..

1892. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 3901 granted to said Emily Reik-to the Committee on Invalid Pen-sions. ...

By Mr. OUTHWAITE: Petition of J. M. Wells Post, Grand Army of the Republic, Columbus, Ohio, for the marking of the battle lines at Gettysburg-to theCommitteeon Military Affairs.

Also, petition of the Presbyterian Church of Central College, Ohio, to close the World's Fair on Sunday-to the Select Com­mittee on the Columbian Exposition.

Also, petition of John Borror and others, for the passage of a law to prevent the adulteration of food and drugs-to the Com­mittee on Agriculture.

By Mr. POST: Two petitions,oneof Charter Oak Grange, No. 1685, of illinois, for free delivery of rural mails-to the Commit­tee on the Post-Office and Post-Roads.

Also, petition by the same grange, to encourage silk culture­to the Committee on Agriculture.

By Mr. POWERS: Remonstrance ofT. H. Purdon and others, of Rutland, Vt., against legislation closing the Columbian Ex­position on Sunday-to the Select Committee on the Columbian Exposition.

By Mr. RAINES: Petition of Georg a D. Fox, of East Bloomfield, N.Y., in favor of the Washburn-Hatch antioption bills-to the Committee on Agriculture.

Also, petition of the Baptist Church~ of Steuben County, N.Y., against the passage oi any bill or resolution to clos3 the World's Columbian Exposition on Sunday-to the Select Committee on the Columbian Exposition.

Also, petition of the Presbytery of Steuben, N.Y., against the granting in Alaska of licenses to dealers in liquor-to the Select Committee on the Alcoholic Liquor Traffic.

By Mr. RAY: Petition of Asa 0. Gallup, in favor of the met­ric system of weights and measures-to the Committee on Coin­age, Weights, and MeasCJres.

By Mr. RAYNER (by request): Two petitions of citizens of Baltimore, Md., for the repeal of the free-leaf sections of the revenue act of 1890-to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. ROCKWELL: Petition of J. W. Slauson and others, for bill to -prohibit the manufacture and sale of cigarettes-to the Committe3 on Ways and Means.

Also, petition of Junius Grange, No. 54, of New York, in be­half of the Hatch option bill-to the Committee on Agriculture.

Also, petition by the same grange, in bahalf of a pura-food law­to the Committee on Agriculture.

Also, petition by the same grange, in behalf of pura food-to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. SNOW: Protest of Farmers' Alliance and Industrial Union, No. 340,·and citizens: of Livingston County, Ill., against the passage of the Brosius lard bill (H. R. 395 ), and praying for a gen­eral pure-food law-to the Committee on Agricultura.

By Mr. STOUT: Three petitions of citizens of Michigan, as follows: George P. Baily and others, of Bunker Hill; R. D. Dean, of Clyde, and L. Brown, of Clio, all in favor of opsning the World's F9.ir on Sunday-to the Select Committee on the Co­lumbian Exposition.

By Mr. WAUGH: Petition of citizens of the Ninth Congres­sional district of Indiana, asking that no exposition or exhibi­tion, for whose support appropriations are made by Congress, be opened on Sunday-to the Select Committee on the Columbian Exposition.

Also, resolution passed by the North Indiana Annual Confer­ence of the Methodist Episcopal Church, asking Congress to in­vestigate and ascertain the amount of alcoholic liquors made in this country, how much pauperism, crime, and misery are caused thereby, and for the passage of such laws as will suppress the improper use of liquors-tD the .Sslect Committee on the Alco­holic Liquor Traffic.

By Mr. WILSON of West Virginia: Two petitions of congre­gations'ofMethodist Episcopal Churches of West Virginia, as fol­lows: The church of Newburg of 85 members, and the church of Ringwood of 220 members, both against opening of the World's Fair on Sunday-to the Select Committee on the Columbian Ex­position.

Also, petition ofT. E. Bowen and 14 members of the Seventh­Day Adventists Church of Newburg, W.Va., against any inter­ference of Congress for or against the opening of the World's .Fair on Sunday-to the Select Committee on the Columbian Ex­position.

By Mr. YOUMANS: Three petitions of the Seventh-Day Ad­ventists of Minnesota, one of Waseca County, the second of St. Johns County; and the third of Kalamazoo County, all against the passage of any bill or resolution to close the World's Colum­bian Exposition on Sunday-to the Sel~ct Committee on the Co­lumbian Exposition.

Also, petition of W. A. Lott, and others of Branch County, Mich., for regulating speculation in fictitious farm products-to the Committee on Agriculture.

SENATE. WEDNESDAY, May 4, 1892.

Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. J. G. 'BUTLER, D. D. TheJ ournal of yesterday's proceedings was read and approved.

PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS.

. Mr. FAULKNER presented a petition of the Morgantown (W. Va.) Methodist Episcopal Church; a petition of sundry churches of Lumberport, W.Va.; a petition of the Presbytery of Winchester, Va., and a petition of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Newburg, W. Va., praying for the closing of the World's Columbian Exposition on the Sabbath, and the prohibi­tion of the sale of intoxicants on the grounds thereof; which wer~ referred to the Committee on the Quadro-Centennial (Select).

He also presented the memorial of Miss Annie Barth ell and Lillie Shroyer, of Taylor County, West Virginia, remonstrating against legislation by Congress to close the World's Columbian Exposition on Sunday; which was referred to the Committee on Quadro-Centennial (Select}.

Mr. DAWES presented a memorial of sundry citizens of Lo­well, Mass., remonstrating against the opening of the World's Columbian ExpJsition on Sunday where United States funds are expended; which was referred to the Committee on the Quadro­Centennial (Select) .

Mr. CULLOM presented petitions of the Swedish Evangelical Church of Knoxville; Middle Creek Presbyterian Church of Winnebn.go County; Stonington and Willowdale l\'iethodist Epis­CJpal churches of Stonington; Presbyterian churches of Wal­tham; Methodist Episcopal Church of Mt. Carmel; Zion's Evan­gelical Lutheran Church of Mt. Carmel; Methodist Episcopal churches of Pana~ Bluff Springs, Leaf River, Napanset, Mar­shall County, Champaign Circuit, Dwight, L':Lwn Ridge, Bunker Hill; Presbyterian churches of Harvard, Clayton, Paris, Water­man, Piper City, and Waynesville; Baptist churches of Wood­stock, Mattoon, and Ashley; Martins Prairie Church of Greene County; Silver Spring Church of Stephenson County; Evang-eli­cal Lutheran Church of Mt. Carroll, and the Congregational church of Harvard, all in the State of Illinois, praying for the closing of the World's Columbia:1 Exposition on Sunday; which were referred to the Committee on the Quadro-Centennial (Se­lect).

Mr. COCKRELL presented the memorial of C. J. Dasher and other citizens of Livingston County, Mo., remonstrating against the passage of any legislation looking to the closing of the World's Columbian Exposition on Sunday; which was referred to the Committee on the Quadro-Centennial (Select).

He also presented a petition adopted at a meeting of the Pres­byterian Church of Columbia, Mo., on the 29th of April, 1892, signed by "F. W. Sneed, committee," praying for legislation to prevent the opening of the Columbian Exposition on Sunday. and that the sale of intoxicants be prohibited thereat; which was referred to the Committee on the Quadro-Centennial (Select).

Mr. COKE presented a memorial of sundry citizens of Bart­lett, Tex., remonstrating against committing the Government of the United States to a union of religion and the state by the -passage of any legislation closing the World's Columbian Expo­sition on Sunday, etc.; which was raferred to the Comniittee on the Quadro-Centennial (Select).

Mr. RANSOM presented the petition of Rev. W. S. Bowman and other ministers, of Charlotte and Mecklenburg Counties, in the State of North Carolina, praying that the World's Colum­bian Exposition be closed on· Sunday and that the sale of intoxi­cating liquors be prohibited thereat; which was referred to the Committee on the Quadro-Centennial (S elect).

Mr. FELTON presented a memorial of the Seventh-Day Ad­ventist Church of San Jose, Cal., and a memorial of the Seventh­Day Adventist Church of San Francisco, Cal., remonstrating against Congress committing the United Stat3s Government to a union of religion and the state by the passage of any legisla­tion closing the World's Columbian Exposition on Sunday; which were referred to the Committee on the Quadro-Centennial (Se­lect.)

He also presented petitions of the Typographical Union, Car and Coa-ch Painters' Union, Iron Molders' Union, Upholsterers' Union, Horse Collar Makers'Union, Tin, Sheet Iron, and Cornice Workers' Union, Bricklayers.' Union, Boiler-makers' Union, Blacksmiths' Union, Sandstone Cutters' Union, Spring-makers' Union, Bakers' Union, Brewery Workmen's Union, Electric Street Car Employes Union, Newspaper Writers' Union, and Laborers' Union of Sacramento, Cal., praying for the passage of legislation for the absolute exclusion of the Chinese; which were ordered to lie on the table.

Mr. TURPIE presented memorials of the Methodist Episcopal churches of Inwood charge, North Indiana Coruerence, Liberty, Charlestown, Pleasantville, Morristown charge, Elizabeth, CIO-

-,·

3902 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. M.A_y 4,

thersville, Worthington, Thorntown, and Quincy, Ind.; of the Baptist churches of Acton and Galveston, Ind.; of the Plymouth Congregational Church, of Fort Wayne, Ind.; of the Evangelical Lutheran St. Peter 's Congregation, of Olean, Ind.; of the rep­ressntati ves of the Antioch, Concord, Flat Rook, Massillon, Mar­quardt, Monroeville, Allen, and Adams Counties (Ind.) churches; of the Presbyterian churches of Rising Sun, Indianapolis, Rock­ville , and Idaville, Ind., remonstrating against the opening of the World's Columbian Exposition on Sunday; which were re­ferred to the Committee on the Quadro-Centennial (Select) . .

Mr. BUTLER. !present the memorial of J. A. Huger, Mitch­ell King, J. A. Huger, jr., and a number of other rice planters, twenty odd, in the neighborhood of Savannah, Ga., remonstrat­ing against the incorporation in the river and harbor bill of the provision for increasing the depth of the Savannah River, which, the memorialists say, is likely to work great damage and

• injury to their rice lands, and they pray Congress to put such provision in the bill as will protect them against the injury re­sulting from these improvements. I move that the memorial, with the accompanying letter, be referred to the Committee on Commerce.

The motion was agreed to. Mr. PASCO presented a petition of the Farmers' Alliance of

Manatee and Liberty Counties, Fla., praying for the passage of legislation for the repeal or amendment of the navigation laws; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce.

He also presented the petition of James Rogers, and 20 other citizens of Crestview, Fla., praying for the adoption by Congress of a national alphabet; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor.

Mr. MANDERSON presented a petition of the Second Pres­byterian Church of Omaha, Nebr., praying that the World's Columbian Exposition be closed on Sunday, and that the sale of intoxicating liquors be prohibited thereat; which was referred to the Committee on the Quadro-Centennial (Select). .

He aloo presented a memorial of sundry citizens of Nebraska, remonstrating against Congress committing the United States Government to a union of religion and the state by the passage of any legislation closing the World's Columbian Exposition on Sunday, or in any other way committing the Government to a course of religious legislation; which was referred to the Com­mittee on the Quadro-Centennial (Select).

Mr. CHANDLER presented the memorial of Frank W. Mace and 20 other citizens of Amherst, N. H, remonstrating against the passage of any legislation closing the World's Columbian Ex­position on Sunday, or in any way committing the Government to a course of religious legislation, which was referred to the Committee on the Quadro-Centennial (Select).

He also presented the following petitions of Crystal Lake Grange, Patrons of Husbandry, of New Hampshire:

Petition praying for the enactment of legislation to prevent gambling in farm products-referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Petition praying for the passage of House bill395, defining lard and imposing a tax there on-ordered to lie on the table.

Petition praying for the passage of a bill to prevent the adul­teration in food and drugs-ordered to lie on the table.

