8258 CON@ESSION AL RECORD-HOUSE. SEPTEl\ffiER 4, 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 

TUESDAY, September 4, 1888. 

The House met at 12 o'clock m. Prayer by Rev. J. H. CUTHBERT, 

D. D. 

The Journal of the proceedings of yesterday was read and approved. 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE. 

By unanimous consent, lC!"ve of absence was granted as follows: 

To 111r. TOWNSHEND, for ten days from to-morrow. . To Mr. BROWER, for two weeks, on account of important business. To Mr. WHITING, of Uichigan, indefinitely, on account of sickness. 

To Mr. SPOONER, an indefinite ex:ten:;ion of his previous leave of 

absence, on account of sickness. • . Mr. COX. I ask leave of absence for four days. 

There being no objection, leave was granted. 

SAMUEL FERGUSON BEACH, EXECUTOR, AND OTHERS. 

The SPEAKER laid before the House a letter from the assistant clerk 

of the Court of Claims, transmitting findings of fact in the case of Sam- uel Ferguson Beach, executor, and others against the United States; 

which was referred to the Committee on War Claims. 

ALLEGED CORRUPTION IN REFERENCE TO LIBRARY BUILDING. 

Mr. KELLEY. I desire to submit for immediate consideration the 

resolution which I send to the desk. 

The Clerk rea-d as follows: 

Resolt,ed, That the special comm.ittee engaged in investigating the construc- tion of the new Library building be directed to inq uhe and report to this House whether any member of the House, acting by and for himself or in concert and 

combination with others, has sought by persuasion, intimidation, or other cor- rupt or improper means, to influence or control the action of Mr. J. L. Smith- meyer, the architect of said building, in the selection, acceptance, or approval of inferior or improper materials to be used in the construction of said building, 

Mr. KELLEY. I do not desire to make any remarks upon this reso- lution. I take it for granted the House will not object to an investi~ 

gation of an allegation or intimation of this kind made by a member 

of the House. , · Mr. BLOUNT. I wish to know whether the gentleman has any information of any improper action of any member of the Honse, on 

which this resolution is based. 

Mr. KELLEY. I make the proposition to the House on information, the first facts of which came to me in the early part of this session 

and have been corroborated by increasing testimony and additional 

facts. I shall name the member when I get before the committee, if 

the House will permit me to go there. - Mr. BLOUNT. Upon that statement I make no objection to the 

resolution. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair thinks this is a privileged resolution, as it relates to the conduct of a member of the House. 

Mr. OATES. It seems to me the gentleman from Pennsylvania 

might very properly broaden the language of his resolution a little. 

The resolution proposes an investigation as to improper influences in 

regard to the acceptance or a-pproval of inferior materials. It seems 

to me there should also be inquiry whether there was any improper 

influence in order t() procure the paying of a larger price than that for 

which materials could be bought in the market. 

Mr. KELLEY. I will accept such an amendment as the gentleman 

indicat-es, if he will embody it in suitable language. 

Mr. OATES. I ask the Clerk to insert that amendment. 

Mr. KELLEY. I want the investigation to be as thorough as we 

can make it. :Mr. TAULBEE. I would like to suggest to the gentleman from 

Pennsylvania [Mr. KELLEY] and the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. 

OATES] that if the wo1·ds "inferior or improper" before "materials" 

be struck out, the language of the resolution, without further modification, might cover the point suggested by the gentleman from Alabama. 

Mr. KELLEY. Whatever tends to broaden the scope of the inquiry 

I will accept. 

Mr. OATES. As I understand from the rea.ding oftheresolution-r 

Mr. COX. Let it be again read. There is no objection to any inquiry that will strike anybody who has been engaged in wrong-doing. 

The resolution was again reported. 

Mr. OATES. After the word "material" I would suggest the addition of the words "at a higher rate than the market price." 

lli. KELLEY. I do not object to the modification. 

1\Ir. BLOUNT. Has the gentleman from Pennsylvania any objection 

to making this a special committee? 

The SPEAKER. Without objection, the amendment suggested by 

the gentleman from Alabama will be incorporated in the resolution. 

l\Ir. KELLEY. I desire to reply to the suggestion of the gentleman 

from Georgia, as to whether I would object to a special committee. As 

,the committee in charge of this matter bas taken much testimony 

touching the Library building, I think it had better proceed with that 

investigation. And I am about to ask, Mr. Speaker, that I may be 

:germitted to insert in the RECORD a sworn statement of Mr. Smithmeyer, made up chiefly of extracts from the record of the commission, 

which I submit as supplementary t.o my remarks during the debate on 

the provision for the Library building in thesundry civil.appropriation 

bill. This is sworn testimony, which is legitimate in connection with 

my statement in that debate, and I ask that, as part of it, it be printed 

in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. 

M:r. DOCKERY. Let it be read. 

:Mr. TAULBEE. Yes, let us bear what it is. 

Mr. KELLEY. I havenoobjection, butthoughtthatthe timeofthe 

House might be saved by printing it instead. I will state that it is a communication under oath handed to the chairman of the s:pecial com- mittee on yesterday with_a tender of cross-examination by this architect. 

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will read the document. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

Srn: My attention has been called to the fact that !Ir. E~wa.rd Clark, a mem· ber of the commission for the construction of the Congressional Library building, in his sworn testimony made the statement t.hat I have had full authority 

and supervision of the work in connection with the Congressional Library building. thus intimating that I a.m responsible for all the expenses incurred. 

In this allegntion 1\Ir. Clark does me a. grave wrong. In my tesGimony before yonr committee, dated Juno 1, 1888, I stated as follows: "Prim: to Jllay 3,1887, a number of old buildings on the site were being 

removed and extensive excavations made under the direct orders, as I believed, of the commission. With this work I had no connection whatever. 

Prior to that date no expense, except for technical assistance and actual office expenses, was known to or incurred by me; since that date all expenses at- tached to the work proper have required the sanction of the commission and my formal:approval." The expenditures on the old buildings above referred to were, in my opinion, excessive, and, together with the unnecessary excava- tion on the southwest corner of Band First streets above mentioned, involved 

the worse than useless expenditure of many thousand dollars. My dissent from the execution of this work was communicated to_.t-he com- mission in three letters, dated February 20, 1887, 1\Ia.rch 24, 1887, and .April 19, 1&"7, respectively. Mr. Commissioner Clark stated before your committee that 

"eve1·y piece of brick could have been used, not only put in the wall, but 

there was concrete required to cover Lhe cellar floors, etc." He had evid.ently not tested the quality of these bdcks and bats as it was my duty to do, nor did he know what weight the foundations and walls would have to sustain. 

In this case n. resisting strength of 5,000 pounds to the square foot is required, while some of the bricks taken out of these old buildings crumbled under a. pressure of l ess than one-quarter of thnt weight. The great variations in the 

sizes of these bricks (the d,iflerence ranging from one-eighth to one-quarter inch in thickness, and one-half inch in width or length) was another serious 

objection to their use. Those of some of the buildings had been laid in cement and others in lime-mortar, and fully one-half of them were broken into bats. 

Some of them were a century old and others but a year, and some were so soft 

that the rains and frosts of one winte1· would have dissolved them like snow in 

the hot sun. In short, they were worthless for the purpose to which 1\lr. Clark says they should have been applied, and their use would have jeopa1·dized the 

stability of the structure. · It is this character of false economy which advocates the use of inferior ma- terials in massive buildings on account of their cheapness; that invites calami· t.ies to stately and costly structures, and brings the architectural profession into 

discredit before the world. 

The fact that this worthless lot o! bats has cost the Go>ernment as much as the best quality of merchantable bricks fresh from the kiln would have cost was not my fault. Mr. Commissioner Clark with Mr. Trainer, t.he clerk (or 

secretary) of the commission, assumed the management of this matter, and are therefore responsible for it. The number of bricks and bats on the premises 

(according to Mr. Clark's statement before your committee) was from two to three millions. Assuming that two and a. half millioneof bricks and bats would 

therefore b3 a fair estimate, from this statement they ehould, at $4 per thousand, 

the price stated by Mr. Clark under oath, have yielded $10,000, instead of$2,185, 

the amount actually received as per report of the commission. A deficiency of 

$7,815 is therefore proven by the testimony of Mr. Clark • .Again it will be 

noticed that if there were two and a. half millions of bricks and bats on the 

premises, and only $2,185 were receh·ed for them, they produced but 87 cents per thousand, instead of$4. To illustrate the looseness and inaccuracy of 1\Ir. Clark's sworn testimony, it 

is proper that I should state these facts: The city measurer investigated the fact 

and 1·eported that there were one million eight hundred and seventy-five thou• 

sand bricks and bats on the premises and there was received for brick and bats 

which had been selected fromthewholelotthea.bove-statedsumofS2,185,showing an average price of 31.1&} per thousand. The ba.lance, which consisted of 

decqmposed salmon bricks and fractured bats, could not be sold at any price 

and had to be hauled away as rubbish at Government expense. · Currentexp~rience proves that a laborer can t-ake down, clean, and stack up 500 bricks a. day. Thus at $1.50 per day (Government pay) the cleaning, etc., of 

1,000 bricks cost $3. The costoftaking down and cleaning 1,875,000 bricks at$3 per 1,000 amounts, therefore, to $5,627, for which bricks the Government received 

$2,185, having thus wasted $3,442 on that brick transaction alone. As an evidence of the quality of these bricks, Mr. Clark informed the committee that he 

h ad used 601000 of them, presumably in his garden wall around the west front of 

the Capitol. For this work, which is to bear no superincumbent weight, they may possibly have been good enough. To recur to my protest against these operations ofl\Iessrs. Clark and Trainer, p ermit me to state that in my letter to the commission of February 20, 1887, I said: "I deem it my duty to call your attention to the fact that the excavations now bE:ing made upon the site of the Congressional Library building have evidently been ordered under a. grave misapprehension, and should be stopped 

immediately. In places where the streets intersect at low grade, and especially 

where the work is now going on, it will be nece sary to fill up again so as to make the terrnces required to give the buildingitsproperappem-ance and o.voicl a portion of it from being sunk into the ground, The inclosed plans and com- putations will show the different levels and their relative positio_ns, and also 

the proper disposition of the surroundings, so as to produce the best. results. They will also illustrate tbe necessity o f filli.ng up again where the g1·:1ding is now going on, and demonstrate the. necessity of having this work "stopped im- mediately." 

The work on the excavation referred to in this letter was likewise under the direction ofl\Ir. Commissioner Clark,assisted by Mr. Secretary Trainer. They em· ployed or discharged laborers, foremen, horses and carts, and fixed their wages; they paid~ per day to foremen and $1.50 per day to laborers for eight hours' 

work, while the foremen and laborers of the contractor5 were paid but $2 or $2.50 per day, and Sl and $1.25 per day of ten hours, though the two bodies of men worked side by side. They ordered their moveme-nts, attended to the 

pay-rolls, and made all set.tlements fo_r materials and labor, and determined what work should be done without examining plans or surveys, or even con- sulting the architect. In fact, they did not even notify him of their purpose or proceedings. It is impossible to state from the disjointed memoranda produced as the record of their expenditures what further losses the Go>ernment sus· tained by their ill-judged operations. I would certainly have been derelict ill 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 8259 

my duty boo I perm.itted this planless procedure to continue without another effort to anest it. I therefore wrote again to the commission ou March 24,1887, and tl ed the following language: "I deem it my duty to again call your attention to the fact that expensive and unnecesl!ary excavations continue to be made upon the site of the new Congressional Library building. I am at loss to know for what purpose these excavations are intended. Certainly not for the proposed structw·e. :Much of the earth excavated will have to be replaced, thus causing a. double expense. I call your attention· to this matter with much hesitancy, in fact with a certain sense of intrusion. 1\Iyposition, however, entails a positive responsibility, both to the public and to yourselves, and I feel impelled under these circumstances to write this letter." No notice of this communication or its" predecessor being taken by the com- mission, 1 again, on Aprill9, 1887, addressed them in the following language: "I request that my duties under my appointment may be clearly defined as to where my responsibility for any part of the work begins and ends. Also, to whom I am responsible and shall make report. Ordinarily this request would be unnecessary, as the duties of architects in connection with buildings erected under their plans are clearly defined and well-established. His well, therefore, that my duties should be definitely known, to the end that I may not be held responsible in cases where you rely upon the judgment of others. You will of course understand that my professional responsibility is deeply involved in this matter, to an extent equal to, if not greater than, your own. Consequently, 

I feel that at the beginning there shouldbeestablishedathorougbandcomplete 

understanding.'' 

During all this time the work on the exca-vations proceeded uninterrugtedly until (by the end of April, 1887), the cost of it had reached the sum of $3,888, as is shown by the official report of the commission. As this letter, like its predecessors, failed to elicit a. response I, on :May 3,1887, 

appealed to the commission for a. personal bearing, and was invited to appear before them. The statement I made to the ,commission embodied the facts above stated, and was sustained by the production of the pay-rolls in the In- terior Department and by the record of the commission. The result was the stoppan-e of this worse than useless work, and the transferring of certain powers and autbority into my hands, leaving the control and appointment of all per- sons. including watchmen, excepting only draugbtsmen and engineers, in the hands of Messrs. Clark and Trainer. After having heard my statement and ex.amined the pay-rolls and other vouchers, the chairman of the commission, Mr. SecretaryLamar, gavemeearn- estpersonalassurance that! should not be held responsible for these improvident 

expenditures of public money, and that the responsibility should be placed where it so eviJently belonged. Immediately after this meeting, the Government property on the premises was placed in my control and inventoried by me, and upon my requisition General Meigs transferred to the use of the Library building certain Govern- ment property no longer required in the construction of the Pension building of which he had charge. I ordered a new inventory to be made, from which I learned that other and large additions had been made to this species of property, -without my knowledge, and upon investigation ascertained that it had been procured from the officer in charge of the State, War, and Navy Department by Mr. Secretary Trainer, on his written request and his allegation that the trans- fers would promote" economy of public expenditures." How far from the truth this allegation of Mr. Trainer was is shown by the fact that the presence of the property thus acquired on the premises as Govern- ment property was concealed fwm me by its delivery to the contractor for the concrete work for his private use and profit. On discovering that this valuable property belonged to the Government I addressed the following letter to the commission: "WASHINGTON, D. 0., October 28,1887. 

"Hon. Commissioners for the Construction of the Congressional LibranJ Building: 

"GENTLEMEN: I haye recently caused an inventory to be made of the United States property upon the site of the Library building, and find among other articles the following: ''One concrete-mixer, complete, one coun ter-sha.ft, four boxes for shafts, 14 feet 5 inches rubber-belt gearing, one clutch, one belt-shifter, and one clutch-shifter, one hoisting engine with two drums and shafts complete, together with a full set of oil-cups attached, sixteen open wrenches (assorted), throttle-valve, belt, and steam-pump, complete; one upright boiler and fixtures, consisting of two H-inch globe-valves, one safety-valve, one steam-gau~e. three gauge-cocks, one check-valve, gauge-glass and cocks, one grate, one hoe, one hook, and one smoke-stack. 

"I have no information of the purchase or acquisition of these articles for the Library building. I would respectfully req nest to be informed if I am to be held responsible for t-heir safe-keeping. 1f so, I would point out that it would be well to furnish me with a list of articles so acquired, so that I may exercise proper authority as to their care. "I would further say that the articles in question constitute a. 'plant' for pre- paring a.nd laying concrete, and I am informed by the secretary (clerk) of the commission that they are now in the possession of the contractor for this work. In the bid made byl\Ir. Barnes, the contractor, and upon which he was awarded the contract, this plant was to have been furnished by himself. Had it been understood that the Government was to furnish the same the bids of the vari- ous com oetUors for the work would certainly have been lower. I mention this to you for the reason that the work is being done in the blaze of publicity, and the use of this Government 'plant' may possibly provoke unpleasant criti- cism. Again, is :Mr. Barnes to compensate the Government for the wear and tear of this plant? 

"Yours, yery respectfully, 

":J. L. S"!\!IT.HMEYER, 

"Architect OongressionatLibrary Building." llon. W. S. HOLMA.N, . 

Chairman of the Committee o.i_Investigation of the 

Oo1rgressionat Lib1·ary Building. 

In view of all these facts it becomes apparent that Commissioner Clark's testi- mony as given to your committee is unworthy of credence and is flagrantly col- ored by his desire to shield himself and 1\Ir. Trainer from the just consequences of their reckless conduct. Permit me to say in conclusion that I have assiduously endeavored to avoid dissensions, but have been unable to submi~ to official wrong-doing without protest. I regret that such protel!ts should have been necessary and have pro- voked toward me the hostility of parties interested adversely to the Govern- ment; but I am compensated for their assaults upon my character by the satis- faction of having performed my duty faithfully and with the approval of the majority of the Commission for the Construction of the Congressional Library Building. 

I am, with great respect, truly, yours, 

:J. L. Sl\IITHMEYER. UNITED STATES OF Ali:ERICA, Di.stl-ict of Columbia, ss: 

:J. L. Smitbmeyer, being duly sworn, upon oath doth depose and say that he prepared the foregoing statement and knows the contents thereof. That the facts therein stated nre true to the best of his knowledge and belief. 

Sworn and subscribed before me September 3, 1888. :r. L. SMITHl\lEYER. 

(SEAL.] AL VYN W. COLEMAN. Notary Public. 

The SPEAKER. Tbe Chair will call the attention of the gentleman 

from Pennsylvania to the fact that the communication mentions certain plans or diagrams. Does the gentleman desire to have them 

printed? 

lli. KELLEY. This is an extrac~ from the communication made 

to the commission. The diagrams accompanied the original commu- nication; but this is only an extract. 

The SPEAKER. Because the Chair was going to suggest that it 

would require n. special order to permit the printing of the diagrams in 

the RECORD. 

Mr. BLOUNT. 1\fr. Rpeaker, I desire to move an amendment to the 

resolution of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, making this a special 

committee. There is a committee at this time, as appears from the 

resolution, engaged in investigating the construction of the Library 

building, and directed to inquire into and make report upon that subject. It is a matter of very great importance, involving many millions 

of dollars. The action of the House on several occasions in this matter, 

in connection with the sundry civil bill, shows that the House regards 

the situation as to that building as exceedingly grave and well worthy 

of the investigation that is going on. I think, sir, so far n.s appears to 

this House, that the conduct of the legislation creating that plan, and 

involving the persons named in connection with it, discloses one of the 

most shameful performances I have ever known in my experience in 

connection with public affairs in this country. Now, at this stage, one of the gentlemen who is under inquiry seems to have suggested-or at 

least his friend bas thought proper to bring into this House a resolution investigating the action of members of Congress. 

1\Ir. KELLEY. I beg leave to interrupt the gentleman there. 

Mr. BLOUNT. Certainly. 

:Mr. KELLEY. This resolution is my own, and the result of my own 

cool, calm, and long-entert.'l.ined purpose to have this country know some of the facts that.came to my knowledge in the early days of this 

session. Mr. Smithmeyer nor any other man other than myself is responsible for the conception of the charge or the manner in which it 

has been made. I alone claim all the honor, and will assume all the 

discredit that may arise from it. 

Mr. BLOUNT. I take it that the statement of the gentleman from 

Pennsylvania is absolutely true--

Mr. KELLEY. It is. 

Mr. BLOUNT. And as such I accept it as absolutely true . . But I am not willing that at the very time this investigation is taking pla-ce 

of Mr. Smithmeyer and others connected with the building, that that 

committee shall now pause in their work and proceed to the investiga- tion of the character and disreputable and dishonorable conduct of any 

member or members on this floor. Tbat investigatiQD. should proceed 

steadily, and without any diversion to any other inquiry. If for any 

other purpose, sir, we should see fit to turn our attention to other investigations, or to an investigation in a new form, respecting the a-ction 

of this House, or of any member of the House-no matter who else may 

be investigated, this pending investigation and inquiry should proceed 

without interruption or delay. 

.Again, sir, I think it is due to this House, I think it is due to any 

member who may be involved in the charges under this resolution, 

that the most prompt and thorough action should be taken in reference 

to the matter. 

I am willing, and doubtless every other gentleman is willing, to act 

with the gentleman from Pennsylvania to ascertain whether or not 

there has been any improper action of any member of this House as indicated in this resolution; and if there is that the country should know 

it, and that this House shall take such action as shall purge its-own honor. These resolutions are not connected at all. Im·estigating the 

contracts in connection with the building does not relate necessarily "' 

to any member of this Honse. The improper conduct of any member 

of this House in relation to it may stand by itself. It is a single allegation, and I will read it, sir: 

Resolved, That the special committee engaged in investigating the construc- tion of the new Library building be directed to inquire-and report whethe:r any member of the House acting by or for himself or inconcertorcombination with others bas sought by persuasion, intimidation, or o ther currupt or improper means to influence or control the action of Mr. :r. L. Smithmeyer. 

It goes, sir, to the dignity of this House. The Speaker has ruled it 

in order, as a matter of the highest privilege, and this House ought to 

treat it as that privilege suggests, affecting the integrity of the House; 

and therefore, sir, I hope that the House will see that a select special 

committee may be appointed that the country may see that this whole 

House is just as eager as the gentleman from Pennsylvania to have it 

investigated, to have action, and to let the country know all about it. I 

move, sir, that instead of it being referred to the existing special com- mittee that the Chair be directed to appoint a committee of five mem- bers to investigate this allegation, and I move to strike out and insert 

so as to make it read as I have suggested. 

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Georgill mo1es to amend the 

resolution by striking out so much of it as directs the existing committee to make the investigation, and substitute in lieu thereof that a special commitiee of five members be appointed. 

Mr. HOLMAN. The hasty reading of this resolution and paper 

satisfies me that whoeyer investigates this subject will be compelled 

to go over much the same ground as that already gone over by the 
·, 

8260 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. SEPTEl\iBER 4, 

select committee appointed some months ago; and therefore I ask my 1\fr. BLOUNT. If that is all, then, Mr. Speaker, I submit my 

friend! if he thinks it better to appoint another committee, that the amendment to the House, and I now yield to the gentleman from Artestimony already taken before the Select Committee on the Library kansas [J\1r. ROGERS]. 

should be referred to the committee that he suggests. .Mr. KELLEY. I believe I have tb~ floor. Mr. BLOUNT. So much of it as relates to the object of this inquiry M:r. ROGERS. The gentleman from Georgia bas yielded to me. 

I think ought to be referred. It is a single question going to the in- The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Georgia [Ur. BLOU ""T] se- tegrity of the members on this floor. There is nothing tbat deserves cured the floor and offered an amendment, and is, of course, entitled 

the attention of this House more highly than that. . to the floor on that amendment, and he now yields to the gentleman 

1\fr. KELLEY. I wish my friend would pardon me for interrupting from Arkansas. 

him there. 1\fr. ROGERS. Mr. Speaker, to illustrate the propriety, and the 

Mr. BLOUNT. Certainly. wisdom as well, of the resolution offered by my friend from Georgia 

1\fr. KELLEY. He broadens my language to an extent that I have [Mr. BLOUNT], let me put the case in this way: Suppose it shall turn 

not contemplatecl when he makes it apply to members on this floor. out that the member of this House who is sought to be investigated is 

Mr. BLOUNT. The gentleman is at no disadvantage, for I ha•e a member of the special committee now conducting the Library invesread his resolution. tigation; we should then have the anomaly of the House of RepresentMr. HOLMAN. I must say to the gentleman from Georgia that I atives referring the subject-matter involving the conduct of a member 

think that he will find that the testimony taken by the select commit- of Congress to a committee of which that gentleman is a member, and 

tee, which is quite voluminous, ought to be before the committee we should have a me:g~.ber of this House acting upon a special com- which investigates the subject, as proposed by the pending resolution, mittee to investigate:himself! I insist, sir, that the proposition is an to avoid delay of going over the same ground again. The proposed anomalous one, such as probably never has been presented before in 

committee, I think, should have this testimony already taken referred the House. At all events, the member could not act with any degree 

to that committee. of propriety or decency upon u. committee which was investigating his 

Mr. BLOUNT. I would ask my friend what there is in the resolu- own conduct. 

tion, except that a certain member of this House is involved in the Mr. CRAIN. Might not the salJle difficulty arise in the case of the 

matter and the gentleman from Pennsylvania will be prepared at the appointment of a special committee, so long as the member to be inproper time t.o name the man. vestigated is not named? · · 

Mr. KELLEY. Yes. Mr. ROGERS. In response to that, it is to be presumed that the 

Mr. BLOUNT. Why should we not act upon it at once? gentleman f1·om Pennsylvania who offers this resolution of investigaMr. HOLMAN. I wish to say to my friend from Georgia that this tion will advise the Speaker before the special committee is appointed 

Library controversy is a subject that I have bad in some· measure of the name ofthe member proposed to be investigated, and it is to be 

under investigation, and I ought to know a little about it, and my presumed that the Speaker, in the organization of the special commitfriend from Wisconsin [Mr. CASWELL] ought to know ~omething about tee, will avoid the impropriety of placing upon it tlle member who is 

it, for he and I have been the only members that have been present sought to be investigated. Now, I do not know that this point can when the body of the testimony was taken: so that a.ll that will be have any application here, but if it should turn out in the way I l1ave 

necessary for him to accomplish his purpose, if he desires to have it supposed, what position would the House be in, as well as the mem- sent to another committee, will be to have it added to this resolution 1 her involved? 

that the testimony already taken before the present committee shall I 1\Ir. CRAIN. The member would have to withdraw from the corn- be transferred to that. mittee. That is all. 

Mr. ROGERS. Will t.he gentleman from Georgia permit me? Mr. ROGERS. Again, Mr. Speaker, if it is import..'lnt that the inMr. BLOUNT. The gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HoUIAN] has formation already obtained by the committee which bas been in•cstibeen very pleasant in his statement about me knowing all about the gating the subject-matter of the Library should be in the possession of 

question and very modestly assumed that he knew a little about it. I the committee making this :special investigation, the Speaker, in the 

have a very great respect for the gentleman from Indiana; bu1!_seem- organizationofthenewcommittee, wonlddoubtlessleaveoffthemember 

ingly harsh speech even in him will not deter me from doing what or members involved, so that the special committee would ba-Ye the 

seems to me a matter of duty. benefit of all the information that is now in possession of the old com- Mr. HOLMAN. No word has been dropped from my lips that would mit tee, and at the same time the difficulty I bn.ve pointed on t wonld 

justify the criticism that has been made by the gentleman from Georgia. be avoided. Therefore, sir, as a matter of propriet-y an,d of correct acI would not sa.y a word that would be offensive to him. If I have said tion upon the part of the House, I claim that this special committee 

any offensive word I take it all back. ought to be or~anized by the Speaker for the purpose of making this 

:Mr. BLOUNT. The gentleman from Indiana bas charge of this in- special investigation; and the Spea,kcr in the exercise of his discretion 

vestigation in the Library building and knows a little about it and all and wisdom will doubtless appoint a. con'imittce which -will make a the circumstances, and he seems anxious to get at this investigation. proper and thorough investigation. I now yield the flo0r ha.ck to the 

Thcl'efore I withdraw my proposition. gentleman from Georgia, if be desires it. 

