection that our domestic legislation and our foreign diplomacy should become responsive to these 

demands and necessities; our statesmanship, whether in legislative 

hall or in the Cabinet, must keep pace with American progress. The 

American statesman must not only look to the growth of the trade 

and power of his own country, but to that of its competitors and cus- tomers. He should know and govern his conduct by the needs and 

friendly disposition of its customers and friends, and carefully study 

the resources of its rivals and thwart its antagonistic policy. In so doing no timidity should mark his action or deference to the equanimity of his adversary control his counsel. Knowin~ the rights and 

interests of his own country, he should dare main tam them. 

Claiming only to be a student in the teachings of the statesmen of 

this country, I now only discharae the duty I owe to the people as one of their representatives when I attempt a criticism on the foreign 

policy of this Government. Before making it, Mr. Chairman, I deem 

it proper, outside of the mere home contemplation of our commerce, 

to call the attention of the committee to the condition and demands 

of the commerce and trade of other countries, and especially to those 

markets wherein rivalry already or may hereafter exist. 

Indeed, just now, and with the purpose I have in making these 

remarks, it is not necessary to refer to our t1'ade with the European 

states or those eastern co011tries which are more or less under the 

control of the European states. The countries to whose trade and cemmerce I shall refer are principally those who are, or claim to be, 

independently governed, and whererivalryintradeexists, and where 

supremacy in commerce may be thereby secured. These markets I 

shall assume without argument or further statement of fact to be 

Mexico, the Central Amerisan states, South America, the West India 

Islands, Oceanica., Asia in part, and Australasia. 

The total export and import trade of these countries, a-s far and as correctly as I can obtain the statistics, I here exhibit, and I do so from the advanced sheets of the American Almanac-a work valued 

by all statisticians, because it is edited by that careful, faithful, and 

able worker, A. R. Spofford, the esteemed and worthy Librarian of 

the Congression¥ Library-and to this exhibit in the following table 
1.554 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. MARon 2, 

I call the attention of the committee, as showing the value of the 

trade referred to : 

Countries. Year. Imports. Exports. 

Argentine Republic ....... ------ .... 1880 $44,660,204 $66,497,423 

Bolivia. ...• -- ------------- -· --·-- ·--- 1879 5, 000,000 5, 600,000 Brazil .•.... ----·----·--· .•••••...... 1880 81,752,900 102,029,250 Chili .. ........•...•....•. : ••.••...... 1878 22,740,000 37,771,440 

Colombia .................. ---· ...... 1879 10,787,634 13,711,511 

Costa. Rica.._ ............ ;............ 1878 3,116, 290 6,187, 062 Ecuador. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1879 6, 030, 000 5, 371, 912 Guatemala. .......................... 1876 2,717,000 3,918,912 

Guiana . ....... __ .................... 1879 10,325.225 13,577,675 

Hayti................................ 1877 7, 971,000 8, 474,000 

Honduras............................ ....... ..... 1, 305,000 Mexico .... .••........•.....•...•.... 1879 29,000,000 31,000,000 

Niearagua............... . . . . . . . . . . . . 1880 1, 470, 114 2, 057, 622 Paraguay ............ ____ ............ 1880 1, 030,000 1, 163,900 

Peru ... _ ............................. 1879 27,000,000 45, 000,000 

Salvador ............................ 1880 22,294,542 4,583,538 

Santo Domingo...................... 1,745,654 1,546,809 

Uruguay ............................. 1879 18,328,225 19,752,201 

Venezuela............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1876 14, 800, 000 11,300, 000 China .... _ ........................... 1878 70,804,027 67, 172,179 

Japan ...... ----··-·----· ............ 1879 32,964,632 28,711,527 

Total. 

$111, 157, 627 10,600,000 

183, 782, 150 60,511,440 

24,499,145 

9, 303,352 

11,371, 912 6, 635,912 

23,902,900 

16,445,000 

1, 305,000 

60,000,000 

3, 527,736 

2, 193,900 

72,000,000 

26,878,880 

3, 292,463 

38,080,426 

29,100,000 

137, 976, 206 61,676,159 

1----- Total _........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 791, 239, 448 

Oceanica, Cuba, and West India Islands, not giten above, estimated ....... .. __ .................................................. 350,000,000 

Total .•......••.•...... : .••....•.•.. ___ ......•.....•......•..... 1,141, 239,448 

Presenting as a grand total of the annual trade of these countries 

the sum of$1,141,239,44B. Unquestionably these States in their trade 

have increased since the dates given, and it is not too much to estimate its grand aggregate for the year 1881 to be $1,400,000,000. 

:Mr. Chairman, before makin~ any comment on this exhibit I beg 

to s.ubmit and to call the attention of the committee to the following 

table showing the trade and commerce of the United States with 

these governments in the fiscal year ending J nne 30, 1881, as I take 

it from the report of Ron. Joseph Nimmo, jr., Chief of the Bureau of 

Statistics, submitted to the present session of Congress. The present 

table represents, therefore, the value ofthe imports from the countries 

named into the United States and the value of the exports from the 

United States into the same countries. 

Imports and exports. 

Countries. Imports. Exports. Total. 

From and to-· Mexico .... __ ....... ___ ... .•. •.• . . .. .. $17,454,126 $11,172,738 $28,626,864 

Central .American States.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 3, 402, 969 1, 793, 757 5, 194, 726 :British Honduras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 464, 500 486, 959 951, 459 West Indies . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87, 524,552 31, 013,537 ll8, 538,089 

South .America........................ 81,501,718 25, 871, 953 107,373, 671 Asia, Australasia, and Oceanica . . . . . . 82, 136, 453 28, 154, 857 llO, 291, 310 

Total _ . . _ ...................... : 272, 4821 318 1 98, 493, 801 I 370, 976, 119 

A comparison of these two tables shows, first, that notwithstanding the proximity of the United States to these countries, and with 

natural advantages to secure the major portion of this immense trade, 

yet we do not enjoy it. If perchance it was secured, who doubts 

that it would largely contribute to the value of our products and 

add largely to our national wealth 'I Secondly, this comparison 

shows that while we buy l)f import nearly 3.1 per cent. of their ex- port trade, namely, the sum of $272,482,318, yet we only sell them about 

12t per cent. of their imports. The balance of trade is largely 

against us. Why this is so, and as to the remedy, I shall have a wonl to say before finishing my remarks; but not now, because, pertinent thereto, there are other facts to be stated and considered. 

While, :Mr. Chairman, we note with exultant pride the marked 

increase in our foreign trade and the great development in the capacity of this country to supply the wants of the world, yet it must be 

said and admitted that this has not been made at the expense of any 

serious decline in t!le volume of. the exports and imports of other 

countries, though it may be true in certain articles in the production of which the United States has rapidly and successfully passed 

all competitors. And, again, it is to be noted that our domestic trade 

and commerce have with even greater stride moved forward and in~ 

crea.sed. 

The immense increase in the commerce of the world is a resultant 

from the improved facilities for the exchange of the products of 

labor given by steam. The railway car and the ship moved by steam 

have wrought miraculous changes in the civilization of mankind. 

With this mechanical power, obedient to the will of man, and with 

the multiplication of artificial wants, which, it is said, marks improvement and progress in civilization, no one can foretell the limit 

to which trade and commerce may extend. It is an aooepted axiom 

that the exterudon of commerce by any given country attests alike 

its inte~gence and wealth. When, therefore, the American states- msm stnees the growth and development of his own country in its 

industries, trade, and commerce and re:ft.ects that in the race of intelligence and wealth there is "no pause"-nnless followed by death 

and decay-he must, if faithful to the trust @f his position, take such 

steps as will promote this growth and development. 

Indeed, :Mr. Chairllk'tn, the present status of our trade and com- merce, internal and foreign, is such that it demands this thought and 

attention upon the part of our statesmen, no matter whether their 

sphere of labor is in the Senate, the Cabinet, or the field of :wtual 

struggle. Look at your immediate surroundings. I need not repeat 

the figures of the tab~s already shown yon. The goal to be reached 

by the great manufacturing and producing cou.ntries lies in the fields 

south and west of us. These fields comprise the commerce of the 

States of South America, Mexico, the West India Islands, the Central American states, Oceanica, Australasia, and Eastern Asia. The 

value of their present trade I have shown you, now $1,400,000,000 

annually, but how rich and valuable will it become when under the ma~!c touch of steam new energy ancllife are given to the people who 

shauinhabit these domains, and when the world shall demand of these 

countries the vast mineral wealth that now sleeps peacefully in the reces es of their mountains and their valleys 7 The day the world 

will demand this of Central America, Mexico, and South America is 

not far distant. 

Mr. Chairman, the keen instinct of our busine s men is ahead of our legislators and diplomates. Appreciating the value of the trade 

to be won, already has the enterprise and capital of our citizens built 

iron channels of commerce across the continent, and they are building others extending into and across the Republic of Mexico. They are fast traveling to points of advantage with a view to seize and 

control the principal marts of the commerce and trade of the countries 

referred to. 

In this connection I beg, :Mr. Chairman, to call attention to the 

increase in the mileage of railroads in the United States within the 

last eleven years. In 1870 the number of miles in opemtion was 52,914; in 1881, 103,000; showing an increase of50,086. This increase 

has been principally in the Western and Southwestern States, and 

constructed with the view and in the effort to reach the Pacific coast 

and the boundaries of Mexico. The large amount of capital in ,~estod 

in these enterprises manifests the estimate placed by the business men of our Government on the present and prospective value of the trade 

of South America and the countries washed by the Pacific Ocean. 

Sir, on the 12th day of March, 1878, in the discussion of the con- sular and diplomatic bill, then pending before this House, and at that 

time in advocating and urgina- the duty of the American Government to provide by treaty with :Mexico for th~ protection of the 

tfapital and labor of our citizens which might be enlisted in the buildrng of railroads, &c., in that republic, I then took occasion to say, what 

I here repeat," that our people with their commerce and trade have 

moved up to tho northern border of Mexico. It is the law alike of 

population and trade that such a tide must move forward. And 

now, knocking at the door they peacefully ask that it may be 

opened, or, in other words, that the channels of trade and commerce shall be unobstructed to the flow of wealth and population. They 

will be· and the statesman af either country who hinders or delays 

the work simply provides a heritage of serious if not bloody complications for the future. Looking facts-the proximity of the two peoples, their mutual and reciprocal wants and wealth-squarely in the 

face, it is the injunction of wise statesmanship at once to set about 

establishing the trade and commerce of the two peoples upon a basis 

of fraternity and peace, and thus realize to the people of the United 

States by friendly offices all that was hoped for by France in her war like movements. And commencing thus with our nearest neighbor, 

let it become fixed in our policy that in the outlets demanded by our commerce protection and security to the capital and labor of the American citizen shall be a.ssured, as is the :Monroe doctrine in our reL'ttions with our sister states on this continent. This being so, wher- ever it is desired to open markets for our surplus wealth we shall find 

volunteer pioneers for our trade and willing missionaries for our commerce." 

:Mr. Chairman, the statesmanship as well as the enterprise and 

capital of European governments appreciates the value and importance of the 11 goal" to be reached in this struggle for supremacy in 

the commerce of the South American states and of the countries in 

and bordering on the Pacific Ocean. Already and now does Great 

Britain enjoy the major portion of this trade, and by diplomacy as well as by taxation of her own citizens, as does the Government of 

France, seek to maintain their present hold on it, but by our domes 

tic enterprises referred to-the building of railroads-our people are on the eve of reversing this order of thin~s. And hence European 

governments are seekin~, not alone by capital invested in trade, but 

by "diplomatic suggestions" in the counsels and administration of 

the affairs of these governments, to make them hostile to American 

interests and jealous of Americn.n influence. .And not content with 

these measures, Eru·ope:m diplomacy and capital seek, in the build 

ing of an Isthmus canal, to "head off" the efforts of American cit 

izens and to place a limit to American power and American progress 

Is it not singular, Mr. Chairman, that so stupendous an undertaking and one so likely to affect seriously the commerce, if not thepeace, of the United States as the building of the interoceanic canal 

by foreign capital and foreign enterprise, under a foreign charter 

and this project inaugurated and promoted by thl)se who have foli' 

' 
lr 

1882. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1555 

years, together with other dreams of the family, dreamed of a Latin 

empire on.this continent-should apparently have arrested so little 

attention upon the part of those charged with the conduct of our forei~ relations 'f Who that studies a moment does not see that in a military and naval point of view it will become necessary upon 

the completion of such a canal that the United States should increase 

its naval armament and multiply its works of military fortification T 

This very fact might and, in my opinion, should induce the United 

States to re~ard the construction of such a canal as a menace to its 

power and Its security. Again, with the progress of our railroad 

system, and with the development of mining, manufacturing, and 

agricultural wealth in the interior-Western and Pacific States, very soon from the Pacific coast we will be able and ready to supply the 

wants of trade to the countries in and bordering on the Pacific Ocean. 

Conflicting as such a canal will with our vast railroad system, in 

which there l8oversixbillionsofcapitalinvested; giving as it will the 

advantages in competition to our European rivals over the interiorWestern and Pacific States; creating as it does an artificial Bosphorus 

around which diplomacy and war are to play their false and bloody 

roles-making" armed powers" a necessity on this continent-it is 

profoundly surprising that the American Government has been apparently so indifferent to "the progress of events" on the Isthmus. 

And yet, ltlr. Chairman, even if the apprehensions whichihavepictured should be esteemed as idle and without reason, and the country 

accept the contrary views, and thatthisartificialchannelistoprove a great highway to commerce, still it must have a large influence 

upon the trade of this Government and our relations with the other 

governments on this continent. But, Mr. Chairman, to return to the 

main lil!.e of thought, who dares believe that the capital of Europe 

seeks investment in this canal either in sentiment or for the benefit 

of our people and their wealth T Certainly those who are building it are not guided alone by effusive sentiment. The people of the United 

States should not forget the efforts of Louis Napoleon, either in Central America. or his attempt to found an empire in Mexico. In relation to this attempt at empire in Mexico I here again quo~ and 

read what it is said a distinguished Frenchman wrote of it. Abbe 

Dominick, in behalf of France, writes : 

Behind the Mexican expedition there was morethan empire to found, a nation to save, markets to create, thousands of millions to develop ; there was a world tributary to France, happy to submit to our sympathetic influence, to receive their SU:J?· 

plies from us and to ascribe to us their resurrection to the political and social life 

of a civilized people. 

I beg gentlemen1 when they consider this great undertaking of 

French capital, to rnquire if these be not yet the motives which induce the Frenchman to enlist in the work. For one I do not doubt 

it, and therefore it is, and for the other reasons given, I believe, tht 

unless soon the American Government defines and takes its position 

in relation to the building or control of such a canal, it provides for 

the coming of a day full of an Iliad of woes to our country. 

Not only in this matter but in other regards it is apparent that 

European governments are not idle as to the condition of things in 

the states of South America. All the indications point to a struggle over the empire of wealth that lies in the present and future com- merce of these southern states of the American continent and the 

islands of the western ocean. The balance of trade is now against us. The diplomacy of Europe has hitherto, with and since the Clayton-Bulwer treaty, overreached us. And nowmaterial progress and 

advancement have brought us to the practical question, shall America 

abaudon the contest for this grand, magnificent, rich empire of wealth on the Pacific Ocean 7 American progress will not tolerate an abandonment of the struggle. Can it be won by domestic protective tariffs f 

Can it be gained and held by subsidized ships 7 Can it be reached 

and secured by interoceanic canals f The propositions contained in 

these queries have each their advocates. Without arguing either 

upon the present occasion, I content myself with saying that neither 

would prove efficacious and satisfactory in my opinion. Either one would prove illusory and futile unless diplomacy had first entered 

"'.he field and secured respect and protection for American capital 

.md enterprise invested in the struggle being made. 

The executive department shi:>uld, in 1ts office, obtain the friendship, good-will, and kindly disposition of the country with which 

commercial intercourse is sought ; the partial barriers, burdens, and 

taxation upon trades there prevailing should be modified or removed; 

reciprocal advanta~es should be sought and given. The proximity 

of country, the similarity of institutions, the harmony of thought in 

that the people must rule and not dynasties govern, being essentially 

American, should therefore unite American governments to work together for the promotion of popular government, in which the alleviation of human want and the promotion of human happiness was and 

should remain the object of all American governments; that, being so identified, they would sedulously and by all peaceful agencies promote the wealth and prosperity of each other so far as it could be 

done without injustice to their own citizens. And, beyond all this, 

it should be known and adhered to under all circumstances that the 

American citizen in his person and in his property-let him be where 

he may and when engaged in lawful pursuit-should J>e protected with all the power of his Government. Let the .American citizen 

know and recognize this; and this being so, as I have already said, 

you will find that "wherever it is desired to open markets for our sur- plus wealth, we shall find volunteer pioneers for our trade, and willin~.~ionaries for our commerce." It is because we have not been 

willin.O' to incur hazards for the protection of our citizens who may 

have the courage to embark capital and labor in commercial enterprises in foreign countries, and prompt to give them rel~ef when oppressed, that "the balance oftrade" is often found against us. Let 

the executive department do its duty in this behalf and the people 

and their Congre s will support such an ad.m.ini.l>tration, and we will 

find a reversal in the existing order of things as regards our com- merce with the countries of which I liave spoken. 

:Mr. Chairman, I come now to spealt in this connection about recent 

efforts in our diplomacy with reganl to the questions I hav;e referred 

to. Let me premise, with the statement of opinion, that immediately upon the commencement of the administration of James A~ Garfield it appeared that the great body of the people believed that his 

administration would be given to the solution of questions affecting 

the industrial pursuits of all classes and sections of the country and 

without prejudice, and that hence in the future parties in the country 

would be divided upon economic instead of sectional questions. Indeed, the common sense of the country ha-d already taken up these 

questions, and it was quick to see that President Garfield was willing 

and ardent to enter upon them. In necessary connection with these 

domestic economic questions was the present and ur(J'ent one of the 

character of the foreign policy .of the Government. The people were gi'atified with the indication that the policy of the Administration in 

this regard was to be a vigorous one amlin harmony with the an- cient policy of the Government. I do not believe, sir, that I misunderstood or that I now misrepresent public opinion when I say 

that one of the chief elemertts of grief in his sad and ui:l.fortunate 

death was the great fear of the people that this policy was to be re- versed. Full mapy a patriot of both parties was more than anxious 

that the bitterness of sectional strife should cease, and that the inglorious and corrupting struggle for office-by machinery at leastshould forever disappear, and that in lien thereof the talent and 

energy of the country should be enlisted in the combat of principles 

whicb should determine what was best for the peace, wealth, and 

glory of the country; hence, having learned to believe that- the administration of President Garfield promised to give at least opportunities for such a combat, it had secured in a very maifked degree 

the respect and good wishes of the large mass of the people. 

While, :1\Ir. Chairman, I do not agree in all of the details of the 

foreign policy of the late President, especially the personal .parts, 

yet I am free to say that in the steps taken by l\Ir. Blaine to modify or cancel the Clayton-Bulwer treaty, and in the main in the efforts 

made by him with the sanction of President Garfield, and at first with 

the approval of President Arthur, to bring about a cordial and sympathetic understanding between the powers representing "American 

progress in American governments" in relation to questions purely 

American, I am in thorough accord, because I believe they are the 

first, most ur~ent, and necessary steps to the assertion of a vigorous 

American policy. Before the Government of the United States can do anything effectively in regard to the Isthmus canal it is absolutely 

essential that our sister American governments should know the obligations of this Govenpnent under existing treaties, as well as its 

duties to its own citizens and territory; and they should know that our efforts made in that quarter were not exclusive of a due and 

proper consideration of their rights and interests, which would be more or less common, especially in view of possible policy upon the 

part of European powers. To invite a common consultation of those 

most directly interested, not alone in their trade, but in their governments, in the results likely to flow from the com;pletion of the 

canal, was not only proper, but, to my mind, vitally important. 

I may be in error, Mr. Chairman, hut I venture the opinion that 

the completion of an Isthmus canal is followed by increased military 

works and naval armaments upon the part of ~very American Government that has the ability to make them. And then~ shall I add, 

that the necessity for this will go on increasing, and ever at the ex- pense of the people, and inevitably involving the character and form 

of their governmentsf Then the careful statesman, mindful always 

of the future, makes no mistake if he can in the present secure such 

guarantees as insure the future peace and glory of his country. But 

that 3tatesman must not purchase the peace of his country at the 

expense of its honor and wealth. Such, Mr. Chairman, seems to 

have been some of the reasons governing the policy of the late President and his Secretary of State, Mr. Blaine; and if so, they are such as will, in my judgment, meet the approval of the people of tke 

United States. 

But, Mr. Chairman, Garfield is dead, and Blaine is no longer 

Secretary of State. The great West and the enterprising East do not now govern. It is the shadow of Wall street. Speculative capital, 

always timid, grows pale, and for fear of offense withdraws the brave 

words that the representatives of energy, power, and honor have 

spoken. The UnitedStateswillnotmove, when the honor, thetrade, 

ihe commerce of its citizens demand their presence and their protection, lest for ooth "jealousy and ill-will" in some foreign power- our rivals it may be-should be created. And to this complexion has American policy fallen ! Is there a lower depth to be reached T 

We are invited to it, so at least it would seem, in the reply of the 

English Government to Mr. Blaine's dispatch in relatiQll to the Clayton-Bulwer treaty. In this reply it is suggested that a conference 

of the great commercial powers be called to gJVe a mutual guarantee 
1556 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. MARCH 2, 

of the neutrality of the Isthmus canal. What is the value of the 

guarantee 'f In case of war what would it be worth f Are we to 

have the elrama of " the Balance of Power " re-enacted on this continent 'f If so, how many bloody and tragic acts is it to contain f Is 

this to be the heritage which our timid and courteous statesmen are to prepare as an inheritance for the republics that now make the 

American family f The honor of our country forbid! 

A conference of European powers suggested l A conference of 

American Republics rejected! Limits to be pre cribed to American 

diplomacy, limits to American progress ancl American prowess! Who 

is to bind and determine the growth and extent of American com- merce and American territory f Sir, let it be said to the honor of the 

late administration that it seems in its foreign policy to have been 

imbued with the teachings of the grand old patriots, whose words and 

deeds illustrated with brilliant luster the brightest, bravest pages of 

American history-Jeffel'Son, who gave us Louisiana; Monroe, who 

gave us a definite American policy; Adams and Clay, who sought 

American unity; Polk, who gave us California; Everett, whose 

memorable dispatch to the Comte de Sartiges should be constantly 

read by the American patriot; and Cass and Douglas and Marcy, who 

gave us their protest against the Clayton-Bulwer treaty. 