Petition praying for the passage of a bill making certain issues of money fu1llegal tender in payment of all debts-referred to the Committee on Finance.

Mr. P ADDOOK presented the petition of A. M. Mosley and 35 other citizens of Montgomery County, Ala., praying for the passage of the Washburn-Hatch antioption bills; which was re­ferred to the CommittBe on the Judiciary.

He also presented a petition of the Presbytery of Niobrara, representing 41 churches in Northern Nebraska, and a petition of the Sj:lcond Presbyterian Church of Omaha, Nebr., praying that no exposition or exhibition for which appropriations are made by Congress shall be opened on Sunday; which were re­ferred to the Committee on the Quadro-Centennial (Select).

He also presented the memorial of William Haverland and 6 other citizens of Elgin, Nebr., and the memorial of N. S. Brooks and 17 other citizens of Oxford, Nebr., remonstrating against Conaress committing the United States Government to a union of religion and the state by the passage of any ~egislation clos­ing the Worlds ColumbianExpositiononSunday, orin onyother way committing the Government to a course of religious legis­lation; which were referred to the Committee on the Quadro-Cen­tennial (Select).

Mr. S'rOCKBRIDGE presented a petition of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Quincy, Mich.; a petition of the First Meth­odi t Epi copal Church of Constantine, Mich.; a petition of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Carleton, :Mich.; a petition of the First Baptist Church of Chelsea, Mich.; a petition of the First Baptist Church of Plainwell, Mich.; a petition of the United Presbyterian Church of Martin, Mich.; a petition of the

/

Methodist Episcopal Church of Ada, Mich.; a petition of the ~irstMethodlSt ;Episcopal Church of Fl.owerv~lle, Mich.; a peti­tlOn of the Bapt1st Church of Deckerville, MICh.; a petition of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Pinconning, Mich.; a peti­tion of the Methodist Episcopal Church of St. Helens, Mich.; a petition of the First Baptist Church of Tecumseh, Mich., and a petition of the Congregation~! Church of Highland, Mich., pray­lUg Congress to refuse to g1ve any further aid or assistance to the World's Columbian Exposition unless the exhibition be closed on Sunday and the sale of intoxicants be prohibited thereat; which were referred to the Committee on tlie Quadro-Centennial (Select). '

Mr. ALLEN presented a petition of citizens and officer of the State Assembly, Knights of Labor, of Washington, praying for the passage of legislation requiring the use of automatic couplers and power brakes on all railroads operating within t.he United States; which was referred to the Committee on InterstatB Com­merce.

Mr. SHERMAN presented a petition of four Congregational churches of Sandusky, Ohio; a petition of 33 citizens of Plain Ohio; a petition of fourteen Methodist Episcopal chur ches of Monroe County, Ohio; a petition of five Lutheran churches of Findlay, Ohio; a petition of eleven Baptist churches of Richmond, Ohio, and a petition of seventeen Presbyterian churches of the S~te of Ohio, praying that the World's Columbian Exposition be cl.o~ed on Sunday, an~ithat the sale of intoxicating liquors be pro­hibited thereat; wh10h were referred to the Committee on the Quadro-Centennial (Select). ~

He also presented a memorial of 90 citizens of Huron County, Ohio, remonstrating against Congress takingany action relative to ~he closing of the World's Col~mbian E~position on Sunday; wh1ch was referred to the Committee on the Quadro-Centennial (Select).

He aiso presented the memorial of the E. M. Hessler Surgical Instrument Company, of Cleveland, Ohio, and other manufac­turers of s~rgical instruments, remonstrating against the passage of House b1ll No. 5682; which was referred to the Committee on Finance.

He also presented a petition of 120 citizens of Jefferson County, Ohio, praying for the passage of House bill 401, relative to the immigration and importation of aliens under contract or a.rrree­ment to perform labor; which was referred to the Committ~v on Immigration.

Mr. BRICE presented a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of High Hill, Ohio; a memorial of the Free Baptist Church of Marion, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episco­pal and Free Baptist churches of Larue, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Minerva, Ohio; a memorin.l of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Prospect, Ohio; a m~mo­rial of the Congregational Church of Wakeman, Ohio; a memo­rial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Cambridge, Ohio; a memorial of the Reformed Church of Stands and Sixteen of Stark County, Ohio; a memorial of the Baptist Church of Ge­neva, Ohio; a memorial of the Wayne Presbyterian Church ol Wooster, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Donnelsville, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of North Benton, Ohio; a memorial of the Trinity Re­formed Church of Thornv'ille, Ohio; a memorial of the First Con­gregational Church of Painesville, Ohio; a memorial of the Presbyterian Church of Rushville, Ohio; a memorial of the First Methodist Episcopal Church of New Philadelphia7 Ohio; a me­morial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of J efferson, Ohio: a memorial of the Reformed and Lutheran churches of Stouts­ville, Ohio; a memorial of the Woodland Avenue Me thodist Episcopal Church of Cleveland, Ohio; a memorial of the Evan­gelical Lutheran Church of Washingtonville, Ohio; a memorial of the congregations of Pike, Berlin, and Amity churches of Knox County, Ohio; a memorial of the North Hill Church of Akron, Ohio; a memorial of the Goshen and Damascus :Metho­dist and Episcopal churches of Goshen, Ohio· a memorial of the Methodist, Congregational, and Disciples churches of Edin­burg, Ohio; a memorial of the St. John's Lutheran Church of Woodview, Ohio; a memorial of the Salem Lutheran Church of B~lle ville , Ohio; a memorial of the R ootstown and Randolph churches of Rootstown, Ohio; a memor ial of the Methodist Epis­copal Church of Spencerville, Ohio; a memorial of the Presby­ter ian Church of Central Colleg-e, Ohio; a memorial of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Dysons, Ohio: a memorial of thirty-six churches in Northwestern Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Chur ch of Steubenville, Ohio; a memorial of the West Beth esda Presbyterian Church of West Bethesda, Ohio; a memorial of the Zion Baptist Church of Lebanon, Ohio; a memorial of the Scoville A venue Methodist Epic;copal Church of Cleveland, Ohio; a memorial of the First Congregational Church of Bucksville, Ohio; a memorial of the Swedish Congre­gational Church of Sweden, Ohio; a memorial of the Grace

' .-. . '

1892. CONGRESSIONAL. RECORD-SENATE. 3903 ~1ethodist Episcopal Church of Springfield, Ohio; a. memorial

'pf the Third Baptist Church of Cincinnati, Ohio; a. memorial of ,the First Presbyterian Church of Van Wert, Ohio; a memorial of ~the Methodist Episcopal Church of Bucks ville, Ohio; a memorial of the African Methodist Episcopal Church of Springfield, Ohio; a memorial of the Circuit churches in Antioch, Ohio; a.memorial .of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Urbana, Ohio; a. memorial of the Second Presbyterian Church of Massillon, Ohio; a memorial of the First Methodist Episcopal Church of Cleveland, Ohio; a. memorial of the Wiley Methodist Episcopal Church of Springfield, Ohio; a memorial of St. Stephen's Protestant Episcopal Church of Hamil ton County, Ohio; a memorial of Brighton Chapel of Cincin­nati, Ohio; a memorial of the First Presbyterian Church of Ada, Ohio; a memorial of the East Baptist Church of Lebanon, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Shiloh, Ohio; a. memorial of the Trinity Lutheran Church of Canton, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Scio, Ohio; a memorial of the Christ Evangelical Lutheran Church of Galion, Ohio; a memorial of the First Baptist Church of Marietta, Ohio; a memorial of the Second Presbyterian Church of Springfield, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Bristol­ville, Ohio; a memorial of the Baptist Church of Medina, Ohio; amemorial of the Baptist Church of Colebrook, Ohio; a memo­rial of the First Baptist Church of Mount Vernon, Ohio; a me­morial of the First Presbyterian Church of Milan, Ohio; a me­morial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Nelsonville, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Uhrichsville, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of St. Clairsville, Ohio; a memorial of the Woman's Missionary So­ciety of the Sugar Run United Presbyterian Congregation of Union County, Ohio; a memorial of the Presbytery of Athens, Synod of Ohio; a memorial of sundry citizens of Oxford, Ohio; a memorial oi the Evangelical Alliance, representing all the Evan­gelical churches in Cincinnati, Ohio; a memorial ol the Congre­gational Church of Sandusky, Ohio; a memorial of the Metho­dist Episcopal Church of Loudonville, Ohio; a memorial of the Lutheran Church of Arcadia, Ohio; a memorial of the Metho­dist Episcopal Church of Tontogany, Ohio; a memorial of the Youngstown (Ohio) District Epworth League; a memorial of the Perry County (Ohio) Sabbath Association; a memorial of the First Presbytery of Ohio; a memorial of the First Methodist Episcopal Church of Van Wert, Ohio; a memorial of the. Protes­tant Episcopal Grace Church of Toledo, Ohio; a memorial of the Presbyterian Church of Fletcher, Ohio; amemorialof the Buffalo Presbyterian Church of Cumberland, Ohio; amemorialoftheEng­lish Lutheran Church of Carey, Ohio; a memorial of the Fifth Lutheran Church of Springfield, Ohio; a memorial of the Third Presbyterian Church of Springfield, Ohio; a memorial of the First Congregational Church of Springfield, Ohio; a memorial of the Third Lutheran Church of Springfield, Ohio; a memorial of the First Baptist Church of Springfield, Ohio; a memorial of the First Presbyterian Church of Leipsic, Ohio; a memorial of the First Baptist Church of Kenton, Ohio; a memorial of the First Presbyterian Church of Mount Pleasant, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Cardington, Ohio; a memorial of the Union Baptist Church of Lebanon, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Gibsonburg, Ohio; a memo­rial of the First English Lutheran Church of Wapakoneta, Ohio; a. memorial of the First Presbyterian Church of Sidney, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Ashland, Ohio; a memorial of the Howard Methodist Episcopal Church of Find­lay, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Port Clinton, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Bellecenter, Ohio; a. memorial of the.MethodistEpis­copal Church of McConnelsville, Ohio; a memorial of the May­flower Congregational Church of Columbus, Ohio; a memorial of the First Presbyterian Church of Weston, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal ChU!'ch of Jackson, Ohio; a memorial of the First Congregational Church of Lorain, Ohio; a. memorial of the English Lutheran Church of Tippecanoe City, Ohio; a memorial of the St. Paul's and Mount Olive Lutheran Churches of Belleville and Hastings, Ohio; a memorial of the Lagonda A venue Congregational Church of Springfield, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Perry, Ohio; a. memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Arcadia, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Bedford, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Huntington, Ohio; a me­morial of the Twinsburg Congregational Church of Ohio; a memorial of the First Presbyterian Church of Marion, Ohio; a memorial of the Bristolville Congregational Church of Bristol­ville, Ohio; a memorial of the First Congregational Church of Windham, Ohio; a memorial of the Union Baptist Church of Cincinnati, Ohio; a. memorial of the Belleville Methodist Epis­C'bpal Church of Belleville, Ohio; a memorial of the First Pres­byterian Church of Xenia, Ohio; a memorial of the First Pres-

byterian Church of Athens, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Convoy, Ohio; a memorial of the St. Paul Methodist Episcopal Church of Springfield, Ohio; a memorial of the Trenton Presbyterian Church of Condit, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Nova Ashland, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Mentor, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church ot Lynchburg, Ohio; a memorial of the Presbyterian Church of Marseilles, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Vienna, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Canal Dover, Ohio; a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Nashville, Ohio; a memorial of the First Baptist Church of Painesville, Ohio; a memorial of the Congregational Church of Norwalk, Ohio; a memorial of the Regular Baptist Church of Cambridge, Ohio; a memorial of the Presbyterian Church of New Lexington, Ohio; a memorial of the First Methodist Epis­copal Church of Steubenville, Ohio; amemorial of the St.Paul·s Methodist Episcopal Church of Defiance, Ohio, and a memorial of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Penfield, Ohio, remonstrat­ing against any further financial aid being given to the World!g Columbian Exposition by Congres3 unless the same shall be closed on Sunday and the sale of intoxicating liquors prohibited thereat; which were referred to the Committee on the Quadr<r Centennial (Select).