Mr. HOLMAN. No, I disclaim that at once. 1\fr. KELLEY. 1\fr. Speaker-- . 

Mr. ROGERS. I renew it. Mr. BLOUNT. The gentleman from P ennsylYauia. (1Hl'. KELLEY] 

111r. HOLMAN. On the contrary, I would be very glad to have the seems to have lost his right to the floor by inadycrtence, and J nm not 

whole business t.urned over to some other committee. disposed to take any advantage ofhin1. 

Jl.l.r. BLOUNT. I withdraw my request to have a select committee The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Pennsylvani.n. yielded to the 

appointed. gentleman from Georgia [Mr. BL01JNT], and thereupon the. gentleman 

Mr. COX. I renew it. from Georgiao.ffered an amendment to the resolution: :md was of conrse ·ur. BLOUNT. I have no doubt, sir-and I say it in all kindness- entitled to the floor to speak to his amendment. 'Ihc Chair recognizes 

that t~e gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HoLl\IAN] is more thoroughly the gentleman from Pennsyhani:l as being still in contxol of the rcso· informed in relation to this very matter than other members of the lution and will recognize him when the gentleman u:om Georgia yieldS~ 

House. the floor. l\lr. HOL~IAN. No; I never heard an intimation of this before. .Mr. BLOUNT. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Cox] desires 

\Vbn.t I have heard here is all I know of it. a few minutes, and I now yield to him such time as hQ wislfcs. l\Ir. BLOUNT. But my friend has said, and I have no doubt prop- Mr. COX. Only a moment. It is very unf01twmte that our Li- cr1y sa.id, t:tat with the knowledge he has of the investigation that is tak- brary building, or its construction, bas been po··tponccl l>y this untoing place, the facts in possession of his committee will have to be turned ward busines£>. I would favor the amendment propo.seu by the genOYCr to the new committee, and I take his mroning to be that this in'- tleman from Georgia [1\Ir. BLOUNT], because I am told that this iuquiry ve tigatiou is already actually pending before his committee. There- involves some member of tbe Honse who is upon the commHtec of 

fore, having h:lfl that intimation from the gentleman from Indiana-- which the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HoLMAN] is chn.irmau. 

l\'Ir. HOLU:AN. No, my friend misapprehends me. I never heard Mr. KELLEY. I haYe not said so. of tl.lis particular matter before. But I can see at once that to make Mr. COX. It does not involve the gcutlcm:m from lndiana [Ur. 

the testimony upon this point applicable, it will be necessary for t,he HOLl\IAN]; we all know that. [Laughter.] The name of the member 

committee which investigates the subject to go over ground which has it does involve is going around in the House in a gossipy -way, and I 

been gone over alrea,dy in the main in the other investigation. am here fl> say for the man involved that he i-, entitled to a fair, clear, 

Mr. BLOUNT. We1l, if I misapprehended my friend from Indiana, and complete opportunity to meet anything that may be hrought 

for whom we all have such great respect, in supposing him to mean against him. 

that this very matter has incidentally come up before his own commit- !think a special committee will do that. In tile making 11p ofn.spccial 

tee-- committee the Speaker will of cour e have in view the selection or those 

Mr. TTOLMAN. Will my friend allo me to interrupt him again? who are familiar with the subject, and will he likely to pu~ upon tile 

I meant simply to say that I can see from the reading of this paper and committee ~entlemen who have already inYcs.tigated matters which are oftberesolution thattoreach thepointinvolvedhereitwould beneces- cognate with it. I think, however, the suggestion of the gentleman 

sary for the committee to go over the ground that has been gone over from Indiana is worthy of consideration; I meau his suggestion tba~ all 

already by our committee. the testimony already bken be ir~msfcrred to ihe special committe~ 

·-
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 8261 

which I think this House will probably organize. I therefore move as I Mr. WHIT~HORNE. In the mean time inj nstice may be done to a nn amendment-- great many members. 

Ur. BLOUNT. The gentleman will allow me tonskwhetherhedoes ¥r. COX. I do not see any objection to having the testimony alnotthink itpossible thatthetnrningoveroftbattestimonyto this com- ready taken·which has reference to this very business transferred to 

mittee might disclose matters not connected with this second investi- this new committee in order that it may have access to it and obtain 

gation and which onght not to be published at this time? from it such data as may be pertinent. 

Mr. COX. So far as concerns the testimony to be turned over to the Mr. KELLEY. One moment. The_testimony taken does not relate 

special committee, if it be appointed-- to the question of the exercise or attempted exercise of improper inMr. KELLEY. If I may be allowed, I think I can make a sugges- fluence by a member because the chairman of the committee, who has 

tion which will be satisfactory to both the gentlemen. Let the special been present at all these meetings, says he bad not heard such an incommittee be app9inted, and let it be made the duty of the chairman timation until he heard it from me on the floor. Therefore it is not the 

of the existing committee to send the name and address of every wit- same question. They are investigating the methods of construction, 

ness that has been examined before that committee to the chairman of good, bad, or indifferent, honest or dishonest; I allege that a member 

the new committee. This would give a clue to the sources of the evi- of this House has by improper conduct sought to control the material uence and to the people who are familiar with the business of this con- which should be put into that building, by influence, by favor or hosstr.uction, while it would lea>e the new committee free to examine its tility. · 

own witnesses. The examinations of the committee already organized Mr. OATES. I understand the geut.l man from Pennsylvania to 

have gone on practically in private. An investigation touching the sav-- highest privilege of the House, because involving the character and in- ltfr. COX. I will withdraw the amendment I intended to offer, but 

tegrity of a member thereof in his representative capacity, should be I think it is due to this House and due to members that the name of 

open. The party necnsed should be permitted to appear by counsel, the man who is implicated should be revealed. [Applause on the Demand if need be the party making the arraignment should be allowed to ocratic side.] 

conduct the investigation or name a competent person to do so. Mr. McCLAMMY. If anybody bas done anything let us know who 

Mr. WHITT HORNE. Will the gentleman from Pennsylvania yield it is. 

to me a moment? Mr. KELLEY. In matters of this kind my judgment and conscience 

Mr. KELLEY. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Cox] has the control me, and when the proper time comes to re>eal the name I will 

floor. do it. [Applause on the Republican side.] 

Mr. COX. I yield to tho gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HOLMAN] I demand the previous question on the resolution. 

if I have the right to do so. Mr. BLOUNT. I have the floor. So far as the statement of the 

Mr. HOLMAN. Mr. Speaker, the first intimation I had that any gentleman from Pennsylvania is concerned that be will at the proper 

gentleman connected with the committee was involved in any degree time reveal the name of the gentleman to whom he alludes; I think 

in the resolution offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania-- we can all afford to be content. I take it as a pledge which the genMr. KELLEY. I beg the gentleman to believe tbat I have made Heman will observe; and now in order that. we may proceed to some 

DO such suggestion. other business I will yield the floor so the gentleman may ask for the 

Mr. HOLMAN. It is made at any rate by the gentleman from New previous qne<;tion. 

York; and it is the first intimation I have had on that subject, beyond 1\Ir. KELLEY. I demand the previous question. 

what has been whispered around the Honse during the last twenty Mr. OATES. I wish to ask the gentleman from Pennsylvania this 

minutes. Under these circumstances, I can see myself the propriety qnestioll. I understood him to state awhile ago that it was intended 

of appointing another committee; and I think that course ought to be the member against whom this charge is made should be heard by 

pursued. counsel. Now, how can be appear by counsel when the gentleman 

I wish to suggest, however, that the testimony already taken, in order from Pennsylvania will not give his name? 

to be valuable, must be connected with this inquiry. I think there Ur. KELLEY. I say if the Chair will name the committee, if it is 

will be no embarrassment whatever in making this resolution a little to be a special one, that as soon as the vote is taken and I shall be sum- broader, so as to embrace the provisions of the original resolutions under moned I will give the name. If the business is to remain with the 

which the existing committee was appointed, making both subjects a existing committee--

matter of inquiry, and adopting also an amendment transferring to this Mr. ROGERS. I hope the Home will be informed just exactly what new committee the testimony heretofore taken, as the inquiry will it is we are called upon to vote. 

cover, to a large extent, the same ground. The SPEAKER. The Chair will have the resolution again read. 

Mr. O'NEILL, of Missouri. Is not your committee now investigat- The resolution was again read. 

ing this man Smithmeyer in connection with charges of improper con- Mr. ROGERS. I rise to a point of order. 

duct on his part? The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. 

Mr. HOLMAN. It is investigating the general subject. Mr. ROGERS. When the gentleman from Georgia withdrew his 

Mr. O'NEILL, of Missouri. The impression in this House among amendment for a special committee both the gentleman from 1\ ew York 

many members :!a that this man Smithmeyer has been charged with and myself renewed it. 

improper conduct in regard to certain contracts-cement contracts and The SPEAKER. Both could not. The gentleman from Xew York 

other contracts-and that your committee is now investigating him in renewed it, but,subsequently withdrew it. 

connection with that matter. Are you not? Ur. BLOUNT. I renewed it. 

Mr. HOLMAN. The subject embraces that, undoubtedly. Mr. COX. The gentleman from Georgia r enewed his own motion. 

Mr. O'NEILL, of Missouri. Then the investigation now proposed The SPEAKER. Which was to strike out so much of the resolution 

would not involve a stoppage of the investigation DOW going on by your as directs the existing committee to make the investigation and substicommittee. - tute in lieu thereof a l'lpecial committee to consist of fi. ve members. Mr. HOLM.iN. No; but let me suggest-- The Chair did not understand the gentleman to renew it, but he states 

Mr. 0' NEILL, of IYiissonri. The gentleman will pardon me. What he did. · 

I wanted to get at is that this man Smithmeyer shall not escape the Mr. ROGERS. Hear me a moment. [Cries of ''Regular ordrr ! " ] 

investigation by raising a charge of this kind that one of the members ~he SPEAKER. The regular order is demanded. 

has been following him up. Mr. ROGERS. I wish to offer an amendment which I think the 

Mr. HOLMAN. It is manifest, as my friend from Missouri must House will accept if it will bear it. 

concede, that if a member of the committee is involved in any charge Mr. KELLEY. I demand the:- previous question. 

of improper conduct, he ought not to act on the committee. · The SPEAKER. The ·question is first on the amendment of the 

Ur. O'NEILL, of Missouri. Certainly not. gentleman from Georgia. 

Mr. HOLMAN. No matter who might be on the committee, a mem- Mr. ROGERS. We will amend it to snit ourselves. It does not nit 

ber under any chargeofimproper conductofcourseshonld not be on the me as it is. 

committee. So that you would have to reorganize the committee in The House divided; and there were-ayes Dl, noes none. any event. Therefore I think this whole matter should be transferred So the previous question was ordered. 

to another committee as proposed. The question recurred on 1\fr. BLOUNT's amendment. 

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Co.x] has The amendment was agreed to; and the resolution a~ amended was the floor. adopted. · Mr. COX. The gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. WHITTHORNE] de- Mr. KELLEY. Ur. ·Speaker, !trust my name will not he included 

sires to ask a question. in the number of the special committee to be a~pointed by the Speaker. l\1r. WHITTHOH.NE. I think it due to the House and the country, I will have to appear before the -committee, and therefore it is improper as well as to every individual member, thatthe gentleman from Penn- that I should be a member of it. 

sylvania should name the member referred t in his resolution. I ask 

him to name that member. 

Mr. KELLEY. When the Hou e shall have taken action, when the 

committee shall have been appointed, and I shall have received notice 

when and where to meet it, I will make known the name of the person 

to whom I allude in that resolution-not until then. 

P UBLIC BUILDI.KG, DETROIT. 

Mr. CHIPMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to discharge 

the Committee of the ·whole Hon!'e on the state of the Union from the 

further consideration of tlle bill (H. R 9-147) to restore cert3.in money 

to the fund for erecting a public building at the city of Detroj t, and put 
8262 CONGRESSIONAL RECOR.D-HOUSE. SEPTE~IBER 4, 

it upon its passage. J will say this does not take a penny out -of the Mr. McCREARY. I move to dispense with the morning hour for 

Treasury. · • the call of committees for reports. 

The SPEAKER. The bill will be read, subject to the right of ob- The motion was agreed to. 

jection. Mr. McCREARY. I ask unanimous consent that members having 

The bill was read, as follows: reports to make may file them with the. Clerk. 

Whereas two lots of land in the city of Detroit, l\lich., contiguous to the pres- There was no objection. ent site of the post-office building in said city, were purchased by the Govern- _ ment as an addition to said site for the purpose of erecting a new public build- FILING OF REPORTS. 

in~~e~~~~~h!~~rchase-money paid for said lots was taken out of and deduct~d I T~.e following reports were filed by being handed in at the Clerk's 

from the amount appropriated for the erection of said building in said city; desk. 

and . . LANDS FOR QUA.RANTL""E PURrt')SES. Whereas the project of erecting said building on said lots bas been abandoned, and other lot& of land purchased for that purpose : Therefore, Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby directed to sell 

said two lots of land for a sum at least equal to the purchase price paid by the 

Government therefor, and to restore to the appropriation for said public building the amount re~ized from said sale. 

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the present consideration of 

this bill? 

llfr. BLAND. I think we had better have the report read. 

The report (by :Mr. NEWToN) was read, as follows: 

The Treasury Department acquired twolotsofland in the rear oftheexisting post-office in Detroit, for the purpose of erecting thereon a new public building, Afterwards a new site in a different part of the city was purchased and paid for, and the project of using the two lots and the old site abandoned. These two lots were paid for out of the appropriation to erect the new building at Detroit and 

cost SLIO,OOO, which the bill seeks to restore n.fter sale of the abandoned lots or so much thereof as the lots may sell for. 'Ve have no doubt that that is just, and recommend lhe passag-e of the bill. 

Mr. BLAND. I wish to ask the gentleman what, independent of 

the two lots proposed t.o be sold, is tbe amount of the appropriation 

made for the erection of this building? 

I\fr. CHIPMAN. We had an appropriation in all of something over 

$1,200,000, in one way or another. Does the gentlellliln mea.n what is 

the limit of the cost? 

Mr. BLAND. The total amount. 

l\fr. CHIP.M:AN. There was an appropriation of $500,000 originally, 

out of which they bought the two lots provided to be sold here, and 

afterwards abandoned the idea of using them. ~ 

Mr. BLAND. It is proposed to sell these lots and put the money in 

another public building? 

Mr. CHIPMAN. No; you arc mistaken. The money is to be devoted to the same building. 

1\fr. BLAND. Well, on the same lot. 

1\Ir. CHIPl\IAN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. OUTHWAITE. Let me a..k the gentleman if this does not 

amount to an appropriation of $500,000 additional. 

Mr. CHIPMAN. No, sir. 

Mr. OUTHW A.ITE. What is the value of these lots? 

1\Ir. CHIP:l'liAN. They paid $110,000 for the lots, and that amount 

was takenfrom theappropriation. Now wewant to sell these lots and 

put the money back into the appropriation to be applied to the building. 

Mr. COBB. When the act making the additional appropriation was 

pas ed, was not this purchase considered? · 

Ur. CHIPMAN. No, sir; it was taken out of the whole appropriation. 

.JHr. HOLUAN. I would like to ask the gentleman how long it has 

been since these lots were purchased. 

Mr. CHIPMAN. About three years. 

Mr. HOLMAN. In that event, the purchase having been so long 

ago, it seems to me that this property should be sold under an appraisement, with the provision that it shall not be sold for less than the appraised value. 

Mr. CHIPUAN. I h~l?e the gentleman will not insist upon that. 

It is not necessary. 

Mr. BLAND. I wish to ask a further question, whether or not this 

will increase the cost of the public building. 

1\Ir. CHIPMAN. No; not one cent. 

There being no objection, the bili was considered ancl ordered to be 

engrossed and read a third time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time, and passed. 

Ur. CHIP~1AN moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the 

table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

Mr. McCREARY. I demand the regular order. 

Mr. BRUMl\I. I rise to a question of privilege. 

The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. 

1\fr. BRUMM. I call the attention of the House to the fact that 

some three months ago or more certain charges were made and statements by my colleague, Hon. WILLIAl\1 L. SCOTT, as to the truth of a statement I had ma-de, and a. number of other statements. · My colleague agreed to be here to-day, and I should like to know if he is in 

the Hull? I do not see him in his seat. If he is not present I shall 

of course defer what I am abo,nt to say, but give notice that I shall call 

it up the very first time I meet him in the House. 

:Mr. PAYSON, from the Committee on the Pa blic.Lands, reported back 

favorably the bill (H. R. 10931) to donate and transfer to the State of 

Louisiana for quarantine purposes certain lands on the Mississippi River 

belonging to the United States, subject to reversion to the United States 

in the event of their non-usage for quarantine purpose , and requiring 

the proper department of the United States Government to execute the 

necessary transfer to the State of Louisiana on the condition aforesaid; 

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

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

EMMA F. READ. 

Mr. YODER, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, repor~ back 

favorably the bill (H. R. 5408) granting a pension to Emma F. Read; 

which was referred to the Committee of the Whole Rouse on the Private Calendar, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be 

printed"'"" 

JANE E. KNOBLE. 

Mr. YODER also, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, reported 

back favorably the bill (H. R. 10708) granting a pension to Jane E . 

Knoble; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole llouse on 

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

be printed. 

P. F. WARTERFIELD. 

1\fr. STONE, of Kentucky, from the Committee on War Claims, reported back favorably the bill (H. R. 11114) for the relief of P. F. 

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

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

to be printed. 

MATILDA COOK. 

l\Ir. STONE, of Kentucky, also, from th~ Committee on War Claims, 

reported back favorably the bill (H. R. 11190) for the relief of Matilda 

Cook; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on 

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

be printed. 

MONEY EXPENDED BY STATES IN AID OF THE GOVERN~lENT. 

:Mr. STONE, of Kentucky, also, from the Committee on ·war Claims. 

reported back favorably the bill (S. 3420) authorizing the Sec1·etary of 

War to ascertain what amountofmoney has been expended by the States 

of California, Oregon, and Nevada for milita,ry purposes in aid of the Governmentofthe United States during the war of the rebellion; which was 

referred to the Committee of the Whole House o:n the state of the Union, 

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

BRIDGES ACROSS MISSISSIPPI RIVER:" 

Ur. CRISP, from the Committee on Commerce, reported back favorably the bill (H. R. 11139) to authorize the building of a bridge or 

bridges across the Missi<>sippi River at La Crosse, Wis.; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, 

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

BRUNSWICK COLLECTION DISTRICT, GEORGIA. 

Mr. CRISP also, from the Committee on Commerce, reported hack 

favorably the bill (H. R. 11101) to include Sapelo Island in The .Brunswick collection district, in the State of Georgia; which was referred to 

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

printed. 

:Mr. STEELE, from the Committee on Military Affairs, reported Lack 

wit.h amendment .the joint resolution (S. R. 56) granting permission to 

officers and enlisted men members of the Military Order of the Loyal 

Legion of the United St..1.tes and of the Grand Army of the Republic 

to wear the badges adopted by those orders; which was referred to the 

House Calend.:<tr, and, with the accompanying report, ordered to be 

printed. 

PURCHASE OF GEN,ERAL SIIIELDS'S sv,·onDS. 

Mr. TOWNSHEND, from the Committee on Military Affairs, reported 

back favorably the joint resolution (H. Res. 20~) to construe nntl ddcrmine the amount to be paid by the Secretary of War in the following 

act of Congress passed at this session, namely: "An act to purchase of 

the widow and children of the late General James Shields certain 

swords;" which was referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, a~d, with the accompanying report, ordered to be 

printed. 

HENRIETTA WALDRON. 

Mr. THOMPSON, of Ohio, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, 

:reported back favorably the bill (H. R. 7344) granting a pension to 

•, 
' ' 

1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 8263 

Henrietta Waldron; which was referred to the Committee of the Whole 

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

ordere.cl to be printed. 

MARL.~DA W A.KEFIELD . REED. 

Mr. THOMPSON, of Ohio, also, from the Committee on Invalid Pensions, reported back favorably the bill .(H. R. 10791) granting a pension to Marinda W ake:field Reed; which was referred to the Committee 

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

ADVE:RSE REPORTS. 

Mr. THO:diPSON, of Ohio, also, from the Committee on Invalid 

Pensions, reported back adversely bills of the following titles, which 

were severally laid on the table: 

.A. bill (H. R. 3987) granting a. pension to Amelia T. Segwert; and 

A bill (H. R. 4010) granting a pension to Surg. Henry Gill. 

SARAH A. WOODBRIDGE. 

1\Ir. THOMPSON. of Ohio, also, from the Committee on Invalid 

Pensions, reported back favorably the bill (S. 3276) granting restoration 

of pension to Sarah A. Woodbridge; which was referred to the Committ.ee of the Whole House on the Private Calendar, and, with the ac- companying report, ordered to be print-ed. 

ENROLLED BILL SIGNED. 

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

they had examined and found duly enrolled a bill of the following 

title; when theSpeaker s1gned .the same, namely: 

A bill (H. R. 8310) to provide for the disposal of the Fort Wallace 

military reservation, in Kansas~ 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

The SPEAKER. The hour for the consideration of bills begins at 

twelve minutes after 1 oJclock, and the call rests with the Committee 

on Expenditures in the Interior Department, which has an unfinished 

matter before the House. 

Mr. O'NEILL, of Missouri. The gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. 

WASHINGTON] in charge of the pending bill is not in his seat at the 

moment, and I ask that the committee be passed over, retaining its 

right to the hour to which it is entitled. j Mr. McMILLIN. What is the pending bill? 

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report it. 

The Clerk read as follows: A bill (H. R.l54.8) to increase the efficiency of the medical division of the Pen~ 

sion Bureau. 

1\fr. McMILLIN. I have no objection to the request. 

There being no further objection, the request of Mr. O'NEILL, of 

1\fissouri, wai agreed to. 

The SPEAKER proceeded to call the committees. 

:Mr. HATCH. :Mr. Speaker, I do not think the members generally 

understand the object of this call. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair stated· distinctly that this hour is set 

ap~rt for the consideration of bills reported from committeE's, and that 

the call rested with the Committee on Expenditures in the Interior Department, which thereupon was by unanimous consent passed without 

losing its right. The Chair is now calling the committees f01: presentation of bills for consideration. 

l\1r. HERBERT. I would like to ask if the Committee on.Nava1 

Affairs bas been called? 

The SPEAKER. Not this morning. The Committee on Expenditmes in the Navy Department has just been called. 

ABOLITION OF CIRCUIT-COURT POWE:RS. 

~Ir. CULBERSON (when the Committee on the Judiciary was reached). I call up Senate bill 3234, a bill to abolish circuit-court 

powers of certain courts in the United States, and for other purposes. 

The bill was read, as follows: 

Be it enacted, etc., That there shall be, and is hereby, established a circuit court of t.he United States in and for the western district of Arkansas, for the northern 

district of .Mississippi (and for the western district of South Carolina.), respectively, as the said districts are now constituted by law. And said circuit courts, respectively, shall be held at the times and places now provided by law for the 

holding of the district courts in said districts, respectively, and also at Helena., 

in the eastern district of Arkansas, at the same tilne the district court is now held. 

SEc. 2. That said circuit courts, respectively, shall have and exercise, within 

their respective districts, the same original and appellate jurisdiction as are or may be conferred by law upon the other circuit courts of the United States. 

And all suits, causes, and proceedinga now pending in the said several respective district courts (and in the district court of the district of West Virginia), in 

and concerning which the said district courts exercise circuit-court powers, shall 

be transferred to and belong to the jurisdiction of said circuit courts, respect- ively, and shall be proceeded with accordingly. 

SKc. 3. That there shall be appointed for each of said circuit courts in this act mentioned, by the circuit-court judge of the circuit, a. clerk, who shall take the 

oath and give the bond required by law for clerks of circuit courts, who shall 

discharge all the duties and be entitled to all the fees and emoluments pre- scribed by general law. And the United States marshals of said respective districts shall act as marshals of said circuit courts, and the United States district 

attorneys for said re pective districts shall discharge the duties of said district 

attorneys in said circuit courts. SEa. 4. That said circuit courts, respectively, shall have power to make such 

ordcr!!l and directions as shall be proper for the transfer from said district courts of all causes, proceedings, matters, records, files, and papers as by force of this act should belong to the said circuit courts. 

SEc. 5. That the provisions of the act entitled "An net to amend sections 533, 

556,571, and 572 of the Revised Statutes of the United States relating to courts in 

Arkansas and other States," approved Jn.nmtry 31, 1877, conferring upon the 

district court for the eastern district of Arkansas, held at Helena, circuit-court powers, and section 571 of the Revised Statutes of the United States be, and the same are hereby, repealed: and all causes, suits, proceedings, records, files, and papers in matters now pendinb iu such district cou-rt at Helena (an d in the district court of the district of West Virginia), in or under the exercise of circuit powers or jurisdiction, shall be remo•ed and transferred to the circuit court for 

the eastern distl"ict of Arkansas (and for the district of West Virginia, t·espectively,) in the same manner and with the snme effect as is hereinbefore in this act provided in respect of said other districts. SEC. 6. That whenever grarld or petit jurors are summoned for service in snid courts in said respective districts in this act named they shall be the grand and 

petit jurors for both said circuit and district courts so held at the same time and 

place. 

The amendment proposed by the committee "as read, as follows: 

That hereafter in all cases tried before any circu,it court of the United States, or before any district court having circuit powers, the judgment of such court may, upon the application of the defendant, be re-examined and reversed or affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States upon a writ of error, granted under such rules and regulations as said court may prescribe. 

Mr. CULBERSON. I yield the floor to the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. ROGERS]. 

Mr. ROGERS. In redraughting this su bsti tu te by inadvertence I left 

out the word " capital" before the word "cases" in the :first line, and 

in order that the bill•may be presented properly to the House, I ask 

that that be inserted. 

The amendment to t,he amendment of the committee was agreed to. 

l\fr. ROGERS. The purpose of the J udicia.ry Committee was to sub- stitute this single section for the Senate bill, and if the section as it 

would now read is not explicit enough as an explanation, then I will 

explain anything further that may be necessary; but unless some one 

asks for it, I hope the House will now take a vote. 

Mr. BLAND. I think we ought to have the bill explained. 

11fr. ROGERS. Very well. This is the same question which was up some time ago, when the House provided for an appeal from circuit courts and from district coarts exercising certain pow.ers in capital cases: so that when parties are tried for capital offenses and are sentenced to be condemned to death they may as a. matter of right have a writ of error to the Supreme Comt ofthe United States for the purpose of reviewing the law. That is all there is in the bill. I do not 

know of but one thing that need be mentioned in addition to that, and 

that is this: As to the probable increase of cases that might reach the 

Supreme Court, I think tliey wonld probably be forty in the course of 

the year, possibly half of that number; and as between the increase of 

that business arid the humanity that is embraced in this bill it does seem to me that the humanity ought to prevail. I have always held 

that no man ought to be condemned to death in any country without 

having a writ to some supreme court to review the law other than that 

which has passed upon his case at nisi prius. The writs of error will 

be provided under this bill in the same way as now provided for in all 

other cases. The amendment of the committee as amended was agreed to; the 

bill as amended was ordered to a third reading, and it was accordingly 

read the third time, and passed. 

l\Ir. ROGERS moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the 

table, 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

ADDITIONAL MODE OF TAKING DEPOSITIONS. 

