1186 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBR.UARY. 14, 

serveonewithanother they are increasing quite as rapidlya.s the white 

l)eople of this country, and in sometribesvet~ymuchmoreso. Now, what 

is to be done with this greatmassofpeoplewhoaregrowing upin ignorance? .Are we dischargin'g our duty when we leave them outside of the 

schools because they say they do not want to go to school? I do not think so.' I am satisfied, after a great many years of observation and some years 

of experience, that there is but one way to settle the Indian question. 

It never will be settled in any other way until you compel the Indian 

to blister his hands. I repe:tt what I have said here before and what 

has been repeated until it bas become trite in the Senate, that no people ever yet emerged from barbarism that did not emerge through 

labor. No people have ever been civilized by outside efforts, and no people ever will be. It is only when you compel the people themselves 

to support themselves that they come up; and you may send your 

teachers to th~ Indians and you may keep them even in the schools, if 

you do not with this compel labor, the education that will enable them 

to support themselves, and ultimately say to them, "Having thus 

educated you, you must now take ~re of yourselves' :_if we do not do 

that we shall have the Indian problem with us for all time. 

Increasing in number, increasing in expense, increasing in degradation (for the wild Indian to-day is not better in any part of the continent than he was previous to his contact with civilization), he has 

picked up the vices and few of the virtues of civilized life; but if you 

take hold oftheindian, put him in school where he can be taught not 

simply to read but to work, beneficial results will come. You should 

teach him the English language, and then teach him to work, and if he 

goes out of the school with those who think and work, although he 

does not know a letter, though he can not read a page, and though he 

can not sign his name, if he c.ow speak English and knows how to hoe corn and to plow and when to plant and when to reap, then he is on the road to progress and he can take care of himself, and then it will 

be the duty of the Government to say to him, ''Having given you thi.E 

start, now do just as my white people do, either support yourselves or go to the wall.'' -

If they go to the wall they will do what thousands of savage people 

have done in their progress to civilization. Many of them will go to 

the wall, but some of them will come up, and they will come up, I re- peat again, just as all other people have come, when they themselves 

will it and when they themselves determine it, and they will not come 

without that. ThiS bill looks to this one step. It is a little step, a short step, but it is a step in the direction of putting the hand of the 

Government on these people and putting them in the way in which 

they should go and compelling them to go, or, if they choose not to 

go, then say, ''You shall no longer share in the munificence of this 

Government,'' and when the Indian is met with starvation or civilization, he will take civiliaation every time, and he will not do it much 

before, in my judgment. 

lli. BECK. Mr. Pre::,"ident, I suppose the Senator fro1p. Massachusetts will want to be heard again on this very important bill, and I hope 

we may now have an executive session for a. little while. Therefore, I 

move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of executive business. 

ROCK CREEK BRIDGE. 

~'[r. HARRIS. I ask the Senator from Kentucky, if the Senator in 

charge of the pending bill will consent, to suspend that motion until 

the Chair lays before the Senate a House bill that I shall ask to have 

considered, if it leads to no debate, as I presume will be the case. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Tennessee appeals 

to the Senator from Kentucky to withdraw his motion. 

Mr. HARRIS. The Senator from Kentucky consents? 

M.r. BECK. Yes. -

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. · The Chair lays before the Senate the 

bill (H. R. 1184) to authorize the construction of a bridge across Rock 

Creek at the Woodley Lane road, in the District of Columbia. 

The bill was read twice by its title. 

Mr. HARRm. Mr. President, on the 7th of February the Committee on the District of Columbia, on the recommendation of the com- mi&Sioners of the District, instructed me to report substantially and 

almost literally the bill that has passed the House. And come to us. I 

.ask the Senate to consider it at this time. 

Mr. MORRILL. I think that bill ought to be printed, so that we can all see what it is. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Vermont objects 

to the present consideration of the bill. 

EXECUTIVE SESSION. 

Mr. BECK. I renew my motion for an executive session. 

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to the considemtion of executive business. After five minutes spent in executive 

se sion the doors were reopened, and (at 4 o'clock and 40 minutes p. m. ) the Senate adjourned ruitil to-morrow, Wednesday, February 15, 

18 , at 12 o'clock m. -

NO:\IINATIONS. 

E xecutive nominations 1·eceived by the Senate the 14th day of February, 1888. 

UKITED STATES JUARSHAL. 

Fernando J . Moreno, of Florida, to be marshal of the United States 

for the southern district of Florida, vice P..! A. Williams, term expired. 

.ASSffiTANT TREASURER UNITED STATES. 

Alexander McCue, of New York, to be assi tanttreasurerofthe United 

States at New York City, in the State of New York, in the place of 

Charles J. C~~da, resigned. 

POSTMASTERS. 

Wil)iam C. Smith, to be postmaster at Stockton, in the county of 

San Joaquin and State of California, in the place of Joseph M. Cavis, 

whose commission expires March 24, 1888. 

Charles Harrington, to be postmaster at Essex, in the county of 

Middlese,tr and State of Connecticut, in the place of Charles S. Mungen, whose commission expired February 4, 1 8. 

John P. :Merrill, to be postmaster at Crown Point, in the county of 

Lake and State of Indiana, in the place of William T. Horine, whose 

commiSsion expired February 12, 1888. 

P. W. Bundick, to be postmaster at Augusta, in the county of Butler and State of Kansas, in the place of Newton A. Yeager, whose com- mission expired February 12, 1888. 

John D. England, to be postm..1.ster at Lindsborg, in the county of 

McPherson and State of Kansas, in the place of William J. Henry, 

whose commission expired January 18, 1888. 

John McLaury, to be postmaster at Belleville, in the county of Republic and State of Kansas, in the place of Max J. Alwens, resigned. 

Justice Webb, to be postmaster at Georgetown, in the county o[Scott 

and State of Kentucky, in the place of Susan K. Burch, deceased. 

James A. Elder, to be postmasler at Emmitsburgh, in the county of 

Frederick ancl State of Maryland, in the place o£ Samuel N. McNair, 

whose commission expired January 24, 1888. 

George Cushing, to be postmaster at Hingham, in the county of Plymouth and State of Massachusetts, in the place of Ed win Wilder, whose 

commission expired December 20, 1887. 

Charles W. Ellison, to be postmaster at Melrose, in the cotmty of 

Middlesex and State of :Massachusetts, in the place of William L. Williams, deceased. James B. Lucas, to be postmaster at Romeo, in the county of Macomb and State of Michigan, in the place of James Gray, whose com- mission expired February 4, 1888. 

Isaac P. Bibbs, to be postmaster at Huntsville, in the county of Randolph and State of l\Iissouri, in the place of George W. Keebangh, 

whose commission expires March 5, 1888. 

Alonzo W. Doremus, to b~ postmaster at Boonton, in the county of 

Morris and State of New Jersey, in the place of Charles F. Hopkins, 

whose commission expired February 12, 1888. 

D. T. Graham, to be postmaster at Ma-dison, in the county of Madi- son and State of Nebraska, in the place of Thomas O'Shea, resigned. 

Felix R. Shepley, to be postmaster at Massillon, in the county of 

Stark and State of Ohio, in the place of Anthony Howells, resigned. 

Frank :J\f. Eastman, to be postmaster at Butler, in the county of Butler and State of Pennsylvania, in the place of Sallie A. Robinson, whose 

commission expired January 11, 1888. James B. Small, to be postmaster at York, in the county of York 

and 'State of Pennsylvania, in the place of James Kell, whose commission expires February 19, 1888. 

Miss Ella Lewi , to be postmaster at Gallatin, in the county of Sum- ner and State of Tennessee, in place of Albert A. Lewis, deceased. 

John C. Weatherred, to be postmaster at Tacoma, in the county of 

Pierce and Territory of Washington, in the place of Lammon E. Sampson, resigned. 

E. F. Donnelly, to be postmaster at White Water, in the county of 

Walworth and State ofWisconsin, in the place of Henry H. McGraw, 

whose commission expired January 16, 1888. 

CONFIRMATIONS. 

ExeCldive nominations confirmed by tlte Senate February 14, 1888. I 

ASSISTANT TREASURER. 

Alexander McCue, of New York, to be assistant treasurer of the 

United States at New York City, N.Y . 

1\IARSH.A.L. 

Benjamin F. Wade, of Ohio, to be marshal of the United States for 

the northern district of Ohio. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 

TUESDAY, Februa'ry 14, 1888. 

The House met at 12 o'clock m. Prayer by Rev. Dr. BRUSH, president of Dakota University. The Clerk proceeded to 1·ead the Journal of yesterday's proceeuings. 

The SPEAKER. If there be no objection, the reading of that portion of the Journal relating to the introduction and reference of bills 

will be dispensed with. 

There was no objection. 

The remainder of the Journal was read and approved. 

'. 
I 

1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD~HOUSE. 1187 

REFERENCE OF SElfATE BILLS. 

· The SPEAKER laid before the House Senate bills of the following 

titles; which were read a first and second time, and referred as follows, 

namely: . The bill (S. 279) makin~an appropriation for the purchase of ground 

and the erection thereon in the city of Washington of a building to be 

used as a hall of records-to the Committee on Public Buildings and 

Grounds. The bill (S. 1938) making an additional appropriation for the relief 

of the poor in the District of Columbia-to the Committee on the Distxict of Columbia. 

ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED. 

Mr. FISHER, from the Committee on Enrolled • Bills, reported that 

they had examined and found duly enrolled bills and a joint resolution 

of tbe following titles; when the Speaker signed the same: A bill (S. 1346) to authorize theChoctawCoalaudRailwayCompany 

to construct and operate a railway through the Indian Territory, and 

for other purposes; . A bill (H. R. 5514) to amend section 4883 of the Revised Statutes, to 

enable the Assistant Secretary of the Interior:to sign patents; and 

Joint resolution (S. R. 50) appointing Andrew D. White a member 

of the Board of Regents ofthe Smithsonian Institution. 

LEA YE OF ABSENCE. 

By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted to ~Ir. BARRY, 

on account of sickness. 

CHANGE OF REFERENCE. 

The SPEAKER. House bill No. 5899, entitled "A bill for the relief 

of the American Postal Machines Company," has been referred to the 

Committee on Claims, to which it really properly belongs under the rules 

of the House. But the Chair is advised that the Committee on the 

Post-Office and Post-Hoads has now under consideration the subject 

to which it relates, and it is requested that this bill be referred to that 

committee. 

Mr. DOCKERY. I did not hear the subject of the bill to which 

the Chair refers. 

The SPEAKER. It relates to the bill which provides for the use 

by the Government of the machine for the cancellation of stamps. 

The Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads has the subject 

under consideration, and the Chair thinks this bill should take the 

same course. Mr. DOCKERY.- The Committee ;m the Post-Office and Post-Roads 

directed the. reference to the Committee on Claims, I think. 

Mr. COLLINS. That was done under a misapprehension of the 

facts. This is on its face a mere claim, it is true, but it involves the 

question of the use of the invention; and as the whole subject is a.Iready before the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads it is 

hardly necessary, it seems, that the matter should be divided between 

two committees. 

Tl1e SPEAKER Without objection the reference will be changed 

as indicated. 

There was no objection, and it was so ordered. 

ADDITIONAL DAY FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. 

:Mr. MILLS. :Mr. Speaker, I submit a privileged report from the 

Committee on Rules. 

The SPEAKER. The report will be read. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

The Oomn:tittee on Rules, to whom was referred the resolution to set apart two days in each month for the consideration of business reported from the Com- mittee on the District of Columbia, has had the same under consideration, and 

reports back a substitute therefor with the recommendation that it be passed. 

The substitute is as follows: 

Resolved, That the second and fourth Mondays in each month, a.fter the <'~11 

ofSt.ates and Territories, shall, when claimed by the Committee on the District 

of Columbia, be set apru-t for the consideration of such business as may be pre- sented by said committee. 

1\Ir. MILLS. Under existing rules the District of Columbia has but 

one day set apart for: the consideration of business reported by it-that 

is, the second Monday in each month. Owing to the increase in population and business of the city, it has been found that the time thus 

allotted to the District Committee is not sufficient for the transaction 

of its busineSs; and as this is the only legislative body that can attend 

to its business, the committee believe this additional day should be 

granted. They requested that another day be given to them, and the 

Committee on Rules, after considering the matter, have agreed to report 

this substitute, allowing them the fourth as well as the second Monday 

in each month. 

If there be no desire to discuss the matter I shall ask for a vote. 

1\fr . .ADAMS. What committee has the fourth l\Ionday now? 

M.r. MILLS. It is not assigned to any committee. 

1\fr. SPRINGER. I desire to ask the gentleman from Texas in this 

connection whether the Committee on Rules has considered the amendment pending before the committee to give to the Territories one day 

in the month? 

:Mr. MILLS. That is not up now. We will have it up hereafter. 

We are only reporting such matters as w,e have acted upon. .Anumber of matters are still pending before the committee. 

I ask a vote. 

The substitute was agreed to; and the resolution as amended was 

adopted. 

Mr. ~HLLS moved to reconsider the vote by which the resolution 

was adopted; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

CmDUTTEE ON THE LIBRARY. 

Mr. MILLS. I present a privileged report from the Committee on Rules. 

The report was read, as follows: 

The Committee on Rules reports the following amendment to Rule X, as· amended at the present session, to wit : · · Strike out the words "the Committee on Library, to consist of five members," 

and insert the words "the Committee on Library, to consist. of three members." 

The committee finds that the statute prescribes that the .Joint Committee on the Library shall consist of three members from the Senate and three from the House of Representatives,and a.s the Senate committee now consists of but 

three members, the increased number upon the part of the House has occa- sioned some embarrassment in the transaction of business. The committee 

therefore believe it is better to reduce the number of members on the commilr tee from the House, even if it be conceded that the House has power, notwith- standing the statute, to create a committee of fiYe . If the amendment now pro- posed be adopted by the House it will be necessary to reduce the committee a .'l now constituted, and it is therefore recommended that the member last named on the part of the majority nnd minority respectively be dropped. 

Mr. MILLS. .A.s explained by the report of the committee, the 

House Committee on the Library is composed of five members, while an 

act of Congress requires the joint committee to be composed of three 

members from the Senate and three from the House. It seems this Jaw 

had escaped the attention of both the Senate and the House, and they 

had committees of :five members in each body. The Senate comniittee 

is now composed of three memhers, ·o as to conform to the statute. 

The Committee on Rules proposes that the same shall be done as regards the committee of the House, and that two members shall be 

dropped from the committee . 

.Mr. BLOUNT. r would like to k'"Ilow whether the Committee on 

Rules concede at all the right of a statute to regulate the nqmber of 

members of a committee, or whether the report merely is based on the 

idea of paying some deference to the view of the Senate. 

l\fr. MILLS. The report states in substance that, without discnssing the question suggested by the gentleman from Georgia, it is best to 

make the committee of the House of Representatives forming part of 

the joint committee to consist of three members. We do not enter in 

the report into the question of the constitutional right of the House to 

appoint its own committees. 

Mr. BLOUNT. I understand that you simply waive that right, not- withstanding the statute? 

Mr. 1\IILLS. That is all. 

The resolution was adopted. 

Mr. MILLS moved to reconsider the vote by which the resolution waa 

adopted; and also moved that the motion t o reconsider be laid on the 

table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

CALL OF THE HOUSE. 

.Mr. CANNON. I present a privileged report from the Committee'on 

Rules. 

The report was read, as follows: 

The Committee on Rules, to which was referred a proposed amendment in 

relation to the voluntary appearance of members during the call of the House, has had the same under consideration, and report the following substitute 

therefor, with a recommendation that it be adopted: 

That Rule XV be amended by adding theret-o the following: 

"1\Iembers who voluntarily appear shall, unless the House otherwise direct, 

be immediately admitted to the Hall of the House, and they shall report their names to the Clerk, to be entered upon the .Journal as present." 

Much inconvenience and delay have resulted heretofore from the fact that 

members who voluntarily appea,r during a. call of the House are unable to se- cure admission to the floor, unless accompanied and reported to the House by 

the Sergeant-at-Arms. If the amendment now proposed j)e adopted, members 

who thus appear will be at once admitted, and upon reporting to the Clerk, 

tbeir names will be entered upon the roll of those present, and consequently it m ny be possible to secure a quorum in many cases without waiting for the • action of the Sergeant-at-Arms. 

1\Ir. CANNON. The report sufficiently ,explains the necessity for 

the rule. I move its adoption. 

The resolution reported by the committee was agreed to. -

Mr. C.A.NKO~ moved to reconsider the vote by which the resolution 

was adopted; and also mo>ed that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

BILLS, ETC., INTRODUCED BY REQUEST. 

J\Ir. CANNON. I present another privileged report from the Committee on Rules. 

The report of the Committee on Rules was read, as follows: 

The Committee on Rules has had under consideration a proposition to am~nd the rules so as to provide tpat when a. bill or resolution is introduced by request the words "by request" shall be entered upon the .Journal1 and reports the fol- lowing substitute therefor, with the recommendation that 1t be adopted : 

• j 
1188 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. i FEBRUARY 14, 

"Wben a bill, resolution, or memorial is introduced' by request,' these words shall be entered upon the Journal." 

The resolution was adopt.ed. 

Mr. CANNON moved tO reconsider the vote bv which the resolution 

was adopted; and also moved that the motion tO reconsider be laid on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

CALL OF THE ROLL. 

Mr. CANNON. I present another privileged report from the Committee on Rules. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

The Committee on Rules, to whicli was referred a proposed amendment in re- lation to the call of the roll of members of tile House, has had the same under consideration, and report back the following substitute therefor, with the recom- mendation that it be adopted: 

Amend, clause 1 of Rule XV so as to read as follows: "Upon every roll-call the names of the members shall be called alphabetically by surnames, except when two or more have the same surnames, in which case the name of the State shall be added, and if there be two such members from the same State the whole name shall be called: and after the roll has been once called the Clerk shall call in their alpilabetical order the names of those not voLing, and thereafter the Speaker shall not entertain a request to record a vote or announce a pair." 

Mr. CANNON. I move the adoption of the resolution. _ 

Mr. DING LEY. I would like to hear ::.orne explanation of the proposed change in the rule. 

Mr. CANNON. I think the report explains itself, and I do not 

know that I can state it any better than it is stated in the report itself. 

I call for the reading of the report again. 

A MEMBER. What is the proposed change of the rnle? 

The SPEAKER. The Chair will state that the only change in the 

rule proposed is that when there is more than one member of the same 

surname from the same State, the State shall be called as well as the 

n:>.me. 

Mr. LONG. Suppose a member does not hear his name when it is 

called, what will be the effect of the rule in that case? 

The SPEAKER. There is no change in the rule with respect to 

that. 

Mr. LONG. I thought from the reading of the last part of the 

amendment that it changed the present rnle in·that respect. 

Mr. OATES. I desire to ask the gentleman from Illinois this question: What is the necessity of retaining that portion of the rule with 

reference to calling the names of mempers a second time as regards 

members who are absent by leave of the House? 

. Mr. CANNON. I apprehend more time will be saved by calling the 

names than by finding out who are absent by leave of the House. 

1\fr. OATES. Is it not to be presumed that the Clerk is informed 

who are absent by leave? 

Mr. CANNON. I suppose that may be presumed, buti do not know 

that the Clerk has the memorandum always before his eyes. I presume 

he l'.nn ca.ll the roll more speedily by calling all the names than by 

keeping track of the leaves of absence. 

1\Ir. OATES. I simply wanted to know what the re:>.Son was for the 

proposed change. 

Mr. BREWER. I wish to ask the gentlem.an from illinois [1\Ir. C.A.NNON] whether it is not a fact that the last clause of the rule is violated 

eYery day when the roll is called? 

1\ir. CANNON. I can not say as to that. 

Mr. BREWER. Does not the gentleman know of his own knowledge that members are permitted to vote after the s.econd roll-call? 

Mr. CANNON. I know that the Speaker, under the construction of 

that 1·nle, has been in the habit of taking the word of gentlemen-that 

they were present, paying attention to the call of the roll, and did not 

hear their names called, and I can readily see how the Speaker wonld 

feel bound to take the word of a gentleman touching that matter under 

such circumstances. . 

Mr. BREWER. As I understand it, the Speaker asks the member 

if he was present during theroll-call, but does not ask him whether he 

beard his name called, and if the gentleman says that he was present, 

then he is permitted to vote. 

Ur. CANNON. The gentleman can see at once that the rule is plain 

and direct, but when we come to put the rule in practice, I can notconcei ve how the Speaker conld v~ry well afford to refuse to take a member's word upon a question touching his right to vote. 

Mr. BREWER. Then the rule itself is inoperative? 

Mr. CANNON. I think not. 

Mr. ADAMS. If my colleague [1\fr. CANNON] will allow me one observation, I think that what the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. 

BREWER] desires to caJI attention to is that under the rule as it exists 

no man would be allowed to 'record his vote even if he were in his seat 

during the roll-call; so it is nota question whether the word of a mem- ber shall be taken,· but whether the rnle shall be stretched so as to 

allow even members who were in their seats to vote, a thing which the 

rule by its terms does not permit. 

Mr. CANNON. Well, I apprehend that the Speaker could speak 

much more authoritatively on this subject than I can, but while my 

colleag\le [Mr. ADAMS] is correct so far as the text of the rule is con- cerned--

·Mr. ADAMS , That is all I spoke about. 

Mr. CANNON. While my colleague is correct so far as the text of 

the rule is concerned, I apprehend thali the rnle conld not stand for a 

moment if it was so construed as to prevent from voting a gentJeman 

who was present in his seat and giving attention to the roll-call, but 

who failed to hear his name called. When a member who was present 

and tailed to hear his name, rises in his plaee and makes that statement, if he conld still be debarred from voting the rule could not stand. 

The rule must be construed reasonably, so as to advance the business 

of the House and protect the rights of members. As the gentleman 

[Mr. BREWER] has asked me the question, I will say that I believe 

there is an abuse of the rule in some cases. I have known members to 

say that they were present during roll-call, when in fact they were not 

present dming the whole of the call, but were present for a few moments while the roll was being called, and in that way satisfied their 

consciences in making the statement. 

1\lr. RANDALL. There is no occasion for any misapprehension about 

the effect of this proposed rnle. It does not change at all the existing 

rule, except in two particulars. Where there are two members of the 

same surname it provides that the Clerk shall can the States from 

which they come. If there are two members of the same surname fTom the same State, then the rule proposes that the full Christian 

names of the gentlemen shall be called. T~ere is no other change, and 

the discussion which has arisen here is not necessary. The report recites the old rule because that seemed to be required in order to make 

the report intelligible. 

1\fr. CANNON. · l move the adoption of the report. 

The report was adopted. 

Mr. CANNON moved to reconsider the vote by which the report was 

adopted; aqd also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the 

table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

DISTRIBUTIO:N OF COMMITTEE REPORTS. 

Mr. RANDALL, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the following report: 

The Committee on Rules reports the following amendment to Rule XXIV, to wit: After the word "Delegate" in the third clause in said rule insert the fol- lowing words: "if requested in writing by the Member or Delegate." Under the existing rule tile Public Printer mails to each member of the House a copy of all the reports made by its committees, and the consequence is that the supply of such reports in the document-roo!ll is very frequently exhausted before the subject comes up for consideration in the House. Members of the House usually receive their mail at their residences, and the reports are sent there, a.nd consequently are not accessible when needed at the House. Under the proposed amendment, any Member or Delegate who desires the reports sent to hill can, a.t the beginning of a session or aft-erwards, notify the Public Printer in writing, and thereupon it will be the duty ofthat officer to send them !9-h.im u.s heretofore. The committee recommends the adoption of the amendment. 

Mr. RANDALL. I think this report is sufficiently explicit to make 

plain to every member the effect of the proposed change of the rnles. 

At present there is mailed to every member of the House a copy of every 

printed report. Inconvenience has resulted from this, because sometimes too small a number of reports is thus left in the House documentroom, so that when bills come up for consideration members can not 

obtain from the document-room the reports they desire. Many members no doubt wish to receive these reports at their residences, because 

thus they are enabled to acquaint themselves with a report more readily than if they received it during the sessions of the House. Those 

who wish still to receive the reports in this way can do so. It will 

only be necessary for them to send a notification to the Public Printer. 

In the absence of such a notification the member's copies of reports will 

go to the Honse document-room. I call for the previous question. 

Mr. DINGLEY. I wish to inquire of the gentleman whether this 

rule, going into effect immediately, will. require notice to be given at 

once in cases where members desire to receive these reports at their 

rooms for the remainder of the session? -

• Mr. RANDALL. This amended rnle will go into effect at once. 

Mr. DINGLEY. And members must give notice at once if they desire to receive these reports at their residences? 

Mr. RANDALL. If they wi'3h to have that arrangement con~inuo 

they must give notice to the Public Printer. 

Mr. DINGLEY. Precisely. 

The previous question was ordered; and under the operation thereof' 

the report of the Committee on Rules was adopted; there being-ayes 

110, noes 8. · 

Mr. RANDALL moved to reconsider the vote by which the 1·eport 

was adopted; and also moved that the motion to I'econsider be laitl on 

the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

REPRINTING OF BILLS, ETC., REPORTED ADVERSELY. 

Mr. RANDALL. I am further instructed by the Committee on Rules to submit the report which I send t.:l the desk. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

The Committee on Rules reports !l1e following proposed amendment to Rule 

XL VI, to wit: Amend Rule XLVI by adding thereto the following: "Unle s ordered by the House, no bill, 1·esolution, or other proposition reported by a commit tee sila.ll be reprinted unless the same be placed upon the Calendar." ' Under the rules of the House as they now e:xist, 100 copies of each prin1.!e bill and 500 copies of each public bill are printed when the bills are introduced, bnt 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1189 

when any billt either public or private, is reported back f1·om a commit 'ee , either COMJ.\fiTTEE ON LABOR. 

favorablyoraaversely,it.isa.gainprinted,andint.hecaseofprivatebills5oocopies Mr. O'NEILL, of Missouri. I submitted yesterday a resolution and are furnished. The committee is unable to see the necessity or propriety of re- p rinting bills and resolutions which are reported upon adversely and laid upon moved its reference to the Committee on Labor, and I understood, at 

the ta ble. There is no further consideration of such bills, and the printing is the time, the resolution w.as so refen;ed. I subsequently learned, howentirely useless. The 'proposed amendment as now r eported-will preven t the ever, on reading the resolution the Speaker referred it .to a different - 1·eprinting of any bill, resolution, or other proposition unless the same be placed on the Calendar of the House, or unless specially orde~·ed by the House. committee. If I bad been aware of the intention to refer it to any 

Mr. RANDALL. The effect of the amendment proposed in this re· other committee I would have taken the sense 6f the House and asked 

port will be to dispense with the reprinting of bills which are reported that it be referred to the Committee on.Labor, my object being, as that 

adversely and do not go upon the Calendar. When so reported a single committee will be reached in the next three or four days, to give the 

member has the right to demand that the bill shall go to the Calendar, House an opportunity of having, during the coming month of 1\farch, 

and in such a case the bill would be reprinted; but where no such re- some day or days designated for the consideration of the business comquest is made, the oill, having been reported adversely, is practically ing from that committee. I now ask the privilege to make the motion 

dead, and there is no occasion for printing copies of it in addition to the referring the resolution to the Committee on Labor . . original number printed upon the introduction of the bill, being 100 The SPEAKER. When the resolution was sent up by the gentlein the case of a private bill and 500 in the case of a public bill. man from :Missouri yesterday, the Chair announced that it 'i~ent to the 

1\fr. OATES. As I understand, this proposition will prevent the re- Committee on Labor. Immediately afterwards, on looking at the reso- printing of bills and reports when the report is adverse. lution, the Chair discovered it was a resolution which in reference to 

Mr. RANDALL. If a bill reported adversely goes to the Calendar other committees had been sent to the Committee on Rules, and thereit will be reprinted; but if it goes to the table no additional copies fore it was so referred. No advantage should be taken of the gentle- will be printed. , man, and the Chair hopes the House wili allow bi-ro now to submit 

Mr. OATES. Ought there not to be some method by which mem- the motion for reference to the Committee on Labor. 

hers whose bills are reported adversely may have them placed upon M:r. O'NEILL, of Missouri. I make that motion. 

the Calendar subsequently to the presentation of the adverse report? The motion was agreed to, and the resolution was referred to the 

Mr. RANDALL. I take it for granted that whenever a member is Committee on Labor. 

interested in the subject embraced in a bill he is on the alert when the 

report is made. In every case the bill is printed upon its introduction. 

ltir. OATES. As I understand this proposition, it is a good amendment to the rules, though -it would seem to require a greater amount 

of "alertness" than members are accustomed to exercise. 