Mr. Chairman, permit me in exposition of this American policy to 

.quote from Mr. Everett's dispatch alr.eady referred to. Mr. Everett 

therein gave a historical review of the acquisition of territory made 

by the United States, and of the policy of this Government proceeds 

to say thatNo person surveying these events with the eye of a. comprehensive statesman- -ship can fail to trace in the main result the undoubted operation of the law of our :political existence. The consequences are before the world. Vast provinces which 

<had Ia.n~sbed for three centuries under the leaden sway of a stationary system ;are commg under the influences of an active civilization. Freedom of speech and 

the press, the trial by jury, religions equality, and representative government have 

!been carried by the Constitution of the United States into extensive regions in 

which they we1-e unknown before. By the settlement of California the great cir-

..cuft. of intelligence round the globe is completed. The discovery of the gold of 

rtha.t r~gion, leadin~. as it did to the same discovery in Australia, has touched the merve of industry tnroughout the world. Every addition to the territory of the 

.American Union 'has given homes to European destitution and gardens to European -want. From every part of the United Kingdom, from France, from Switrerland 

.and Germany, and from the extremest north of Europe, a march of immigration has 

lbeen taken up such as the world has never seen before. Into the United States, ,grown to :their present e::rtent in the manner described, bnt little less than half a nD.illion Q'f the population of the Old World is annuallyponring, to be immediately iincorporated into an industrious and l'rosperous community, in the bosom of which 

Jthl).y .:linil political and religious liberty, social position, employment, and bread. 

lit will be remembered that the United States have been :i.Bvited 

by the Governments of France and Great Britain to enter into a con- vention by which the three Governments would disclaim "now and 

for hereafter all intention to obtain possession of the island of Cuba." 

This invitation was declined by the United States Government in . the admirable and bold dispatch referred to, and in which he uses lthe language I have already quoted, and in which he further adds: 

But-whatever may be thought of these last suggestions, it would seem impossilble for any one who reflects upon the events glanced at in this note to mistake 

tthe:law of American growth and progress, or think it can be ultimately arrested 

by a .convention like that proposed. -In the judgment of the President it would 

!be as ·easy to throw a dam from Cape Florida to Cnba.,. in the hope of stopping the 

diow of the Gulf stream, as to att~pt, by a. compact like this, to fix the fortunes 

.of Cuba "now and for hereafter." 

And in this the great American statesman meant to be understood 

tthat no human power could define and limit the extent of American .growth and progress. At a later period in our history, when it was supposed that this was .attempted to be done by the Clayton-Bolwer treaty, that brilliant 

American stateslru),n, who in his life and speech more nearly typified American thought and American aspirations than any of its re- cent statesmen, Stephen A. Douglass-the grand representative of 

American. Democracy-in protesting against the treaty referred to 

spoke as follows in reference to American growth and progress: 

But I cannot close my eyes to the history of this country for the ll\st half cen- tury. Fifty years ago the question wa-s being debated in t his Senate whether it was wise or not to a~qoire any territory on the west bank of the Mississippi River, 

.and it was then contended that we coUld never, with safety, extend beyond that 

river. ·It was at that time seriously considered whether the Alleghany Mountains 

tihould not be the barrier beyond ·which we should never pass. At a. subsequent date, after we had acquired Louisiana and Florida, more liberal views began to prevail, and it was thought that perhaps we might venture to establish one tier of 

States west of the Mississippi; but in order to prevent the sad calamity of an un- due expansion of our territory, the policy was adopted of e tablishing an Indian 

Territory, with titles in perpetuity, all al.ong the western border of those States, so that no more new States could possibly be created in that direction. That barrier could not arrest the onward progress of our people. They burst through it, 

and ;passed the Rocky Mountains, and were only arrested by the waters of the 

Pacific. Who, then, is prepared to say that in the progre s of events, having met with the. barrier of the ocean in our western course, we may not be compelled to turn to the north and to the south for a.n outlet 1-Appendix to Cong-ressional Globe, 

Second session Thirty-second Congress, volume 27, page 26. 

Mr. Chairman, in the progress of events we have reached that point. 

Our ad vel'Saries realize this. The trade and commerce of the Pacific 

is to American progress a necessity. Shall the peaceful weapons of 

<iiplomacy and the kindly offices of friendship secure it, or shall we submit to bind the giant by lithes and postpone the day of power 

to the future, then to b~ obtained by a bloody drama f 

No, Mr. Chairman, this struggle cannot be postponed. The six billio~ of capital invested in railroads all concentrating on your 

coasts and on the borders of this sought-for land; the immense an- nual value of the products of your farms, workshops, and mines, 

amounting to billions; the grand and increasing aO'gregate of the 

commercial capital and enterprise of our people; t~e great Mis issippi Valley, from whose productive fields, if rightly encouraged, the 

support and sustenance of the world is to be drawn; the very law of our existence and growth, with our rapid increase in population, 

demand that the statesmanship of the country shall aid in securing 

this empire of wealth and commerce for our industry and labor. 

Within the sound of my voice, and on this floor as represent atives 

of the people, are those who will see within the limits of our present 

Union over one hundred millions ofpopulation. Ima~iue if you can the 

progress ofthis country in material wealth within tnat time. Grasp 

if you can the then demands of our commerce and trade. In making 

the effort you will comprehend the wisdom and patriotism of the 

statesmen of this country who by their counsel prepare in the ways 

of peace for the grand march of American civilization and .Aruerican 

progress. 

It must be ever onward. And, sir, looking far away into the future, 

and contemplating the vast possibilities of free Government, with 

prosperous trade and commerce to the thriving millions who are to 

occupy, possess and enjoy this continent of ours, it seems to me that 

wise statesmanship would hail with ambitious pride this propitious 

hour to inaugurate commensurate movements to meet these magnificent possibilities. I say propitious, Mr. Chairman, because now, 

while mere trade politicians would traffic in sectional feelings and 

passions or run office by mactinery, the people who comprehend the 

misfortunes of overproduction and surplus products, anxiously desire 

material relief and material support, and will hail him or that party as entitled to their confidence who by peaceful agencies brings wealth, 

peace, and pro&perity to their doors. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. Mr. Chairman, when I asked the gentleman in charge of this bill to allow me some time for its discussion, 

I proposecl to devote it to some suggestions which my study and 

experience hnd led me to conclude would improve the consular ser- vice of the United States, especiallyin·connection with that part of 

the service which relates to the Treasury; and I have prepared some notes with reference to that branch of the subject. I do not suppose, 

however, that I shall be able now to engage in that line of discussioh; and if I find that my time and strength will not permit me to 

do so, I shall ask the permission of the committee-to incorporate these 

suggestions in my printed remarks. 

There are two questions connected with our foreign relations as to which the popular judgment has come to absolute and positive 

conclusions: first, that our citizens, whether naturalized or native, 

shall have full and complete protection at home and abroad; second, 

that the Monroe doctrine, as it is called, shall be asserted and maintamed at every cost and hazard, even to the issue of the cannon's 

month . 

When the resolutions offered by my colleagues, [Mr. Cox and Mr. 

RoBINSON,] and referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs were under consideration upon the report of the committee, the gentieman 

in charge of the subject [Mr. ORTH] made some statements which were as surprising as they were unfounded. He held the closing 

hour, and he did not allow any reply whatever to be made to the 

allegations in which he indulged; and as the discussion upon this 

bill affords the only opportunity for such reply, I feel that I am justified, in fa-ct constrained, to forego what I intended to say in the strict 

line of business, and to attempt as best I may to reply to the propositions of the gentleman from Indiana. He said: 

The Democratic party had control of this Government for more than thirty 

years. They obtained and retained that control mainly by the votes of the natnr- iilized citizens of this country. It was that vote which ga.ve them power and which 

gives them power to-day. 

* * * * * * * During the thittY years they had the control of the Government, claiming to be 

especial friends ol the naturalized citizen, where is the law within the lids of our statute-book which the Democratic party ever placed there to protect him while 

visiting his native land 1 

He then proceeded to claim for the Republican party the credit of 

enacting in 1868 the provisions of law now known as sections 2000 

and :2001 of the Revised Statutes. It is weH that these provisions should be clearly understood by the Hou.se in order that discussion 

may be an intelligent one. I will therefore ask the Clerk to read 

them. 

The Clerk read as follows : 

SRc. 2000. All naturalized citizens of the United States, while in foreign coun- tries, are entitled to and shall receive from this Government the same protection of persons and property which is accorded to native-born citizens. 

SEc. 2001- Whenever it is made known to the President that any citizen of the 

United States has been unjustly deprived of his liberty by or tinder the authority of any forei!!D government, it shall be the duty of the President forthwith to demand of tha't government the reasons of snch imprisonment; and if it appears to be wrongful and in violation of the rights of American citizenship, the Pre ident 

shall forthwith demand the release of such citizen, and if the release so demanded 

is unrea onably delayed or refused, the President shall use such means, not amounting to acts of war, as he may think necessary and proper to obtain or effect- uate the release ; and aJl the facts and proceedings relative thereto shall, as soon as practicable, be communicated by the President to Congress. 

DKMOORACY THE ' FRIEND OF THE NATURALIZED CITIZEN. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. Now, Mr. Chairman, I pa by as unworthy of notic.e the allegation of the gentleman from Indiana 

that the Democratic party obtained power in this country by the 

votes of naturallzecl citizens.' If he had referred to the message of 

President Monroe which contains that declaration of policy known 
1882. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1557 

as the Monroe doctrine he would have found that Yr. Monroe, speak- ing the legislation of 18S8 as hls ·work,· and in declaring in th1s House 

ing of the growth of the country, says: · or elsewhereThat, like an eaale in a dovecote, I What Flutter'd your Volcians at Corioli : is more extraordinary, it is almost altogether native, for the emigration 

irom other countries has been inconsiderable. 

Now, certainly the Democrats were in power from the time of J efferson to the time of James Monroe; and it is quite certain, as there 

had been no considerable immigration up to that time, that this.power was not obtained by the votes of naturalized citizens. But I am perfectly willing to admit, and I take it to the credit of the Democratic 

party, that it ha-s received the steady support of the naturalized citi- zens of this country. They have had good reasons for giving this 

support. They know their friends; and they recognize the fact that 

the Democratic party is the only political organization to which in 

the past they could look for the assertion and maintenance of the 

rights of naturalized citizens. This reliance has never been and never will be misplaced. As I pointed out to the gentleman from Indiana in the question which he was good enough to allow me to ask 

him, the war of 1812 was undertaken by a Democratic administration, 

when the country was still feeble, for the express pnrpo e of resisting the claim of Great Britain to search our ships and remove our naturalized citizens from the protection of the American flag. The 

gentleman replied that the war of 1812 settled nothing; but I pointed 

to the fact that since that time no American ship had been subjected 

to ssarch, and no naturalized citizen had been deprived of his right 

to protection on the high seas. But I now go further and assert that the right of search wa-s abandoned in fact, and the practical right of expatriation acknowledged 

lly Great Britain at that time, so far as we were concerned, although 

it was not formulated into a specific law of the realm until 1870. 

But the treaty of Ghent, which concluded the war of 1812, contained an article which in fact conceded the doctrine of expatriation, but 

in a covert manner. We were strong enough to resist the claim of 

inalienable allegiance, butt we were not strong enough to compel its 

express abandonment in words. It was abandoned, nevertheless, 

by the third article of the treaty, which is as follows: 

.All prisoners of war taken on either side, as well by lmid as by sea, shall be 

restored as soon as practicable after the ratilication of this treaty. 

To show that this provision in fact abandoned the right of search and of perpetual allegiance, I now give the gentleman from Indiana an authority which he will not gainsay, one of the greatest of· living 

authorities, Lord Tenterden, who was a member of the joint high 

commission which framed the treaty of Washington. In his report on "naturalization and allegiance" which led to the adoption of the 

l aw of 1870, by which the right of expatriation was recognized and _affirmed in Great Britain, Lord Tenterden (then :Mr. Abbott) says: 

The further claim to punish as traitors British subjects found in arms against their native country was practically abandoned when the prisoners taken in the 

United States service were unconditionally exchanged in 1814 without having been brought to trial, as threatened. * * * 

It must De remembered that the theory of treason is the same in England and 

in the United States. * * .. The right of impressment having been given up, and the doctrine of treason thus modified by ~ractice, there does not now remam any claim which Great Britain need seek to mamtain upon the allegiance of British 

subjects emigrating to foreign countries. 

The war of1812 did then settle the question for which it was fou~ht, 

and from that day to this .American naturalized citizeni have nn.d 

equal protection under tke law with those of native birth. 

REPUBLICAN ATI'ITUDE IN 1868. 

How, then, came it to pass that a Republican Congress and aRepublican administration placed upon the statute-book the legislation 

of 1868 Y Was it a voluntary movement, or was it forced upon them 

by the general feeling of indignation which had been aroused in the 

country in consequence of their neglect to give due protection to 

American naturalized citize~ in foreign countries f I affirm, without the fear of contradiction, that it was a step reluctantly taken to sa.ve themselves from the consequences of indifference and neglect. 

Such legislation was not necessary, because Marcy and Webster had ~e a-sserted the true American doctrine; and up to 1867 there was no call for legislation placing upon the statute-book a declaration of 

the rights of citizenship which all parties acknowledge, and which 

had been asserted firmly and fearlessly, even to the issue of war, in 

the e.ses of the whole world. 

But in 1867, under a Republican administration, American citizens 

who had gone to Great Britain (whether for lawful or unlawful purposes it does not matter) were seized, brou~ht to trial, convicted, 

and put in prison. It was alleged that in tnese arrests, trials, and 

convictions the rights of our citizens were not properly asserted and 

protected, and that the administration had not shown sufficient zeal 

for the protection of the lawful rights of these citizens. 

SERVICES OF HON, W. E. ROBINSON. 

The excitement thus pl'odnced in the minds of our adopted citizens 

resulted in the election of Ron. WILLIAM E. ROBINSON to the Fortieth Congress, for the express purpose of securing such action on the 

part of the .Administration and such legislation from Congress as might be necessary for the protection of our naturalized citizens resident or traveling in foreign lands. And this legislation he succeeded 

in securing; and a-fter carefully examining the steps by which it was semued I am !Jrepared to say that he is fully justified jn claimAlone I di<i. it. 

He claims no more than his just due when he asserts that prior to 

this legislation the feudal doctrine of perpetual alle~iance, which is a doctrine of political servitude, had not been abanaoned, except as the result of the war of 1812, by any leading European·nation, but 

after our legislation of 1868 it was e:>...rpressly abandoned by all of 

them; so that in fact the rights of our natura:ijzed citizens were as fully recognized by the civilized world as our duty to protect them 

had been-asserted in the war of 1812. 

In securin~ this legislation there is a atriking similarity between 

the scenes of disorder which we have recently witnessed, whenever 

my colleague from Brooklyn has taken the floor, and the occurrences of the Fortieth Congress. That Congress assembled in extra session on the 4th of March. On the 7th of March Mr. RoBINSO~ in trounced 

the familiar resolution of inquiry, calling upon the President for infol'lll.ation as to American citizens held under arrest in Ireland. 

On the 20th March Secretary Seward sends a lett~r refusin~ to 

furnish the correspondence on the ground thu.t its publication nnght 

be detrimental to the public interests. Congress then took a recess until the 3d of July, and on the lOth Mr. ROBINSON again renewed 

the subject in a resolution instruct.ing t.he Committee on Foreign 

Affairs to report immediately whether American citizens had been 

arresten, tried, and convicted or sentenced for wol'ds spoken or acts 

done in the Unite!! States. Again there was a scene, but the motion was carried. . On the 20th of July the State Department stated to the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs that it had no such infor.mation. On 

the same day Congress took a recess until the 21st November, and 

upon that day Mr. ROBINSON offered a resolution of impeaclunent 

against our minister to England, and made a speech in w hi~h he outlined the measures of legislation which were subsequently adopted. 

But at that time there was a sceno as usual, and no action. 

On the 2d December, on the very opening of the second session, 

Mr. RoBINSO~ got the floor, and for an hour pressed his views, amid 

great opposition and excitement, upon the attention of t he Honse. 

Up to this time he had stood alone in advocating the right of expatriation, but on this occasion Mr. Judd, of Illinois, came to his support in an able speech, and the resolutions of Mr. ROBINSO~ were referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, of which happily he was a member. 

Then followed a series. of vast public meetings over the whole 

country, in which the principles of Mr. ROB~SON'S resolutions were indorsed, the result of which was that Congress was flooded with 

petitions and resolutions, showing that the country was thoroughly 

aroused on this question, so vital to the independence of the Republic. 

Nearly every member of the House was suddenly waked up to the 

magnitude of the question, so that in the course of a month a dozen or more bills and resolutions were introduced declaring for the right 

of expatriation and for the protection of our naturalized citizens. 

On the 27th of January, 1868, Mr. Banks, chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, reported a bill providing for reprisals as a remedy for the unjust arrest of our citizens. There is a change ! The 

first report was a bill for reprisals. This bill was most elabomtely 

discussed, all the leading members of the House taking part in the discussion. Meanwhile, the State Department relented and sent in the 

correspondence, filling now two bulky printed volumes. On the 18th 

of February the House passed, under suspension of the rules, in five 

minutes, a bill appropriating $50,000 for the relief of our citizens imprisoned abroad. The vote was 114 to 29, the negative votes being, 

with one exception, all cast by Republicans. On the lOth of :March 

Mr. Banks reported an amended bill, which, after much discussion, was :finally passed on the 20th of April, with only four votes in the 

negative, all Republicans. I have not time to follow the elaborate 

discussion which took place in the Senat-e, but the bill, with amendments, was finally passed by a vote of 39 yeas to 5 nays, the latter 

all Republicans. The House concurred in the amendments, and the 

act was approved by the ·President on the 27th of July, 1868, a day 

which witnessed a declaration of rights scarcely less important to 

the freedom of the world than the Declaration of Independence. 

This was the work of my colleague, WILLIAM E. RoBL~so~, and 

there is no man, not even a Republican, who can justly contest his 

claim to the credit of this great measure of j ustke and natural right. 

~!~~=:~u~e~d. The passage of this bill was followed by treaties in 1870 with Great 

Britain, France, Prussia, and other countries, recognizing the right 

of expatriation; so that now and henceforth international law recognizes no difference between native-born and naturalized citizens. 

It has been necessary to recite the history of the passage of this 

bill at such length in order to refute the claim of the gentleman from 

Indiana, that the legislation of 1868 was due to the Republican party 

and is to be credited to their record. !twas, in fact1 not a party mea- sure, and the best men on both sides contributed to Its success; but so far as it was opposed, it was opposed only by Republicans. It owed 

its final triumph solely to the courage and pel'sistence, in order and 

out of order-and generally the latter-of my ever-genial but some- times rather impetuous colleague. [Laughter.] 
l558 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE. MARCH 2, 

DOMICILE AND PROTECTION. 

Having thus disposed of the historical errors of my friend from Indiana,. I now take issue with some of the doctrines of his speech. I 

think that he does not concede sufficient strength to the claim which 

domicile, wi'thont actual naturalization, ~ives to the protection of 

the Government. I understand the position in the Martin-Koszta case to go much further than I infer from his speech he is willing to 

concede. He was pleased to speak contemptuously of Governor Marcy as. the exponent of the Bourbon era of American politics; but I should 

like to know whether he disavows the position of Marcy as to the 

rights acquired by domicile. . I ask to have read from the desk the passage I have marked in the 

dispatch of Mr. Marcy in regard to the Koszta case so far as it relates 

to domicile. The position there taken is a very important one, and 

very much in advance of any position which seems to be at present 

maintained. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

lfr. H ulsemaun, as the undersigned believes, falls into a great error, an error fatal to some of his most important conclusions, by assuming that a nation can properly 

extend its protection only to native-born or naturalized citizens. This is not the 

doctrine of international law, nor is the practice of nations circumscribed within 

such narrow limits. This law does not, as has been before remarked, complicate 

questions of this nature by respect for municipal codes. In relation to this subject 

it has clear and distinct rules of its own. It gives the national character of the 

countr:v, not only t~ native-born and naturalized citizens, but to all residents in it 

who are there with, or even without, an intention to become citizens, provided they 

have a domicile therein. Foreigners may, and often do, acquire a domicile in a. country, even though they have E~ntered it with the avowed int~ntion not t~ become 

naturalized citizens, but to return to their native land at some remote and uncer- tain period; and whenever they acquire a domicile, international law at once impresses upon them the national character of the country of that domicile. It is a maxim of international law that <lomicile confers a national character; it does not aJlo:w any one who has a domicile to decline the national character thus conferred ; it forces it upon him, often very much against his will and to his great detriment. 

International law looks only to the national character in determining_ what country 

has the right to protect. If a person goes from this country abroad, with the na. tionality of the Unit~d States, this law enjoins upon other nations to respect him, 

in regard to protection, as an American citizen. It concedes to every country the 

right to protect any and all who may be clothed with its nationality. 

1\ir. HEWITT, of New York. For one, I am not willing to yield one particle of the doctrine which was thus announced by Governor 

Marcy in regard to the right of domicile, even. when it is not claimed 

for naturalized citizens or persons who have declared their intention 

to become citizens. I hold with Governor Marcy that the right of 

domicile, without such decla,ration of intention, secures a right in 

certain cases to the protection of this Government. 

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS. 

Now i.f the doctrine thus enunciated by Marcy be Bourbonism, the 

gentleman from Indiana must study a different kind of lexicon from 

t.he one I am in the habit of consulting for my political definitions. 

But I must go a step further and take issue with some of the con- clusions which my friend from Indiana draws from what I cheerfully 

concede to be well-settled principles. He says: 

When American citizens go to a foreign state or nation they are amenable to t,he laws of that nation to the same extent as the citizens of that nation themselves; but in case they are charged with an infraction of the laws of another na- tion they are entitled to the same course of procedure and to the P.ame mode of 

trial in all respects as the citizens belonging to that nation ; and it is equally clear 

when that principle is departed from, when one principle of action is applied to the stranger and ~ different one to their citizens, this Government then has a. right, and it is its ctuty, to interfere and claim for its citizens that they shall be 

treated no more harshly and in no different manner than that in which snob foreign government treats its own citizens. 

As a general proposition this statement is correct, hut in practice 

there are and must be many exceptions to its application. For ex- ample, for many hundreds of years, from the time of Edward ill to 

the year 1868, a foreigner ilJ_ England was entitled to a jury de rnedie- tate lingure, to which no native citizen had a right. And again in 

oriental countries we should protest very vigorously if our citizens were subjected to local laws;· :tnd we have established consular courts, 

for which the bill under consideration makes provision, and secured 

by treaty the right to try our own citizens according to our own laws. 

In. other words, the doctrine of extra-terTitoriality is a substantive 

right under ,some circumstances. But no such privilege exists in 

regard to Great Britain. 4Dd yet it seems to me that even there 

there is a limit to the doctrine of absolute conformity to municipal 

law laid down by the gentleman from Indiana. 

The laws of Great Britain and of the United States have much in common. They spring from the same great fountain and our system 

of jurisprudence .is substantially that of the mother country, whose 

colonies we were. Among the rights dearest to both nations and to 

all English-speaking people is the writ of habf!as em-pus. It may be 

suspended under certain circumstances in both countries, but it can only be suspended by law especially enacted for the purpose in cer- tain contingencies and within certain limits of time and place. Now 

it seems to me that when the right to this writ is suspended and the 

citizens of the United States are thrown into prison and denied a speedy trial, there does arise a grievance which demands the interference of the Government. It seems to me that we have a right to 

a.sk that as to our citizens there shall be a speedy trial or a release 

from imprisonment; otherwise an innocent man may be left to 1·ot 

in jaB and the protecting arm of his government paralyzed by an act which is unusual, abnormal, and contrary to the spirit of the law 

under which both nations live and move and have their being. I do 

not think it unreasonable that under snch circumstances the actual 

facts should be investigated promptly and thoroughly by our Govern-· ment, and in the absence of a speedy trial that the release of 6ur citizenr, 

shall be demanded, unless a conclusive prim,a facie case is made out 

against them on the facts as developed by such investigation. I would 

be the last man to embana-ss a forei~ government in a crisis of its f~e 

by unreasonable demands, but I will never consent to any doctrine, or the application of any principle, which shall abandon an .American 

citizen to the tender mercies of a foreign government which suspends 

that great muniment of personal liberty, t.he writ of habea.s corpus, 

secured hy so much precious Anglo-Saxon blood and so dear to every 

lover of freedom. If my friend from Indiana has correctly statetl tho 

Republican view of this principle, then I do not wonder that the naturalized citizen "'ho has :fled from political oppression support and 

will continue to support the Democratic party. 

RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL. 

Now let me quote a recent letter of our minister in London in reply 

to an application from OID' consal at Cork asking his intervention 

in behalf of American citizens thus lying in jail in Ireland, and who 

have been lying there for months untried: 

The "coercion act " so called, is an exceptional and arbitrary measure. It.\1 

chief object is to enable the authorities to arrest persons whom they suspect of 

illegal conduct without being obliged to produce any proof of their guilt. Its very 

substance and main purpose are to deprive suspected persons of the speedy trial 

they desire. This law is of course contrary to the spirit and foundation principles of both English and American jurisprudence. But it is the law of the land, 

and it controls all persons domiciled in the proclaimed districts of Ireland, whether 

they are British subjects or not; and it is manifestly futile to claim that naturalized citizens of the United States should be excepted from its operation. 

Unless I am instructed to the contrary by the Department of State, I must take 

this view of my duties, and it is proper you should give this intimation to thepar- ties interested. 

.T. R. LOWELL. 

Now that is a doctrine to which I cannot subscribe. I reassert 

that it is the duty of this Government to require of the British Government that these American citizens shall either be put to trial, con- victed if they are guilty, and punished if convicted, or el e that they 

shall be released. It is not reasonable that an American citizen who 

may be as innocent as any gentleman in this House, going to h'eland on lawful business or for his pleasure, shall be taken by the throat, 

carried to p1ison and kept there to rot, because the writ of ltabeas 

em-pus happens to be suspended. 

And I am told that in answer to a request made by the Committee on·Foreign .Affairs for information as to two citizens in June and 

July last, the demand for information having been forwarded to 

London, that no reply has yet been received. Will this House justify such delay in the case of an American citizen who has the right 

to claim the prot.ection of his country f I answer no; and I hope the 

Department of State will at once, if it has not already done so, send 

to 1\Ir. ·Lowell the instructions without which he declares that he 

must decline to intervene in behalf of our fellow-citizens i:o whom a speedy trial is refused. EXPATRIATION. 

Before I leave this branch of my subject, and in order to give it a practical application, let me say that the neglect of Congress to define 

how the doctrine of expatriation, which it has announced with so much 

emphasis, is to be canied into effect when an American citizen wishes 

to expatriate himself, is not at all creditable to its sense of duty. So 

early as 1869, after the pa.ssage of our declaratory laws, the British 

Parliament enacted the statute entitled " the naturalization act of 

1870," iu which it is provided thatAny British snbject who has at any time before, or may at any time after the pa~s~$ of this act, when in any foreign sta~~,,and not under any disability, vol· 

untariJ.y become naturalized in such state, sna.u, from and after the time of hls so having become naturalized in such forei~ stat-e, be deemed to have ceased to be a British subject and be regarded as an alien. 

Now we have no such provision for expatriation, and the result is 

that many questions of a very emban sing nature have :nisen ill 

regard to this subject President Grant called the attention of Congress to this subject in his annual message at the first session of the 

Forty-third Congres , in the following emphatic language, which I 

commend to the attention of the Committee on Foreign Affair as in 

need of pressing attention: 

Until the year 1868 it was left embarrassed by conflicting opinions of courts and 

jurists to determine how far the doctrine of allegiance derived from our former 

colonial relations with Great Britain was applicable to American citizens. Congress then wisely swept these doubts away by enacting that "any declaration, instruction, opinion, order, or decision of any officer of this Government which denies, restricts, impairs, or questions the right of eX}latria.tion is inconsistent with 

the fundamental principles of this Government." "But Congress did not indicate 

in that statute, nor has it since done so1 what acts are deemed to work ex:patria· tion. For my own guidance in determinmg such q_nestions I required (under the 

provisions of the Constitution) the opinion in wnting of the principal officer in 

each of the Execnti~e Departments upon certain questions relating to this subject. The result satisfies me that further le.,.isla.tion has become necessary. I therefore commend the subject to the carer;:a consideration of Con~e , and I transmit herewith copies of the several opinions of the principal officers of the 

Executive Departments, together with other correRpondence and pertinent information on the same subject. The United States, who led the way in the overthrow 

of the feudal doctrine of perpetual allegiance. are among the last to indicate how 

their own citizens may elect another nationality. 

President GFant then renews very earnestly the recommendation 

that immediate action should be taken to save the Government from 

the embarrassmm;~.t of this question. Nothing has ever been done in 

this direction. The Foreign .Affairs Committee of the 1!-.orty-third 

Congress, of which, if I am riot mistaken, my friend from Indiana. 
1882. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1559 

[.Mr. Ounr] was chairman, never took any action. These gentlemen 

who claim so much for the Republican party (and I will concede 

every item of the claim which is just-I am glad to welcome their 

efforts for the protection of naturalized American citizens) never se- cured any legislation upon this recommendation, though the volume 

which I hold in my hand is made up of opinions of Cabinet officers, 

all agreiJing that such legislation was absolutely necessary. 

As th·~matternow stands, those of ourforeign-borncitizenswho by 

treaty ?tre limited to two years' residence in the land of their birth un- der the penalty of forfeiting their claim to protection as American citi- zens h1we just reason to complain of the discrimination against them; 

and this inequality presses with peculiar severity upon our citizens 

of German birth. We owe it to them and to our own safetyto have one miiform rule of expatriation, applicable, as is the British rule, 

to all tJuuntries alike; and if the Committee on Foreign Affairs will 

mature and report such a measure, I think it will receive a hearty 

support on this side of the House. 

THE M0$0E DOCTRINE. 

Upon the other branch of the subject to which I referred, the as- sertion of the Monroe doctrine, I have listened with very great interest to my friend from Tennessee [Mr. WmTTHORNE] who has 

given in his adhesion to n. doctrine much more advanced than any 

that wa-s ever propounded by President Monroe, or by any President 

who has occupied the Executive office since his day, or by any Secretary of State who has preceded the late Secretary of State. It is 

important to the destinies of the United States that what is known as the Monroe doctrine should be properly defined, asserted, and 

maintained. 

The gentleman from Indiana may possibly have had reference to 

these novel claims when he characterized Mr. Marcy as a relic of 

Bourbonism; for Mr. Marcy never for one moment denied that European nations had, and might continue to have, commercial interests on the western continent which they might justly protect, and which 

would entitle them to the use upon equal terms of any intercommunication which might be established across the Isthmus of Panama 

between the two great oceans. Neither did he ever reject the idea 

that treaties guaranteeing the neutrality of such avenues of commu- nication might properly be made by the maritime powers of the 

world, with the nation through whose territory such communication 

might be constructed. Such guarantee surely can only strengthen 

the full use upon equal terms to all the world, which the very nature 

of the enterprise suggests and demands. 

So far as I understand the Monroe doctrine, it does not reject the 

willing co-operation of European nations in assuri,ng the neutrality 

of the proposed Isthmus transit, but it relates rather to the acquirement of new or ad(litional political jurisdiction on the Ame1·ican con- tinent, or to the assumption of any protectorate over or in behalf of 

any existing politicail power on this continent. Mr. Monroe's statement limits his opposition to further European colonization on this 

continent, and ngainst any attempts of the allied powers to extend 

their system to any portion of this continent. But to extend this 

doctrine to the denial of the right to guarantee neutrality, and to reserve the right of such guarantee to ourselves alone, is certainly a novel departure, and one which, if approved and sustained by Congress, will tend to isolate this country and its commercial interests 

from the rest of the world. Such isolation would not accomplish the 

results at which my friend from Tennessee aims in extending the area of American commerce. It would simply restrict it to the territory which we now occupy, and which wemaytakeunderourcontrol or into our possession whenever it may suit us to do so. I do not think that we are prepared for such isolation. On the 

contrary, while we will not tolerate or permit European int.erference 

either with our internal affairs or any intervention which will impair 

the sovereignty or autonomy of our neighbors, we should be ready 

now, as of old, to accept their assurance that they will recognize 

and confirm the guarantee which we have made with the Colombian 

Government that the great Isthmus highways of commerce shall be 

and remain forever free to all comers for legitimate commercial purposes, but. not for warlike operations. That the control of these highways should be in our hands, so far as this continent is concerned, 

is just as reasonable as that the control of the Suez Canal should be 

in the hands of European powers. But the Monroe doctrine does 

not apply to commercial interests. It is political in nature, and in 

its political application to the non-interference of European nations 

in the politics of the American continent, it is to be asserted and 

maintained at all hazard and at any cost. 

In conclusion let me reproduce the language of Mr. Monroe. A 

great deal is said about it, bot it seems to me thatveryfewpersous can have read it. In his message to Congress in 1823, in which what 

is known as the Monroe doctrine was announced, Mr. Monroe said : 

'The political system of the allied powers is essentially different in this respect 

from that of America.. This difterenoe proceeds from that which exists in their 

respective governments. And to the defense of our own, which has been achieved 

by the loss of so much blood a.nd treasure, and matured by the wisdom of their most enlightened citizens, and under which we have en,joyed unexampled felicity the whole nation is devoted. We owe it, therefore, to candor and to the amicable 

relations existin11: between the United States and those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of 

this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered and shall not interfere, but with the governments who have declared their independence and maintained it, and whose independence we have on ~eat 'consideration and on .just principles acknowledged, we could not view any mterposition for the purpose of 

oppressing them or controlling in any other manner their destiny~ a Euro~n 

~;;~d~:UJJ:!drsff~!.than as the manifesta.tiou of an unfrien y disposition 

That is the Monroe doctrine. From the doctrine thus announced we have never departed, nor did we fail to assert it when France, taking advantage of our embarrassments in the throes of a civil war, 

undertook to set up an imperial government in Mexico. We shall 

maintain this doctrine at all cost and every hazard, but we shall never permit it to be used as the cloak for speculative enterprises, or as the covert means of gratifying personal ambition. 

It is always to be borne in mind that while the Monroe doctrine 

expressly denies the right of European nations to acquire any new or additional jurisdiction on the western continent, it makes no limitation whatever as to the right of the United States to acquire new territory or continental jurisdiction. As a matter of fact, we have 

acquired Texas, California, and other portions of Mexico since his 

day. Any limitation, therefore, to such acquisitions is a violation of 

the spirit of the Monroe doctrine, and if at any time, as I think is the case in what is known as the Clayton-Bulwer treaty, we have limited 

this right of acquisition and extension, we have departed from the 

ways of the fathers, and should retrace our steps, taking care, however, to protect our honor while we protect our interests, by conducting the negotiation for the unavoidable abrogation of the treaty, with a proper regard to the rights and sensibilities of the contracting parties. The other side shoulq be made to see that it is not possible to 

put limits to the enterprise of a free people.whose very principle of 

government involves the possibility of indefinite expansion, and may 

demand it in the inter.ests of progress and humanity. 

THE DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR BILL. 

To the diplomatic and consular bill as reported by he committee 

I do not propose to take any exception. The appropriations are mainly 

in accordance with the requirments of law, and any criticism which 

I might deem it my duty to offer will be directed rather to the law 

under which these appropriations are made, t.han to the a.ppropriaf,ions themselves. The laws relating to the commerce of the country 

and to its diplomatic and consular service are the growth af a cen- tury, during which time they have been patched to meet particular 

exigencies aud have neverreceivedathorough and intelligent revision, such as has been given from time to time to the commercial 

legislation of England and France. The present time is peculiarly 

appropriate for the consideration of this question. We have peace 

within our borders, and there are no disturbing causes which are likely to produce dissension. 

The political r econstruction of the southern part of the Union is now complete-the attention of the country is fully drawn to the 

great resources of thJtt portion of the Union, and the work of development already inaugurated will surely be prosecuted until these resources in minerals, and in the great staples of commerce, will be 

fully exploited and converted into national wealth. We no longer 

lack capital or machinery, or intelligent views as to the possibilities 

of our industrial future, we only need to remove the artificial obstructions, which have been raised by legislation in order to enter 

upon a c::t.reer of progress which shall outdo anything which has 

been witnessed in any country or in any age. These obstructions are of two kinds ; first, those imposed by the fiscal legislation of the 

country, and secondly, those of an administrative nature in the imposition of taxes for raising revenue for the support of government. 

It is with the latter class that I propose to deal to-day, reserving 

what I have to say in reganl to the tariff and its provisions hereafter, when the bill creatin~ a commlssion for the revision of tho 

tariff shall come op for consideration. 

Yet I may say now that as each appropriation bill comes up for 

consideration I shall endeavor to point out the administrative re- forms which may be made with advantage to the trade and industry 

of the country, in the hope either by independent legislation or by 

such provisions attached to the appropriation bills as may be proper. 

the reforms may be effected. In what I shall say to-day I hope to 

have the sympathy and co-operation of the committee who have re- ported this bill, and whose attention was not specially directed to 

the abuses which I think should be reformed. 

CONSULAR SYSTE?tl SUPPORTED BY TAXATION. 

In the report which accompanies the bill the committee very highly 

commends the consular system of the United States, and congratulates the House upon the fact that it is self-su taining and contributes 

very largely to the prevention of fraud on the importation of goods. 

It is stated that theReceipts by fees paid into the Treasury of the United States amount annually to from $75,000 to $100,000 more than the entire expenses of the consular system, so that in the mere money view of it tho r-e ult is extremely sa.$factory. 

The exact fact as shown by the report of the Fifth Auditor on pagoo 

3 and 4 is that the receipts were 873,229.67 and the expenses wero 

$847,986.0'2,makingtheexcessofreceiptsoverexpenditures$25,243.65. 

The receipts were from two sources: fees received for official services 

$843,066.36, and for the extra wages of seamen discharged in foreigy.. 

ports 30,163.31. The proper statement is, therefore, that the com- merce of the country was taxed for fees collected to an amount sufficient to pay all the expenses of the consular system, which is no more self-sustaining than any other department of the Government, 
1560 ~ONGRE~SIONAL . REQORD-HOUSE. 

which is also maintained by taxes levied upon the general business 

ef the country through custom-house and internal-revenue agencies. 

In other words, there is no distinction to be made in favor of the ~onsular system by reason of the fact that special taxes are levied 

for its support. The only question to be considered is how far this 

taxation is necessary, and how far any portion of the consular system 

is useless or injurious to the general business of the country. 

CONSULAR FUNCTIONS. 

Consuls are of two kinds, those who attend to commercial business 

in the ports and those who attend to custom-house busfuess in interior towns. The latter are not consuls in the proper sense of the 

term; they are Treasury a~ents to whom the name of consul is given 

because they serve in foreign countries, but they have none of the 

ordinary functions and duties of consuls to perform. The proper 

duty of a consul, and the only duties which the consuls of other com- mercial nations perform, is to attend to the shipping and see to the 

sailors who may come into the ports where consuls are stationed. 

They are there for the protection of our maritime rights and the 

rights of our citizens in foreign ports. Upon this class of consuls, 

however, has been devolved commercial duties pertaining to invoices 

of goods, and to the extent that this work is done by consuls staticmed in ports of entry, they also are Treasury agents doing work 

which has no necessary connection with the maritime business of the 

country. These Treasury agents are now stationed in nearly all the 

industrial centers of foreign countries, where their chief duty is to 

verify invoices in triplicate, and to ~ive consular certificates that the 

true value of the goods is stated m the invoices. These consuls were unknown to our system, as they are to the consular systems of 

other commercial nations. until the exigencies of the war of the re- bellion required us to establish the present tariff of high duties upon 

foreign goods, and as a consequence to introduce the ad valorem system more largely in the schedules than would otherwise have been possible or desirable. These Treasury consuls came into existence under 

the act of 1864, and the theory under whi,ch they were created was undoubtedly sound. COXSULAR CERTIFICATES. 

The idea was that they would make themselves familiar with the 

market value of goods shipped io the United States, certify to it in 

each case, and thus prevent fraud upon the customs, but as a matter 

of fact the syste~ has been a total failure. It is not possible, where 

the business is large, for the consul to make himself familiar with 

the fluctuations in value; and inasmuch as nearly all our imports come in steamers, a very rapid handling of goods is require<l, so that the invoices are usually brought into the consul's office on the 

day before the sailing of the steamer, and the pressure is so great that 

he can do no more than affix seals and sign his name in order to re- turn the ~nvoice in time to catch the mail, without making any investigation whatever as to value. In fa.ct, in London and Paris, 

where I have personally inspected the operation, it is not an uncom- mon thing to find a long line of merchants with consular invoices awaitin~ signature, which cannot be procured in time for the mail, 

and dorm~ my last visit to Loudon I was especially requested to call 

the attentiOn of the Treasury to this matter, in order that the inconvenience and annoyance of delay might be avoided. I am glad to 

say that the new consul at London, General Merritt, has promised, 

and doubtless will adopt, some measures to remedy these just com- plaints. But, aside from delay, the fact is that the subject of value 

is entirely and necessarily overleoked, and the officers of the customs on our side do not regard the consular certificates as of any practical value. When the Jay commission wassittingin NewYorkthis 

matter was fully discussed, and Colonel Burt, who is now the naval 

officer of the port of New York, made a serias of recommendations, 

the :first of which is as follows: 

The repeal of all laws requiring consular certificates and invoices-they are absolutely useless. No attention is given by consuls to the accuracy of invoices 

either a.s to naked market price or to discounts and charges. Apart from the simplification of business, consulships would only be necessary at the principal sea- ports. 

I have since communicated with Colonel Burt in order to learn 

whether his opinions on this subject have been changed; but he re- affirms them, and his opinion is confirmed by that of every officer of 

the customs I have consulted. · It will be remembered that tke Jay commission, as it was called, 

investigated the New York custom-house, and the merchants ofNew 

York had a hearing before it, in which they pointed out the reforms 

which the Chamber of Commerce had requested them to recommend. 

They submitted their views in writing, which will be foundonpages 

10 and 11 of the pamphlet published by the Chamber of Commerce, 

from which I make the following extract: 

m. THE ABOLITION OF TRIPLICATE IXVOICES. 

'.rhe committet suggest the abo~tion of the 1l,resent system of triplicate invoices as provided for in section 2853 of the R-evised Statutes. ~his sys~m <!f trip_lic~t.e ~voi<;es was originated by the act of March 3, 186.3, 

pnor to whroh time tr1plicate 1nvmces had ne>er been required. 'I'he system wa.s meant to be an improvement on the act of March 1, 1823, which necessitated simply the production by the importer of a single invoice. 

Triplicate invoices are a source of expense, because under existing laws at least 

f<?ur copies must be made-three for the Government and one for the merchant 

himself; and each copy must be written out by itself, no pre..~s copies be in.., allowed. 

Triplicates a:e _also a source of de~y in shippmg goods. This is emphatically true under .the eDstmg custom of ordermg goods by cable, on the eve of the sailmg.of a particular steamer, where there is oft~n not time enough to multiply invoices in 

offices. empl?ying but a limited clerical force. Merchants complain that the secrets ?f theiT busmess are often exposed, the one of the triplicates filed for preservation m the consular office being usually accessible to rivals in business. _ 

IV. THE ABOLITION OF CONSULAR CERTIFICATES. 

Triplicate invoices and consular certificates, being parts of the same system ·sh?uld be treated toge!Jler. The C?Ommittee propose the abolition of triplicate in: 

vOices, also of the .foreign declaration to accompany one of the triplicates. also of 

the consular certificat-e, all provided for in sections 2853 to 2855 of the Revised 

Statutes. 

Consular certificates on all invoices were not required prior to tho act of July 

14, 1862. T~at.act ~as r~pealed by the act of ~reb 3, 1863, which originat-ed the ~ystem of triplicate mvm.ces. The theory of this system is perhaps a good one. It ~ that.a consul becomes an agent of the Government to collect information rela.tmg to Im}?orts, and t-o collect sampl~s of all goods shipped to the United States, and ~at he~ make ~selfanauthorityuponmarketvalues, and will so familiarize 

himself With the pnces of goods, br a comparison of invoices and otherwise a..~ to ma.k~ himself a skille!l instrume~t m detecting and preventing fmuds. ' 

It IB generally admitted that this system, however good in theory is practically a failure. Consuls do not become experts in value, nor do they re'gularly colleet 

and forward samples, nor are they efficient instrument.~ in diSco>~rin(J' frauds· even the revenue officials themselves paying but little att.ention to the s~tement~ of consuls, and rarely giving to their certificates any consider.atio~. It is not too much. to say ~hat every im~orter .can from his own e:ll.-perience furnish instances 

sho:wm£ ~~ Igno?Doe and meffi.c1enc:y of consuls touohing the revenue laws arid 

m~~:a~: ~trti:fsnid!3.letters received by the conunittee containing numerous 

Two complaints are made against tllis system, namely: the expense to the mer- chant, and the delay. The expense is now a larger it-em than it was formerly when 

there were less facilities for ordering goods, and when invoices were less frequent and of larger amounts. The statute, section 2851, authorizes a fee of $2.50 for a certificate, and that amount is usu~y increased _by another dollar, by local usa.ges. pelays, how.ever.. are a more senous complamt. Before merchandise can be 

shipped three mvorces must be made out for the consul, and his certificate mnst be 

obtamed. If for any reason he is absent from his post, or if his office hours are eit.h:er very sh?rt o~ are. not strictly obs~rved, the merchant may lose the oppor- tunity of makin~ his shipment ?n ~ certam day. The tel~raph has revolutiomzed 

the system of domg busmess Within the last few years. l.ustea.d of larae im porta- tiona made at the oeginning of each season, frequent and small orders a~e now sent by cable, often with reference to the sailin~ of particular st.eamers. Into the mer- chant's calculations as to whether his gooa.s will be shipped, there enters, under 

the present syste~ of triplicates and consular certificates, the uncertain quantity i!t!~e length of trme that may be required to pass his invoices through the consu-

~he .power to detain invoic~ is another serious objection to the .present s;ystem. It IB g~ven to consuls by section 2862 of the R-evised Statutes. This discretionary 

power is sometimes abused, causing expense and vexatious delays to merchants 

without any adequate benefit to the revenue. Our C<?mmittee reconuneud that the entire system of triplicates, declarations 

and ce:tfficates be abolished, and that the substantial provisiollll of the act of 1823 be reVIved. Under that act entry was made on an invoice verified by the owner of the goods, s~ch verifica:tion being made in this country if the owner was here, or be~ore a for~1gn consul if the owner was abroad. The substantial requirement was sunply this: that entry should be made on a sworn invoice verified by the 

actual owner of the goods, wherever he might be. ' 

HOME APPRAIBEMENT. 

It thus appears that the judgment of the customs officers is con- firmed by the opinion of the leading merchants who handle the foreign busine_ss of this coun~ry. But t~e d.ifJ?.culty does not stop here; 

the law as 1t stands proVIdes two things m regard to the invoices: 

first, the market value at the time of procurement or manufacture ; 

and second, the market value at the place of such procurement or manufa-cture. And then the law provides two other things with ref- erence~ the entry a.~ the custom-house : first, the market value at ~he perw?- o~ exportation; a;nd second, the market value at such period m the prmCiple markets of the country of exportation. Now these 

two values are often very different, and the merchant is left to choose 

between them, and if by any chaime the difference is more than 10 

per cent. his goods are liable to forfeiture and he 'is liable to fine. 