He also presented the petition of Francis A. Fields, late cap­tain Eleventh Regimenit, United States Infantry, praying that he be placed on the retired list of the Army; which was re­ferred to the Committee on Military Affairs.

He also presented a petition of Berlin Heights Grange, No. 345, Patrons of Husbandry, of Ohio, and a petition of Smith­field Grange, No. 676, Patrons of Husbandry, of Ohio, praying for the passage of House bill No. 395, defining lard and impos­ing- a tax thereon; which were ordered to lie on the table.

He also presented a petition of Berlin Heights Grange, No. 345, Patrons of Husbandry! of Ohio, and a petition of Smith­field Grange, No. 676, Patrons of Husbandry, of Ohio, praying for legislation for the encouragement of silk culture; which were ordered to lie on the table.

He also presented a petition of Berlin Heights Grange, No. 34.5, Patrons of Husbandry, of Ohio; a petition of Smithfield Grange, No. 676, Patrons of Husbandry, of Ohio; a petition of Convoy Grange No. 153, P&trons of Husbandry, of Ohio, and a petition of 125 citizens of SanduskyCounty1 Ohio, praying for the passage of legislation for the regulation of speculation in :fictitious farm products; which was referred to the Committee on the Ju­diciary.

He also presented a petition .of Berlin Heights Grange, No. 345, Patrons of Husbandry, of Ohio, and a petition of Smithfield Grange, No. 676, Patrons of Husbandry, of Ohio, praying for the passage of a law prohibHing contracts discrediting legaJ.-tender currency; which was referred to the Committee on Finance.

He also presented a petition of Berlin Heights Grange, No. 345, Patrons of Industry, of Ohio, and a p~ition of Smithfield Grange No. 676, Patrons of Husbandry, of Ohio, praying for the free delivery of mails in rural districts; which were referred to the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads.

He also presented a petition of Typographical Union, No. 219, of Canton, Ohio, praying for the pasage of House bill No. 257, constituting eight hours a day's work; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor.

He also presented a petition of Convoy Grange, No. 153, Pa­trons of Husbandry, of Ohio, praying for the passage of legisla­tion to prevent the adulteration of food and drugs; which was ordered to lie on the table.

He also presented the petition of C. W. Harshman, in behalf of a number of other citizens of Charlestown, Ohio, praying Congress to make no further appropriation for the World's Columbian Exposition except on condition that the Exhibition be closed on Sunday; which was referred to the Committee on the Quadro-Centennial (Select).

He also presented a petition of the Chillicothe (Ohio) Board of Trade, praying for the passage of the TQrrey bankruptcy bill; which wa-s referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

He also presented a memorial of Roberts Post-, No. 672, Grand Army of the Republic, of Poplar, Ohio, remonstrating against the passage of any legislation for the free coinage of silver; which was ordered to lie on the table.

He also presented the memorial of B. B. Francis and 20 other members of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church of Licking County, Ohio; the memorial of 46 citizens of Reedsville, Ohio, and the memorial of 56 members of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church of Henry County, Ohio, remonstrating against Congress committing the United States Government to a union of religion and the state by the passage of any leg·islation closing the World's Columbian Exposition on Sunday, or in any other oay

-.

. ·. I •

•

. .

.. ' _.

3904 CONGRESSIONkL REOORD-SENATE. MAY 4,

committing the Government to a course of religious legislation; which were referred to the Committee on the Quadro-Centennial (Select).

He also presented sundry petitions collected by the National Woman's Christian Temperance Union of Ohio, containing 223 individual signatures, praying that no exposition or exhibition for which appropriations are made by Congress shall be opened on Sunday; which were referred to the Committee on the Quadro­Centennial (Select).

Mr. CAMERON presented a petition of sundry citizens of Pennsylvania, praying for th_e repeal of section 3519 of theRe­vised Statutes authorizing the Postmaster-General to have return requests printed on envelopes; which was referred to the Com­mittee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES. Mr. CAMERON, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, to

whom was referred the bill (S. 2472) for the relief of Thomas G. Corbin, reported it without amendment, and submitted a report thereon.

He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred the bill (S. 262) for the relief of Jabez Burchard, reported it without amendment, and submitted a report thereon.

Mr. GIBSON of Louisiana. lam instructed by the Commit­tee on Naval Affairs to report the following amendment to the bill making appropriations for the naval service for the fisca1 year ending June 30, 1893, and for other purposes, to come in on page 13, line 16, after the words" eight hundred."

Naval reservation, Algiers, La..: Toward the construction of a dry dock at Algiers, La.., in accordance with the recommendation of the two commis· sions, and for the purchase of such land as is shown by the report of said commissions to be necessary fs:>r this purpose in addition to the present Gov­ernment reservation, $250,000; and the Secretary of the Navy is hereby au­thorized to make a contract for the construction of the said dry dock, the cost thereof not to exceed !840,000.

I move that the amendment be printed and referred to the Committee on Appropriations.

The motion was agreed to. Mr. CHANDLER, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, re­

ported an amendment intended to be proposed to the naval ap­propriation bill, and moved its reference to the Committee on Appropriations; which was agreed to.

Mr. DOLPH. By direction of the Committee on Foreign Re­lations I report back favorably an amendment to the bill (H. R. 7520) making appropriations for sundry civil expenses of the Government for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1893r and for other purposes. The amendment increases the proposed appropriar tion for executing the Chinese exclusion act from $50,000 to $100,000. I move that it be referred to the Committee on Ap­propriations, and printed.

The motion was agreed to. Mr. McPHERSON, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, re­

ported an amendment intended to be proposed to the naval ap­propriation bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ap­propriations, and ordered to be printed.

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. T. 0.

TOWLES, its Chief Clerk, announced that the House had passed the following bills, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate:

A bill (H. R. 10:1:4) to correct the military record of Jesse C . Taylor, Sixth Tennessee Cavalry; .

A bill (H. R. 5108) to establish a military post at or near the city of Helena, in Lewis and Clarke County, in the State of Mon-~~~ .

A bill (H. R. 7557) to ratify and confirm an agreement with the Indians residing on the Colville Reservation, in the State of Washington, with certain modifications, and to make appropriar tions to carry into effect the same.

BILLS INTRODUCED. Mr. SAWYER introduced a bill (S. 3060) granting a pension

to Isabella W. Newkirk; which was read twice byitstitle, and, with the accompanying papers, referred to the Committee on Pen­sions.

He also introduced a bill (S. 3061) to pension Edith S. Read; which was read twice by its title, and, with the accompanying papers, referred to the Committee on Pensions. - Mr. STANFORD introduced a bill (S. 3062) for the relief of Mary A. Swift; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

Mr. PASCO introduced a bill (S. 3063) granting a pension to E. A. Tucker, of Pasco County, Fla.; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Pensions.

Mr. JONES of Arkansas(byrequest) introduced abill(S. 3064) for the relief of Holliday S. Ravell; which was read twice byits title, and referred to the Committee on Claims •

He also (by request) introduced a bill (S. 3065) for the reliefof the estate of William B. Pool, late of Jefferson County, Ark.; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Claims.

Mr. PAD DOCK introduced a bill (S. 3066) to amend the third paragraph of section 4693 of the Revised Statutes; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Pen-sions. .,.

WITHDRAWAL OF PAPERS. On motion of Mr. CASEY, it was Ordered, That James W. Foley have leave to withdl:aw his papers and peti·

tion from the files of the Senate, subject to the ru1es. DISTRICT BUILDING PERMI'l'S.

Mr. HARRIS submitted the following report: The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Hou~es on

the amendments of the Senate to the resolution (H. Res. 118) to suspend the issue of permits to erect dwelling houses in alleys in the District of Colum­bia, having met, after 1'ull and free conference, have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows:

That the House recede from its disagreement to the first amendment and agree to the same with an amendment, namely, strike out the words "the first session of;" so as to read: "That the Commissioners of the District or Columbia are hereby instructed not to issue any more permits for buildings intended for human habitation, in alleys less than 40 feet in width in the District of Columbia during the Fifty-second Congress."

That the House recede from its disagreement to the second amendment and agree to the same, namely: Strike out the words" until further provided for by Congress," and add the words "and that all such permits heretofore granted on alleys less than the width aforesaid, shall be revoked where con­struction shall not already have been actually' begun."

The report was concurred in.

E. 0 . WOLCOTT, JAMES McMILLAN, ISHAM G. HARRIS,

Conferees on tlte part of the Senate. J. R. FELLOWS, JNO. T. HEARD, WM. OOGSWELL,

Conferees on the pm·t oftlte House.

DISTRICT PUBLIC SCHOOLS. Mr. GALLINGER. I offer a resolution for which I ask imme•

diate consideration. The resolution was read. as follows:

Whereas complaint is made that the public schools of the District of Co lumbia are unable to prepare students to pass the admission examination tor Harvard College, the requirements for wh.ich are readily met by high schools of the best grade: Therefore,

Resolved, That the Committee on Educat.ion and Labor be .instructed to to make a careful inquiry into the matter and to report the resu1t to the Sen­ate at as early a day as possible. _ The- Senate, by unanimous consent, proceeded to consider the resolution.

Mr. COCKRELL. I should like to know if any serious com­plaint-s have been made of the character stated iq the resolu-tion. -

Mr. GALLINGER. I will state for the information of tho Senator from Missouri that I hold in my hand a letter from thEl secretary of Harvard University, which I will rea{].:

HARVARD UNIVERSITY, Cambridge, May 2,1892. DEAR Sm: I have recently received a letter rrom Washington complaining

that the public schools of the District of Columbia are unable to prepare stu­dents to pass the a.dmission examinations for Harvard College. I send yo11 by this mail a copy of the Harvard University Catalogue for this year, and call your attention to the adm.ission requirements as stated on pages 152-158. These requirements are readily met by high schools of the best grade in va­rious parts of the country, and I think you may be interested to know that competent judges in Washington are dissatisfied with the present school re­quirements in the District.

Yours, very truly,

Hon. JACOB H. GALLINGER. FRANK BOLLES, Secretary.

I know nothing whatever of this matter from personal knowl· edge, but if there are serious complaints made against the public schools in this District, schools which ought to be above the average of the high schools in the country because they have greater fa.cilities by way of libraries and otherwise for instruct:­ing their pupils, it seems to me that an inquiry as to the fact's would be in order and I trust it will be made.

Mr. COCKRELL. I ask the Senator to read the first part of the letter again. I did not catch what it was. There is so much conversation in the Senate Chamber that it is very difficult to distinguish the many voices.

Mr. GALLINGER. The secretary of Harvard University says:

I have recently received a letter from Washington complaining that the public schools of the District of Columbia are unable to prepare students to pass the admission examinations for Harvard College.

Then he afterwards says--Mr. COCKRELL. That is what I wanted to get, simply as to

the information from Washington. I do not know as to the pre­cise requirements in the catalogue of studies here in the high schools and at Harvard. I know, however, a number of students who have graduated in the high schools here have passed a satis­factory examination and are at Harvard College now.

Mr. CULLOM. Yes, t)?.at is the case.

1892. CONGRESSIONAL REOORD-SENATE. 3905 Mr. COCKRELL. Still i.t will do-no harm to make an inquiry Mr. FRYE. It will go over for a day at any rate, b ecause the

under the resolution. unfinished business will occupy that time. · Mr. GALLINGER. As I state, I have no personal knowledge

or feeling in the matter, but I think no harm will come from an inquiry.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on agreeing to the resolution.

The resolution was agreed to. Mr. COCKRELL subsequently said: I should like to suggest

to the Senator from New Hampshire that probably the resolu­tion in reference to the District schools ought to go to the Com­mittee on the District of Columbia. They have more direct jurisdiction of the matter.