Mr. CULBERSON. I now call up the bill (S. 832) to provide an additional mode of taking depositions of witnesses in causes pending in 

the courts of the United States. 

Mr. BRUMM. I rise to a pnvileged question. If the Chair will re- member, before the motionofj;he gentleman from Arkansas was made, 

which was in order, I rose and I simply wanted the Chair to indicate and 

ask the gentleman whether he intended to make such a motion. I 

was willing to let the gentleman do that; and then the Chair recognized the gentleman from Texas. -

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair woul,d ask the gentleman 

from Pennsylvania whether he desires to interrupt the proceedings 

during this hour for the consideration of bills. 

Mr. BRUMM. I do not, if I may be recognized after this hour is 

passed. 

l\Ir. CULBERSON. I call up Senate bill 832. The bill was read, as follows: 

Be it enacted, etc:., That in addition to the mode of taking the depositions of 

witnesses under dedimus potestatem or otherwise now provided by law, in causes pending at la.w in the district and circuit courts of the United States, it shall be lawful for such courts to make rules and regulations allowing the taking of depositions or testimony under dedimus potestatem or otherwise as near as Inay be, according to the mode prescribed by the laws of the State in which 

the courts are held. 

The amendment offered by the committee was read, as follows: 

That in addition to the mode of taking depositions of witnesses in causes pending at law or inequity in the district and circuit courts of the United States it shall be lawful t.Q- take depositions or testimony of witnesses in the mode pre- scribed by the laws of the State in which the courts are held. 

Mr. CULBERSON. I will now yield to the gentleman from Alabama TMr. OATES]. 

-
8264 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--LHOUSE. SEPTE1\IBER 4, 

Mr. OATES. I will nsk that the report be read. It is very short, 

and it states the fact as well as I could. 

The report (by Mr: OATES) was read, as follows: 

The Committee on the .Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill (S. 832) to provide an additional mode of taking depositions of witnesses in causes pending in the courts of the United States, having had the same under consideration, r eport: 

'l'he main purpose of the bill is to invest the district and circuit courts of the United States with the discretion of making rules for the taking of depositions of witnesses in causes at law pending in their respective courts independent of the method prescribed by the United Slates statutes. and the latter part of the bill, which prescribes that theae rules, as near as may be, shall conform to the laws of the States in which such courts are h eld, is merely directory and not obligatory; in other words, if enacted into law its only effectwot1ld be to invest the courts with power and authority, in theiJ· discretion, to make what eYer rules tlwy deem proper for the taking of depositions of witnesses in cases at law. It 

follows, that under its provisions two district courts in the same State might have different rules, or a district and a circuit court held at the same place might have difl'e rent rules touching the same subjectr-IDli.tter, which might produce 

great confusion, uncertainty, and inconvenience. Your committee therefore recommend that said bill be amended by striking out all after the enacting clan e, and inserting the following: ''That in addition to the mode of taking depositions of witnesses in causes pending at law or in equity in the district and circuit courts of the United States, it shall be lawful to take the depositions or testimony of witnesses in the mode prescribed by the laws of the State in which the courts are held." And lhus am~nded your committee recommend the passage of the bill. 

1\fr. OATES. The report explains the nec~sity for the passage of 

this bill and tor the amendments submitted. It points out the objection to the bill as pm>sed by the Senate, and I ask that the bill be put 

on its 'third reading and passage. 

The amen<hnent of the committee was adopt-ed. 

Mr. UACDONAJ..D. I wanted to ask the gentleman in charge of 

the bill if the object of this substitute is to secure uniformity in taking 

testimony. · Mr. OATES. It is to secure uniformity and provide an additional 

mode. 

The bill as amended was ordered to a third reading; and it was accordingly read the third time, and passed. 

Mr. OATES moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was 

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

table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

l\Ir. OATES. I think it would be proper to ask a conference with 

the Senate on this matter, because the House passed a bill similar to 

this before and there is a manifest disagreement. I will therefore 

inquire if it is in order to ask a conference with the Senate. This is an amendment of their bill by striking out all after the enacting clause. 

It will come to that in tbe end, and that is the reason why I ask the 

committee on conference now. 

The :SPEAKER pro te1npore. The gentleman from Alabama asks that 

the House insist upon itB amendment to the Senate bill and request 

a conference with the Senate. If there be no objection, the conferees, 

will be appointed during the day. 

There was no objection; and it was so ordered. 

BEFUND OF ADDITIONAL TOBACCO TAX. 

Mr. CULBERSON. I call up the bill (H. R. 11258) for the relief 

of certain persons who paid additional taxes assessed against them 

under the act of March 3, 1875. This bill has been upon the Calendar, and I ask unanimous consent that the Committee of the Whole be 

discharged from the further consideration of the bill, and that it be 

considered in the House as in Committee of the Whole. I will state 

it is a very short bill. 

There was no objection. 

The bill was read, as follows: 

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary ofth:e Treasury is hereby authorized and directed, out of any moneys in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, within two years after the appro"al of this act, to pay to any persons who may present their claims to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue such sums of money, re- spectively, as they shall show to said Commissioner to have been severally 

paid by them, or the persons whom they legally represent, as an additional tax on tobacco, cigars, or cigarettes. which they sold or removed for sale or con- sumption, on the 3d day of March, 1875. 

Mr. CULBERSON. I yield the floor to the gentleman from North 

Carolina [Mr. HE...~DERSON]. 

Mr. HENDERSON, of North Carolina. I ask for the reading of the 

report. 

The report (by :ltfr. HE...~DERSON, of North Carolina) is as follows: 

The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 11039) for the relief of certain persons who paid additional taxes assessed against them under the act of March 3, 1875, submit the following report: An act of Congress of 1.\iarch 3, 1875, increased the internal-revenue tax on to- bacco from 20 cents to 24 cents per pound. The law contained the express pro- viso that it "shall not apply to tobacco on which the tax under existing laws shall have been paid when this act takes effect." A great many persons pur- chased stamps to pay all the taxes which had accrued on their t-obacco, cigars, and cigarettes, but did not affix the stamps to the same until March 3, 1875. The Commissioner of Internal Revenue ruled that there were no fractions of a 

g.a~~~~~~~ei~=~~ rn~~~a't~.:::u~~t~~!~~rt~~r~:o~~;~tx fol\~:rl~! funded, in case this bill becomes a law. at not exceeding $l00,000, and he sug- gests certain chavges in the bill which have been concurred in by the com mit- t~. In accordance therewith the committee recommend the adoption of the accompanying substitute and that the original bill (II. R. 11039) do lie upon the table. 

[Mr. HENDERSON, of North Carolina, withholds his remarks for reviiion. See APPENDIX.] 

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time; and bejng 

engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time, and passed. 

1\lr. HENDERSON, of North Carolina, moved to reconsider the vote 

by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to recon· sider be laid upon the table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

SAl'tiUEL I. GUSTIN. 

Mr. CULBERSON. I call up bill R. R. 10919, to make valid a deed 

ts:> a certain tract of laud in Bibb County, Georgia, made anddeliveren 

by Brig. Gen. Davis Tilson, acting assistant commissioner of the Freedmen's Bureau, to Samuel I. Gustin: his heirs and assigns, and I ask 

unanimous consent that the Committee of the Whole House on the 

state of the Union be discharged from the further cousiderat.ion of the 

bill, and that it be· considered in tbe House as in Committee of the 

Whole. 

There was no oQjection, and it was so ordered. 

The bill was read, as follows: 

Be it enacted, etc., That the title conyeyed by deed from Do. vis Tilson, brigadier- general of -volunteers and acting assistant commissioner of the Freedmen's .Bm·eau, on the 27th day of April;-1866, to Srunuel I. Gust.in, of the county of Bibb, State of Georgia, to 4acres 1 rod o.nd 10 perches of land situated in said county and State, being a part of the 20-acre lot number 8 in the 1\Iacon re- serYe, west of the Ocmulgee River, and further known as a part of that portion of said lot which H. I. Peters and Jacob Russell deeded to Samuel P. 1oorc in his capacity of surgeon-general of the Confederate States, is hereby con finned to, and whatever right or interest which the United States may be supposed to have in said described tract of land is hereby gmnted and released to the said Samuel I. Gustin, his heirs or assigns. Sxc. 2. That all laws and parts of laws militating against this act be, and the same are hereby, repealed. 

1\fr. CULBERSON. I yield now to the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. 

STEW.A.BT]. 

1\Ir. STEWART, of Georgia. 1\Ir. Speaker, I desire to explain very 

briefly the object of this bill. During the existence of the Confederate 

government, it. purchased a tract of land in Bibb County for the purposes of au arsenal. After the close of the war the property was taken 

charge of by the Freedmen's Bureau, and later General Tilson, who 

was acting assistant commissioner of the Freedmen's Bureau, made a deed of the property to Mr. Gustin. The question has a1isen as to the 

authority of General Tilson to make that deed. The Government has 

the money which was '[laid for the property, and the present 'owners 

sil:pply desire to have the deed made by General Tilson validate...d by 

this act. 

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and rea-d a third time; and 

being engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time, and passed. 

Mr. STEW ART, of Georgia., moved to reconsider the vote by which 

the bill was pa.<:Sed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be 

laid on the table. 

The _latter mo_tion was agreed to. 

CIRCUIT AND DISTRICT COURT AT JOHNSON CITY, TENN. 

Mr. CULBERSON. I now call up a bill (H. R. 11087) to establish a. circuit and district court at Johnson City, Tenn. 

The SPEAKER pro tfmpore. That bill, the Chair is informed, is 

upon the Calendar of the Committee of the Whole House on the state 

of the Union. 

Ur. CULBERSON. It ought to be upon the House Calendar, and I 

now ask unanimous consent that the Committee of the Whole House on. the state of the Union be discharged from the further consideration 

of the bill, and that it be considered in the House as in committee. 

There was no objection, and it was so odered. 

The bill was read, as follows: 

Be it enacted, etc., That a term of the circuit court and of the district court for the east.ern district of Tennessee shall be held at Johnson City, in said State, in each year, on the first Mondays of May and November after the passag,e of this act. That the &'l.id courts shall be known as the mountain division of the eastr- ern district of Tennessee, and shall consist of the following counties, to wit: Johnson, Carter, Unicoi, Sullivan, Washington, Greene, Hawkins, nod HRn· cock; but no additional clerk or marshal shall be appointed in said di trict. That said courts shall be held by the circuit and district judges now assigned to hold the courts of the eastern district of Tennessee. SEC. 2. That the clerks of the circuit and district courts of the ea. tern district of Tennessee, and the marshal and district attorney for said district, shall per- form the duties pertaining to their offices, respectively, for said court ; and lhe said clerks and marshals shall each appoint a deputy t<> reside and keep their offices in the said Johnson Oity, and who shall, in the absence of their principals, do and perform all the duties appertaining to their offices, respectively. SEC. 3. That all suits not of a local nature in the circuit and di trict courts ago.inst a single defendant, inhabitant of said State, must be brought in the di- vision of the district where he resides i but if there are two or more defendants residing in different divisions of the dtstrict such suits may be brought in either division. All issues of fact in said suit shall be tried at a term of the court held in the division where the suit is so brought . . SEC. 4. That all prosecutions for crimes or offenses heretofore committed in any of the counties composing said mountain division shall be tried at Knox- ville, as now provided; but all crimes or offenses hereafter committed in any of the counties composing said mountain division shall be cognizable within said monntain division. '.rhat all grand and petit jurors summoned to attend for service in said division shall be residents of the same. SEc. 5. That all cases of removal of suits from the courts of the State of Ten- nessee to the courts of the United States in the eastern district of Tennessee such removal shall be to the United States court in the division in which the county is situated from which the removal is made, and the time within which the removal shall be perfected, in so far as it 1·cfers to or is regulated by the terms of the United States courts, shall be deemed to refer to the tel'lns of the United States c ourts in such division. That each of said courts shall be held in a building to be provided for that purpose by the State or municipal authorities, and witl!out expense to the United States. 

,' 
1888. CONG·RESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 8265 

SEc. 6. That this act shall be in force from and after the 1st day of l't!a.y, A. D. 1889; and all acts and parts of acts inconsistent with the provisions of this act be, and the same are hereby, repealed. 

1\fr. BUTLER moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was 

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

table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

WITNESSES IN UNITED STATES COURTS. 

Mr. CULBERSON. I call up the bill (H. R. 10182) to amend an 

act entitled "An act to make persons charged with crimes and offenses · competent witnesses in the United States and Territorial courts." 

The bill was read: as follows: 

Be il enacted, etc., That an act entitled "An act to make persons charged with crimes and offenses competent witnesses in the United ~tates and Territorial courts," approved March 16, 1878, be, and the same is hereby, amended as fol- lows, to wit: By adding thereto the following words: "And no person shall be disqualified as a witness in any criminal prosecution by reason of his interest in the event of the same n.s a party or otherwise, or by reason of his conviction of any crime, but such interest or conviction may be shown for the purpose of affecting his credibility." · 

Mr. CULBERSON. I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. · ROGERS]. 

Mr. ROGERS. llfr. Speaker, the bill, I think, explains itself, and I 

move that it be put upon its passage. 

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time, and passed. 

Mr. ROGERS moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was 

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

table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

DEALERS IN COUNTERFEIT MONEY. 

Mr. CULBERSON. I now call up the bill (H. R. 9268) to punish 

dealers and pretended dealers in counterfeit money and other fraudulent devices for using the United States mails, and I yield to Mr. 

SENEY. 

The bill was read, as follows: 

Be it enacted, elc., That any person who shall knowingly deposit, or cause to be C.eposited, in any po~troffice, letter-box, or other receptable for the United States mail, any letter, circular, or other communication addressed to any other person, offering or proposing to sell, give, deliver, or transfer, to any person, any imitation of any coin, bill, note, bond, or other security of t.he United States, or bank notes, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable by .a fine of not more than $1,000 and by imprisonment at hard labor fot• not more than three years. 

Mr. SENEY. I move that the bill be put upon its passage. 

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a. third time; and bein~ engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time, and passed. 

Ur. SENEY moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was 

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

table. 

The latter motion was agreed to. 

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS. 

Mr. CULBEHSO~. I call up the bill (H. R. 8344) to prevent cruelty 

to domestic animals. 

The bill was read, as follows: 

Beilenacted, etc, Thntany person within the District of Columbia or Territories of the United States who overrides, overdrives, overloads, drives when over- loaded, tortures, torments, deprives of necessary sustenance, cruelly beats, muti- late.<~, or cruelly kills, or causes or procures to be overridden, overdriven, over- loaded, driven wb.en overloaded, tortured, tormented, deprived of necessary sustenance, cruelly beaten, mutilated, or cruelly killed, any domestic animal, and whoever, having the charge o.r custody of any such animnl, either as owner ot· otllerwise, inflicts unnecessary cruelty upon the same, or fails to provide the same with proper food, drink, or protection from the weather, or cruelly drives the same when unfit for labor, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and must·, on conviction, be fi:-:ed not exceeding SlOO, and, upon failure to pay the same aud cost, shall be imprisoned or sentenced to hard labor for not exceeding one hundr~d days. . ' SEc. 2. That it sllall be the duty of any officer of the law, and shall be lawful for any other person, to arrest and take before any commissioner, jadge, or justice of tile peace any person violating the provisions of this act, sud noon the con\iction of the person so arrested, the officer or person making the arrest shall be entitled to $3, to be taxed and collected as a part of the cost; and any execu- tive officer of the District of Columbia or Territories of the United States, who fails or n eglects to arrest any person who violates any of the provisions of this act in his presence, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon convic- tion thereof, shall be fined not exceeding $100,and, on failure to pay it, shall be liable to ramoval from his office. 

The committee recommended amendments as follows: 

Between the words" who" and" overrides," iu line 4, of section 1, insert the following: "Individually or as member or employe of any corporation." Also amend section 2 by inserting between the words" act'' and" and," in line 4, the following: "Whereupon such proceedings shall be had as in other cases of misdemeanor." And thus amended your committee recommend the passage of the bill. 

The amendments were agreed to. 

Mr. CULBERSON. I yield to the gentl~man from Alabama [Mr. 

OATES]. 

Mr. OATES. 1\fr. Speaker, those who have listened to the reaQ.ing 

of the ~ill certainly understand it, ·and I do not believe that any one 

can make any objection to it. I ask that the bill be put upon its pas- sa.ze. 

Mr. BLAND. I desire to offer an amendment to that bill. I think 

the greatest cruelty to animals that is practiced in this city is perpetrated by the street car companies in attaching but one horse.to a dreet 

car, and there is no way ofpreventing cruelty to animals while that is 

permitted to continue. I would, therefore, make it unlawful and punishable, and I desire to offer an amendment to cover that point. 

1\fr. O.A TES. If the bill does not cover just such cases as that, then 

the Judiciary Committee can not prepare one that does. If tho gentleman will examine the bill he will see that oyerloading aud over- driving are expressly mentioned. ' 

l\fr. BLAND. But 1 want the bill to mention this expressly a being a case of overloading and overdriving. In this city I have seen one horse attached to a street car, driven along and whipped until the poor 

animal fell dead. It is a disgrace to Congress that such thinga should 

t.:'l.ke place. I think this is the time and the place to make it unlawful 

to drive a street car on any of these roads with less than two horses. 

The ~PEA.KER p1·o tempore. The Chair will state to the gentleman 

from Missouri that the bill is open to amendment. The Clerk · will 

read the report of the committee which submits, as the Chair is informed, several amendments. . The report (by Mr. OATES) was read, as follows: 

The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred House bill 8314, having had the same under consideration, report the same back with amendments, as follows: · Between the words "who" and ''overrides,'' in line 4 of section l, insert the following: "lndividually or ns member or employe of any corporation." Also amend section 2 by inserting between the words "act" and "an l," in line 4, tbe following: "Whereupon such ptoceedings shall be bad as iu other cases of misdemeanor." · And thus amended your committee recommend the passage of the bi 11. It shows upon its face that its purpose is to prevent by adequate punishments 

cruelty to domestic animals, and defines with accuracy and certainty what shall be considered cruelty and the mode and weasure of punishment. To in- flict cruelty upon domestic animals is an act so mean and despicable t!:tat it needs no further comment or argument to sustain this bill. Some humani- tarians think that the criminal laws should be so extended as to prevent c:uelty to all animals, those which are jerre nattwre as well as domestic, whi ch might be very tough on huntsmen. Your committee think that this bill goes far enougl1. 

:Mr. OATES. I ask a vote on the amendments of tho committee. 

The amendments stated in the report were agreed to. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Missoari will now send up his amendment. 

Mr. BLAND. I move to amend by adding to the bill the clause 

which I ask the Clerk to read. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

And it shall be conclusive evidence of- overloading to drive less than two horses to oue car in the District of Columbia; and the using of less than two horses is hcTeby declared unlawful. 

Mr. 13L.AND. Now, Mr. Speaker, under this amendment there can 

be no mistake about the law and the evidence of its violation. 

Mr. OATES. I quite agr~e with the gentleman from Missouri that 

the case he intends to cover, if it be that of overioading, is one of 

cruelty; but it is amply provided for in the bill, which is general in 

its provisions, while the amendment is in the nature of mere local legislation, a species of legislation which is frequently the subject of con- demnation by the courts: especially when framed in severe and harsh 

terms, which it is not best to adopt except where absolutely necessary. 

I would like the gentleman from Missouri to withdraw his amendment, 

because the case which he really intends to cover is, in my opin~m and 

in the opinion of the Committee on the .Judiciary, covered fully by 

the bill. The measure of evidence provided in the amendment is improper legislation. I will state, for the information of the gentleman 

and the House, that this question was raiserl in the committee when 

the bill first came up for consideration on the first report of the subcommittee, and it was re-referred to the subcommittee for investigation, and the amendments which have been a.dopt.ed were the result. 

Mr. BLAND. Mr. Speaker--

Mr. BREWER addressed the Chair. 

The SPEA.KER pro ternpore. The Chair will recognize the gentle· man from Michigan in a moment. • 

Mr. BLA.ND. Mr. Speaker, thia bill, it is true, is general in its 

character. So far as this District is concerned, and so far as concerns 

the question of using one horse or two hor'3es for the drawing of a street car in this District, it is so general that it will be of no effect unless 

this amendment be adopted. The amendment makes it perfectly clear 

that the use of less than two horses to a. car shall be unlawful; it makes 

this fact indisputable e>idence of overloading. It is a shame and an outrage that Congress for the last twenty years has permitted this 

cruelty to animals as well as cruelty to the public on the pa.rt of 

these street-car companies. 

Mr. OATES. I move the previous qmsti(m on the pending runendment and on ordering the bill to be engrossed aud read a. third time. 

Mr. BREWER addressed the Chair. 

The SPEAKER p-ro tempore. The gentleman from .Alabama [Mr. 

OATES] had not yielded the floor, and now calls the previous question. 

Mr. CASWELL. The only way to pass this bill is to do it instantly, as in a few minutes the hour will expire. 

The previous question was ordered, and under the operation thereof 

the amendment of Mr. BLAND "'as adopted, there. being-ayes 21, 

noes 19. 

The bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and read a third 
• 

~8266 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. SEPTEMBER 4, 

time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time, and 

passed. 

Mr. OATES moved to l'econsider the vote by which the bill was 

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

table. · The latter motion was agreed to. 

.JURISDICTION OF DISTRICT AND CIRCUIT COURTS. 

Mr. CULBERSON. I call up the bill (H. R.1873) to limit the jurisdiction of the district and circuit courts ofthe United States. 

'The bill was read, as follows: 

Be it enacted, etc., That the district a n d circuit courts of the United States shall not take original cognizance of any suit of a civil nature, either at common law or in equity, between a corporation created or organized by. or under the laws 

of any ~tale and a citizen of any State in which such corporation at the time the cause of action accrued may have been carrying on any bus'iness authorized by 

the l[lW cre.<tting it, except in cases arising-under the patent or copyright laws, 

and in like cases in which said courts are authorized by this act to take original 

cognizance of suits between citizens of the same State; nor shall any such suit 

between such a corporation and a citizen or citizens of a State in which it may be doing business be removed to any circuit court of the United States, except 

in li!;:e cases in which such removal is authorized by the foregoing provision 

in suits between citizens of t}le same State. 

The amendments reported by the Committee on the Judicia.ry were 

read, as follows: 

In line 11 strike o ut the words "by tWs uct." In lines 16 a nd 17 strike out the words "foregoing provision" and insert "exist.in,blaw." 

Mr. ADAMS. I wish the gentleman from Texas [Mr. CULBERSON] 

would ask unanimous consent that the hour, which is now within a 

few minutes of its expiration, be considered as having expired·, so that 

we may discuss this bill to-morrow. It is a very important subject 

and will occupy considerable time. 

The SPEAKER pro tempou. There is but one minute of the hour 

remaining. _ Mr. CULBERSON. This is a very important bill, and I am perfectly willing to accede to the gentleman's suggestion. 

Mr. ROGERS. I hope the report may be printed in the RECORD, so 

that gentlemen may examine it. ~I:r. ADAMS. That is right; and let the views of the minority of 

the committee be also printed. 

Mr. ROG-ERS. Let the majority and the minority report be printed 

in the RECORD. 

'1 he SPEAKER p1·o tempore. Unanimous consent is asked that the 

report of the committee and the views of the minority on this bill be 

printed in the.RECORD. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, 

and it is so ordered. e 

Mr. CULBERSON, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following report: The Committee on the Judiciary, having had House bill No.1873 under con- side ration, recommend its passage with the following amendments: 

1. Strike out the words •• by this act," in the eleventh line. 

2. Strike out the words "foregoing provision," in the sixteenth and seven- teenth lines, a.nd insert in their stead the words" existing law." 

'.rhe object of this bill is not to interfere with the privilege of corporations to bring snits in the United States courts in cases arisiug under the Constitution or ln.ws of the United States or treaties made by their authority, but to withdraw juri diction from the district and circuit courts of the United States of any suit of a civil nature at law or in equity between a corporation created under 

the Ja11Vs of any State and a citizen of any State in which such corporation at the< time the cause of action accrued may llave been carrying on any business 

authorized by the law creating it. T he committee believe that a corporation that pursues its business in a State or S tates othe r than tha t in which it was organized ought to be regarded as a citizen of such State or States for judicial purposes. 

VIEWS OF THE JIIT!i"ORITY. 

Tho effect of this bill if enacted into law would be that a corporation organ- ized under t he laws of Iassachusetts, which- at the time when the cause of ac- tion accrued was carrying on in the State o( Missouri any business au~horized 

by its charter, could not sue a citizen of Missouri in the Federal courts. It need not appear, in order to give the a.ct effect and compel the dismissal ot a suit for want of jurisdiction, that the corporation was carrying on any busi- ness in l\fis o11ri at the time when the suit was commenced; it may have been a stranger in :1\fissouri for years ; nor need it appear that it bas eYer carried on business in the district where the suit is brought; its business and agency may have been in a different part of the State. Yet it could not maintain a suit in 

the F ederal courts. Nor is there any definition in the act of the phrase "carrying on any business." 

The phrase is so general that the act would practically amount to an exclusion 

of c rporations from the Federal courts in suits where the ground of jurisdiction · s that the suit is a controYersy between citizens of different States. Even if tlle phrase" carrying on any business " were to be strictly construed to be the 

keep ing an office and local agents in the State where the defendant resides, there appears to be no sound reason why the Federal courts should be closed 

against a non-resident co1·poration having a resident agency, while they are open to non-resident corporations not having such an ag~ncy, and to non-resided't partnerships and individuals whether they have a like resident agency or 

not. T he purpose of the constitutional provision that the judicial power shall ex- tend to controversies between citizens of different States was to protect the non- .resident litigant against local prejudice. How far this protection is needed we need not discuss. If it is not needed a t all, we might as wen take away from Federal jurisdiction all controversies between citizens of different States. 

J:f it is needed by any non-resident litigant it is surely needed as much by a non-resident corporation as by a non-resident partnership firm or a non-resident 

individual. The dangerous aggregations of corporate power which have in many instances occurred in this country ought not to make us forget that in a large majority of cases the formation of manufacturing and other business cor- porations has been a benefit to the country. If it were not so they would not be authorized by State laws. In a large majority of cases they are formed by citizens of the State under the laws of which they are organized, and their prinI 

cipal office is in that State, although they are obliged to some extent to carry on business in other States. They can not be formed except under the laws of some State, and they can not do business in any other State except by pe:rmission of ita Legislature and under such conditions as it may see fit to impose. If 

they are allowed to carry on business in a State in which they do not reside, 

they should ve the same right to resort to tho Federal couxts which other 

non-residents have. 