This question of dutiable value, which is thus complicated by two 

sets of rules governing the shipment of goods, would be embarrassing enough, but it is coupled with another provision of the law that 

the goods when they arrive shall be appraised at the cust,om-house 

and the ju~~ent of the appra~ser is final unless appealed from: 

After proVIding elaborate machinery abroad for the determination 

of value, the J?~Chinery costing at least $500,000 a year, and which 

all the authonties agree upon as useless, another organization of ma- chinery is provided at home in the custom-house, also at a cost ex- ceedino- half a million of dollars a year, for the determination of the 

dutiabie value which the consuls are supposed to know and verify. 

I h~ve not time to describe the extent ai;J.d ramifications of the ap- pra~er'_s department ofthe New: York_custom-house, but it occupies a buildmg nearly as large as this Capitol, and is filled with as rna~ 

acnve and contradictory individuals. 

.PRACTICE OF OTHER CO:IIMERCIAL NATIONS. 

Moreover, we are the only commercial people in the world whorequire triplicate invoices and consular certificates. In the customhouses of Great Britain and France they are entirely unknown. All 

that is required at th~ hands of the importer, is to furnish the government with a descriptive list of the goods imported and proof of 

ownership, which it receives, and takes upon itself the examination 

of the goods, and the making out of a bill of duties, which the importer pays and receives an order for his merchandise. Neither are invoices or bills of lading indispensable; nor are oaths on bonds re- quired, and there are no fees or charges except in the use of stamp 

paper, costing two cents a sheet. This is the French system. In 

Great Brita:in all that is required is to submit a formal entry, which 

must contam the particulars corresponding with the description of 

the goods and packages given in the report of the ship, with a memo· random of the duties which may be payable upon the go111ds men· 
1882. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1561 

tioned in the entry, which, when paid, is to be signed by the collector or his deputy and transmitted to the proper authority, who 

will deliver the goods. Neither invoices nor bills of lading are essen- tial, but these with other papers can be demanded by tb.e government if fraud is suspected. No consular certificates, however, are required in any case. There are some customs fees, but neither bonds nor oaths are required. When goods are incorrectly described to the 

prejudice of the treasury, they are forfeited, with the penalty of £100. 

The only countries in the world besides the United States who 

require consular invoices are the Hawaiian Islands, Mexico, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, Venezuela, and Golombia, all nations witheut any considerable commerce, and who have blindly followed our legislation because it makes possible the collection of fees appropriated to the maintenance of a feeble consular system, which in their oase might otherwise be abandoned. 

REFORM }i'REDED. 

If I am correct in my views in regard to the inutility of triplicate 

invoices and consular certificates, and these views are confirmed by 

every known authority, then the tax imposed for this purpose is an absolute obstruction to commerce, a,nd an unnecessary charge upon 

the consumer, who has to repay to the importer all the expenses, governmental or otherwise, which adhere to the delivery of the goods. 

The only effect of maintaining this system of Treasury consuls is 

to provide places at the expense of the tax-payer for ala.rgenumber 

of officials, who, finding it impossible to earn a living at home, are thus provided with positions abroad at the expense of the tax-payers. 

I estimate that about one-third of the whole expense of the consular 

system is incurred for these Treasury consuls who do not reside at 

ports of entry. They are as useless as a fifth wheel to a coa.ch, and 

should be discontinued. The sa.ving will be about three hundred 

thousand dollars a year to the tax-payer, and the Government will 

be relieved of a large number of useless placemen. 

How is this reform to be br011.ght about 7 When I discussed this 

subject in the Forty~ftfth Congress I recommended tha.t the Committee on Foreign Affairs should bring in a bill repealing so much of the 

Revised Statutes as provides for triplicate invoices, consular oaths, 

and themaintena.nceofthese consuls, whose sole business is to receive 

ancl verify these documents. No such legislation has been brought 

forwa.rd. I am not in favor of this kind of legislation on appropria.-

tion bills, but reflection has brought me to the conclusion that if 

permissive a.uthority be given to the Secretary of the Treasury in his 

discretion to dispense with these invoices and certificates, and with 

the consuls who do no ot.her business but to verify them, the reform 

might be tentatively undertaken. This was the system pursued in 

regard to consular fees, to which I shall advert hereafter. A re- quest was made to the President t0 revise them and the revision has 

already resulted in a large reduction in the exactions heretofore imposed upon our merchant marine. There is certainly no occa-sion for 

these invoices or certificates for goods upon the free list, or where 

the duties are specific-probably one-half of the fees which, aa I said 

before, are only a charge upon commerce, would be saved by dispensing with consular Gertificates in such cases, a.nd the other half, being 

practically useless, would very soon be abandoned. 

In order that the committee may act intelligently upon the suggestion I annex a letter from the Secretary of the Treasury, giving a statement of the fees received and the expenses incurred at seaport 

consulates, and at inland consulates, by which it appears that the inland consulates. collected $327,341.14, at a cost of 200,821.80. The 

fees collected by seaport oonsulates are $515,725.22, in which are included, however, as I understand it, fees collected from shipping 

amounting to $122,000. If the suggestion which I shall make be 

adopted, and the consular certificates upon triplicate invoices are dispensed with, the whole of the inland consulates will be abolished 

and a considerable portion of the expenses of :the seap<ut consulat6s 

will be saved, but the fees collected will no longer suffice for the 

support of the consular system, which will then be paid for as the 

diplomatic service is, by appropriations from the Treasury, as is the case with other commercial nations. The cost of the consular serv- ice of Great Britain is about one million three hundred thousand 

dollars per annum. They maintain no consuls in interior towns, but 

they have consuls in every port where the Britishflag floats. I advocate the same system. I would strengthen the consular system all over the world in ports of entry; I would pay an adequate compensation for men oompetent to perform the duties, subjected to preliminary examination, and I would let the charge fall upon the whole 

country, and not place a positive obstruction in the way of its general commerce. But particularly I would avoid the imposition of 

tax which produ_ces no beneficial results, as is the case with the fees 

taken to support inland consulates for the protection of the Treasury-a protection which it does not and cannot receive in that way. 

The amendment which I shall ask the committee to a.ccept at the 

proper time will be as follows: 

• .A nthorio/ i'l here?Y. give~ to !he Secretary of the ~reasnry in his discretion to d.18pens~ with the tnplicat~ IDvmces .and consular certificat~ now required by sec- tions 2So3, 2854, and 2855 of the RevlSed Statutes of the Umted States· and be is 

hereby authorized and requested to make such regulations in regard to invoices 

and consular certificates as in his judgment the public interest may require, and 

the President is hereby requested to withdraw the consuls of the United States from allllaces which are not ports of entry whenever in the judgment of the Secretary o the Treasury they are no longer required for the protection of the rev- enue. 

RRCOMllENDATlONS OF CHAMBER OJ:' .OOMMERCE OF NEW YORK. 

There are some other points whe:cein the operations of the consular 

system connect it with the laws and regulations under which the 

Treasury Department exercises supervision over the commercial 

marine of the country. These points of conta-ct have been made the 

subject of an investigation by the Chamber of Commerce of the State 

of New York, a,nd led to a report of a special committee, which was adopted on the 16th of January, 1882. This report deals with what are alleged to be impediments to the prosperity of our. shipping 

interests. The committee sum up its recommendat.ions under ten 

heads, all of which I have carefully examined, and to some of which 

this is the proper time to refer. 

The first recommendation is that the e:risting law of Congress re- quiring three months' wages to be collected by the consul for all sea- men discharged in foreign ports should be repealed. In view of the 

facilities of transportation introduced in recent years, the object of 

the law would certainly be gained by collecting one month's wages 

only, which should be paid to the seamen, and the remaining twothirds be altogether remitted. _ The committee also recommend the abolition of all consular fees, 

and they seem to be under the impression that the consuls of the 

United States are pa,id chiefly by fees and not by salaries. In this 

they are in error. The fees collected by the consuls were formerly 

vexatious in number and excessive in amount, but in 1879, in the bill 

making provision for the support of the consular system, I offered, and 

the Honse inserted, a provision requesting the President of the United 

States to revise the tariff of fees and to reduce them to the standarcl 

adopted by other commercial nations. This duty was performed 

under the la-st administration, and I had hoped to be able, in answer to a resolution which I offered early in the session, to furnish the 

official reply of the State Department as to the action which has been 

taken, but it is enough to say now that no real grievance any longer 

exists in regard to the consular fees. I am in favor of their entire 

abolition so far as services to ships and seamen are concerned. These 

fees now produce $122,000 per annum-a sum too small to be permitted to cause annoyance, and sometimes hardship, to the shipping 

interests of the country; and if the committee approve I would rec- ommend that the President be requested to discontinue the collection 

of fees so far as in his jud~ment may be practicable and advisable. 

The ship-builders of this country have fallen into the same error in regard to these fees, and Mr. Roach in various publications, and 

particularly in his testimony before the Naval Committee, expressly 

charges that the whole amount of fees collected by American con- suls, about eight hundred thousand dollars, is a direct burden upon 

American shipping and an impediment to its growth. As a matter 

of fact three-quarters of the entire sum collected, as we have seen, 

is derived from consular certificates on triplicate invoices of mer- chandise, and does not in any way affect the shipping interest of the 

country, although it is an 11I\Wise and unnecessary charge upon its 

commercial trade. 

REVIVAL OF AMERIOA....~ SHlPl'IXG. 

There are some other trivial and unnecessary impediments in the 

way of American ships engaged in the foreign trade, but if they were all removed, as they should be, we should not secure the restoration 

of our foreign commercial marine. Foreign commerce we have to the 

extent of 1,500,000 per annum, but it is carried on mainly in foreign 

bottoms and will continue to be so carried until we can build, or buy 

ships, and run them as cheaply as our competitors. We are the only 

people in the world who are forbidden to purchase foreign-built ves- sels, but we permit all the world to enter our ports with vessels purchased in the open markets of the world. We thus prohibit our own citizens from engaging in the canying trade upon equal terms with 

foreigners, and yet we complain that the carrying trade has passed 

from our ~asp. The ocean is free and ships should be free, and until 

the right IS grant-ed to American citizens to get ships in the open 

market-s of the world it is idle to talk of the restoration of our shipping to its old pre-eminence by the removal of a few petty charges,. which, however objectionable, are not differential, but are imposed on every ship, foreign and domestic alike, which enters ourports. · Nor will subsidies improve our case. We may indeed bribe capitalist-s to float the American fiag, but the subsidies thus paid will be 

taken from the pockets of our own people in the shape of increased or unnecessary taxes, and what we pay for the luxury of running 

costly ships will, after all, come from the pockets of the producers of 

the freight with which these ships will be loaded. We are now at 

least clear of this form of injustice, if it be not entitled to a stronger 

descriptive appellation. Let us remain clear, and let us remove the 

real obstructions to the growth of ourinvestmentsin ships, by adopt- in~ the policy of the rest of the world, and that is, the purchase of 

ships designed for the foreign trade where we can get them cheapest, reserving the monopoly of our coasting trade as the needed and 

ample nursery for seamen. We shall then have an American shipping interest that will be healthy in its character, permanent in its 

operation, and beneficent in its results to all classes in the community. 

:Mr. KASSON took thft floor. 

Mr. ORTH. I ask my friend from Iowa to yield to me a few minutes. 

Mr. KASSON. I can yield to the gentleman from Indiana for ten 

minutes. 
"1562 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE. MARcH 2, 

llr. ORTH. Mr. Chairman, on the 31st of January I had the honor 

to submit to this House a few hurried remarks, not a prepared speech, 

in reference to the doctrine of the rights of American citizens abroad, 

whether native-born or naturalized; and in the course of my remarks 

stated, what I am ready to-day to reaffirm, that the Democratic party 

-ofthis country had obtained and retained control of the Government 

for more than thirty years, mainly by the vote of the naturalized citi- zens of this country, .and yet during all that time had failed to place 

within the lids of the statute-book a single law for the protection of 

-such citizens while visiting fatherland. I ou~~t probably to have 

said the "modern Democratic party," for my triend from New York 

[Mr. HEWITT] would hardly be included in the democracy of Jack-

..son's time. I submit to that gentleman in all conscience whether it is 

not going a little too far back-[Mr. HEWITT, of New York, rose]-

! have but a few minutes and cannot yield. I submit to the gentle- -man in all candor whether he does not go back a little too far into 

the dim vista of the pa-st to ascertain the paternity of modern Dem-

.ocracyt 

He stated I had made a challenge and refused to yield for reply. 

The RECORD does not so disclose. 

Mr. McLAl-."'E. Yes, I asked you to yield, and you would not do so. Mr. ORTH. I am referring to the gentleman from New York; in .a moment I will refer to the gentleman from Maryland. He [Mr. 

IIEWI'IT] states here to-day in a carefully prepared speech, in answer to my remarks made thirty-odd days ago, that I had theu refused 

him the privilege of reply. I repeat now that the RECORD of the 

.31st January last does not sustain the gentleman from New York in 

his assertion. On the contrary, I folded my arms and paused for a Teply. The gentleman from New York volunteered a reply, and here 

it is, and I a ~k the Clerk to read it. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Mr. IIInvrrr, of New York. Will the gentleman from Indiana allow me to ask 

him a question¥ Mr. 0RTB. Certainly. . Mr. HEwrrr, of New York. On what principle was the war of 1812 fou~ht ¥ 

W aa it not on the doctrine that this Government would not permit an Amen can .citizen to be taken from under the prot-ection of the American flag and carried on board a British ship 9 

Mr. ORTB. Let me ask the gentleman from New York what principle was set- tled by the war of 1812 in regard to citizenship ¥ 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. The question I put to the gentleman was whether 

the war of 1812 was not fought on the doctrine that the American Government 

would not permit a naturalized Amelican citizen to be taken from under the pro. tection of the .American flag by any British ves el of war¥ 

Mr. ORTB. While engaged m the war of 1812 we denied the riaht which the 

British claimed to search our vessels, but the war was concluded' without that 

.question being settled or the right of search being yielded by Great Britain. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. Do I understand the gentleman from Indiana to say that nothing was settled by the war of 1812 7 ~. ORTH. I have said that the principle for which we contended was not settled; 

-that is,· the right of search was not yielded by the British Government. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. No American citizen, native or naturalized, sir, 

.from that hour to this has been taken from under the protection of the American 

flag and carried on board of any British vessel of war. And that war of 1812 was unaertaken and carried to a successful conclusion by a Demooratic administration. 

Mr. ORTB. I will infonn the gentleman from New York [Mr. HEwiTT] and the 

members of this Honse when Great Britain surrendered the doctrine of perpetual 3llegiance, and as a sequence the "light of search " which she held over her snb· 

;eots. It was, sir, in 1870, and by virtue of this very treaty, negotiated by a R~pnb· 

J.ican administration, and which to-day is the law of the land. 

Mr. ORTH. So much for the charo-e just made that in my former 

remarks I refused to yield to the gent~eman from New York for reply. 

If he failed in making satisfactory reply to the challenge I then 

<>ffered it is his fault and not mine. And it comes with an ill grace, 

after thirty days have elapsed, for him to come here and complain 'Ofit. • 

In regard to my not yielding to the gentleman from .Maryland, 

[Mr. McLANE,] the RECORD shows that when he asked me to yield 

I bad but two minutes of my time left. The RECORD further shows 

I offered if the gentleman from Maryland could put his han(~. on a :Single statute enacted by the Democratic party for the protection of 

the foreign-born citizen I would publish it concurrently with my 

:Speech. I have waited thirty-odd days and have not yet received 

such law, or any reference to it, from the gentleman from Maryland. 

So much for the charge that I declined to be interrupted after I 

had asked this Democratic side of the House whether they could point me to a single law on the statute-book enacted by the Den;wcratic 

party for the protection of the naturalized citizen abroad. I have 

but a few minutes of my time remaining. 

Mr. McLANE. Have you not an hom Y 

Mr. ORTH. No; bu I will say this: short as my time is, I will 

yield a minute or two, long enough for gentlemen to send into the 

Library for the statute, if they can produce any, ever passed in favor 

'Ofprotecting the naturalized citizen in foreign lands. Not by infer-

-ence, sir; I want the statute. 

Mr. McLANE. I do not mean to be under any obligation to the 

gentleman from Indiana for time, because I intend to go on in my 

'Own time. 

Mr. ORTH. The gentleman from Maryland has not charged me with .a refusal to yield, except as I have stated. Now, then, I made the 

charge thirty-odd days ago, and I submit to this House that up to 

this hour, after all the Ions- preparation and elaboration the gentle- man from New York has g1ven to the subject, he has not answered, 

directly or indirectly, the charge I then made, and which I renew here on the floor to-day, that the Democratic party obtained andretained power of this Government for thirty years by the aid of the 

vote of the naturalized foreigner ; and up t o this hour it bas never placed upon the statute-book any law for the protection of his 

rights. I do not wish to be answered by inference. 

Mr. STOCKSLAGER. The Democratic party rendered the foreignborn citizen more substantial aid. Mr. ORTH. I will yield to my colleague if he will tell me what 

way--

Mr. STOCKSLAGER. It saved the foreign-born citizen from persecution under the Know-nothing party. Mr. ORTH. Oh, yes; we know something about that. 

Mr. Chairman, the position I then took has not been answered up 

to this moment. The gentleman from New York, on the 30th of 

January, and again to-day, attempted to draw an inference that the 

Democratic party had fought the war of 1812, and that from that 

day Great Britain yielded up the right of search. That is a mere inference, and an inference that is not justified by the facts of the ca e. 

You know, Mr. Chairman, and the gentleman from New York 

knows, that we went to war with Great Britain because of her insolent 

demand of the right of search of our vessels. We all know that we fought that war to the close; and we all know that at such close 

nothing wa-s settled in reference to Great Britain's claim to this.very 

question of the right of search. Mr. ROSECRANS. But the right of American citizenship was practically settled by it. 

Mr. ORTH. Ah, my friend from California says, the rights of 

American citizens were practically settled by it. Does not the gentleman from California know that a "practical right" is worth very 

little unless it be placed upon the statute-book and guaranteed by an the power of the Government 7 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman's time ha.s expired. 

Mr. ORTH. The gentleman frem Iowa, I understand, has not 

restricted me to the few moments I have occupied. lli. KASSON. I will yield to the gentleman for a few moments 

longer . 

:Mr. ORTH. Now the gentleman from New York says that in the 

Forty-third Congress, when I happened to be a member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, no legislation was had with regard to the 

protection of our naturalized citizens. I do not conceive any other answer to be necessary to such a statement than this : the gentle- man from New York himself, if I recollect aright, was a member of 

that committee in the next Congress. Does the gentleman from New 

York now claim, or is he able to point his fii\ger to a single instance 

where that committee took any steps while he was a member thereof 

to protect the Irish, or German, or any naturalized citizens Y I pan e for a reply. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. We secured the release of Condon. 

:Mr. ORTH. Well, mark one, then; you secured the release of one man. 

Mr. COX, of New York. There were several others at the same time. 

Mr. ORTH. You secured the relea-se of one man. Well, we will 

give you credit for that; and I think, Mr. Chairman, in all fairness, 

that that is a pretty even set-off against the charge which the gentleman from NewYorkmakesuponmeofinaction in the Forty-third 

Congress. I think, sir, the record of that Congress will show that 

the Republican party relieved several gentlemen of similar trouble, 

where, accordin~ to his own statement, the gentleman from New 

York succeeded m getting but one. Now, the gentleman approves very much of these results of Republican administration of the Government. The ac1s of Congress which. 

he has read, sections 2000 and 2001 of the Statutes, and the treaty to 

which he refers, all of these the gentleman from New York heartily 

approves and commends. · 

'Vhy, Mr. Chairman1 this is not the first time that the gentleman 

and his political assoCiates approved of what the Republican party 

had done for this Government. I was here, sir, as a member of this 

body when there were Democratic members on this floor opposing bitterly day after day the efforts of the Republican party to adopt 

the thirteenth constitutional amendment, which gave freedom ·to 

four millions of human beinCYS. But that was passed, and finally 

placed in the Constitution. Freedom was guaranteed to all of the 

citizens of this country, and ever since it became the law of the 

land he and his associates on that side of the House approve of our action in the premises and on all proper occasions speak in its praise. 

I recollect being upon this floor when the Republican party, with 

the aid of a few Democrats.? contended that this Union should not 

be dissolved ; that we woUld stand by the soldier in the field; that we would feed, clothe, and equip him and place the instrument in 

his hands with which to put down the rebellion. But we got no aid, 

with few exceptions, from the gentleman's political as ociates. 

1\fr. HEWITT, of New York. Does the gentleman mean to say 

that the Government got no aid in putting dowu the rebellion from 

the Democratic party Y 

:Mr. ORTH. Oh, no! I say that the Government got no special aid, 

with few exceptions, from the Democrats of that Con o-re s. I know 

what I am talking about, and I know that there was 1ittle aid from 

the Democrats in that Congress extended to the Government. I do 

not speak of the war Democrats who stood by the Government. Mr. 
1882. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-I(OUSE. 1563 

Chairman, we had Democrats in my own State who held meetings 

3nd passed resolutions denouncing the war and declaring in favor of 

3 division of the Government. But ever since the rebellion was put 

do"\"\'Il they have been loud in their praise of what has been done by 

the Republican party to save the Union. 

Mr. STOCKSLAGER. Will the gentleman permit me now to ask 

him a question Y 

Mr. ORTH. Oh, yes; as the gentleman has risen and addressed 

the Chair. · 

Mr. STOCKSLAGER. Does the gentleman claim that the Republican party put down the war Y 

Mr. ORTH. Oh! no. Mr. STOCKSLAGER. That is exactly what I am led to infer from 

tltl} gentleman's remarks. 

Mr. ORTH. No, Mr. Chairman, I make no claim of anything that 

is not borne out by the history of those times. I claim that there were war Democrats whe stood by and aided the Republican party, _ and my colleague who addresses me was one of the war Democrats 

who shouldered his musket and entered the service of his country 

and did his duty in the ranks of the Army. 

Mr. STOCKSLAGER. Will the gentleman permit me to ask him 

another question f 

Mr. ORTH. Certainly. 

Mr. STOCKSLAGER. Does not the !t!tleman know that in 

Democratic counties and districts in In · a-that is, in counties 

and districts where there were the heaviest Democratic majoritiesthat a larger number of men went into the service of their country 

from such counties and districts than from any other part of the 

StateY 

Mr. ORTH. I will answer the gentleman's question in Yankee 

fashion. The gentleman is not unfamiliar with the throes and troubles of Indiana during that period. Now, does he not know that men known as "the Sons of Liberty" in his district and in the districts adjoining or~anized a conspiracy, a Democratic conspiracynot a Republican m it-to go and seize the capital of our State, to 

murder Governor Morton, to release the rebel prisoners at Camp 

Morton, and to turn over the government of Indiana to rebel sympathizers Y Will the gentleman answer me that question Y 

Mr. STOCKSLAGER. Yes; and I willsayto the gentleman, ifhe 

wants my opinion as borne out by what the record shows, that the 

whole matter was instigated by the Republican party, and that the 

Republican party, through Mr. Morton and through Mr. Dodds, was instrumental in getting lip there that whole organization. According to the testimony of Mr. Dodds, the chief conspirator, given in the 

trea-son trials which afterward took place, that organization was gotten up by Governor Morton for the purpose of defeating the Democratic party in the election which was to follow soon after. 

Mr. ORTH. I am very willing that that answer should go back to 

Indiana. 