Mr. GALLINGER. I have no objection. Mr. COCKRELL. I think that would be a better reference. Mr. HARRIS. The District Committee has absolute control

over the subject-matter of the resolution. The VICE-PRESIDENT. If there be no objection the vote

by which the resolution was passed will be regarded as reconsid­ered, and the resolution will be referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia. The Chair hears no objection, and it is so ordered.

HOUSE BILLS REFERRED.

The following bills, this day received from the House of Rep're­sentatives, were severally read twice by their titles and referred to the Committee on Military Affairs:

The bill (H. R. 1044) to correct the military record of Jesse C. Taylor, Sixth Tennessee Cavalry; and

The bill (H. R. 5108) to establish a military post at or near the city of Helena, in Lewis and Clarke County, in the State of Montana.

The bill.(H. R. 7557) to ratify and confirm an a~reement with the Indians residing on the Colville Reservation, rn the State of Washington, with certain modifications, and to make appropria­tions to carry into effect the same, was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.

PUBLIC BUILDING AT M'KEESPORT, PA.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. If there be no further morning busi­ness, that order is closed, and the Calendar under Rule VIII is in order.

Mr. QUAY. I ask the Senate to proceed to the consideration of the bill (S. 19l5) to provide for the purchase of a site and the erection of a public building thereon at McKeesport, in the State of Pennsylvania. -

There being no objectio11, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, proceeded to consider the bill, which had been reported from the Committee on Public Building-s and Grounds with an amendment, in line 13, after the words ·'one hundred thousand dollars," to insert "which sum is here by appropriated."

The amendment was agreed to. The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amend­

ment was concurred in. The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read

the third time, and passed. PILOTAGE ON AMERICAN COASTWISE VESSELS.

Mr. COCKRELL. The regular order. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Calendar under Rule VIII is

in order. The bill (S.1282) exempting American coastwise sailing ves­

sels niloted by their licensed masters or by a United States pilot from the obligation to :pay State pilots for services not rendered, was announced as first m order on the Calendar.

:Mr. BUTLER. That is a very important bill, and I trust it will not be called up for consideration under Rule VIII.

Mr. FRYE. It was passed over a day or two ago on the sug­gestion of the Senator from Missouri [Mr. COCKRELL], and I gave notice that immediately after the conclusion of the present

. unfinished business I should ask the Senate to take it upforcon­sideration, not of course in the morning hour and not under Rule VIII.

Mr. BUTLER. I have been necessarily absent from the Sen­ate for the last four days, and I was not aware of the fact that the bill was coming up. I shall therefore ask that it go over, re­taining its place on the Calendar.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The bill will go over, retaining its place.

Mr. FRYE. Let it retain its place on the Calendar. I have already given notice that on the conclusion of the unfinished busi­ness I shall move that the Senate proceed to its consideration. That will not be under Rule VIII.

Mr. BUTLER. I should like very much, if it would be en­tirely convenient to the Senator, that the bill might go over for a day or two. I have not had an opportunity to examine some papers.

:XXIII-245

WITNESSES BEFORE DISTRICT TRIAL BOARDS.

The bill (H. R. 6295) to punish false swearing before trial boards of the Metropolitan police force and fire department of the Dis­trict of Columbia, and for other purposes, was considered as in Committee of the Whole. '

The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, or­dered to a third reading, and was read the third time.

Mr. CALL. I should like very much if the Senator whore­ported the bill from the committes would submit some explana­tion of the necessity for it. It is a bill imposing severe pains and penalties upon persons for not attending court here, I under­stand, and we ought to know something about it.

Mr. PERKINS. The report is not lengthy, and perhaps will give the information that the Senator and Senate desire.

Mr. COCKRELL. Let the report be read. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The report will be read. The Secretary read the report (submitted by Mr. PERKINS

March 21, 1892), as follows: The Committee on the District of Columbia, to whom was referred the bill

(H. R. 6295) entitled "An act to :punish false swearing, before trial boards of the Metro:politan :police force and fire department of the District of Colum­bia, and for other purposes," after having considered the same, make a favor­able re:port to the Senate, for the reasons set forth in the following letter from the District Commissioners:

"COMMISSIONERS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUM13IA, "' " Washington, F eb1'uary 19, 1892.

"Sm: The Commissioners of the Dist rict of Columbia transmit herewith draft of a bill' to punish false swearing before the trial boards of the Metro:poli­tan policeforce andfiredepartmentof the District ofColumbia, and for other :purposes,' and request that you will be kind enough to urge its early :pre­sentation and enactment. Testimony frequently given before the :police and fire department trial boards indicates a lack of due a:p:preciation of the obli­gation of an oath, while the immunity from punishment in the premises be­gets an impression of security in misrepresentation and evasion, which is prejudicial to the discipline of bot h of those departments.

" Very respectfully, _ · ".J. W. DOUGLASS,

" President of the Board of Commissioners of the 1Jist1·ict of Columbia. " Senator .JAMES MCMILLAN,

·• Chairman Senate Committee on thg JJistrict of Columbia."

Mr. PERKINS. I will state in addition that the Commission­ers are of the opinion that under existing law there is no pro­vision for the punishment of false swearing in these com·ts of an inferior order in this District. The Committee on the District of Columbia of the Senate, upon investigating the matter, were disposed to think the same and to concur in the opinion of -the District Commissioners, and hence thought it was b2st to report favorably the bill, which was prepared in the office of the Dis­trict Commissioners or of the District attorney and r~com­mended to the Senate for favorable consideration. We thought there ought to be some provision of law for punishing offenses of that character.

The bill was passed. SOLDIERS' HOME IN KANSAS.

Mr. PEFFER. I ask cons 3nt to call up the bill (S. 2140) to au­thorize the Secretary of the Interior to convey to the State of Kansas certain lands therein named for homes of old soldiers and their families, etc., which was passed over yest.erday without prejudice.

Mr. COCKRELL. I should like to ask that that bill be laid over, unless the Senator can give me some information which 1 have not had time, since it was passed over yesterday, to look up. I was under the impression that we had already given one military reservation in the State of Kansas for a soldiers' home, and I wanted to look and see if we had not done so. I know we have established in the State of Kansas a volunteer soldiers' home at Leavenworth, supported by the National Government. It would seem probably at first blush that it would be uni)nportant to the Senate whether a State home was established or not; but when we consider that we already have thirteen State homes and that one-half of all the expenditure in those State homes is paid out of the United States Treasury and amounts to over a million and a half dollars a year, we see that we ara just as much interested in the State homes as in the national homes. I hope the Sena­to.r will not call up the bill this morning, unlesa he knows defi­nitely that there has been no such previol!"s bill passed.

Mr. PEFFER. The bill as it has b3en r eported to the Senate c::mtains an amendment proposed by the Committee on Public Lands. The committee have very carefully examined the meas­ure and there is no objection made to the amendment of the committee, which provides simply that the use of a small por­tion only of the tract may b a ceded to the State of Kansas, re­serving the fee in the Government, and for the purpose of a sol­diers' home, to be provided and maintained wholly at the State expense, so that the Government will be at no expense what­ever.

Mr. COCKRELL. Now, one moment. Does the Senator sup-

3906 CONGRESSIONAL REOORD-SENATE. MAY4,

pose that the State of Kansas, represented by two distinguished · Senators as it is, would permit every other State home in the United States to have half of its expenses paid by the General Government and those two Senators not ask the Senate to pay one-half that expense? There is no use in thinking that the State of Kansas is going to maintain this home at its own ex­pense when no other State is doing it. That will not bear in­vestigation.

Mr. PEFFER. The Senator knows that the people of Kansas are somewhat peculiar in that respect and in some others.

Mr. COCKRELL. I have no doubt of it. Mr. PEFFER. We are asking no appropriation whatever

from the Government. We are asking simply the use of a por­tion of the land which the Government is not now using to be used for a soldiers'.home at our own expense, and the remainder of the land to be opened to homestead settlement. The Senator from Oregon [Mr. DOLPH], the chairman of the Committee on Public Lands, is familiar with the history of the case, and I shall be pleased to have him make a statement for the information of the Senator from ~ssouri.

__ Mr. DOLPH. The bill as introduced by the Senator from Kansas proposed to provide that the whole of this military res­ervation shall be ~ven to the State of Kansas. It is a small reservation. I thmk it embraces either 5,000 or 7,000 acres of land. Upon examination we found that at the last session the bill had been reported by the then chairman of the committee, the late Senator Plumb, in the shape in which the committee now report it.

Mr. PADDOCK. The bill was originally introduced by him. Mr. DOLPH. The bill was originally introduced by him.

The bill asintroduced byhim proposed to give more land to the State than the committee determined should be given to it. I do not understand that the question of appropriation made by the General Government to s~pport State homes is at all involved in this case.

Mr. COCKRELL. As a matter of course it is. If the Senator will permit me, I want the question answered positively, when we are paying one-half of all the expenses of all the other State homes, will the State of Kansas sit back and pay all the ex­penses of this home .without asking the Government to pay half its expenses? We know that it is absolutely ridiculous to ex­pect any State to do it.

Mr. DOLPH. It is not a q_uestion of legal right. It is not a question of present law. It IS a mere supposition as to what the State of Kansas may do when she has provided a home for dis­abled soldiers. The Senator will understand that in this bill Con~ress is not authorizing the State of Kansas to erect and maintain a soldiers' home which shall be supported in part by the General Government. The State of Kansas may go any­where and buy land, if it does not possess it to-day, and erect a soldiers' home.

All that is done by this is merely to make a grant of a few acres of land that are eligibly situated for a soldiers' home to the State of Kansas. It does not involve the question o! expense to the General Government at all. If the State of Kansas does not use it for that purpose it reverts to the United States. Certainly it does not involve a question of any expense to the General Gov­ernment to support homes, and we can not prevent the State of Kansas from erecting a soldiers' home if we tried. It is the privilege of the State of Kansas to erect as many institutions of that kind as it chooses, and it may appropriate money from its treasury to purchase the ground. Everything that is proposed to be done here by Congress is simply to give the use of a few acres of ground to the State of Kansas to aid in this matter, and if it is not used for that purpose it comes back to the General Government.

Mr. PERKINS. Mr. President, I agree with the Senator from Missouri [Mr. CocKRELL] that in the event this bill should be­come a law and the State of Kansas should erect on these lands 11o soldiers' home weshall be no less modestthan the other States of the Union and shall want such assistance as is granted to like institutions in other States. .

1\ir. COCKRELL. That is manly, and that is just. Mr. PERKINS. I have not any doubt that that will be so,

but I desire to suggest to the Senator from Missouri thatitdoes not seem to me that it is a good objection to this bill to say that there is already a national home in the State of Kansas. It is true that at Leavenworth, in the State of Kansas, there is a. National Soldiers' Home, open to the State of Missouri and open to all the States in that regionof country, as it has been to Kan­sas, and there are no more Kansas inmates in that soldiers' home in proportion to population than there are from the adjacent States of the country.

Mr. COCKRELL. ':Phat is right. Now, will the Senator an­swer whether Congress has donated any lands heretofore to Kansas for a State home? I may be mistaken, but I think that

heretofore a bill passed the Senate granting a military reser­vation to Kansas for a State home. Whether it ever became a law or not I do not know, and that is what I wish th~ Senator to answer.

Mr. BERRY. I will state to the Senator that this iS the same bill that passed the Senate during the last Congress.

Mr. PERKINS. J was going to suggest in that connection that it is true that this bill, or· substantially this bill, in the early days of the present session, was reported by the Commit­tee on Public LandB and passed the Senate; but subsequently in­formation was brought to the Senators from the State which in­duced my colleague to introduce this bill, which has been amended

'somewhat by the committee. As presented in the present form this bill is more satisfactory to the delegation from the State than the bill which passed this body heretofore in the early days of this session. That bill I believe is pending in the House. If this bill passes that bill will not be called up for consideration.