Mr. RANDALL. Even where a bill reported adversely goes to the 

table and not to the Calendar: the House, if it so choQses, can order 

the printing of an additional number. 

The question being taken, the report of the Committee o~ Rules was adopted. 

Mr. RANDALL moved to reconsider the vote by which the report was adopted; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on 

the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. l 

COMPILATION OF REBELLION RECORDS. 

The SPEAKER laid before the House a letter from the Secretary of 

War, in response to a resolution of the House calling for information 

relative to the plan and scope of the compilation of the Official Records 

of the War of the Rebellion, and transmitting a report thereon from 

Lieut. Col. H . M. Lazelle, in charge of the publication of war records; 

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

• to be printed. 

SUPPORT OF PRISONERS. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the House a letter from the Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting an estimate from the Attorney-General of an additional appropriation for support of prisoners for the cur- rent fiscal year; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed. 

LIGHT-HOUSE, ETC., AT CASTLE HILL. · 

ThG SPEAKER also laid before the Honse a letter from the Secretary 

of the Treasury, transmitting a deficiency estimate from the LightHouse Board of appropriation for the establishment of light-house and 

fog:signal at Castle Hill; which was referred to the Committee on Ap- propriations, and ordered to be printed. · 

COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the Honse a letter from the Acting 

Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting a statement of expenditures 

for the Coast and Geodetic Survey for the fiscal year ended J UI,le 30, 

1887; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed. 

PAY OF DEPUTY SURVEYORS. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the House a letter from the Secretary 

of the Interior, transmitting a communication from the Commissioner 

of the General Land Office, and recommending an urgent deficiency appropriation to pay for services of deputy surveyors rendered pursuant 

to law; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and 

ordered to be printed. 

GOVERNMENT ATTORNEYS IN BELL TELEPHONE CASE. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the House a letter from the Acting 

.Attorney-General, submitting a list of the attorneys employed by the 

Government in the case of the United States against the Bell Telephone Company; which was referred to the Committee on Expenditures in the Department of J nstice, and ordered to be printed. 

PAY OF ASSISTANT UNITED STATES DISTRICT A'ITOR EYS. 

The SPEAKER also laid before the House a letter from the Attorney-General, with inclosures, in relation to the estimates for compen- sation of assistant United States district attorneys; which was referred 

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

STATISTICAL ABSTRACT. 

Mr. RICHARDSON. I am •directed by the Committee on Printing 

to submit the following privileged report. 

The Clerk read a13 follows: 

The Committee on Printing, to whom was referred the House concurrent res- olution to print 15,000additional copies of Statistical Abstract for1887, direct me - to return the same with the recommendation that it do pass. Estimated cost for printing, $1,283.65. The approxima te cost of the amount of 

printing previously estimated upon for Congress wit.hin the present fiscal year is $737,407.90. 

The resolution was read, as follows: 

Resolved by the How;e of Representatit·es (the .Senate conCUI'Ti ng), That there be 

printed 15,000additional copies of the Statistical Abstract of the United States for 

the year 1887, of which 5,000 copies shall be for the use of the Senate and 10,000 

copies for the use of the House of Representatives. · 

¥r. RICHARDSON. I demand the previous question on the adop-

'on of the resolution. 

Mr. OATES. Ofwbat value are these documents? 

Mr. RICHARDSON. They are a compilation or abstract of the sta-

'stics scattered through the documents of the various Departments. It a volume of easy reference, and· contains most valuable information 

r the use of the officers of the Government. Instead of having this 

formation scattered through many volumes, it is embraced in one ~olume. We only order the usual number of copies during preceding 

years. I demand the previous question. 

The previous question was ordered, and under the operation thereof 

the resolution was adopted. 

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

laid on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

CATTLE AND DAIRY FARMING. 

Mr. RICHARDSON. I have a resolution here which is not a ques--

tion of privilege, but I will ask for its consideration at this time. 

The SPEAKER. The regular order has been called for by several 

gentlemen. _ Mr. RICHARDSON. I have been requested by so many members on both sides of the House t.o report this resolution back, I will do it 

at this time, and take the sense of the House on the subject. 

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the resolution. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, Februar y 6, 1888. 

Resol11ed by the &nate (the House of Rep1·esentatives concun-ing), That there be 

printed 7,000 additional copies of Executive Document 51, first session Forty· 

ninth Congress, on the subject of C~~.ttle and dairy farming; 2,000 copies for the use of the Senate, 4,000 copies for the use of the House of Representatives, and 

1,000 copies for the Department of State. 

Attest: 

ANSON G. McCOOK, Secretary. 

Mr. RICHARDSON. Permit me to make a statement for one mo- ment. This resolution which has been passed by the Senate provides 

for the printing of 7,000 copies of this document. Resolutions have 

been introduced by members on each side of the House directing a 

larger number of copies to be printed, but the cost is so great the Committee on Printing do not feel authorized to recommend more than 7,000 

copies to be printed. The cost is $2.60 a copy 1 and for 7,000 copies it 

would be an expense of some $17,000 or $18,000. We were-not willing to go beyond that, and therefore the resolution of the Senate is be· 

fore the H.ouse simply with the recommendation that it be concurred in. 

1\fr. HATCH. I would like to have a minute, with the consent of 

the House. 

The SPEAKER. The first question is, Will the House consent now to consider the resolution? 

• 

-. 
I • 

1190 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE~ FEBRUARY 14, 

'Mr. BLOUNT. I would like to know before givinO' consent if this 

is likely to produce any de hate. 0 

Ur. HATCH. I only want a minute. 

J'l.fr. BLOUNT. I have no objection to th,at. 

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 

from Uissouri ? 

Mr. BLOUNT. I do not want to object to the gentleman from Missouri having a minute if he needs it; but I want to reserve the rirrht 

to object if this is to lead to prolonged debate and delay the consideration of the deficiency bill. 

Mr. HATCH. I want to say to the House, and emphasize what I 

have no doubt everymcmberor ne..·ulyeverymemberwill indorse, that 

this is the most valuable publication that has ever been made by the 

Government of the United States within the last twenty years. 

Mr. MORGAN. And there is more demand for it. 

Mr. HATCH. There is more demand from every agricultural district of this Union for this book than for all the other Government publica.tions combined which can be obtained from the foldinrr-room. It 

is the most important. work to the farmers of the country tb~'l.t bas been 

published in the last quarter of a century; and instead of 7,000 copies 

I want the privilege of moving to amend this resolution by making it 

25,000. 1Ir. HEl DERSON, of Iowa. That is right. 

Mr. O'FERRALL. I had in view a similar amendment. I have a 

hundred letters at least on my desk now a..'lking for a copy of this book, 

and I hope the gentleman will make his amendment 50,000. I would 

rather see that amount pub~ished than•a le._"S number. 

A MEMBER. What is this work ? 

Mr. HATCH. It is the concentrated informa'tl.6n from every cattleproducing district in the world. It is the best work upon cattle and 

cattle-breeding that has ever been published in the English languarre, 

and it should be in every township and neighborhood in the United 

States. The mere cost of two dollars ancl fifty or sixty cents a volume 

is simply insignificant in proportion to the great value of the work. 

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the present consideration of 

the resolution? 

Mr. BLOUNT. I hope the House will take the responsibility of this 

increased expenditure and not charge it to the Public Printer. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair will again ask if there is objection to 

the present consideration of the resolution? 

There was no objection. Mr. HATCH. I now offer the amendment I send to the desk. 

Mr. TAULBEE. I wish also to offer an amendment. 

Mr. MARTIN. This is the best book e\er published by this Government or by any other in the world. It ought to be in the hands of 

every farmer and every dairyman in this country. All persons interested in cattle-breeding and the products of the farm should be furnished with a copy. I hope the number of copies will be increased. 

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the amendment of the gentleman from Missouri. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

It is pro~ose~ in the second line to strike out :• ;>even" and insert 11 twenty- five,' makmg 1t read, "twenty-five thousand addttional copies." 

M:r. HENDERSON, of Iowa. What proportion will be for the Houee 

and what for the Senate? 

:Mr. HATCH. I was going t o move to strike out " two thousand" 

for the Senate and insert "six thousand," and strike out "four thousand" for the House and insert "eighteen thousand. " 

Mr. RICHARDSON. It is t h e custom to provide only double the 

n umber for the House as for the Senate, and I think the Senate will 

n ot consent to.any other division. 

Mr. HE.L~DERSON, of Iowa. Then let any difference be settled in 

conference. 

Mr. HATCH. I have no objection t o making it 25,000 copies and 

dividing it upon the same basis as now provided in the resolution. 

Mr. FARQUHAR. That is right. 

Mr. RICHARDSON. I wish to submit an amendment to the amend- ment of the gentleman from Missouri. 

Mr. TAULBEE. I want to send up, to be pending when it is in 

order, an amendment also. 

The SPEAKER. There is an amendment now pendin<Y. 

Ur. TAULBEE. r.I'his is an independent amendment. 

0 

The SPEAKER. The Chair can decide at OI1ce, then, that it is not 

n ow in order. 

Ur. TAULBEE. I simply wanted it left with the Clerk to be pending. 

The SPEAKER. It will not be pendinO' until offered in the House. 

The Chair will recognize the gentleman t; offer it at the proper time. 

Mr. HATCH. I have r educed my amendment to writing. The SPEAKER. The Clerk will read. The Clerk read as follows: 

Strike out in the second line of the r esolution the word " seven" and insert 11 twenty-five." S~ke out" two thousand" in the fifth line and insert" eight thousand." 

Str1ke o ut "four thousand" in the same line and insert 11 sixteen tho usand." 

So that it will read : 

That ther e be printed 25,000 additional copies of Executive Document No. 

51, first s~ssion Forty-ninth Congress, on the subject of catUe and dairy farming · 8,000 copies for the use of the Senate, 16,000 copies for the use of the House of 

Representatives, aud 1,000 copies for the Department of State. 

Mr. WILKINS and others. That is right. 

Mr. RICHARDSON. I offer an amendment to the amendment. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

.And that there be hereby appropriated out of the Treasury the smn of$62,500, or o ~uch thereof ns may be n ecessary, out of any money not otherwise ap- propnated, t~ pay for the same. 

:Mr. BUCHANAN. That is rjght. 

1l~r. RICHARDSON. I desire to say that this is a publication for 

w~ICh there have been more calls upon the Committee on Printing of 

th1s House, and I believe upon individual members of the House than 

~rhaps any other document heretofore printed by Congress. ' 

The SPEAKER. The Chair will state to the gentleman from Tenne?See that this is not a joint resolution in which money can be appropnated out of the Treasury, but is a concurrent resolution, which does 

not go to the President for his signature, and does not become a law. 

1\ir. RICHARDSON. Then I will move to amend the concurrent 

resolution so as to make it a joint resolution. 

Th!'l S~EAKER. There ~ _an amendment now pending, and until 

that IS disposed of the propositlOn of the gentleman from Teimessee is 

not in order. 

Mr. RICHARDSON. I will ask unanimous consent that the resolution be changed to a joint resolution. 

There was no objection. 

The SPEAKER. The question is on the amendment offered by the 

gentleman from Uissouri [IUr. HATcH]. 

Mr. BH.OWNE, of Indiana. I desire to mn.ke a suggestion to the 

gentleman from Missouri. Every gentleman who has been favored with 

a copy of this most excellent book knows that in the form in which it 

is now published it is most unwieldy. I suggest that the resolution 

should provide that it be published in two volumes. 

Mr. HATCH. I understood from the gentleman from Tennessee 

[Mr. RICHARDSON] that if the book should be republished it would be 

divided into two volumes. It certainly ought to be. I agree with the 

gentleman from Indiana that in its present form it is unwieldy and too 

large to be conveniently handled. The change would not materi::illy 

increase the cost. 

Mr. 1\Ic:M:ILLIN. It will cost more in two volumes than it will in 

one, and that additional cost should be provided for. 

Mr. RICHARDSON. If the House will indulge me for a moment I 

will state that the estimated costofthis book, as I have alreadyst.a~ is about $2.45 or $2.50 per copy, ifboundin one volume. If bound i~ two volumes the aggregate cost will be $2,000 or $2,500 more than if 

bound in one volume. I think the$62,500 provided in my amendment 

will cover the cost of the book whether bound in one volume or bound 

in two. 

The SPEAKER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. HATCH]. 

Mr. RICHARDSON. Is not the question first on my amendment? 

The SPEAKER. It is not. The amendment of the gentleman from 

Tennessee is not an amendment to the amendment. 

M:r. RICHARDSON. I do not object to the amendment of the gentleman from Missouri; bot I do not think it should be agreed to unless 

the House shall first appropriate the money necessary or signify its willingness to do so instead of taking the cost of this book out of the amount 

annually appropriated for printing. ._ 

Mr. HEl-1-rnE.RSON, of Iowa. There will be no trouble about that. 

The amendment offered by Mr. HATCH was agreed to. The SPEAKER. The amendment offered by the gentleman from 

Tennessee [Ur. RICHARDSON] will now be read. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Add to the joint resolution the following: 

"And that there is hereby appropriated out of theTreasurythesumof$2 500 or so much thereof as may be necessary, out ofanymoneynot otherwise appro: priated, to pay for the same." 

Mr. HATCH. Does the gentleman from Tennessee say that it will 

require $2,500 more if the book is bound in two volumes? 

Mr. RICHARDSON. No, sir. I think the amount named in my 

amendment will cover· the whole cost. 

The amendment offered by Mr. RICHARDSON was agreed to 

Mr. TAULBEE. I desire to have my amendment read. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Add to the resolution the following: "Provided, The apportionment among tho members of the House of Repr e- sentatives sha ll be made with regard to former distribution." 

Mr. FELTON. I would like to know what that means. 

Mr. TAULBEE. That simply means this, that i.f.in the former distribution of this same report some members of this House have had more than was due to them other members have had less. This amendment to the resolution provides that the deficit shall be made up out of 

the volumes to be distributed. 

1\Ir. CUTCHEON. Will the gentleman please explain what he refers to? 

Mr. TAU!J3EE. Some time heretofore, perhaps two weeks ago or 

more, I introduced a resolution into this House calling for an investi--
:·· 

1888. CONGRESSlONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1191 

gation of this same matter and bad it referred to the Committee on 

Printing. What disposition has been made of the resolution I presume 

the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. RICHARDSON] will be able to state. 

That books have beeri put to the credit of member3 which they have 

been unable to procure is a fact wpich I know and which is demonstrated by the letter from the Doorkeeper of the Honse of Representatives which I had referred to the CommitteeonPrinting. 

Mr. MORGAN. That has no business in this resolution. Mr. TAULBEE. It ha<J business in this resolution. This is one of 

the most valuable books to be printed under resolution of Congress, and 

it is one in which my constituents feel an interest as well as the constituents of every other member on this floor. I do not think any member can object to my amendment. If such discriminations have not 

been made, this amendment is certainly void. If such discriminations 

have been made, gentlemen must certainly see the fairness of this proposition. 

Mr. HATCH. Is not the gentleman from Kentucky falling into an 

error? This book was distributed to members of the Forty-ninth Congress. The members of the Fiftieth Congress have not received from 

the State Department any copies at all. '.rhis resolution provides that 

they shall be distributed to members of the Fiftieth Congress. 

1\fr. BLAND. Will the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. 'DAULBEE] 

yield to me for a moment? 

Mr. TAULBEE. Certainly. 

1\Ir. BLAND. It seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that this amendment 

would place the Doorkeeper of the House in a very embarrassing poition, if it required him to ascertain what members have heretofore had 

books in excess of their quot.1. and what membe~ have not had their 

share. Certainly the Doorkeeper of the House has no right to investigate the administration of former Doorkeepers, and I think this amendment would impose upon him a very onerous and disagreeable duty. 

Mr. TAULBEE. 1\Ir. Speaker, I think this matter is perfectly clear 

to any one who understands the fact that in the distribution of these 

books the records of the Doorkeeper's office show who has received them 

and how they have been distributed. With reference to the objection 

urged by the gentleman fTom Missouri [Mr. HATCH] to m~ amendment--

Mr. ENLOE. ]')lr. Speaker, I rise to a parliamentary inquiry. 

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Kentucky (:rt1r. TAULBEE] 

has the floor. 

1\fr. TAULBEE. I will yield to the gentleman if be desires to make 

a parliamentary inquiry. 

Mr. ENLOE. I desire to ask, Mr. Speaker, whetht:lrthegontleman's 

amendment is germane to the resolution. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair thinks it is. It relates to the distribution of these documents the printing of which is provided for in the 

resolution. The resolution itself provides for distribution and the 

amendment proposes to change the method of distribution. That is all. 

A MEMBER. I call for the regular order. 

The SPEAKER. This is the regular order. The gentleman from 

Kentucky fMr. TAULBEE] will proceed. 

Mr. TAULBEE. Mr. Speaker, if I understand the objection of the 

gentleman from Missouri (Mr. HATCH] to this amendment, it consists 

in this, that whatever inequalities may have existed heretofore in the 

distribution of books relates to a former Congress and not to this. I 

understand that the distribution of books under the resolution of this 

House relates not so much to the members of the Honse as to the con- stituents they represent. 

Mr. UACDONALD. I wahtto &'\y to-the gentleman that we do not 

understand his remarks from the fact that we did not hear his amend- ment read. 

l'lfr. TAULBEE. Then, Mr. Speaker, for the benefit of the gentlemen who did not hear it, I will ask the Clerk to read my amendment 

again in my time. _, 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Provided, That apportionment among the members of the House of Represent- a tives shall be made with regard to former distribution. 

Mr. ]'}liLLIKEN. Will the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. TAULBEE] permit a question? 

Mr. TAULBEE. Yes, sir; I will yield for a question. 

]')fr. MILLIKEN. I would like to have the gentleman state a little 

more explicitly to what he refers. I desire to vote intelligently upon 

this resolution if I vote at all, and I am seeking information. I do not 

know how much of a deficit there has been in these books. If the 

House has lG,OOO books or documents, and they are to be distributed 

equally among the members, I know pretty nearly what share I am 

going to get; but if a portion of them are to be taken out to make up 

for some prior deficit, then I do not know how much I am going to get 

until I know how large the deficit is. There was similar trouble in 

r egard to the book on :fish and :fisheries. f!lome members found that 

they did not have halftheirquota., and the excuse given was that upon 

a recount it was found that the first apportionment allowed too many 

books to each member. If the gentleman is correct in what he says 

about the distribution of hooks, I think it is high time there was an investigation, so that the House may know what is being done in such cases and whether there is a fair distribution or not. If the gentleman will state the facts that he 1·efers to, I sl}.all be exceedingly glad 

to hear his statement. 

1\I.r. TAULBEE. That is a very difficult question to answer. In 

fact it covers so much ground that I do not know just what it relates to. 

Mr. :MILLIKEN. I want to know how large a deficit there has been, 

who the members are that have got more than their share, and who 

they are that have not received the books due them. 

Mr. TAULBEE. I am unable to speak authoritath·ely with reference 

to this matter, from the simple fuct that my efforts to ascertain the facts 

have proved fruitless, by reason, I suppose, oftheinactionoftheCommittee on Printing. From tv hat outside knowledge I have of the inequality 

of ~he distribution of books, it has arisen from the miscalculations of 

those who have made the apportionment among members. I have made 

a so mew hat thorough personal investigation of the matter, and I am unable to conclude that there has been any gross fault on the part of any 

of the officers whose duty it is to ma.ke the distribution. • uy amendment simply proYides that my constituents shall be entitled to as many 

books in the aggregate as the constituents of any other member, and 

that the constituents of a new member of the Fiftieth Congress shall be 

entitled to indemnity for whatever tlley may have suffered by reason 

of any prior misappropriation or misapportionment. 

Mr. HATCH. How many books were placed to the credit of the gentleman in the fo1 ding-room? 

Ur. TAULBEE. I am unable to answer from memory. 

Several MEIDJRRS. Five. 

Mr. HATCH. Five. There iS no member who has received more 

tllan :five-none that I ha•e heard of. 

JI.Ir. TAULBEE. I am not so well posted with reference to these 

matters as I would have been bad the resolution which I introduced 

been reported to the Honse by those charged with its consideration. I 

am un\villing to anticipate such an investigation. 

Mr. lliCHARDSO~. I ask the gentleman to yield to me a moment. 

He has I'efcrred several times to an investigation--

1\Ir. TAULBEE. Certainly I yield to the gentleman. 

Mr. RICHARDSO~. The gentleman has referred several times to 

the fact that .there was referred to the Committee on Printing a resolution directing some inquiry to be made as to the reasons why members 

could not obtain certain books placed to their CTedit in the Doorkeeper's room. 

Mr. TAULBEE. If the gentleman will allow me, I will explain to 

him that the conclusion to which lie is drifting is incorrect. I was going to state that a subsequent resolution--

1\Ir. RICHARDSON. I think I can obviate the speech the gentle- man is going to deliver. [Laughter.] _ 

l'IIr. HATCH. I rise to a point of order. I desire that the gentleman 

from Kentucky [Mr. TAULBEE] shall have time enough to explain his 

an;J.endment, but I make the point of order that he is speaking to an 

amendment after t he main re olution bas already been disposed of. 

And I submit the gentleman is entitled to only :five minutes under t he 

rule .. 

Mr. TAULBEE. I would like a word under that point of or<lcr. 

The f:;PEAKER. The gentleman from Kentucky, under the rules, 

is entitled to the floor for one hour. [Laughter. J 

:Mr. TAULBEE. I have no purpose to occupy the floor for one hour, 

but only long enough to say with reference to the resolution which I introduced that I have had an understanding that this investigation merged 

into a broader in vestiga.tion which is to be curried on by a specin.l Com- mittee on Printing. 

Mr. RICHARDSON. It does not touch that at all. 

Mr. TAULBEE. Then, Mr. Speaker, I say that prior to this time 

the Honse was entitled to a report from the committee having that 

resolution under consideration, a report which would have given us a 

better opportunity to understand the evils intended to be remedied by 

my amendment. 

With reference to the point raised by the gentleman from Missouri 

[Mr. HATCH] that my amendment is not to be regarded as a part of 

this resolution, I am unable to see how one amendment can be so re- garded and not another. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair has decided that question. 

Mr. O'NEILL, of Pennsylvania. I would like to ask the gentleman 

from Kentucky a question. 

Mr. TAULBEE. Certainly, I am wiUing to yield to the gentleman 

for that purpose; but I am ready to surrender the floor so soon as I 

have answered question.s which gentlemen may desire to ask. [Cries 

of "Vote ! " " Vote ! "] 

Mr. O'NEILL, of Penns:vlvania. I ask the gentleman to state explicitly how many of these documents each member is entitled to; and 

I put this question for the r eason that the document is a very important one and very greatly sought for in all parts of the country-in 

the cities as well as in the country districts. I wa.nt it explicitly stated 

how many volumes each member is entitled to receive, so that . the 

people may know we ha•e >ery 1ew copies to distribute. And I wish 

to :rp.ake a remark here-not exactly upon this subject-- 1\fr. TAULBEE. Then I object., if it is not on thjs subject. 1 do not 

yield any fnriher. 

Mr. O'NEILL, ofPennsylvania. Itdoesrelatetothisgeneralquestion. 

/ 
1192 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 14, --------------------------------------------------------.--------------------------------------------------------

Mr. TAULBEE. Answering as briefly as I can the question asked 

by 'the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. O'NEILL], I will say that 

his question involves a simple arithmetir.al calculation in long division, 

and he has as much time to make the calculation as I have. 

Mr. HA'rCH. Now I ask the gentleman from Kentucky to yield to 

me. Mr. TAULBEE. For a question? 

Mr. HA.TCH. •No. I ask the gentleman to yield me the floor. 

Mr. TAULBEE. I want a vote. But first I will yield for a question to the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. McMILLIN]. / 

1\Ir. McMILLIN. I wish to say to the gentleman from Kentucky 

that his amendment, being in these words, "Prot'ided, The apportionment among the members of the House of· Representatives shall be 

made with regard to former distributions," leaves the matter so uncer- tain that t~ officer charged with ·the duty of distributing these documents- or placing them :to the credit of members would be unable to 

correct the evil of which the gentleman complains. · Mr. HENDERSON, of Iowa. That is true. 

Mr. TAULBEE. The amendment may be liable to some objection 

in that respect; bqt I shall not oppose any modification which may· be 

suggested for the purpose of rendering my proposition more definite. 

Mr. HATCH. I hope the gentleman from Kentucky will now demand'the previous question. 

Mr. TAULBEE. I demand the previous question. 

Mr. RICHARDSON. Having submitted this report, I would like 

to offer an amendment, and I think, according to custom, the right to 

call the previous question would belong to me. I ask the gentleman 

from Kentucky to withdraw his demand for the previous question. 

Mr. TAULBEE. I do so, and yield to the gentleman frou Tennessee (Mr. RICHARDSON]. 

Mr. RICHARDSON. Mr. Speaker, the House seems to desire that 

this document shall be published in two volumes. The resolution has 

not so provided. I will therefore move the previous question upon the 

pending amendment and upon agreeing to the resolution, first yielding to the gentleman from Tennessee, who has an amendment to print 

the document in two volumes. 

Mr. TAULBEE. I make the point of order that the proposed amendment is not in order. 

The SPEAKER. No new amendment is in order until the pending 

amendment has been disposed of. 

Mr. HENDERSON, of Iowa. We can dispose of that quickly enough. 

[Cries of "Vote!" Vote!"] 

The question recurred on Mr. TAULBEE's amendment, and it was 

disagreed to. 

Mr. RICHARDSON. I offer the following amendment. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Add to the resolu~ion the following wo1·ds: 

"Said work shall be bound in two volumes." 

The amendment was agreed to. 

The resolution as amended was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time, 

and passed. 

Mr. RICHARDSON moved to reconsider the vote by which the res- olution was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be 

laid on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

The SPEAKER. There being no objection, the title of the resolution 

will be amended to conform to the amendments made to the body of 

the joint resolution, and it will be changed from a concurrent resolution 

to a joint resolution. 

There was no objection, and it was ordered accordingly. 

BRIDGE ACROSS ROCK CREEK. 

The SPEAKER. The regular order of business is the consideration 

of the bill (H. R. 1184) to authorize the construction of a bridge across Rock Creek a~ the Woodley Lane road, in the District of Columbia, 

which comes over as the unfinished business from yesterday. The pend-

_jng question is on the passugeofthe bill, upon which the previous question has been ordered. At the adjournment the gentleman from Iowa 

[Mr. HENDERSON] had asked for the reading of the engrossed bill, 

which will now be read. 

The Clerk proceeded to read the engrossed bill. 

Mr. HENDERSON, of Iowa. !withdraw the demand forthereading of the bill. 

The bill was passed. 

Mr. HEMPHILL 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 ag2eed to. 

FICTITIOUS TRANSACTIONS IN PRODfJ'CE. 

Mr. HATCH. Mr. Speaker, yesterday I introduced a bill (H. R. 

7051) to prohibit fictitious and gambling transactions on the price of 

articles prodneed by America.n farm industry, and asked it be referred 

to the Committee on Agriculture. I understood at the time the Chair 

ordered its reference to that committee. 