The only valid and reasonable objection which any litigant can have to b~ 

ing impleaded in a Federal rather than in a State court is the greater expense attending litigation in the former and the greater distance which parties and 

witnesses have to travel in order to attend court. These evils exist to the same extent in cases in which the plaintiff is a non-resident individual as in those in 

which the plaintiff is a non-resident corporation .. The evil should be remedied 

by more stringent regulations of fees and by providing for terms of eourt to be held in different parts of the district rather than by the sweeping provisions of 

the pending bill, which deny the protection of the Federal courts to that particular class of litigants which more than all oth ers stands in need of it. \ 

There is a. larger question involved tn the pending bill into which it is unnec- essary to go, further than to express a doubt. It is the q uestion of constitutional p ow e r. A 1\fassachusettscorporation, having a local agency in 1\IisSOtlri, would. still be a citizen of Massachusetts, notwithstanding the enaci;J:nent of the p ending bill. A controversy between it and a citizen of lUissouri would still be, in the lan- guage of the Constitut ion, a controversy between citizens of different States. H ns Congress the constitutional power to close the Federal courts sitting in one State against a particular class of citizens of other States? 

G. E. ADAMS. 

The SPEAKER pro temp ore. The hour for the consideration of bills 

called up by committees has now expired. 

DEPOSITIONS IN UNITED STATES COURTS. 

The SPEAKER (having resumed the chair) announced the appointment of Mr. OATES, Mr. CuLBERSON, and Mr. CASWELL as conferees 

on t.he part of the House on the bill (S. 832) to provide an additional 

n'rode of taking depositions of witnesses in causes pending in the courts 

of the United States. 

ARMY APPROPRIATION BILL. 

1\Ir. TOWNSHEND. I rise to present a conference report on the 

Army-appropriation bill. 

The SPEAKER. The gentleman will send it up. That is a matter 

of the highest privilege. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

'!'he committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 10234) making appropriations for the support of the Army for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1889, and for 

other purposes, having met, after full and free conference have agreed to rea- ommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows: 

That the Senate recede from its amendments n •Lmbered 6, 12, 18, 19, 22, 2!, 

and 27. 

That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendments of the Sen- ate numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 23, 26, 28, 29-, 30, 31, and 

34, and agree to the same. That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Sen- ate numbered 11, and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: Insert after the word "charge," in line 19, l?age 5 of the bill, the words "or over any of the bond-aided Pacific railroads; " strike out in line 21, same pago, the words 

"last named railroad" and insert in lieu thereof the word "railroads;" and in 

lieu ol the matter proposed to be inserted by said amendment insert the following: 

"And pro'l:idedjm·ther, That tho transportation furnished by the Quartermaster's Department to officers traveling without troops shall be limited to trans- portation in kind, not including the sleeping or parlor car accommodations over free roads, over bond-aided Pacific railroads, and all conveyanCfs belonging to the S.\id department." And the Senate agree to the same. That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the-Senate 

numbered 25, and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: In lieu of 

the sum proposed insert "$42,000:" ntld the Senate agree to the same. On amendments numbered 32,33, and 35 the committee of conference ha been unable to agree. R. W. TOWNSH END, 

JOSEPH D. SAYERS, 

ManaJel·s on the pa1·t of the H o11se. 

W. B. ALLISON, 

P. B. PLUMB, 

.Managers on the part of the Sen ale. 

:M:r. TOWNSHEND. In order to save the time of the House I will 

say it will be unnecessary to read the statement accompanying the report, as it has already been printed in the RECORD. I ask that H be 

printed in the REcoRD to accompany the report. 

There was no objection, an!'f. it was ord~d accordingly. 

The statement is as follows: 

STATEMENT OF HOUSE CONFEREES ON H. R. 10234. 

The managers on the part of the House of tho conference on the disngreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (Ii. R 10234) 

making appropriations for the support of the Army for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1889, and for other purposes, submit the following written statement in explanation of the eifect of the action recommended on the Senat-e amend- ments as compared with the bill as it passed the House: On amendments numbered 1, 2, 3, and 4: Limits the pay and traveling ex- penses of contract surgeons, hospital matrons, and veterinary surgeons to not exceeding 50, 160, and 14 in number, respectively, and reduces the appropria- tion therefor from 8100,000, as provided by the House, to $85,000. 

On amendment numbered 5: Limits the number of paymasters' messengers to not exceeding thirty. On amendment numbered 6: Restores the House provision for payment of a clerk attendant on the collection and classification of military information from 

abroad, 81,500, and authorizes the officers detailed to obtain the same to receive 

mileage and transportation and commutation of quarters while on this duty. On amendments numbered 7, 8, and 9: Limits the mileage to officers when 

traveling on duty without troops to cases where authorized by law only, and to the shortest usually-traveled routes, and makes the appropriation $150,000 

instead of$100,000, as provided by the House. On amendments numbered 10 and 11: Provides for limiting the transporta., tion to be furnished by the Quarter.master's Department to officers tra.veliliJ: 

• 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 8267 

without troops to transportation in kind over free railroads and bond-aided Pacific railroads and by conveyance belon~;ring to said department. · On amendment numbered 12: Makes a verbal change only. On amendments nw:nbered 13, 14., and 15: Strikes out the provision providing for commutation in lieu of rations to enlisted men competing in rifle contests at places of contest, and limits the amount for payment of civilian employes of the Subsistence Department to SllO,OOO instead of $120,000, as provided by the House. 

On amendments numbered 16 and 17: Strikes out the Hou.Se provision for a riding and training master for the instruction of officers and cadets and the ap- propriation of $1,500 therefor. • On amendments numbered 18 and 19: Restores the provision of the House allowing the hire and transportation of the necessary agents and employes of the .Army. 

On amendment numbered 20: Reduces the amount for Army transportation from $2,800,000 to $2, ':'00,000. On amendment numbered 21: Strikes out the following proviso in House bill: "That no expenditure authorized by this act from the appropriations made herein for the Quartermaster's Department of the Army, including the transpor- tation of troops and their supplies, and the expenses -incident thereto, shall be m.ade except by the Quartermaster-General, under the direction of the Secre- tary of War, unless an emergency exists that demands immediate action; and in such case the expenditure necessary to meet the emergency may be made upon the order in writing of the general commanding the Army, or upon the order in writing of a division or department commauder tn whose jurisdiction the emergency arises; but every such order from a. dfvision or department com- mander shall certify that an emergency exists requiring immediate expenditure, stating the emergency necessary to be met." On amendments numbered 23; 23, 24, and 25: Provides under the medical and hospital department for general sanitat-ion instead of limiting to post sani- tation, includes medical supplies for the Army and Navy Hospital at Hot Springs, reduces the appropriation for Medical Department from $!?05,000 to $~00,000, and limits the amount which may be expended for civilian employes to 84.2,000: On amendment numbered 26: Provides an appropriation of $2,500 for repairs to sea-wall and wharf at \Villets Point, New York. On amendment numbered27: Strikesoutthe proposed ap opriation of~l,OOO 

for repairs to the works on old Fort Barranc:lS, Florida. • On amendment numbered 28: Provides for horse equipments for n.rtillery as well as for cavalry. On amendment numbered 2(): Provides for the manufacture, repair, and issue ofal'ms at national armories, instead of at the National Armory. On amendment numbered 30: Provides that the cosHotheOrdnance Depart- ment of all ordnance and ordnance st-ores issued to the States, 'l'erritories, and District of Columbia, under the act of February 12, 1887, shall be credited to the appropriation for ·~manufacture of arms at national armories," which appro- priation for 1889 and thereafter shall be available until exhausted. . On amendment numbered 31: Provides that the pneumatic dynamite guns and carriages to be purchased shall be all complete and mounted in place ready for military use. 

An amendment numbered 34: Provides for an appropriation of$5,000 for the Signal Service of the Army, in lieu of $3,000 as proposed by the House. 'l'he amendments numbered 32, 33, and 35, on which the conferees are unable to agree, make provisions as follows: Amendment numbered 32: Strikes out from the House provision for examin- ing, testing, and experimenting with pneumatic or other dyn::tmite guns, gun- carriages, and plants for the same, etc., the words" and plants for the same," and inserts the words'' aerial torpedoes." Amendment numbered 33: Provides for the manufacture or purchase and test of cannon and carrtages, including two 10-inch carriages maneu'l"ered by power, one of whicn shall be a disappearing carriage, and also including those for the field and siege services; for the alteration of caniagcs on hand to adapt them to improved service guns; for projectiles, and increased facilities for their man- _ufacture, powder, fuses, and implements, their trial and proof; for experiments in the means of protecting torpedo lines; for compensation of drnughtsmen 

while employed in the Army Ordnance Bureau on ordnance construction, and for the necessary expenses of ordnance officers while temporarily employed at the proving ground and absent from their proper stations, at the rate of $2.50 per diem while so employed, $600,000: Provided, 'l'hat all purchases of ma- terials under this provision, excepting samples, shall be of American man ufact- ure: Provided, 'rhat of the above sum $10,000 may be used for increasing facili- ties for the manufacture of proj ectilcs. Amendment numbered 35 provides: 

"SEC. 2. That the Secretary of War be authorized to enter into negotiations for the purchase of the 225 acres of land on the Hudson River, directly south of the miJitn.ry reservation at West Point, belonging to the estate of Edward V. Kins- ley, or so much thereof as he may deem necessary for the purposes of the ~Iilitary Academy, and to receive off'ers for the sale of their interest in such land froru such of the heirs of said Kinsley as a;e competent and willing to sell such interests; and the Secretary of 'Var is authorized to submit all offers so made • and the question of the \'alue of said 225acres to aboard to consist of three Army officers and three c.ompetent civilians, who shall make due investigation andre- port concerning said value: t\.nd the Secretary of War shall submit said offers and the report of said board, with his opinion, to Congress at its next session. The expenses of said board and compensation at the rate of $10 a day for not more than ten days for each of the civilian members shall be paid from the ap- propriation for contingencies ofthe War Department. "SEC. 3. For the erection, purchase, or manufacture of the necessary buildings and other structures, machipery, tools, and fixtures for an Army gun factory for finishing and assembling heavy ordnance, to be erected at the Watervliet 

arsenal, 'Vest Troy, N.Y., in accordance with the recommendation of the Gun Foundry Board f February 16, 1834, $750,000. •· SEC. 4. For the purchase of rough-finished, oil-tempered, and annealed steel for high-power coast-defense guns of 8, 10, and 12 inch caliber, in quality and dimensions conforming to specifications, subject to inspection at each sta"'e of the manufacture, and including all the parts of each caliber, $5,000,000: Pro;[.ded That no money shall be expended except for steel accepted and delivered. ' "SEC. 5. The mat-erial for the guns provided for in section 4 shall be purchased in nccordance with section 3709, Revised Statutes, for which purpose the Secre- t.ary of 'Var is authorized to make contracts with responsible steel manufactur- ers, aft.er proper advertisement, continuing not less than thirty days in the newspapers most likely to reach the said manufacturers: Provided, That each bidder with whom such contracts shall be madeshallagreeto erect in the United States a. suitable plant, including the best modern appliances, capable ofmakin"' all the steel required, and of finishing it in accordance with the contracts and shall further agree to deliver yearly a specified quantity of each caliber the 'time of the delivery of the steel for the smaller calibers of heavy guns to c~mmence at the expiration of net more than eighteen months, and that for the largest calibers spP.cified in the advertisement, at the expiration of not more than three years from the date of the acceptance of the contracts; and that all the material for ;:aid guns shall be manufactured in the United States. "SEc. 6. For the purchase of submarine mines, for needful casemates cable galleries, and appliances to operate Fubm:uine mines; fo1· continuinP' ~rpedo experiments and for practical instruction of engineer troops in the details of tor- pedo service, $5,000,000. 

"SEC. 7. For the purchase of ;ubmarine controllable torpedoes or torpedoes and torpedo-boats controllable from shore and adapted to coast defense, HOO.OOO. "SEc. 8. The appropriations provided fot· in sections 3, 4, 6, and 7, shall be available until expended." · R. W. TOWNSHEND. .JOSEPH D. SAYERS. 

1\Ir. TOWNSHEND. I will say the conferees agree upon all matters 

with the exception of three amendments, numbered ~2, 33, and 35, 

relating to ~.n factory and ordnance, and without further statements 

I move that"the report be adopted. The report was adopted. 

Ur. TOWNSHEND. I now move that the House further insist on the amendments numbered 32, 33, and.35, n.nd agree to the conference 

asked by the Senate on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses. 

The motion was agreed to. Mr. TOWNSHEND. I will be absent from the city some days, anu ask that some other member shall be substituted on the conference on the part of the House. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair will substitute for the gentleman from 

illinois on the Honse conferees the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Ur. 

MAISH]. PERSONAL EXPLANATION. 

1\Ir. :McCREARY. House bill11309 has been set down as the spe- c~ul order for to-day, and I ask that the bill be read. 

Mr. BRUMl\I. I rise to a question of priv;ilege. Mr. 1\IcCREA.RY. I hope the gentleman from Pennsylvania will 

postpone it until to-morrow morning. We have already had one ques~ 

tion of privilege to-day, and if the gentleman will postpone his ques- tion of privilege I will take up the bill I have indicated and proceed 

to its consideration. ~Ir. BRUUl\I. Provided my colleague [Mr. SCOTT] is here and is 

willing, I do not object. 

Mr. SCOTT. I would gladly do as the gentleman from Kentucky 

[Mr. :McCREARY] desires me to do in this matter~ b!Jt if the gentle- man from Pennsylvania [1\Ir. BRU.l\DI] confines himself strictly to the 

issue he proposes to raise, the question between him and myself can 

be disposed of in fifteen minutes. 

During my absence from the House, in consequence of sickness, I 

have received from the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. B&Umf] 

three notices, stamped with a 10-cent postage-stamp on each of them. [Laughter.] I must be present in the Honse to answer what he pro- poses to bring up here this morning. Now, unfortunately, I can not 

wait forever to meet the charges of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, 

and if he confines himself strictly to the point he should confine himself to for ten minutes it will be time enoug~ t-o do all we have got to 

do. 

l\Ir. BRUMU. I shall follow my own judgment and not that· of the 

gentleman. Mr. McCREARY. I ask the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. 

Scorr] whether he expects to be here in the morning? 

1\Ir. SCOTT. I do. 

Mr. McCREARY. Then let it go over until then. 

JIIESSAGE FRO::U: THE SENATE. 

A message from the Senate, by l'l1r. McCooK, ita Secretary, announced 

that the Senate requested the return of the bill (S. 3086) granting a 

pension to Victor, Gertrude, Margaret, and Helen, minor children of 

Lieut. George L. McGuire; and the bill (S. 3087) granting a pension 

to Mary A. Pfeiffer. Also, that the Senate had passed without amendment the bill (H. R. 

988) for the relief of Joseph R. White, the bill (H. R.. 649) for there- lief of A. C. Bradford, and the bill (H. R.. 109) to refund to Dr. F. 0 . St. Clair $97.80 duty on monument to the memory of Francis J. Townshendr late of the United States Army. 

Also, that the Senate had passed with amendment, in which the con- currence of the Honse of Representatives was requested, the bill (H. 

R. 8873) in relation to bonds of disbursing and other officers and to 

monthly payment of the Army. 

.Also, that the Senate bad passed a bill (S. 3074) for the relief of . Nicholas J . Bigley; in which the concurrence of the House of Rep.resentatives was requested. And further, that the Senate had passed with amendments House 

bills of the following titles: A bill (H. R 8855) for the establishment of alight-ship with a stea.m 

fog-signal at Sandy Hook, New York Harbor. 

A bill (H. R. 1239) to extend the jurisdiction of the Light-House 

Board to the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers, California. A bill (H. R. 5716) for establishing a light at the mouth of Ott~r 

Creek, Lake Champlain. 

A bill (H. R.. 1641) for the e1·ection of a light-house at or near a point about midway between Barnegat and Navesink lights, in the 

State of New Jersev. -

A bill (H. R. 1249) for establishing a light-house and fog-signal on 

Roe Island, Suisun Bay, California. 

A· bill (H. R. 5700) to facilitate the t.ransportation of life-saving and 

light-house supplies at Hog Island, Virginia; and asks a conference 

with the House on the several bills so amended, and had appointed 

l\Ir. PALr.IER, ~Ir. DoLP:If, and Mr. VEST as conferees thereon. 

' 
' 

. 

8268 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. SEPTEJ\.ffiER 4, 

• 

FISHERIES TREATY. _./ 

Mr. :McCREARY. I ca.ll up the bill which is the special order for 

this time, and I ask thnt it be read: 

The Clerk read as follows: 

A bill to empower the President to carry out the purposes of an net entitled "An act to authorize the President of the United States to protect and defend the 

rights of o\merican fishing vessels, American fishermen, American trading and 

other vessels in certain cases, and for other purposes," approved l\Ia1·ch 3, 1887. 

Be it enacted, etc., That whenever the President may deem it his duty to exer- cise any of the powers given to him by an act entitled "An act to a~o~thorizc the 

President of the United States to protect and defend the rights of American fishingvc_sels, American fishermen, American trading and other vessels in certain cases, and for other purpose-," approved March 3,1887, itshall be lawful for the Pre ident, in his discretion, by proclamation to that effect, to su ·pend, in whole or in J?at·t. the transportat.ion across the territory of the United Stales, in bond 

and Without the payment of duty, of goods, wares, n.nd merchandise imported or exported from any foreign country from or to theBriti h dominions in North America. ~E?· 2 . . That whenev~r the President shall be satisfied that there is any dis- cnmmatlOn whatever 111 the use of the Welland Canal, the St. Lawrence River 

Canals, the Chambly Can.al, or ~ith ~r of them, whether by tolls, drawbacks, r efund of tolls, ot· otherwise, which 1s, or may be, detrimental to the interests 

of the United States, or any of its citizens, it shall be lawful for the President 

in his di cretion, to issue a. proclamation to that effect, whereupon there shall 

be c?llected a toll. of 20 cents a ton upon e-very foreign vessel and her cargo passmg through either the Sault Stc. 1\Inrie Canal or the St. Clair Flats Canal; 

and the Secretary of the Treasury may authorize and direct any of the customs officer~ to colleet tho tolls levied under this act, or the President may, in his 

discretion. when he is satisfied there is any such discrimination, prohibit the use of said canals to any such foreign vessel. The President, when satisfied 

that such discrimination has ceased, may issue his proclamation to that effect 

in his di"'cretion, whereup on the tolls authorized by this act shall no longer b~ collected, and said prohibition, if ordered, shall cease. S:Ec. 3. 'rhat the Secretary of the Treasury is a uthorized to make any regula.-

tions needful to carry this act into effc;ct. 

Mr. SPRINGER. I find the bill under consideration will be con- sidered to-day and to-morrow. After that I understand the appropria-· tion bill will be pressed on Friday and Saturday and t..'tking up all the 

week. And I wish to state to the friends ofthe Oklahoma bill it will 

be impossible to reach it before Tuesday next, when I will call it up. 

Mr. HOOKER. I give the gentleman notice we will not take it up 

during his absence. [Laughter.] 

:Mr. BELMONT. :Mr. Speaker, the measnre which has just been 

called up for our consideration is one in which I, in common with all 

members upon this floor, take a very deep interest. I do so particularly because during the last Congress I introduced and reported to 

the House a bill of similar purport, which was adopted by the House 

with but a single dissenting voice. 

When the message of the President of the United States was received 

I was absent; and the Committee on Foreign Affairs very properly, in 

the discharge of its duty, at once proceeded upon the consideration ot 

the message and the preparation of a report to the Honse. Upon my 

return I thought it but right and proper that the special committee 

having this matter in charge should report it to the Honse; and Irequested my colleague on the committee, the gentleman from Kentucky 

[Mr. :McCREARY], so to do, knowing th~:~.t the bill would thus be in 

excelJent hands. I shall take occasion during the course of the debate 

to give my most hearty co-operation in securing a speedy passage of the 

bill by the House. 

I deem this statement due to the Honse and to myself in co!!nection 

with the matter. (Applause.] 

1\Ir . .M:cCREARY. Mr. Speaker, the message of the President, sent to 

the Congress of the United States on the 23d day of August, 1888, places 

the Administration in a firm and courageous attitude on the fisheries 

controversy with Great Britain. It is dignified, resolute, and courteous, - and presents a course of a<!tion for our Government that is worthy of the 

approval and support of the American people. · While it may have caused some persons to sulk like Achilles, and 

others, like Thersites, to indulge in vituperation and abuse, the general 

sentiment of the public is that the President should be upheld in his 

efforts to. preserve the honor and dignity of our country, and protect and 

maintain the rights and interests of the people. 

This message and the tariff message of Presi4ent Cleveland should 

be recorded together in the history of our country. One seeks toreduce taxes and lighten the burdens of the people. The other seeks to 

maintain the rights and the dignity of American citizens, and both will 

be remembered forever. 

Prompted by a patriotic purpose and a desire to settle all disputed 

questions, he opened negotiations and concluded a treaty with Great 

Britain, as was his constitutional privilege and duty, and submitted it 

to the United States Senate on the 20th day of February, 1888, for 

:ratification. This was the proper course. The course which intelligent and enlightened opinion everywhere sustains. 

If the President had resorted to retaliatory measures against Canadian citizens, under the act of March 3, 1887, without having attempted 

negotiations with Great Britain, he would have been criticised, perhaps ..censured, for having failed to make proper efforts for a settlement 

with Great Britain through the treaty-making power. 

'l'he treaty, so carefully prepared by able and accomplished gentlemen 

under the directionand authorityofthe President, which provided for 

a settlement of all disputed questions that have been under discussion 

by the two governments, and which added greatly to the privileges of our fishermen in British American ports, was rejected by the unani- mous vote of the Republican Senators, without any effort to recast or amend it. 

While the motive that prompted this action may not be properly unde~tood, it was equivalent to giving notice to the President and to the 

country that no treaty which could be negotiated in regard to Canadi:m 

.troubles ·would be deemed sufticient by them, and that the time for 

treaty negotiations had passed and retaliation must commence. There is nothing lefb the President now but retaliation. But this is no new issue. The policy he now proposes is substantially the policy 

decided on by him a year and a half ago, and whicq was practically indorsed by Congress when the act of l\farch 3, 1887, was passed. . Vithout giving the details of all the ne~otiations betweenj:he United 

States and Great Britain in the past, it is proper to a satisfactory un- derstanding of the questions involved that a brief reference should be 

made to treaties ratified by the two governments. There have been 

iwenty-fivetreaties made between the United States and Great Britain, as follows: 

1783-Treaty of independence. 

1794-Commercial treatv. 

1796-Treaty explaining a provision of treaty of 1784. 

1798-Treaty explaining fifth article of treaty of 1784. 

1802-ThomasJefferson madeatreatywithEngland explaining treaty 

of 1794, and annnlled one article of it. 

1814-Treaty of peace, negotiated on the part of the United States , by Henry Clay, J.9nathan Russell, Albert Gallatin, John Quincy Adams, 

and J. A. Bayaro. 

1815-Treaty of commerce. 1817-Treaty in·relation to the naval forces to be placed on the Great 

Lakes, Ontario, Erie, etc. 

1818-Fisheries treaty, negotiated by 1\1r. Gallatin and Mr. Rush. 

1826-Treaty in regard to the award of the Emperor of Russia about 

1slaves. 

1827-Treaty a bon t Oregon. 

1827-Second treaty, continuing in force for ten years longer the 

commercial treaty of 1815. , · 1827-Third treaty, relating to the northeastern boundary. 

1842-Treaty relating to the northern boundary and tQ the St. Lawrence, St. John, and Detroit Rivers. 

1846-Treaty settling the boundary of Oregon, negotiated by James 

Buchanan. . 1850-Ciayton-Bnlwer treaty. 

1853-Treaty for settlement of claims. 

1854-Reciprocity treaty with Canada: 

1854-Second treaty, extending the duration fa commission previously provided for. 

1862- Treaty relating to the suppression of African slave-trade. 

1863-'l'reaty adding another article to the slave-trade treaty of 1862. 

1863-Second treaty, to settle claims of Hudson Bay and Pnget 

Sound Agricultural Company against the United States. .. 1870-Treaty relating to the African slave-trade. 

1871, May 5-Treaty in regard to naturalization. 

1871, July 4-Treaty for the settlement of the Alabama claims, the 

fisheries, reciprocity, and the boundary line between the United States 

and British Provinces. 

1888-Treaty transmitted to the United States Senate February 20, 

1888, and rejected by the Senate. . I only propose to discuss the treaties of 1783, 1818, 1854, and 1871, 

for these are the only treaties made between the United States and 

Great Britain which bear upon the questions under consideration. 

Before the :revolution of 1776 the inhabitants of all the British colonies in North America possessed the common right of fishing on all the 

coasts of British North America. At the end of the revolution the 

treaty of peace, Illilde in 1783, defined the area of American fisheries 

and fixed the boundaries between the British provinces and the United 

States. 

Its third article declared: 

It is agreed that the people of the United States shn.ll continue to enjoy un- molested the right to take fish of every kind on the Grand Bank and on all the 

other banks of Newfoundland; also in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and at all 

other places in the sea where the inhabitants of both countries used at any time 

heretofore to fish, and also that the inhabitants of the United States shall have 

liberty to take fish of every kind on such part of the coast of Newfoundland M 

British fishermen shall use (but not to dry or cure the same on that island), and 

also on the coasts, bays, and creeks of all other of IDs Britannic Majesty's do· 

minions in America. 

The rights and liberties thus set forth, continued down to the war 

.of 1812 and to the treaty of peace negotiated at Ghent, which closed 

the war on the 24th day of December, 1814, between the United States 

and Great Britain. 

This treaty of peace provided: _ First. For a restoration to each party of all countries, territories, 

etc., taken by either party during the war, without delay, saving some questions of islands in the Bay of Passamaquoddy. 

Second. It provided for disposition of prizes and prisoners of war. Third. It provided for questions of boundary and dominion regard-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-· HOUSE. 8269 . --------------------------;---------------------------

ing certain islands, and for the settlement of the northeastern boundary and also for the northwestern boundary: etc., but it made no reference whatever to fisheries questions. 