Mr. COCKRELL. Is this the same military reservation? Mr. PERKINS. Thesamemilitaryreservation, the FortHays

military reservation, in the State of Kansas. It does seem to me, as suggested before, that because we have

a national home in our State we ought not to be precluded from receiving such :privileges as may be granted to other States.

.This reservation is no longer needed by the Government of the United States, and it is no longer used for military purposes. There are buildings there which were constructed at the ex­pense of the Government that are valuable for the purpose pro­posed by this bill. They are standing there idle and unoccu­pied. There is a custodian paid by the Government of the United States at this time to take care of and preserve this prop­erty. There is no reason, in my judgment, why this bill should not reeeive the favorable consideration of this body, and why we should not be permitted as a State to utilize this property and to create there a soldiers' home. It is but fair that I should say in this connection that Kansas

has more ex-Union soldiers in proportion topopulation than any other State in this Union. They went there from all the States in the Union in the early days of the settlement of our State. It seemed to be an inviting field for those who were discharged from the military ranks of the Government; they settled there by thousands, and the State is anxious to make some provision for them.

This is an eligible, a beautiful, and healthy site, and if this bill passes I believe the State will make ample provision for the poor and the unfortunate. To that extent it will assist the Gov­ernment in providing for them, and to that extent will relieve the Government of their maintenance and support.

The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, proceeded to aon­sider the bill.

The bill was reported from the Committee on Public Lands with an amendment, to strike out all after the enacting clause and insert: ·

That there is hereby granted to the State of Kansas the right to occupy, improve, and control for the purposes of a soldiers• home, to be established and ma.tnta.tned thereon by said State, two sections and one-haJ! of the lands embraced within the Fort Hays m111tary reservation, to include the build­ings located thereon, and to be selected by the governor of the State of Kan· sas according to legal subdivisions and contiguous, on condition that said State, shall, within twolears, establish such home, at which provision sha.ll be made tor the care an maintenance of omcers, soldiers, sailors, and lllf.\· rines W'ho have served in the Army, Navy, or Marine Corps of the United States, their dependent parents, widows, or orphans, and under such rules and regulations as said State may provide; and there is likewise granted to said State trom said reserva.tioJ?-1 to be selected by the governor, two and one­half sectiollB of la.nd to embrace une timber on the reservation, such selections to be m.a.de to correspond to the legal subdivisions and to adjoin the firs t­named tra.ct. Said last-named tract 1s granted tor the purpose and upon condition that the State of Kansas sha.ll ma.ke of the same and maintain thereon a public park.: and shall fully protect from dl')struction and damage said timber: Providea, That the United States reserves to itself the fee and the riJmt forever to resume possession and dispose of the said lands when· ever it sha.ll appear that the State of Kansas has ceased to use the same for such public purpose.

SEa. 2. Tha.t a.ll the remainder of said reservation after said selections have been made shall be open to settlement under the homestead laws only: Pro­fliaed, That no entry shall embrace more than SO acres.

Mr. PADDOCK. Mr. President, there is an error, I think, in the statement that this bill passed during the present session of. Congress. It passed in the last Congress.

Mr. PERKINS. It passed the Senate. Mr. PADDOCK. It passed the Senate at the last Congress,

but has not been passed in this Congress. Mr. PERKINS. I was of the opinion that the bill passed in

December before my appointment, but it may be that I am in error in relation to that.

Mr. COCKRELL. As Kansas comes in for this bill now, frankly admitting the situation, and not under the false pretense that it is not going to impose any burdens on the Government, I shall not oppose the bill any further.

Mr. PALMER. :Mr. President, this bill in its present form looks toward a.n experiment that has interested almost every

'

.

1892. OONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 3907 wan who has felt concerned in the proper care of the class of persons named in the bill.

The United States, in the first instance, established homes where men were isolated. It also established soldiers' orphan

. homes where the children were isolated. It has always been thought that an experiment that would authorize any of the States to collect and employ and educate the families of certain classes of soldiers and sailors would be a wise experiment, and

·probably lead to the solution of the difficulty which we have all experienced. We have a large orphan home in illinois. I have felt always the embarrassment of separating these children from their parents and from home associations and caring for them in the sort of semimilitary way that is necessary to beemployedin governing them in the homes.

At Dayton, where there are many thousands of soldiers, I had the honor for several years of being one of the managers of the National Home. I found a diffi.cul ty almost incurable in the sep­aration of soldiers from their families and from home associa­tions. When I saw this proposition to lend to the State.of Kan­sas-for, after all, it is no absolute gift, unless Congress shall hereafter, for reasons that may subsequently occur, choose to convert it into a gift, it is a loan of the land in this bill to the State of Kansas-that the State maywithitsownresourcesmake the experiment of bringing soldiers, decrepit old men and their families, to a home where home life can be enjoyed by these old men. I know of but very few things more pitiful than the ne­cessity that Eeparates an old man, an old soldier, from his family, and in order to enjoy the benevolence of the Government to abandon the care of all those whose care would be so precious to him. In this proposition an opportunity is given to the State of Kansas to make the experiment of caring for ~hese old men and their old wives and bringing them together, and in that way promote the happiness of all. ·

I understand this thing may be carried very much too far, but it seems to me this bill meets the exact point to which we have already been looking as an experiment.

As to the State of Kansas, it has in it relatively more soldiers than any other two States, I think, in the Union. I went over not long ago on the sad ~rrand of conducting the remains of a late Kansas Senator to his home, and at different points in Kansas I found a number of old associates and a number of men who had come to the State that was actually surprising. They will grow old like other men; they will be object-S of care like other men, and the State of ::Er,fm.sas will have a very large burden thrown upon it, no matter what the Government may do.

But I wanted to say merely that I regard this as a loan of land that the Government no longer needs, and that it shall be for the State of Kansas to make this experiment in which old men, at least, are so deeply interested, of bringing the old soldier, de­crepit as he is, to this home that Kansas will provide and bring with him the children, if there are any who are still objects of care, and there are decrepit children of these old men who will cling to them for life. I know of instances where these old sol­diers have decrepit children who have been by nature rendered incapable of self-help and self-care.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator's time has expired. Mr. PALMER. I am very glad to hear it has, for I needed

some such check to bring me to a conclusion. [Laughter.] Mr. ALLISON. I do not understand that this bill provides

any special plan such as suggested by the Senator from Illinois. Mr. PALMER~ My time has expired, but I understood the

matter in the way I have stated. Mr. ALLISON. I do not understand that this soldiers' home

is to be established in any other way than the ordinary soldiers' homes, except that dependent mothers, widows, etc., may be ad­mitted there.

But I do not rise to make any observation respecting the char­acter of this home. I wish, however, a little information re­specting the Fort Hays military reservation. I should like to ask the Senator in charge of this bill what is the extent of" the Fort Hays military reservation?

Mr. PEFFER. Five or six thousand acres, I think. I have forgotten the exact number.

Mr. DOLPH. I think it is about 7,000 acres. Mr. PADDOCK. All the land there is not proposed to be do­

nated by the bill. Mr. DOLPH. It gives five sections, or about 3,000 acres. Mr. ALLISON. I only desired to get some information in

regard to it. Mr. PEFFER. I have forgotten the exact number of acres

contained in the entire reservation, but it is somewhere about five or six thousand acres, as my memory is impressed.

Mr. PERKINS. Between six and seven thousand acres, I think.

Mr. PEFFER. Between six and seven thousand acres, but

the bill does not propose to give the use of more than a small portion, two or three sections.

Mr. COCERELL. Two and a half sections. Mr. DOLPH. Two and a half sections of timber land merely

for a park. · Mr. COCKRELL. Five sections altogether, or about 3,200

acres. Mr. ALLISON. I notice that section 2 of the substitute pro­

vides that the remainder of this land shall be opened to home­stead settlement. It seems to me that that is hardlv a fair pro­vision respecting this land, situated as it is in the very heart of the State of Kansas, to allow this small tract to be opened to homestead settlement.

The custom is, I believe, with these military reservations to have them sold. I should be glad if the Senators who have charge of this bill would state some reason why this remnant of lands should be left open to homestead settlement only. Why should it not be sold and the proceeds paid into the Treasury?

Mr. PADDOCK. Under the act of 1884 abandoned military reservations are surveyed, appraised, and sold for cash at public sale under the old rules of sale.

Mr. ALLISON. So !understand. Mr. PADDOCK. But the practice has been, and the rule has

been well established here during the past two or three Con­gresses, to turn these lands over to homestead settlement, as all other lands are now disposed of under that rule. A number of bills have been passed turning over abandoned military reserva­tions to homestead settlement. That rule seems to nave been pretty well established in quite anum~r of cases similartothis.

Mr. ALLISON. I can very readily see why that would be a proper rule in uninhabited regions or regions where the lands were not specially valuable; but it is manifest that these are valuable lands.

Mr. DOLPH. I have not understood.that they were anything more than ordinary agricultural lands, but they may be a little more valuable than more remot-e lands. The homestead claim is reduced to not exceeding 80 acres to each person, reduced one-half the ordinary homestead claim. ·

I do not understand that this is near a city or village, or near to a town, or that the land is valuable for any other purpose than for agriculture. The committee so understood, and I think that must be the case, because the bill was thoroughly discussed by the late Senator Plumb. These lands are understood to ba only agricul turallands.

In the case of lands that are especially valuable for town-site purposes, or being near a large city, or if there is any reason why they should not be sold asagriculturalla.nds, they are taken out of the operations of the general law, but in all these outly­ing military reservations in recent years we have reported sep­arate bills putting them under the operation of the homestead law, sometimes giving persons who are in possession a prior right.

:Mr. ALLISON. I do not object to the bill, but my understand­ing was that these lands are very valuable. If, as the Senator now says, they are not, I do not wish to interfere with the bill.

Mr. DAWES. Can a homesteader obtain 160 acres of this land without paying anything?

Mr. PERKINS. Eighty a-cres only can be obtained by any one person under the provisions of this bill.

Mr. DAWES. We have for the last two or three years com­pelled every homesteader who goes on the poorest part of an Indian reservation, on all that land in the Indian Territory and all up in the North west, to pay a dollar and a half an acre. Now, here is land in the heart of Kansas. I do not know how good it is, but I do not believe there is an acre in all Kansas that is not worth five times.as much as the average acres on the Cherokee Outlet, and yet we compel the homesteader in all this region to pay a dollar and a half an acre for the land.

I do not know anything about the merits of this bill, but I do not see why a homesteader, since we have adopted that rule, should not be compelled, without regard to the quality of the land, if he desires it for a homestead, to pay a dollar and a half an acre for it and give him four years to pay it in.

Mr. DOLPH. The homestead law does not require any pay­ment whatever, unless the homesteader commutes, as the law now stands, at the expiration-of two and a half years. It used to be at the expiration of six months' residence and cultivation. The homesteader may commute and pay a dollar and a quarter an acre and get his title. If he does not do that, he has to wait five years to get his title. That is the general provision of the homestead law, and the pending bill puts the land referred to under tha.t law.

Mr. DAWES. I know that is the general homestead law, but it seemed to Congress to be wise, and the homestead la.w in. that respect has been modified as to all the lands opened from the

3908 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. MAY4 '

Indian reservations, amounting in the last three years to 20,000,-000 acres.

Mr. DOLPH. These are exceptions to the general rule. There are special ena-ctments for the disposition ol lands ceded by the Indians to the Government, and the reservations are sold upon the basis of the treaty, which requires a certain amount to be paid to the Indians for the land. The object of legislation re­quiring payment, I suppose, is to reimburse the General Govern­ment for the money paid to the Indians; but the homestead law itself requires no payment if the homesteader lives five years on his land ·before getting his title. If he chooses to commute after a partial residence, then he has to pay for the land.

Mr. PADDOCK. We~an not afford to be quite as generous with other people's land as we can with our own. The Indians own their land, and therefore we have toaccount to them for it.