The SPEAKER. No, the Chair referred it to the Coinmittee on the 

Judiciru'Y. Itchangesthecriminallawofthe United States. It creates 

new crimes and provides for their punishment. . Mr. HATCH. The subject-matter embraced in the bill related to 

farm products alone. 

The SPEAKER. It does not relate to agriculture. It changes the 

criminal law of the United States. It creates new crimesand provides 

for their punishment. 

Mr. HATCH. I did not hear the Chair, but was under the impression that the bill had been referred to the Committee on Agriculture. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair. sent it to the Committee on the Judiciary. By reference to the rules it will be seen that the Committee on the Judiciary has charge of all proposed legislation relating to judicial 

proceedings and civil and criminal law. 

1\Ir. HATCH. I move to change the reference of the bill, and move its reference to the Committee on Agriculture. 

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE, of Kentucky. Is that a privileged motion? 

The SPEAKER. The gentleman claims there has been an erroneous reference without the action of the House, and under the circumstances 

the Chair thinks the question should be submitted. Mr. HATCH. I would have submitted it yesterday if I had understood at the time the reference had been changed to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

Mr. HENDERSON, of Iowa. We do not know what it is. Let the 

bill be read. 

The title of the bill was again read. 

Mr. OATES. Let the bill be read. 

The SPEAKER. The bill has passed from the possession of the clerks 

of the House. 

Mr. HATCH. The bill is in the bands of the printers. 

The f3PEAKER. The consideration of the bill will be passed over for the pre.sent. 

ADDITIONAL MESSENGERB. 

Mr. COX, by unanimous consent, submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Accounts: 

Resolvecl, That the Doorkeeper of the House be authorized to appoin~ one additional messenger, at a salary of $75 a month, during the remainder of this ses- sion, and one night watchman, at a salary of$60 per montD, during the remainder 

of this session, both of whom shall be assigned to duty with the committees of 

the House of Representatives located in the Butler building, and both of whom 

shall he paid out of the con~ingen~ fund of the House. 

ORDER OF llUSINESS. 

Mr. BURNES. I move to dispense with the morning hour for to-day. 

:M:r. LANHAM. I object, and demand the regular order of business. 

:M:r. BURNES. If gentlemen have more important busine....~ than the 

consideration of an appropriation bill I will yield. 

The SPEAKER. The regular order of business is the call of com- mittees for reports. 

PURCHASE OF UNITED STATE£~ BONDS. 

Mr. MILLS, from the Committee on Ways and 1\Ieans, reported back 

favorably the bill (H. R. 5034) for the purchase of United States bonds 

by the Secretary of the Treasury; which was referred to the Committee 

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

AMENDMENT TO CONSTITUTION. 

Mr. COLLINS, from the Committee on the Judiciary (by Mr. RoGERs), reported back favorably joint resolution S. R.13, proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States; which was referred to the ~ouse Calendar, and, wtth the accompanying report, 

ordered to be prrnted. · 

JURISDICTIO~ OF UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURTS. 

Mr. GLOVER, from the Committee on the Judiciary, reported as a substitute for the bill (H. R. 1600) to determine the jurisdiction of 

circuit courts of the United States, a bill (H. R. 7216) of the same title; 

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

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

The bill H. R. 1600 and the resolution of January 5, 1888, bearing 

upon the same subject, referred to the committee, were ordered to lie on the table. 

Il\IPORTATION OF BREEDING STOCK. 

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

favorably the bill (S. 1564) for the relief of importers of animals for 

breeding purposes in certain cases; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, and, with the ac- companying report, ordered to be printed. 

ADVERSE REPORT. 

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

adversely the bill (H. B.. 1846) for the appointment of a commission to 

inquire into and report to Congres...c; what, if any, Iegi lation is necessary 

to improve the administration of justice in the courts of the United 

States; which was ordered to lie upon the table, and the accOmpanying report printed. 

SECTIO~ 90.51 REVI~ED STATUTES. 

llfr. OATES also, from the Committee on the Judiciary, reported 
. ' 

1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. - 1193 

back favorably the bill (H. R. 5666) to amend section 905 of the Re- the bill (H. R. 136) for the relief of Will.ia.m :Bassett; which were sev- vised Statutes; which was referred to the House Calendar, and, with erally ordered to be ~aid Oll the table and the accompanying reports 

the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. printed. 

BRIDGE ON FLINT RIVER, GEORGIA. 

Mr. CRISP, from the Committee ·on Commerce, reported back with 

amendments the bill (H. R. 5096) authorizing the construction of a bridge over Flint River, in the State of Georgia; which was referred to 

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

the accompanying report, ordered to be printed, 

BRIDGES IN ARKANSAS. 

:M:r. CRISP also, from the Committee on Commerce, reported back 

with amendments the bill (H. R. 4759) authorizing the Little Rock and 

Alexandria Railway Company to bnild certain bridges in the State of 

Arkansas; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House 

of the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered 

to be printed. · 

BRIDGES, ST. MARY'S AND OTHER RIVERS, GEORGIA .AND FLORIDA. 

11Ir. CRISP also, from the Committee on Commerce, reported ba<lk 

with amendment the bill (H. R. 3470) to authorize the construction of 

bridges on t.he rivers St. Mary's, Satella, Little Satella, and Crooked, 

in the States ot Georgia and Florida; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the ac- companying report, ordered ~ be printed. 

BRIDGE ON OCMULGEE RIVER, GEORGIA. 

Mr. CRISP also, from the Committee on Commerce, report~d back 

wjth amendments the bill (H. R. 5095) authorizing the construction 

of a bridge across the Ocmulgee River, in the State of Georgia, and for 

other purposes; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole 

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

ordered to be printed. 

BRIDGE ON THE COLUMBIA RIVER. 

M:r. CRISP also ,from the Committee on Commerce, reported back with 

amendments the bill (H. R. 2807) authorizing the Columbia River 

Bridge Company to construct a bridge across the Columbia River between the State of Oregon and the Territory of Washington; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

QUARANTINE STATION, SHIP ISLAND. 

M:r. DUNHAM, from the Committee on Commerce, reported back 

with amendments the bill (H. R. 1588) to authorize the remoml of the 

quarantine station from Ship Island, Mississippi; which was referred 

to the Committ-ee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and 

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

BRIDGES ON RED RIVER. 

Mr. DUNHAM also, from the Committee on Commerce, reported 

back with amendments the bill (H. R. 2528) to authorize the con- struction of a railroad bridge across the Red River of the North bvthe 

North Dakota and Pacific· Railway Company; which was referred to 

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

the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. · . 

.Mr. D_UNHAM also, from t~e Committee on Commerce, reported 

back With amendments the bill (H. R. 2527) authorizing the con- struction of a bridge across the Red River of the North by the Duluth, Rainy Lake River a~d Southwestern Railway Company; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole Honse on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

BRIDGE ON MISSOURI RIVER, CLINTON, IOWA. 

Mr. ANDERSON, of Iowa, from the Committ-ee on Commerce reported back with amendments the bill (H. R. 6610) to authorize' the 

construction of a railroad, wagon, and foot-passenger brido-e across the 

1\Iissouri River at or near Clinton, Iowa; which was referred"' to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the ac- companying report, ordered to be printed. 

CREW 01:1' AMERICAN BARK CASHMERE. 

Mr. MORRO_":• from the 0>mmitteeon Foreign Affairs, reported back 

favorably the ,lOIDt resolution (H. Res. 95) to enable the President of 

the U~~ed States ~o extend to certain inhabitants of .Japan a suitable 

recogmt10n of theu humane treatment of the survivors of the crew of 

the American bark Cashmere; which was referred to the Committee 

of the Whole House on the state of the Union, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

WILLI.A:U: G. GALLOWAY. 

Mr. YODER, from the Committee on Military Affairs reported back 

favorably _the ~ill (H. R. ~508) for the relief of Willia~ G. Galloway, 

late captain, Fifteentp. Umted States Army; which was referred to the 

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

accompanying report, ordered to be printed. ' ' 

.ADVERSE REPORTS. 

_Mr. GEAR, from the Committee on 111:ilitary Affairs, reported back 

mth an adverse recommendation the petition of W. H. Hardin; also, 

KANSAS V .ALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY. 

Mr. LAIRD, from the Committee on Military Affairs, reported back 

with a favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 1438) authorizing the 

Kansas Valley Railroad Company to construct and operate a railway 

through the Fort Riley military reservation, and for other purposes; 

which was referred to the Committee of the WholeHouseonthePrivate 

Calendar, an~, with the a<lCOmpanying report, ordered to be printed. 

BEN J .Al\HN R. W .ALLER. 

?Yfr. LAIRD also, from the Committee on Military Affairs, reported 

back with a favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 289) for the relief of Benjamin R. Waller; which was referred to the Committee of 

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

JOHN M'CORMICK. 

· Mr. LAIRD also, from. the Committee on Military Affairs, reported 

back with a favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 2857) to remove the charge of desertion from the military record of John McCormick; 

which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private 

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

1\IINING DEBRIS QUESTION. 

Mr. O'FERRALL, from the Committee on Mines and Mining, re- ported back with amendments the bill (H. R. 1216) for the investigation of the mining debris question in the State of California; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the 

Union, and, with the amendments and accompanying report, ordered 

to be printed. - .., 

SITES OF PUBLIC BUII,DINGS. 

Mr. DIBBLE, from the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds, 

1·eported back with amendments the bill (H.-R. 6153) to authorize the 

condemnation of land for sites of public buildings; which was referred 

to the House Calendar, and, with the amendments and accompanying 

report, ordered to be printed. 

PUBLIC BUILDLL~G .AT CHARLESTON, W.VA. 

Mr. HOGG, from the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds, 

reported back with a favorable recommendation 1he bill (H. R. 3253) 

appropriating the sum of $52,000 for the enlargement and improvement 

of the United States public building at Charleston, W.Va.; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, 

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

PUBLIC BUILDING .AT ALLENTOWN, P.A. 

Mr. SOWDEN, from the CommitteeonPublicBuildingsand Grounds, 

reported back with amendments the bill (H. R. 4357) to erect a public 

building at Allentown, Pa.; which was referred to the Committee of 

the Whole House on the state of the Union, and, with the amendments 

and accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

PUBLIC BUILDING .AT LANCASTER, P.A. 

Mr. SOWDEN also, from the Committee on Public Buildings and 

Grounds, reported back with amendments the bill (H. R. 1788) for 

the erection of a public building in Lancaster, Pa.; which was referred 

to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, and, 

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

PUBLIC BUILDING .AT LOWELL, MASS. 

Mr. SOWDEN also, from the Committee on Public Buildings and 

Grounds, reported, as a substitute for the bill H. R. 1546, a bill (H. 

R. 7217) for the erection of a public building at Lowell, !fass.; wliich 

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. . 

The bill H. R. 1546 was laid on the table. 

PUBLIC BUILDING .AT BIRJ\-IINGH.AM, .AL.A. 

Mr. BANKHEAD, from the Committee on Public Buildings and 

Grounds, reported back with amendments the bill (H. R. 5062) for the 

erection of a public building at Birmingham, Ala. ; which was referred 

to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, and, 

with the amendments and aceompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

GOVERNMENT ·oFFICES .AT COUNCIL BLUFFS, IOWA. 

Mr. NEWTON, from the Committee on ~ublic Buildings and Grounds, 

reported back with a. favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 1394) 

authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury to purchase additional ground 

for the accommodation of Government offices in Council Bluffs, Iowa.; 

which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state 

of the Union, and, with the accom panyin_g report, ordered to be printed. 

PUBLIC BUILDING .AT DULUTH, l\IINN. 

Mr. NEWTON also, from the Committee on Public Buildings and 

Grounds, reported, as a substitute for the bill H. R. 1583, a. bill (H. 

R. 7218) to provide for the erection of a public building in the city of 

Duluth, State of Minnesota; which was read a first and second time, 

., 
1194 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. I FEBRUARY 14, 

referred to the Committee of the Whole Honse on the state of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying re- Union, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. port, ordered to be printed. 

The bill H . R. 1583 was laid on the table. 

PUBLIC BUILDING AT NEWARK, N . J. 

Jt.Ir. LEHLBACH, from the Committee on Public Buildings and 

Grounds, reported, ~ a substitute for the bill H . R. 1649, a bill (H. 

R. 7219) for the extension and repair of the public building at Newark, 

N. J., and for the purchase of additional land; which was read a first 

and second time, referred to the Committ-ee of the Whole House on the 

~tate of the Union, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be 

printed. 

_... The bill H . R. 1649 was laid on the table. 

PUBLIC BUILDING AT CHATTAKOOGA1 TENN. 

Mr. NEAL, from the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds, 

r eported, as a substitute for the bill H . R. 615D, a bill (H. R. 7220) to 

amend an act entitled "An act for the erection of a public building at 

Chattanooga, Tenn.," approved February 25, 1885, and the act amendatory thereof, approved February 21, 1887; 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. 

The bill H . R. 6159 was laid on the table. 

PUBLIC BUILDING AT BUFFALO, N . Y. 

1\fr. NEAL also, from the Committee on Public Buildings and 

Grounds, reported back with amendments the bill (H. R. 1678) to authorize the purchase of a site for a public building at Buffalo, N. Y.; 

which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state 

of the Union, and, with the amendments and accompanying report., ordered to be printed. 

PUBLIC BUILDING AT O.llAIIA, NEBR. 

Mr. McSHANE, from the Committee ~m Public Buildings and 

Grounds, reported back with a favorable recommendation the bill (S. 

182) to proYide lor the purchase of a site and the erection of a public 

building thereon, at Omaha, Nebr.; which was referred to the Committee- of the Whole House on the state of the Union, and, with the ac- companying report, ordered to be printed. 

. LICENSING CONDUCTORS. 

Mr. BUR.NETT, from the Committee on Labor, reported back with 

an adverse recommendation the bill (H. R 4289) to proVide for licensing conductors on certain railroads within the United States; which 

was- laid on the table, and the accompanying report ordered to be 

printed. · 

MARY J . FRANCIS. 

1\Ir. MAT.SON, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, reported 

back with a favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 4655) granting 

a pension to I\Iary J . Francis; which wa.s referred to the Committee of 

the \Yhole House on tbe Private Calendar, and, with the a.:ccompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

ADVERSE REPORTS. 

Mr. MATSON, from the Committee on I nvalid Pensions, reported 

back ad>ersely biUs of the following titles; which were severally laid 

on the table, and the accompanying reports ordered to be printed: 

A bill (H. R. 132) granting a. pension to Hamilton R. Harper; and 

A bill (H. R. 135) granting a pension to Dallas Miller. 

Mr. CHIPl\IAN, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, reported 

back adversely bills of tbe following titles; which were severally laid 

on the table, and the accompanying reports ordered to be printed: 

A bill (H. R. 870) granting-a pension to Isaac Kimball ; and 

A bill (H. R. 415) granting a pension t o Henrietta Bowers. 

THOMAS H. AULLS. 

Mr. CHIPMAN also, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, reported back with a favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 416) granting a pension to Thomas Anlls; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompany- ing report., ordered to be printed. 

G. W. BURKHART. 

l'tlr. CHIPMAN also, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, re--

ported back with a favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 407) granting a pension to G. W. Burkhart; which was referred to the Committee 

of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompany- ing report, ordered to he printed. 

JOH~ BISBEY. 

Mr. CHIPMAN also, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, reported backwit.ha favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 2491) granting a pension to John Bisbey; which was referred to the Committee of 

the Wbole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying r eport, ordered to be printed. 

ALONZO HIGLEY. 

J . MILLER RAUTI. 

1\Ir. CHIPMAN also, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, reported back with a favorable recommendation the bill (H. R. 2514) 

granting a pension to J. ~filler Raub; which was referred to the Com- mittee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the ac- companying report, ordered to be printed. 

MARY PENFIELD. 

Mr. CHIPMAN also, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, reported back with a favorable recommendation the bill (II. R. 6071) for 

the relief of :Mary Penfield; which was referred to the Committee of 

the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompany- ing report, ordered to be printed. 

DAVID STRUNK. 

Mr. CHIPUAN also, from the Committee ou Invalid Pensions, reported back with a favorable recommendation the bill (ll. R 417) 

granting a pension to David Strunk; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calentlar, and, with the 

accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

JAMES II. REEVE. 

1\fr. CHIP:M:AN also, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, reported back with a f.worable recommendation the bill (H. R. 3898) 

grantin_g an increase of pension to James H. Reeve; which was referred 

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

with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

RETIECCA H . CLARK. 

Mr. MORRILL, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, reported 

back with an amendment the bill (IT. R. 183) granting a pension to 

Rebecca H. Clark; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole 

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

ordered to be printed. 

ADVERSE REPORTS. 

1\fr. MORRILL, from the Committee on Invalicl Pensions, also reported back adversely bills of the following titles; which were severally 

laid on the table, and the accompanying reports ordered to be printed: 

A bill (H. R. 2266) for tbe relief of William Watson; 

A bill (H. R. 2521) granting a pension to'Uorgan Johnson; 

A bill (H. R. 433) granting a pension to Lydi:J. A. Train; and · 

A bill (H. R. 2520) granting a pension to Jacob Niebels. 

W. l?. RANDOLPH. 

Mr. PIDCOCK, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, reported 

back with a f.worable recommendation the bill {ll. R. 5233) granting 

a pension to William F. Randolph; which was 1·eferred to the Committee of the Whole Honse on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

MRS. E. B. ANDERSON. 

Jt'Ir. GALLINGER, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, reported 

back with amendments the bill (H. R. 754) to increase the pension of 

1\frs. Eliza B. Anderson; which was referred to the Committee of the 

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

-ADVERSE REPORTS. 

Mr. GALLINGER also, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, reported back adversely bills of the following titles; which were seYerally 

laid on the table, and the accompanying reports ordered to be printed: 

A bill (II. R. 3163) granting a pension to Clarissa. Shorey; 

A bill (H. n. 4890) granting arrears of pension to George Andrews; 

A bill (H. n. 3909) granting a pension to George Cox; 

A bill (H. R. 4733) for the relief of Phebe S. Robinson; and 

A bill (H. R. 4109) granting a pension to Richard Hinch. 

IDA B. LINTHICU:hL . 

:Mr. LANE, from the _Committee on Invalid Pensions, reported back 

favorably the bill (H. R. 97) granting a pension to Ida B. Linthicnm; 

which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the 

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

printed. BRIDGET O'RILEY. 

Mr. LA};~ also, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, reported 

back adversely the bill (H. R. 3564) for the relief of Bridget O'Riley ; 

which was laid on the table, and the accompanying report ordered to -

be printed. 

JOHN GODSON. 

Mr. STRUBLE, from the Committee on Pensions, reported back 

favorably the bill (H. R. 5246) granting a pension to John Godson; 

which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Pri- vate Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

~fr. CHIPMAN also, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, re- JOHN D. THOMPSON. 

p orted back with an amendment the bill (H. R. 2498) granting a pen- Mr. LANHAM, from the Committee on Claims, reported back with 

sion to . .A.lonzo Higley; which was referred to the Committee of the amendment the bill (H. R. 2746) for the r elief of J ohn D. Thompson ; 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1195 

which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private 

Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered ii9 be printed. 

C. B. WILSON. 

:Mr. LAN~I also, from the Committee on Claims, reported back 

£worably the bill (H. R. 5030) for the relief of C. B. Wilson; which was 

referred to the Committee of the Whole Honse on the Private Calendar, 

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

R . S. STANLEY. 

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

fuv01~bly the bill (H. R. 6291) for the relief of R. S. Stanley, postmaster at Booneville, Miss.; which was referred to the Committee of the 

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

A . B. NORTON. 

1\Ir. LANHAJ\f also, from the Committee on Claims, reported back 

fnxorably the bill (H. R.. 4805) for the relief of A. B. Norton; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Cal- endar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

W. W. SCREWS. 

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

fayorably the bill (H. R. 6562) for the relief ofW. W. SCl·ews; which 

was referred to the Committee of the Wbole House on the Private Cal- enuar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed.. 

LESLIE E. BROOKS. 

Ir. LANHAl\I also, from the Committee on Claims, reported back 

fa\O!'ably the bill (II. R. 4256) for the relief of Leslie E. Brooks; which 

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

FIItST NATIONAL BA.L'\K OF PORTLAND, OREGON. 

Mr. TAULBEE, from the Committee on Claims, reported back with 

amendment tlle bill (H. R. 1761) for the relief of the First National 

Rank of Portlnnd, Oregon, for money advanced the Oregon Iron Works, 

tJ1e contractor in building the United States revenue cutter Thomas 

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

be .iJrinted. · - H}\InS OF SOLOMON SPITZER. 

:Mr. TiliOTHY J. CAMPBELL, from the Committee on Claims, re- ported back fiworably the bill (H. R. 2699) for the relief of the heirs of 

the late Solomon Spitzer; which was referred to the Committee of the 

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

1\lESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. 

A message from the Senate, by Mr. UcCooK, its Secretary, announced 

tbut the Senate had passed bills of the following titles; in which the 

CDncurrence of the House was requested: 

A bill (S. ~0) to provide for the constrUction of a public building at 

Portland, Oregon; 

A bill (S. 416) for the relief of Mrs. Harriet H. Robinson; 

A bill (S. 424) relating to lands in Colorado lately occupied by the 

Uncompahgre and White River Ute Indians; 

A bill {S. 601) to authorize the purchase of additional ground in 

Newark N. J., adjoining the cnstom-house and post-office building, · and for the improvement of the builcling thereon and the erection of 

additions thereto; and 

A bill (S. 1071) for the relief of A. B. Norton. 

L. J. WORDEN. 

Mr. LAIDLAW, from the Committee on Claims, reported back favorably the bill {H. R. .2265) for the relief L. J. Worden; which was re- ferred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, 

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

ESTATE OF WILLIAM STOTES:BURY. 

Mr. LAIDLAW also, from ~he Co_!!11Uittee on Claims, reported back 

favorably the bill (H. R. 933) to open and set aside an order of the 

Court of Claims canceling a portion of~ judgment against the United 

States, remitted through mistake as to the facts in reg3rd to the same by claimant to the United States, and to refer the matter to the Court 

of Claims for such further action as such court shall find to be j nst and cqnitable ; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on tbe Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered 

to be printed. 

LOUIS JACOBSON. 

1\Ir. LAIDLAW also, from the Committee on Claims, reported bac~ 

faYorably the bill (H. R. 1158) for the relief of Louis Jacobson; which 

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

CHARLES H. MASON. 

1\ir. LAIDLAW also, from the Committee on Claims, reported back 

favorably the bill (H. R. 2160) for the relief of Charles H. Mason; 

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

NEHEl\:UAH OSBURN. / 

Mr. LAIDLAW also, from the Committee on Claims, reported back 

favorably the bill (H. R. 464) for the relief of Nehemiah Osburn; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and the accompanying reportorderedJo be printed. 

DANIEL B. WASHBURN·. 

Mr. KERR, from the Committee on Claims, reported back favorably 

the bill (H. R. 3750) for the relief of Daniel B. Washburn; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, 

and the accompanying report ordered to be printed. 

Al\IERICAN GROCER ASSOCIATION, NEW YORK. 

Mr. KERR also, from the Committee on Claims, reported back favorably the bill (H. R.. 5248) for the relief of the American Grocer Asso- ciation of the city of New York; which was referred to the Committee 

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

report ordered to be printed. 

G. W . M' ADAMS. 

Mr. KERR also, fi·om the Committee on CL.'lims, reported back favorably the bill (H. R. 4765) for the relief of G. W. McAdams; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and the accompanying report ordered to be printed. 

JOHN J. CROOKE. 

MT. KERR also, from the Committee on Claims, reported back favorably the bill (H. R. 2696) for the relief of John J. Crooke; which was 

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

ACCOUNTS OF EDWIN A. 1\IERRITT. 

Mr. KERR also, from the Committee on Claims, reported ba~kfavorably the bill (H. R. 4573) to provide for the adjustment of the ac .. 

counts of Edwin A. Merritt; which was referred to the Committee of 

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

HEIRS OF JOHN R. TRENTLEN. 

lflr. KERR also, from the Committee on Claims, reported back favorably the bill (H. R.. 2896) for the relief of the heirs of John R.. Trentlen; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the 

Private Calendar, and the accompanying report ordt::red to be printed. 

MARIAN F. HAYNIE. 

Mr. McCULLOGH, from the Committee on Claims, reported back 

with amendments the bill (H. R. 67) for the relief of Marjan F. Haynie; 

which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private 

Calendar, and the accompanying report ordered to be printed. 

Ml~S. CARRIE E. HOPKINS. 

Mr. McCULLOGH also, from the Committee on Claims, reported 

back favorably the bill (H. R. 3907) for the Telief of Mrs. Carrie E. 

Hopkins, widow of Moses A. Hopkins; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the · Private Calendar, and the accom- panying report ordered to be printed. 

S. DILLIKGER & SONS. 

Mr. McCULLOGH also, from the Committee on Claims, reported 

back favorably the bill (H. R. 6591) for the relief of S. Dillinger & 

Sons; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole Honse on the 

Private Calendar, and the accompanying report ordered to be printed. 

L. B. TOWN E~D AND OTHERS. 

Mr. LAIDLAW, from the Committee on Claims, reported the bill 

(S. 388) for the relief of L. B. Townsend :mel others; which was re- ferred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, 

and the accompanying report ordered to be printed. 

CLAIMS REPORTED BY ACCOUNTING OFFICEBS, TREASURY. 

111r. STONE, of Kentucky, from the Committee on War Claims, re- ported back favorably the bill (H. R. 6514)for theallOW1ffice of certain 

claims reported by. the accounting officers of the Unitf>A States Treasury Department~ which was referred to the Committee of the Whole 

House onthePrivate Calendar, and the accompanying reportordered to 

be printed. HEIRS OF WILLIAM PITCHER, ETC. 

J,fr. BROWER, from the Committee on War Claims, reported back favorably the bill (H. R. 787) .for the relief of the heirs ofWilliam Pitcher 

and Axel Hayford, and Samuel Otis and George B. Fergusson; which was refened to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and the accompanying report ordered to be printed. 

C. T.DILLING~- , 

Mr. BROWER also, from the Committee on War Claims, reported 

back favorably the bill (H. R. 6242) for the relief of C. T. Dillingham; 

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

:MRS. JliARY F. COFFEY. 

Mr. BROWER also, from the Committee on War Claims, reported 
1196 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 14, 

back favorably the bill (H. R. 6244) for th(relief of Mrs. Mary F. Cof- berg; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the 

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

Private Calendar, and the accompanying report ordered to be printed. printed. 

ELIZABETH JONES. 

Mr. BROWER also, from the Committee on War Claims, reported 

back favorably the bill (H. R.. 483) for the relief of Elizabeth Jones, 

widow of John Jones, deceased, and . to place the name of said John 

Jones on the muster-rolls of Company B, Second Regiment North Carolina Mounted Infantry; which was referred to the Committee of the 

Whole House on the Private Calendar, and the accompanying report ord~red t-o be printed. . 

CONRAD CLAYCOMB. 

Mr. BROWER also, from the Committee on War Claims, reported 

back favorably the bill (H. R. 6243) for the relief of Conrad Claycomb; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on 

the Private Calendar, and the accompanying 1·eport ordered to be 

printed. 

JOHN SULLIVAN. 

Mr. LAWLER, from the Committee on War Claims, reported back 

favorably the bill (H. R. 3493) for the relief of John Sullivan; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private 

Calendar, and the accompanying report ordered to be printed. 

J A11IES C. NEWMAN, ADMINISTRATOR. 

Mr. STOCKDALE, from the Committee on War Claims, reported 

back favorably the bill (H. R. 831) for the relief of James C. Newman, 

administrator; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole 

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

ordered to be printed. 

REUBEN RAGLAND. 