Soon after the treaty of Ghent the British Government announced 

its purpose to exclude American fishermen from the liberty of fishing 

within one marine league of her shores in N~th America, and of drying and curing fish on the unsettled parts of those territories, and asserted that the fishing rights, recognized and secured to the citizens of 

the United States by thetreaty of 1783, had become abrogated inconsequence of the war of 1812. This assertion led to the treaty of the 

20th of November, 1818, the fisheries article of which provided (Article I ): 

·whereas differences have arisen respecting the liberty claimed by the United 

States for the inhabitants thereof to take, dry, and cure fish on certain coasts. ba.ys, harbors, and creeks of His Britannic Majesty's dominions in America, it 

is agreed between the high cont-racting parties that the inhabitants of the said 

United States shall have forever, in common with the subjects of His Britannic 

1\fajesty, the liberty tQ take fish of every kind on that pa1·t of the southern coast of Newfoundland which extends from Cape Ray to the Ramean Islands; on the western and northwestern coast of Newfoundland from the said Cape Ray to the 

Quirpon Islands, on the shores of Magdalen Islands, and also on the coasts, bays, harbors, and creeks from 1\:lountJ oly, on the southern coast of Labrador, to and 

through the Straits of Belle Isle, and thence northwardly indefinitely ·along the 

coast, without prejudice, however, ·to any of the exclusive rights of the Hudson 

Bay Company; and that the Americanfishermenshallalso have liberty foreYer to dry and cure fish in any of the unsettled bays, harbors, and creeks of the 

southern part of the coast of Newfoundland, above described, and of the coast of Labr.\dor; but so soon as the same, or any port.ion thereof, shall be settled, 

it shall not be lawful for the said fishermen to dry or cure fish at sucli portion so seWed without previous agreement for such purpose with the inhabitants, 

proprietors, or possessors of the ground. And the Unit-ed States hereby t·e- nounce forever any liberty heretofore enjoyed or claimed by the inhabitants 

thereof to take, dry, or cure fish on or withil'l 3 marine miles of any of the 

coasts, bays, creeks, or harbors of His Britannic !lfajesty's dominions in America not included within the above-mentioned limits: Provided, hou>e!•e~·, That tlfe American fishermen shall be admitted to enter such bays or harbors for the · purpose of shelter and of repairing damages therein, of purchasing wood, and 

of obtaining water, and for no other purpose whatever. Bnt they shall be unqcr such restrictions as may be necessary to prevent their taking, drying. or curing fish therein, or in any other manner whatever abusing the privilege3 hereby reserved to them. 

Only, two weeks ago the American schooner Herman Sabson was 

seized and taken to St. John's, Newfoundland, and fined $100 for buying a few barrels of herring without license. The week before the 

steamer Novelty was r.efused permission to buy coal unless the captain 

paid $400 for a license. 

Senator EmrnNDS said in his speech in the United States Senate: 

It will be seen from the correspondence and papers submit ted by the President 

in his message on the subject, of the 8th of December last, and from the testi- mony taken by the committee, tha~ some of these instances of seizure or detention or of driving vessels away by threats, etc., were in clear violation of the 

treaty of 1818. 

The people in Canada seem to be expecting retaliatory ·measures on 

our part. Ron. Mr. Laurier, leader of the Canadian Liberal party, in 

his speech at Toronto a few days since, declared that the United States 

had sufficient cause for retaliation in the action of Canada in the past. 

He said: 

If the Canadian Government had followed a more friendly course there would not have been any unfriendly feeling to-day. Time a,nd again in the year 1885 

American fishermen were arrested for trivial offenses. * * * If the Canadian 

Government had administered our laws as they conceived them under the 

treaty, in a friendly manner, this could not have taken place. * * * It is 

hig·h time we should 1·everse the policy we have been following toward the 

United States for the past twenty-five years. 

The first step toward retaliation was taken in 1885. In his annual 

message of December, 1885, the President c..1.lled the attention of Congress· to the difficulties and disputes and harassments that have occurred, and Congress passed an act, which was approved by the President on the 3d of M~rch, 1887, entitled "An act to authorize the 

President of the United States to protect and defend the rights of 

American fishing vessels, Amc.rican fishermen, American trading and 

other vessels, in certa.in cases, and for other purposes." The act is as follows: 

Be it enacted, eic., That when eve the President of the United States shall be 

satisfied that American fishing vessels or American fishermen, visiting or being in the wate1·s or at au y ports or places of the Bri~ish dominions of North America, are or then lat-ely have been denied or abridged in the enjoyment of any rights secured to them by treaty or law, or are or then lately have unjustly vexed or hanassed in the enjoyment of such rights, or subjected to tmreasonable re- From 1818 forward, for a number of years, peace and neighborly strictions, regul atioo1s, or requirements in respect of such rights; or otherwise 

feeling seemed to reign supreme, and no serious difficulties occurred unjustly vexed or ar ra sse d in said wate_rs, ports, or places; or ~henever the as reg:uds the riO'hts of Americ::m fishermen in Canadian and Ameri- l-'rel';iident of tb ~ Umtcd Sh~tes shall be satisfied that an.f such fishmg vessels or 0 • fis!1ermen, ha.vmg a perm1t under the laws of the Utnted States to touch and can waters. I trade at any port or ports, place or places, in the British dominions of North 

In 1854 a treaty was concluded by which exclusive reciprocity or America, are or then bte!y have been denied the privilegeofenteringsn<;h port 

trade was aareed on and the ri<Yht O'Uaranticd to the Americans to or ports_, place o.r place:;. m the same .manner and under the same regula~ons as , • • 0 • • ' • • 0 c . m::w ex1sL therem appliCable to tradmg vessels of the most favored natwn, or fish Wlthm the limitS prohibited by the treaty of 1818, under vanous shail be unjustly vexed or harrn.ssed in respect thereof, or o~herwise be unjustly 

restrictions and limitations, and a similar right granted to British fish- vexed or barrassed therein, or shall ~e prevented from purcha,singsuchs!J.pplies c..-men in certain waters of the United States. as may there be la\~fully sold to tra<;J.mg vessels df the mos.t favored natwn; or . . . . . . . w henever the PresJClent of the Umted States shall be satisfied that any other 

Thrs treaty con tamed other prons10ns respecting navrgatiOn of tlile vessels of the United States, tbeir masters or crews, so arriving at or being in 

St. Lawrence River and American and Canadian canals, and waster- such British waters or ports o1· place~ of the British d~m_inions of N5>rth Amerminab)e on notice after the expiration of ten years. It was not popu- ica, are or then lft!cly ha.ve been demed any of the pnnleges t~crem a~<J?rded 

C . · d · · · h · f 1 Q

6 , - b to the vessels, then· masters or crews, of the most favored natwn, or liDJustly lar, and ongtess term mate It In t e sessiOn 0 o 4- 6L> Y a large. vexed or harrusscd in respect of. the same, or unjustly vexed or harrassed therein 

ma;jority in both the ~enate and House of Representatives. by the auth<?rities thereof, then, and in e~ther or all of l?uch cases, !t sh;all ~e 

In 1868 serious trouble commenced bec..1.use the Canadian Govern- law~ul , and 1t shall be. the duty of t~1 e Pres1dent of the Um~ed States, m his d1s- . b " . crctton, by proclamatiOn to that efiect, to deny vessels, thmrmastersandcrews, ment enacted harsh a~d strmgentlaws on t~e su .)ec~ of Amen can fish- of the British dominions of North America,_ any entrance i~to tl_le waters, ports, ermen ca.lculated to cnpple and destroy theu operatiOns. or places of, or within the United States (w1th such cxceptwus m regard t.oves- Then came the tre::tty of 1871 concluded and signed at Washington sels in distress, st-ress of weather, or needing suppliEs, _as to the Presi<;J.ent sh!ill- . . ' . · . seem proper), whether such vessels shall have come directly from satd domln· 

and devoted prunanly to the Alabama. claims, but which also pro- ions on such destined voyao·e or by wav of some port or place in such destined 

vided that for a period of ten years fishermen of the United States voyag-e elsewhere; and fils~. to deny entry into any port or place of the United 

should have in addition to their rights under the treaty of 1818, the States of fr~sh fish or s:--lt fis~ •. o_r [l.ny other pr?dnet of said dominiol"!-s, or other .· h f B · '· h N th A .· · h fis1 · d . · li · goods commg from sa1d dommwns to ~he Umte(l States. The Prestdent ~ay, I~g t o ntiS ?r men can InS ore umg, uu <:r ~er tam rJ?-I~a- in his discretitm, apply such proclamat~on t? a_ny p:u·t or to all of the foregOI!lgbons, and the United States agreed to the free admiSSIOn of Bnhsh named subjecLs, and may revoke, qua.ltfy, llm1t, and renew su~h proclamatiOn 

North American fishery products ioto our country and it was also pro- from time to time. as he may dee;n n~cess:1.ry to the full and J!:!St execution of · · · h ' h · h fi h · ' · · tile purposes of th1s act. Every vwlatwn of any such proclamatiOn, or any part v1ded that the Bnbs fis ermen m1g t s In certa~n Amenca~ waters thereof, is hereby declm·ed illeg·ul, and all v~s;>cls and goods so coming, or being 

and that the balance of alleged advantage to the Umted States m these within the waters, ports, or plnces of the Umted States contrary to such procrespects should be settled by a commission. · lamation shall be forfeit ell to ~he United St.'ttes; and su?h forfeiture shall be r h d f th" : · . k th H l"f: Co · · enf,wced and proccede.;l upon m the same manner and wJt.h the satne effect as _T e awar o IS commiSSIOn,. nown as e a 1 ax mm1~10n, in t.he ease of vessels or goods whose importation or coming to or being in the 

wJ.ll probably never be forgotten m our country. By the vote of the waters or ports of the United States contmry to law may now be enforced and 

British commissioner and of• the Belgian umpire and against the vote proceeded upon. Every pc1·:;on who shall violate any of the provisions of this 

f th A · . '>:. • th . · 'd to b "d b h act, or such proclamation of the President made in pursuance hereof, sl1all be o . e mer.c:1n comml s~on.er, e sum Ieq~rre e ,P,a1 Y ~ e deemed guilty of a. misdemeanor, a nd, on conviction thereof, shall be punished 

Umted States to Gr~'\t Bntain was fixed at $a,500,000. I he gross lll- by a fine not exceei!in~ 1,00 , or by imprisonment for a term not exceeding 

justice of this award strengthened the desire for a tennina.tion of these two years, or by both said punishment.>, in the discre tion of the court. 

fishery arrangements by negotiations with. t~e British ~overnment to The President also in his message sent to Congress August 23, 1888, 

that end. Both Houses of Congress by JOmt resolutiOns, approved describes the situation fairly and forcibly, as follows: 

!II arch 3, 1883, directed that notices be given of the termination of Our citizens engaged in fishing entet·prises in waters adjacent to Canada have 

Articles XVIII, XIX, XX, XXI, XXII, XXIII, XXIV, XXV, and been subjected w n umerous vexatious interferences and annoyances, their ves- XXX of the treaty of Wa.shington, which articles covered the whole sel" have been seized upon pretexts whi ch appeared to be entirely inadmissible, and they ha-.;-e otherwise been treated by the Canadian authorities and officials 

fishery subje<:t as well as certain matters of navigation j and Article inn. manner inexcusably h:l.r;;h and oppressive. 

XXXII was also terminated. By the proclamation of President Arthur, While keenly sensitive to all that was exasperating in the condition, and by 

the termination took effect July 1, 1885. After the termination of the no meansindis;Josed to support the just co~plaintsof our injured cit-izens, I still 

deemed it my duty, for the preservation of important American interests which 

fisheries articles of the treaty of Washington, unfriendly coercion and were directly invoh·ed, and in view of all the details of the siLuation, to attempt 

harassment of American fishermen by Canadians were again resorted by negotiation to remedy existing wrongs and to finally terminate, by n.fairu.nd to with great exaggeration. just treaty, these ever-recurring causes of difficulty. 

f · 1 I fully believe that the treaty just rejected by the Senate was well suited to I shall not attempt to urmsh ists of all the cases of warnings, seiz- the exigency, and that its provisions were adequate foroursecurityin the future 

nres, fines, COnfisca.tions, searches, and captures that haYe been visited from vexatious incidents and for the promotion of fdendly neighborhood and 

upon American fishermen. They have be_en yery numerous and ai!gm- intimacy, without sacrificing in the least our 1mtiona,l pride or dignity. 

Yat.ed, and have cost our fish~rmen heavy exp~nse and serions loss, and, It seems clear and conclusive that the time has arrived for action on ris has been re~rted by a committee of Senators, these lists comprise the part of the United States Government. The rights of American 

· in all nearly four hundred vessels that have been involved in seizures fishing vessels, American fishermen, American trading and other vessels 

and other interferences growing out of disputed constructions of the must be protected and a stop must be put to a discriminatio~ in. the 

treaty of 1818. use of ~ertain Canadian canals, which is manifestly unjust and m VlOla-
.-

8270 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. SEPTEl\IBER 4, 

,tion of international agreement and comity. The pending bill provides 

the legislation now needed. I do not propose to speak at length on the 

merits of the fisheries question or to go into details that have puzzled 

and perplexed many of our ablest and best statesmen for near a century. 

n is sufficent for me to say that the two chief questions are: AB to 

whether the expressio~ '' 3 .ma.ri.J;le m~es of any of the coasts, bays, 

creeks, or harbors of HIS Bntannic Majesty's dominions" should be 

taken to mean a limit of 3 miles from the coast line, or a limit of 3 

miles from a line drawn from headland to headland; and whether the 

proviso that "the American fishermen shall be admitted to enter such 

bays or harbors for the purpose of shelter, and of repairing damages 

therein, of purchasing wood, and obtaining water, and for no other purpo~e whatever," is intended to exclude American vessels from cominO' 

inshore to traffic, transship fish, purchase stores, hire seamen, etc. 0 

Canadians, acting under the authority of a Dominion law and a proclamation isaued March 5, 1886, by the ministerofmarine, which withdrew all com'ln.ercial privileges thereafter from our fishing vessels except shelter, repairs, purchasing of wood, and obtaining water, have 

since that time seized every AmeTican fishing vessel which has entered 

Canadians waters, harbors, or ports for any purpose except these four, 

and have enforced their laws with so much rigor and, as Secretary 

Manning said, so great "brutality" as to practically deprive us of even 

these four conceded privileges. Instead of discussing the details of the 

fisheries dispute further, it is pertinent to this discussion for me to ask 

which nation first violated treaty stipulations. It is well known that 

Canada first violated the treaty stipulation entered into by the United 

States and Great Britain. 

In the year 1886 notice was received by the representatives of our 

Government that our fishermen would no longer be allowed to ship 

their fish in bond, free of duty, from Canadian territories to this count..ry. Since that time such shipment lfls always been denied. 

On the lOth day of July, 1886, the Novelty, a duly registered steamvessel of the United States, was denied the right to take any steamcoal or purchase ice or transship any fish in bond to the United States, 

at Pictou, Nova. Scotia. 

Since 1866 free transit in bond has been allowed across our territory 

to goods arriving at our ports destined to Canada or exported from Canada to other foreign countries, and a profound sensation was produced 

when Great Britain excluded our fishermen from the privilege of shipping fish in bond, free of duty, from Canadian ports to this country, 

notwithstanding the privileges enjoyed by Canadian transport lines 

within our borders. 

The great advantage ~rived by Canada is shown by the fact that 

$270,000,000 worth of Canadian merchandise has been carried in bond, 

free of duty, across our territory during the past six years, nearly all of 

which were goods dutiable under our tariff laws, and the larger part 

of tbi3 traffic consisted of exchanges of goods between Great Brit.,'lin 

and her American provinces. The bill now under consideration enlarges the power of the President, 

and authorizes him, in his discretion, by proclamation to that effect, 

to suspend, in whole or in part, the transportation across the territory 

of the United States, in bond and without the payment of duty, all 

goods, wares, and merchandise, imported or exported from any foreign 

co~try. from or to the British dominions in North America. This is 

stron,g, appropriate, and comprehensive language, aud the words are 

almost the same as those used by the President in his message. 

It is assert.eq., however, by some that the President already has sufficient power conferred upon him by the act of March 3, 1887. 

The answer to that is, that the aet of 1887 does not go far enough, 

and does not confer sufficient authority on the President to meet the 

demands of the existing situation. · Under that act the President has the power, by proclamation, to deny 

vessels, their masters and their crews, of the British dominions of North 

America. entrance into waters, ports, or places of or within the United 

States, and also to deny entry into any port or place of the United 

States of fresh fish or salt fish or any other product of said dominions, 

or other goods coming from said dominions to the United States; but 

it does not authorize him, as the pending bill does, by proclamation to 

suspend i11 whole or in part .the transportation in bond and without 

payment of duty of goods, wares, and merchandise imported or ex- ported from any foreign country to or from the British dominionS-in 

North America. across the territory of the United States, neither does 

it authorize him when tliereis discrimination in the use of the Weiland 

Canal, the St. Lawrence River canals, the Chambly Canal, or either of 

them, which is detrimental to the interests of the United States or any 

of its citizens, to direct the collection of tolls upon every foreign vessel and her cargo passing through either of said canals, or in his discretion to prohibit the nse of said canals by any such foreign vessel. 

It is asserted also that the President or his Secretary of the Treasury 

already has the power of retaliation under the act of 1866 (section 3005 

of the Revised Statutes), which is as follows: - All merchandise arriving at the ports of New York, Boston, Portland, in 

:niaine, or any other port specially designated by the Secretary of the Treasury, 

and destined for places in the adjacent British provinces, or arriving at the port 

of Point Isabel, in Texas, or any other port specially designated by the Secretary of the Treasury, and destined for places in the Republic of 1\Iemco, may be 

entere~ at the cust<?m-house and conveyed in transit through the territory of 

the Umted States without the payment of duties, under such regulations as the 

Secretary of the Treasury may prescribe. 

~his section only refers to importations into .Canada through the 

Umted States and does not refer to exportations. It contains no authority for a transshipment of goods through the United States to and 

from Canada and destined for other countries than the United States. 

It is as absolute in its terms as a st..'ltute can he and is not conditioned 

upon any. r~iprocal right to be granted .or act t~ be performed by Cana~a, an~ It lS perf~ctly clear t~at there IS no power granted in this sec- ~on which authonzes the President to suspend its operations under any 

cucumstances whatever. · 

Section 3006 of the Revised Statutes has also been referred to as conferring all the power necessary on the President. That section is as 

follows: 

SEc. 3006. Import:.E:d merchandise in bond, or duty pnid, and product.s or man- ufactures of the Uruted States may, with the consent of the proper authorities 

of the J?ritish provinces or Republic of ~Iexico, be trans_Ported from one port in 

the Umte~ States to another port therem, over the territory of such provinces or Repubhc, by such routes and under such rules, regulations and conditions as the Secretary of the Treasury may prescribe; and the merch'andise so trans- ported shall, upon arrival in the United States from such provinces or Republic 

be treated in regard to the liability to or exemption from duty or tax as if th~ transportation had taken place entirely within the limits of the Unit~d States. 

Tills section relates alone to the coastwise trade of the United States 

and to imported merchandise and products, or manufactures transported 

from one port in the United States to another port in the United States 

over foreign territory. . 

Back of both of these sections also is the act of 1864 section 3102 of 

the Rev~ed S.tatutes, which allows the transshipment dr goods thmugh our terntory m bond and free of duty upon the proper certificate of an 

officer of the United States duly authorized to act. 

It is also contended that the power sought to be conferred upon the 

:rresident is in opposition to Article XXIX of the treaty of 1871, which 

IS as follows: 

It is agreed that, for tho term of years mentioned in .Article XXXIII of this 

treaty, goods, wares, or merchandise arriving at the ports of New York Bos- ton, and Portland, and any other ports of the United States which have' been or may, from time to time, be specially designated by the President of the 

Unite? States and destined for Her Britannic Majesty's possessions in North A~er1ca, may be entered at. the proper custom: house and conveyed in transit, 

Without the payment of dut1es, through the terr1tory of the United States under 

such rules, regulations, and conditions for the protection of the revenue' as the ~vernment of the.United States-. ~ay from time to time prescribe; and under 

hke rules, reguln.t~ons •. and cond1t10ns, goods, w:u~s, or merchandise may be 

conveyed in tr9:-US1t, Without t_he payment of duties, from such possessions 

%~ft!a~::~!~rritory of the Umted States for export from the said ports of the 

It is further agreed that, for the like period, goods, wares, or merchandise ar- riving at any of the ports of Her Britannic lUajesty's pos essions in North America. 

li!!d destined for the United States may be entered at the proper custom-house 

and conveyed in tra.ns1t, without the payment of duties, through the said pos- sessions, under such rules nnd regulations and conditions for the protection of 

the re;enue as the Governments of the said possessions may from time to time 

prescribe; and under like rules, regulations, and conditions goods wares or merchandise may be conveyed in tran!!lit, without payment of dutie~. from 'the 

United States through the said possessions to other places in the United States or for export from ports in the said possessions. 

This presents the leading question, to wit.: Is Article XXIX of the 

treaty of 1871 now in force? If Article XXIX is not in force, it is of 

great importance to determine whether it ceased to be in force because 

the treaty of 1871 was violated or whether, according to the provisions 

of the treaty, it fell with Article XXX and Articles XVIII to XXV, 

inclusive. 

Such high authority as Mr. Madisqn said, in his letter to 1\fr. Edmund 

Pendleton, January 2, 1791 (Wharton's Digest, International Law, 

section 138) : Treaties, as I understand the Constitution, are made supreme over the con- stitutions and laws of the particular States. nnd, like a. subsequent law of the 

United States, over pre-existing laws of the United States; provided, however, 

~~tc~~tS~~t~~ft:. within the prerogative of making treaties, which, no doubt, 

'.rhat the con trading parties can annul the treaty can not, I pre1mme, be ques- tioned, the same authority precisely being exercised in annulling as in making a. treaty. 

That a breach on one side (e;en of a single article, e!lch being considered as a condition of every other article) disdmrges the other is as little questionable, but with this reservation, that the other side is at liberty to take ad vantage or not of the breach as dissolving the treaty. * *- * 

:M:r. Madison shows that a breach on one side of even a single article of a treaty discharges the other side, but with the reservation that 

the other side is at liberty to take advantage or not of the breach as 

dissolving the treaty. 

There are important provisions in the treaty of 1871 in regard to 

navigation rights, boundary lines, etc., about which no complaint is 

made, and which our Government may wish to remain unabrogated. 

The President in his message ma.kes a just and proper distinction, 

and declares that Article XXIX of the treaty of 1871 terminated July 

1, 1885, when the fisheries articles terminated, but he also says: 

Without basing our complaint upon a. violation of treaty obligations, it Is ne;ertheless true that such refusal of transit and the other injurious acts whlcll 

have been recited constitute a. provoking insistence upon rights neither mitigated by the amenities of national intercourse, nor mollified by the recognition of our liberality and generous considerations~ -

I think it is clear J;hat Article XXIX provides wh~ it shall go iuto 

effect and when it shall cease to have effect. It fixes th.e term pf its 
1888·. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 8271 

own existence: to wit, "the term of years mentioned in .Article 

XXXIII.'' 

Article XXXill -does not me~tion Article XXIX, but contains a 

provision that Articles XVIII to XXV, inclusive, and Article XXX 

shall take effect as soon as the laws required to carry them into operation shall be passed by the legislative bodies ofthe different countries 

concerned thcreinJ and thatThey shall remain in force for the period of ten years from the date in which they may come into operation, and further until the expiration of two years after either of the high contracting parties shall have given notice to the other of its wish to terminate the same. 

The term of years mentioned in Article XXXIII having expired~ including the two years required for notice of termination, I belie•e 

Article XXIX is not now in force, and that it died when the fisheries 

articles of the treaty of 1871 died. The Joint High Commissioners who 

negotiated the treaty so understood, and section third of the act of 

Congress approved March 1, 1873, substantially so declares. 

The language of the President in his message on that subject is conclusive. He says: 

I am of the opinion that the "term of years mentioned in"Article XXXIII," referred to in Article XXIX as the limit of its duration, means the period dur- ing which Articles XVIII to XXV, inclusive, and Article XXX, commonly called the "fishery articles," should continue in force under the language of said Ar- ticle XXXIII. That the joint higb commissioners who negotiated the treaty so understood and intended the phrase is certain, for in a statement containing an account of their negotiations, prepared under their supervision and approved by them, we find the follo:wing entry on the subject: "The transit question was discussed, and it was agreed that any s~ttlement 

that might be made should include a reciprocal arrangement in that respect for the period for which the fishery articles should be in force." In addition to this very satisfactory evidence supporting this construction of the language of Article XXIX, it will be found that the law passed by Congress to carry the treaty into effect fw·nishes conclusive proof of the correctness of such construction. · This Jaw was passed 1\Iarch 1, 18i3, and is entitled ''An act to carry into effed the provisions of the treaty between the UniledStatesand Great Britain, signed in the city of 'Vashington the 8th day of 1\lay, 1871, relating to the fisheries." After providing in its first and second sections for putting in operation Articles XYITI to XXV, inclusive, and Article XXX of the treaty, the thirdsectionisde- voted to Article XXIX, as follows: · ·• SEC. 3. That from the date of the President's proclamation authorized by the first section of this act1 and so long as the articles eighteenth to twenty-fifth, in- clusive, and article thutieth of said treaty, shall remain in force, according to the terms and conditious of article thirty-third of said treaty, all goods, wares, or merchandise arriving at the ports of New York, Boston, and l'ortland, and any other ports in the United St.ates which have been, or may from time to time be, specially designated by the President of the United States, and destined for Her Britannic Majesty's possessions in North America, may be entered at the proper custom-house and conveyed in transit, without the payment of duties, 

through the territory of the United States, nnder such rules, regulations, and conditions for the protection of the revenue as the Secretary of the Treasury may from time to time prescribe; and under like rules, regulations, and condi- tions, goods1 wares, or merchandise may be conveyed in transit, without the pay- ment of duttes, from such possessions, through the territory of the United States, for export from the said ports of the United States." · 

It is so well settled that the legislative power of our country is superior to the treaty-making power that it is hardly necessary to refer 

to the many decisions rendered by the Supreme Court of the United 

States on this subject, and I shall only refer to the language nsed by 

the court in one case. Thecourtsay (Head-money cases, United States 

Reports 112, page 599): 

In short., we are of the opinion that so far as a treaty made by the United States with any foreign nation can be made the subject of judicial cognizance in the courts of this country it is subject to such acts as Congress may pass for its enforcement, modification, or repeal. 

Mr. Speaker, once before in the history of our country a President of the United States called the attention of Congress. to the man- ner in which Canada harassed American fishermen. Though he is 

dead now his action at that time is still admired, and will ever add additionalluster to his great reputation~ a patriot and soldier. I refer 

to President Grant. In his annual message in December, 1870, he alluded to the course pursued by the Canadian authorities toward the 

fishermen of the United States. In many respects .the same state of 

affairs existed in 1870 that exist to-day, and President Grant said to 

Congress: 

Anticipating that an attempt may possibly be made by the Canadian authori- ties in the coming season to repeat their unneighborly acts towards our fisher- men, I recommend you to confer npon the Executive the power to suspend by 

proclamation the operation of the laws of authorizinf: the transit of goods, wares, and merchandise in bond across the territory of the United States to Canada; and further, if such extreme measure become necessary, to !US pend the 

~~[!Ji~~ eo::~~:':a:;~:~rbth!hun'ii!~ek~~!"e~~e Dominion of Canada are perThe effect of this message was remarkable. Almost instantly agents 

were sent from London to Canada to warn the authorities that their unneighborly and improper acts toward American fishermen must cease 

n.nd before the fishing season came again the Joint High Commissio~ which negotiat~d the treaty of Washington in 1871 was authoriZed. 

Thus it appears that President Grant also believed that the proper 

way _to settle these disputes and differences was-through the treaty- maklllg power. 