Mr. PERKINS. Mr. President, I desire to say briefly to the Senator from Iowa [Mr. ALLISON] and the Senator from Massa­chusetts [Mr. DAWES] that these adjacent lands were entered, as a rule, under the homestead law or under the commuted pro vi­sion of the homestead law. Under the provisions of this bill the settlers who take possession of this land wiU be treated as set­tlers on the adjacent lands are treated with the exception that in this case settlers are limited to 80 a-cres each.

It is true, as suggested by the Senator from Massachusetts, that under the provisions of the bill to ratify the agreement with the Cherokee Indians, we propose to charge the settlers $1.50 an acre, but that is to reimburse the Government. The Government is proposing to buy those lands from the Cherokee Indians, and to reimburse the Government we propose to charge the settlers $1.50 an acre. The settlers recently located in the Cheyenne and Arapahoe Reservation in Kansas are required to pay to the Gov­ernment $1.50 an acre to reimburs3 the Government for what it paid to the Indians. In the Sac and Fox and Iowa Agencies in Oklahoma, and in the Seminole lands, and the Creek lands, we only charge the settlers $1.25 an acre, and we only charge the settlers away up in Dakota $1.25 an acre.

Mr. DAWES. The Senator is mistaken about that. Mr. PERKINS. I think not. Mr. DAWES. It is true that when Oklahoma Territory was

established the public lands opened at that time were opened at $1.25 an acre, but since then I have no knowledge of an acre having been opened. I know we purchased 3,000,000 acres of the Crows last year at 30 cents an acr3, and every settler upon that land is obliged to give $1.50 an acre. If the Senator . desires to say that there is an a-cre of land in Kansas that is not worth three times as much as that land up there is I would not have it re-ported. _

Mr. PERKINS. I think myself this land is more valuable than some of the Indian land that has been opened up for settle­ment; but, as has been stated, that land has been reserved by the Government from its general domain. The Government is not buying this land; the Government is making no expendi­ture, and Congress, if this bill passes, opens the land which has been retained heretofore from settlement under the provisions of the homestead law, as has been suggested.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The time of the Senator from Massachusetts lMr. DAWES] has expired. The Senator from Kansas is speaking by consent of the Senator from Massachu­setts.

Mr. PERKINS. I will take the floor in my own right, then. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator has already occupied

his full time under the rule. · Mr. CALL. I should like to ask the Senator from Kans3.s if

I understand this reservation to be 3,500 acres? Mr. PERKINS. Between six and seven thousand acres. Mr. CALL. And that is to be opened for settlement under

the homestead law? Mr. PERKINS. Under the homestead law, except 3,200 a-cres,

which are to be given to the State of Kansas under the provi­sions of this bill.

Mr. CALL. Three thousand two hundred acres? Mr. PERKINS. The use of 3,200 acres by the provisions of

this bill is to be given to the State of Kansas for the purpose of this home. The remainder of the reservation is to be opened to settlement under the homestead law. Settlers, however, are limited to 80 acres each.

Mr. CALL. Will theSenatorallowme to ask him what is the necessity to tho soldiers' home of 3,200 acres of land-what use would it be?

Mr. PERKINS. Two sections and a half are reserved for a park by the provisions of this bill-timber land. It was thought wise that that should be preserved; and under the provisions of this bill it is to be preserved; the timber is not to be destroyed, it is not to be cut down. The land is simply loaned to the State of Kansas for the purpose of a park, and two sections and a half given for the use of the home proper.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on the amendment reported by the committee in the nature of a substitute.

Mr. CALL. I ask if there is any length of time for the loan of the land?

Mr. PERKINS. Only that when it ceases to be used for the purpose proposed by the bill , or in the event that it is not used for that purpose , it reverts to the Gover nment.

Mr. ALLISON. I move to s trike out the second section of the amendment reported by the committee.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The amendment to the amendment will be stated.

The CHIEF CLERK. It is propooed to strike out section 2 of the amendment, as follows:

SEc. 2. That all the r emainder of said reservation after said selections have been made shall be opened to settlemen t. under the homestead laws only: Provided, That no entry shall embrace more than 80 acres.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. Thequestion is on the amendment of the Senator from Iowa lMr. ALLISON] to the amendment of the committee.

Mr. ALLISON. I desire to say a word upon my amendment. Here is a donation to the State of Kansas for the use of one­

half of a reservation of 7,000 a-cres, and we are told that this land will revert to the Government of the United States when the State of Kansas ceases to use it for a soldiua' home, the remain­ing 3,200 acres to ba opened to settlement under the homestead law. The theory of homestead settlement is that all the lands of the United States are open to all the people of the United States for such settlement. Now, I venture the l: s ~erticn that these lands are worth $10 an acre; they certainly will be worth that much after this law passes, and probably twice that much. It is certain that only a few people in the immediate neighborhood of these lands, probably not 10 miles distant, will gather in there and take up the lands.

If any Senator can give me a reason why this little residuum of t-hese lands should be given noway to the people who happen to be in that neighborhood. I may be disposed to vote for this sec­ond section, but I should s.1y that if this land is to be given to the State of Kansas for the p:J.rpose of establishing a home, we had better give the whole 7,000 acres for this purpose than to al­low a few people who may live in the immediate neighborhood of Fort Hays to grab this land under the homestead law.

Mr. JONES of Arkansas. I should like to ask the Senatorfrom Iowa a question for information.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Iowa yield? Mr. ALLISON. I do. Mr. JONES of Arkansas. I donotunderstand the effect of the

amendment offered by the Senator from Iowa, and I should be glad to have him explain it to the Senate. I am notfamiliar with these laws, and my impressions are favorab!e to his view of the case, but I do not understand how these lands will become sub­ject to sale if the Senator's amendment should prevail. I should be glad if he would explain that to the Senate.

Mr. ALLISON. If section 2 is struck out, the remainder of these lands will be subject to future disposition, unless there is some general law whereby they can be sold. They will remain the lands of the Government of the United States until we au­thorize their sale . If this donation is given upon the idea that at any time these lands shall revert to the United States, why notg1ve the whole of it., with these buildings and this beautiful and lovely park, to be decorated and ornamented by the State of Kansas, and why not enlarge and amplify it, and give the entira 1,000 acres, instead of the 3,500?

My point is that if we are to dispose of the whole of this land, we had better give it all to the State of Kansas for this purpose. The State can utilize it very well in many ways, by cultivating it for the use of these old soldiers and in other ways, rather than to allow a few people who live in the neighborhood of Fort Hays to grab this land to the extent of 80 acres each and and sell immediately at $20 an acre.

Mr. BUTLER. The Senator from Iowa does not suppose that any portion of this land will ever be returned to the United States Government, does he?

Mr. ALLISON. I was laboring under that pleasant delusion after the statements made by the Senators from Kansa . I may be mistaken about that, but, if not, let us give the whole of it to Kansas.

Mr. BUTLER. If there is an instance in the history of the Government where anything has come ba-ck to the United States I fail to remember it. Perhaps the Senator from Iowa may.

Mr. ALLISON. I do not remember any special instance of it. Mr. JONES of Arkansas. My inquiry was addressed to the

Senator from Iowa in good faith. I had an impression that if his amendment should prevail, under the law as it stands, these lands would be sold at public sale to the highest bidder, perhaps, in some way as prescribed by law.

Mr. PADDOCK. As I stated awhile ago, there is a provision

,•

1892. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-. SENATE. ·3909 in the act of 1884 regulating the sale of land in military reserva­tions.

Mr. JONES of Arkansas. Then I should like to know why it would not be a proper thing for these lands to be disposed of un­der the operations of that general law.

Mr. McPHERSON. What is the general law? Mr. PADDOCK. The act provides for the survey, appraise­

ment, and public sale of the lands. Mr. BUTLER. To the highest bidder. Mr. PAD DOCK. The rule which has obtained in recent years

in respect to the sale of public lands in remote sections was by special acts to set them aside for homestead settlement. That rule has been observed by Congress for several years. The lands covered by this bill are no better than other lands in that region of country which are subject to homestead settlement. I ven­ture to say that these lands are no more valuable than other unoccupied lands within 20 miles of them.

Mr. COCKRELL. Let me ask if the rule which the Senator refers to about the change of the law of 1884, which required im­provementsand the lands to be appraised and then sold at pub­lic sale to the highest bidder-if the change to the homestead policy in regard to reservations has not been confined to those reservations which are in a wild and unsettled cJuntry and are no more valuable than the adjoining lands? Has that principle of the homestead law ever been applied to a valuable reserva­tion such as that down near St. Louis, the Jefferson Barracks, or anyfof those reservations which are worth thousands of dollars?

Mr. PADDOCK. This land is in the newer section of Kansas. The rule I have referred to was applied to the lands in the newer sections of Kansas, Nebraska, Wyoming, etc. A few Congresses ago, I think so early as the Forty-sixth Congress, a special act was passed authorizing the sale of the Fort Kearney military reservation in our State. The land was a-s good land as that re­ferred to in this bill. There were settlements not very remote from the reservation, and the lands possibly might have been sold at public sale at some advance above a dollar and a quarter oreven twodollarsandahaU anacre. Theymighthavereached that price, but under the general principle that lands shall be disposed of to actual settlers to be improved for the purpose of developing the country and enriching it by cultivation it was concluded not to take that course with that tract.

Mr. JONES of Arkansas. I should like to ask a question. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The time of the Senator · from Ar­

kansas has expired under the rule. Mr. JONES of Arkansas. I wanted to ask a question, Mr. Pres­

ident~ and rose for the purpose, but I believe the Senator has occupied the whole of my five minutes' time and I can not ask the question. When some other Senator takes the floor, I shall endeavor to ask my question in his time.

Mr. PADDOCK. I beg the Senator's pardon. Ididnotknow I was occupying his time.

Mr. CULLOM. I have not risen to make a speech. As I un­derstand it, if the amendment of the Senator from Iowa prevails, it strikes out the second section of the bill, and out of the con­sideration in connection with the bill one-bali of the land, or whatever it may be included in this reservation, so that 3,000 or 3,500 acres of land remain in the possession and ownership of the Government of the United States, to be disposed of hereafter as the Government may see proper to dispose of it.

Mr. DOLPH . . To be appraised and sold under existing law. Mr. CULLOM. To be appraised and sold under existing law.

In my judgment, the best thing to do is to strike out that sec­tion, and I think the friends or this bill are not particularly op­posing that view of it. I hope it will be disposed of in that way.

Mr. PERKINS. No, we are not opposed to it. Mr. CULLOM. The Senator from Kansas states that he has

no objection to it. Mr. PADDOCK. There is no real objection to it. Mr. PEFFER. We have no sort of objection to striking out

section 2. The bill as originally presented proposed that Con­gress grant to the State of Kansas the use of the entire reserva­tion for the purpose of establishing and maintaining by the State a home on the lands, but the Committee on Public Lands saw proper to amend it by giving the State the use of only a portion of the reservation, and it is section 2 of that amendment which the Senator from Iowa proposes to strike out. That would leave us, by a proper amending of section 1, just where we were in the beginning, granting to the State the use of the entire reserva­tion. I am not at all satisfied but that the Senator's view is entirely correct and that it would be better to keep the reservation in one body, because the bill as originally drawn did not propose to part with the fee, with the title to the land., but to retain it in the United States.

Mr. DOLPH. I will state to the Senator from Kansas that the Committee on Public Lands would not consent to that without a re-reference of the bill.

-Mr. PEFFER. I will only state to the Senator that so far

as the people of Kansas are concerned and the Senators repre­senting the State upon this floor, we are not tenacious about re­taining the second section in the bill at all. That is the point we make.

Mr. DOLPH. Then let it be stricken out. Mr. PEFFER. If the section is stricken out, it will keep the

reservation in a body, so that when the final disposition of it is to be made it will be in one body and can then be governed by the general law regulating such matters or by a special act.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on the amendment of the Senator from Iowa to strike out section 2 of the commit­tee's amendment.