Mr: GAINES, from the Committee on War Claims, reported back 

favorably the bill (H. R. 6351) for the relief of Reuben Ragland; which 

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

CLAIMS FOR ADDITIONAL BOUNTY. 

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

reported back favorably the bill (H. R. 1413) to extend the time for 

tiling claims for additional bounty under the act of July 28, 1866, 

which expired by limitation upon July 1, 1880, until July 1, 1890; 

which was referred to the House Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. · 

JOHN F. ALSUP. 

Mr. THQMAS, of Wisconsin, also, from theCommitteeon WAr Claims, 

reported. back favorably the bill (H. R. 3494) for the relief of John F. 

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

be printed. 

HIRAM SOMERVILLE. 

:Ur. O'NEALL, of Indiana, from the Committee on War Claims, re- }:,orted back favorably the bill (H. R. 5524) for the relief of Hiram 

Somerville; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House 

on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying report; ordered 

to be printed. 

JOHN S. FILLl\IORE. 

Mr. WASHINGTON, from the Committee on War Claims, reported 

back favorably the bill (H. R. 671) for thereliefof the heirs of John S. 

Fillmore, deceased; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole 

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

ordered to be printed. 

REPRINT OF UNITED STATES MAPS. 

Mr. RICHARDSON, from the Committee on Printing, reported back 

favorably the joint resolution (S. R. 17) to print additional copies of the 

United States map of the edition of 1886, prepared by the Commissioner of Public Lands; which 'was referred to the Committee of the 

Whole on the" state of the Union, and, with the accompanying report, 

ordered to be printed. 

ADVERSE REPORTS. 

Mr. RICHARDSON also, from the Committee on Printing, reported 

back with adverse recommendation bills and resolutions of the following titles; which were severally ordered to be laid on the table, and 

the accompanying reports printed, namely: 

A bill (H. R. 561;8) to disseminate Congressional current legislation among the people; 

House resolution directing the Public Printer to publish monthly 

a consolidated index of t)le proceedings of Congress, etc. ; 

House resolution to reduce the price of the CoNGRESSIONAL REcORD to $1.50 for the long session and to $1 for the short session; and 

Joint resolution (H. Res. 31) to print in RECORD form additional 

copies of the President's message. 

ALFRED REHBERG. 

Mr. MAISH, from the Committee on Military .Affairs, reported back 

with amendments the bill (H. R. 34;35) for the relief of Alfred HedPROTECTION OF MECHANICS AND LABORERS IN THEIR WAGES. 

Mr. O'NEILL, of Missouri, from the Committee on Labor, reported 

back favorably the bill (H. R. 3405) to protect mechanics, laborers, and 

servants in their wages; which was referred to theHouseCalendar, and, 

with the accompanying report, ordered to be printed. 

EMPJA)YMENT QF ENLISTED ME~ IN COMPETITION WITH CIVILIANS. 

ltfr. O'NEILL, of Missouri, also, from the Committee on Labor, re- ported back favorably the joint resolution (H. Res. 99) in reference to 

the employment of enlisted men in competition with local civilians; 

which was referred to the House Calendar, and, with the accompanying 

report, ordered to be printed. 

COl\IMITTEE SERVICE. 

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Cox] asks 

to be excused from further service on the Committee on the Territories, 

and the gentleman from Kentucky [l\1r. TAULBEE] from further serv- ice on the Select Committee on the Eleventh Census. If there be no objection, these gentlemen will be excused, as requested; and the Chair 

will appoint the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. TAULBEE] to serve 

as a member of the Committee on the Territories in place of Mr. Cox. 

There was no objection, and it was so ordered. 

CLAIMS FOR REM:USTER. 

Mr. CUTCHEON. I am directed by the Committee on Military Affairs to submit a privileged report, which I send to the desk. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

The Committee on 1\lilitary Affairs, to which was referred ·the following res- olution, having considered the same, report it back, and recommend its adoption: 

Resolved, That the Secretary ot War be requested to advise this House what progress bas been made in the examination and adjudication of claims for re- mnster of officers of the volunteer forces under the act of June 3, 1884, or under 

said act-as amended by the act of February 3, 1887; what is the whole number. of claims filed under the said acts respectively; what number remained to be 

examined and adjudicated, and bow long it will be before the consideration of 

said claims can be completed with the present clerical force of the AdjutantGeneral's Office. 

The resolution was agreed to. 

Mr. CUTCHEON moved to reconsider the vote by which the resolution was adopted; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

M:r. BURNES. I move to dispense with the morning hour. 

The SPEAKER. The morning hour has been oc~;upied. 

Mr. BURNES. I move that the House resolve itself into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration 

of general appropriation bills. 

The motion was agreed to. 

The House accordingly resolved itself into Committee of the Whole 

House on the state of the Union, Mr. BLOUNT in the chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. The House is in Committee of the Whole for the 

purpose of considering general appropriation bills. The Clerk w.ill re- port the first general appropriation biJI on the Calendar. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

A. bill (H. R. 5445) making appropriations for the payment of invalid and other 

pensions of the United States for the fiscal year ending June 30,1889, and for 

other purposes. 

ltlr. WEAVER. I wish to make an inquiry of the gentleman who is 

in charge of the bill as to the time to be allowed for debate. I tlllnk 

I may require some time myself. 

Mr. BURNES. I ask unanimous consent to lay aside the pension 

appropriation bill. 

There was no objection. 

URGENT DEFICIENCY .APPROPRIATION BILL. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the next appropriation 

bill. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

.A. bill (H. R. 6437) to provide for certain of the most urgent deficiencies in the 

appropriations for the service of the Government for the fiscal year cndmg June 30,1888, and for other purposes. 

Mr. BURNES. I ask that the first and formal reading of the bill be 

dispensed with. 

There was no objection. 

Mr. PETERS. I desire to state to the gentleman from Missouri 

lMr. BURNES] that I am requested by the Committee on the PostOffice and Post-Roads to ask that that committee be allowed to present the legal features of. the bill that was before the House on last 

Thursday. I would like very much if the gentleman would yield to 

that committee time enough to have those legal questions presented so 

that the views of the committee upon them may be before the House. 

If this is agreed to it will facilitate the final disposition of this bill. 

Mr. BURNES. I ask unanimous consent to limit ge_neral clebate 

upon the pending bill to two hours, so as to allow one hour to the gen-
1888. CONGRESSIONAL R-ECORD-HOUSE. 1197 

tleman from Kansas [Mr., PETERS], and half an hour to the gentleman 

from Iowa [Mr. WEAVER]. 

Mr. ROGERS. Do I understand that the two hours to which general debate is to be limited will be devoted to the discussion of the 

post-office bill? · :Mr. BURNES. I understand the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. 

PETERS] will discuss the Pacific telegraph bill. 

Mr. ROGERS. On this deficiency bill? 

Mr. BURNES. Not exactly on this bill, but while this bill is under 

consideration. 

Mr. ROGERS. I do not want to consent to that mode of procedur~. 

This is an urgent deficiency bill, and should be considered in the light 

of a deficiency bill, and not in the light of a railroad or telegraph bill. 

The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Arkansas object to the 

request that general debate be limited to two hours? 

Mr. ROGERS. I want to use a portion of the time myself. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair understands that the gentleman from 

Al·kansas objects to the arrangement. 

Mr. ROGERS. I do not object to limiting the debate to two hours 

if we are to occupy that time in discussing this bill; but if gentlemen are to discuss the telegraph bill under this arrangement, I do object. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair understands the gentleman from Arkansas to object. 

Mr. PE'.rERS. I will say to the gentleman from Arkansas that we 

are now in Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, 

and the gentleman who gets th~ floor has the right to discuss any ~tter, whether the pending bill or any other. 

Mr. ROGERS. I want thirty or forty minutes myself. 

Mr. BURNES. You shall have that time. 

Mr. ROGERS. How can I have that time if the general debate is to 

be limited to two hours? 

Mr. BURNES. Yon can have thirty minutes. 

-Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, with the understanding that I will 

have thirty minutes of the time on this side, I withdraw any objection 

I may have made to the proposition. 

Mr. HOOKER. I desire to make a point of order. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state it. 

Mr. HOOKER. I want to know whether, in this assignment of time, 

it is design a ted who shall occupy that time. I understand that in Committee of the Whole any gentleman who obtn-ins the floor has a right to 

occupy it. 

The CHAIRMAN. No arrangement of this kind can be made except 

by unanimous consent. The Chair will submit the request for unani- mous consent to limit debate to the time indicated. 

Mr. HOOKER. I understand that under the rules operating in Committee of the Whole debate is in order on the sections of the bill seriatim by any gentleman who gets the floor. 

Mr. RYAN.' That is under the five-minute rule. 

The CHAIRMAN. The question now is as to the general debate, 

and not as to the five-minute debate. 

Mr. PETERS. If the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. BURNES] will 

allow me to be recognized, I will proceed: 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair does not understand that any agreement has been reached as to the limitation of debate. 

:Mr. BURNES. I understood the agreement was made. 

The CHAIR!YIA.N. There was some conversation between gentle- men on the floor, but it was not followed by any request on the part 

of the gentleman from Missouri, and there was no submission of the 

question to the committee. ~ 

1\Ir. BURNES. I will withdraw the request and let matters take 

their course. . The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Missonri [Mr. BURNES] is 

entitled to the floor. 

Mr. BURNES. This bill carries appropriations for $4,083,342.57. 

If amendments which the committee has authorized to be offered are agreed to by this Committee of the Whole House, the amount will be 

increased a little over $1,000,000. No general debate, I presume, is 

desired by any one. The bill has been printed and in the hands of 

members for the last ten days, so that all ar~ presumed to be acquainted 

wHh its various provisions. 

The most important items of appropriation by this bill are those re- lating to1. Repairs of light-stations. 

2. Expenses of collecting customs revenue. 

3. Completion of water supply for District of Columbia. 

4. Military establishment. 

5. Signal Service. 

6. Increase of the Navy and completion of the steel cruisers Chicago 

and Boston. 

7. Clerical assistance to surveyors-general. 

8. The public-land service. 

D. Post-Offi<!e Department. 

10. Department of Justice. 

11. Fees of jurors and witnesses in United States courts. 

12. Pay of bailiffs, etc:, in United States courts. 

13. Fees and expenses of marshals in United States courts. I 

14. Fees of commissioners. . 15. Miscellaneons expenses of United States courts. 

16. Judgments of Court of Claims. 

17. Claims certified by the Sixth Auditor under the act of March 3, 

1883. 

18. Claims certified by Second Auditor and Second Comptroller. · 

19. Refunding to States expenses of raising volunteers. 

20. Claims certified by Third Auditor (lost horses, etc.). 

These are the principal items of this bill, sir. I apprehend that no general debate is necessary on the merits of the bill itself. None has 

been deemed necessary by the me.mbers of the Appropriations Committee, and unless circumstances require it, we shall, as soon as possible, move to proceed to the consideration of the bill by sections. I reserve 

the balance of my time. 

Mr. PETERS. 1\Ir. Chairman, I do not think I need make any ex- cuse for calling the attention of the House to the bill which was under 

consideration on last Thursday, because the interest manifested in that 

measure by the House at that time is certainly a sufficient justification 

for the desire of the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads to ask 

attention to the questions presented at any time when, under our rules, an opportunity can be obtained. 

I propose now to present for the information of the House such facts as have come to my knowledge, together with such law bearing upon 

the subject as I have been able to cull from the general statutes and 

from the authorities, with the desire and hope that all those who have 

not gi•en attention to this subject will, from this time forward, consider 

the questions involved, so as to be ready to act upon the bill proposed 

by the committee. I do not think that a more important bill has been 

presented for the consideration of this House during the present session · than the one which proposes to have the land-grant railroads resume their telegraphic franchises and operate .their telegraph lines in obedience to the laws that created those corporations. I shall proceed now 

to discuss the questions involved in the bill in as systematic order as I 

can; and for this purpose I will call attention, first, to the wrongs that 

have grown up under the legislation that has been enacted in respect 

to these land-grant roads; secondly, to the power of Congress to regulate or control the roads and to remedy these wrongs; and third, I shall 

very briefly ask the attention of the Honse to the remedy itself. 

The wrongs complained of are in their nature threefold, and can . all be grouped under three heads namely, destruction of competition, discrimination against individuals and other corporations, and 

the diversion of the effects or results of public aid to private aggrandizement. I think that all of the wrongs complained of before the 

Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads, wben they had this matter 

under investigation during the last Congress, can be brought in under 

one or other of these three heads, to which I shall now address myself 

in the order I have stated them, and as briefly as possible. 

First, a brief recital of history in relation to the land-grant legislation as it affects the bill in question. June 16, 1860, a bill was passed 

for the purpose of promoting communication between the Atlantic and 

Pacific coasts by means of the electric telegraph. Mark, the bill was passed J nne 16, 1860, and under it the first overland telegraph was constructed by two different companies. The provisions of the original 

grant gave $40,000 of Government business to this line annually for 

the period of ten years. That is, the Government agreed that it would 

do $40,000 of business over the line yearly, or if it did not, it would 

in any event pay that amount annually for ten years. It further agreed 

to give this telegraph company the use of a quarter-section of land for 

every 15 miles of the entire route traversed by the line, a route of about 

2,000 miles. Itfurtheragreed togivethistelegraphcompanythe right 

of way over the public domain, and, in addition to this, one of the com- panies that built the original line received nearly$100,000 from the State 

of California; which made the aggregate money consideration received 

for the construction of this original telegraph line $400,000 from the 

Government and $100,000 from the State of California, together with the use of about 25,600 acres of land and the right of way over the public -

domain. Under the provisions of this bill, as I have stated, the original line was constructed by the Pacific Telegraph Company and the 

Overland Telegraph Company. 

The Pacific Telegraph Company was chc'\rtered by the State of Ne- • braska and was capitalized at $1,000,000. The California State Company was incorporated by the State of California, and it entered into an agreement to construct the line eastward as far as Ogden or Utah. 

The Overland Company was organized under a charter granted by California with a capital of $1,250,000, for the purpose of carrying out 

the obligation of the California State Company to construct the line 

east as far as Utah, and these two telegraph companies, the Pacific, 

chartered by Nebraska, and the Overland, chartered by California, virtually built this line. It was built in four months and eleven days, 

and was completed in October, 1861. The entirecostofthe construction 

of this telegraph lin~ from the Missouri River to San Francisco did not 

exceed, according to the best estimates and information I can obtain, 

$400,000, which was the amount contributed to its construiction in 

money by the Government of the United States alone. I think that 

in this estimate I have exceeded at least $50,000 the actual cost of the 

construction of this original telegraph line. 

I . 

• 

. 
. ' 

• 

'· 

1198 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 14, 

Next in historical order comes the act of July 1, 1862, which provided for the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the 

Missouri River to the Pacific Ocean, and went on to prescribe ~rtain 

rules and regulations as well as to set out the object and purposes of 

the constru.ction of this line of railroad :md telegraph. This, as I have 

said, wus the first and original Pacific railroad act; and I will therefore use it for the purpose of illustration and argument. because nearly all 

the land-grant charters are almost identical with this one, differing 

somewhat in detail as to the names of the corporators, etc., but beirlg 

in all their general features similar to the act passed in favor of the 

Union Pacific Railroad, and the act amendatory thereof. Thus, when 

I discuss the features of this act, my remarks apply to all the landgrant railroads. 

Now, in this act of July 1, l862, there was a reservation of power by 

the Government. I know it has sometimes been said in discussion 

that there wns in this act no reservation of power to the Government; 

but the eig"\lteenth section not only reserves this })Ower, but in language 

remarkably strong ca.lls attention to the objects of the passage of this 

grout itself. At this point, in connection with this historical review, 

I wish to read a portion of the eighteenth section of the act of July 1, 

1862: 

And the better to aceomplish the object of this actThat is to promote the public interest and welfare. How? 

by the construction of said railroad and telegraph line and keeping the same in working order, and to secure to the Government at all times, but particularly 

in time of war, the use and benefits of the same for t>Ostal, military, and other purposes, Congress may at any time add to, alter, amend, or repeal this act. 

I wish to call attention to this reservation of power by the GDvernment to repeal, alter, or in any way amend this original act granting 

aid for the construction of a line of railroad and telegraph between the 

Missouri River and the Pacific Ocean. 

I might ah:o add rjght here that in the act of :Tune 16, 1860, which 

provided for the construction of a line of teleo-raph, there was also a 

reservation of power by the Government, but that reservation did not 

go to the extent of permitting the Government to repeal the act; it 

only went so far as to allow the Government to alter and amend the 

act. 

Next in hlstorjcal order comes tbe act of July 2, 1864, which was amendatory of the act of July 1, 1862. Why was this amendatory act 

enacted? Simply because under the act of July 1, 1862, no capital 

could be secured for undertaking the construction of t.his great railroad. 

Hence, theamendatoryactofJuly2, 1864, increasedthesubsidieswhich were granted to the railmad, not only with reference to the amount of 

money allowed per mile, but with reference also to the amount of the 

land grant. In this act also the power of the Government t.o amend, 

alter, or repeal was reserved. 

.Allow me now to call attention to the fifteenth and twenty-second 

sections of thls amendatory act.. Section 15 providesThat the several railroad companies authorized to construct the aforesaid roads are hereby required to operate and use said roads and telegraph for all purposes of communication, travel, and transportation, so far as the public and the Government are concerned, as one continuous line ; and in such operation and use to a1ford and secure to each equal advantages and facilities as to rates, 

time, and transportation, without any discrimination of any kind in favor of the road or business of any or either of said companies, or adverse to the road or business of any or either of the others. and it shall not be lawful for the pro- prietors of any line of telegraph authoxized by this act, or the act amended by t·his act, to refuse or fail to convey for all persons r equiring the transmission of news and messages of like character, on pain of forfeiting to the person injured for each offense the sum of $100 and such other damage as he may have suffered on aecom1t of said refusal or failure, to be sued for and recovered in any court of the United States, ox of any State or Territory of competent jurisdiction. 

Then section 2'2 of this act provides that " Congress may at any time 

amend, alter, or repeal this act." 

The next act, in chronological order, affecting the question is the act 

of July 24, 1866, commonly known in the Revised Statutes as Title 

LXV, and which provides in the first section as follows: 

SEc. 5263 . .Any telegraph company now organized, or which may hereafter be organize!l, nnder the laws of any State, shall have the right to construct, main- tain, and operate lines of telegraph through and o>erany portion of the public domain of the United States, over and along any of the military or post roads of the United States which have been or may hereafter be declared such bylaw, and over, under, or across the navigable streams or waters of the United States; but snch lines of telegraph shall be so constructed and maintained as not to obstruct the navigation of such streams and waters or interfere with the ordi- nary travel on such military or post roads. 

What was one of the objects of the laws of 1862 and 1864? It was so that any telegraph line, any telegraph company that stretched out 

its arms and reached the termini of any of these land-grant telegraph 

companies might have the right to connect with them~ and might also 

have the right to use those lines as a continuous line between the East 

and the West. 

This law of 1866 gave to any telegraph company then organized, or nny to be organized after that, the right to go on the right of way of 

any of these land-grant companies and construct its line of telegraph, 

and only prohibiting them to this extent, that they should not interfere with the business management and operation of the railroad on that 

right of way. 

Next in order is the contract of the Western Union Telegraph Company with the Union Pacific Railroad, entered into on July 1, 1881. 

This contract of the Western Union with the Union Pacific Railroad is 

a remarkable contract. I will not take your time now to refer in detail to that contract, but I will do so hereafter when I come to discuss some of the legal questions involved. 

Having thus brought up the history of the question to the time when 

the Western Union received from the Union Pacific the control of the 

telegraph line upon that road, I now proceed to ca.ll attention, Mr. 

Chairman, more definitely and more in detail to the wrongs which I 

have enumerated, and first to the destruction of competition, which was the practical result of the contract made by the Western Union with 

the Union Pacific Railroad Company. I need not go into any lengthy 

argument to show that one of the objects of the passage of these landgrant acts was to secure competition. 

I know many may say that the object of our legislators at the time 

of the passage of these acts was to secure speedy communication between the East and the West. But that was not all the object. Any 

one who will turn to the debates in Congress at the time this original 

act of July 1, 1862, was under consideration will find that this question of competition was then considered and declared to be one of the 

objects to be attained, not only in railroad transportation, but also in 

the transmission of messages between the East and West. 

I will not take time to read but from one portion of the debate that 

took place in the Senate on the 17th of J nne, 1862. But perhaps before 

I do th&.t I had better call attention to the nineteenth section of the act 

of July 1, 1862. 

It reads as follows: 

.Aml be itfurt.her enacted, That the several railroad companies herein named are authorized to enter into an arrangement with the Pacific Telegraph Com- pany, the Overland Telegraph Company, and the California State Telegraph 

Company, so that the present line of telegroph between the 1\lissouri River and San F1·ancisco may be moved upon or along tlle I ine of said railroad and branches as fa t as said roads and branches are built; and if said arrangement be entered into, and the transfer of said telegraph line be made in accordance therewith to the line of said railroad and branches, such transfer shall, for all purposes of this act, be held and considered a fulfillment on the part. of said railroad companies of the provisions oft he act in r egard to the construction of said line of telegroph. 

And, in case of disagreement, said telegraph companies are authorized to remove their line of telegraph along and upon the line of railroad herein contemplated, without prejudice to the rights of said railroad companies named herein. 

On the 17th of June, 1862, an amendment was presented which, besides what I have read as section 19, adds these words: 

And the railroad company's telegrat>h shall be confined to the business of the railroad company and the transmission of messages for the Government of the United States,'and shall not enter into any competition for the commercial busi- ness, provided such telegraph company shall furnish sufficient facilities for the transaction of its business. 

Mr. WHITE, of New York. Give the page. 

Mr. P..ETERS. I have read from the CoNGRESSIONAL GLOBE of 

June 1'7, 1862, second session Thirty-seventh Congress . There was a proposition which expre...~ly confined the telegraph busi- ness to the land-grant railroad business and messages of the Government, excluding all other business, but this amendment was defeated 

and the section as found in the law of July 1, 1862, adopted in its place. 

And now, in the argument that took place upon that. amendment we can readily see what object was sought after and why this was done. 

1\Ir. Doolittle says, referring to these telegraph lines constructed 

under the act of June 16. 1860: 

The line has only recently been completed, and so far, I understand, the stockholders have received but one return from the receipts of this route. I re- member that when the bill was before the Senate !struggled to put a limitation upon the company, and I did succeed in putting on a. limitation that they should not charge more than $3 for a dispatch across the continent, because I was afraid of the monopoly at the time; but when the privilege has been granted, and you have given them a monopoly of the business for ten years, when you are creat- ing another great monopoly, a great overshadowing monopoly, the greatest ever conceived in this country, and with powersgreater than anyothermonopoly ever had in this country, will you give them the power also to wipe out the existing telegraph company which has been constructed, for that will be the effect of your amendment. 

Then Mr. Latham, of California, says: 

I do not know exactly the order to be pursued, but I am opposed to the latter part of that sec~ion, commencing after the word "herein"-

Which is that portion of the section I have read in addition to what is 

section 19 of the original actin line 17, and I move to amend the amendment by striking out all after said word. The Senate will ob erve by glancing at the section that it vests a some- what extraordinary power in the present telegraph company, a power that I am unwilling to see it possess. It puts it in their power to dictate to the railroad companythetermsand conditions on which they shall use the present telegraph 

line; and if they do not accept their terms the railroad telegraph is limited in the nse of their line to their own messages and such messages as the Govern· 

ment may desire to send over the wires. 

I will not read further; it is unnecessary; but any gentleman who 

feels an interest in following this debate will readily come to the con- clusion that one of the main objects that was supposed to be accom- plished and secured by the act of July, 1862, was that there might be 

competition in the telegraph business between the East and the West. 

One of the wrongs that has grown up out of the contract made 

between the Western Union and the Pacific Railroad Company is the 

destruction of competition in this branch of service between the East 
1888. CONGRJJSSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 

\ . 1199' 

and the West; and this leads rue to call the attention of the committee 

somewhat more in detail to that contract which wa.s entered into between the Western Union and the Uruon Pacific Railroad Company. 

I would like to read some of' the '' whereases" appended to that contract, but I notice that my time is going very fast, and I will simply 

call your attention to ~ few paragraphs, or certain portions of them, 

which haven. tendency in their operation to destroy competition in the 

telegraph business. I ~ill read this paragraph: 

Third. The railway company, so f:lr as it legally may, hereby gr:l.nts and agrees to assure to the telegraph company the exclusive right of way on, along, upon, and under the line, lands, and bridges of the railway company, and any ext~nsions and branches thereof, for the construction, maintenance, operation, and use of lines of poles and wires, or either of them, or nndergTound or other system of communication for commercial or public uses or business, with the right to put up from time to time, or cause to be put up or constructed under the pro\·isions of U1is agreement, such additional wires on its own or the railway 

company's poles or such additionallincs of poles and wires, or either, as well on its b.-idges as on its right of way, or to construct such underground lines as the telegraph company may deem expedient, doing as little damage and causing as little inconvenience to the rail way company as is pracLicable. 

I want to call your particular attention to what follows: 

And the railway company will not transport men or material for the construc- tion or operation of a line of poles and wire or wires or underground or other system of communication in competition with the lines of the telegraph com- pany party hereto, except at and for the railway company's regular local rates, nor will it furnish for any competing line any facilit;:ies or assistance that it may lawfully withhold, nor stop its tl·ains, nor distribute material therefor other than at regular stations. 

Any one who ca.n understand the force of the English language an C. 

the meaning of words will see at once that the Union Pacific Railroad 

Company, giant as it was, permitted itself to be bound hand and foot 

by this contract with the telegraph company so that it could not transport poles, wires, or any other material needed for the purpose of constructing any telegraph line that may want to be constructed over its 

right of way, unless, as shown by this, such company paid local rates 

and unless it wonld receive all material at regular stations. 

That, 1\Ir. Chairman, is virtually a prohibition against the construction of any competing line which might desire, under the provisions of 

the act of July 24, 1866, to construct a line of telegraph over the right 

of way of any of these land-grant railroads. This Dillon Pacific Railroad Company, under that contract, bound itself to rejt:ct any and all 

offers that might be made by any other telegraph company desiring to 

go upon this right of way to construct a continuous telegraph line between theW est and the East. That contract virtually forbade the Union 

PacificRailroadCompanytoaccommodateanypersonorcompany, except 

the Western Union, by hauling poles, or wires, or material, or distributing them along the line of road, or extending to them any facilities to 

construct a competing line. In other words, the possibility of constructing another line was throttled by this agreement, so that no line could 

thereafter be built against their wish, whether by a company which 

was then in existence or to be organized thereafter, to transfer messages betw~en the East and tho West. 

So that, I repeat, one of the great wrongs complained of, one of the 

WTongs that grows out of this transaction, is, that there was an absolut~ throttling of competition between the Missouri River ami theW est 

in relation to this service. 

Mr. Chairman, in the investigation before the Committee on the 

Post-Office and Post-Roads it was shown that when the Baltimore 

and Ohio Telegraph Company, one of the strongest telegraph lines outside of the Western Union that ever had exist-ence in this countrywhen that compa'ny tried to secure some of the rights by which it 

could connect with the telegraph lines upon these land-grant railroads, 

and thereby secure a continuous service between the East and the 

West, it was delayed in its correspondence in this connection time and 

again, and for more than six months, and was then virtually told 

that under the provisions of the contract between the Union Pacific 

and the Western Union Telegraph Company the Union Pacific Railroad could not offer any facilities to the Baltimore and Ohio. 

They were told after the Union 'Pacific people were brought up to 

the point-and it required a great deal of questioning to bring them 

up to that point-the Baltimore and Ohio Telegraph people were told 

they could have rights over the Union Pacific Road as individuals or 

the same as those which could be had by any individual, but that they 

could have no business arrangements with that land-grantnilroad line, 

because prohibited by their contract with theW estern Union from ex- tending such privileges. 