Mr. HUBBELL. What was the answerf We did not hear it. 

Mr. ORTH. I said I was willing the answer of my colleague should 

go back to Indiana. The idea of a conspiracy between our loyal 

Governor Morton and that disloyal reptile Dodd will be news to the 

people of Indiana. 

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Indiana has 

expired. 

Mr. HAZELTON. I move that his time be extended. 

Mr. KASSON. In view of the fact 11hat the war has been transferred from Ireland to Indiana, I think I must now claim the floor. ~h. HAZELTON. The gentleman from Indiana is on his way to 

Ireland, and will get back there by and by. I move that his time be 

extended. I want the gentleman to put the iron into their souls still 

deeper. . Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. A little over two hours have been 

spent already in general debate. I desire to know if it is the wish 

of the House that this general debate is to go on. Mr. KASSON. Does the gentleman from Indiana desire five or ten minutes more, or does he wish to rest now Y 

Mr. ORTH. I do not desire more time than is necessary to enable me to add a sentence or two. 

Mr. MILLER. The gentleman from New York [Mr. ROBINSON] 

does not hear very well, and I suggest that he have leave to reply to 

the remarks of the gentleman from Indiana to-morrow, when be shall 

have read them in the REcoRD. 

Mr. ORTH. I wish to say I am not surprised to find--

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Indiana is out of order; 

hi time has expired. 

Mr. UPDEGRAFF, of Ohio. But the gentleman from Iowa, [Mr. 

KA. so~,] I understood, yielded him five minutes more. Mr. ROBESON. Ifthegentlemanfrom Indiall3desiresmoretime, 

.a:pd the gentleman from Iowa is willing to give it to him, I wiJ.l re- place t he time to the gentleman from Iowa when I take the floor as I am entitled to do. 

.Mr. ORTH. I am very much obliged, but I do not de he any more 

time than is neces ary to add a sentence or two. 

.Mr. KASSON. I desire to follow, as far as I may, the wishes of 

the gentleman who has charge of the bill. If I have the floor I ask 

the 8hair to secure a little order that we may understand what we are doing. 

The CHAIRMAN. How long time does the gentleman from Indiana 

desire f 

Mr. ORTH. Probably two minutes. 

The CHAIRMAN. If there be no objection the time of the gentle- man from Indiana will be extended for two minutes. 

There was no objection. 

Mr. ORTH. I wish merely to add--

.Mr. HOLMAN. l\fr. Chairman, I desire to ask my colleague a question. 

-The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. ORTH] 

yield to his colleague f 

Mr. ORTH. I do. 

Mr. KASSON. I wish to know what is going on. If my friend 

from Indiana [Mr. 0RTH] does not desire any time, I am ready to 

proceed. 

Mr. ORTH. I have yielded to my colleague [Mr. HoLMAN] for a question simply. 

Mr. HOLMAN. My colleague, I am certain, will be very glad to answer the question I shall propound to him, since he has had occa- sion to refer to the political action of Indiana during the late war in 

which neither he nor myselfpersoll3lly participated. 

Mr. ORTH. I do not yield for a speech. I resume the floor unless 

my collea!!'Ue desires to ask me a question. 

Mr. HOlMAN. The question will come in a moment. My friend 

has been cultivating the virtues of peace for some time. 

Mr. ORTH. When my colleague asked me to yield it was for a question, not for a speech. But if my colleague at any time--

Mr. HOLMAN. Does my colleague d'6cline to allow me to ask him a questionY 

Mr. ORTH. You are not asking a question. I decline to yield 

further. 

Mr. HOLMAN. The question I desire to ask the gentleman is this: 

My colleague talks about his courage in debate; why does be not 

allow me to ask him a question f 

:.Mr. ORTH. I have said nothing about "courage" in debate; but 

if my colleague will honestly, fairly, and squarely ask me a question, 

I will yield tor that purpose. 

Mr. HQLMAN. That is what I design doing. 

Mr. OR'TH. But I will not yield to him for a speech. 

Mr. HOLMAN. My question is this: Does my colleague propose to assume or ha-s he assumed here in the debates in the House that in the 

main, so far as the people of Indiana were concerned, it was members 

of the Republican party alone who rushed to the support of the GovernmenU Or does he not admit and concede cheerfully that as large a number of men from the Democratic ranks went into the 

.Army and adhered to the national flag as did so from the rauks of his own partyf And whether amon~ his Democratic colleagues my colleague from the New Albany dtstrict and my colleague from the 

Greencastle district were not foremost in the fight, while my colleague [Mr. ORTH] who speaks so bravely, myself, and otkers were quietly in the walks of private life Y 

Mr. ORTH. Mr. Chairman, I will answer the question which my 

colleague sees fit to propound to me, making the additional remark 

that he and I can have no controversy on this subject. He and I were here in Congress during the dark times of the war, and stood 

shoulder to shoulder in all the measures to put down the rebellion. 

My colleague will not for a moment suppose I had charged that the 

entire Democratic party of Indiana was disloyal. Not for a moment 

did I do so. Nor should I have alluded to it but for the question propounded to me by my colleague from the New Albany district. But, 

sir, the gentleman knows, as does everyman who is acquainted with 

the history of Indiana, that a large portion of that party were disloyal, were engaged in disloyal practices, and if they could would 

have aided in destroying this Government. [Mr. STOCKSLAGER 

rose.] I yield no further. 

Mr. STOCKSLAGER. I deny the gentleman's statement most em- phatically; and I assert that a-s many Democrats went into the Army 

from Indiana as Republicans. 

Mr. ORTH. How about the Sons of Liberty Y To what party did 

they belong f 

Mr. STOCKSLAGER. That has nothing to do with it. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. If this profitless discussion cannot 

end, I will move that the committee rise for the purpo e of closing 

general debate. But if the gentleman from Iowa [~fr. KAssoN] 

desires to proceed now, I will not make that :rpotion. 

.1\IESSA.GE FROl\I THE PRESIDENT. 

The committee rose-informally, and the Speaker resumed the chair. 

A message in writing from the President of the United States was communicated to the Honse, by Mr. PRUDEN, his Secretary. 

CONSULAR AND DIPLOMATIC APPROPRIATION BILL. 

The Committee of the Whole resumed its session. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Iowa [Mr. KAssoN] is entitled to the floor. 

Mr. KASSON. It is always gratifying to me and to many, if not 

to the majority of the members of this House, when a measure comes before us for action which makes us forget thatparty lines exist and 

unites us a patriots, loving a common country and seeking its honm: and welfare. 
1564 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--HOUSE. MARon 2, 

I had hoped, sir, that this was one of those occasions, and was prepared, for my own part, to proceed to the consideration of this bill 

providing for the foreign service of the United States, to consider all 

its provisions which in any way change the pre-existing condition 

of the service, and to determine whether such change was for the 

interest, the honor, and the welfare of the country. 

I regret that the honorable gentleman from New York [:Mr. HEWITT] has made use of this occasion to bring up again a subject which 

will doubtless be presented at other times during this session, and 

which has already been once considered. The question of arrests 

in Ireland is totally alien to any subject contained in this bill. In 

doing it he has revived the complaints of neglect in the care of the 

interests of some of our citizens, native or naturalized, in Great 

Britain. I ought, therefore, to say and to remind the House that in 

due time, when the correspondence is completed, and when according to diplomatic usage that-correspondence will be made public, the 

gentleman from New York will probably be surprised, perhaps as a patriot gratified, to know that while all this noise on the subject 

has been going on on this floor the Department of the Government 

charged with the jurisdiction of the subject has been quietly1 diligently, and energetically at work to secure the riahts under mternationallaw belongin~ to our citizens, and which have been in any 

way infringed in any toreign country. 

It is one of the misfortunes of our executive government that it is 

obliged often to submit in silence to charges of inaction and neglect 

because, as is well known, it is improper in the highest degree to 

bring before the public the current condition of negotiations in their 

nature delicate, sometimes so delicate that nothing but the mantle 

of silence enables them to succeed. 

I have known cases, I have one in mind at this moment, when by 

the use of a happy chance by one of our ministers abroad, at a favorable juncture, when all in America was silent, and our demand was partially forgotten in England, one of our naturalized citizens was released from prison and restored to the country of his adoption ; 

and the only right we had to demand his relea-se was as a favor, for 

he had violated the laws of the land in which he was temporarily 

domiciled. 

I leave this subject with that remark, only a-ssuring the gentleman, as I think I may give assurance to the House, that the subject is fur 

from being neglected in the executive department; and the more noise and the more clamor made on this floor on the subject is an embarrassment to the result which we all seek to accomplish. 

Mr. HEWITT. of New York. Will the gentleman yield--

Mr. KASSON. I do not wish to ente~: into a discussion of that subject. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I desire the gentleman to yield for a question. 

Mr. KASSON. For a question, certainly. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I only desire to know if the gentle- man from Iowa [Mr. KASSON] underst~od me as making any charges 

against the Department 'I I made none. Mr. KASSON. I only under tood the gentleman to make charges 

against the Republican party of neglect oiits duties in all its branches, 

executive and legislative. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I dissented from the doctrines of the 

Lowell letter which I quoted. That is the extent to which I went. 

'Mr. KASSON. I leave that subject. And now I have a more grateful duty to do, to express my appreciation of the speech of the gentleman from Tennessee, [Mr. \VmTTHORNE.] He entered into the 

question of what can be done and what should be done to enlarge 

the influence of the Government of the United States upon both 

American continents, and what means should be adopted to develop our commercial interests and our honor and dignity on this continent. 

I was enlightened by what he said, and if there were time I would 

most gladly go into the subject myself. 

I must, however, take exception to one of his statements, or rather 

to one of his assumptions. With a possible desire to see the Republi- can party under two ofitsleaders divided aud separated, he attempted 

to draw the line so sharply and so strongly between the policy of the 

late Secretary of State and of the present Secretary of State that he 

has, I think, and as he himself will be convinced on readin~ the cor- respondence, passed the point of accuracy in defining that difference. 

Now, sir, I submit without reading the correspondence, but com- mending it to the attention of gentlemen on both sides of the House, 

that it will be found there ha been no definitive chanae of policy; 

that there has been no'change in the mind of the Presid:'ent as to the 

great objects to be accomplished. 

They will also find that the new Secretary of State, comin~ into 

office without knowled~e of unpublished conespondence which he was at the time engagea. in examining, found a critical condition of 

things which pledged his country to a course of diplomatic action 

which might be the predeces or of a war. The result of the action 

of the Unit-ed States diplomate, then recently dispatched to South 

America, might have been such as to have made it impo.ssible to 

escape without at least a warlike demonstration. Is it, then, sur- prising that the Secretary of State just entering upon his office 

should say, "Halt! let us look at this thing and its conseq_uences !" 

Is it surprising that. the President should say to the same officer, 

"Halt! until we understand this fully, and until you have mastered 

the correspondence, public and secret f" And so the present Secretary of State asked practically for time to consider the step which was taken, the responsibility of which would be turned upon him,. 

and which was of vast importance to the honor of our country and 

to its material interests. 

I venture the statement here, sir, that he has never withdrawn theoffer and aid of the United States for a peaceful settlement "etween 

Chili and Peru; that he has never desired to withhold its entire 

legitimate influence for the salvation of Peru, if that salvation bepossible. I maintain, sir, be has never essentia.lly changed or withdrawn definitively the proposed assemblage of a conference of theAmerican States for the purpose of devising means to preserve in the 

future the peace and independenee of all these countries. 

I ask the House and the country to wait until this correspondenceis completed, and then if it be found that a policy which in the main 

has been approved by the country and by this admini.stration shall 

have been abandoned, then will come the time for censure. It has 

not yet come. I take this exception to the statement made by the gentleman from 

Tennessee in his speech. Beyond that I ought not now to go, sir, by 

entering into the same questions which he has discussed. 

Let me say to him and to the House that when a practical measure comes before us to increase and strengthen our ties, commercial and 

political, with the South American states beyond the point they 

have :!!ever reached hitherto, you will find, at least on this side of the 

House, a maJority, and in my judgment the executive government 

also, ready to unite for the accomplishment of such a result, even if 

it costs some millions of money to inaugurate it. 

I stop reluctantly. I confess that my mind has long been full of 

this subject of extending the commerce and navigation of the 

United States, and of strengthening our relations southward, and 

of securing the control of the commerce which by right of proximity belongs to us along the Pacific coasts, with the 1slands of that 

great ocean. I have been profoundly interested in those discussions 

wherever they have occurred. I beg gentlemen to study the questions and prepare for action. I hope to see the whole legisla-tiveforce of Congress brought to bear to that end. We must be rid of 

the timid traditions of our past weakness-rid of past prejudices,. 

and ready to vote money to increase the Navy, to promote our com- mercial enterprises, and to do all things necessary to bring us to theposition where the great future demands the United States should 

stand in their natural domination of the Pacific and of the coasts 

bordering upon it. I must withhold what I have to say to another 

occasion, which I hope will be presented by one of the reports to- come from the Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, a single word on the provisions of this bill. 

There are some changes in it on which I shall hardly take the timeto call a division of the House, but which I commend to the gentle- man in charge of the bill. One of them is inclosed in parenthesis on the fourth page, and converts consuls-general into secretaries of legation. The Honse, I think, on careful consideration, and the com- mittee itself reporting the bill will, like the Committee on Foreign 

Affairs, be of the opinion that it is unwise and unsafe to confuse thesetwo branches of the service. It is not merely because of existing 

diplomatic rules and convenience which would make the change 

very embarrassing in the transaction of business with nearly every 

government of Europe, but from the fact that the consul-general's 

office is usually distant from the legation, and the business of the one is entirely with the commercial interests, while the other is 

chiefly with the political interests. 

The correspondence is great, too great to be conducted in these 

capitals by one officer. Certainly, at one of these points I knowthe 

office of secretary of legation is too :important and indispensable to 

be abolished. .A.t Vienna, were that done, and the consul-general 

charged with the duties of secretary of legation it would cause the 

most serious embarrassments. At Vienna the consul-general I happen 

to know is one of the busiest officers in Europe, often at his consulate 

after the usual hours ofthe day, and in a. different part of the city. 

When the minister is away from sickness or other cause the legation 

would be left unoccupied. It must be locked up, and its archives 

and secret papers would be exposed to discovery and to loss, there 

being nobody in charge. Without entering into detail, the practical 

difficulties are too great to be accommodated by the arrangement .proposed, and for the saving of a. very small sum of money. 

And I may add, while on that subject, (and there is another gentleman here who knows the same difficulties exist at other capitals 

of Europe,) that at Vienna instead of one secretary of legation bein~ 

too much, a clerk was employed in addition, at private expense, ana. paid at the rate of one thousand gulden a year, to help out the work 

of the legation. There is an immense private correspondence, I 

should not say private but personal correspondence, going on all th& 

time with persons seeking to emigrate to the United States from different parts of the country, or naturalized citizens wanting information relative to the United States, or their rights; letters never reported to the Department at Washington, and answers to be written by a secretary or clerk who knows the alien language in which 

they are written. There are large files of these letters. .A.t Vienna, 

for example, there is necessity for a secretary or clerk who speaks 

Hungarian as well as German. 

Our ministers who are sent abroad, I regret to say, do not generally speak fluently the foreign languages, and this is the case all over 
1882. 'OONGRESSION AL RECORD-HOUSE. 1565 

Europe. The object of the secretary oflegation is to have an officer more permanent than that of minister, who is able from his familiarity with the language of the country, or, if possible, with several 

of the forei~n languages, to conduct the correspondence of the office 

.and make tne translations; and, 1\Ir. Chairman, we frequently find 

letters written by American citizens, not yet long enough in this 

country to have become familiar with the language, written in the 

language to which they were accustomed in Europe, in reference to 

their affairs in the fatherland. 

For these and other reasons I think it unwise to attempt to abolish 

the secretaries of legation. I leave out of consideration altogether 

the other point which might be mentioned in this connection as to the 

difficulty and embarrassment in which it places our foreign minister, 

by lowerin~ the dignity of his position and the grade of our national 

representation abroad. It is not for so great a nation as ours to model 

it npon the action of Portugal, or Denmark, or Sweden, or other minor 

nationalities of Europe. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, permit me to say that Europe to-day, more perhapa than ever before, recognizes, and willingly recognizes, 

the United States as one of the foremost great powers of the world. · hall we now, by any action of our own, degrade that position and 

voluntarily surrender it by lowering the rank of our ministers or the 

.status of our legations Y Let us rather maintain and advance the 

dignity which belongs to one of the great powers of the earth. I 

hope the committee will not destroy the existing and very modest 

dignity of our legations and diminish their utility. 

In connection with this subject I wish to submit a letter addressed 

to the chairman of the Forei~n Affairs Committee of the House, and 

which I ask permission to ofter as a part of my remarks. The letter 

is from the Secretary of State in answer to a resolution of the Committee on Foreign Affairs upon that subject. I ask that it be printed 

in the RECORD so that it may be accessible for the information of the 

House to-morrow. 

The letter is as follows: DEPARTMENT OF STATE, 

Washington, February 20, 1882. 

Sm : I ha.ve the honor to acknowledge your letter of the 13th instant, commn· nieating a. resolution of your committee adopted that day, inquiring of me •• whether 

the proposition made in the consular and diplomatic appropriation bill reported at this session, to abolish sundry c"nsular places and secretaries of legation, and to change certain diplomatic representatives of the United Stat~. will, in my opinion, 

be for the public mterest; and how far, if at all, such change may be made with- out detriment to the national welfare and dignity." In reply I have the honor to state that the main features of the bill, and especially the changes· referred to, were the occasion of conference between the subcommittee of the House Committee on Appropriations and the Department. While I am of the opinion that the position of the United States among nations is such as to warrant and require representation of the higher ~des at all the seats of 

government of the prmcipal friendly powers, yet, in the mterest of retrenchment 

;the Department would concur in certain changes in the service. Such changes ·should, however, in my judgment, be the result of a. very careful examination and .a thoroughly digested scheme of reoraanization t{) be submitted by this Depart- ment to Congress. This examination 1;:as been undertaken and is now in progress, -so that a.t the next session of Congress precise recommendations can be made. It ;ID~d therefore seem premature to introduce the changes proposed by the reported 

For this reas_on I at present advise against the proposition to consolidate several 

.European missions, such as joinina the Bel~an and Netherlands missions in ene, .and also uniting the Swedish and Banish nusBions. So far as present experience 

goes, the differences oflanguage and of intercourse with the Unitoo States make 

the proposed consolidation undesirable. I am, however, entirely in favor of adding the Servian mission to the present •mission to Roumania.. I doub~, however, the expediency of coupling Greece with 

the other countries named, owing to the difference of langt!age and people, and the 

distance and inaccessibility of Athens from Bucharest oc Be1grade. I entirely approve the changes in the title of certain mis!iions. The represent;a. 

tive rank of a charg6 d'affaires (commissioned as such) is somewhat anomalous, 

and not very consistent with the dignity of a nation like our own. In all eases where it is practicable it would be much better, as proposed, to styl~ the officer a minister resident. and consul-~eneral. We have at present three such officers, ae- •credited respectively to Hayti, Bolivia, and Liberia. The following should follow 

the same style, with the salaries attached by the pending bill, namely: 

Bucharest, Roumania, $5,500; Caracas, Venezuela, $5,000, (a reduction from -$7,500;) Berntl1 Switzerland, $5,000; Lisbon, Portugal, $5,000; and also, for uniformity, Copenhagen, Denmark, $5,000, (the salary now paid.) To these should be .added Montevideo, Paraguay and Uruguay, $5,000. 

The mis ion to Para,auay and U rugnay is left out of the reported bill, and should 'be inserted, with the proposed change in the style of the representative. It 

hardly seems a. necessity to se~er intercourse with iwo rich and friendly states of ·our own continent in the interest of retrenchment, especially at a time when the 

policy of our Government counsels closer intimaey with the republics of &nth 

America. By uniting the principalconsularofficetothemission, as now suggested, the necessity for a separate consular officer at Montevideo would disappear. The raising of the rank of the mission at Constantinople to the plempotentiary grade is very desirable. Both nat1onal decorum and official utility require til.at 

'the United States should occupy a proper place in the foreign_representation at the •Ottoman capital. For a. like reason I lately, in my letter to your Committee on Foreign Affairs, .January 5, recommended that the grade of the resident mission in Central America. :should be also raised to the plenipotentiary rank, (but without increase of salary,) :and I suggest that the bill should be so aiDended. 

In the existing act the consul-general at. Constantinople is made to act as secre· ~ry of legation also. The reported bill makes the saiDe pro.vision at Vienna, 

Rome, St. Petersbuvg, and Copenhagen. I do not regard this change as wi e ·or desirable. It may be necessary to present my objections with somewhat of -details. 

First, Rome. The consul-general here has the supervision of all the consuls in 

Italy, twelve in nu'mber. 'ro impose upon him diplomatic functions will ~ery seri- on.<~ly endanger inportant-consular and commercial interests. 

Second, St. Petersburg. Here the same objection applies, with the additional 

argument that the proposed increase of compensation from $2.000 to $3,500will not eqnal the increased cost of living which a. diplomatic officer would be forced to incur. The compensation{)£ the consul-general at St. Petersburg should be in- •crensed, but the o:ffioo ehould. not be connected with the legation. 

Third, Vienna. This is an important commercial post, the fees collected at the 

consulate-general amounting to about $7,000 annually, and indicating an amount of business requiring the constant attention of a competent and a.ctive officer. 

The addition of the secretaryship of legation could not be effected without detri- ment to the consular business and the prot~ction of our revenues. ourth, Copenhaaen. This is impracticable as the bill now stands, with the 

Danish and ~wedist mis~ions united, unless the seat of the combined legation ee at Copenhagen, thus neglecting the most essential of the two mis ions. If the 

union of these missions be insisted upon, the diplomatic officer would have to be 

stationed at Stockholm, and the utility of a so-called secretary of legation at Copenhagen would be at least doubtful. On the other hand, if the mission at Copenhagen be retained, as I trust it will, the grade of minister-resident and 

consul-general which I suggest will supersede tlie need of a separate consular 

officer. To these specific objections, I may add one founded on the diplomatic anomaly 

in•olved in the combined function. Properly, the diplomatic rank is the highe t, 

in int~rnational intercourse. and yet the bill subordinates it to the consular rank. 

In view of this, it might be well to consider the propriety of changing the title at Constantinople, so as to read " secretat·y of legation and consul-general," t.hus 

giving the representative capacity its proper precedence. The purely consular part of the bill as reported merits careful attention also. 

A certain cla s of consulates in Mediterranean aml Eastern countries combines 

quasi diplomatic functions with those purely consular. These are, Tangier, 

Tunis, Tripoli, Cairo, Tamatave, (Madagascar.) and Bangkok. I observe in the 

reported bill that Tunis and Tripoli are omitted alt{)gether, and the salary of the 

consulate at Tangier is reduced to $2,000. I regard this omission as premature, 

and as calculated to _Prejudice the projects of reorganization which the Depart- ment is consldering m that quarter, in view of the changed position of Tunis 

under the French protootorate. The reduction of the salary at Tangier strikes me as uqjust to an ~portant office, and as discriminating especially against a meritorious officer, Mr. Felix A. Mathews, who has done much to maintain the 

good name and extend the interests of our country in Northern Africa. 