Mr. CALL. Mr. President. as far as I am concerned I shall never give a vote in this body'for the withdrawal of public lands from the policy to which they have been dedicated by the action of Congress as free homes for the people of the United States who will occupy and cultivate them. I believe that policy is abso­lutely necessary to the preservation of this Government.

But where lands have been improved and a special value given to them, as in the immediatevicinityofacity, theycannolonger be said to be taken for agricultural purposes or for the purposes of occupation and cultivation. In this case, it seems to me, the Government having made a reservation for military purposes and built upon it substantial buildings, it would not be right to give this increased value under the guise of enabling some person to occupy and cultivate it for agricultural purposes. It would be a violation of that policy. Therefore I think the amendment of the Senat0r from Iowa is a proper one.

Mr. McPHERSON. Mr. President, I wish to ask the Senator from Iowa, whose position I think is very correct in regard to this matter, if section 2 be stricken out, which appears to be a direction with respect to the disposition of the residue of the lands, will it not be necessary, in lieu of section 2, to provide some special authorization in the act for the survey and disposition of these lande under the general law which has been heretofore quoted?

Mr. ALLISON. I understand not from the chairman of the Committee on Public Lands. I understand the remainder of these lands will continue in their present condition without any change whatever.

Mr. JONES of Arkansas. I understand the chairman of the Committee on Public Lands to say that in case the amendment of the Senator from Iowa prevails, these lands would then become ·subject to sale under the general law, which provides for their appraisement and sale. I should be glad to know if I understood the Senator correctly? -

Mr. DOLPH. There is such a law in force. I do not know how promptly sales are ma<!e under it, but when a reservation is abandoned for military purposesand the lands are agricultural lands and not specially valuable, the rule has been for Congress to pass special laws directing how they shall be disposed of and providing that they shall be disposed of under the homestead law . only. Now, if it is supposed that these lands are or will become specially valuable by the erection of this home, taking one-half the reservation for that purpose, I see no reason why they should not be appraised and sold.

Mr. JONES of Arkansas. But the question I had in my mind was, by the operations of the law alone, if the amendment of the Senator from Iowa is adopted, whether these lands will become. subject to sale under the provisions of that general law without additional legislation?

Mr. DOLPH. They may be sold under that law without ad­ditional legislation.

Mr. JONES of Arkansas. It seems to me that would be en­tirely satisfactory.

Mr. PADDOCK. And turned overt:.> the General Land Of­fice.

Mr. PALMER. I have no disposition to interfere with this bill except to know about its present status and form, but it oc­curs to me that the proposition of the Senator from Iowa is an exceedingly proper one. If these lands should be disposed of under the homestead law, theywould be gobbled up by somebody in the neighborhood.

Now, I suggest to the gentlemen who have charge of this bill that the second section be stricken out, and that the words " two sections and one-hall," in line 6 of section 1, and the words in line 8, "and to be selected by the governor of the State of Kan­sas according to legal subdivisions and contiguous," be stricken out, so that the whole body of the land be transferred or loaned to the State of Kansas for the purpose of a soldiers' home.

Mr. DOLPH. The Senate Committee on Public Lands could not assent to that, and would have to oppose the passage of the bill if that proposed amendment shoutd be adopted.

1ir. PEFFER.. I ask permission to make a statement to the Senator from Illinois.

( I

3910 OONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. MAY4,

Mt·. PALMER. I shall be glad to hear the Senator. Mr. PEFFER. I wish to state for the information of the Sen·

ator from illinois further, that the motion made by" the Senator from Iowa to strike out the second section of the bill, is entirely satisfactory to those of us who represent the State of Kansas, and we shall make no further objection nor shall we propose to amend the bill in any other way.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on the amendment of the Senator from Iowa to the amendment of the committee.

The amendment to the a10.endment was agreed to. The VICE-PRES~DENT. The questionrecurson the amend­

ment oi the committee as amended. The amendment as amended was agreed to. The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amend­

ment was concurred in. The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third read.ing, read

the third time, and passed. Mr. DOLPH. I think the title should be amended so as to

read: "A bill granting to the State of Kansas the right to occupy, improve, and -control, for the purposes of a soldiers' home, certam lands in that State."

The committee amendment simply grants the right to use the land.

Mr. PERKINS. There is no objection to that. Mr. PEFFER. That will be satisfactory. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The title will be so amended in the

absence of objection. . ADDITIONAL LAND DISTRICT IN MONTANA.

The bill (S. 878) creating two additional land districts in the State of Montana was considered as in Committee of the Whole. The first section provides that all that portion of the State of Montana commencing at a point on the southern boundary of the State of Montana where the range line between ranges 2 and 3 east of the principal meridian will, when extended, intersect the same, and running thence north along said range line to the first standard parallel south; thence west on said standard par­allel to the point where the range line between ranges ·2 and 3 west of the principal meridian intersects the same; thence north along said range line between ranges 2 and 3 west of the princi­pal meridian to the base line; thence with said base line to a point where the same, wh~n extended, will intersect the main divide of the Rocky Mountains; thence southerly, following the main divide of the Rocky Mountains, to the boundary line be­tween Idaho and Montana; thence with the boundary between Montana and Idaho to the place of beginning, be constituted a new land district, to be called the southern land district, and the land office for the district shall be located at the town of Dil­lon, in the State of Montana.

The bill was reported from the Committee on Public Lands with amendments.

The first amendment was to strike out section 2, as follows: SEC. 2. That all that. portion of the State of Montana. bounded and described

as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of the State of Montana, and running th'4IDce south on the line between the States of Montana and North Dakota to the south boundary of the Fort BUford military reserva­tion, as declared by Executive order of August 18, 1868; thence west to the Missouri River; thence westerly along said river to the point where the range line between ranges 12 and 13 east of the principal meridian intersects said river; thence south along said range line, between ranges 12 and 13 east, to the fifth standard \>a.rallel north; thence west along said standard parallel to the Montana prinCipal meridian; thence north with the line of said merid­ian., when extended, to the north boundary of the State of Montana; thence east with said north boundary of the State to the place of beginning, be, and the same is hereby, constituted a new land district, to be called the northern land district, and the land of!lce for said district shall be located at the town of Fort Benton, in said State of Montana.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, in section (3) 2, after the word"' ap­

point," to strike out "registers and receivers" and insert "a register and receiver;" so as to make the section read:

SEc. 2. That the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Sen­ate, is hereby authorized to appoint a register and receiver for such land dis­tricts, who shall discharge like and similar duties and receive the .same amount of compensation as other of!lcers discharging like duties in the other land of!lces of said State.

The amendment was agreed to. The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amend­

ments were concurred in. The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read

the third time, and passed. Mr. SANDERS. The title should be changed, so as to read:

"A bill creating an additional land district in the State of Mon­tana."

The VICE-PRESIDENT. That modification of the title will be made in the absence of objection.

TOWN OF FERRON, UTAH. The bill (HJ R. 1080} for the relief of the inhabitants of the

town of Ferron, County of Emo'l.·y, Territory of Utah, was con­sidered as in Committee of the Whole. It authorizes the pro-

bate judge of Emery County, Territory of Utah, to enter in trus\ for the inhabitants of the town of Ferron, for town-site purposes, section 16, in township 20 south, of range 7 east, Salt Lake me­ridian, subject to the provisions of sections 2387, 2388, and 2389 of the Revised Statutes of the United States relating to town sites. .

Upon the passage of this act the Territory of Utah, through its proper officer, shall be authorized to select as indemnity for said land, and in full satisfaction thereof, and for the purpose stated in section 1946 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, one section of the public lands at any land office in the Territory, the selection to be made in a. body, according to legal subdivisions.

Mr. COCKRELL. Let the report be read in that case. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The report will be read. The Secretary read the following report (submitted by Mr.

CAREY, March 21, 1892): The Committee on Public Lands to whom was referred the bill (H. R.1080)

for the relief of the inhabitants of the town of Ferron, county of Emery, Territory of Utah, submit the following report:

The section of land referred to in the bill is already occupied in part by the town of Ferron, this school section being the only land surrounding or ad­joining the town that is suitable for town-site .Purposes. The land on.. the north and west of the town is too hilly and broken, and that on the east is swampy.

Houses have been built, irrigation ditches constructed, town lots a.nd gar­dens improved, a.nd streets laid out on the land in question under the belief that Congress would grant the relief sought by this bilL Congress has here­tofore passed simila.r bills for the relief of towns built on school sections.

The committ-ee recommend tha.t the bill pass.

The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, or­dered to a third reading, and read the third time.

Mr. SANDERS. I should like to have that bill reported a.t length again.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The bill has been read at length. It will be again read..

The Secretary rea.d the bill. Mr. PLATT. Mr. President, I should like a little explanar­

tion of this bill. I desire to inquire why, if this school section, which is near a town, is to be sold, the schools should not have the benefit of what it brings· why the school fund should not derive the advantage of the sale and why the authorities of the Territory should be compelled to select, in lieu of it, a. section somewhere1 which probably might not be one-tenth of the value of the present schools3ction?

Mr. DOLPH. To the State the school lands are granted, for the Territory the school lands are reserved. They are not granted until theTerrirories areadmitted as StatesoftheUnion. It seems that here is a t.own so located in a canon around the mountains that the only available land for a town site is a sec­tion that is reserved for schools. As stated in the report, the town is already built upon the school section, and it is proposed to authorize the county judge to enter the s~ction under the town-site law, under which the lands are sold to the occupants or conveyed to the occupants for the benefit of the town, as really no money comes to the General Government, and to allow the Territory to select another section in lieu of the present section from lands that. are already reserved to the Territory. The se­lection will be only to reserve that section for the Territory when admitted as a State.

Mr. SANDERS. I am not satisfied with the explanation. In the first place, as to the size of this town, whether 6-iO acres is an appropriate quantity of land, we are not advised by anything in the report of the committee. While it is true, as the chairman of the Committee on Public Lands says, that these lands are simply reserved from sale and are not granted to the Territory, it is just as competent for the Congress of the nited States to provide that that section of land shall be eold to occupants for a price that it will bring under the town-site laws, or othexwise, and that that money shall go to the schools of Utah.

I see in the bill a despoilment of the common-school fund of the future State of Utah. I think the circumstances are such that we have a right to interfere with it, and I think that the money which it brings should either be given to the Territory of Utah to be used for its common schools, or that it should be reserved until the Territory of Utah is admitted as a State.

It is idle to say that there is any hope of selecting a section of land which shall be equal in value to the one UJ>On which a town is builtJ My own observation of these matters m the Territories of the West is that, whenever a school section becomes valuable, all sorts of excuses are made to withdraw it from the future school fund of the S tate into which the Territory may be organ­ized, to divert the values from that fund and to try to satisfy the general conviction which prevails, that these schools are entitled to that which we have promised them by offering them some­thing in lieu thereof.

I do not desire any action upon this matter in the absence of the member of the committee who made the report, the Senator

1892. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 3911 from Wyoming [Mr. CAREY], and I suggest that it go over,with· out prejudice to its place on the Calendar, for consideration \Vhen he shall return. - -

Mr. WARREN. Mr. President, I t1·ust the Senator will not urge his objection. The school sections in the Territories are reserved in the manner explained by the chairman of the Com­mittee on Public Lands. There isalawprovidingfortownsites, eo that a town in a Territory, and I presume ina State, can make en try and receive certain lands. The towns do not pay any amount of money for the lands. It is in the nature of a home­stead. So, were these lands not school lands, the Government would receiveno payment of consequence for them. The inhab­itants receive the land without price,exceptwhat the necessary expenditur~s, legal or otherwise, may be in securing it.

Her a is a case where a growing town is situated between the hills in a canyon, and the only direction which it can properly grow is out over the school section.

There are reasons why Congress in its wisdom has not seen fit heretofore to give statehood to the Territory of Utah. Those reasons will probably prevail for some time. The only way in which the growth of this town can be provided for is under some arrangement whereby this school section can ba made available. This piece of land would be given almost free were it not school land for the town. There is no reason, in my judgment, why a piece of school land sheuld not be disposed of in the same manner and the settlers receive the benefit, provided the Territory or the State reimburses itself by further selection of school land, as it can do under the statute.