Then there is another wrong to which I wish to call attention in _ponnection with this contract, and that is its discrimination. In the act of 

July 1, 1862, one of the objects was "to subserve the public interest 

and public welfare, and to afford equal facilities to all companies and 

to all individuals" not only in relation to railroads but in relation to 

telegraphs by carrying messages without discrimination. And yet in 

the investigation before the Committee on the Post-Office and PostRoads it was shown beyond question, and not denied by the Western 

Umon Telegraph Company, that when the Baltimore and Ohio Telegraph 

Company desired to send a message from Baltimore to San Francisco, 

it could send it to the end or its line in Kansas City or Omaha, and then . if it desired any further transmission of that mes3age, it was required to 

pay an excess of from 30 to 50 ~ents for the transmission of that message of ten words. Here was a discrimination made by the Western 

Union Telegraph Company against the Baltimore and Ohio Telegraph 

Company. , 

I know it may be said that that telegraph company has now been 

absorbed; that it is out of the way; that it has been put upon the shelf; 

that it is ended. I remember now in connection with that fact oneremarkable statement tlmt was made by Ur. J. C. Reiff in that investigation. He appeared before the committee as one of the representatives of the Baltimore and Ohio Telegraph Company, and he said that 

that company had behind it the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company and sufficient c..1.pital, so much, that the Western Union could not 

absorb it. And yet in less than one year after that declaration wa<J 

made the Baltimore and Ohio Telegraph Company was absorbed by 

and taken into the fold of the Western Union. 

I know it is said also that there are no telegraph companies that are 

reaching out and connecting with these land-grant railroads. That is 

another mistaken idea. I have here a telegram which was sent to the 

gentleman from Missouri [Mr. DocKERY] by the president of the Pacific Mutual Telegraph Company, which I want to read as bearing upon 

this question. It will show whether there is not some other company 

besides the Western Union Telegraph Company in the United States 

that has connection with the telegraph lines upon these land.:-grant 

railroads. This telegram is sent from Kansas City, ~Io., and the body 

of it reads as follows: 

Is it too late for me to appear before the committee. havin/in charge the An- derson bill requiring the Union and Central Pa-cific Railroads to operate and maintain independent telegraph lines over their systems for the use of the pub- lic and connecting lines? The Pacific Mutual Telegraph lines extend ft·om St. Louis to Sio= City, via Sed.alia, Kansas City, St. Joseph, Atchison, Leaven- worth, Lincoin, and Omaha, N ebr., and intermediate points. We are barred from exchanging business over the land-grant railroads orr a-ccount of their fail- ure to comply witll their charters in this respect, and we think the Anderson bill should be passed by all means, thus giving independent telegraph lines other than the Western Union an opportunity to exchange business with the land- grant lines iu the same manner that the railroads interchange upon an eqwta- ble basis. 

Please reply. E. S. MARTIN, 

President Pacific Mutual Telegraph Company. 

So that we have to-day a telegraph company that connects with the 

telegraph lines upon these land-grant railroads-that is, comes up to the 

termini of those land-grant railroads-~tnd has the right under the 

charter of 1862 that was gr-anted to the Uruon Pacific Railroad Company, to make a connection of its telegraph lines, and send messages between the East and the West; and yet, by virtue of this contract with 

the Western Uruon, the Union Pacific has tied itself hand and foot, so 

that it can not comply with the reqllirements of this act of J nly 1, 1862, 

and the act of July 2, 1864. 

So there is a discrimination; and what kind of a discrimination is it? 

Why, gentlemen, it is a discTimination that virtually nullifies the act of 

July 24, 1866, which provides that any telegraph company organized 

or thereafteT to be organized shall be allowed to connect and transmit 

its messages upon the lines of these laud-grant railroads-that it shall 

be allowed to ~o upon the right of way of these land-grant railroads. 

The W~--tern Union Telegraph Company prevented the Baltimore 

and Ohio, and prevents the Pacific M:utual Telegraph Company, from 

constructing any line of telegraph over the right of way of the Union 

Pacific. Why? Because, as you all know, gentlemen, if the Pacific 

M:utual Telegraph Company had to haul the poles over the Uruon 

Pacific and pay local rates, and then only have its poles and wires delivered at regular stations, the cost of construction would be so great 

that it wonld never undertake it. Therefore this contract made by 

the Union Pacific Railroad Company, leading to this wrong and discrimination, goes to the. extent of nnllifying the act of July 24, 1866. 

But I want to call attention to another wrong, and that is the diversion of the results of the public · aid that was granted to this railroad 

company for the purpose of building up private corporations. 

It is a well-known provision of law that where public aid is given 

it implies a public trust. Public aid can not be given in the interest 

of anything that is private in its nature. Public aid can be given, under the law and under the decisions of the courts, only for public objects. Here, then, in this grant of 1862 public aid was given for the 

const tuction of this Uruon Pacific Telegraph, and I ask you to mark 

the connection that is maintained in all these ae.ts between the telegraph and railroad. I will not take time to read them, but every 

member can read them for himself, and he will find tha,_t every single , 

one of these acts couples the telegraph with the railroad. The acts do 

not provide for the construction of a railroad line alone, b"nt every one 

of them provides for the construction of a railroad and a telegraph line. 

The telegraph line is not made subsidiary to the railroad; it is not supplemental to it; it is of equal dignity with the railroad itself and can 

not be alienated any more than the railroad can be alienated. 

All this discrimination, all of this destruction of competition was 

and is in the interest of the Western Union. The very year this contract referred to was made, namely, 1881, the capital stock of this com- pany was incre-ased from forty to eighty million of dollars, at least 

twentymillio:r;1s of which increase was a stock dividend . This brings me to consider the legal effect of the reservation of 

powe1· in all these acts. In every one of the acta referred to there is 
l.. 

1200 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 14,. 

reserved to Congress the power to alter and amend, as was the case in 

the original telegraph bill, and in the land-grant a-cts the power to 

alter, amend, or repeal. The act of 1864, amendatory of the prior act, 

was passed because under the original act this enterprise would not be 

undertaken. The act of 1864 was signed by tha~ President_ whose 

name and fame have become as immortal as time.' I mean Abraham 

Lincoln. It was signed just two days before, by his presence and his 

utterances, he consccra ted and hallowed the battle-ground of the greatest battle in ancient or in modern times. [Applause.] The very fact 

that this act was passed at that time, in 1864, shows that nothing had 

been done under the act of July 1, 1862, and therefore that no rights 

could have· accrued under it. As nothing .:was done under the original 

act nobody could have acquired any rights under it. 

Under the act of July 2, 1864, therewasanexpress, unequivocal, unconditional reservation of the power of Congress to alter, amend, or 

repeal. Now, I want to call attention to the decisions of the courts as 

to what is included in that power. I refer first to the sinking-fund 

cases, which are familiar to all the lawyers of the House. I will read 

from the decisions of Chief-Justice Waite, 99 United States Reports, 

719. Speaking of one of the land-grant companies, he says: · 

This corporation is a. creature of the United Stutes. It is a private corpora-· tion, created for the public purposes, and its property is to a. large extent devoted to public uses. It is therefore subject to legislative control so far as its 

business affects the public interests. It is unnecessary to decide what power Congress would have had over the charter if the right of amendment had not been reserved, foi", as we think, that reservation has been made. In the act of 

1862, section 18, it was accompanied by an explanatory statement, saying that 

this had been done the "better to accomplish the object of this act, namely, to promote the public interest and public welfare by the construction of said railroad and telegraph line and keeping the same in working order, and to secure to the Government at all times, but especially in time of war, the use and benefits of the same for postal, military, and other purposes, and by an injunction 

that it should be used with due regard for the right-s of said companies." In the act of 1864, however, there is n(lthing except the simple words that "Con- gress may,at any time alter, amend, or repeal this act." Taking both acts to- gether and giving the explanatory statement in that of 1862, all the effect it can be entitled to, we are of the opinion that Congress not only retains, but bas given 

special notice of its intention to retain, full and complete power to make· such 

alterations and amendments to the charter as come within the just scope of legislative power. That this power is limited no one can doubt . . All agree that it can not be used to take away property already acquired under the operation of 

the charter, or to deprive the corporation of the fruits, actually reduced to posses- sion, of contracts lawfully made; but, as was said by this court, through Mr. Justice Clifford, in Miller vs. The State, 14 ·wallace, 498, it may be safely affirmed 

that the reserved power may be exercised-

! call attention to this languagethat the reserved power may be exercised to almost any extent to carry into 

effect the original purposes of the grant, or to secure the due administration of 

its affairs so as to protect the rights of st<>ckholders and of creditors. 

Now, I want to call attention to the language of 1\fr. Justice Miller, 

because considerable has been said about a decision that he made in 

one of these cases. I want to call attention to the language of Justice 

Miller in the case of Greenwood vs. The Freight Company, to be found 

in 105 United States Reports, page 17. _ 

In treating of acts which reserved the legislative authority to alter, 

amend, or repeal, Justice Miller says: 

It would be difficult to supply language more comprehensive or expressive 

than this. Such an act may be amended; that is, it may be changed by addition to its terms or by qualifications of the same. It may be altered by the same power; and it may be repealed. What is it that may be repealed? It is the act of incorporation, it is this organic law on which the corporate existence of the company depends, which may be repealed, so that it shall cease to be a law. 

And the legislature may adopt the milder course of amending the law. in mat- ters which need amendment, or alteri.ng it when it needs substantial change. 

All this may be done at the pleasure of the legislature. 

I will not take time to read further; but it seems to me that these 

two decisions-one expressed in the language of Chief-Justice Waite, 

the other in that of Associate Justice Miller-establish conclusively that 

whatever would be within the legislative power has been reserved by 

thE>Se acts. And this brings me to the legal question, what can be done 

by the legislative power in · relation to these land-grant corporations? 

What is the power of Congress in relation to these land-grant corporations under the reservation as contained in these acts? 

And here I want to step aside a moment and· utter a word of commendation in favor of those statesmen who passed these acts of 1862 and 

1864. I commend with earnest admiration the sublime statesmanship 

which in the midst of the perils of war, in the midst of illl..minen t national 

danger, at the very time when the Empire of France was thundering 

at the gates of Mexico in orderto obtain a footi_ng from which to wage 

a war of conquestover our Pacificcoast-atthatvery time, with all these 

dangers, these men who passed these acts, could do it, with so much 

deliberation, so much careful attention to detail, that every power, 

every right, was reserved to the Government itselt~ to be made use of by 

future Congresses. [Applause.] 

Now, going on with m_y legal argument, we have power as Congress 

to legislate, and this power is unlimited in favor of such legislation as will accomplish the objects and purposes of these grants. You may 

talk about "vested rights;" you may talk about the "sacredness of con tracts;" there can be no "vested right" acquired by any corporation or individual that in any manner contravenes or interferes with 

the carrying out of the objects and purposes of these grants. Why? 

Because any contract that interferes with carrying 9ut the objects 

and purposes of the grant is 'Ultra vi1·es and void. There is no question 

about that. That proposition seems to me beyond dispute, even if we 

had not decisions to sustain it. The object and purposes of the grant! 

Think of it for a moment. Here was a land-gr:1nt company that received aid from the Government-large aid, for a purpose, for an object--

to furnish communication between the East and West, to connect the 

eastern and western shores of this continent, to bind the country together, to make it a united country. 

Not only this, buttosubservethepublicinterestand welfare. Andnow 

any contract, however great its consideration may have been, which in 

any way contravenes or interferes with the carrying out of this object 

is absolutely void and unlawful. Hence, in view of the decisions, I 

say that the contract between the Western Union and the Union Pacific, in so far as it contravenes the original objects and ·purposes of this 

grant, is absolutely void and unlawful. I have said that I have some 

authority on tills subject. My time has so nearly expired that I can not do more than refer to it. I refer to. a case reported in 1 Federal 

Reporter, in which Judge McCrary, of the United States circuit court, 

sitting in Kansas, decided that a contract similar in its terms to this-a 

contract made between a telegraph company and the Union Pacific 

Railroad-was ultra vires. 

1\Ir. WHITE, of New York. What is the name of the case? 

Mr. PETERS. The title of the case is Atlantic and Pacific Telegraph . 

Company vs. The Union Pacific· Railroad Company. The part of the 

decision to which I refer is to be found on pages 748-751. I would be 

very glad if I could read from this decision and comment upon it; but 

I see I have not the time. Any lawyer, however, who examines this 

decision will come to the conclusion that any contract which in any 

manner interferes with the objects and purposes of these grants is ultra 

vi1·es, is null and void, is unlawful. 

Much stress has been placed on a decision rendered by Justice Miller, 

and to that I want to call attention. It was a decision in one of these 

telegraph cases, and is to be found in 3 Federal Reporter-! do notremember the page. The decision, however, of JusticeMilleris embraced 

in the report of the committee. 

It is claimed that this decision of Justice Miller establishes the validity of this contract between the Western Union and the Union Pacific. 

I say that Justice :Miller did not so decide; that the question of the 

validity of the contract between the Western Union and the Union Pacific was not before Judge Miller except in an incidental way. This 

was a case which came up on motion to dissolve an injunction which 

had been granted by a probate judge in Kansas-a temporary injunction granted by a p,wbatejudge-and this decision was on a motion to 

dissolve that temporary order of injunction. 

Let me read first from that decision: 

The act of 1864, which we have just referred to, concerning the United States 

Telegraph Company, was clearly designed to give it a. similar privilege, and if 

the arrangement was made and that company should build or transfer its line to the line of the railroad company, the railroad company in like manner was released from the obligation to construct and build another line. I hold it, 

therefore, to be very clear that if the present telegraph line, as it is now oper- ated and run by the Western Union Telegraph Company, can be traced to the 

authority of that act of 1864, and the Western Union Telegraph Company in 

making that contract exercised rightfully the powers conferred upon the United 

States Telegraph Company, that the contract is valid, although it forbids the 

railroad company to convey commercial messages over the single wire which 

it has the ri!!ht to control for its own business. 

Any one will see, by reading that decision, that Justice Miller said, if 

so and so prove to be the facts in the case, then the contract might be 

valid, but afterwards he modified even that expression. 

Mr. HOPKINS, of illinois. Are not all these conditions dispubed 

and claimed not to exist, except by the Western Union Telegraph Company ~nd its followers? 

Mr. PETERS. And even the Western Union Company does not 

cL1im it now. Every sing1e fact a>Ssumed by Justice Miller, as a condition, not only does not exist, but even the Western Union Company 

itself does not claim that any one of them does exist. 

What are these fa-ct..s? First, it is assumed an arrangement was made 

between the telegraph company and the Union Pacific, whereby, 

under section 19 of the original act, the telegraph companies transferred their lines to the nion Pacific right of way. No such arrangement ever was made between the Union Pacific and any telegraph 

company. 

1\fr. WHITE, of New York. Does not that apply to a special condition which existed with the Kansas Pacific Railroad Company before 

this contract with the Union Pacific-was not that condition made in 

reference to the Kam~as Pacific? 

Mr. PETERS. No; it was not. It was not, although it was assumed and agreed to, at the time this case was heard, that an arrn.ngemen t h:td been made between the Kansas Pacific and these lines whereby 

its construction of a telegraph line was waived, yet--

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman's time has expired. 

1\fr. PETERS. I would like to have five minutes more. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair hears no objection, and the gentleman 

will proceed for five minutes longer. 

Mr. PETERS. I will say that notwithstanding ~hat was assumed, 

yet it proved not to be the fact, for there was no arrangement between 

the Kansas P~.~.<:ific and _any telegraph line whereby the telegraph line . 

could be moved on to the right of way of the Pacific Railroad, which 

• 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1201 

would be ill lieu of the construction of the telegraph line called for in 

their chartel'8. What does Justice Miller further say: 

I am not prepared to say with any degree of assurance that if this case comes to a final hearing, and no more complete evidence is then given of the corpo- rate existence of the first United States Telegraph Company of New York, and 

of the transfer of the powers granted to it by the act of Congress of 1864 to the Western Union Telegraph Company, than has been presented on this hearing, 

that that contract can be sustained under the act of 1864. But I am prepared to hold that there is no such clear case made against the right of the Western Union 

Telegraph Company to all the franQhises and privileges of the original . United 

States Telegraph Company a:s to justify me in totally dissolving the present injunction, iQ view of the consequences which would follow such action, which will be hereafter considered. 

But the facts assumed there are found by our committee not to have 

existed. First, no arrangement was made-and that was the strongestand, second, these telegraph companies did not move on to the line in 

accordance with any such arrangement. 

If these original telegraph companies moved on the line of the Union 

Pacific, or the line of the Kansas Paoific, they did it under the second 

clause ofsection 19, which allowed any telegraph company to move on 

the right of way, but not to interfere with the railroad. 

:Mr. DOCKERY. That was to be in the event of a failure to make 

the "arrangement" provided for in the nineteenth section of the act 

of July 1, 1862. 

Mr. PETERS. Yes, s;r; I will turn to that provision and read it: 

And if said arrangement be entered into, and the transfer of said telegi·aph 

ine be made in accordance therewith to the line of said railroad and branches, 

such transfer shall, for all purposes of this act, be held and considered a fulfill- ment on the part of the said railroad company of the provisions of this act in 

regard to the construction of said line of telegraph. 

Not construction and operation, you will observe. There is not one iota of law that authorizes any of these land-grant railroad companies 

to transferor.alienate the operation of their telegraph franchises. All 

that could be.accomplished under the "arrangement" here specified, 

if made at all, was to be in lieu of the construction of the telegraph 

line. But the railroad companies m-q.st, under the provisions of their 

charter, go on and operate the telegraph lines just the same as though 

they had constructed them themselves. 

Mr. DOCKERY. Now read the second provision, under which they 

did remove their lines of telegraph to the right of way of the Pa-cific 

Railroad, under this same section of the act of July 1, 1862. 

Mr. PETERS. That is in the following words: 

And in case of disagreement said telegraph companies are authorized to remove heir line of telegraph along and upon the line of railroad herein con tern plated 

without prejudice to the rights of said railroad companies named herein. 

It was under that second provision that all the telegraphs constructed 

under the provisions of the act of June 16, 1860, to which I have re- ferred, moved onto the line of route of the Central and Union Pacific 

companies. What right did that provision give them?. The right of 

occupation merely. They have nothing under that act but what every 

other telegraph company in the country under Title LXV of the Revised Statutes may have and has now. The Western Union, if it is 

the successor of the California State and the Overland and Pacific Companies-if, I say, it is the successor of these companies, it has no right ·n the premises except that of occupation alone. [Applause.] 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. 

Mr. PETERS. If I can trespass for three minutes longer upon the 

.ime of my friend from Arkansas, I shall be under many obligations. 

Mr. ROGERS. Very well. 

:Mr. PETERS. I wanted just three minutes to call the attention of 

tills committee to this remedy. I think I have shown, Mr. Chairman, 

conclusively that Congress bas the power. 

But there is a mistaken opinion as to what is the remedy proposed 

by the committee. It does not contemplate doing away with a single 

vested right that anybody or any company or any corporation now 

has. It does not contemplate removing a single pole of the Western 

Union Company, or taking down a single foot of its wires. It does not 

contemplate the closing of one single office, or stopping the ticking of 

one single instrument of that company. It allows the Western Union. to remain just where it is. It does not interfere in any way with the 

Western Union, except that the remedy proposed will allow competition in the telegraph business over land-grant railroad lines of the 

United States. 

That is all. It simply puts an end to this monopoly by the Western 

Union from the Missouri River to the Pacific Ocean in the telegraph 

business. 

I know, from the expression of sentiment we have beard, that you 

would suppose this interfered wonderfully with the Western Union 

Company, and yet I have given you the provisions, and all of the provisions, relating to the subject, which show that it does not interfere 

with the Western Union's rights at all, except that it breaks up this 

monopoly. But I want to say in conclusion that it is about time that 

we taught by proper legislation a lesson on this subject. The fault was not with the legislator.:; who enacted the legislation in 1862 and 

1864. The fault lies at our own door We have the power, we have 

the right, to legislate upon the subject, and we should step forward 

and legislate in the interest of the people and for the purposes for 

which these grants were manifestly made. 

XIX--76 

I tell you, Mr. Chairman, that the sixty millions of·people in this 

country to-day, bound hand and foot as they are, crushed beneath the 

power of the Western Union with its eighty millions of capital stock, 

fifty millions of which is watered, are incensed against this thing to 

such an extent that if a remedy is not supplied we will have a rebellion 

that will tear down this monster corporation, despoil it of its usurped 

strength and power, and erect upon its ruins a postal telegraph system 

that will subserve the public interests and the public welfare. [Great 

applause.] 

[Here the hammer fell.] -

l\1 r. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to brin~ the committee 

back to the bill nnder consideration, and I ask their attention to such 

observations as I intend now to submit concerning the bill. As the 

basis of the remarks I int~nd to make I shall ask permission to print 

in the RECORD without reading that portion of the report of the com mittee which is found on pages 4 and 5, under the bead of" Expenses 

of the United States courts." 

EXPENSES U:r.'LTED STATES COURTS. 

There are recommended in the bill, appropriations, on estimates submitted by 

the Department of Justice, for balance of the current fiscal year as follows: 

For fees of jurors ..................................................................•.................. $150,000 For fees of witnesses................................................................... ............. 300, 000 For pay ofbailiffs,etc......... ...................................................................... 75,000 

The estimates, appropriations, and deficiencies for jurors and witnesses for 

the fiscal years 1886 to 1888, and the estimates submitted for 1889, are as follows 

For jurors. For witnesses. 

Years. A~R~~~~i- Estimates. Deficiency. AfJ~~~~i- Estimates. Deficiency. 

1885 .. .. . ..... $400, 000 

1886 ........... 

1 

4-50. 000 1887 ....••.••.. 450, ()()() 

1888 .,......... 450, 000 1889 .......................... .. 

$500,000 

500,000 

450.000 

500,000 

450,000 

$50,000 

90,000 

50,000 

150,000 

$500,000 

550,000 

550 000 55o;ooo 

$610, ()()() $121,408.74 

610, ()()() 237, 150.00 

550, 000 200, 000. 00 

550, 000 300, 000. ()() 

550,000 ················· 

The ever-recurring deficiencies both in annual estimates and appropriations 

for the "expenses of United States courts" arc entitled to the grave and 

thoughtful consideration of Congress. The real cause of them may be found L In the system of allotment of appropriations by the Department, which is 

inherently bad; as, necessarily, no wisdom or judgment can prevent the giving 

of too much money to some courts and too little to others, thereby tempting the 

former to extravagance and compelling the latter in many instances to suspend 

proceedings. 

2. In the power of appointment of clerks and certain other officers and em ployes of United States courts by the district judge, who too frequently gathers 

around him in official positions or employment those who by blood or marriage 

const.itute his personal family. 

3. In the want of n. different system of disbursing the money appropriated 

for these expenses. the present system of payment through the marshals being 

unsatisfactory and demoralizing. 

At the place where a United States court is held a disbursing officer might well 

be appointed under existing law, who, being wholly disinterested and under the 

law and strict regulations of the Treasury Department, could make the cour disbursements without los.~, delay, or irregularity, and at all times be ready to report the balance on hand. The cost of disbursement would not be thereby in 

creased, and the great reform would be that the self-created creditor of the 

United States would not be the custodian of the money out of which he is to become paymaster to himself and associates. It will be obsen·ed that in 1885 the expenditure for jurors was $4.50,000, which amount was $50.000 less than the estimates for that year. In 1886 the expendi- tures exceeded the estimates to the amount of $-!0,000; in 1887 the expenditures 

exceeded the estimates to the amount of $50,000: and in 1888, if the appropriation in this bill is made, the expenditures will exceed the estimates .,.100,000, 

Thus year by year there is a steady increase of expenditures over estimates, so that some remedy must be mterposed if a due regard for the public money is to be observed. In 1885 the expenditures for witnesses were $11,408.74 in excess of the esti- mates: in 1886 the expenditures were in excess of the estimates to the amount of$177,150; in l887theexpenditures were in excess of the estimates to the amount of$200,000; in 1888 the expenditures, if the appropriation in this bill is made, 

will be in excess of the estimates to the amount of $300,000. How long will it 

be before the excess of expenditures over estimates or appropriations will be more than the amot:nt estimated or appropriated for this service? But tl1e most pninful and deplorable part. of this subject has- relation to the wrongs and outrages perpetrated, under the forms of law, upon poor and ofttimes 

ignorant men by deputy United Stat~ marshals and others, because of some mere technical or imaginary petty misdemeanor, in order that a color of right may appear for retaining money of the United States for extraordinary ex- penses of witnesses and others. If the prodigal waste under this head were only the loss of money to the United States the injury would be inconsiderable as compared with the personal wrongs upon individual citizecys perpetrated 

merely as a basis for large expenditures. '.rhe system now and for years existing pays a premium for cupidity and encourages assaults upon the body of the 

people. 

I proceed now to discuss such provisions of the report as have en- lisnKl my attention. The Committee on Appropriations in the draugbting of this report seem to have been struck with a sort of nightmare 

in -connection wit.b the increase of deficiencies and the increase of estimates and appropriations for the expenses of the United States courts. 

It is my purpose, as far as I may be able to do so, to demonstrate to 

the House, if I can, that in view of legislation in Congress and in view 

of the increased litigation growing out of other en uses, the increase of 

expenses is in no wise commensurate with the increase of the business 

dispatched by the cou:rts oftbe country. In doing so I have no criticism 

to make upon the Committee on Appropriations beyond that which 

affects the policy which has been pursued by the committee and th~t 

House of Representa.tives with reference to the mode and methods of 

making appropriations in the past. 

-, 
_.) .. · 

1202 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY i4, 

In their report the committee say there are three inh~rent defects in 

our present system of estimates and appropriations. They say: 

The ever-recurring deficiencies both in annual estimates and n.ppropriations for the "expenses of United States courts" are entitled to the grave and thoughtful consideration of Congress. The real cause of them may be found- 1. In the system of allotment of appropriations by the Vepartment, which is inherently bad; as, necessarily, no wisdom or judgment can prevent the giving of too much money to some courts and too little to others, thereby tempting the former to extravag::wce and compelling the latter in many instances to suspend proceedings. 

I am not advised by this paragraph that I have just read whether 

this n.Heged defect exists in the Department of Justice or in the Department of the Treasury. Under the law, if it exists at all, it is in the 

Department of the Treasury. No one is left in doubt when considering the paragraph itself as to what the committee intended. I think 

I may judge from what has occurred on the floor of the House before in 

this Congress what is meant by this paragraph. On two previous oc- casions I have undertaken to demonstrate that the Committee on Ap- 'propriations in making that charge of an inherent defect in the method 

of appropriations did so without foundation in fact. I propose now authoritatively, as fur as I may do so, to silence that suggestion in the 

future if.! can. 

When I read this report I went to the First Comptroller of the Treasury and requested of him the basis which had been given to the Committee on Appropriations in 1886, and which authorized them in their 

judgment to make a statement of this kind, either upon the floor of 

the House or in their report. In response to that request he furnished me with a letter addressed to the Attorney-General, daterl July 23, 

1886, and from that letter I shall have read a paragraph bearing upon 

this subject. I will send it to the Clerk's desk and let him read the 

whole letter, that it may go to the country just as it is. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

TREASURY DEPART~T, FinST COYPTROLLER'S O FFICE, 

Washington., D. 0., July 23, 1886. 