The conau.late at Algiers is discontinued by the reported bill. It should be 

restored, with a salary of $1,000, if we are to obtain any good results from the cruise 

of Commodore Sllufefdt. I should be glad also to see Venice, with its salary of $1,000, retained as a con- sulate. The fees amount to ne!U·ly one-half the salary, and increase yearly, while 

the convenience of the office to the large numbers of Americans visiting that city 

is very great. The DepaTtment asked in the estimates for $75,000 for employment of office 

clerks at the consulates. The bill only gives $65,000, which is much less than the 

good of the service requires. For the contingent expenses of all consulates the Department asked $140,000. 

The bill gives $135,000, the same as last year. If the increase be not made, the 

usual annual dedciency will again have to be voted. In like manner the bill onll 

gives $5,000 for payment of "consular officers not citizens of the United Sta.t~s. ' 

On this account a deficiency regularly occurs. It is not within the power of t-he 

Department to limit this item, as deaths and resignations of consular officers eon· tinually require the employment of substitutes, who can only be compensated from 

this appropriation. The First Comptroller of the Treasury bas requested the State 

Department to aQk for $10,000 as the least sum adequate for the purpose. I have thus complied with the request of your committee, to point out the par- ticulars in whicll the pending bill, as re-pOrted, is detrimental to the public inter- ests and national dignity. fu doin~ so Ihavealso snggeste~ several minor points, 

in which the -project of reform which the Department is considering may be con· veniently antici~ated. T(} the remaining hems of the bill I find no objection, 

except that it fails. to adopt several suggestions which this Department has recom· mended to Congress ; such, for instance, as the establishment of consulates at St. 

Stephen's, New J3runswick1 with a salary of $1,500, and the erection of Antigua into a salaried consulate of the l!ll,OOO class. 

This Department made the request for the erection of a consulate at St. Stephen's at the earnest solicitation of the Treasury Department. The Secretary of 

the Treasury states that it will be quite impossible ro protect our revenues and 

prev.ent the importatioD.of foreign lumber under the exemptions enjoyed by Ameri- can lumber, unless we have an independent salaried officer at St. Stephen's. The 

oifice is now an aaency, and the officer is interested in the lumber trade. Commendin~ tEe foregoing to your careful consideration, I have the honor to be, 

sir, your obed1ent servant, 

FREDK. T. FRELINGHUYSEN. 

Hon. C. G. Wl:LLIAMS, 

Ohairman of the Oommittu on FOTeVjn Affairs, House of Representatives. 

Mr. McLANE. Mr. Chairman--

Mr. KASSON. I yield the remainder of my time to the gentleman 

from Pennsylvania, [Mr. CURTIN.] 

Mr. McLANE. I thought the gentleman had yielded the floor. 

Mr. KASSON. I had promised to yield some time to the gentleman 

from Pennsylvania, and will yield any remaining time I may have to 

the gentleman from Maryland if he desires it. ' 

Mr. CURTIN. Mr. Chairman, the time may come, and it is possibly mpidly approachin~, when it will be quite unnecessary to 

exchange with foreign nations ministers or ambassadors. But while we do send ministers abroad to represent this country, in deference 

to the customs of nations, we should clothe them with all the proper 

powers and surround them by all appliances which will give conse- quence to the representatives of this great nation. We should give 

them that standing among the nations of the world which this coun- try itself holds, not take from them any of the dignity of their high 

position. 

I understand perfectly well in what au embarrassing position a foreign minister would be placed should he have a consul appointed 

without consulting him, without ills selection, who would have ac- cess to all of the archives and papers of his office, and to all of the 

private aud public correspondence, and have full k-nowledge of his 

business, and one who would have charge of the legation and the 

disposition of the affairs of the Government intrusted to the minister at the court to which he is accredited in his absence as charge 

d'affaires, which is the law. I know full well that it is common to 

complain of the expenses of our diplomatic intercourse with foreign 

nations and of our consular service. Our representation abroad is 

not made to produce money or revenue. It is a representation of the 

interests of a great people. And, sir, I do object to making consu- lar appointments abroad a source of revenue. I regret, Mr. Chairman, to have heard the c.alculations of expense 

and profits of the diplomatic and consular service made by the chair-
1566 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. MARCH 2, 

man of the committee. He exhibited the numbers of passports issued 

by various ministers, and the balance in favor of the Government 

growin(J' out of the consular service. The consular service of the 

United States we require for the benefit of those engaged in commerce and trade, and a just protection to American mariners. The service, 

in my judgment, should be renqered free of any expense to the citi- zen and be paid for by the Government. The fees exacted are a tax levied off the trader, merchant, or mariner, and in restraintto 

that extent of our commerce with foreign countries. The issue of 

passports is not properly the business of the minister, although he 

is clothed with the power. There are very few of the countries in 

Europe where a pa-ssport is required, and American citizens traveling 

either for business or pleasure are in the habit of securing passports 

from the Department of State before leaving home. He has direct 

connection with the court or government tow hich he is accredited. He 

conveys to his own Government all that occurs in the country where 

he resides in relation to or can have any importance to the tra~e, 

commerce, and interests of our people abroad, and he is there, as has 

been said by the gentleman who last addressed the committee, to 

protect the rights of citizens, whether foreign born or naturalized, 

and in that respect recent events have clearly demonstrated that to 

withdraw our ministers, or to abridge their power, would be an acknowledged weakness in our Government which could not be con- doned, and a calamity to those of our citizens who have suffered 

arrest and imprisonment in foreign countries. It would be a source of serious objection, in my judgment, to an American minister at a foreign court to allow a consular officer, with on t reference to his own wishes or the qualifications of the consul, to be appointed with power 

to have access to and control of the records of his legation, of the 

archives, and of all the business interests represented by him at that 

government. 

The selection of a secretary to take charge of such matters Ahould 

be left with theministerhimse~ so that the citizen who is best qualified may be selected to ful:fi.ll the duties. The relation being confi- ~ential, the qualifications of a secretary should be of a much higher 

grade than those required to ful:fi.ll the duties of a consulate. Justice to the minister as well as to this Government surely demands that 

he should have as his secretary a citizen well qualified, and one in 

wbom he can place most implicit confidence. 

Mr. Chairman, I have said that the time may come when we may 

dispense with this system, and thereby cut down the expense; when 

steam and lightning will give such rapid communication as to an- nihilate time and. space, and we can assert our rights and protect our interests without the presence of ministers abroad. It may be 

in the nearfu ture; but such a happy condition in the affairs of humanity may be postponed until the lion and the lamh lie down together, or the proclamation of the promised peace and good-will settles down 

upon the world. But while it is the practice of the whole worldof all the great nations of the world-1 bold that we, the American 

nation, should be represented in every nation, or wherever there is 

aD organized government or exercise of governmental power, ·and 

that we should have an American minister, selected for his fitness, 

to represent our fifty millions of freemen at the seat of government of 

every foreign nation, and should surround him with all the rights and 

powers, the dignity and the consequence of this great nation. 

Mr. Chairman we have never been the propagandists of our political ideas. 'Ve have never cbargedourministers abroad to interfere 

with governments to which they are accredited, or to commend our broad liberty and the dead-level of our social organization to the 

civilized nations of the earth. On the contrary, they are expressly 

forbidden to interfere with the laws or the governments to which 

they a1·e accredited. 

Sir, in the one hundred years of the existence and example ofthis 

nation, where iree government has been exercising its mighty power 

over peoples who enjoy its blessings, and all the governments of the 

world have felt its power in relievmg oppressed humanity, silently 

but constantly our example has been contracting the power of the 

ruling cl~Jsses and remitting it to the masses of the people, where it 

justly belongs. 

Our precepts and example, our liberal political ideas have broken 

down the barriers between centralized power and the ma-sses of the 

people, and every concession made in Europe to the voice and con- trol of the people in their government is a signal embodiment of the 

force of the American ideas of government and the rights of common humanity. The people have power in all the governments in Europe save one. Kings and emperors are lessened in their powers and prerogatives, and in my judgment, believing as I do in the future of 

this great country and of our form of government, our broad liberty 

and equality, the emperor and the king will soon remain as the 

tinsel, nominal heads of the government, if they are not entirely dispensed with as unnecessary in governments which aim to secure individual happiness arid prosperity and enjoy the blessi.Ltgs of liberty, 

peace, and concord; and there will come a time when the rights of 

humanity will stand up and beassertedandappearin livinO' light in 

the presence of the American ideas of human rights and llberties. 

[.Applause.] 

Mr. McLANE. If we are not to vote on this bill to-night I should 

not put so much restraint on myself in addressing the Chair. 

Several MEMBERS. The bill will not be voted on to-ni0'ht. 

Mr. :McLANE. Then! shall saywhatlhave to say without refer- ence to any limitatien of time. I rose really for the purpose of discussing the bill and to gtve my assent to the policy indicateu by the 

committee, but at the same time to indicate to the committee how 

very imperfect, how very unsatisfactory was the application they were making of the principle. 

The gentleman in charge of this bill indicated his desire to limit 

the diplomatic organization of the country. With that desire and 

with the principle on which it is based I am in accord. But it is not 

becoming this country to limit its diplomatic organization by ren- dering it less respectable than it now is. To-day we have ntissions 

that are not only without occupation and without labor, but where 

the missions themselves are not respectable in their organization. 

Now, I would strike from this bill all such missiom;, and I would 

concentrate the organization under four single missions so far as Europe is concerned, and instead of making the missions to Belgium 

and Holland one mission with a salary of 7,000, I would have no mission at all in those countries. 

We have already a well-organized system in Europe. We have 

missions to Great Britain, France, Germany, and St. Peter!! burg, with 

cquipments for those missions commensurate with the dignity of this 

country. It has been the practice of the diplomacy of all countries, 

and of our own when its diplomacy was most distinguished, to ac- credit ministers to more countries than one. If we exist then ands 

of yea.rs we will never have a diplomacy more distinguished an<l more honorable than the diplomacy of our early history, when a minister 

to Great Britain was accredited to France, to Russia, to Holland, 

and to any other country in Europe with which we need have inter- course. 

We have a yearly appropriation to carry on foreign intercourse 

other than the actual support of missions. Why not, therefore, let 

these missions to England and to France and to Germany and to St. 

Petersburg draw from that fund all necessary traveJ.i.ug and incidental expenses? That is what in truth it should be provided for. 

The expense of our ministers goin~ to other countries than those to 

which they are accredited woulu be very insignificant. What is 

there to prevent the minister to France from going to .Madrid and 

to Rome f What is there to prevent the minister to Germany going 

to Vienna' .And what difficulty have we in letting the minister ail 

St. Petersburg deal with all those countries of kindred race and as- sociation with Russia f It will not detract from our dignity. The 

gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. CURTL~]. need not be uneasy, and 

I know that he has not onlytheliberalityofview but the experience 

necessary to decide this question. .And I shall submit my ob erva- tions to him with some rea-sonable confidence that .I may have his 

assent. · 

It is the ministers at the smaller courts, the ministers resident, 

who are without sufficient salaries, without the means given to hire 

respectable apartments for themselves and their legations ; with no contingent fund allowed with which to pay office rent; living in 

hotels of second and third class accommodations, actually unable, if 

they paid out their entire salary, to meet necessary personal ex- penses and pay the per diem of board and lodging in a respectable 

hotel. There is. not a first-class hotel in Europe in one of its ~reat 

capitals at which the per diem for board and lodging woulu not 

exceed the salary of your minister resident after a reasonable allow- ance for personal expenses of self and family. 

Hence my objection to the suggestion that you should take a minister of a low degree and accredit him as a minister plenipotentiary, 

and yet give bini the salary of the lower degree. 

Why, sir, I cannot conceive of a measure be'!iter calculated to discredit this country than to organize its diplomatic service upon any 

such standard. If you cannot give a salary sufficient to make your 

legation respectable~ abolish your legation. .And if there is nothing 

to do, if the statement made by the gentleman who reported this bill 

is correct, and if the supplementary statement be correct, made by 

the gentleman from New Jersey, as a reason why a secretary of legation and a consul-general should be concentrated in one man ; that 

the secretary of le~ation has nothing to do, and, therefore, that it 

cannot conflict witn his duties to be a consul-general-if this statement be correct-then abolish the office of secretary of legation. 

What an argument to present to this House,-that you should make 

your secretary of legation consul-general, uniting the two offices in one person, because your secretary of legation has nothing to do I 

That is the statement of the gentleman from New Jersey, who is a member of the Committee on.A.ppropriations, whichreportthis bill. 

The argument ofthegentlemanfromMichigan [Mr. BURROWS] that 

at The Hague and at Brussels neither minister has anything to do is not a reason sruely for making one of them the minister at both court . If it is a reason for anything it is a reason for abolishing them at 

both courts. If it is a goodreason forabolishingtheminister atone 

court, then it is a. good reason for abolishing them at both. Why not 

take a minister who has something to do, butwh~yet willhave sufficient time to attend to our diplomacy at The Hague and at Brussels, and let him go there T Take your minister at Paris. He can go to Brussels in five hours and to The Hague in seven. Now I say to this committee, and! say it directlyto my honorable 

friend from Pennsylvania, [Mr. CURTIN,] who will bear me out, I am sure, thaj; there is nothing in accrediting a man to five courts that 

takes away from his dignity; just the reverse. When he is accreditee! 

to five courts he has that much more dignity than if he was accredited to but one . .And wehaveconstantlydonethat. In recent times, 

during the administrations of lir. Polk and of Mr. Pierce, the same 
1882. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE. 1567 

minister was accredited to three or four courts. Our laws made provision for it, and allowed the additional expenses to be paid for. 

Under the administration that followed that of Mr. Pierce our minister to Brazil was accredited to other South American states, 

and he received in addition to his own salary one-half of the salary 

of a minister accredited to one court. 

Now, I do not contemplate any such provision as that, nor do I 

contemplate weakening the influence of this country in the estimation of European governments. But does this committee take note 

of the fact that in reciprocating these diplomatic courtesies the very 

countries to which we send our first-class ministers rate us as but a fourth or fifth class -power! The very countries to which we send om first-class plenipotentiaries, to which we would send our am- bassadors if it were possible for us to have an embassador-if we had an individual sovereign to represent our minister plenipotentiary 

to Great Britain would be an embassador, and so on with all the 

other great powers-does it occur to this committee that these very 

powers to which we show this great courtesy and this great con- descension rate us down among the fourth or fifth powers of the 

world Y And do they take note of the fact that when we receive here a foreign minister, no matter of what age, no matter of what service, we receive a man growing up from service at the court of some inferior 

power on this continent or some inferior power on the other continent f I say inferior; inferior in everything, inferior in population, 

inferior in wealth, inferior in intelligence, and in cultivation. 

Now, if there ever was a case in which a country should entertain a feeling of resentment in view of its diplomatic relations to the rest 

of the world, it is the case of this country. . :Much of it is due, I am free to say, to our own inattention. 

Few men of this Congress or of any other Congress can be made 

to feel an interest in this simple question of diplomatic organization. 

No more striking proof of the correctness of that statement could be 

given than the very bill now presented for our consideration. 

What an argument1 what a statement to make to this House, that 

the consular system 1s a system that supports itself. How does it 

support itself7 It supports itself by taring the American ship-owner, 

already stricken down nearly unto death by other taxation ; out of 

sailors' wages and the ordinary shipping and commercial taxes of 

the country we pay our consuls. And, forsooth, because these taxes 

exceed the expenses-and the expenses in that branch of the service, as in all others, are excessive and unreasonable-because the receipts 

exceed the expenses, it is held up as a matter of congratulation. 

This committee will bear patiently with me when I tell them that 

in this cry of the day for the revival of American shipping the very 

first step we ought to take is to abolish all these fees which are taken 

from the ship-owners and from the sailors with which to support 

our consular system. Abolish them all, and in doing so you will not 

only relieve your ship-owners but you will save the morals of your 

public officers. Where a alary can be paid and honorably accepted 

you will have a consul not tainted, not demoralized by the fact that 

when he puts one dollar into the Treasury beyond his legal salary he 

puts another into his own pocket. There is not a consulate of this 

country of any importance where it is not notorious that·the salary 

is less than the actual receipts of the consul. 

It may be said that it is done with the sanction of the Government. 

That sanction is easily obtained. It is the history of all administrations of our Government that these little perquisites, these little indulgences, grow out of incidental charges, such as a charge for the 

support of a messenger or other office expenses. That is not peculiar 

1lo this department of the Government. And if tolerated at home we ought not to be surprised that it is tolerated 12,000 miles away from us. Precisely the same abuses which exist at our own door and in 

every Department of the Government here at the seat of Government exist in all these consulates. 

The system itself is a bad application of the principle of economy. 

In an unhappy moment we thought we could economize our diplomatic service by paying these consuls with fees, and when the attempt was made to pay them by salaries we continued fees in order to make sure that the fees we authorized the consul to charge should cover the amount we appropriated for his salary. I say that the principle 

in itself is bad, and the actual administration of it is odious and dishonest. 

If my view could prevail, I would strike from this bill everything 

but the first portion of it, so far as Europe is concerned, that portion which provides for the four missions to London, Paris, Berlin, 

and St. Petersburg. And then I would provide that those ministers should be accredited wherever the President of the United States chose to accredit them, and that their traveling expenses should be 

paid from the fund appropriated by this bill for the expenses of our diplomatic intercourse. There is a sum appropriated sufficient for 

that purpose. Then I would make the necessary provision for sec- retaries of legation at these four courts, and everythin~ else I would 

strike from the bill, until I came to that portion of 1t relating to 

America. 

Sympathizing entirely with the gentleman from Tennessee, [Mr. Wm'ITHOIL..~,] sympathizing entirely with the gentleman from Iowa, 

[Mr. KAsso~,] in so far as they refer to America and our relations to 

America, antl remembering that these American states treat us as their first power, that we do not receive from them subordinates in 

their diplomatic service whom they are educating for the courts of 

Europe, but that they are in the habit of sending to us the best men 

they can send to us, I would show them fully as much consideration as I would show to Europe. • But I would apply the same principle in our American diplomacy as in our European. There is no difficulty- net only is there no difficulty but there is infinite advantage-in letting our minister to Mexico deal with the Central American states. 

Mr. KASSON. Will my friend from Maryland allow me to mention a single circumstaB.ce f He speaks of a minister accredited to one- place being sent to other places. 

Mr. McLANE. Accredited to other places. 

Mr. KASSON. I wish to state an incident which occurred during 

the service of the last minister at Vienna, when, to his great sur- prise, he found an important question referred to arbitration, one oi 

the countries involved having a single legation for Europe, to be ac- credited to different countries as business called. Under that general floating power they put in an appearance at Vienna, where suddenly the interests, almost the fate, of their country was involved; 

and their first step was to go to the American legation, which was a fixture there~ to ask advice or counsel; to say that they were strangers, did not Irnow how to start any business, and must have the coun- sel of a man who knew the ways of doing business and the influential men who controlled the doing of it. 

Mr. McLANE. Does my friend mean to intimate that they could 

get such information as that from our ministers abroad T :Mr. KASSON. In that case they felt satisfied with the information 

they received. The American minister, of course, telegraphed home 

for permission to render assistance, obtained such permission under 

the usual diplomatic re traints, and then gave what aid he could. The result in that case of one of these floating missions was that therepresentatives of that country found themselves able to do nothing 

except through the intervention of a permanent minister ; they left 

before their business was finished, with the request that this permanent minister should finish it for them. I mention this circumstance as showing the difficulties connected with these floating missions. 

Mr. McLANE. I am considering this question seriously, and I 

shall treat the interruption of my friend quite seriously. 

Mr. KASSON. I beg the gentleman's pardon if the interruption was too long. 

Mr. McLANE. It was not. In the first place, there is no obligation upon this Government to keep ministers abroad in order to tell 

any stray American who may domicile himself in another country and 

become an inhabitant there how to conduct his commercial business. 

There is no necessity and no propriety in keeping a minister for such a purpose. Does the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. KAssoN] understand-he might well not understand ; if he had listened to the honorable gentleman from Indiana, and paid any deference to his opinions, he certainly would not understand-does he understand that an American citizen who goes abroad and domiciles himself in a foreign country, making that the place of his residence, becomes in 

many respects a citizen of that country f 

That is the very argument we have had here to-day; and it is a sound argument. Why, sir, an American going to Austria, where my 

honorable friend once represented this country, and plantin~ himself 

in business there, would be regarded, if a war with Anstna should 

arise, as a party at war with the country with which Austria was at war. Nobody would treat him as an American citizen except his own country, which might still protect him though he was abusing 

and misusing it. The rest of the world would treat him as an Austrian, because domiciled there. That j.s the argument of the honorable gentleman from New York, [Mr. HEWITT,] and it is the argument of a statesman in my estimation among the first in this or any 

country, Governor Marcy. That is his doctrine as read at the desk 

to-day-that Koszta, domiciled in America, was an American, en- titled to our protection, though he was not naturalized, and though 

he might not have given notice. Any boy at a law school knows 

that a man domiciled in a foreign country and doinO' busine s thereis treated as a citizen of that country. It is not worlh while to spend 

any time in establishing that proposition, which is maintained by thecourts of every country the world over, En?:land included, and long 

before the act of 1870 providing for expatriation of British subjects. 

Therefore, when the honorab1e gentleman from Iowa urges that a minister to Austria should not be accredited to Italy, (a thing I donot propose to provide for,) he must find some better reason than 

that an American domiciled t·here may require diplomatic protection. 

I say that if an American citizen establishes himself in business in 

Italy, he has no right to a k this country to keep a minister there toinform him how to organize his commercial business. 

If t.here be anything reasonable in the opposition to the view I hav~ pre ented, it is the view presented by the gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. CURTIN,] which is that this great country, with its.. 

great political power and prestige, should not count the cost; but 

should keep a representative in every country on the face of the 

earth that the "St.ars and Stripes" might be seen floating there as, an emblem of our principles of self-gove:mment. But that, he will 

allow me to say, is an extravagant demonstration of patriotism. 

I think life is too practical for such things. I say to him, with all 

deference, if we at home by sound and w1se legislation develop our- material interests, and at the same time give equal rights, not only 

political, but industrial, to all classes of our citizens, growing in 

wealth and population until within a few years we shall be known 
1568 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. MARcH 2, 

<Over the world as a country of 100,000,000 T/eople with wealth proportionp.te! and wtth our" Stars and Stripes' again ~oatiD;g-_on American ships m all the harbors of the world, such a policy W1ll do us far more honor, will give us far more glory, than to have a resident minister loafing about the streets of foreign cities without the means to 

pay for his lodpng and his board in a second-class hotel. 

No, Mr. Chauman, we might as well look this subject in the face 

fairly. This foreign service of ours is more--well, the word comes .and the word fits-more debased and more degraded than our own home service, and that is saying much. It has become the rule that .a poor devil who is not able to pension himself on the home department begs a forei~ consulship. If he is without repute, and so much 

without repute tnat he would discreilit a department of the Government at home, then be gets an appointment to represent us at a foreign government. 

Mv fl'iend from Iowa can make a ready application of that observation. I say my friend from Iowa can make it, for from the 

few remarks he made here to-day I recognize nobody is better able 

than he is to speak for what is occurring. :tfobody will suppose by 

my reference to him that I was unmindful of his own great merit 

.abroad. Nobody can suppose my reflection had reference to him, 

because I know none who did more honor to the foreign service than 

he did. But from his intimacy with the governments of the day he can very easily make application of the remark which I made to-day, 

that when a man is altogether unfit for the home department, when 

he would discredit a home department, he is fit for the foreign service. 