If the treaty signed. and concluded under the direction and authority 

of President Cleveland had been ratified by the Senate of the United 

States, as was the treaty signed and concluded durinoo the administration of President Grant, there would have been an e;'d to our fisheries 

trouble; but now that the Senate has declared that it will not allow 

President Cleveland to adjust by treaty the old disagreements and · 

disputes which have been renewed on account of the expimtiou of the 

fishery provisions of the treaty of 1871, I do not see how any patriot 

who respects the dignity and honor of his country or the just rights of 

the people dare refuse to indors~ the recommendations of the President 

that the existing powers of retaliation against Canada be enlarged. · 

The President also calls the attention of Congress to another subject 

involving wrongs and unfair treatment to our citizens . . He says: 

The navigation of the Great Lakes and the immense business and ca.rrying trade growing out of the same have been treated with freedom and liberality 

by the United States Government and made free to all mankind, w bile Canadian railroads and navigation companies sha1·e in our country's transportation upon terms as favorable as are accorded to our own citizens. ' 

And he recommends that such legislative action be taken as will give 

Canadian vessels navigating our canals and their cargoes precisely the 

advantage granted to our vessels and their cargoes upon Canadian 

canals, and that the same be measured by exactly the same rule of 

discrimination. 

It is well known that the canals and other public works, built and 

maintained by our Government along the line of the Lakes, are made 

free to all. In contrast to this condition, every lock and canal which 

is a public work of the Dominion of Canada. is subject to tolls and 

charges. 

By Article XXVIIof the treaty of Washington, provision was made 

to secure to the citizens of the United States the use of the Weiland, 

St. Lawrence River. and other canals in the Dominion on terms of 

eqll!l.lity with the inhabitants of the Dominion, and also to secure to 

the subjects of Great Britain the use of the St. Clair Flats Canal on 

te~ms of equality with the inhabitants of the United Stares. 

Notwithstanding this solemn enactment and this intended equality, 

the Secretary of the Treasury has furnished Congress with evidence 

showing that an order has been issued by the authorities of the Dominion of Canada, and is now in force, by which vessels from ports of 

the United States, laden with wheat or other merchandise for export 

or otherwise, are required to pay less toll when they pursue their voyage by way of the St. Lawrence River and Montreal than when they 

pursue their vonge by way of Lake Ontario or American ports, the 

Canadian regu1ationscle..9.rly operating as a discrimination againstAme:rican ports, American railroads and canals, and American vessels. 

To meet this unjust discrimination, the bill under consideration provides that whenever the President shall be satisfied that there is anv 

discrimination whatever in the use of the Weiland Canal, the St. Lawrence River canals, the Chambly Canal, or either of them, which may 

be detrimental to the interests of the United States, or any ofits citizens, he is authorized in his discretion to issue a proclamation directing that a toll of20 cents a ton upon every foreign vessel and her cargo 

passing through either the. Sault·Ste. Marie Canal or the St. Clair Flats 

Canal be collected, and providing further that the President may, in 

his discretion, when he is satisfied there is ll:ny such discrimination, 

prohibit the nse of said canals to any such foreign vess~l 

Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I wish to say with emphasis that we 

should not fuH to be mindful of the obligation which our Government 

owes to more than one hundred thousand men, who manage six thousand vessels engaged in our sea and lake fisheries. Many of these men 

pursue their hazardous business amid dangers such as are not encountered by any other class of citizens, and they maintain an industry 

the annual products of which are valued at $45,000,000.· 

The time has come when we ought to be in earnest, ~nd our legislation should be such as to prove to Canada, to Great Britain, and to the 

world that we are in earnest. 

The power granted to the President in the pending bill is no stronger 

than it ought to be. It is time Canadian wrongs should be resenred 

by the United States and repressed by Great Britain. The bill sJ?.ould 

be passed promptly. • 

Almost every case in which American vessels have been seized by 

the Canadian authorities was in violation of the spirit of the treaty of 

1818. Almost every seizure was in violation of that comity, hospitality, and good feeling that the civilization of this age requires between 

neighboring nations. . 

Adjoining nations are compelled to provide for their mutual interests by legislation. If the Dominion of Canada, supported by the 

Government of Great Britain, legislates in hostility to the interests of our citizens, it is not only our duty but now it is our only alternative 

to legislate in hostility to their interests and retaliate for their bad 

conduct. 

The bill under consideration is not a war measure, but it is a peace 

measure. It is a public, plain announcement to our people and to 

the people of Great Britain that the Government of the United States 

proposes to maintain its dignity and protect the rights of its citizens. 

The President will exercise the power confi<le<l to him intelligently, 

conservatively, and courageously. There can be no doubt about his 

proper appreciation of the dignity and honor of the great Republic 

over which he presides, and any power placed in his hands will be 

nsed for the protection of American _dignity ana of 4merican rights. 

It is by no means certain that he will be required to issue the proclamations authorized by the bill. I hope and believe that when the 

bill nnder consideration is enacted into a. law; the usual wisdom and 
,_ 

, • 

8272 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. SEPTEMBER 4, 

- good judgment of the Canadian authorities and of the English authorL 

ties will again be manifested and all difficulties arranged without re sort to anything that will break up the cordial relations which have 

existed for so many years between the United States and Great Britain. . Let the result be as it will, I believe the President will be supported 

by the people of the United States, regardless of party, in his efforts 

to exercise such authority us may be granted to him by Congress. 

There will be no division on sectional lines, but men of the South and men of the North will stand shoulder to shoulder, in solid phalanx, 

to defend American rights and American honor. [Loud continued applause.] 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has ex- pired. 

1\Ir. McCREARY. I Wl_l.S about to suggest that if I had any further 

time I would reserve it. • 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has exceeded his time 

by three minutes; and if there be no objection, the Chair will recognize the gentleman from Illinois for the same length of time in addition to his hour. 

l\Ir. HITT. l\Ir. Speaker, this new retaliation bill and the message 

with which it was sent here deserve comment, or I would not detain the 

House from voting by any remarks of mine. The circumstances attending it and the peculiar character of the message that the bill accompanied were a surprise to the House. The message was received 

with partisan applause on the Democratic side of the House, the :first 

word uttered about it being from the irrepressible and enthusiastic 

gentleman from .Missouri [Ur. O'NEILL], whocriedoutitwas a" good 

campaign document." [LaughterJ The description sticks to it in 

the public mind. 

Presidents' messa~es sent to Congress are usually state papers, and 

I am not willing to accept that declaration even of his political friend, 

and the imputation that all this is a mere electioneering device. The 

President in this message takes a new position that to every one of us was gratifying in that it admits we were right--all of us who have urged retaliation before-and in that it admits his great mistake in 

abandoning the rights of our fishermen in his late unlamented treaty. 

We have beenhumbledoflate. OurChief:Magistrate sent in a treaty 

which he called a "just, honorable, and satisfactory settlement," and 

in it the rights of American fishermen contended for and firmly claimed 

for many years were given up and to be purchased as privileges. Now 

he-sends a message, and with it comes a bill to empower him to retaliate for the violation of rights not taken care of in that which he said was just settlement, but in that just settlement were excluded. He 

has found out that he was wrong and we were right. 

Who can forget the resounding terms with which this Administration two years ago vindicated in words the rights, the incontestable 

rights, of .American fishermen which we have claimed for some fifty 

years ? And these rights, commercial rights, extended by us to British - subjects in all our ports, and claimed by us in theirs, were utterly abandoned in that treaty which the gentleman from Kentucky has just been 

eulogizing, as did the President, who called itjust, honorable! and satisfactory. 

These commercial rights, so stoutly, and I believe so truthfully and 

logically, contended for in 1886 by the Secret.'lry of State, by Minister 

Phelps, the voice of our people speaking officially, are not recognized, 

set out, and protected in the Chamberlain treaty at all. They are relegated to the fifteenth arti,cle, near the end, and among them the right 

to transship fish. It is there agreed that these rights may be purchased 

by us hereafter as privileges by giving up to Canadians the whole 

amount of what they pay now as duties upon their fish sent into the 

United States. When the President has discovered, as it is evident he 

has, how greatly and how grievously he was mistaken as to the rights 

of American fishermen, because here he asks us for authority to retaliate for the violation of one of those very rights so mistakenly aban- doned last February, I do not feel like interposing opposition. 

We might say in response to his request for power to retaliate that he 

has already abundant powers, and we would like them tried. 

The Congress has conferred upon him <.~ce and again in great and 

liberal measure authority to vindicate our wronged fishermen on the 

northeast coast. He can exclude Canadian ships, fish, products, or any goods coming from Canada. He asks an enlargement on one side 

of one of tlie powers contained in that act of 1887; he wishes power to 

stop goods going through to Canada. Congress there conferred upon 

him powers-with a wide discretion as to how he might apply them, 

revoke in part or in whole or renew-to retaliate for the offenses com- mitted by the Canadian fishermen upon our fishermen, graduatin"g all, 

in kind, in degree, rising higher and higher. He may retaliate by first 

excluding their vessels, not merely fishing ships, but all vessels from_ Canada-their steam-ship lines, their trading vessels, their fishing vessels-all. Second, he may deny entrance to Canadian fish. Third, he 

may exclude or deny entrance to any other product of the Dominion of 

Canada. 

Then come the sweeping words '' or other goods coming from the 

Dominion of Cana-da." We thought when we discussed and passed 

the act of 1887 that we could not touch the bonded transit system, nor jnterrupt it in anyway in our proposed retaliation; but that the treaty 

of 1871, in its twenty-ninth article, protected the right of both Ameri· 

ca.ns and CaJ?-adians to send goods in bond across the other's territory 

Without paymg duty. That was all that stood in the way of his ex· 

eluding all goods coming from Canada; he could not stop those bonded 

in transit. But the President now says, in his new fishery message 

that twenty-ninth article is abrogated, and the gentleman who ha~ just taken his seat says it is ''dead." There is nothing then to prevent him from stopping goods coming from Canada, ev~n thdugh by 

the bonded system, if they only come from Canada to the United S taies 

to go through our country, and the extension of power asked is to sub· 

stantially authorize the arrest of the whole bonded-transit system both 

ways. This would of course authorize the President to stop the entry 

of goods coming by way of our ports and going to Canada as provided 

for by the act of 1866, which the gentleman has read .in extenso. 

For vindicating the rights of our fishermen many members perhaps 

think this is not a necessary power at all; and many think he bas 

abundant power already, and that this is like his request for power to 

buy bonds when he had abundant power. But there is a difference between that case and this. That was a mere pretense of want of power 

for a purpose, and we could readily refuse such a request when the 

pretense was brought out, the politics in it exposed. This is a question not of business policy, but of the rights of American citizens. The 

President asks for an additional power for their p~tection by retaliation. We have indicated to him long ago that be ought to retaliate. 

He bas done nothing. If we refuse this request may it not be held to mean that we exonerate him for his failures and intimate that he need 

do nothing-at least, excuse inaction? With him lies the vast respon· 

sibility of his acts. He is President. I am unwilling to refuse a power 

asked to protect such rights. I know there are reasons for distrust, 

lor refusing additional authority, and still further extension of his 

powers of retaliation. But I do not accept as a basis of my own a.ction the theory of the gentleman who called this a ''campaign docu· men t. '' That is sounding a depth we ba ve never yet reached in A mer· "ican politics. We must still consider it as a President's message. 

The gentleman from Kentucky, with a felicity characteristic of his 

expressions, rich in what they imply or suggest, in eulogizing it classed 

this fishery message with the message of last December~ sometimes 

known as the "free-trade message." It was an apt combination; the 

fishery troubles and free-trade-how can they be used to aid it?-and 

the treatment of the fishery question and the tendency towards freetrade that distinguish the Administration have gone hand in hand 

since the day of the inauguration. [Applause on the Republican side.] 

How did the Administration begin this curious business-this long 

play of one interest to forward a pet theory? In 1883 this House and 

the Senate, by a joint resolution, had provided for the termination in 

July, 18S5,'ofthefishery articles of the treaty of 1871, which the gentle· mau bas cited, and that termination was to take place in a few months, 

when the present Administration came into office. 

Everybody interested, the fishermen and all others, had been notified 

for two years. All were prepared for it, and all the fishermen of the 

United States were impatiently waiting for the last day of the arrangement which bad proven to be so greatly to their disadvantage. They 

did not ask and did not want any interference in their behalf to prolong it. It was only eight days after the beginning of this reform Administration when a discussion was commenced with the British minister for the renewal of the arrangement, the news of which filled the 

Canadians with joy and the American fishermen with dismay. It was 

to provide that our fishermen should still t>njoy the inshore fisheries of 

Canada, which they did not want; and although the Administration or 

the Executive could not suspend the tariff laws and give the Canadians 

flee trade in fish at once, he could take the fu'St step towards that end; 

and accordingly a promise was made to the British minister that the 

President would recommend to Congress the appointment of a commission to take up the subject of the fisheries, and the commission, he was assured, would go on and consider the enlargement of trade-in other 

words, free trade in fish. 

'The President kept his word. He sent in a message that recom· mended a commission. I remember it' well. He urged upon this 

Honse to proceed in that line and authorize a commission. Now, the 

House, though Democratic and friendly to the President as far as it 

could go, would do nothing of the kind. The members knew too well 

the sentiment of the people on this subject. It was sent to the Senate 

also, and the Senate sent him back word that it disapproved of any 

such course. That was a disappointment-a check. His policy-that same policy that is indicated by his last free-trade message, and which 

the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr . .McCREARY] classed together with 

this. fishery message-was pursued still. The Canadians, greatly en· couraged by what had been done by our Government, now began a campaign of outrages upon our fishermen by every form of vexation 

intended to secure this free tmde in fish, which they believed they 

would ultimately obtain indirectly if not directly. 

Is there any one here who can forget the indignation of every American citizen during 1886 at the recital of wrongs brought daily from 

the Northeast, of ships boarded, anested, and tied up in the Canadian 

ports, the inhumanities to which our fishermen were subjected, the in· 

suits to the American flag? The story is a burning one of wrongs un~ 

,. 
...... 

,-. 

1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 8273 

redressed and insults unavenged to this hour. The House, responsive 

to indignant public feeling, took the matter up and passed the retaliation bill of 1887. Negotiations, however, had been going on all the 

time, and strangely enough after Congress had thus spoken went on still. It seemed to be determined in advance that the right way was 

nC>t to stop the wrongdoer, but to commence discussion with him and 

continue it and persist in it. . The retaliation bill was passed, conferring upon the Executive the 

authoriL-y which I have already briefly stated. It st.·mds upon the 

statute-book still, and eighteen months have passed by. None of the 

powers conferred in that bill have been exercised, and no intimation was ever given that any was meditated untilafewdays ago we received 

a request for still more power. 

This system of outrages which I have spoken of was checked in part, 

I think, by the influence of the passage of that retaliation bill, which 

this House passed by a vote of 236 against 1, a pretty strong indication 

by the representatives of the people of the sentiment of the nation and or the method the American people desired the Executive to take to 

enforce the rights and redress the wrongs of our fellow-citizeris. Negotiations went on still, not visible to the great world, and cropped out 

ali last in the Bayard-Chamberlain negotiation-which all of iYOU re- member-last winter. · We knew nothing in this Hall, nothing was known anywhere to the 

outside world, of the proceedings in that negotiation, and we waited 

all with anxiety, and some with hope, for the treaty that was to be the 

result. It came at last in February, and the country cried out at the 

lame conclusion. The gentleman from Kentucky has compared that 

treaty with the treaty of 1871, and the treatment it received in the 

Senate with the treatment which the treaty of1871 received in General 

Grant's time. 

The different treatment which the two received is a very good indication of their respective merits. One was an abandonment of the 

rights of American citizens, and was rejected by the Senate; the other, 

covering a great i:ody of subjects, dea.l t with them in a spirit which the 

nalion and, I believe, maukind has approved; and in a part of that 

treaty relating to the Alabama claims there was a great advance in the 

methods of adjusting international disputes. It was a notable event 

in the history of the progress of international law. That treaty was received with genernl satisfaction, and was confirmed by the Senate. 

I must say that the part which dealt with this fatal subject of the 

fisheries proved hru:dly better than some other arrangements had been 

before and have been since, and we were glad to ter.minate it as soon as we could in 1885. It was an unfortunate thing, and there is no need of.reviving the history and the bitterness connected with the story 

of the Halifax Commission and that unjust award by an unfair um- pire, based on pretended evidence long since exposed and denounced. 

The treaty that was brought in last February, called generally the 

Bayard-Chamberlain treaty, was the one which, before we saw it, we bad anxiously hoped would fulfill expectations excited by the spirited 

dispatches of Mr. Bayard, and would give protection and security thereafter to the oft-asserted rights of American citizens. Anticipating it, 

many of us looked back over the protesting dispatches written d~ring 

the time Canadian fishermen were committing daily outrages upon our fishermen, recalled what Minister Phelps, as well as Secretary Bayard, 

had said with such forcible logic of our rights to commercial privileges 

in British ports similar to those we granted to British vessels and fish- ermen in our ports; of the rights determined by the reciprocal legislation of 1830. 

What was the result? When that treaty eame we discovered that 

it abandoned a vast region of :fishing waters in which American :fisher-

' men bad been before as free to :fish as on the high seas, and it allotted 

those water5 by delimitation to be held exclusively for the Canadians. 

There were some provisions to grant to Americans what would not be 

denied by any nation on earth-refuge in disaster, relief f1·om some 1 of the most exasperating vexations of litigation, facilities for sickness 

and death. But the treaty relegated to the fifteenth article those great · and ca.rdinal questions of American rights which this Administration 

bad defended with vigor--I wish I could add, had persisted in defending to the last. 

The assertion of those rights has been the task of American states- men for many years, and it is hard to say which of our public men has 

stated most vigorously and forcibly the doctrine of the rights of Amer-

; ican fishermen in the pods of the Canadian coast. That treaty passed · those rights to a contingent, separate article, which provided that we · might hereafter, by paying for them in the remission of the duty on 1 fish, obtain those commercial privileges-purchaseofsnpplies and trans- . shipment of C;ltch. It gave up the whole question. Fortunately the 

·Senate received that treaty in a spirit of careful scrutiny. They found 1 it vastly difrerent from the treaty of 1871, and they pro, erly rejected 

. it. It wa.s subjected to long examination and debate, and in that croci-

; ble it was found utterly wanting. The opinion of the ..country had re-

. jected it I eng before the vote of the Senate. 

As the gentleman from Kentucky said, it is dead, and it were well · if that vrere the end of it; but it has left behind a heavy load. The ad- missio~ ill that treaty live to plague ns. They are the admissions of _the Drgan of the American people, th~ Executive of the nation. They 

XIX-513 

are the most solemn and formal declaration of the whole scope and 

boundary of our rights, as we by our President recognize them in a doc- ument that he Ca.lls "just, honorable, and satisfactory." While it is 

not a treaty in force and has no obligation now, it may be cited, as it 

certainly wiJd be, in ·any negotiations that we may enter upon hereafter. 

It was said in the discussion of that treaty elsewhere, and in the 

press, that the enforcement of its terms would lead to the same old vexa- tion, troubles, and confusion in the future, when harshly enforced, 

especially the third and fourth articles, changing the dead line, as it 

certainly would be if the hope of free fish through that means was again 

held out to Canada; that the line of delimitation was one hard to en- force and the line 3 miles from low-water mark difficult to observe in · 

murky wild weather, and so our :fishermen would be liable to seizure 

if fishing or preparing to fish; that there were in the tr~ty provisions 

which the hostile spirit of Canadian local authorities could make the 

ground of multiplying cont-roversies, so that if ratified it would not 

have been a cure even for those minor difficulties, while it ga>e away 

the great points in the controversy. . There was a part of that treaty which was not written; a postscript 

which was not printed with it. A treaty is a bargain. There was more bargained in this case than was written down and signed. The protocols were sent to the Senate upon its request, and are public documents 

which we have seen, containing the record of the formal meeting and 

adjournment each day-a barren record of forms and dates. The arguments, the concessions, the negotiations, the daily struggle of mind with 

mind in adjusting these questions of rights, of values, of places, in all 

their sinuosities, are not shown there, nor the agreements nor the prom- ises. Bnt as in Great Britain the Parliamentary government, by its 

system of open explanations, often discloses to Europe many secrets 

which otherwise would not be known from anything on the continent, so the repetition of that same system of government on the north brings ns some information from the Canadian Parliament, tow bich Sir Charles 

Tupper made his report when he returned from Washington; and we find it printed in Hansard, the official publication of the Government 

of Canada. In that report ~his accomplished and trained statesman, 

who bas dealt with this grave question so many times, whese skill, 

whose experience, whose ·knowledge, we have bad occasion to know in· 

negotiations for many years, stated, and with reserve {for he said he 

must be cautious in his statements, as all that he was saying there 

might be quoted agn.insttheirinterests pending in Wasbington)-stated, as touching the question of free trade, that there were some promises, 

which I will not try to repeat without reading his exact words from 

the official record. I read: 

Mr. Bayard told us, the American plenipotentiaries told us, that there was but one way of obtaining what we wished. "You want greater freedom of com- mercial intercourse; you want relaxation in our tariff arrangements," etc. "You will find"-

Continues Mr. Bayard- I give his closing lauguage-

"Yotl will find that the policy of this Government, the policy of the President, and of the House of Representatives, the policy of tlre great Democratic party of the United States, will at once take an onward ·march in the direction you. propose"-

[Laughter and applause on the Republican side.] 

"and accomplish steadily that which you would desire. It is the only way it - can ever be attained." 

Sir Charles then adds: Those were not empty words; those were the so leer utterances of d istinguisbed 

statesmen, who pointed to the avowed policy of the Government of the United States us the best evidence of the sincerity of what they 10aid. 

Then be calls attention to the position on this floor of the gentleman 

from Texas [Mr. MILLS]. I am sorry that gentleman is not present, 

as I refer to him personally. But, says Sir Charles Tupper, as chair- man of the great Committee on Ways and 1\feans, Mr. MILLS occupies a position in the American Congress corresponding to finance minister 

in a parliamentary government-is selected hy the Speaker-designated in obedience to the sentiment of the Democratic party. 

Sir Charles Tupper then adds: 

What have we seen? The ink is barely dry upon this treaty before be, as the representative of the Government and chairman of the Committ-ee on \Vays and 1\Ieans, brings forward a measure-to do what? \Vhy, to make free articles that Canada sends into the United States, and upon which l:l.st year $l,800,000 of duty wos pa.id. 

Let me add that he not only introduced the Mills bill, hut pressed it 

through the Honse. He kept Mr. Bayard's word to the ietter. That 

part was ratified. The Democratic party stood by its bargain with the 

British plenipotentiary. [Laughter and applause on the Republican 

side.] 

The eminent gentleman from Texas to whom I refer, and who, 1 regret, is absent, is ''starring in the provinces,'' carryin~ on the great 

campaign work of which my mistaken friend from Missouri [Mr. O'NEIL] calls this President's message a part. And I observed thereport of a remark b-y the gentleman from Texas, referring to this very 

message, that" while the Hepnblicans may have taken the British. lion 

by the tail, we take him by the snout." Thnt was just after he had 

carried out this bargain with the British emoy and crammed the Brit- ish lion's month with $1,800,000ayear-asht>ergift! ''We take him 

by the snout!" [Laughter aud applause ou the Republican side.] 

The gentleman who bas just taken his seat [Mr. McCREAI!Y] argued 

• 

,_ 
• 

·I 

8274 CONGRESSIONAL 1-tECORD-HOUSE. SEPTEMBER 4, 

at much length the question of the abrogation at present of the twentyninth article of the treaty of 1871, providing for. reciprocal tran it in 

bond across the United States and across Canada. I do not think it 

necessary to assent or answer. The President in his message tells us th..'lt in 1886 notice was given to our representatives that this right 

of transshipment in bond would be denied t~ us. That denial to us would relieve us of obligation to Canada. I have tried to get a copy 

of that notice. I have asked our amiable acting chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs [Mr. McCREARY], as the organ of the com- mittee, if he would procure it from the State Department, where--

Mr. BELMO:NT. The gentleman will permit me. The notice re- ferred to was in the CfiSe which undon btedly is familiar to my colleague on the committee, the case of the Novelty, which has been-- Mr. BITT. I am familiar with the case of the Novelty; but the 

remark of the President in his messa!!e is that "in 1886 notice was received by the representatives of our Government," and he uses the 

word in a way which would lead us to accept it as meaning formal and 

solemn notice from one government to another, given in 1886 to our representatives. Why, sir,. the story of the Novelty is a statement 

made by the Secretary of State, in a dispatch to Minister West that 

the consul at Halifax told him that the collector of customs told him 

that they would not allow transshipment in bond. That is the "notice." 

Mr. BELMONT. The gentleman recognizes that is sufficient notice. 

Mr. BITT. I have not complained of that. Mr. BELMONT. The American consul at Halifax received notice 

certain privileges had been withdrawn. 

Mr. HITT. I am aware of what the gentleman is stating. 

ML BEL fONT. Privileges which had been up to that time granted 

onder Canadian laws. 

Mr. BITT. That does not appear in the dispatches. Mr. BELMONT. The gentleman will acknowledge that would be 

sufficient notice? 

Mr. HITT. I have read the dispatch to which the gentleman refers, 

wherein it appears that Mr. West is informed that Mr. Bayard is informed that Mr. Phelan is informed by a; collector of customs at that 

·office that they would not allow any further shipments in bond. 

Mr. BELMONT. I ask the gentleman if he does or does not con- sider the notice sufficient? 

Mr. BITT. I am not questioning the truth of this or the validity 

of the notice. ?t~r . .BELMONT. That is all I wish to know, and I am perfectly 

satisfied with the answer of my colleague. 

Mr. HITT. No, sir; I have not questioned that. I have been try- ing to find out if there was anything more. I have been waiting to 

know whether there was or not any formal document. I know the 

President would not have made such . a statement unless it was true. 

His statement in his message that there was a· notice is sufficient. 

That notice that the reciprocal obligation on the side of the British 

to permit shipment in bond would no longer be observed released us · at once from observing it. I think that is the end of that question, 

without trying to prove that Article XXIX died in some secret way 

unknown to either nation three years ago~ because it said "for the 

term mentioned in Article XXXIII," and Article XXXIII said that 

Articles XVIII to XXV and XXX should stand ten years and further 

till one of the parties gave two years' notice, and notice was given and 

ended XVIII to XXV and XXX, and XXIX must have died with 

them. I have see.n no need of ~oing into the humiliation of an a gument 

concerning the force of Article XXIX, based on references and crossreferences, and forced meanings of words, as if I were trying to get a thief out of trouble on a flaw in an indictment., picking out a reference from one arliicle of the treaty and then pie king out something else 

' from another article of the treaty, and so on, trying to infer from them 

when pieced together that it could be considered as then terminated, 

when no one knew it. . It may be a plausible and ingenious legal argument as the President 

has made it in his message. I will not examine it; I will not be drawn 

into it. Sir, in dealings between two great nations, the leading peoples 

of the world, can we after three years have passed and we as well as the other side have acted daily and are now acting on the ~wenty-nintb 

· article, can we in good faith undo it in a moment without a word and 

say it has been void for years? The notice received in 1886 that they 

would not observe it on the other side released us at once from the 

obli6ation to observe it, though that did not terminate the article. 