SIR: R~fen-ing to the matter of advances of public funds to United States mar- shals, about which I spoke to you this morning, I beg to say that, although a · marshal is a disbursing officer, pure and simple, so far as his connection with the appropriations for fees of jurors, fees of witnesses, support of prisoners, and mis- cellaneous expenses of United States courts are concerned, I do not conceive that such a relation at all exists between him and the appropriation for fees and ex- penses of marshals. I do not, therefore, perceh' e the propriety of allowing a marshal, under this appropriation, to carry balances for the United States during the whole of the fiscal year. Under the former appropriations a marshal should, 

ofcom·se, be furnished with the necessary money, otherwise he could not be ex- pected to pay the demands against the United States that are presented to him forpayment. . The evil effect of the practice that has heretofore obtained, of treating the appropriation for fees and expenses of marshals very much us though it were a disbursing fund, to be handled by marshals, is seen in the fact that Congress is applied to at this session for appropriations to the amount of S00,750.60to pay fees and expenses of marshals in 1885 and prior years (and this ·amount is pro- vided for in the general deficiency bill now pending), when the books of the Treasury Department show that there is, at this time, due from marshals for 1885 and prior years, under that appropriation, $129,157.03. In other words, the appropriations already made for the above purpose are more than sufficient by 

$63,406.43; and yet, by reason of the erroneous manner of dealing with it, we have now to go to Congress and ask a further appropriation of $65,750.60. I see no impropriety in making small advances from this appropriation to de- fray the actual expenses of travel, etc.; but it occurs to me that the appropria- tion should principally be called on to pay balances found due marshals on an examination of their accounts. Of course, they can render accounts us frequently as they have occasion. In this way the appropriation would simply be called on t-o the extent that marshals' fee and e:ll.tJense accounts h ad been approved by the proper accounting officers. 

I write the foregoing that you may know the considerations that will influence me in my recommendations as to advances of money to marshals on tlleir requisitions. I send statement of the Register as to state of accounts indicated herein. 

Very respectfully, yours, 

Hon. A. H. GARLAND, Attorney-Gencml. 

!II. J. DURHAM, Comptroller. 

l'lfr. ROGERS. Now, 1\Ir. Chairman, this letter suggesta two considerations. First, the deficiency spoken of here preceded the 23d day of 

July, 188G. This letter having been written about a year after the 

present administration began and cover~g the fees in the hands of mar- shals for previous years, it suggests another consideration; and that 

consideration is that except in so far as these distributions may havo 

taken place during the first year previous to the writing of this letter the present administration are in no sense responsible for them. 

And finally it suggest..<~ another considemtion, which is this, and in 

regard to which the Committee on Appropriations have seemed to 

be always unner a misapprehension of fact when discussing these 

court expenses. Is is that if these moneys, the amount of which now 

outstanding, as shown bythis letter, is about $65,000, are to be recov-' 

ered, they are not to be added to the appropriations for the current 

fiscal year, but on the contrary are covered into the Treasury and 

placed with the general ftmd, subject to any appropriations made 

hereafter, and not to be used for the expenses of the United States courts for the current fiscal year. 

But, Mr. Chairman, the more importan~ letter of the two has yet to 

be read. I requested in person thatishould be f.nrnished with a statement of the courts and marshals, anrl tlle States in which they are located, and the amounts in their Lands which had not been properly 

disbursed; and this is the answer I received. 

1\fr. SAYERS. What is the date of the letter? 

Mr. ROGERS. February 4, 1888. It is as follows: 

'£BElsURY DEPARTMENT, FmsT COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE, 

Washington, D. 0., February4, 188S. 

SIR: Referring to your verbal request of this morning to be furnished with certain information as to the status of marshals with the appropriation for "Fees and expenses of marshals," I inclose herewith copy of a letter which I addressed to the Attorney-General on the 23d of .July, 1886, showing the status at thJ.lt time as to 1885 and prior years. The amount so outstanding as to 1886 and 1887 would be found to be quite small as compared with former years. Itwouldrequire so much time and labor to overhaul the figurPs, etc., of the various marshals of the country to give you the information in d etail that I make this general statement, 

thinking that perhaps it will answer your purpose. I understand th.at you wanted the information on l\Ionday. 

Very respectfully, 

Hon. JoB:N H. RoGERS, M. C., House of Representatives. 

U. J. DURHAM, ComptroUer. 

I think, Mr. Chairman, that this ought to dispose of two propositions. 

First, it ought to show that ''the method of disbursement," which the 

report says is" inherently bad," "'as always a. thing that was under the 

control of the First Comptroller, and, secondly, that under thearlministration.of the present Comptroller the abuses which grew up in former 

administrations, mulcting the Government to the extent of some $65,000 

in former years, have been practically corrected. 

.Mr. SAYERS. Will the gentleman yield to me for a moment? 

Mr. ROGERS. With pleasure. 

~tr. SAYERS. I understood you to say that this bill only covers deficiencies for 1885 and prior years? 

~Ir. ROGERS. Not at all. I did not make any statement about the 

bilL I spoke of the letter of the First Comptroller. 

The next proposition to which I desire for the mome)Jt to address my 

attention is found in the second ground upon which fault is found by 

the committee with the present method of transacting this business. 

It is stated to be in "the power of appointment of clerks and certain 

other officers and employes of United States courts by the district judge, 

who too frequently gathers around him in official positions or employ- ment those who, by blood or marriage, constitute his personal family.'' It in sufficient to say, I\Ir. Chairman, that I concur fully with the 

Committee on Appropriations on that point in so far as it applies to 

former years, but the force of their statement is completely broken 

when the fact is made known that Congress at the last session prohibited by public law any United States judge from appointing any relative of his as an officer of his court. So that, in the line of reform and 

retrenchment, in the line of dissipating these abuses which have created 

in the minds of the Committee on Appropriations tbis nightmare, a 

Democratic Congress have corrected this evil so that it can no longer 

exist )n our conntry. 

The third objection, as stated by the committee, consistsin the wn.ntof a different system of disbursing the money appropriated for these expenses--

Mr. SAYERS. I wish to ask the gentleman n. question. Was the 

effect of that lav;r of which he speaks to turn out the sons and nephews 

that were already in office? · Mr. ROGERS. No. TheCommitteeontheJudiciarydidnotundertn.ke to interfere with that which had been already done; they simply 

attemptct1, as far as possible, to correct or prevent similar evils which 

might otherwise exist in the future. 

The third objection, as stated by the committee, consistsin the want of a different system of disbursing tho money appropriated for these expenses, the present system of payment through the marshals being unsatis- factory and demoralizing. ... 

And they say that- At. the place where n. United States com·t is held a disbursing officer might 

well be appointed under existing la,w 'vho, being wholly disinterested, and under the law and strict regulations of the Treasury Department, could make the court disbursements without loss. delay, or irregularity, and a.t all times be ready to report the balance on hand. The cost of disbursement would not be thereby increased, and the great reform would be thnt the self-created creditor of the United States would not be the custodian of the money out of which he is to become paymaster to himself and associates. 

I propose to discuss the propriety of legislation of that sort, and to 

show, in ihe first place, that the Committee on Appropriations are in 

error, as I believe, as to the facts; and secondly, that the policy which 

they suggest to the House would he an unwise one. It is said in the 

report that these disbursing officers could be appointed under existing 

law, bnt I understand from private consultation with my friend from 

Missouri [Ur. BURNES], who prepared this report, that he did not mean to say that the appointments could be made under any law now existing, 

but that the law could be and should be amended so thatthese appoint- ments conld be made. Therefore I waive that point, simply remarking 

that there is no existing law of which I am cognizant that would authorize the appointment of any disbursing officer at any of these courts. 

If I am in error as to that, I should be glad indeed to be corrected. 

\Vhat., then, would be the effect if we undertake to challge the existing 

la.w so as to place a disbursing officer at every United States comt 

throughout the country? If some gentleman more familiar than myself with the judiciary system could tell me just how many courts we lk'l.ve, 

I could then indicate how many officers would be required to be located 

at thesa courts in addition to those we now ha"Ve. But I do not know 

any better way of indicating the error of the policy suggested than to 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL -RECORD-HOUSE. 1203 

show. by way of illustmtion, the effect of it with reference to the court 

with the detaHs of which I am more familiar than those of any other. 

The marshal of the western district of Arkansas, as the report of the 

.Attorney-General will show, has for a number of years earned about 

$8,000 a year. Embraced in this amount is the 2 per cent. for the 

disbursement of the moneys of the Government under existing law. 

Now, if yon place a disbursing officer there, the maximum compensation 

of the marshal is not thereby curtailed in the slightest degree, because 

he ea.rns his $6,000 over and above the 2 per cent. commission; or, if that 

is not true in this particular case, it would be the fact in many courts 

throughout the country. Assuming the case to be as I have supposed, 

you would have themarshalreceivingthemaximumcompensation under 

the law, $6,000, and you would have in addition a. disbursing officer 

who would get the 2 per cent. on all funds disbursed in that court. Thus, 

instead of economizing the expenditures of the Government in the administration of the law in the courts of the United States, you would 

simply have throughout the country aftditional officers to be paid from 

the Treasury of the Government. 

This would not be true of all the courts, becau...c:e in many places the 

marshals do not earn $6,000; and in those cases there would simply be a distribution of whatever earnings they do make between two separate 

and distinct offices. 

Finally, :Mr. Chairman, the marshals of the United States disburse 

moneys which I classifY into two funds. One is for the marshal and his 

deputies. This is advanced to him under the direction of the Comptroller of the Treasury. It is true that the requisitions pass through 

the Department of Justice; but the statutes give the Comptrolle1· of the 

Treasury control over the requisition, and .he may at his pleasure re- duce the sum allowed in accordance with what he conceives to be the 

proper requirements of the court. I will state, by way of parenthesis, 

that the letter I have just read indicates that under the present administration the system is not involved in any abuses worthy of mention. 

The second class of funds controlled by the marshal embraces fees of 

jurors and witnesses, and this expenditure, I will state to the Appropriations Committee (and if they think I am in error I will cite the 

statute), is under the absolute control, not of the marshal, not of the 

Attorney-General, not of the Treasury Department, but of the United 

States courts themselves, by orders which are made a part of the pub- lic record of the respective courts. 

Mr. SAYERS. Will the gentleman allow me to interrupt him? 

:Mr. ROGERS. Certainly. 

Mr. SAYERS. Does not the gentleman know that the Comptroller of 

the Treasury pays no attention whate>er to the order of the court allowing these fees unless it suits him to do so? He does not consider the 

order of the court as absolute and conclusive. , :Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I will answer the gent.leman's question. I do not know what the Comptroller of the Treasury does in 

every instance~ but I undertake to state what the law is on this subjectnot as interpreted by me, but as found in the statute-books. I send to 

the Clerk's desk to be read section 846 of the Revised Statutes. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

SEc. &16. The accounts of district attorneys, clerks, marshals, and commission- ers of circuit courts shall be examined and certified by the district judge of the 

district fox:,. which they are appointed, before they are presented to the account- ing officers of the Treasury Department for settlement. They shall then be subject to revision upon their merits by said accounting officers, as in case of other 

public accounts: Provided, That no accounts of fees or costs paid to any witness or juror, upou the order of any judge or commissioner, shall be so re-examined as to charge any marshal for an erroneous taxation of such fees or cost; that 

where the ministerial officers of the United States have or shall incur extraordi- nary expense in executing the laws thereof, the payment of which is not specifically provided for, the Presidenl! of the United States is authorized to allow the 

payment thereof under the snecial taxation of the district or circuit co ru-t of the 

district in which the said services have been or shall be rendered, to be paid from the appropriation for defraying the expenses of the judiciary. 

Mr. ROGERS. It will be seen, :Mr. Chairman, that this provision of 

the law gives the accounting officers of the Treasury control over the 

accounts of the clerks of the courts, the district attorneys, the mm-shals 

and the1r deputies; but it will likewise be seen that by express _provision of the statute the fees of witnesses and jurors (which I was discuss- in~ at the time I was interrupted) are under the absolute control of the 

court. It io provided thatNoaccountsoffees or costs paid to any witness or juror, upon the order of any judge or commissioner, shall be so re-examined as to charge any marshal for an erroneous taxation of such fees or costs. 

So that, by the very terms of the statute, the power of the accounting officers of the Treasury is to this extent expressly restricted. 

Neither the Comptroller of the Currency nor any other officer under the 

Government has control of these expenditures after they have received 

the approval of the court. It is true, following that is the provision of 

the statute which enables the President, in case of extraordinary ex- penses, to make allowance for expenses of that character. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, that brings me to the conclusion thatinsofaras 

the marshals are disbursing officers for themselves, their deputies or 

clerks, and district attorneys, the a,uditing officer of the Government is 

the Secretary oftheTreasuryhimself-or, in other words, is the Comptroller of the Treasury, to whom this work is assigned under the or- ganization of the Department-and if in the exercise of the proper care and judgment on the part of the First Comptroller unnecessary sums of 

money are kept out of the hands of these officers under the law, he has 

the absolute control of adjusting these accounts as he may see fit; and 

to that other conclusion, that in so far as the marshal is a disbursing 

officer for jurors and witnesses the power is not in the marshal or the 

Department of Justice or the Department of the Treasury, butabsolutely 

in the courts of the land. So I think when the Committee on Appro- priations suggests a reform by appointing disbursing officers, it must 

have been in the dark as to the correct management or the disbursement of these funds. 

There is another provision of this report to which I might refer, but 

I do not care, not being very familiar with it, to indulge in any criticism 

except as to one particular point, and that is that in all these districts 

throughout the country where the internal-revenue system prevails, 

where liquor is manufactured and tobacco is grown and manufactured, where the laws in reference to the internal-revenue system apply, if the 

courts would assume the responsibility of controlling and managing, as they have the power and right to do, they could stop these petty pros- ecutions of which the report of the committee complains. I do not 

know any better way of illustrating how they can do it than by stating 

the method or plan of the district court judge in the western district 

of the State of Arkansas. 

Whenever a new marshal comes in for that court and his deputies are appointed, the judge summons him and his deputies to the pres- ence of the court and signifies to them his condemnation of the ar- rest of persons in that district for mere technical violations of the in- ternal-revenue or intercourse law. The effect of that proceeding has 

been a wholesome one throughout that district; and every other judge throughout the United States who has the public interest more at heart 

than that. of his judicial family can bring about the same reform if he 

will only do it. 

Many years ago in that district a large number of the most petty,insignificant, and trifling prosecutions were set on foot under a former 

i ud~e, but now with a proper organization of the court they have been completely and absolutely broken up, and you will find on the dockets 

of that court scarcely a single case of violation of the internal-revenue 

law which is not a substantial violation of the law and not merely tech- nical in its character. It is so with reference to entries of cases of vio- lation of the intercourse law, which law makes liquor contraband in the 

Indian country. 

I turn now to another branch of this subject-the statement that 

the ever-recurring deficiencies are entitled to the grave and thoughtful 

consideration of Congress. That statement, Mr. Chairman, is well put, for deficiencies under any proper system ought always to receive the grave and careful consideration of Congress. But what has been the practice and experience in Congress in making these appropriations ? 

My information is for twenty· years Congress instead of granting to the Departments the amount estimated for them undertake to make such 

appropriations as they deem necessary and afterwards make up the bal- ance by deficiencies; in some cases the deficiencies amounting almost 

to the original appropriation. I do not know but one or two instances 

during UlY experience when appropriations were granted in conformity 

to the request of the Department of the Government. One instance 

was last year when the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads 

ga>e every dollar that was estimated for. 

There was a full appropriation made for the requirements of the United St..'ttes courts. In one instance at least, in the cases of jurors, we ·granted in the year 1887 the exact sum asked for. In that year the 

appropriations were $450,000, while the estimates were the same, and 

in 1887 and 1888 the appropriations for witnesses was $550,000, while the estimates were the same. With these two exceptions during my 

whole experience in Congress I do not know of a single instance wllere the appropriations asked for were granted in full. '!'here may be other instances, but they do not occur to me now, and I know it has not been 

the practice. 

'l'he Departments make the estimates as best they can, only approximating what the needs will be. They do it in pursuance of law, and 

they should do it with the same resp·onsibility that we act here, but we assume to do what we please, and then complain if the money does 

not hold out. There are exceptions, of course, but this i<; the rule. 

But, Mr. Chairman, there are instances where, even when all that 

has been asked for has been granted by Congress, deficiencies have oc- curred, and hence I say in that class of cases particularly is it true that 

"they should enlist the grave and thoughtful consideration of Con- gress.'' 

What are deficiencies, and in what light are they to be considered? 

Deficiencies are for actually ascertained expenses for which no money 

is available, or an ascertained certainty of expenses that must be in- curred in excess of the appropriation. When the full amount has been 

granted that has been estimated for, one of two things is true: either 

that the sum estimated for was not sufficient to meet the requirements 

of the service, or if it was sufficient and the appropriation was granted, 

that appropriation was improperly disbursed. In either case, I repeat, 

it requires ''the thoughtful consideration of Congress. 1' 

1\Ir. RANDALL. In both the cases you mention, however, thero were deficiencies. 

Mr. ROGERS. Yes, Iamawareof that;itsoappearsin the report. 

. 

' \ 

. 
1204 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 14, 

Now, Mr. Chairman, on the subject, more particularly on the subject I courts and a list of the deficiencies in the appropriations fort en consecu- of the expenses of the United States courts, let me invite your attention tive years, from 18'78 d~wn to 1888, and I will ask at this point to have 

to another fact. It may be foundsubstantiallypresented in the report I printed in the RECORD this table fortheinformation of those who have 

of the committee, which furnishes a statement of the expenses of tpe not examined it. It is as follows: · 

Statement of appropriations for expenses of United States courts. 

[Including items in the deficiency bill already passed and the accompanying bill.] 

1878: 1879. 1880. 1881. 1882. 1883. i884. 1885. 1886. 1 1887. 1888. 

Expenses of U.S. courts: Annual appropriation. $'2, 650, OCO. 00 S2, 7'50, 000. 00 Deficiencies . .......... ... ... 286, 000. 00 425, 000. 00 Claims . . . . ..... .. . ...... ...... 19, 481. 57 66, 520. 49 • •• 0 • •••••••• 0. ••••• •••••• • ••• 0 • • • 0. 0 •• • ••• 0 0 0 •• • ••••••••••••••• 0 ••••••••••••• 0 • ••••••• 0 •••• 0 ••••••••• 0 ............ . ......... 0 •• • •• • • 0 • ••••• , ~. • • • • • • • •• ••• • • .............. . 

Total .................. 2,935,481.57 3,241,520.49 ........................................ .................... , ................... j ................................... : ......................... , ........................... .. 

Fees and expenses of marshals: 

S650, 000. 00 sooo. 000. 00 $600, 000. 00 $600, 000. ()() $600, 000. 00 $67'5, 000. 00 $675, ()()() $675, ()()() 

60,'000. ()() 50,000.00 150,000. ()() 91,724. 67 127,155.03 30, 000. ()() ............................• 

Annual appropriation. ......... ...... ...... ............... ...... $600,000.00 Deficiencies ................. ................... -.................... 30,000.00 

Claims ................................ ·-·········· ........................................ . 32, 243. 37 2, 058. 55 30, 549. 96 786. 30 .. . ..... ...... ...... . . . .........•. ...... . ....... ................... . 

Total.................. ......... ............ ............... ...... 630,000.00 742,243. 37 652,058.55 780, 549.96 692,510.97 727,155. 03 705, 000. 00 675,000 675,000 

Fees of district attorneys: I 

Annualappropriation. ................ .... ..................... 300,000.00 350,000.00 325,000.00 325,000.00 325,000.00 325 000 00 350,000.00 350,000 325,000 

Deficiencies................. ..................... .............. ...... 25,000. 00 20,000.00 f!il, 370.37 119, 500. 00 80, 000. 00 40: ooo: 00 25, 568. 81 ............... ............ .. Claims......................... . . . ... .. . .. . . . . . .. .. . .. .. .... .. . ... .. . . .. .. . .. . . . ... .. . . . .... 2, 4.17. 06 3, 067. 05 3, 228. 33 175. 60 . . . . . .... .. . . .. . . . . . .. . . . ............... . ........................... . 

Total....................................... ............... ...... 325,000.00 372,417.06 415,4.37.4.2 1 447,728.33 405,175.60 365,000.00 375, 568. 81 350,00 325,000 

Pay l~~s~~~~;~:~~i~u~~~ .......................................... ! ........................................ 1 ........ ...... .-..... j .................... ! ........... . : ...... .......................................................... ~.~:~.~ 

Fees of clerks: I Annual appropriation. ............... ...... ...... ......... ...... 160,000.00 160,000.00 150,000.00 160,000.00 160,000.00 160,000.00 175,000.00 175,000 175,000 Deficiencies .. . ....... ...... ......... .. ... ....... ......... .. .... .... .. 25, 000. 00 45, 000. 00 5 ), 000. 00 60, 000. 00 50, 000. 00 54, 744. 50 8, 465. f!i7 ............................ . Claims......................... ......... ........... ............... ...... .................... 1, 257.65 65.49 1, 283.20 38.00 .................................................................... . 

Total.................. ............... ...... ............ ......... 105,000.00 I 206,257.65 205,065.49 221,283.20 2l0, 033.00 214,744.50 183,465.87 175,000 175,000 

Fees of commissioners : Annual appropriation. ..................... .................. ... 140,000. 00 140,000.00 100,000. 00 130, 000.00 130, 000. 00 100,000. 00 100,000. 00 100,000 50,000 

Deficiencies................ .. ................... ......... ............ 230.90 16,000.00 55,000.00 20,000. 00 5, 000.00 46, 0.>6. 22 60,000.00 ........................... .. Claims .. . ...... •.. ...... ...... ......... ... ...... ... ... .. . ......... ...... ...... ......... ..... 3, 119. 80 780. 95 4&!. 93 131. 85 ........... ........................................................ .. 

- Total.................. .. . . .. . ... .. . .. ...... .. . ....... .. .. . .... . . 140, 230. 90 159, 119. 80 j 155, 780. 95 150, 488. 93 135, 131. 85 146, 056. 22 160, 000. 00 100,000 j 50, 000 

Fees Annual of jurors: appropriation. . . . ....... .. ... ... .. . . . . .. .... .. .. . · .. .. ... 400, 000. 00 I 400, 000. 00 I 450, 000. 00 450, 000. 00 I 450, 000. 00 I 400, 000. 00 450, 000. 00 450,000 450,000 

~l~~:~~~~.~.::::.·.·.·:::·.·.·.::: :::::.··.· .. ·.·.·.·:·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·. :·.·.·.·.· .. ·.·.·.·.·.· .. ··.· .. ·.·.·· .. ·····4·0··'·7··56·-· .. 35.-... 40,000.00 20,000.00 ............ ........ 60,000.00 50, 000.00 90,000.00 50,000 150,000 - 2, 154. 65 62. 20 87. 70 80. 20 .................................................................... . 

Totai .................. '-.. -.. -.. -.. -.. -... -.. -.. -.. -.. '-.. -.. -.. -.. -.. -... -... -.. -.. -.. ·!-4-t-o.-7-56-.-35---:j ·-44-2-,1-54--.65- 470,00"i20~87.7o 5W,o8o.20j 450,ooo.oo 540,ooo.oo 500,ooo roo,ooo 

Fees of witnesses: I Annual appropriation. ..................... ..................... 550,000. CO 55:>, 000.00 600,000.00 600,000.00 600,000.00 500,000.00 550,000.00 550,000 550,000 Deficiencies ... .-...... ...... .................... ...... ...... ......... 60, 497.14 30, 000. 00 7'0, 000. 00 6, 080. 00 60, 321. 50 121,408. 74 237, 150. 00 200,000 300,000 

Claims .................. ...... .................... .................. .. .................... 6,185. 83 247. 55 3,171. 66 98.80 .................... .................... .......................... .. 

Total.. .......................................................... , 610,497.14 5 6,185.83 j 670,247.55 609,:~51.66 660,420.30 621,408.74 7f!i7,150.00 750,000 850,000 

Support of prisoners: . I I · Annual appropriation . .. ............ .... .. ....... .. .. .. . ...... 193, 000. 00 200, 000. 00 325, 000. 00 325, 000. 00 300, 000. 00 300, 000. 00 250, 000. iO 240, 000 250, 000 Deficiencies................ ............... ...... ...... ............... 128, 972. 13 100,000. 00 ................ ,.. .................... .............. ...... .................... 11,740. 68 40,000 ............. . Claims ... ...... ... . . . .. .. ..... . .. .... .. ...... ... . .. .... . . ... .. . . . ...... . . . . .......... .... .. 3, 657. 93 3, 804. 50 -5, 678. 53 263. 00 .................................................................... . 

Total... .................................... j...... ............... 321,972.13 303,657.93 1 328,804.50 330,678.53 I 300,263.00 300,000.00 261,740.68 280,000 ~ 

n.l{f~!~.¥~~~:::~:~~~ :::::::: :::::: : :: ::::::::::: ::::::::: ".'·?~:~. ::::~:·~::::! '-"::::- ::::~:·:~:~: .... ~:-~:~ .... !:.~:~ I.. ~z:.~:~ ... ~:.~ :~:~ • • Total... ............... ~== ==~ 67,360. 00 75, 000.00 I 75,750. 00 70,000.00 5.5, 559.40 57, 409. 90 I 58,628.03 63,500 I 60,000 

Pay ofbaBiW•, ete.' . I I I I · I I M~~:~~~~~~~:..~~-r:::::::::::::::::_ ::::::::::::::::: :: (:: :::: :::::::: ::::: :: .. :::: ::::::::::::::_::: :I ::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::: ::.:::~_::::::.: :::::::::::~ :::::: ::::::::: :::::1;; Annual appropriation .. ............... .......................... I 280,000.00 1 300,000.00 325,000.00 1 3?..5, 000.00 1310,000.00 825,000.00 1 300,000. co 314,400 r 214,4.00 Deficiencies ........................................................... , 26,608.04 .................... .................... .................... 15,000.00 .................... 13,361.53 20,000 ............ .. Claims . . .. ........ .. .... .. .. .. .. . . ........... ...... .. . .. .... .... .. ... ... ... ........ ... ...... 6, 858. 91 1, 418. 90 949. 93 2, 021. 50 .................................................................. .. 

Total ....................................... ~ .................... 1 306,608.04 I 306,858.91 326,418. ?O I 325,949.93 I_ 327,021.50 325,000.00 I 313,361.53 I 334,400 _ 214,400 

Total by years ... 2, 955, 481.57 1 3,2il, 520.49 3, 027,424.56 js,I93, 895.20 3, 299,625.56 13,386,018.24 13,296,200.82 13,206,774.39 13,384,914.92 13,227,900 13,374.400 

Mr. UcCO~I.AS. .Allow me to interrupt the gentleman there for· a 

moment, to state that if be wants to publish with his remarks the table 

of expenditures given here, in order to make it correct it should include 

also the deficiencies for the years 1886 and 1887 in this very bill, and 

give the detailed expenditures for those years, which show them to be 

greater than for prior years. 

Mr. BURNES. The table does include them. Mr. McCOMAS. No. 

Mr. ROGERS. I do not know whether the table includes it or not; 

but if it is important to have given the exact amount, it should be included in the table by the gentleman who prepared it. I have not examined to ascertain whether it is included or not. 

But from 1878 to 1~88 the increase of expenses in the Department of 

Justice runs from $2,955,000 up to $3,374,000. Here is an increase of 

only about $319,000 in a decade, in a country growing and developing 

and increasing in population, in wealth, in courts, in States and Territories as rapidly as this. _ Mr. LONG. Let me ask if that includes also the deficiencies for 

1886 and 1887? 

Mr. HENDERSON, of Iowa. You mean for 1887 and 1888. 

Mr. RANDALL. We have not got through with 1888 yet. 

Mr. HENDERSON, of Iowa. I had that table prepared and it does 

not contain the deficiencies for 1887 .and 1888. What they are I do not 

know. 

.. 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 1205 

l\1r. LONG. You will want your statement to g<! ont exactly correct? 

:M1·. ROGERS. Undoubtedly; and I intend that ~t shall so go out. 

I have not examined to see whether the deficiencies the gentleman refers to are in the report or not. 

