The San Francisco call., 1897-03-01

The next amendments were those max
ing appropriations for the great river and
harbor Improvements under contracts au-
thorized by former river and harbor bills
the various amounts being generally re-
duced by the committee about % per cent
from the figures fixed by the House.
Eight or nine pages OF these amend
ments were disposed Of without much de-
bate, but those appropriating 100000 to
prevent the Mississippi River from break
Ing into the Cache Rivtr nearrCairo. I'm
provoked an extended discussion, durin g
which the whole subject of the improve
ment of the Mississippi River was gone
over.
German (D) OF Mary land opposed the
amend ment 10 make this appropriation
outright instead OF from the amount for
the improvement of the upper Missis-
sippi. on the ground that it would make
this bill a river and harbor bill. He char
acteriZed the sundry civil bill as the most
extravaganza ever considered by either
house OF Congress, carrying as 1t did over
$51, 600 000-$17, ,000,00 of which was for
rivers and harbors-which was more than
the condition OF the treasury warranted.
And he warned Senators not to further
overload it with amendments, intimating
that if it were it would meet the veto of
the President
The amendment was adopted.
An item in relation TO electric lighting
in the District of Colum bia. to which Hill
(D.) Of New York was opposed, gave that
Senator an opportunity for expressing his
views in regard to d Sunday session OF the
s nate He had doubled the propriety OF
meeting to-day 10 enact legislation for the
people of the United States. His atten-
ton had been called TO various>petitions
10 the honorable Senators asking for a
''rest day" for the District of Colum bia
and he had been disposed to acqu;esce in
the sentiment expressed in those petitions
He also remembered that the Senator
from Michigan (McMillan), who had sug-
gesied that amendment had introduced a
bill to protect the first day CT the week,
commonly called Sunday, as day OF rest
and worship in the District of Colum bia. "
That bill, if it had passed, was broad
enough to prevent any legislation on this
day. For these reasons he hesitated to
engage in a general debate. But now
to be serious" he continued
"Have not you been serious all the
timer Senator asked in low tones.
THAT is reflection on the remarks 1
have made" Mr.. Hill replied, and he
went on with his statement.
The amendment was adopted,
Pettigrew (Sil.) of South Dakota op-
posed the item Of $4,000 for continuing the
com mmunication to investigate the Alaska
seal fisheries. He thought it would be
better for the United States to kill every
seal which landed on the islands and 80
end the controversy, unless Great Britain
would operate with this Government in
protecting the seal herds. The PROPOSE
ton to treat further with England on
these lines was new disgrace. He ridi-
culed the numerous com MISSIONS and arbi-
49,. ffav. vryhf fnk 1xaI
vened, particularly that TO determine the
141st degree of longitude.
Perkins (R. Of California supported the
amendment. To adopt the suggestion OF
the Senator from South Dakota, he said,
would be TO perform the dog. in the
manger act and say to Great Britain that
rather than let you kill the seal animals
at sea we will kill them all ourselves when
they land for breeding purposes: He sug-
should be branded. as this would destroy
their fur value, which led Mr.. Pettigrew
to ask whether it was thought that the
seals, before being speared outside the
limit, would come UP to the boat of the
hunters TO exhibit their brands
Nor an I'd. Of Alabama said that as he
had been q member OF the commission
whose award seemed to have caused the
trouble, be had always felt q delicacy in
history of the question from the time the
United States acquired Alaska, an act
which excited the anger and jealousy OF
Great Britain.
At the very moment we gained posses
sion the Canadian raiders were turned
into Boring Sea and in the first year de-
stroyed 100000 seals. Year by year the
difficulty increased, until finally it became
necessary to take some definite steps for
the final settlement of the question. At
that time there we're two parties in the
United States--one demanding that the
United States plant itself squareiy on its
right to protect the seals and to defend
that right by force of arms if necessary,
while the business party, or peace party,
favored arbitration. This policy pre-
vailed, and, as in every arbitration with
European Governments, the United States
lost its case.
So it always would be arbitrating with