To that we have come in our diplomatic service. And, Mr. Chairman, no reasonable gentleman on either side of the House need suppose· he inflicts injury on the public service or the presti~e of the 

cmmtry when he strikes out of that bill all the resident m.misters I 

propose to strike out. Whatever may be their personal respectability; whatever may be their personal merit so far as their public 

service is concerned, it is not creditable because it is nil. Yes, sir; 

it is nil. No man without occupation in public life can maintain his 

respectability. Nothing is more likely to discredit them with the 

nations to which we send these gentlemen than to find them there 

without occupation and withon_t interest in the country where they are accredited. This is the lamentable fact for us to consider, be- cause we have no remedy for it but to abolish the missions. I have 

allowed myself in thase observations no greater freedom than I am entitled to exercise, and, although I have allowed myself to look to 

what might be supposed to be political aspects of the case, that must 

not detract from the main body of the argument, and that is, this 

service is not necessary. It does not, as the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. CURTIN] said, contribute to the prestige of the country. 

I think it has just the contrary effect. I think, sir, the service detracts from the prestige of the country, that it is a great mistake to 

have such a service, and that it takes money out of the Treasury, 

and withou.t any necessity, for such expenditure. The gentleman 

from Illinois [Mr. SPRINGER] and I represent constituencies some- what different in their situation, which may account for our differ- ences occasionally on these questions of debil in appropriation bills. 

But I have never seen the day I was not with him when he proposed 

to refuse the public money to a service that-was of no value to the 

Government, and I am glad to have his encouragement now. I am dealing with a· service which I believe to be without value to us; and 

then comes the further fact that I believe it is actually discreditable. 

I would not have indulged in these remarks, and I would not have 

moved such an amendment to this bill, if the committee had not 

invited my attention to it. I would have considered it outside of my 

role. But although! am not amemberoftheCommitteeonForeign 

Affairs or the Committee on Appropriations, I am nevertheless a member of this House, and when I am called on by a committee 

which has matured an appropri~tion bill, when I am called on by 

them to consolidate two missions into one, it becomes my duty to 

say to this House and to that committee that they have not consolidated missions enough. They have presented to me a seund principle, and precisely the reason the honorable gentleman from Michigan, the member Qf the committee in charge of the bill, gives for 

consolidating two is a good reason for consolidating twelve, and I 

want to consolidate twelve. And there is nothingwhlchhe can say 

in support of the proposition. to consolidate two that does not apply ~ompletely and unanswerably to the proposition to consolidate twelve. 

Now, China remains. Our ministers to China were accredited to 

.Japan, Siam, Corea, and CQchin China, and under an administration 

of foreign affairs qillte as respectable as any we have ever had, 

quite as respectable in expel'ience and in original capacity. And 

yet they thought those eastern relations of ours could be conducted 

with one minister and he accredited to all those eastern countries. 

And so, as I said before, Mexico should be a~sociated with Central 

America. If we had had one minister accredited to the people and 

the countries on the west coast of the Pacific we would not have 

had this ugly picture which results from inoapable and conflicting 

ministers. 

And when the gentleman from Iowa tells us that the two Secretaries of State are in accord, when he tells us there was a keen and en- lightened appr-eciation of the development of om· American interests on the west coast of America in the policy of both, then ho must allow me to take the othel' horn of the dilemma. If these two Secretaries of ~tate are in accord, then God help this country from the stupidity 

and ignorance and incapacity of the ministers who represent the 

country, and ~veto all the world the impression we were at one moment rushing heedlessly to war and at another unduly subservient to the views of European powers, and indifferent to the interests and welfare of the South American republics. 

It will embarrass the honorable gentleman from Iowa, I imagine, 

to satisfy this side of the House at least, that he is correct in his 

view of this question, although he seems to have given entire satisfaction to his own side; but I am sure the gentleman from 'renness e, 

who gave his eloquent development of what he believed to be the 

American policy, will not accept the fact that the two-1 am em- barrassed in saying the two, Secretaries of State, because I know 

that the Secretaries of State do not represent the country abroad, 

and I should be doing myself the injustice which I think the di - tingnished gentleman from Iowa has done to himself if I employed 

the terms he has seen proper to use. I cannot talk about the former Secretary of State and the present Secretary of State in view of the 

foreign policy of this country, because neither one nor the other had 

control of it. Not a line could either of them honorably write that was not directed by the President of the United States. 

Therefore, the question that the gentleman from Iowa should have 

put to the House is: Was the President of the United States in accord 

with the gentlemanfrom Tennessee and withhimselff He ou~bt to 

have told us that the President of the United States was an eruightened and a consistent statesman, and that he had put his band to that 

good work, and that he proposed to continue in the line whick had 

been marked out. Unless the gentleman can tell us that he can tell 

nothing to the credit of either of these Secretaries of State. Now, he 

cannot tell us that to-day, and we cannot wait as he has invited us to do. It is not reasonable that we should wait. Why, the people we represent have not wait-ed. They have a keen sense of all 

political policies, and they take no liberties with their consciences. 

They exercise all freedom in choosing their lines of political conduct. 

They follow their instincts, their convictions, and when they say to 

each other that this is a great American empire, and that we hold 

relations to other American empires that we do not hold to European 

empires, they mean it. 

And, Mr. Chairman, whether it comes in 1819 in one form, or in 1850 

in another form, it is always the policy that is in the line of their 

instincts and of their consciences. It is not necessary that they 

should flaunt the Stars and Stripes and avow their readiness to make war for some foreign country. No advooo.te of the Monroe doctrine, 

no opponent of the Clayton-Bulwer treaty, no sympathizer with 

South American states to-day advocates any such policy. We never did advocate it. I say we, because I am cordially and warmly with 

those who do consider this country under obligations to separate 

itself, as our fathers taught us we should do, from all European alliances; to take to our souls with hooks of steel the American empires 

of our own continent and do by them all we can within the limits 

of our peaceful civilization. 

War only comes when we have contracted obliO'ations to them; 

and then we ought not to shrink from war. No decent, honorable 

country in the world would shrink from obligations contracted. The 

only question for American statesmen is to know what obligations we have contracted; and I say to-day, in view of this reference to 

South America, that we do not want any more dispatches ; and no criticism of either of the Secretaries of State has anything to do with 

it. It is our duty, if we can, to make peace between the South 

American states. This no man can question. Not to fight either ot 

them. Not to go to warwith either of them, but to bring the whole 

power of this Government, I mean the moral power, to make peace 

between these people. To make peace as an arbitrator, as a friend. 

That imposes no obligation to fight either of them, and if it does not 

impose any obligation to fight, with what face can honorable gentlemen tell us that we stop suddenly mid way in our career because we were going to fight 7 And I understood the honorable gentleman 

from Iowa [Mr. KAssONl to give this as a reason for what be seemed 

to consider an apparent out not a real difference of opinion or policy 

between the two Secretaries of State that he referred to. 

If I were permitted to style any expression as absm·d, if it were cour- teous or proper to do it1 I would feel compelled to stamp it as absurd. 

I never knew a man rn thehistory of this country of either political party who contended that we ought to make war with a South 

American state in order to develop happy or peaceful relations 

between it and other American states. And in this particular case 

there was not only no threat of wart but the Government of this 

country, if it had undertaken to declare war with a view to com- pelling Chili to make peace with Peru, would have become ridiculous 

before the people and would have been hooted out of the country. 

No such proposition wa& ever made, and I would deem it to be 

unfair if I insinuated that the Secretary of State, who initiated this 

policy, intended to bring on a war, or that he was in any danger of 

bringing on a war. That is all well enough for those to say who 

would proscribe him and discredit him. It is all very well for those 

to say who are finding excuses for not doing as he did. And as I 

feel myself to be no partisan of either party in this matter, as I do 

not cla.un for either party any well settled policy on this question, 

but as I propose myself to do exactly what the gentleman from Iowa 

[Mr. KASSON] said he would do, as I propose to do all I c"an either 

by voting or by my personal and public conduct to give this country 
1882. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1569 

its fullest development in assisting South .American countries, and a I would not he itate to deal with them a-s if they were the strongest 

empires in the world, and then give them the benefit of o.ur strength, so for that reason I must repel any excuse that is made for not doing 

what was right and what was in the line of avowing a decided pref- erence for American influence as opposecl to European influence in the 

politic of South American states. And what was in process of being 

done that we were on the eve of a wart If we were on the eve of a war it must necessarily be because we were fnl.filling some engagement we had made. Well, if we had made the engagement, then we ought to have made the war to maintain it. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, I might as well cover the question to-day as nt any other time. The gentleman from Iowa has alluded to it. lie 

has spoken of the ~reat interest he takes in these American questions, 

these communicatiOns. I take as great interest in them as he doe . Ile referred, I think, in these observations, to the communications 

between the two oceans. I take as much interest in that as he doe . I must say that, having got a railroad to the Pacific coast, having 

got two railroads to the Pacific coast, having got three, four, five 

rai'lroads to the Pacific coast, I am not as anxious to have a canal as I was when we had no railroad at all. And I am very free to say that 

when I have a. canal, and have it by my own vote, it shall be over a territory with whose uovernment I have a treaty that guarantees 

protection to my people, and that r should have the right to join that 

country in giving that protection. That is the kernel of the whole 

question with me. Whether it be here or whether it he there, the 

country over which the communication passes must he a country 

with which we have a relation, and that relation must secure to us the whole power of that country, and it must give us the right to 

give them the whole power of this country. Any other arrangement 

will end a that Panama communication did. There we made a treaty; 

there we had the right to ~uarantee it; and now we have seen all the 

stock of that company sold to a foreign company; and if you can. suppo e that the l!'rench company has any relation to the French Government you can ee that foreign government enjoying first of all the 

fruit of our guarantee and then insisting that it too shall join in that 

gnarantee. 

Now, I am not extravagant, Mr. Chairman, because there is no country in America with which we have not a right to make that 

treaty. I am ~mly astonished that any Secretary of State, be he the 

present or he he the last-that any Secretary of State should stop on that que tion to deal with any foreign country not even with England. For I stake, I was going to say my credit a-s a public man, 

but I will not do that for fear I might be deemed presumptuous, 

therefore I will only say that so far as my light goes, so far as I can under tand the tl:eaty, it is no obstacle at all; and I speak not only 

for myself, but I peak for the Government of this country under a Democratic administration. :Mr. Buchanan, who, if we had followed 

the gentlt man fi·om Indiana [Mr. ORTH] in this debate, would have 

been covered with dirt and with the filth that that gentleman en- deavored to throw upon the Democracy of Indiana, but against whose 

wi dom and experience as a statesman and a diplomate not even he 

could have cast astone-Mr.Buchanan wascalled upon toconsiderthis 

Clayton-Bnlwer treaty as late as 1859, and he did not hesitate to 

in truct his minister to make a treaty with :Mexico for a transit aero s the Isthmus. We got a transit across Tehuantepec, and we stipulated 

in that treaty, the Clayton-Bulwer treaty being in full force, that our people and the property of our people should be protected by 

the power of Mexico and by the power of the United States Army 

and Navy. We paid no attention to the Clayton-Bulwer treaty as forbidding forts and troops on the Isthmus. That treaty was for a special purpose. That treaty had reference to one project, and that 

project has long since exploded. It never had any application to 

Mexico or any other Central American state than Nicaragua, and it 

ha.s not now any application to Nicaragua. · We never he itated a moment in our determination to disregard 

that treaty. We were at a loss how to do it. We desired to do it 

peacefully. Mr. Buchanan, as President of the United States, did it 

precisely as General Garfield did it, and as I presume Mr. Arthur is 

endeavoring to do it. He did it by diplomatizing and asking the 

c.onsent of England, that it might be done by mutual consent; but 

he never conceded an obligation to respect it. He regarded it as a piece, I will not say of sharp practice, because it received the assent 

of an overwhelming majority of the Senate of the United States, and 

however full of error I may consider their vote I shall not discredit 

it. I leave it with all the dignity and all the sanction that any 

treaty can have. But the point I make is that it does not interfere 

with our right to make a treaty with Mexico or a Central American 

state to protect our transit; not even )Vith Nicaragua itself. 

.Mr. RANDALL. Will the gentleman yield to me for a question t 

1\fr. McLANE. Certainly. Mr. RANDALL. I desire to ask the gentleman whether when that 

treaty was made and ratified there was not in the possession of one of 

the officers of the Government a treaty much more advantageous to 

the United States known as the Heiss treaty f 

Mr. McLANE. Yes, sir; in the posession of the Secretary of State, an officer of the Government, and I was about to say in the hostile 

possession, for he locked it up in his desk and refused to send it to 

the Senate. 

Mr. RANDALL. Who locked it up f The Secretary of State' 

Mr. McLANE. According to my idea. it must have been the PresXITI-99 

ident, for I do not reco~e the Secretary of State in that matter. That treaty was the He1ss treaty. 

Mr. RANDALL. And that was an American treaty f 

Mr. McLANE. That was an American treaty in the broadest sense of the term. It was precisely the same treaty that was negotiated 

with Mexico by Mr. Buchanan in regard to the Tehauntepec route. That treaty by the a·ccompanying military convention gave to this 

country the right to send its Army and Navy to assist Mexico in pro- tecting American life and property on that transit, and the treaty 

with Nicaragua did the same thing. Dnt both the one and the other are now in the tomb of the Capulets; they are neither of them living 

instruments to-day. 

We have to deal now with the Clayton-Bulwer treaty as it stands. 

Therefore I say to those who have any respect for my opinion that our issue ought to be, that to-day the Clayton-Bnlwer treaty has no interfering force in our relations with Mexico and the Central American states. 

Mr. RANDALL. That is right. 

Mr. McLANE. It not only does not exclude us from :Mexico, but 

it does not exclude us from Panama, it does not exclude us from Hon- duras; and I do not admit that it excludes us from Nicaragua. It 

has served its purpose in Nicaragua, and such of you as want to vote 

for a Nicaragua transit can vote, in my opinion, for it without fear 

of the Clayton-Bulwer treaty. 

I should, however, be sorry to see any man vote for that transit, or for any other, until he ha.s the right to protect it by the power of 

the American Government. He ought never to let a dollar of the 

public money go for one of those communications until this country 

has the right in its full sovereignty to take care of tha.t dollar. Let 

your Eads canal or ship railway and your Nicaragua transit go to 

the winds until you have such a treaty. 

No man desires more than I do to see a communication open from 

the Gulf of :Mexico to the Pacific Ocean. I love my own coast line 

first, and I would not want to build a canal that required me also to 

build an enormous navy commensurate in power with the navies of 

all the world to protect it. What folly for us to suppo e that we can go down to Panama or to Nicaragua and guarantee the neutrality of a canal there against all Europe. But as one of these Secretaries of State said, so mew here in that very 

voluminous correspondence, "on land this country is invincible." 

Do you remember it, Mr. Chairman f Do you remember when Mr. Lowell was told to say to Lord Granville that this country was invincible on land¥ Now we can go to Tehuantepec with our railTOatl 

and ask odds of no man when we g_o to protect American life and 

property, when the railroad is but little over a thousand miles from our own frontier. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gen tleman has expired. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I move that the committee now rh;e. 

Mr. WILLIAMS, of Wisconsin. I ask the gentleman to yield to me for a moment, that I may obtain an order to print in t he RECORD 

certain papers which I have. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I yield for that purpose. :Mr. \VILLIAMS, of Wisconsin. I ask consent to have printed in 

the RECORD a communication from the Secretary of State, with ac- companying documents, in reference to the consul at Antigua, British 

West Indies. 

There was no objection, and it was so ordered. 

The comJ;Ilnnication, with accompanying papers, is as follows : 

DEPARTME...'IT OF STATE, 

Washington, February 24, 1882. 

Sm : I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 22d instant, 

asking to be furnished with such facts as may be used in the endeavor to secure favorable action on the recommendation of the Department that the OQnsul at Antigua, British West Indies. be placed in Schedule B, with a salary of $1,500 per annum. Complying with this request, I send you inclosed a copy of lli. Evarts's letter to the cha.irinan of the Senate Committee on .Appropriations, and of dispatches Nos. 38 and 55 from the consul at Antigua., all bearing upon the subject. 'l'hese 

papers will be found to contain a statement of the importance of our interests in .Antigua, which it is believed will convince Con!ITess of the necessity of making 

the appropriation asked for. I fully concur in t'he recommendation of my :prede· cessor, and belleve that the advancement of our commercial interests in the1sland 

will be greatly furthered by providing the cont~ul with the means of devoting t-o those interests his whole time and energy. This appropriation was requested in the estimates submitted to Congress at its 

present session, and when omitted from the bill by the sub-committee of the House was strongly urged before that body and subsequently before the full committee. 

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

FRE.D'lL T. FRELINGHUYSEli. Hon. CHARLES G. WILLIA.liS. 

Inclosures: Mr. Evarts to Mr. Davis, January 6, 1881; dispatches Nos. 38 and 55 from Antigua. 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, 

Washinyton, JanuanJ 6, 1881. 

SIR: I have the honor to inclose herewith for your information a copy of a rlis· 

:patch of the 4th of December last, from the con ui at Anti rna, British West Indies, m which he solicits the Department to reco=end to Congress that an appropriation be made for a salary for his office. 

The increa. e in tho trade of that Island with lbe United States in the la.st two years i quite noticeable, and i believed to be in a great mea.sure due to tlle effot·1s 

and energy of Mr. Jackson, the llre ent incumbent of the office. In view of Mr. 

Jackson's representations. and in tho belief that it will ad vance the interests of o~t.r 

commerce WJth that island, I have the honor to recommend that the sum of $1,5('l: 

per an.num may be appropriated as alary for that offico, to be included in SchedtL 1: 

B, which prohlbits conP.u.lar officers of that g:radt from engaging in busine · . I have the honor to b sir, your obedient servant, WM. M. EVARTS. Hon, Hrulnr G. D .. vns, Oha.irman Committee on Appropriations, &nate. 
1570 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. MARcH 2, 

finclosure : Mr. Jackson to Mr. Hay, No. 38, December 4, 1880.) 

UNITED STATES CONSULATE AT ANTIGUA, 

December 4, 1880. 

Sm: I have the honor to inform you that I again make application to the Depart- ment of ota.te to use it.q influence with Congress to place this consulate on a. better 

footing than that which at present sruTounds it. 

The rapid increa.qe of trade, with the a. urance that the growth will attain greater proportions, would seem to justify the act. The shipment of sugar to the United States alone from this port, for the ensuing 

year, will reach the respectable figure of 14,000,000 pounds, With a declared export Yalne of $700,000, which is an increase of fully 100 per cent. over the preceding year. The exports from the United States to this port for the same period of time will 

exceed the sum of $400,000, which is also a considerable increase over the preceding year. 

The total exports from this port for the ensuing year will amount to $1,500,000, 

while the imports will amount to at least. $1,000,000. 

The total exports of the British Leeward Islands, of which Antigua is the capi- tal and residence of the governor-in-general, comprising the islands of .A.nti!ma, 

Dominica, Saint Christopher, Montserrat, Nevis, .A.uquilla., and Tort.ula-orthe Virgin Islands-amount annually to the sum of $3,200,000, while their imports in the same period of time amount to the sum of $2,365,000. This trade is rapidly turning to the United States. In addition to the statement cont-ained in dispatches Nos. 21 and 22, I would state that there are twelve a-rrivals an1l departures of steamers at thi.q port each 

month, and that a second' line is about to lJe established between New York and 

thE' e islands. 

The fees of this office are barely in excess of last year, aJt.hough such a noticeable increase in trade, owing to the carrying trade oeing monopolized by British ves. els. 

The strong but ineffectual effort made bytheDepartmentofStat.ewith Congress to establish a salaried consulate at this port was most kindly appreciated by the incumbent, and stren$lhened his hands to promote trade between the two countries. 

'!'rusting reneweu efforts will be made with Congress with the prospect of better success, I have the honor to remain, sir, your obedient. servant, 

CHESTER E. JACKSON, 

Hon. JOHN llu, United States Oons1.tl. 

Assistant Secretary of State, Washington, D. a. 

(No. 55.] UNITED STATES COKSULATE, 

Antigua, September 5, 1881. 

SIR: The time drawing :aear for the assemblin"' of Congress, I again make ap- plication to the Department of State to recommend to Congress that tbis consulaw 

be advanced to Class B, with a salary of $1,500 per annum. The Department ha-s twice attempted to ad vance the interests of this consulate, 

but has failed, I have reason to believe, because of the petitions arriving too late to place in the general recommendation by the Secretary of State for changes 

necessary to the several consulates. 

I trust this will receive the Department's kind consideration and recommendation. 

I beg to refer you to dispatches No .. 22, 34, and 38 for statements of trade and 

other items necesilaryto a tatement to be plaeed before Congress. In addition to these, I would mention that, owing to the rapid changing of ownership to resident 

proprietors, the entire product of the Island, with small exception, is diverted in 

favor of t.lJe United States. This fact is strengthening to imports from America, 

of wbich there is a considerable increase over last year. I wish to assure the 

Department of my constant exertion in furthering the interests of trade between 

the two conntries. I am laboring under serious disadvantages in my trading, owing to competition by firms of large capital, who, to my discomfiture, seize upon .American improve- ments as soon as I have proved their merits to the purchaser or to the satisfaction 

of the trade. If Congre swill strengthen this oftice, I shall gladly do my utmost; if not, I shall be compelled to resign. I have the honor to remain, your obedient servant, 

CHESTER E . .T .A.CKSON, RoBERT R. Hrrr, Esq., Consul. 

Assistant Secretary of State, Wa1$hington, D. a. 

1\fr. BURROWS, of Miclrigan. I now move that the committee 

rise. 

The motion was agreed to. 

The committee accordingly rose; and Mr. BRIGGS having taken 

the chair as Speaker p~·o tempm·e, Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts, re- ported that the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the 

Union had had under consideration. the bill (H. R. No. 3830) making 

appropriations fdr the consnlar and diplomatic service of the Government for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1t!83, andforotherpurposes, 

and had come to no resolu@on thereon. 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. I have not interfered with the debate to-day upon the consular and diplomatic appropriation bill; 

but I trust the House is now ready to make an order to limit general 

debate on that bill. I therefore move that when the Rouse shall 

again in Committee of the Whole resUJD.e consideration of the consu- lar and diplomatic appropriation bill all further general debate shall 

be limited to one hour. 

:Mr. SPRINGER. Does the gentleman propose to go on with the 

consideration of that bill to-night f 

Mr. BURROWS, of Michigan. Not to-night. I only want to obtain from th~ House an order to limit fm-ther general debate on the 

bill to one hour. 

The motion to limit debate was agreed t6. 

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. 

A message from the Senate, by Mr. SYMPSON, one of its clerks, annotmced that the Senate had passed with amendments, in which 

the concurrence of the House was requested, the bill (H. R. No. 3844) 

to establish post-routes. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

Mr. BURROWS, of l\fichiuan. I move that the House now adjourn. 

Mr. SPRINGER. I ask the gentleman to yield to me to introduce a joint resolution for reference to the Committee on Printing. 

l\fr. MILLS. I call for the regular order. 

The SPEAKER. The regular order is the motion to adjourn. Mr. BURROWS, of Micliio·an. I will withdraw that motion for 

the present, 

REBELLIO~ RECORDS. 

Mr. SPRINGER, by unanimous consent, introduced a joint resolution (H. R. No. 150) concerniDg the publication anu distribution of 

the official records of the rebellion ; which was rer.d a first and 

second time, referred to the Committee on Printing, and ordered to 

be printed. ED)IU~D RYAN. 

l\Ir. HISCOCK, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. 