Mr. LONG. But if that is more than $319,000, that fact ought to 

go out. . :Mr. ROGERS. Yes, sir; I notice in 1887 a deficiency of $20,000in 

miscellaneous expenses, but in 1888 there are no deficiencies whatever. 

So much I have gathered from the table, havin taken the time to ascertain that. Of course there are deficiencies provided for in the bill now under consideration. I do not know what they are. The bill will 

show that. 

So that, Mr. Chairman, wehave this significant fact, that, beginning 

with 1878 and running to 1888, the deficiencies and the app opriations 

for the Department of Justice for the United States courts th1·oughout 

the country have ranged from $2,900,000 to$3,300,000, in round num- bers. In other words, the expenses have fallen a litt e helow or risen 

a little above $3,000,000 annually; and yet, after having carefully or critically examined the table. I undertake to say that there has not been a single year of the ten for which deficiencies have not been appropriated for. 'P:Vs settles the fact that the Hous~ of Representatives or the 

Congress of tlie United States ought to bring it down closer. 

The Committee on Appropriations, with the knowledge before their 

eyes of the fa-ct that the appropriations must approximate either a little below or a little above $3,000,000, continue upon the system of 

making the appropriation less than $3,000,000, and following it up by 

making appropriations to supply deficiencies thereafter, so that instead 

of meeting fairly and squarely, as we should, the necessary expenses 

of the Government in our annual appropriation bills, we have affected 

another policy, which I shall undertake to demonstrate is neither wise 

nor economical-that is, to appropriate less than the estimates and then 

bring them up to the required amount by deficiencies afterwards. 

Mr. HENDERSON, of Iowa. Your reflection should go further than 

that, or rather in a different direction; for it will be found, if you ex- amine, that the attempts we have in many cases made t.o give the full 

.amount of the estimates by the Department of Justice have resulted 

after all in deficiencies to meet the expenses. 

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, these gentlemen simply ·run faster 

than it is possible for me to do. I had stated that fa-ct, however, before, in certain cases, but not generally by any means. Mr. HENDERSON, of Iowa. I did not hear the gentleman, as I 

happened to be out. 

; ~1r. ROGERS. I am now discussing the origin of these deficiencies of which the Appropriations Committee now complain; and I am discussing the policy wh_ich we are warrant-ed and authorized in stating has been adopted by the Honse of Representatives in reference to 

deficiencies, which is simply to appropriate too little, and when you 

have exceeded the appropriation make it np by deficiencies; which, as I have stated, I will undertake to demonstrate and which I believe 

to be unwise and not economical. 

Mr. SAYERS. Will the gentleman from Arkansas permit meto'interrnpt him? 

The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Arkansas yield to the 

gentleman from Texas? 

Mr. ROGERS. Yes, sir: if he does not consume too much time. 

l\1r. SAYERS. I 1·ead this paragraph: For fees of witnesses in United SlP,tes courts, 1885 and prior y ears, S3,1G3.83. 

Mr. ROGERS. What is the gentleman reading from? 

Mr. SAYERS. From t he pending bill. 

Mr. ROGERS. The gentleman from Texas is trymg to confine my 

argument to the present bill. I am not criticising the present bill. 

Mr. SAYERS. If you do not criticise the present bill, all right; then 

go ahead. 

Mr. ROGERS. I will be candid enough to say that I have not ex- amined the present bilJ. I have read it, but have not examined it 

critically. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, I go on to say that the policy which has been 

pursued and which is the policy established now by the practice of the 

Appropriations Committee with reference to appropriations is not a wise one. Mr. BUCHANAN. Is it an honest one? 

Mr. ROGERS. Well, Mr. Chairman, I do not like to put it so strongly as that. Itma.y sometimes operate harshly, tyrannically, and unjustly, 

and I did say on one occasion that it was not an honest policy. But I 

did not intend to go so far as that now. It is not necessary for my purpose. 

Let me give the House now, for a moment, the results of this policy. In passing the appropriation bill for the fiscal year 1887 there was a 

deficiency, as in all the former years, for the expenses of the United 

States courts, and unfortunately-! find no fault on that subject now; 

it is not necessary-unfortunately the deficiency bill failed. And now -what was the result and effect upon the country of the failure of that 

deficiency bill? All will concede that there would have been no result 

if the appropriation had been originally made sufficiently ample to meet 

the current expeuses of the Government. But it was not so made. 

That bill failed, and what was the result? In order that gentlemen 

may understand the effect of that, I send to the Clerk's desk this estimate, which has been made by the clerk in the district in which Ire~ 

side, showing what it cost the Government to suspend the proceedings 

of that court from some time, I believe, in May to July. I am not cer~ • 

tain as to dates. 

The Clerk read as follows: FORT SMITH, AnK. , December 8, 1887. 

All criminal business in the United States court for the western district of Arkansas was suspended for want of funds to pay witnesses, with criminal cases on the docket for trial as follows: • 

Murder ....................... .................................................................................... . 17 Assault to kill ......................... .............................................. .,........................ 23 

~fh ~i~-~8·::.:·.:::·:::::.:·:.:::·.:·.::·::.::·.:::::··- ·:::· ·:.::::::·.·::.::::·:.::~::::·.·.::·:::::::::::::::::::: ::::: ~ , Total .................................................. ..................................................... 108 

If money had been available at that time to pay witnesses and proceed w~th 

the business of the court in the regular w a y, these cases could have been tned at a cost for witnesses of not exceeding $20,000; whereas the fees now paid to witnesses in these cases amount to about $55,000, and the estimated amount of increase of expenses on account of overcrowding the docket is $25.000; making a total unnecessary expense for w'itnesses on account of failure of appropria- tions of about $60,000. Estimated increase of cost of keeping, feed;ng, etc., pris- oners, $3<:0 per month, for each year, $3,600. I believe the foregoing statement to be a. low estimate of the increase of ex- penses in t his district on account of failure of appropriations last year. I have given the m a tter a good d eal of attention, and if the exact figures could be as- certained I believe they would exceed the above. 

STEPHEN WHEELER, 

Clerk of the United States Distl·ict Court, Western District At·kansas. 

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, this letter was sent to .me by the 

clerk in obedience to the directions of the judge of that court, and is, 

of course, only an approximate estimate of what losses the Government 

sustained by virtue of the failure on the part of Congress to make the 

proper ap»J'Opriations for that fiscal year. Alld I have in my hand now 

a .paper giving me the estimate of the Department of Justic~ upon the 

same subject; and that bears upon the question that my friend from 

Texas [Mr. SAYERS] invites my attention to, namely, the deficiency 

of $300,000 for witnesses' fees during the fiscal year; because whatever 

this loss to the Government was, it was brought over from a former fiscal 

yen.r by-crowding the business of the courts from one year into another 

year, and must be subtracted from the deficiency which you now have 

embraced in your bill for the current fiscal year. 

The estimates submitted in the urgent deficiency bill for jurors and 

witnesses for the current fiscal year are expenses exclusively under the 

control of the court. These expenses in a large measure do not properly 

belong to this .fiscal year, but have been passed over from the last fiscal 

year from the want of appropriations for the expenses of that fiscal year. It is a reasonable estimate that at least $60,000 of this deficiency arises 

from that source. Mr. SAYERS. Does not the gentleman from Arkansas know that 

Congress gave to the Department of Justice forthat particular expense 

all that the Department of Justice asked? · Mr. ROGERS. I do not know it. 

Mr. SAYERS. Then I call your attention to that. 

Mr. ROG.ERS. That does not touch the question if it did; but I do 

not know whether it did or did not. 

Mr. SAYERS. It did. _ 

Mr. ROGERS. I will state to my friend that I am now trying to 

show that it don't pay to stop the courts, and Congress had notice of 

the deficiency in ample time to have made provision for it. It knew, 

moreover, by at least ten consecutive years' experience that it required 

about $3,000,000 annually to run the courts. Very rarely has it been 

the case that the sums estimated for have been appropr~ted. 

Let us go another step in this matter. 

Mr. RANDALL. Will the gentleman yiold to me for a moment? 

Mr. UOGERS. Certainly. . Mr. RANDALL. Befo1·e the gentleman proceeds further, I would 

like to make a suggestion that bears on no particular year, but has re- lation to each year's appropriation; and that is, that in theannualappropriations for marshals and their deputies the amount is given in advance for the coming year, and the deficiency is uniformly given during 

the year for which at a prior date the appropriation had been made, so that there should not be really any inconvenience. 

The practice is to make the annual appropriations prior to the be- ginning of the fiscal year; that is, they are made for the coming fiscal 

year. Deficiency appropriations, however, are made for the current 

year; so that in effect the annual appropriation which is made before 

entering upon the fiscal year and the deficiency appropriation which 

is made for that year, before its expiration, taken together are ~most 

always sufficient to meet the necessities of the year. 

Mr. O'FERRALL. Will the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations permit me to ask him a question? 

?!1r. RANDALL. Certainly. 

Mr. O'FERRALL. I understand that there is $450,000 appropriated 

in the last appropriation bills for the purpose of paying fees, etc., and 

running the United States courts. 

Mr. RANDALL. Six hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars. 

Mr O'FERRALL. Six hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars 

altogether. -

• 
'· 

1206 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEB:BUARY 14, 

Mr. RANDALL. No, sir, for fees ofUnited States marshals, etc. 

Mr. O'FERRA.L.L. How much is provided in this deficiency bill? 

r. ROGERS. The gentleman from Virginia [Mr. O'FERRALL] is 

consuming my time, which is limited. 

Mr. O'FERRALL. I simply want to say, as supplemental to what 

has been said by the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. RoGERS] that in 

Virginia during the last year the courts were suspended time after 

time for want of funds, and there are now hundreds of witnesses who were summoned before those courts but whose fees were not paid, because there was no money for that :p.urpose. 

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. 

RoGERS] has expired. 

Mr. ROGERS. I trust that I shall be allowed to complete my statement, as I have been so often interrupted. 

11fr. RANDALL. How much time does the gentleman desire? 

Mr. ROGERS. Probably twenty minutes will be sufficient. 

l\ir. BURNES. Mr. Chairman, I trust that the gentleman from Arkansas [.l\ir. ROGERS] will be allowed twenty minutes more. 

1 Mr. RANDALL. If the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. BuRNES] 

will allow me to take the floor, I will give the gentleman from Arkansas the twenty minutes. ~fr. BURNES. I yield twenty minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas. 

Mr. ROGERS. ltfr. Chairman, I did not perhaps precisely understand the force of the suggestion made by the distinguished gentJ.eman 

from Pennsylvania [MT. RANDALL], but I want to call his attention 

to what I conceive to be a complete answer to it if I did comprehend 

him. He seems to think that becausa the appropriations that are made 

for marshals are made in advance, that ought to obviate all inconvenience. t 

Mr. RANDALL. No; I say that all appropriations of eve:IJ"kind are mad.e in advance .. This is what I say: We make annual appropriations prior to the beginning of the fiscal year for which they are made. 

Then in the middle, as it were, of the year for which the annual appropriations are made-that is, in the middle of the current year-we provide a deficiency, and those two appropriations taken together, the general appropriation and the deficiency appropriation, should be sufficient 

to ''run'' the Government for the y~ar if the money ~ properly handled. 

Mr. GROSVENOR. Apd if the original appropriation was large 

enough. -

Mr. ROGERS. Understanding now the suggestion of the gentleman 

from Pennsylvania I mUEt beg leave to differ with him on that point. 

He says it ought to be sufficient. My only answer to that is that it is 

not sufficient and that it never has been sufficient, or rarely so. The 

courts are stopped now for want of funds. 

Mr. LONG. He means sufficient with prudence. 

Mr. ROGER~. Where is the imprudence? I have undertaken to 

demonstrate that these funds have been disbursed as carefully, as cau- tiously, as prudently as they could be disbursed. We can not legislate 

upon the theory that public officers are public scoundrels. They must 

be assumed to be honest men. I pass now to another consideration. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, what took place in the last fiscal year is in operation again. I hold in my hand an exhibit of the condition of the 

docket to which I have just alluded, some time about the 20th of 

December last, when the operations of the court were suspended. I 

send this document to the Clerk's desk to be read that members may 

see what is the practical operation of this system. 

The Clerk read as follows: ' 

COURT_ AND COMMISSIONERS. 

:Mw·de~ :. D?cket, December 21, 1887. 

In Jail .............................................................. ~·······································... 34 On bond.................... ................................................................................. 9 

Embezzlement : On bond ........................................................... , .......................................... 1 Receiving stolen goods: 

On bond ..... .............................................................................................. . 1 Cutting Government timber: 

On bond ................................................................................................... . 3 

Unla wful distilling: 01'1 bond .......... _ ............................................... ......................................... . 2 Wholesale dealers in oleomargarine: 

On bond .................................................................................................... . ! 

Perjury: 

On bond ................................... .................... .. ..... : ..................................... . 4 

TotaL ...................................................... ................................................ 1t11 

Inja.il............... ................................................................................................ 99 

On bond ............ .................. .................................................................. ........... 62 

Mr. ROGERS, Thus, Mr. Chairman, we see that without any failure of th~de:ficiency bill for this year we have the court exercising 

jurisdiction over the Indian Territory suspended somewhere about the 

20th of December, with 161 prisoners charged with criminal offenses 

untried, 43 being charged with murder and the rest with variou other 

felonies and misdemeanors. Proceeding upon the estimates of the Department of Justice, as well as the clerk of that court, as to the losses 

sustained by the Government on account of the failure of the deficiency 

bill in a former year, we may readily estimate that the Government 

loses, by reason of want of appropriation to run the court for the first 

six months of the present year, from $30,000 to $60,000. What the 

losses elsewhere will be I have no means of knowing or estimating. 

Who will say that this is economy? 

Mr. SAYERS. I will ask the gentleman whether it is not the habit 

in that court to bring witnesses to Fort Smith, Ark., and keep them 

there on pay two, three, and four months? 

1t.Il.-. ROGERS. I answer that question distinctly and emphatically 

in the negative. 

When the deficiency bill failed the year before last, the effect was to 

crowd the business of the last quarter of one :fiscal year into the first 

quarter of the next, keeping witnesses in attendance upon the court 

from one week to four and :five weeks consecutively; and the business 

of the court which belonged to one period of six months was crowded 

into the succeeding term, to be tTansacted along with the current busi- • ness coming in from time to time from the Territory. The effect of suspending court on the 20th of last December will be again to force 

the business of the first quarter into the second quarter; and instead of 

the court being able, in the exercise of its executive ability, to distribute 

these cases so as not to incur any unnecessaxy expense, the nature of the 

circumstances is such, by rea.':'lon of the absence of railroad, telegraphic, 

and postal facilities, etc., that the court is unable to do anything except let 

witnesses come and stay until the cases cart be tried. This fact of itself 

is an unanswerable argument against pursuing any course that withholds from the court sufficient money to administer the law over that 

Terri tory, which is almost God-forsaken, as the state of this docket shows. 

Mr. BUCHANAN. Is it not the fact that a similar state of affairs 

exists in numbers of other courts of the· United States? 

ltfr. ROGERS. I am unable to ooswer that question. 

Mr. BUCHANAN. It is the fhct; andespeciallyso in my own State, 

where to my knowledge the officers arc careful~ prudent, and honest. 

Mr. ROGERS. Turning to another bmnch of this case, let me suggest that as early as 1879 the annual expenses of the United States 

courts were $3,241,000, while atpresentthey are $3,374,000-anincrease 

of between $100,000 and $200,000 in the course of nine years. In this 

connection another point requires investigation. What has Congress 

d0ne in the way of making increased appropriations necessary? ·what 

have the natural development and growth of the country done in increasing the expenditures for United States courts? Let us look at 

this for n moment. Within the last few years we have created, in 

obedience to the demands of the States and Territories, United States 

coru'ts at Peoria, Ill. ; St. Joseph, Hannibal, and Springfield, Mo.; TexTotal... ................................................................................ ,.................... 43 arkana, Ark.; Scranton, Pa. i Bay City, Mich.; Aberdeen, Miss.; Sitka, 

Ra.pe: 

In jail. ..................................................................................................... .. 

Ala~ka; Shreveport and Monroe~ La.; Waco, Graham, Jefferson, and 1 El Paso, Tex.; Macon, Ga.; Los Angeles, Cal.; Chattanooga, Tenn.; 

Sioux City and Fort Dodge, Iowa; Birmingham, Ala.; Wichita, Kans. 

Assault, etc. : and Eau Claire, Wis. _ Injo.il ......................... ,............................................................................... 11 Th h b ted · dd" · to th h" h on bond................................................... ................................................. 11 ese courts ave een crea m a ttion ose w 1c were sup- ported when $3,000,000 was annually paid for court expenses. These 

Total.. ........................................................................................ -: ··········· 22 additional courts necessarily increase the expenses of the Government 

.Arson: in' this direction. Now, I believe from what I know of these courts 

In jail......................................................................................................... 2 that every one of them is essential for the proper administration of the 

On bond..................................................................................................... 1 law. Why, in some of these Territories alone, when the last census 

Total. ..................................................................................... ~ ............... . 3 wa-s taken, they had 40,000 population, and they now have 1,250,000: 

Are they to go on with the same judicial system they had ten years 

ago, or are they to keep pace with the progress and development of the 

country? And should we not furnish proper appropriations to meet 

the necessary expenses of the courts? 

:Larceny: 

Injail ........................................................................................................ 24 On bond ..................................................................................... ............... 21 

TotaL ........................... :-........................................................................ 45 • But there is another and more significant matter in regard to the 

Introducing and selling liquor: • . thing to which I wish to invite your attention, and which, I think, is 

Injail ................................................ '!" ........................................................ '1:7 scarcely understood. We -are not only developing and growing as a On bond.................................................................................................. ... 8 people and a country, taking in and absorbing new States and '£erriTotal ......... w······.......................................................... ........................... 35 tories, but at the same time, Mr. Chairman, we are creating new crimes 

and embarking in new legislation of a. character which was unknown 
I 

1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE. 1207 

to us until within the last decade. We have on the statute-book a law 

in reference to the sale of oleomargarine, with provisions -against the 

violation of that law, and since its passage there have been instituted 

forty-two new criminal prosecutions, not to speak of the large number 

of cases which have been compromised. We have under the Edmunds 

act created new offenses for all of the Territories, the statistics of the 

prosecutions under which I have been unable to get. In Idaho we have 

prosecuted two hundred and eleven cases for illegal cohabitation, not 

to speak of those in the Territory of Ut-ah, or in the Territory of Montana, or in the other Territories. I do not know what these prosecutions are in number, as I have not been able to get the information. 

Then, sir, we have passed laws providing for the protection of the 

public domain which have also increased very largely the business of our courts. Up to March 4, 1885, there were two thousand eight hundred and fifty-two prosecutions fer unlawful inclosures and timber 

depredations alone. The Democratic party in its policy to recover back 

the public domain bas passed penal statutes against these inclosures, 

unlawfully made, and against fraudulent entries, etc., and under those 

acts nearly three thousand cases have been instituted in the effort to recover the public domain. 

Now, .Mr. Chairman, I have it officially from the Department that 

two thousand six hundred and ninety-one cases have been instituted 

against the bonds of defaulting officers of preceding administrations 

alone, not including the bonds of distillers; not including the bonds ot 

internal-revenue officers, nor embracing warehouse bonds, distillers' 

bonds, and exporters' bonds. I have been unable to get information as to how many suits have been instituted in those c..'l.Ses) although I have 

called for the information. 

Mr. CANNON. Can the gentleman inform me what amount of 

money the Government has recovered in these prosecutions? 

Ur. ROGERS. I will take great pleasure in answering the gentleman s question as far as I am able to do so. The sum total of these 

prosecutions, which embrace new legislation, with the exception of suits on bonds of defaulting officers, is five thousand seven hundred and 

ninety-six. 

But the p;entleman from Illinois asks me a pertinent question, to fur- nish him with information of the amount of money recovered by the 

United States in these several prosecutions. :Mr. CANNON. Right there let me ask the gentleman- - 1\Ir. ROGERS. Let me answer the question which the gentleman 

has already put, and then I will hear what he has to ask further. 1\Ir. CANNON. The appropriations for the Department of Justice 

this year- - 1\Ir. ROGERS. Do not say" the Department of Justice;" it is the 

United States courts. The Department of Justice does not have the 

disbursement of 'this money. 

1\Ir. CANNON. Does not the gentleman know that the $3,374,000 

include not only the appropriations in this bill but the appropriations 

in the original bill for this year, but does not include other deficiencies 

yet to be provided for in the general deficiency bill, which will increase 

the amount in the aggregate some $400,000, making in round num- bers a total of $3,800,000 as. expenditures for the courts this year, in- stead of the amount stated by the gentleman of $3,374,000? 

Mr. ROGERS. I must take thatstatementcumgrarw sali-s. When- ever a man comes to deal with the Committee on Appropriations under 

the idea that he is going to getwhat he has estimated for, he is certain 

to get left--dead certain to be left." 

MI·. CANNON rose. Mr. ROGERS.· Now, I do not want the gentleman from Illinois, 

with that left finger of his, to keep me away from answering the question he has already put. The Department of Justice for this year has 

received in judgments and in fines, penalties, and forfeitures $2,127,- 034.53. The amount of money realized from the same sources during 

that period was $251,213.72. In addition to this, $274,153 were realized in judgments recovered, and on fines, forfeitures, and penalties 

imposed in former years, and in other civil suits. I ought to state, Mr. 

Chairmar:., tlmt these suits have been instituted on the defaulting bonds of officers, a.mountingto2,691, by authority of the Solicitor of the Treasury, of some of which suits I have myself personally cognizance. 

:Mr. CANNON. In view of the fact that the statute of" limitations 

does not nm a.,o-ainst the Government, have you any additional infor- mation as to when these defaults were made? 

1\fr. ROGERS. No, sir. Mr. CANNON. Because I know of some myself for defaults twenty, 

twenty-five, or thirty years ago. 

1\Ir. ROGERS. There need not be any dodging about this matter. 

I do not suppose the Solicitor of the Treasury is authorizing suits on bonds executed orcausesofaction which originated twenty-five, thirty, 

or a hundred years ago. They are more recent. But I will give the 

gentleman the information I have, for I want him to have it correctly. 

Since :March 4, 1885, there have been 2,852 prosecutions in connection 

with fraudulent trespasses or entries upon the public lands; and since 

March 5, 1885, there have been 3,685 suits which have been entered by 

the Solicitor of the Treasury on bonds other than those connected with 

the internal-revenue bonds. I went in :person to inquire, for I wanted 

information personally upon the subject, whether tP.atcovered suits originating under the present administration, and was told that they referred 

exclusively to defuult.s during former administrations. And I find from an examination of the report of the Attorney-Genera,! of the United 

States, which I commend to the country and to the examination of 

gentlemen on both sides as being the most full, the most complete, the 

most exact, and, I trust, the most accurate that ever came from that De- partment, that 12,905 criminal prosecutions were terminated iu the 

courts in the last year. ' 

With this evidence, this testimony, which is, I think, exact, which 

challenges contradiction, is there ground or is there reason why the 

present Committee on Appropriations should come into the House and 

with their hands upheld in holy horror ask the country how long this 

thing is to continue, and say, to use their own language: 

The eYer-recurring deficiencies, both in annual estimates and appropriations, for the expenses of the United States courts arc entitled to the grave and 

thoughtful consideration of Congress. 

And again: 

How long will it be before the excess of expenditures over estimates or appro- priations will be more than the amount estimated or appropriated for this serv- ice? 

I think, sir, in view of what Congress has done, in view of the development and growth of this country, and in view of the fuct that we ha"e been balancing the books and settling the accounts, in view of 

the fact that there has been no sQrt of increase of appropriations for 

this purpose commensurate with the growth, the development, the 

strength, and the increase of the couniiry, that we· have sincere grounds 

for congratulation rather than to take the contrary view, because we are slowly but gradu11lly increasing the expenses for the United States 

courts. Nothing but increase will meet the demands of a growing and 

developing country like ours, and nothing else can be reasonably hoped 

f0r by sane men. [Here t.he hammer fell.] 

Mr. BURNES. I shall not attempt to close this debate to-night, and 

will move that the committee now rise. The motion was agreed to. 

The committee accordingly rose; and Mr. HoLMAN having taken the 

chair as Speaker pro tempore, Mr. BLOUNT reported that the Committee 

ofthe Whole House on the state of the Union, having bad under con- sideration the bill making appropriation to supply certain of the most 

urgent deficiencies for the service of the Go\ernment for the fi cal year 

ending June 30, 1888, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution 

thereon. • CORPS OF CHAPLAINS, UNITED STATES AR~. 

Mr. HENDERSON, of Iowa, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. 7221) to establish a corps of chaplains for the Army and to 

provide for appointments and promotions on examination therein ; 

which was read a first and second time, referred. to the Committee on Military Affairs, and ordered to be printed. 

AGRICULTURAL-EXPERIMENT STATIONS. 

Mr. BLOUNT, by unanimous consent, introduced a bi11 (H. R. 

7222) to amend an act entitled ''An act to establish agricultural stations 

in connection with the colleges est::tblished in the several States under 

the provisions ofthe act approved July 1,1862, and of the acts supplementary thereto;'' which was read a first and second time, referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and ordered to be printed. 

ANALYSIS OF BEER, DEPARTl'llENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

M:r. BOUEIS, by u.nanimous consent, introduced a resolution calling on the Commissioner of Agriculture for his reasons for withholding cer- tain information regarding the analysis of certain articles of beer by 

the Department of .Agriculture; which was referred to the Select Com- mittee on the Alcoholic Liquor Traffic. 

• 

DUTY ON IRON ORE. 

Mr. MOFFITT. Air. Speaker, I have a short memorial from .the Eastern Iron-Ore Association, protesting against any reduction from the 

present duty on iron ore, which I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD, and referred to the Committee on Ways and 

Means. . There was no objection, and it was so ordered. 

The memorial is as follows: 

1\Iemorial to the honorable Senators and Representatives of the Congress of the United States. 

The Eastern Iron-Ore Association would most respectfully protest to you against any reduction from the present duty of 75 cents per ton on iron ore. This 

association represesents an annual output of over 2,500,000 tons, and upon this 

industry are dependent ior their subsistence not less th&n seventy-five thousand 

people and millions of invested capital. The territory embraced, lying between the Appalachian chain of mountains ru::ttl the Atlantic Ocean, is peculiarly exposed from its very location to foreign 

competition. The mines of Canada lie to the north of it, while those of Spain, 

Greece, and Africa can be laid down at a very low cost almost any,vhere along 

its coast line. The miners have to compete in wages witll tile nominally paid 

barbarian labor of the above countries in the eastern hemisphere, and to reduce 

the duty would be to threaten the annihilation of the labor and capital above referred to. From Maine to Alabama there is hardly a State in wllich large bodies of iron ore do not exist, especilllly in the South, yet the dread of a reduced 

duty and the fact that, notwithstanding the present duty, over 1,300,000 tons of 

foreign ore was imported in 1887, stands as a constant menace against obtaining 

capital to develop these sections. This association would also protest against the demand made in certain quarters that ore snonld be placed on the free-list 
1208 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. FEBRUARY 14, 

as being a" raw material." If iron ore be considered a raw material, so must other products requhing a like proportion of labor to put them into commercial 

conditions be so called. The ore may be considered as a "raw material" when 

in the ground, but the labor put upon it to mine and prepare it for the market 

certainly constitutes it!\ ''product." Nor. is the argument in favor of free raw materials a reliable one when analyzed, for by admitting iron ore, for instance, 

free, we will trndoubt-edly close the majority of our domestic mines and put. our- sel'l"es at the mercy of foreign producers, whose ores are likely to be of uncertain 

supply in case of wars or e..-..:cessive vessel rates, and when our mines have been 

nearly all closed they are likely to increase the price, so little can be gained t-o consumers. To properly equip an iron mine requires a large outlay of capital, 

and our wiser policy would seem to be to still more encourage the development of om· own mines, and in that way, by increasing our own output, we shall be en- abled to produce cheaper and better ores than by surrendering our market up to foreigners. Therefore this association would again most respectfully protest to you agajnst any reduction from the present duty of 75 cents per ton. EASTERN IRON-ORE AsSOCIATION, 

By F. S. WITIIERBEE, President. 