As the President considered that a full notice in 1886, why did he 

not act then and inform the British Government that their refusal of 

transshipment would be met by refusal on our part? I regret that he 

has waited so long without acting either on the retaliation measure 

we placed in his hands, or on the notice from the .other side thai gave hi~ the opportunity for acting. There is something-to recur again to that twenty-ninth article- mys~erious a.bout its alleged demise. I was a member of the committee that reported the joint resolution in 1883 to terminate the fishery 

articles. I believe I am almost the sole survivor on the committee be- sides my friene, General KETCH.A~I. 

At the time that resolution to abroga.te the fishery articles was before 

the committee the bonded tran it system,. under the twenty-ninth :uti- cle, was considered, and it was intended to avoid touching that system. Members from the Northwest were concerned about it. 

Wb.en that resolution passed upon this :floor Mr. Washburne, of Minnesota, asked whether there was anything which touched shipment in 

bond. Mr. Rice, of Massachusetts, a veteran and eminent member of 

the committee~ told the House that its terms were framed expressly 

to avoid that. . 

In the Senate :Mr. Windom, from Minnesota, bad raised the question and the words had been amended with that very purpose. If the 

joint resolution struck at Article XXIX the House did not kuow it. 

The Senate did not know it. President Arthur did not know it. He 

did not mention it in his proclamation; nor was it in the earlier com- munication or notice by Mr. Lowell to the B1·itish G-overnment. Lord 

Gra.nville did not know it, did not so underst."tnd it, but just t.he con- trary. When he received notice of the passage of the re olution he 

ca.lled Mr. Lowell's attention to the possible termination of the thirtysecond article of the treaty, which was concerning Newfoundland, and 

not having been carried out by Newfoundland in legislation seemed 

to be by its ,terms of no effect; and I.ord Granville asked, to be perfectly clear, if that was also to be held to be terminated. Mr. Lowell 

said, ''You are right; but I will consult Mr. Frelinglmysen.'' A cor- respondence ensued; Ur. Frelinghuysen confirmed and appro\·cd what ~Ir. Lowell had said; not a \vord in the correspon.dence by Mr. Frelinghuysen or the others to intimate that Article XXIX was included or touched at all. 

In an interesting interview, communicated by the gentlemnn from 

New York [Mr. BELlUO~ T],or what purported to be an interview, published in the New York World of last Friday, I see a statement to the 

effect that be last year waited upon Mr. Cleveland at the time the Belmont bill was under consideration in the House, and discus ed it with 

the Presidenttwho approved it, and the gentleman can conect me if the 

extract does not faithfully represent what he said; that some gentlemen 

from the Northwest (I assume that they were some Democratic members), feeling anxious and uneasy as to the results of the Belmont bill 

upon the people of that section by its possible effect on traffic, spoke to 

him in reference to the matter, and he took them to the White Honse 

and discussed the bill with the President, who appro>ed the Belmont 

bill. Now, the Belmont bill contains an express recognition of Article 

XXIX. [Laughter.] So the President thought it was in force. It 

provides that,'' upon proof that the privileges secured by Article XXIX 

of the treaty concluded between the United States and Great Britain on ?t1ay 8, 1871, are denied as to goods, etc., the President may also by 

proclamation forbid the exercise of the like privileges as to goods," 

etc.--

Mr, BELMONT. Will the gentleman permit me a moment to interrupt him just there, as he has referred to me? 

Mr. HITT. If the gentleman wishes me to yield for a question I 

will do so, but I would rather, as he is to follow me, that be will ex- plain in his own time. 

l\'Ir. BELMONT. I think I can give a satisfactory explanation. M.r. IDTT. I trust it will be satisfactory. 

Any one who has the RECORD in his possession can refer to the bill 

of which I have spoken. President Cleveland thought last year that 

the twenty-ninth article was valid, and that we should observe it a.nd 

make the other side observe it. We thought so when we framed the 

retaliation act. . The debate then turned on that very point; and if any one will take 

the pains to do so, although I do not know that any one has sufficient 

curiosity to read old Congressional debates of eighteen months ago, be 

will :find that great care was taken to avoid any infringement or that 

article. Articles of agreement, when there is a question a.s to the1r 

meaning, are usually construed as between contending parties by the 

long continued conduct of the. parties to the contract, and these two 

nations have plainly by their acts construed this article as a pledge of 

their mutual faith, binding upon each, aml no one thought of questioning it until last Thursday week, when it was revealed for the first time 

from the White House. Then a revelation came that this article had 

died- died in the night over three years ago, the whole ,,·orld unconscious of the filet. I notice in the morning papers that the Cann.-

dian ministers in recent speeches have referred to the twenty-ninth 

article of this treaty as in force. It is evident that they had not learned 

all tha.t is known in Washington. 

Why, there is another article with the same phraseology as the twentyninth, "for the term mentioned in Article XXXIII," which the President's argument or discovery would abrogate; I mean Article XXVIII 

of the same treaty. It begins in the same words, provides for the s:1me 

term menti~ned in Article XXXIII, which provides a method for the 

teTmination of articles, ten years and further till two years' notice is 

given, and yet I have not heard gentlemen claim that the rule which 

they would apply to Article XXIX should determine the existence of 

Article XXVIII as well. Now, the twenty-eighth article is that which makes Lake Michigan 

free to Canadian vessels, and this afternoon at the ports of Mil waukee and Chicago, all along their docks are Canadian ships whose right to be_ 
.._ 

1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE. 8275 

there depends on that article, which died three years ago and they -do 

not know it. [Laughter.] They do not know that there is no such 

article and they have no right to be there, and are liable to be turned 

out of the whole lake by telegraph at any hour. 

No, Mr. Speaker, there is no need of resorting to any such quibble 

to justify our action in voting for a bill granting plenary authority in 

this matter. The British authodties have disregarded their obligations 

to permit the transit. in bond, and therefore the obligation is not binding on us. 1f we choose to assert our release, we can do so at any time. 

A decent regard for the usages of mankind ordinarily demands a communication when such di putes occur. The aggrieved nation usually informs the other that they have disregarded the agreement and refused 

the"ir part of the reciprocal duties and obligations, and so can not expect a one-sided perto1·mance of the agreement. We can therefore 

cease on our part. That is all that is nece sary. · 

The authority the President asks, according to his own theory and 

message, pe possesses-that is, touching goods-coming u:om Canada, for 

we provided in that very act a power which I mentioned some time 

ago, whereby, under certain conditions, he might exclude not only 

vessels from our ports and everywhere from entrance into the conntry, 

but any other product of Canada and any goods coming from Canada; 

English or Chine e, or :.my other goods in Canada or coming from Canada could be excluded by him from that Ride. The bonded transit 

system having been disregarded by the British is no longer binding 

upon us, and hence he can exclude them now, coming from either way. 

This authority now asked, to exclude goods coming from either way, 

would enable him to stop transit of goods for Canada arriving at New 

York and other ports, provided for jn the act of 1866. In so far this 

bill would confer an enlargement of the authority granted in tile retaliation act of 18 7. That is about all there is of it; for that act substantially covers goods coming from Canada .. 

M:r. Speaker, the President lays sn·ess upon retaliation for fishermen's wron crs by striking at traffic in bond. He says in his message 

that retaliation should be by "visiting upon the offending party the 

same measure or kind of treatment of which we complain and as far as 

possible within the same lines," a!ld, he says, "with the least possible 

damage to ourselves.'' As a practical fa-ct, the interruption of the traffic 

in bond would probably affect onr people more seriously and more injuriously than anything that has transpired in the fishing difficulty 

sinee the beginning; and as to punishing an enemy, while it might 

trouble many persons in Canada, it would play directly into the hands 

anrl promote the pm·poses of the body of men who now rule Canada. 

Canada is ruled by a body of ab1e men under a system which has enabled the Tory party with concentrated English influence to keep Sir 

John Macdonald in power now these many years. Every means within 

the reach of that governing Tory influence bas long been exerted to{ie-· 

velop every element which would tend to keep t.hat people separate 

from the United States; to bind them together, to force them in spite 

of nature to deal only :iJong that northern line, to unite and come together as nearly like a nation as possible. It was a tremendous 

problem. 

Canada upon tte map appears a great block of country, half a continent; in fact it is a long feeble string of thinly united groups ofpopubtion. The maritimepro,·inces are separated by a vast region of almost 

desert conn try from the large body of people that occupy the central region of Quebec and Ontario; then there is a ·long rocky stretch of the 

upper Lake Superior country separating that from the Manitoba region, 

aml then again you must traverse a vast vacant space to reach the coast 

province around Vancouver. All along, pressing close upon them on 

the south, is the great Republic, sixty millions strong. 

To prevent the subtle attraction and almost irresistible tendency together of neighboring populations, which drew each of these groups of 

Canadian people by interest to the great people on tbe ·south, has long 

been the effort of <Ainadian statesmen. Thev have bound these several 

populations together by a costly and unprofitable system of government 

milroads or roads subsidized by government. The one that connects 

the maritime provinces with Quebec was constructed by a. tremendous 

outby from the treasury. It co t more than forty millions. It is 

worth notbinrr, less than nothing. It is a ccnsLant drain and burden 

upon the treasury. 

I saw a gentleman who had been over it recently and •he said the 

grass would yet grow between the tracks of that great-co tly thorough- fare, so slight is the business now done. Stop transit in bond now coming across the United States, turn it all over that intercolonial road to 

the sea, and it will become a great trunk line, its trains loaded with 

the commerce of central Canada. Now, I have no sympathy with the 

separative policy of Sir John Macdonald and his Government, norwith 

that Tory part.y which governs the Canadian people. I would gl:1dly see improved relations between the two countries, but l do not want 

all the conce sion on one side; for instance, by giving up $1,800,000 

annually of duties upon their goods, with no reciprocal concession whatever; nor do I see the wisdom of promoting the general policy of the 

Tory government. 

The people of Canada are not our enemies. Why, one million of our 

· coru:tituents were born in Canada.. I believe it is estimated that one- fourth of the native-born Canadians are to-day in the United State . They are good citizens, among the most industrious, intelligent, loyal 

and patriotic. Do you believe their relatives across the way think 

only of this country in hatred? The fishermen of Canada, owing to 

the jealousy of conflicting interests, l1ave inflicted wrongs on Ol:r fishermen. 

Let me recall the words of the President that retaliation should be 

''visited upon the offending party.'' Stop the transit-in-bond system, 

turn Canadian traffic to their coast, and you will make the cities of 

Halifax and St. John prosperous centers of new life and wealth-towns 

the names of wbich recall to every American the indignation he felt 

through 1886 at :the news from that quarter of humiliation and outrage 

to our citizens. 

The President thinks we should punish the offending party "in the 

same line with the injured. '' Would not the offending party be rewarded? He can hurt our own Northwest, if he shall be so injudicious 

as to select this among all the methods of retaliation we p;taced in his 

bands in that wide discretion we gave him to choose any part, to apply 

to any part, to enforce, revoke, or renew. 

He would, in arresting this large intercourse, with a certainty that 

it will be met hy like measures on the other side, take away the competition of the Canadian lines, and make the control of the trunk-line 

pool complete over this business. They could dictate terms as they 

pleased to the Northwest. I will not readily believe that Lhe President of the United States will ever subject a large number of our people unnecessarily to such retaliation-retaliation upon ourselves. 

·wrongs are going on now in the way of interrnptinf?: fishermen and 

.fishing vessels, retaliation for which has been provided in the law. 

Why is it not applied? No, he thinks the way to redressJfisbermen's 

wrongs is to admit foreign fish free, and bankrupt them, while benefiting those who wron~ them. 

The gentleman from Kentucky read some facts for which I thank 

him. I took note of them, and will recall them to attention. The 

Herman Sampson within two weeks was seized and fined by theCanadi~ au.thorities in defiance of those very rights which Mr. Bayard 

and 1\Ir:. Phelps so often· stated with just and forcible logic. That vessel had been to St. John's to buy ~orne herring. 

The Novelty, of which the gentleman also spoke, was refused coal a 

week before. Twenty-five vessels this season are said to have been compelled to pay from $150 to $200 for the privilege of buying supplies; 

the veryprivilegewliich wedaimed for our fishermenin this discussion 

which has run through a lifetiQle. That right is one that we extend 

every day to any Canadian vessel, fishing or trading, and we have contended always that our vessels, with proper permits to trade, we1:e entitled to the same rights in Canadian ports. 

The President is clothed with power to retaliate. Why does he not 

enforce the retaliation now? Why is he waiting? The message indicates a sudden outburst of zeal on behalf of the fishermen. His indignation is all at the wrong done to our fishermen in denying them 

transshipment of fish in bond. How great and urgent is it? The consul-general at Halifax, who was named by the gentleman from New 

York a few moments ago, is Mr. Michael Phelan, an appointee of the 

present Administration, and,• I am told, a man of singular intelligence. 

Let me read a few words from what that consul-general stated so re- cently as the 24th of August: 

1\Iackerel is t he only fish there is that our fishermen want to transship home 

in bond, and as th~e are no mackerel being caught this year, that is not alive 

question just now. 

[Laughter.] 

That is the la...o:;t word I have been able to obtain from any source 

likely to be well informf'.d on this subject. Is the President think-ing 

of fishermen ; or is he fishing fox votes? [Laughter.] 

The gentleman from Kentucky referred to the reception given in Engla,nd to General Grant's message when he threatened retaliation. We 

have had some opportunity to see the reception given in England to 

the President's messag_e sent here the other day. The chief organ of 

opinion in the British Empire is the London Times, and it greets with 

admiring congratulation the President's message, apparently hostile, 

remembering that he is the author of the two messages which the gent1em:m from Kentucky aptly compared, the free-trade message as well 

as tbe fisheries message. The London Times, bearing in mind the whole 

situation, says: 

President Cleveland has dished the Republicn.nsby a masterly move, and may fairly be cong-ratulated upon his adroitness. 

[Laughter and :applause.] 

The writer knew that the Administration which came out with this 

stage-thunder now was the sa.me one that bad brought tn and driven 

through the Mills bill, giving tbe Canadians $1,800,000 .a year of remission of duties without auy compensation whatever. 

Sir, I ha.-e favored remission of duties where it could be done with 

reciprocal advanta~e. Numerous instances have arisen in the last-dozen 

years, while I have bad my attention -directed to our relations with 

different foreign nations, where I thought such exchanges of reciprocal 

facilities could have been made with great profit to our country. I 

have never yet, however, seen the instance where there was a country 

which I loved so much better than my own that I would take from our 

revenues $1,800,:000 every year and give it to them for nothing. [Laughter and applause on the Republican side.] I amstillauAmer- ican. 
8276 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. SEPTE~ER 4, 

I have spoken long, perhaps, too long for your patience, of our relations with Canada, and I must add that the remission of the duties 

leyied upon Cani).dian products would, I believe, be wise policy if we 

in return could secure the Canadian market. But we have always 

been most unfortunate in dealing with those statesmen, and have always been outwitted. It has been almost all concession on our partlittle or nothing secured in return. It was so in that one-sided and 

unfortunate treaty of 1854, called the reciprocity treaty. It was so 

in the unfortunate arrangement, ca1led. a treaty, recently negotiated by 

Sir Charles Tupper and Mr. Chamberlain, where we yielded all along 

the line and made a provision at the end to give up to them the duties 

on fish in return for what we had always claimed were our incontestable rights. It was so agai..t]. when we yielded to them in the Mills 

bill, passed here in the House, wifhout any compensation whatever. 

I would enlarge widely, very widely, our relations with Canada if I 

could do it so that the arrangement would be profitable to our own citizens. I am an adYocate of friendly relations with foreign countries. 

It is the policy of wisdom. It is inspired by the highest and broadest 

sentiments that should animate every public man and- every nation. 

Wl,lenever it can be done with an enlightened self-interest in ·dew, 

which in nations as in indi v id nals must be the guide, it is our duty to 

cultivate in every way friendly relations and increased intercourse with 

foreign countries; and I believe this Canadian question and all questions cognate to it will yet be solved on broader lines and on higher 

principles. 

I haYe introduced a measure, now on the Calendar, looking to commercial union with Canada, excluding all idea of political union. I 

hope it ma.y yet receive thoughtful and favorable consideration. I 

fear, however, that it will not be done immediately, but it will be 

when calm shall l'etutn to heated spirits, when Presidents' messages 

shall no more be campaign documents, when legislation will not be 

dehnsed for use as electioneering devices. 

J or do I entertain confident hope of wise action on legislation .already 

had. I cannot help sharing some of the distrust that so many have 

emphatically expressed of the present Administration and the sincerity 

of its aw!ikening to duty and adopting the ideas that we have pressed 

so long upon it. We cannot tell whether aught will result, but it will 

not be long till, I trust, in other and I believe better bands an administration will take up the whole subject and bring it to a just, honorable, and satisfactory conclusion-a solution which will be permanent, 

which will bring our interests together in mutual harmony for mutual 

profit, conserving the peace and the independence and the glory of both 

peoples. [Applause.] : 

APPENDIX. 

JOINT RESOLUTION OF MAB.CH 3,1883, TO -TERMINATE FISHERY ARTICLES. 

Joint resolution providing fo.r the termination of Articles numbered XVTII to XXV inclusive, and Article numbered XXX of the treaty between the United 

States of America and Her Britannic Majesty, concluded at Washington l\Iay 

8,1871. . . Be i t resoLved by the 8enate and House of R~resentatives of the United 8tales of America in Cong1·ess assemble-d, That in the judgment of Congress the provisions of Articles numbered XVill to XXV, inclusive, and of Article XXX of the treaty 

between the United States and Her Britannic Majesty, for an amicable settle- ment of all causes of difference between the two countries, concluded at Wash- ington on the 8th day of May, A. D.1sn, ought to be terminated at the earliest 

possii.Jle time and be no longer in force; and to this end the President be, and 

be hereby is, directed to give notice to the Government of Her Britannic Majesty that the provisions of each and every of the articles·aforesaid will termi- nate and be of 11.0 force on the expiration of two years next after the time of 

g-iving such notice, - SEC. 2. That the President be, and he hereby is, directed to give and com- municate to the Government of Her Britannic Majesty such notice of such termination on lhe lst day of January, A. D. 1883, or as soon._thereafter as may be. 

SEC. 3. That on and after the expiration of the two years' I ime required by said treaty, each and every of said articles shall be deemed and held to have 

expired and be of no force and effect, and that every department of the Gov- ernment of tbe United States shall execute the laws of the United States (in the 

premises) in t.be same manner and to the same effect as if said articles had nevet· been in force; and the act of Congress approved March I, A. D. 1873, en- titled "An act to carry into effect the provisions of the treaty between the United 

States and Great Britain, signed in the city of Washington the 8th day of 1\Iay, 1871, relating to the fisheries," so far as it relates to the articles of said treaty so to be terminated, shall be and stand repealed and be of no force on and after 

the time of the expiration of said two years. · Approved 1\Iarch 3, 1883. 

, RETALIATION BILL PROPOSF;D AND PENDING, 

A bill to empower the President to carry out the purposes of an act entitled "An act to authorize the President of the United States to protect and defend the 

rights of American fishing vessels, American fishermen, American tracling and 

other vessels in certain cases, and for other purposes," approved J'.Iarch 3,1887. 

Be it enaeted, etc., That whene,•er the President may deem it his duty to exer- cise any of the powers given to him by an act en tilled "An act to authorize the 

President of the United States to protect and defend the rights of American fish- ing vessels, American fishermen, American trading and other vessels in certain cases, and for other purposes," approved 1\Iarch 3, 1887, it shall be lawful for tile 

President, in his discretion, by proclamation to that effect, to suspend, in whole or in part, the transportation across the territory of the United States, in bond . and without the payment of duty, of goods, wares, and merchandise imported or exported from any foreign country from or to the British dominions in North 

America. RETALuTION ACT OF li1ARCH 3, 1887. 

Be it enacted, etc., That whenever the President of the United States shall be 

satisfied that American fishing -vessels or American fishermen, visiting or being in the waters or at any ports or places of the British dominions of North America, are or then la-telyhavebeen denied or abridged in the enjoyment of any rights 

seciUed to them by~reatyor law,or are o1· then lately have been unjustly vexed 

or harassed in the enjoyment of such rights, or subjected to unreasonable re. strictions, regulations, or requirements in respect of such rights, or otherwise 

unjustly vexed or harassed in said waters, ports, or places; or whenever the 

President of tb_e United States shall be satisfied that any such fbhing vessels or fishermen, having a permit under the laws of the United States to touch and 

trade at any port or ports, place or places in the British dominions of North 

America, at·e or tlten lately have been denied the privilege of entering such port or ports, place or pla.ces, in the same manner and under the same regulations as may exist therein applicable to trading vessels of the most favored nation, or shall be unjustly vexed or harassed in respect thereof, or otherwll>e be unjustly vexed or harassed therein, or shall be prevented from purchasing such supplies as may there be lawfully sold to trading vessels of the most favored nation; or whenever the President of the United States shall be satisfied that any other 

vessels of the United States, their masters or· crews, so arriving at or being in such British waters or porls or places of the British dominions of North America, are or then lately have been denied any of the privileges therein accorded to the vessels, their masters or crews, of the most favored nation, or unjustly vexed or harassed in respect of the same, or unjustly vexed or harassed therein 

by the authorities thereof, then, and in either or all of such cases, it shall be 

lawful, and it shall be the duty of the President of the United States, in his discretion, by proclamation to that effect, to deny vessels, their masters and crews, of the British dominions of North America, any entrance into the waters, ports, or p laces of or within the United States (with such exceptions in regard to ves- sels in distress, stress of weather, or needing supplies, as to the President shall seem proper), whether such vessels shall have come directly from said dominiO!lS on such destined voyage or by way of some port or place in such destined 

voyage elsewhere; and also, to deny entry into any port or place of the United 

States of fresh fish or salt fish, or any other product of said dominions or other ~oo~s C?min~ from said dominions to -t.he United States. The President may, m his discretiOn, apply such proclamatiOn to any part or to all of the foregoing- named subjects, and may revoke, qualify, limit, and renew such proclamation 

from time to time as he may deem necessary to the full and just execution of 

the purposes of this act. Every violation of any such proclamation, or any part 

thereof, is hereby declared illegal, and all vessels abd goods so coming, or being within the waters, ports: or places of the United States contrary to such proc- lamation shall be forfeited to the United States; and such forfeiture shall be 

enforced and proceeded upon in the ame manner and with the same effect as in the case of vessels or goods whose importation or coming to or being in the waters or ports of the United States contrary to law may now be enforced and 

proceeded upon. Every person who shall violate any of the provisions of this 

act, or such proclamation of the President made in pursuance hereof, shall be 

deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not ex~eeding $1,000, or by imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court. 

ARTICLE ,XXIX OF THE TREA~Y OF 1871. 

It is agreed that, for the term of years mentioned in Article XXXIII of this 

treaty, goods, wares, or merchandise arriving .at the ports of New York, Bos- ton, and Portland, and any other ports of the United States which have been or may, fwm time to time, be specially designated by the President of the 

United States and destined for Her Britannic Majesty's possessions in North 

America., may be entered at the proper custom-house and conveyed in transit, 

without the payment of duties, through the territory of the United States, under 

such rules, regulations, and conditions for the protection of the revenue as the 

Government of the United States may from time to time prescribe; and under 

like rules, regulations, and conditions, goods, wares, or merchandise may be 

conveyed in transit, without the payment of duties, from such possessions 

through the territory of the United States for export from the said ports of the 

United States. It is further agreed that-, for the like period, goods, wares, or merchandise arriving at any of the ports of Her Britannic Majesty's possessions in N01·th America 

and destined for the United States may be entered at the proper custom-house 

and conveyed in transit, without the payment of duties, through the said possessions, under such rules and regulations and conditions for the protection of 

the revenue as the governments of the said possessions may from time to time 

p rescribe; and under like rules, regulations, and conditions goods, wares, or merchandise may be conveyed in transit, withol.!t payment of duties, from the 

United States through the said possessions to other places. in the United States or for export from ports in the said possessions. _ 

Article XXXIII does not mention Article XXIX, but contains a provision that 

Articles XVIII to XXV, inclusive, and Article XXX shall take etrect as soon as the laws required to carry them into operation shall be passed by the legislative bodies of the different countries concerned therein , and that-

"They shall remain in force for the period of ten years from the date in which 

they may come into operation, and further until the expiration of two years 

after either of the high contracting parties shall have given notice to the other 

of its wish to terminate the same." 

Mr. HITT introduced the following joint resolution: 

Joint resolution to promote commercial union with Canada, 

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives ofUI;e United States of Ame1·· ica in Oongress assembled, That whenever it shall be duly certified to the President of the United States that the Government of the Dominion of Canada has 

declared a desire to establish commercial union with the United States, having a uniform revenue system, like internal taxes to be collected, and like import 

duties to be imposed on articles brought into either country from other nations, 

with no duties upon trade between the United States and Canada, be shall ap- point three commissioners to meet those who may be likewise designated to represent the Government of Canada, to prepare a- plan for the assimilation ol 

the import duties and internal revenue taxes of the two countries, and an equi- table division of receipts, in a commercial union; and said commissioners shall 

report to the President, who shall lay the report before Congress. 

Mr. CHIPMAN. Mr. Speaker, tbehonorofour country must always 

be asserted with the decorum which becomes her dignity. She is strong, 

so strong that she may be forbearing without being suspected of cowardicej patient, without incurring the reproach of ignorance. I firmly 

believe that she is the most beneficent presence in the ages. I would 

have all her children believe this. I would have them so proud of her 

that they will not wrong any other nation-so loving that they will 

submit to no wrong to her. 