No. 4758) granting a pension to Edmund Ryan; which was read a first and second time, referred to the Committee on In valid Pensions, 

and ordered to be printed. 

CHINESE ThTDEMllo~TY FUND-CALDERA CLAIMS. 

l\fr. O'NEILL, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. No. 

4759) supplementary to an act approved June 19, 1878, giving to tho 

Court of Claims jurisdiction of the Caldera claims upon the Chi- nese indemnity fund; which was read a first and second time, re- ferred to the Committee on Foreign Aftairs, and ordered to be printed. 

WASHINGTO~ CITY AND POL.~T LOOKOUT RAILROAD. 

l\Ir. orNEILL also, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. 

No. 4760) to authorize the Washington City and Point Lookout Railroad Company to extend a railroad into and within the District of 

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

Committee on the District of Columbia, and ordered to be printed. 

RETIRED LIST FOR NO~-COMIDSSIO~"ED OFFICERS. 

l\lr. BEACH, by unanimous consent, introduced a bm (H. R. No. 

4761) to authorize a retired list for non-commissioned officers of the 

United States Army who have served therein continuously, honorably, and faithfully for a period of thirty years or upward; which was read a first and second tfrne, referred to the Committee on Military Affairs, and ordered to be printed. 

WILLIAM S. GRANT. 

l\fr. DUNNELL, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R . . · 

No. 4762) for the relief of WilliamS. Grant; which was read a first 

and second time, referred to the Committee on War Claims, and or- dered to be printed. MAJOR-GE~"ERAL EDWARD HATCH. 

Mr. HATCH, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. No. 

4763) to authorize the accounting officers of the Treasury to settle 

the accounts of Brevet Major-General Edward Hatch, United States 

Army, chairman and disbursing officer of the special Ute commission appointedunderactofCongressofMay3, 1878; which wasread a first and second time, referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs, 

and ordered to be printed. 

HARBOR OF REFUGE, BIG SA.J..~Y CREEK, l<."EW YORK. 

Mr. SKINNER, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. No. 

4 764) authorizing the construction of a harbor of refuge at the mouth 

of Big Sandy Creek, New York; which was read a first and second 

time, referred to the Committee on Commerce, and ordered to bo 

printed. PHILLIP FELSENTHAL. 

Mr. CASSIDY, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. No. 

4765) for the relief of Phillip Felsenthal; which was read a first and 

second time, referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs, and ordered 

to be printed. 

JOIDi WILEY. 

Mr. SMITH, of Pennsylvania, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. No. 4766) to remove 1W:te charge of desertion from the 

military record of John Wiley; which was read a first and seoond 

time, referred to the Committee on Military Affairs, and ordered to 

be printed. 

MAJOR R. SLATER. 

l\fr. l\I.ATSON, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. No. 

4 767) to pay Major R. Slater for property destroyed; which was read a first and second time, referred to the Committee on Claims, and 

ordered to be printed. 

MARSH LU.TDS IN OHIO. 

1\fr. ROBINSON, of Ohio, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill 

(H. R. No. 4768) to confirm to the State of Ohio certain ma.rsh lands; 

which was read a first and second time, referred to the Committee on the Public Lands, and ordered to be printed. 

J. V. DAVIS. 

l\fr. BARBOUR, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. 

No. 4769) for the relief of J. V. Davis; which was read a first and 

second time, referred to t he Committee on Military Affairs, and 

ordered to be printed. 

CLARA H. FLOWER Alo.'D OTHERS. 

Mr. BLANCHARD, by unanimous censeut, introduced a. bill (H. 

R. No. 4770) forthe relief of Clara H. Flower and others; whi~h wru; 

read a first and second time, referred to the Committee ou y,· ar Claims, and ordered to be printed. 

MARY T. HICKMA....~ .Al\'D OTHERS. 

Mr. BLANCHARD also, by unanimous consent, introduced a, bill 

(H. R. No. 4771) for the relief of Mary T. Hickman and others: 

which was read a first and second time, referred tf.l the Committ:~o 

on War Claima, and ordered to be printed. 

C. A. PRUITT A..."'D J, M. JO~ES. 

Ur CHALl!ERS, by unanimous consent, intl'gdu~ed a hill (H. B.. 
1882. OONGRES8!0NAL RECORD-· HOUSE. 1571 

No. 4772) for the relief of C. A. Pruitt and J. :M. Jones, executors of 

Joseph Pruitt, deceased; which was read a :first and second time, 

referred to the Committee on Claims, and ordered to be printed. 

B. F. YOE. 

Mr. PETTIBONE, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. 

No. 4773) for the relief of B. F. Yoe; which was read a first and sec- ond time, referred to the Committee on War Claims, and ordered to 

be printed. 

JAMES WffiTE AND OTHERS. 

Mr. PETTIBONE also, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill 

(H. R. No. 4774) for·the relief of James White and the legal representatives of William White, deceased; which was read a first and 

econd time, referred to the Committee on War Claims, and ordered 

to be printed. 

LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF JOHN G. BYNUM. 

Mr. PETTIBONE also, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill 

(H. R. No. 4775) for the relief of the legal representatives of John 

G. Bynum, deceased; which was read a :fir~t and second time, re- ferred to the Committee on War Claims, and ordered to be printed. 

WARREN HALL. 

Mr. HOLMAN. At the instance of the gentleman from New Hampshire, [Mr. HALL,] who has char~e of a corresponding bill before the 

Committee on War Claims, I desrre to take from the Speaker's table a Senate bill for the relief of a colored man who for thirteen years 

has been asking for relief, to which, according to the report in this 

case, he i very clearly entitled. The bill to which I refer is Senate bill No. 892, for the relief of Warren Hall. 

1\fr. }ULLS. What action does the gentleman desire f 

Mr. HOLMAN. I ask that the bill be taken up and passed. 

Mr. MILLS. I object to the passage of any bill at this time when 

there are so few members present. 

Mr. HOLMAN. Then I shall have to call for the regular order. Mr. SINGLETON, of Illinois. I move that the House adjourn. 

POST-ROUTES. 

Mr. BINGHAM. The bill (H. R. No. 3844)to establish post-routes 

is now on the Speaker's table, having been returned from the Senate 

with amendments. I have made an examination of the amendments, 

and there is no legislation in them, except merely the establishment 

of post-ront ~. I ask immediate concurrence in the amendments. 

'£he Post-Office Department desires the prompt passage of this bill in 

order to determine upon the spring lettings. 

The SPEAKER. Is there objection Y 

}lr. HOLMAN. I wish to say that it is unusal action on the part 

of Congress to pass that bill so early in the session. 

l\1r. BING HilL It is passing early because the Post-Office Depart- ment has asked it, in order that it might be allowed to make con- tracts in the spring lettings. 

Mr. HOLMAN. I understood the gentleman's statement. 

Mr. BINGHAM. We will have a supplemental bill. 

Mr. HOLMAN. The supplemental billmaynotpass for sometime. 

Why will not the ~entleman from Pennsylvania allow the bill to go 

uack to the Comrruttee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads' 

Mr. BINGHAM. That will only be battle-door and shuttle-cock. 

\Ve will pass another bill in two weeks. 

Mr. HOLMAN. We are asked to pass this one earlier than usual. 

Mr. BINGHAM. And it is only asked to be passed by the Department in connection 'vith the spring lettings. 

Mr. HOLMAN. But there are several gentlemen who wish other 

routes establishetl. 

Mr. BINGHAM. There will be another reported in two weeks, 

containing other routes. 

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to taking from the Speaker's 

taule the amendments of the Senate to the post-route billY 

There was no objection; and the amendments of the Senate to the 

bill (H. R. No. 3844) to establish post-routes, were taken up. 

Mr. ROBINSON, of Massachusetts. They contain nothing but 

post-routes. 

:Mr. BINGHAM. That is all. I move they be concurred in. 

The motion was agreed to. 

Mr. BINGHAM moved to reconsider the vote by which the amendments of the Senate were concurred in ; and also moved that the 

motion to reconsider be laid on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE. 

By unanimous consent leave of absence was granted in the following cases: 

To Mr. MUTCHLER, until March 13, on account of important business; 

To Mr. COLERICK, until next Monday, on account of important business; and 

To Mr. BARrus, of Massachusetts, for two dRys, on account of important business. 

WARREN HALL. 

Mr. MILLS. I withdraw my objection to the request by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HOLMAN] for unanimous consent. 

Mr. HOL~IAN. I ask again for unanimous consent in behalf of the 

gentleman from New Hampshire [Mr. HALL] to take from the Speak- er's table the uHl (S. No. 892) for the relief of Warren Hall, a colored man from Saint Louis. 

The bill was read, as follows: 

Be it enacted, &c., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, au- thorized and directed to pay to WaiTen Hall, out of any moneys in the Treasury derived from the proceeds of captured and abamloned property, th.e sum of$1,125.61, 

being the proceeds of five bales of cotton voluntarily turned over to Thomas H. 

Yeatman, assistant special agent of the Treasury Department, -on July 7, 1863, by 

said Warren Hall, which saia proceeds have been paicl into the Treasury. 

The SFEAKER. Is there objection¥ 

There was no o1jection, and the bill was taken from the Speaker's 

table and read a fir ·t and second time. 

Mr. HOLMA...~. On behalf of the gentleman from New Hampshire 

I ask this letter be priiJ.ted in the RECORD. 

There was no objection, and the letter is as follows: 

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, March 19~1880. 

Srn: In compliance with t-he request of your committee, of the 18th instant, by its elerk, I transmit herewith copies of papers on file in this Department -elating 

to the claim of Warren Hall, for the proceeds of five bales of cotton. The proceeds of the cotton in question, amounting to $1,125.61, were covered into the Treasury as proceeds of captured and abandoned property, and no claim therefor bas been maue except by Warren Hall. 

This claim is of the class referred to by the Secreta.rv of the Treasury in a report to be found in Senate Executive Document No. 22, Fortieth Congress, second ses- sion, pages 6 and 7, in which the Secretary states that "certain agent.s, acting under a. misapprehension of the instructions of the Department, inrluoed owners of cotton to bring in and voluntarily abandon it, on the assurance that the same, or its proceeds, woulll be restored on application to the Department. Therefore, 

in any particular case upon due proof, and where the agent who received the property certified that he bad given such assurances, Secretary Chase directed its re· lease or the payment of its proceeds, considering that neither justice nor good faith warranted the retention by the Government of property thus voluntarily con. fided to its protection. 

Respectfully, JOHN SHERMAN, Secretary. llon. E . S. BRAGG, 

Ohairman Committee on War OUt..ims, Hause of IlepTesentatives. 

Mr. ROBINSON, of Massachusetts. I wish the gentleman would 

tell us whether this has the indorsement of any committee. 

Mr. HOLMAN. ThegentlemanfromNewHampshirewasrequested 

to make this motion by order of his committee; but being confined 

to bis room he has asked me to do it for him. 

Mr. ROBINSON, of }fassachusetts. In the confusion we did not 

before hear the gentleman's statement. 

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

read the third time, and passed. Mr. HOLl\tiAN 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. 

POST OF FORT THORNBURGH. 

The SPEAKER, by unanimous consent, laid before the House the 

following executive communication; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed: 

To the Senate and House of Representatives: 

I transmit herewith for the consideration of Congress a communication from the 

Secretary of War, dated the 18th ultimo, inclosing plans and estimates for the con· struction of the po t of Fort Thornburgh, in Utah Territory, and recommending 

fur =~~~:~~~f $84,000 for that purpose, and that the same be made available 

CHESTER A. ARTHUR. EXECUTIYX MANSIO:-<, March 2, 1882. 

And then, on motion ofMr. BURROWS, gf:Michigan, (atfifty-eight 

minutes after four o'clock p.m.,) the House adjourned. 

PETITIO~S, ETC. 

The following memorials, petitions, and other papers were laicl on the Clerk's desk, under the rule, and referred as follows: 

By Mr. BAYNE: The petition of ex-soldiers of Allegheny County, 

Pennsylvania, in favoc of the passage of the bill to establish a soldiers' home at Erie, Pennsylvania-to the Committee on Military 

Affairs. 

AJso, the resolutions of the Philadelphia board of marine lmderwriters, urging the passage of the bill relating to the United States 

Signal Corps-to the Committee on Commerce. 

By Mr. BLAND: The petition of John T. Collier, of :Missouri, relative to the pension laws-to'the Committee on Pensions. 

By Mr. BRIGGS: Memorial of Charles H. Dalton, treasurer of the 

Merrimack Manufacturing Company, of Lowell, Massachusetts, and 

the treasurers of 47 other manufacturing corporations situated in 

Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont./ and Massachusetts, asking for the 

passage of an act creating a tariff commission-to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. J. H. BURROWS: The petition of W. W. Moore and many 

others, citizens of Avalon, Livingston County, Missouri, praying for 

the rest.oration of fractional currency-to the Committee on Banking and Currency. 

By Mr. CAMPBELL: The petition of citizens of Blair County, Pennsylvania, praying Congress to adopt as spee<lily as possible snch stringent measures as will destroy the monstrous evils of polygamy-to 

the Committee on the Judiciary. 

Also, memorial of the American Souiety of Civil Engineers, asking 

Con~ress to authorize the appointment of a commission of experts to 

test Iron, steel, and other materials used in the consti·uction of bridges, 

buildings, &c.-to the Committee on 1\lanufaatures. : Also, the petition of honorably discharged soldiers and sailors of 

the late war re iding in Bedford County, Pennsylvania, for the passage of the bill to e~:~tabli ·h a soldiers' home a.t Erie, Pennsylvaniato the Committee on Military Affairs. 
1572 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. MARCH 3, 

Also, memorial and resolutions of the uuited branches of the Land 

League of John town, Pennsylvania, relative to the imprisonment of 

American citizens in British dungeons, and demanding their speedy 

trial or immediate release-to the Committee on Foreign .Ail'airs. 

By Mr. CARLISLE: Papers relating to the claim of M. L. Broadwill, J. S. Frozen, and Joseph B. McClintock; of J. S. Frozen, of 

Jo eph B. McClintock, of thee tate ofThomas V. Stirman, of Saint 

Andrew's Lodge, No. 18, Free and Accepted l\la ons, Cynthiana, Kentucky, and of Isaac N. Webb-severally to the Committee on War 

Claims. 

By Mr. COBB : The petition of citizens of Indiana, for continuing 

the improvement of the Wabash and White Rivers, and for recon- structing the lock dam on the Wabash River near Mount Carmel, 

in the State of Illinoi - to the Committee on Commerce. 

Also, the petition of citizens of Greene County, Indiana, praying 

Congress to pass a law allowing the producer of tobacco to selllOO 

pounds of his annual product without :first procuring a license-to 

the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. CROWLEY: Papers relating to the claim of James J. 

Cooper-to the Committee on Claims. 

By Mr. CULLEN: The resolutions of the Land League of Braidwood, Illinois, in reference to American citizens in British prisonsto the Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

By M:r. DEUSTER: The petition of .A.. H. T. Holsten and 2'20 

others citizens of the District of Columbia, prayin~ Congress to 

abolish the licen e which exacts of produce dealers selling from stalls or stands in market an annual license of 25-to the Committee on the District of Columbia. 

By Mr. DIBBLE: The petWon of citizens of North Carolina and 

Georgia, for equalizing the dnty on foreign rice imported into the 

United States-to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. DUNNELL: Memorial of William S. Grant, asking for 

relief-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. ELLIS: Papers relating to the claim of Clark .A.. Fultonto the same committee. 

By Mr. GEDDES: ThepetitionofJames.A.llison andl30others, citi- zens of Mansfield, and of I. Brinkerhoff and 105 others, citizens of 

Plymouth, Richland County, Ohio, for the enactment of laws to 

suppress polygamy-severally to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

By Mr. HARDY: The petition of James O'Brien, praying that the 

charge of de ertion may be removed from his military record-to the 

orumittee on Military .Ail'airs. 

By Mr. HAWK: The petition of D. S. Donegan and 75 others, citi- zens of Erie, Wbiteside County, Illinois, for legislation for the suppression of polygamy-to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

By Mr. HENDERSON: The petition of William J. McLaughlin, 

for relief from loss of postage-stamps stolen from the post-office at 

Reynolds, Tilinois-to the Committee on Claims. 

By Mr. HOBLITZELL: The petition of the Baltimore Drug Exchange for Pharmacists and .A. pothecaries, praying for the repeal of the 

stamp tax on proprietary medicines and kindred articles-to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. HOOKER: The petition of citizens of Mississippi, for legislation to regulate charges for railway transportation-to the Committee on Commerce. By Mr.HOUK: PapersrelatingtotheclaimofMrs.Lucy .A.. Baileyto the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. LACEY: The petition of .A.. L. Smith, J. W. French, B. S. 

Spoftord, and 55 others, citizens of Michigan, and of Hon. G. W. Van 

Aken, J. E. Stricklon, W . .A.. Barnum, and 51 others, citizens of Branch 

County, Michigan, praying for relief from the unjust discriminations 

of transportation lines-severally to the Committee on Railways and 

Canals. 

ByMr.M.A.NNING: Papers relating totheclaimof John C. Thompson, and of William H. Quinn-severally to the Committee on Claims. 

By Mr. MILLER: Memorial of citizens of Guy's Mills, Crawford 

County, Pennsylvania, on the que tion of polygamy, adopted at a public meeting February 22, 1882-to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

Also, the petition of C. E. Shader, of Conneautville, Pennsylvauia, 

in favor of an equalization of bounties-to the Select Committee on the Payment of Pensions, Bounty, and Back Pay. · Also, the petition of 80 iron-workers of Wheatland, Mercer County, 

Pennsylvania, asking for the passage of a bill to correct defects in 

the revenue laws-to the Committee on 'Vavs and :Means . 

Also, the petition of Hiram S. Wa~hburn, for relief-to the same committee. 

Also, the re olutions of the Philadelphia Board of Marine Underwriters, favoring the bill for putting the Signal Corps Service of the 

United States .Army on a permanent basis.-to the same committee. 

Also, papers relating to the claim of William S. Stockton-to the same committee. 

By Mr. PEELLE: Paper relating to the claim of Andrew H. 

Turner-to the Committee on Claim . By Mr. RICH: The petition of citizens of Tu cola County and of 

citizens of Lapeer County, in the State of Michigan, for the Tepeal of 

the tax on bank deposits and the two-cent stamp on bank checks and 

draft -severally to the Committee on Ways and Mean . By Mr. W. E. ROBINSON: The petition of ex-Union soldiers, praying for the pas age of the Blis bill, granting a pension to soldiers and 

a1lors of tb.e late war who were confined in confederate pri ons-to 

the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

Also, papers relating to the application of Jeremiah P. Phelan, 

hospital steward, to be placed on the retired list--to the Committee on 1\lilitary Affairs. 

By Mr. J. HYATT Sl\ITTH: The petition, si!med by over 6,000 citi- zens of different tates of the Union, for legis9.ation for the suppression of polygamy-to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

By Mr. SPAULDING: The petition of Samuel G. McLaughlin, praying to be relieved from the charge of desertion-to the Committee on Military .Ail'air . . By Mr. SPOONER: Memorial of the city councii of the city of 

Providence, Rhode Island, concerning the improvement of Providence 

Harbor and Narragansett Bay-to the Committee on Commerce. 

By Mr. WILLI.A.l\1 G. THOMPSON: The petition of 4GO citizens 

of Poweshiek County, Iowa, for legislation for the suppression of 

polygamy-to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

By 1\lr. WEST: Papers relating to the application of Henry S. 

Van de Carr and Elsie M. Reynolds, for extension of a patent-to the 

Committee on Patents. 

By Mr. CHARLES G. WILLIAMS: The remonstrance of J. I. Case, 

James H. Kelley, and 18 others, ves el-owners, of Racine, Wisconsin, 

against the passage of House bill No. 4260, to regulate marine shipping-to the Committee on Commerce. 

By Mr. WILLIS: Paper relating to the claim of H. T. Figg-to 

the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. MORGAN R. WISE: The petition of Jacob Cox and 2@ 

other soldiers and of J. S. Kunginsmith and 36 other soldiers, for the 

establishment of a soldiers' home at Erie, Pennsylvania-severally 

to the Committee on Military .Ail'airs. 

Petitions, memorials, &c., were reported from committee und~r 

clause 2 of Rule XXII, and referred as follows: 

By Mr. HEl'<I"'DERSON, from the Committee on Military .Ail'a.irs: 

The resolutions of the Philadelphia conference of Baptist ministers, 

against the pa&Sage of House bill No. 2677-to the Committee on Education and Labor. 

By Mr. MASON, from the Co~ittee on Claims: The petition of 

Sidney P. Gambia, postmaster-to the Committee on the Post-Office 

and Post-Roads. 

By Mr. POUND, from the Committee on the Public Lands: The 

petition of Dr. 1\iary E. Walker-to the Committee on the District of 

Columbia. 

By Mr. R.A.Y, from the Committee on Claims: The petition of 

Thomas Foster and E . . Leonidas Smith-to the Committee on War 

Claims. 

Ji'rom the Select Committee on the Payment of Pensions, Bounty, 

and Back Pay: The petition of Jane M. McCrabb, for a pensionto the Committee on Pensions. 

From the Committee on Commerce : .A. memorial of the San Franci co (California) Board of Trade, relative to harbor defenses of that 

place-to the Committee on Military .Ail'airs. 

From the Committee on Commerce: The petition of J. H. Ware and. 

others, citizens of Missouri, relative to the repeal of tax on banksto the Committee on Ways and 1\ieans. 

From the Committee on Military Affairs : The petition of Patrick 

Hill-to the Committee on War Claims. 

SENATE. 

FRIDAY, March 3, 1882. 

.A.lso, the petition of 75 workingmen of Sharon and of manufacturers repre enting fifteen manufacturing establisb;ents in the She- nan go Valley, Mercer County, in the State of Pennsylvania, a~king 

for the speedy passage of the McKinley bill, fixing the rates of duty on manufi:wturesof iron, steel, &c.-severally to the same committee. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. J. J. BULLOCK, D. D. 

By Mr . .MOREY: Paper relating to the claim of William Maden- The Journal of yesterday's proceedings was read and approved. 

to the Committee on Claims. MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. 

Byl\lr.MORSE: Thepetiti<mofthemanufacturer~ofcottongoods, .A. mMsage from the House of Representative, by 1\Ir. 1\fcPHER-

&c., of New England, protesting against the appointment of a tariff so~, its CleTk, announced that the House had passed the following 

commission for the purpose of delaying action, but for a speedy revis- bills; in which it requested the concunence of the Senate: 

ion-to the Committee on ·ways and 1\Ieans. .A. bill (H. R. No. 4185) making appropriations for the current and 

By Mr. MOSGROVE: The petition of citizens of the twenty-fifth contingent expenses of the Indian Department, and for fulfilling 

Congressional ~istrict of Pennsylvania, for the enactment of laws treaty stipulations with various Indian tribes, for the year ending 

for the sup pre 1on of polygamy-to the Committee on the Judiciary. June 30, 1~3, and for other purposes ; and 

By Mr. O'NEILL: The petition of Charle W. Hepburn, praying .A. bill (H. R. No. 4283) for the relief of Susan Marshall Massie. 

for an honorable discharge from tb.e military service-to the Com- The mes age further announced that t.fi.e Horu;e had passed the 

m.ittee on l.lilitary Affairs, ... __ biJ..! (S. No. 892) for the relief of .:Warren Hall. ·