PoRT HENRY, N.Y., January 20, 1888. · 

WITHDRAWAL OF PAPERS. 

By unanimous consent, leave was granted to Mr. HoUR to withdraw 

from the Jiles of the House, without leaving copies, papers in the case of Mrs. E. C. Abbott. 

1t!ONT.AN.A, KANSAS AND TEX.AS RAILROAD COliPANY. 

Mr. T"GRNER, of Kansas, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill 

(H. R. 7223) to grant the right of way through the Public Land Strip, 

Indian Territory, to the Montana, Kansas and Texas Railroad Company, and for other ·purposes; which was read a first and second time, 

referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs, and ordered to be printed. 

MESSAGE FROM THE SENAl:E. 

A message from the Senate, by Mr. McCooK~ its Secretary, informed 

the House that the Senate had passed a joint resolution and bills of the 

following titles, in which the concurrence of the House was requested: 

Joint resolution (S. R. 35) appropriating $10,000 for the subtropical exposition, at Jacksonville, Fla. ; 

A bill (S. 1103) to provide for an Indian school at carson City, Nev.; 

and 

A bill (S. 937) for the relief of David L. Brainard and others. 

MEXICAN WAR PENSIONS, ETC. 

Mr. GAY, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. 7224) to 

extend to certain volunteers in the Mexican war t.he benefit of the act 

of January 29, 1887, granting pensions to soldiers and sailors of the 

Mexican war, and for other purposes; which was read a first and see:, 

ond time, I'efen-ed to the Committee on Pensions, and ordered to be 

printed. INTERNAL-REVENUE TAXES, ETC. 

Mr. GAY also, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. 722fi) 

for the repeal of all existing internal-revenue taxation and for the 

enactment of certain taxes, and for other purposes; which was read a first and second time, referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, 

and ordered to be printed. 

CL.Alli OF NEW YORK CITY. 

l\Ir. COX, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. 7226) to 

provide for the payment of the claim of the mayor, aldermen, and com- monalty of New York City; which was read a first and second time, referred to the Committee on Claims, and ordered to be printed. 

• WITHDRAWAL OF P .APERS. 

On motion of Mr. TAULBEE, by unanimous consent, leave was given 

to withdraw from the files of the House the papers in the case of John 

Hogan. 

PUBLI<;J BUILDINGS AT LINCOLN, NEBR. 

Mr. McSHANE, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. 

722i) authorizing the expenditure of $10,000 for improving the postoffice site and public grounds and paving and grading streets at Lincoln, Nebr.; which was read afirstandsecond time, referred to the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds, and ordered to be printed. 

..INSPECTOR-GENERAL'S DEPARTMENT. 

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE, of Kentucky, by unanimous consent, intro- duced a bill (H. R. 7228) to increase the efficiency of the InspectorGeneral's Department; which was read a :first and second time, referred 

to the Committee on Military Affairs, and ordered to be printed. 

FOURTH-CLASS POSTMASTERS. 

Mr. GAINES, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. 7229) 

to provide for the better compensation of postmast-ers of fourth-class 

post-offices of the United States; which was read a first and second 

time, referred to the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads, apd 

ordered to be printed. 

APPEALS FROM TERRITORIAL SUPREME COURTS. 

Mr. THOMAS, of Wisconsin, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. 7230) relative to appeals from supreme cou.rts in the Territofi:es; which was read a first and second time, referred to the Committee on the Territories, and ordered to be printed~ 

PUBLIC BUILDING AT ROME, GA. 

Mr. CLEMENTS, by unanimous consent, introduced a. bill (H. R. 

7231) for the erection of a public building -at Rome, Ga., which was read a first and second time, referred to the Committee on Public Bnil dings and Grounds, and ordered to be printed. 

Mr. McMILLIN. I move that the House do now adjourn. 

The motion was agreed to; and accordingly (at 5 o'clock and 2 minutes p. m.) the House adjoumed. .· 

PRIVATE BILLS .AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS INTRODUCED .AND REFERRED. 

Under the rule private bil1s and joint resolutions of the fol1owing 

titles were introduced and referred as indicated below: 

By Mr. ABBOTT: A bill (H. R. 7232) for the relief of C. L. Wilsonto the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads. · By Mr. BACON {by request): A bill (H. R. 7233) granting a pension 

to Hiram Beach-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By _Mr. BURNES: A bill (H. R. 7234) to grant a pension to John P. 

Bedwell-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Ur. CARUTH: A bill (H. R. 7235) for the relief of Benjamin 

Parker, deceased-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By M:r. CHEADLE: A bill (H. R. 7236) granting a pension to Otis 

S. Staffm·d-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. CLARK: A bill (H. R. 7237) granting a pension to Clarissa 

Harvey-to the Committee on Invalid Pension~. . Also, a bill (H. R. 7238) for the relief of John D. Ham-to the Com- mittee on :Military Affairs. 

By Mr. FLOOD: A bill (H.¥· 7239) for the 1·elief of R. R. R. Domars-to the Committee on Claims. 

By Mr. GIFFORD: A bill (H. R. 7240) granting a pension to Albert 

W. Keeny-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. HARMEH: A bill (H. R. 7241) for the relief of George S. 

Thompson and A1chibald Campbell-to the Committee on Patents. 

By Mr. HAYES: A bill (H. R. 7242) granting a pension to William 

White-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. HITT: A bill(H. R. 7243) to relieve JosephS. Hurst from 

the charge of desertion:;-to the Committee on Military Affairs. 

Also, a bill (H. R. 7244) for the relief of Abram A. Lutz-io the ·Committee on Claims. 

By Mr. S. I. HOPKINS: A bill (H. R 7245) for the relief of Romantus Lake-to the Committee on Military Affairs. 

By Mr. HOWARD: A bill (H. R. 7246) for the relief of Ephraim 

Smallwood, George Smallwood, Jesse M. Browning, Allen Goss, and 

Frank Varney-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By 1\Ir. MAISH: A bill (H. R. 7247) to increa-se the pension of 

Mary A. Gibson, widow of Commander William Gibson-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. ' 

By Mr. MANSUR: A bill (H. R. 7248) to grant a pension to C. J . J. 

Martyr-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. McCREARY: A bill (H. R. 7249) for the relief of Santford 

Alcorn-to the Committee on Military Affairs. 

Also, a bill (H. R. 7250) for the relief of Santford Alcorn-to the 

Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. MONTGOMERY: A bill (H. R. 7251) for thereliefofMary 

West, administratrix of Charles West- totheCommitteeon War Claims. 

By Mr. MORROW: A bill (H. R. 7252) granting a pension to Robert 

Harrison-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. NELSON: A bill (H. R: 7253) granting a pension to the 

widow of Samuel Clary-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. PEEL: A bill (H. R. 7254} granting a pension to James C. 

Garrison-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. PHELPS: A bill (H. R. 7255) for the relief of A. B. Tyanto the Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

,By Mr. C. A. RUSSELL: A bill (H. R. 7256) to provide for the pay- ment of the passage of General de Lafayette and family from France 

to the United States in 1824 as the "guest of the nation," etc.-to the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs. 

By Mr. SCULL: A bill (H. R. 7257) for the relief of Job'n W . 

Gummo-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. G. M. THOMAS: A bill (H. R. 7258) for the relief of Thomas 

Mattingly-to the Committee on Military Affairs. 

By Mr. TRACEY: A bill (H. R. 7259) for the removal of the charge 

of desertion from the military record of Jacob Wyant-to the Committee on Military Affairs. . By Mr. WALKER: A bill ( H. R. 7260) for the relief of B. M. Horrell- to the Committee on War Claims. 

Changes in the reference of bills improperly referred were made in 

the following cases, namely: A bill (H. R. 2529) granting a pension to Mary Monti-from the 

Committee on Invalid Pensions to the Committee on Pensions. 

Also, a bill (H. R. 2530) granting a pension to John C. Wagonerfrom the Committee on Invalid Pensions to the Committee on Pensions." . . Also, a bill (H. R. 2531) gran tin~ a pension to Frederick W. Travisfrom the Committee on Invalid Pensions to the Committee on PenJ 

sions. 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-· HOUSE. 1209 

PETITIONS, ETC. digo, of .A..ntoynette Pace, of J. W. Pace, of James .A.. Powell, of J. 

The following petitions and papers were laid on the Clerk's desk, H. Poynter, of Franklin Overstreet, of Thomas J. Owen, of W. D. 

under the rule, and referred as follows: Owen, of B. W. Nuchols, of J. R. Maddox, of James Merry, of J. B. 

By 1\Ir. BELDEN: Petition of the faculty of Syracuse University, Marsliall, and of C. A. Milligan, of .Kentucky, for reference of their 

Syracuse, N.Y., favoring the reduction of the tariff on the importation claims to the Court of Claims-to the Committee on War Claims. 

of scientific works-to the Committee on Ways and Means. By Mr. GALLINGER: Papers in the case of Emanuel Mason-to the 

By 1\Ir. BINGHAM: Petition of the United American Clay Tobacco- Committee on Claims. 

Pipe Employers and Employes' Association, for a revision of the tariff By Mr. GEAR: Resolution of the General Assembly of Iowa, in re- laws on manufactured clay pipes imported from Europe-to the Com- gard to liens of judgments of the Federal courts being filed in the coun- mittee on Wavs and Means. ties and indexed by the clerk of the court-to the Committee on the 

By 1\Ir. BLOUNT: Papers and petitions in theclaimsofMartha Price; Judiciary. 

of James Trice, administrator of William Trice; of Mary Willmaker; By Mr. GIFFORD: Petition of John Alelan, and 46 others of Dickof James A. Carden; of John E. Elam; of Susan Carrier; of Benjamin inson, Dak., for the relief of George Auld, late postmaster ~t said 

F. Reaves; of James M. Middlebrook; of William R. Welborn; of Chris- place-to the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads. 

tian Whele; of John Cox; ofF. F. Matthews; of Nicholas Rawlings; of By Mr. GROUT: Petition of 124 citizens of Jay, Vt., for a pension 

Sabina Morton; of Thomas G. Scott, administrator of Easley Cleveland; for Edna M. Hildreth__:_to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

of John Ficken; of George F. Pander; of Martin Wendleken; of Peter Also, proof in support of Laura. D. Pierce's claim for a pension-to 

Lynch; of Thoma,s J. Walsh; of Elizabeth Wright; of Thomas Clem- the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

ents; of Tillman Niblett; of l\Iargaret Bloodworth; of Abraham l\1. By Mr. HARMER: Petition of Thompson S. Campbell, for extenWeaver; of Larkin Wilcher; of Jordan Lyons; of Mattie A. D. Vaughan, sion of letters patent-to the Committee on Patents. 

widow onL B. D. Vaughan; of Susan Davis; of Dr. Solomon Shiftall; By Mr. HAYES: Petition of William White, for a pension-to the 

of William Rutherford; of James Trice; of Henry Fields; of Asa Bras- Committee on Invalid Pensions. • well; ofWilliam Goddard; of Jackson Burt; of William J. Willis; of By Mr. D. B. HENDERSON: Joint resolution of the General AsJosiah R. Chambers, administrator of Josiah Chambers; of Zadock C. semblyof Iowa in regard-to the liens of judgments in the United States 

Baker; of George Von Waldner; of Simeon L. Morton; of Richard But- courts-to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

ler; ofWilliam H. Parker; of Ballenger Gravely; of John P. Davidson; By Ur. S; I. HOPKINS (byrequest): Petition ofminers and others 

of Shelton H. Campbell; of Abraham Shiftall; of John M. Nace; of J. of Caperton and of Stone Cliff, W. Va., protesting against. the re- B. Bray; of Rebecca D. Fulton; of Thomas \V. Quarterman; of Gabriel moval of duties on coal, coke, and ores-to the Committee on Ways 

Parks; of Jane A. Head; of Allen J. Veal; of William C. Battle; of and Means. · Mrs. E. B. D. Vaughn; of Tilman Nibbett; ofG. H. Elliott; ofHiram By Mr. LAFFOON: Petitionof3,500 citizens,andofB. C. Courts and 

Howe; of Benjamin Haygood; of Pinkney Persons; of Jane Edge; of 206 other citizens, and of John W. Belt and 202 other citizens, living on 

Margaret Blood worih; of l\Iartin Wendelkin; of J. B. Rogers and 0. Green River, Kentucky, for the purchase by the Government of the franL. Wy ley, heirs of Lowery Williams; of Thomas G. Verdine; of Levi chise of the Gree:Q and Barren River Navigation Company, in Kentucky, 

N. Middlebrook; of Wilkins W. Jackson; and of Matthew T. Farley, and opening said riv~rs to commerce-to the Committee on Rivers and 

all of the State of Georgia-to the Committee on War Claims. Harbors. 

By 1\Ir. BRECKINRIDGE, of Kentucky: Petition of the adminis- Also, a bill authorizing and directing the purchase of the lease owned 

tratrix of Michael McAllister, of Henry County, Kentucky, for refer- by the Green and Barren River Navigation Company on said rivers, 

enceof his case to the Court of Claims-to the Committee on War Claims. ·and appropriating money for that purpose-to the Committee on Rivera 

By Mr. BREWER: Petition of Merritt Lewis, for increase of pen- and Harbors. 

sion-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. · Also, petition of citizens of Evansville, Ind., in favor of opening the 

By Mr. BUNNELL: Resolutions of. Beech Flats Grange, Patrons of Green and Barren Rivers, in Kentucky, to navigation-to the CommitHusbandry, of East Canton, Bradford County, Pennsylvania, protest- tee on Rivers and Harbors. 

ing against the repeal of the oleomargarine law-to the Committee on By Mr. LEE: Petition of Jane Dulaney, for illcrease of pension-to 

Agriculture. • the Committee on Pensions. 

By Mr. BURNETT (byrequest): Petition for general appropriations · By Mr. LYNCH: Petition of Rosalie Bleecker, widow of John Van 

to build post-offices in all towns of over 3,000 inhabitants-to the Com- B. Bleecker, ~or increase of pension-to the Committee on P~sions . . mittee on Public Buildings and Grounds. By Ur. McCLAMMY: Papers in the claims of Richard W. Johnson, 

By Mr. CARUTH: Paper in relation to the bill for the relief of the of Elijah Parker, of Esidore Cohn, of Nathaniel K. Thornton, of Fredestate of Benjamin Parker-to the Committee on War Claims. I erick Mathis, of Hector Mcl\Iillan, of Margaret Du.ffy, of William R. 

By Mr. CLEMENTS: A bill to appropriate $97,000 to complete the Clark, of Ezekiel Stevens, and of Theopolus Weaver, of North Caroimprovement-, of the Coosa River, in Georgia ·and ~abama-to the lina-to the Committee on War Claims. 

Committee on Rivers and Harbors. By Mr. McCREARY: Petitions of John Kincaid, of William McCarAlso, a bill to appropriate $500,000 for the improvement of the Coosa ley, of Clemen tina Kincaid, of Jeff McGinniss, of Samuel G. Moore, of 

River, in Georgia and Alabama-to the Committee on Ri>ers and Har- Geo;rge W. Mitchell, of Jesse Peter, of S. M. Pipes, of Thomas C. Prebors. witt, of John T. Russell, of Lytle .R. Schooler, of John G. Wade, of 

Also, a bill to appropriate $20,000 to improve the Oostenaula and Ann S. Tadlock, of Richard Surratt, of Noah Hundley, of John W. IsCoosawattee Rivers, in Georgia-to the Committee on Rivers and Har- ham, of Mary. Hope, of Susan A. French, or J ane H. Davis, ofT. J. Dilbors. · lehay, of Cooper Dunn, of Charles Clark, of John W. Huguely, of esta.te 

By Mr. COX: Petition of Burger & Lee and 47 other firms and in- ofGrcen Bottom, of Henry P. Bottom, of James A. Bottom, ofThomp· 

dividuals in New York City, for the removal of the duty on tin-plate- son M. Arnold, and of Marcus H. Garnet, of Kentueky, for reference 

to the Committee on Ways and Means. of their claims to the Court of Claims-to the Committee on War 

By Mr. CROUSE: Resolutions of the Bricklayers and l\fasons' In· Claims. _ ternational Union-to the Committee on the Library. By Mr. MATSON: Petition of W. Y. Beller, for arrears of penBy Mr. DINGLEY: Petition of Gideon L. Pease, for pensions for sion-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

soldiers of the Black Hawk war-to the Committee on Pensions. By Mr. MOFFITT: Petition of Joseph Laport and Isaac L. Rock, 

By Mr. DOCKERY: Petition of Dr. l\1. 1\Iansur, for a pension-to and of John Houghron and William H. Gordon and others, relative to 

the Committee on Pensions. I arrears of pension-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. ELLIOTT: Petition of citizens of Sumter and of Mayes- By 1\fr. OATES: Petition of P. M. Calloway, sr., and 52 others, of 

ville, S.C., for the improvement ofWinyaw Bay Bar-to the Com.mit- 1 Newton, Dale County, and ofT. A. Beard and 25 others, of County 

tee on Rivers and Harbors. . Line, Ala. 

By Mr. ENLOE: Petitioif of E. T. McGill and of R. H. Hall, of By Mr. O'FERRALL: Petition of William H. Anderson, of FredCarroll County, Tenn., for reference of their cla,ims to the Court of erick County, Virginia, for reference of his claim to the Court ·of 

Claims_-to the Committee on War Claims. Claims-to the Committee on War Claims. 

Also, petition of Margaret E. Price, of Dunbar, and of Nancy R. Price, By Mr. CHARLES 0' NEILL: Joint memorial of the Board of Trade,_ of Scott's Hill, Tenn., for pensions. Also, affidavit of James G. Mont- the Commercial, Maritime, and Drug Exchanges, and Vessel-Owners 

gomery, of Decatur County, Tennessee, in support of their applica- and Captains' Association of Philadelphia, for the passage of an act for 

tions-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. an international maritime conference, for the purpose of promoting 

By Mr. ERMENTROUT: Memorial of William Schaus, for removal the safety of life and property on the high seas-to the Committee on 

of duty on works of sculpture and painting-to the Committee on Ways Foreign Affairs. 

and Means. Also, 1·esolutions of the councils of Philadelphia, favoring the reA.Jso, memorial of C. L. Gibbs, of Pennsylvania, for low postal rates moval of Smith's, Windmill, and Petty's Island in the Delaware River- on seeds, etc.-to the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads. to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors. 

By Mr. FINLEY: Petition of Nathan Warren, of D. 1\1. Williams, By Mr. PARKER: Petition of citizens of Houndfield, Jefferson 

of William F. Warren, of W. E. Waller, of Andrew Walters, of Will- County, New York, in favor of an equalization of pensions-to the 

iam Wells, of John G. Smith, of P. M. Smith, of Lucy S. Stark, of Committee on Invalid Pensions. Isaa~ S~ithJ of Silas Redford, of Robht Richa.rdson, of JesseS. Pe- By Mr. PERKINS: Resolutions ofthe Board of Trade of .Atchison, 
'· 

' 

1210 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. FEBRUARY 15, 

Kans., for an immediate appropriation to keep the Missouri River open 

to navigation, and to protect important property interests now threatened by the washing of the river at that city-to the Committee on 

Rivers and Harbors. . Also, memorial of the Board of"Trade of Kansas City, Kans., for a public building in keeping with the necessities of the post--office and 

the growth and importance of the city-to the Committee on Public 

Buildings and Grounds. 

By Ur. PERRY: Petition of citizens of Columbia, S.C., for an ap 

propriation for the improvement of the Congaree River-to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors. 

By JI.Ir. RANDALL: Petition of A. G. P. Brown and others, for increase of the pension for tota.l or partial deafness-to the Committee on Im·alid Pensions. 

By Mr. SCULL: Papers in the claim of B. F. Jameson, for relief-to 

the Committee on Claims. 

By Ir. SHAW: Petition of Mary C. Correll, widow of Christian 

Correll, of Carroll County, 1\Iaryland, for reference of her claim to the 

Court of Claims-to the Committee on War Claims. Also, petition of Richard T. Howard, Company A, Eleventh Maryland Volunteer Infantry, and of William Otley, father of Robert Y. 

Otley, for pensions-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. SNYDER: Resolutions of miners and laborers at Crown Hill, 

Kanawha County, West Virginia-to the Committee on Ways and 

!leans. • By Mr. STAHLNECKER: Petition of the United American TobaccoPipe Employers and Employes' Association, for protection to clay-pipe 

inuustries-to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. STRUBLE: Joint resolution of the General ~embly of 

Iowa, for a law providing that judgments of the United States courts 

shall become liens on real estate only on the filing of transcripts of the same by the clerks of the courts in the counties where the real estate is 

situated-to the Committee on the Judiciary. 

By Mr. TAULBEE: Petition of John Brumley, ofCompany B, Forty-seventh Regiment Kentuck--y Infantry Volunteers -to the Committee 

on Invalid Pensions. 

By .Mr. G. M. THOI\IAS: Petition of Thomasl\fattingley, for reliefto the Committee on Military Affairs. 

Also, petition of William Preston, of Johnson County, Kentucky, for 

reference of his claim to the Court of Claims-to the Committee on War 

Claims. By Mr. WEST: Petition of the letter-carriers of Schenectady, N. Y., 

for a.n increase of salary-to the Committee on the Post-Office and PostRoads. 

By Mr. WHEELER: A bill to improve the navigation of the Tennessee !liver at Colbert and Bee Tree Shoals-to the Committee on 

Rivers an<l Harbors. 

Also, petition of Nancy Dulaney, widow of William Dulaney, of 

Jackson County, and of Ben. :Mansell, of Franklin County, Alabama, 

for reference of their claims to the Court of Claims-t.o the Committee on War Claims. ~ 

Also, papers in the claim of Benjamin Mansell, of Pranklin County, 

and of William Dulaney, of Jackson County, Alabama-to the Committee on War Claims. 

By Mr. WHITTHORNE: Petition of William A. Baugh, of Giles 

County, Tennessee, for reference of his claim to the Court of Claimsto the Committee on War Claims. 

By 1\.ir. WICKHAM: Memorial of the authorities of Elyria, Ohio, 

for a general appropriation bill to erect post-office buildings in cities 

and towns of 3,000 inhabitants or over-to the Committee on Public 

Buildings and Grounds. 

By Mr. YOST: Petition of Sarah W. Brown, of Alleghany County, 

Virginia, for reference of her claim to the Court of Claims-to the Committee on War Claims. 

The following petitions for an increase of compensation of fomthcla.ss postmasters were severally referred to the Committee on the PostOffice and Post-Roads: 

By Mr. BINGHAM: OfcitizensofKenwood; Indiana County, Pennsylvania. · By Mr. CARLTON: OfW. H . Mealloy, A. V. Johnson, and others, 

of Elbert County, Georgia.. 

By Mr. YARDLEY: Of 125 citizens of Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. 

The following petitions, praying for the enactment of a law providing temporary aid for common schools, to be disbursed on the basis of 

illiteracy, were severally referred to the Committee on Education: 

By Mr. DARLINGTON: Of 374 citizens of Chester County, Pennsylvania. . Ry .l'lir. DINGLEY: Of118 citizens of Sagadahoc County, Maine. 

By ]')Ir. MOFFITT: Of citizens of Peru, Clinton County, New York. 

By l\Ir. YARDLEY: Of 638 citizens of Montgomery County, PennEzylvania. 

The following petitions, asking for the passage of the bill prohibiting 

the manufacture, sale, aud importatioiLof all aJcoholic beverages in the 

District of Columbia, were severally referred to the Select Committee on the Alcoholic Liquor Traffic: 

By Mr. McRAE (byrequest): Of202 citizens of the District of Columbia.. 

By Mr. C. H. ALLEN: OfRev. Edwin Smith and108citizensofthe 

Eighth district of :M:assachusetts. 

By l\Ir. BAKER: Of 99 citizens of the Thirtieth and Thirty--first districts of New York, and of 300 women of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union, of Rochester, N. Y. 

By Mr. PERKINS: Of J. B. Cook, E. D. nates, and 88 others, citi- zens of the Third district of Kansas. 

SENATE. 

WEDNESD.A. Y, Febr'lta1·y 15, 1888. 

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

The Journal of yesterday's proceedings was read and approved. 

STATISTICAL ABSTRACT. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate the following 

concurrent resolution received yesterday from the House of Representatives; which was referred to the Committee on Printing: 

lN THE HOUSE OF REPRE ENTATIVES, February 14,18SS. 

Resolved by the Hott,Se of Representatives (the Senate concurrina), That there be 

printed 15,000 additional copies of the Statistical Abstract of the United States 

for the year 1887, of which 5,000 copies shall be for the usc of the Senate and 

10, 000 copies for the use of the House of Representatives. 

CATTLE AKD DAIRY F AR:~U ~G. 

The PRESIDENT pt·o tempore laid before the Senate the amendments of the House of Representatives to the concurrent I'esolution of 

the Senate of February l3, 1888, for printing 7,000 additional copies of 

Executive Document No. 51, first session Forty-ninth Congress, on the 

subject of cattle and dairy farming; which were referred to the Com· 

mittee on Printing. 

PETITIONS AND ME!tiORI.A.LS. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore presented a memorial of Knights of 

Labor of South Amboy, N. J., remonstrating against the proposed 

change in the plans of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad bridge across 

the Arthur Kill near Elizabethport, N. J.; which was referred to the 

Committee on Commerce. He also presented a petition of citizens of the District of Columbia, 

praying that an appropriation be made to keep the channel of the Potomac River free from ice during the winter season; which was referred 

to the Committee on Appropriations. _ Mr. GRA. Y presented the memorial of Thomas E. Records and 32 

other citizens of Lewes, Del., remonstrating against the pa sage of the 

educational bill; which was ordered to lie on the table. 

Mr. PAYNE presented a petition of 233 citizens of the Eighth, Eleventh, Fourteenth, Seventeenth, and Twenty-first Congressional districts 

of Ohio, praying for prohibition in the District of Columbia; which was referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia. 

He also presented a petition of the board of directors of the Cincin- nati Chamber of Commerce, praying for legislation against the importation of adulterated articles of food under any other names than those 

which legitimately pertain to the same; which was referred to the 

Committee on Agriculture and Forestry. 

ir. SAWYER presented a petition of 119 citizens of the Third, Sixth, 

and Eighth Congressional districts of Wisconsin, praying for prohibition in the District of Columbia; which was referred to the Committee 

on the District of Columbia. 

Mr. VANCE presented a petition of the Woman's Christian Temper- ance Union of North Carolina, offic1ally signed, representing 1,000 

members, praying for the repeal of the internal-revenue tax on ali alcoholic liquors; which was referred to the Committee on Finance. Mr. BUTLER. I present the petition ofL. G. Johnson, 1\I. L.l\fcCormack, W. E. Dodge, Granville G. Bennett, and other citizens of the 

Territory of Dakota, praying for the passage of an enabling act for the 

Tenitory of Dakota. As the bill upon that subject has been repo.rted, 

I move that the petition lie oii the table. 

The motion was agreed to. 

Mr. DAWES presented the petition of H. L. Newhall and other citizens of Middlesex County, Massachusetts, praying for a proper revision 

and amendment of the wool and woolen schedule of the existing tariff; 

which was referred to the Committee on Finance. 

Mr. FARWELL presented the petition of the Woman's Christian 

Temperance Union of Illinois, praying for such legislation as shall provide for the adequate punishment of crimes against women and girls; 

which was referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia. 

Mr. PALMER prfSented a petition of 144 citizens of the Third and 

Ninth Congressional districts of Michigan, praying for prohibition in the 

District of Columbia; which was referred to the Committee on the Dis· 

trict. of Columbia.