It is in this spirit that we ought to treat the Canadian people. It i<J our interest, and their interest., that their relations with us shall be 

friendly. Our contiguity is, of itself, a good reason for this. Along 

the northern frontier the commerce of the two countries runs in tho 

same channels. The great lakes and rivers are not barriers, but bonds 

of union. From the headwaters of Lake Superior to the mouth of 

the St. Lawrence nature bas created highways for millions of peoplQ, 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECOllD-HOUSE. 827.7 

routes of travel and traffic for vast areas of country lying on both sides involve the question what articles are dependent on Article XXXIII 

of the national boundary line. and whether our transit relations with Canada are still governed by 

From the far West, through Illinois, Michigan, Ontario, and New York Article XXIX of the treaty or by the statutes of 1866. 

is the easiest couutryfor railroad construction to the seaboard north of Now, sir, my position is that every right granted to continue during 

the Ohio River-a country already traversed by railwayfj and destined the term mentioned in .Article XXXIII was abrogated when the ar- to be crowded with many more as the West grows to the supremacy of ticles from XVIII to X~V inclusive and Article XXX were tenni- · her power. And so, through Minnesota, Wisconsin, the Upper Pen- nated by the two years' notice. 

insula of Michigan, across the Falls of St. 1\Iary's, thl'ough Ontario and Article XXXIII is as follows, namely: 

New York or Maine to the ocean, other lines stretch from west to east1 ARTICLE xxxiiL 

invited by the necessities of all civilization. The foregoing Articles XVIII to XXV, inclusive, und Article XXX of this 

Surely the areas tra>erscd by these water ways and connected by treaty shall take eft'ect as soon a.s the laws required to carry them into opera- these railways are so identical in all natural features, topography, soil, tion shall have been passed by the Imperial Parliament of Great Britain, by 

ell· mate, productions, th"t they were meant by nature £or one country, the Parliament of Canada., and b~ the Legislature of Prince Edward's Island "" on the one band, and by the Congress of the United States on the other. Such 

and are only under different flags by the rude divorcement of man. assent having been given, the said articles shall remain in force for the period Sir, I can not exaggerate the greatness in all natural resources of these of ten years frqm the date at which they may come into operation; and fm·ther until the expil-ation of two years after either of the high contracting parties areas. They constitute one vast region, a land of wonders, of gold and shall have given notice to the other of its wish to terminate the same; each of 

silver and all the useful metals, of grain and lumber and fisheries, oflakes the high contracting parties being at liberty to give such notice to the other at 

and rivers, of water-power already chanting the welcome of coming in- the end of the said period often years or at any time afterward. 

dustry, of vast spaces of fertile soil tempting the husbandman and glow- The duration of the articles mentioned in Article XXXIII is the test 

ing with the promise of happy homes. Here the frosts of winter lend of the duration of the others, and among them of Article XXIX, the 

vigor to men and ripen them to high achievement. transit article. 

Here, sir, are every material and element for the comfort of men and Which are the articles dependent on Article XXXIII? ·They are all 

the power of an empire. "Those whom God hath joined together let articles which are to endure, acconlingtotheir language,'' for the term 

no man put asunder.' ' I would be loath, very loath, to do aught to bring · of years mentioned in Article XXXIII.'' 

discord into this paradise. I would, ifl could, remember only the bonds An examination of the tr.eaty will disclose that these are Articles 

of union, forged and welded by the band of nature. I would, ifl could, XVIII and XIX, relative to fishing on the shores of the respective conn- realize the hope of one flagGver thisvastarea. That hope, now feeble, tries; Article XXI, which relates to the admission of fish into theremay yet :blaze upon the world in a sunburst of r.ccomplishment; but spe<;tive countries free of duty; Article XXVIII, relative to the navinot to-day, not until the time when America, as she ought, has become gation of Lake Michigan; Article XXIX, which is the transit article; 

the mistress of the seas and her great rival, now dominating Canada, and Article XXX, granting certain rights to Cana,dian and AmeriCan 

shall fall behind her in the march of commerce. Rival, sir, I say; for vessels on the St. Lawrence and the Great Lakes. 

England is om rival, despite all the trash about Milton and Shake- Sir, before the treaty of 1871 went into force both Canada and the 

speare and one blood and one language, as if the relations of nations United States had provisions on their statute-books embodying practiconld flow in the liq nid eloquence of sonnets and the peace of the world cally the details of Article XXIX. .A system of transportation in bond 

be maintai.ced by the rules of syntax. was in existence, founded on local enactments. There was no necessity 

I say, sir, we may not to-day hope for that common nationality for either country to legislate on the subject, as in the case of Articles 

which will be so full of blessing to Canada and to the United States. XVIII to X~V, inclusive, and Article XXX. The system would probWe must be content now with peace and good-will, if we can have ably continue, as a matter of international comity, regaidless of the 

peace and good-will, and strive for a comrpercial union ·wb · ch will do fate of the treaty, and during the time necessary to pass the laws rehomage to the law which nature has imposed on the continent. Let qui.red to carry the fisheries articles into operation. Hence the term me emphasize it, sir. The desire of the American people is peace and of years prescribed in Article XXIX is made to commence when these 

godd-will with the Canadian people, and it will not be our fault if articles become operative. 

there is an unfriendly act, nay, even an unfriendly thought on this If they had never become operative, Article XXIX wouldbave"becn 

side of the line. as if it had never been conceived. Can there be any doubt of it? The 

But, sir, it has happened that we have been obliged to be very pa- languageisnotobscure. The term, tenyears, theonlytermmentioned 

tient with our neighbors. Perhaps they have mistaken this for fear. in the treaty, has a definite beginning, namely, the time when certain 

Perhaps they think -we are so stupid that we do not know. when we legislation is perfected, and a definite ending; that is, ten years after are unjustly treated. Perhaps the intense ''jingoism'' of the party in that time. If there had been no beginning to the operation of the other 

power in the Dominion believes in its own cuteness to drive hard bar- articles, there would have been no term to embrace Article XXIX. 

gains. I know not how that is; but I do know we have been unjustly Why, sir, we are dealing with a legal matter, in which legal terms 

treated. I will not go back to the treaty of 1818, nor recapitulate the are used and legal processes of construction must be resorted to. The 

evasions and misconstructions by which they stripped it of all benefi- ten years begin to run with the operation of the articles named in Arciitl power for us. ticle XXXIII-thetenyears, the "term" prescribed in Article XXIX. 

I will even pass over that period of peril for our country and our The last article and the article concerning Lake Michigan did not go 

institutions when Canada., infl.amed with the wicked hope of England into effect regardless of the time when Articles XVIII to XXV, inclutbat the Union of these States might perish, insulted the North and sive, and Article XXX, went into effect. 

cajoled the South. Thank God, the peril is past, and all the children The true construction is the simple one, which would be applied to a 

of the Union are here under the old roof-tree united, determined to grant of property or franchises. It is as if a term of years for two pieces 

uphold the dignity of the nation. [Ap:g ause.] of property were expressed to be during the continuance of the term of 

I pass al! this by. Though no statutes of limitation can run against certain other property. 

memory, national honor is epitomized in treaties~ because the nation's Now, sir, the language of the article is very singular if it does not 

word has been plighted, and in 1871 we made a treaty embracing all mean that the beginning and .end of all the privileges granted for a points at issue with England concerning Canada. It is the violation term of years were to be coincident with the durat.ion of the articles 

of tb_at treaty which has evoked this high debate. specified in Article XXXIII. That article treats the laws required to 

That it bas been •iolated is not a question of controvcn~yhere to-day; put them into force as an ''assent,'' and prescribes ''such assent havviolated by the Canadians, not by us; violated in its fisheries and in its ing been given, the said articles" (that is, Articles XVIII to XXV, incanal articles; violated brutally as to the first, most meanly as to the elusive, and Article XXX) "shall remain in force for the period of ten 

last. I know of no just complaint the Canadians have against us· but, years from the date at which they may come into operation." 

sir, the ink was hardly dry upon the treaty before complaints of out- Is it not plain that the ten years, the ''term'' of Article XXIX, berage began to pour in to the Department of State. The history ofthe gan with the operation of these articles? 

treaty up to the time of the p~sage of the joint resolution of March 3, But, sir, the article proceeds to prescribe that they shall be in force 

1883, is but a repetition of unfriendly acts on their part and of temper- not only ten years, but r• further until the expiration of two years after 

ate expostulation on ours. either of the high contracting parties .shall have given notice to the 

They refused the ordinary amenities of commerce to our seamen; other of its wish to terminate the same;" that is, of its wish to termitbey set afloat armed Yessels to hunt our fishermen on the hign seas; nate Articles XVIII to XXV, inclusive, and Article XXX. · they captured American citizens and American ships; they hauled 

1 

Not a word here about the transit article or the Lake Michig-.. m arttdown the American flag. At last they exhausted our patience, and in cle. The term of their existence is the "term mentioned in Article 

1883 Congress passed judgment on the whole matter, decided that they XXXIII," and the beginning. and ending of that term is fixed by the 

had wronged us, by the joint resolution directing notice of termination fate of the other articles. 

under the thirty-third article of the treaty, and again, in 1887, by the But, sir, there is no doubt about this matter; both Canada and the 

retaliation act. I regru·d that resolution and act as the voice of the United States have given it a practical construction. The act of ConAmerican people. gress approved .March 1, 1873, passed uuder the thirty-third article of 

To-day, by reason of the joint resolution and the notice given under the treaty, proceeds in all its parts on that constructiorr. In its first 

it, every provision of the treaty relating to the fisheries and depend- section it enacts that Article XXI shall go into force when the assent 

ent on Article XXXIII is dead. Why they are dead, what was the required by Article XXXIII is granted by Canada,. In section 2 it ad-

" m~nner of~hei.rtaking off," is of great concern to us, because, repre- mits Newfoundland to the benefits of the treaty on the same condition. 

senbng the digmty of the nation, we must be right, and becallSe they In section ~it prescribes tha.t tn.nsit iu bond may he made across our 
/ 

I 

8278 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. SEPTEMBER 4, 

territory on t he same conditions. In section .4 the same condition is 

made the foundation of the operation of Article XXX. 

This is a legisl::tt ive construction of the meaning of the treaty, and 

the Supreme Court bas decided that such a construction is aut.hority. 

In the "Head-money cases" (112 United States Reports) the decisions 

are epitomized and t he power of Congress to determine what a treaty 

means is held to be beyond question. Canad a, too, has acquiesced in 

this construction. Her refusal since 18 0 to permit our fish, brought 

to her ports, to be carried across her country can only be justified on 

the £round that Article XXIX was terminated by the notice given 

under the joint resolution of 18 3. 

In my opinion she had a right to do this, for with the termination of 

Article XXIX the subject of transit reverted to the state it wa8 in before the treaty, and was only regula~d by the localla.ws of the respective countries. That, sir, is the state it is in to-day. We need. not then 

seek for any justification of the bill before us. We had by the terms of 

the treaty a clear right, of our mere pleasure, to terminate certain of 

its articles. We exercised that right. Still, sir, we did not repeal our 

transit laws in whole or in part. They were before the treaty. They 

exist after it. They were conceived in a spiritofneighborly friendship; 

but they are our private concern. If Canada refuses to reciprocate them, 

we may repeal or suspend them without just offense to her. 

Now, Mr. Speaker, in the course of his remarks the gentleman from 

Dlinois [Mr. HITT], for whom I have great respect, arraigned the President for not exercising a power which the gentleman contends he 

possesses under the law of 1887. I would call his attention to the 

fact that this is a bill giving power to suspend the transit of goods in 

bond across our country, not only from bnt to Canada. In that regard 

it enlarges the provisions of the actof1887 clear beyond any apprehension which the gentleman has of its effect. More than that, his construction of the act of 1887, as a·matter of law, is radically wrong. The 

law doe not mean what he thinks it does. There is no such power 

given to the President under the law of 1887 as the gentleman thinks. 

The gentleman is not only wrong in his opinion of the President's 

action, but of the law, according to my construction; but the transit 

laws of 1866 are in no manner involved in or touched by this bill. 

The law applie merely to Canadian goods-goods belonging to Canadians, no matter how the Canadians got them-to the products of 

the Canadian oil or the products of their manufacture or what they 

may buy. If a proclamation was issued under the law of 1887 it 

would in no way prevent any American at any American port from 

carrying his goods into any place of Canada, shipping them through 

Canada, through .Michigan, or anywhere through the West to their 

de tination whatever it might be. The language, it seems to me, admits of no other construction. A man could purchase his goods in 

·England, Spain, France, or any country beyond seas, bring them to a 

Canadian port and ship them through Canada to the United States. 

It is Canadian goods only which the act of 1887 is directed against. 

Mr. HITT. Will the gentleman permit me a moment? 

~fr. CHIPMAN. Certainly I will. I have refrained from saying 

some things I would have said, because I did not know I had the honor 

of the gentleman's attention. I have not made so good a speech as I 

should have made if I had supposed the gentleman was listening to me. 

I am pleased to hear from the gentleman, because I have several other 

remarks which I would be glad to have him hear. 

Mr. HITT. Does the gentleman think that the words ''or any other 

product of said dominions, or other goods coming from said dominions 

to the United States," have any meaniug? . 

1\Ir. CHIPMAN. That is exactly what I am talking about; that is the very point I am tryingto elucidate. 

Mr. HITT. I ask you, do you think those phrases are meant merely 

to repeat each other, or is one of them an addition to the meaning expressed by the other ? • 

Mr. CHIPMAN. If the geutleman had heard my remarks--

.JI,fr. HITT. I listened to the gentleman. 

Mr. CHJP.JI,fAN. The clauses are an addition one to the "other. The 

goods may be the product of Canada, or they may become the property 

of some one in Canada. The reference is to goods coming from Canada, 

not goods coming from England, not goods coming from France, not 

goods coming from beyond the sea, not goods brought into a Canadian 

port for the purpose of transit under our transit laws of 1866 across the 

teiTitory of Canada. The goods referred to are goods coming from 

Canada and goods produced in Canada or belonging to Cauadian people.. . Why, sir, under the construction of my friend from Illinois, if 

American goods were shipped at Niagara Falls, in New York, to take 

either of the great routes to Otu' frontier, they wonld have to be treated 

under the statute of 1887 as goods "coming" from Canada. 

My friend has a very airy way of treating legal questions as '' quibbles." He speaks of the acuteness with which we seek to make defense of thieves. It struck me it was rather cavalier to dispose of a great 

question in that way. That may oe the way in which these things are done in the sublimated realms of diplomacy. There may be a purer 

ether than we ordinary people, "of the earth earthy," conceive of. Bnt 

in our work-a-day way we believe that words mean something, that 

laws have power, and that their interpretation should everywhere be 

approached with intelligence on the one hand, w.l! with the greatest 

resoect on the other. 

[The hour of adj ournment being reached, the House, by unanimotlS consent, requested the gentleman to go on.] 

U r. CIDP MAN. I d o n ot know about going on. I am afraid I am 

talking too long. [Cries of " Go on ! " ] I will not k eep you long. Uy friend, the honorable gentleman from Illinois [Mr. HrTT]-and 

I will only dMain the H ouse about five minutes longer-he pret ends t o 

speak here in behalf of the great Northwest. I come from the great 

Northwest. The bands may be the b auds of Esau, but the voice is the 

voice of Jacob. It is not t he voice of the Northwest. [Applause.] 

The N ortb west does not desire, nay, theN orth west is protesting against 

a proclamation enforcing the clause of tha retailiation act which the 

gentleman says the Presidentougbt to enforce. It is acl.ause whereby 

our ~rade will.be broken up, and if the Pre ident bad issued a procla- matiOn under 1t, from one end of the Northwest to the other his name 

would ba.ve 15een a by-word and reproach, because be would hn.vedone 

a wicked thing. He did what you and your people in Illinois wished 

done, and what is necessary to our Northwestern trade and commerce and prosperity. He has done no rash or foolish thing. 

Mr. BAYNE. Will the gentleman yield to me for a question? 

M:r. CHIPMAN. No, I tbinlc I will not ; I have watched y0u all 

through th is session. You never ask a question that has anything to 

do with t he subject under discussion. I have watched you closely. 

[Laughter. J 

Mr. BAYNE. You will find that out later. 

1\Ir. CH IPMAN. I have no doubt you can make people laugh, I 

have no doubt you may be abusive, but I am in a hurry and I desire 

to talk sense. [Laughter. J . Besides, this is not your fight. I am replying to the gentleman from 

Illinois [Mr. HITT], and one at a time is enough, but two to one is one too many. [Renewed laughter.] 

The gentleman [Mr. HrTT] finds fault with something that Mr. 

Bayard has said. I wish I had time to follow that up to its conclusion, 

but I will simply say here that with the exception of one State, and 

that the State of Pennsylvania, from' which the gentleman: comes who 

is so anxious to ask me a question, with the exception of that one 

State, ont of all the nine States which debouch upon the lakes, there 

is not one that does not desire free tJ:ade and commercial union with 

Canada. Indeed, one of the most eloquent and able gentlemen on 

your side, the gentlema,n from Ohio [Mr. BUTTERWORTH], has been 

the high priest and apostle of tha,t doctrine, has gone from one end of 

the great West to the other and throughout Canada preaehing it. 

It is the settled, earnest desire of the Northwest to have free trade 

with Canada, and if they have anytlpng to do with shaping their own 

destiny, if they have any potency in determining that question, the 

people of that section will have absolute free trade with Canada. [Applause.] 

I wish I had more time [cries. of" Go on!"], but I will not detain you 

longer. ' [Cries of ''Go on!"] No, I wish to finish to-night. 

I have stated only two points. I had about a dozen more, so many 

mistakes did the gentleman make, but I think I will let them go; you 

have been patient enough already. 

I do not care to go into the subject of the canals. Above Lake Erie, 

through the Lime Kiln crossing, through the St. Chtir Flats Canal, 

through Hay Lake and the canal around the Falls of St. M:ary, our 

money, our skill and enterprise have created paths of commerce. We 

have not shut them up against the Canadian marine, but though our 

canals are now too crowded fqr our own convenience we have loyally 

shared their benefits with our neighbors. Their dis~rimination against 

om marine under the mean subterfuge of charging the same rate to their 

own as to ours and giving their own a. rebate needs no comment. It is one of the acts which belittle a people. 

Sir, I have heard d{)ubts expressed as to our action here. The press 

spEaks of those who would give England some n otice before the President issues a proclamation under this bill if it becomes a bw. I believe this is esteemed to be some sort of a diplomatic etiquette. Thank 

God, we have no diplomatic corps in tho European sen e, and that in 

the estimation of our people the nearer a man approaches a diplomat 

in fOl'm the nearer he is akin to a fool, and the more be approaches one in substance the nearer be is to a knave. [Great laughter and applause.] But , sir, our own statutes are not the subject of foreign interference. We are not by the b.ws of nations compelled to inform 

any other power what may or may not be transported across our territory. 

For one, sir, I am not inclined to be more polite to England than 

self-respect and strict law require. Her foot has been on every weak 

neck. She has pursued her commercial interests wi tb the brutality of 

force or the meannesses of diplomacy, as the exigency might demand. 

In India, from the time of Clyde and Hastings; at the Cape, among 

the Zulus; in Ireland, among a people who are now bone of our bone 

and flesh of our flesh, she has been selfish and pitiless. Even the other 

day she kidnapped a poor African chief and imprisoned him on one of 

her West India Islands. She is the monster money-changer in the 

temple of God's earth. Sir, what the honor of our country demands 

I will concede to her; not an atom more. Here we stand to-day representatives of a nation which is in the right. This bill is in the pathway of our duty. I shall vote for it with a stout heart and clen.r conscience. (Applause on the Democratic side.] 
1888. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 8279 

During the delivexy of the above speech, on ~otion of Mr. McCREARY, by unanimous consent, the session was extended beyond 5 

o'clock and until Mr. CHIPMAN had concluded his remr.rks. 

WILLIAM R. ROGERS. 

Mr. THO::UPSON, of Ohio, by unanimous consent, reported, as a 

substitute for House bill No. 511, a bill (H. R. 11362) for the relief of 

William R. Rogers; 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. 511 was ordered to be laid on the table. 

And then, on motion of Mr. McCREARY (at 5 o'clock and 12 minutes p. m. ), the House adjourned. 

PRIVATE BILLS INTRODUCED AND REFERRED. 

Under the rule private bills of the followinO' titles were introduced 

and referred as indicated below: o 

By ~Ir. ABBOTT: A bill (H. R. 11357) for the re]jef of Caroline 

Bartley-to the Select Committee on Indian Depredation Claims. 

B~ Mr. GEST: A bill (H. R. 11358) to correct the military record 

of Lieut. Aaron G. Henry-to the Committee on Military Affairs. 

By Mr. MILLIKEN: A bill (H. R. 11359) for the relief of the estate 

of Nathaniel K . Sawyer, deceased- to the Committee on Claims. 

By Mr. A.. C. THOMPSON: A bill (H. R. 11360) granting a pension 

to R. W. Hubbard-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By Mr. YODER: A bill (H. R. 11361) to placethename ofSarah C. 

De Frees on the pension-roll- to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

PETITIONS, ETC. 

The following petitions and papers were laid on the Clerk's desk 

under the rule, and referred as follows: ' 

By Mr. McKENNA: Resolutions of Knights of Labor, Assembly No. 

6039, Oakland, Cal., for postal-telegraph systems-to the Committee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads. ' 

By Mr. SHAW: Papers in the case of John E. 0' Donnell- to' the 

Committee on Claims. 

SENATE. 

WEDNESDAY, Sep_tember 5, 1888. 

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

The Journal of yesterday's proceedings was read and approved. 

HOUSE' BILLS REFERRED. 

!he following bills received yesterday from the House of Representatives were severally read twice by their titles and referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary: ' • 

A bill (H. R. 8344) to prevent cruelty to domestic animals· 

A bill (H. R. 9268) to punish dealers and pretended dealers in' counterfeit money and other f1·audulent devices for using the United States 

mails; 

A bill (H. ~· 101~2) to amend an act entitled "An act to make per- sons charged With crunes and offenses competent witnesses in the United 

States and Territorial courts," approved March 16 1878· 

A bill (H. R. 10919) to make valid a deed to a ~ertain' tract of land 

in Bibb. Count_y, Georgia, ~~de and delivered by B.rig. Gen. Davis Tilson, actmg assistant commissioner of the Freedmen's Bureau to Samuel 

I. Gustin, his heirs and assigns; and ' 

A bill (H. R. 11258) for the relief of certain persons who paid additional taxes assessed against them under the act of March 3, 1875. 

CIRCUIT-COURT POWERS. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before _the Senate the amenament of the House of Representatives to the bill (S. 3234) to abolish 

circuit-court powers of certain district courts of the United States, and 

for other purposes. ' 

Mr. HOAR. I bave looked at the amendment of the House. It is 

in su~stance an e~tirel~ new bill providing simply for a rehearing of 

questions of law m cap1t.al cases. I do not suppose it is necessary to 

have the amendment read. I think it had better be referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary befme the Senate is asked to take action 

upon it. 

The bill with the Honse amendment was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. · 

FORT MISSOULA MILITARY ItESERV ATION. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate a communication £:om the Secr~tary of 'Yar, transmitting a letter from the commandmg offi~er of Fort 1\hssoula, Montana, and the indorsements 

thereon, relative to the status of the title to the lands em braced within 

the p::esent Ii~its o~ the_ mi~tary reservation at that point, and recommen~ng certamleg1Slat10n m regard thereto; which, with the accompanymg papers, was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs and 

ordered to be printed. ' 

PETITIONS AND 1\I.EMORIALS. 

·:rtrr. SPOONER presented the petition of James Shaahan, late of Company F, Eighth P ennsy 1 vania Cavalry, praying to be allowed an increase 

of pension; which was referred to the Committee on Pensions. 

Mr. TELLER presented a petition of citizensof Gilpin County Colorado, praying for the passage of certain amendments t o the nte tate commerce law; which was referred to the Committee on Interst ate Commercf!. . 

Mr. l\IITC ELL presented a petition of citizens of Columbia County, 

Oregon, praymg for the passage of certain amendments to the interstatecommerce law; which was referred to the Committee on Interstate Commerce. 

REPORTS OF COIDIITTEES. 

:hlr. DAVIS, from the Committee on Pensions, submitted a report 

~ccompa~ied b_y a bill (S. 3513) granting pensions to Powell's Battal- IOn of M1ssour1 Mounted Volunteers; which was read twice by its title. 

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

(H. R. 11021) to increase the pension of Charles Hahneman, reported 

it without amendment, and submitted a report thereon. 

Ur. SPOONER, from the Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 6514) for the allowance of certain claims reported 

by the accounting office.~;s of the United States Treasury Department, 

reported it with an amendment. 

Mr. SAWYER, from the Committee on Pensions, t-o whom was re- ferred the bill (S. 3387) granting a pension to Charles S. Hamilton, 

reported it with an amendment, and submitted a report thereon. 

He also, from the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads, to whom 

was referred an amendment intended to be proposed by Mr. STOCKRIDG~ to the general deficiency appropriation bill, reported it favo:ra~ly, and submitted a report thereon; and the amendment, together 

w 1 th the report, was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and 

ordered to be printed. 

Ur. TURPIE, from the Committee on Pensions, to whom were referred the following bills, reported them severally without amendment, 

and submitted reports thereon: . 

A b~ (H. R. 3152) for the relief of Arlington :hf. Harrington; 

A b~ll (H. R. 10210) to increase the pension of Philip Thomas; 

A btll (H . .R. 9148) to grant a. pension to Jane Robinson; 

-A b~Il (H. R. 6201) granting a pension to John Robeson; and 

A b1ll;{H. R. 7657) granting a pension to Mary Woodworth, widow 

of Ebenezer F. Woodworth. 

Mr. VEST, from the Committee on Commerce, t~ whom was referred 

the bill (H. R. 11262) to authorize the construction of bridges across the Kentucky River and its tributs.ries by the Richmond, Nicholasville 

Irvine and Beattyville Railroad Company, reported it with amend: 

ments. 

Ur. MITCHELL, from the Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the petition of J. W. Parrish & Co., of St. Louis, Mo., praying 

for certain relief, submitted a report thereon, accompanied by a bill 

(S: ~20) for the relief of Joseph W. Parrish, George C. Hadle-y, and 

•William L. Huse, lately composing the firm of J. W. Parrish & Co., of 

St. Louis, Mo~; which was read twice by its title. · 

• BILLS INTRODUCED. 

Mr .. CULLOM introduced a bill (S. 3514) to remove the charge of 

?ese~on from t?e record of William Martin; which was read twice by 

Its t1tle, and, With the accompanying papers, referred to the Committee on Military Affairs. · 

He also introduced a bill (S. 3515) granting a pension to Lottie R. 

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

Mr. _GORMA~ introduced a b~ (S. 351G) to further suspend the 

operation of section 5574 of the ReVIsed Statutes of the United States 

!itl~ LXXII, ~relation to guano islands; which was read twice by 

Its title, an?, with the accompanying papers,. referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations . 

. Mr. PALMER ~by requ~t) introduced a bill (S. 3517) granting a penSIOn to Ja~ Snlhvan; which was read twice by its title, and, with the 

accompanymg papers, referred to the Committee on Pensions. . 

He. also (by request) introduced a bill (S. 3518) granting a pension 

to Elizabeth De La Hooke; which was read twice by its title andreferred to the Committee on Pensions. ' 

:hir. ~LAIR_ introduced a bill (S. 3519) granting a pension to Sarah 

D. Lew1s; whlCh was read twice by its title and referred to the Com- mittee on Pensions. ' 

l\1r. F ~~WELL introduced a joint resolution (S. R. 107) limiting 

the ~rovt 1o~ of the act entitled "An act making appropriations to 

.proVIde for the expenses of t he government of the District of Columbia.," etc:, on the subject of overhead electric wires, approved July 18, 

18°8; whwh was read twice by its title, and, with the accompanying 

papers, referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia.. 

"JU.:· SPOONER introduced a bill (S. 35'21) granting an increase of 

pensiOn to James Shaahan ; which was read twice by its title, andreferred to the Committee on Pensions. · · 

.AMEND:U:ENTS TO GENERAL DEFICIEXCY BILL. 

. Mr. PLUMB submitted two amendments intended to be proposed by 

h1m to the general deficiency appropriation bill· which were referred 

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

Mr. PLATT submitt.ed an amendment intended to be proposed by