I simply ask ii the bill does go over that it may go over with­out prejudice, so that my colleague may take care of it. I be­lieve, however, if _the Senator from Montana would reflect a mo­ment he would see that to postpone action on the bill is a very severe hardship. The town is desirous of getting title and se­curing not only the present settlers, but further settlers. I do not believe we ought to interpose any objection that may retard the growth of any portion of this country, especially of the West, and more especially of the Territories.

Mr. SANDERS. I should like to inquire of the Senator if he knows where in Utah this town is located?

Mr. WARREN. I can not describe it as to metes and bounds. Mr. SANDERS. In what vicinity? I am somewhat familiar

with that Territory, but this town 1s new to me. Mr. WARREN. The subject is new to me as to the town, ex­

cept as to the explanations I have received. The subject of the town-site law and the troubles of new town-sites that are located on schoollands I am very familiar with, because! have livedfor more than twenty years in a town where the most valuable por­tion is yet a part of the school section.

Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I do not still feel like sur­rendering my objection to this kind of legislation. In the State which I have the honor in part to represent, I know of an in­stance which, I should judge, was very like unto this, where, im­mediately adjacent to the town, and in fact, for that matter, cornering into it, there is a school section. This occurred while it was a Territory. No doubt it would have been gratifying to a great many gentlemen if they could have had the reservation of that section removed, and the future State of Montana. mocked by an offer to give them so meting in lieu of it-'' reimburse them," is the language used by the honorable Senator from Wyoming­but it would take a great many sections of land such as they could select to actually reimburse them for the valu~ of that sec­tion.

I am not undertaking to make any objection which shall in­terfere with the growth of the alleged town of Ferron, or that shall put in peril any squatters' rights or any ultimate title that they may obtain. As to those towns, however, that are so en­tered, the laws require that the occupants of these lots shall pay a certain amount per lot, which goes, more or less of i t , to the payment of the expense of entering the land. Now, there is not any pretense whatever that these 640 acres of land, which is a piece of land a mile square, is occupied as a town. It is said there are some buildings upon it, that there are irrigating ditches upon it, that there are gardens upon it.

For one, I do not feel, as being to some extent the guardian of the future educational fund of the State of Utah, in which all the people of the United States feel, if possible, a profounder interest than they do in any other educational fund in the United States, like giving away this mile square of land because it is valuable and because it is desirable, remitting the future State of Utah to the selection of a piece of ground because it is not equally valuable.

I say it is competent, if it is wise, to prepare such a bill as that those people who shall move upon this town site and shall select a lot 42 by 150 feet, I believe is what is provided in the o.ct, can get a title, but whatever amount they pay should cer· tainly be reserved for this school fund. If it be true that noth-

ing is paid except what is expended for the entry of the lot, then the balance of that section, which will be contiguous to the town, ought to be reserved and ought to be owned by the State of Utah, when it shall be created, for the use and benefit of its common schools.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. PLATT in the chair). Does the Senator desire the bill to go over?

Mr. SANDERS. I do. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill will be passed over

without prejudice. Mr. WARREN. I understand the bill retains its placJ oa

the Calendar. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill retains its place on

the Calendar. It is passed over without prejudice. ORDER OF BUSINESS.

Mr. SHERMAN. I ask the unanimous consent of the Senate that the Calendar shall b3 proceeded with to-day under the five­minute rule.

Mr. CULLOM. All day? Mr. SHERMAN. Until the adjournment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio asks

the unanimous consent of the Senate that during the remainder of the day the Calendar may b3 proceeded with 1.mder Rule VIII, not displacing, however, the unfinished business, as the Chair understands.

Mr. SHERMAN. Leaving all the orders stand a.s they are. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? The Chair

hea\'13 none, and that order will 'be adopted. Mr. JONES of Arkansas. In view of the fact that the Senate

will devote to-day to the Calendar, I ask that the Present unfin­ished business may, by unanimous consent, be taken up to-mGr-­row immediately after the conclusion of the morning business and proceeded with during the day.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkamas asks the unanimous consent of the Senate that the unfinished business may be taken up to-morrow morning at the conclusion of the routine business and proceeded with during the day. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and that will be con­sidered the order of the Senate-.

PUBLIC LANDS IN ALABAMA. The bill (S. 1696) to further provide for the disposal of c3rtain ·

lands in the State of Alabama. was considered as in Committee of the Whole.

The bill was reported from the Committee on Public Lands with amendments.

The nrst amendment was, in section 1, line 3, before the word "public," to strike out" proceeds of the sales of the;" in line 4, after the word" now," to insert" remaining;" in line 5, before the word" under," to strike out" and are re~uired to be sold;" in line 8, after the date" 1883," to strike out 'and any rents, is­sues, and profits that may accrue therefrom under the provisions of this act;" in line 10, after the word" hereby," to strike out "set apart" and insert "~anted;" in line 11, after the word "Alabama," to strike out 'as a. fund;" in the same line, before the word "exclusively," to strike out "employed" and insert "applied;" in line 16, after the words" production of," to insert "coke;" in the same line, after the word "thereof," strike out ''and '' and insert ''to be used; " in line 18, after the word ''Ala· bama," to strike out "in" and insert "for;" in the same line, before the word" industrial," to insert "such;" in line 19, be· fore the word" shall," to strike out" fund" and insert" lands·" and in line 20, after the word "applied," to insert "to the for~­goiug trusts;" so as to make the section read:

That the public land!! in the State of Alabama which are now remaining subject to sale under the provisions of uAn act to exclude the public lands in Alabama from the operation of the laws relating to mineral lands," ap­proved :rtbrch 3, 1883, are hereby granted to the State ot Alabama to be ap­plied exclusively in promoting technical education in any school, college, or university that the Legislature of Alabama shall designate, in the branches of learning connected with the mining of coal, and iron ore, a.nd the produc­tion of coke, iron, a.nd steel, and the manufacture thereof, to be used in the discretion of the Legislature of Alabama for the promotion of such indus­trial education in that State. Said lands shall be under the control of the General ABsembly of Alabama., and shall be applied to the foregoing trusts and administered under the laws of said State. .

The amendment was agreed to. Thenextame~dment was, to strike out section 2, as follows:

SEC. 2. That -the· lands in said act mentioned shall be sold, in accordance with the provisions thereof., at such tiines and in such quantiti~s a.nd legal subdivisions as may, from time to time, be designated by the governor of the State of Alabama, and the Legislature of Alabama shall have authority to select and set apart any of said lands for the purpose of being leased to miners, the rental or royalty to be paid into the treasury of the State of Alabama. for the purpose declared in the first section of this act, and the pro­ceeds of any sales of said lands, made as herein provided, less the expenses of selling the same; shall, from time to time, be paid, under the direction of the Secretary of the Interior, to the proper omcer of the State of Alabama authorized by law to receive and receipt for the same.

The amendment was agreed to~ Mr. CALL. I shall not oppose the passage of this bill, but I

3912 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. MAY 4,

wish to state for myself that I believe every withdrawal of the public lands of this country from the use and occupation of the people upon the condition of cultivation for free homesteads, is a wrong policy and a great injury to the country. I should pre­fer myself that, in the first instance, all wild land should be sub­ject to the sole condition of occupat ion for free homes by the families of the American psople, subject to the conditition of cultivation and r esidenc3 alone.

The bill was reported to the Senate as amended. Mr. CHANDL~R. I suppcse this bill is one which has been

on the Calendar for some time and substantially the same bill which was upon the Calendar in the last C~ngress.

Mr. MORGAN. This is the third time it has been reported. Mr. CHANDLER. I will ask the Senator, firs t, whether the

amendments which have just b3en adopted are thos3 wilich ara contained in the bill as printed a!ld now upon the Calendar?

Mr. MORGAN. Yes. Mr. CHANDLER. S::> that the bill now before the Senate

reads exactly as the bill was reported from the committee? . :Mr. MORGAN. Yes.

Mr. CHANDLER. I should like to have the Senator make a statement ccncerning these lands, showing us in what quantity land is baing granted to Alabama by this bill, and why the United States should make this donation?

Mr. MORGAN. Mr. President, the report of the committee, which I will ask the Secrehry to read, contains a full statement upon those propositions.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The report will be read. The Chief Clerk read the following report (submitted by l\lr.

MORGAN, March 22, 1892): The Committee on Public Lands, to whom was referred the bill (S. 1696)

"to further provide for the disposal of certain lands in the State of Alabam a," have examined the same, and r espectfully report the same to the Senate, with certain amendments, and recommend its passage.

Before the development of coal anj iron production in what i s termed the mineral district of Alabama, the public lands had been offered at sale at 1.25 per acre. Alter that these lands were o1Iered at a rate as low as 25 cents an acre, and were kept on the market at that price for several years without being disposed of. They are located in a. country that is not useful for agricultural purposes, except in small, detached parcels along the small streams flowing trom hills of 300 to 1,000 feet above their beds. The result has been that few of these lands have been or ever will be taken up for agricultural purposes, either at the public sales or by private entry or under the homestead laws.

When, on the 3d day of March, 1873, the coal lands in the several States were withdrawn from private entry and from the operation of the home­stead laws by act of Congress, and were included in a new system of laws for the disposal of coal lands in the public domain at $10 and S20 per acre, only a few persons were residing on any of these lands in Alabama as home­stead or preemption claimants.

Prior to the passage of the coal-land laws (Rev. Stats., sees. 2347 to 2352) land grants were made and confirmed to certain railroads located through or near to the coal district in Alabama. These grants included large bodies of the best coal lands in that region, and private capital had taken up, for speculation chiefly, all of the great coal fields in Alabama except the small remnant of detached parcels of land covered by this bill.

The act of March 3, 1883, dealt with this remnant of the coal fields, still in the ownership of the United States, and put them all on the basis of ordi­nary agricultural lands as to the manner of their disposal. The rights of all homesteaders and preemption claimants who were residing on those lands at the date of that act were saved to them and their claims, made in goo:l faith, were confirmed. So that every homesteader and preemption claimant who resided on any ot said land at the date of said act of March 3, 1883, had its title placed under the protection a1Iorded by the homestead and preemp­tion law.

Prior to the passage of said act the Department of the Interior. Mr. Schurz being Secretary. sent out Mr. Winter, a geological expert, to examine the coal regions of Alabama, and to designate the lands of the United States in that region that were to be classed as coal lands. His examination and des­ignation of the coal lands in Alabama was reported by him to the General Land 01llce, in which report he designated, chiefly by townships and ranges, the coal lands of that region, and made and filed in the General Land 01llce maps which he prepared, on which such designations were noted.

Those lands described in Winter's maps were entered upon the tract books of the General Land 01llce, and are the same that were included in said act of March 3, 1883. The identification of the lands which were thus designated and reported by Winter as coal lands was rendered certain and accurate on the books of the General Land 01llce. After the passage of the act of March 3, 1883, Congress granted to the University of Alabama about 40,000 acres of land, which were located on the area that was described and designated as coal lands by said Winter, and the General Land 01llce in making up to Ala­bama a deficiency of acreage in the sixteenth sections reserved to the State for township schools allotted to those purJ!oses about 40,000 acres, which al-

~~~~f;~ ~;:~~~~d~~~~~~:ac~\~~~~f ~h~~~:iaf~~~ ~~_acres, all After deducting the lands so granted to the University of Alabama, and

allotted to the sixteenth sections that were less in size than 640 acres, there remains about 200,000 acres that will be disposed of by this bill, if it should become a law, less the amount that may be included in grants to railroad companies. ·

These lands were proclaimed for sale under the provisions of the act of Con­gress approved March 3, 1883, by the President, and were advertised in hand­bills, copies of which were appended to this report.

These offerings for public sale were withdrawn and the sales were post­poned indefinitely by the order of the President.

No reason has yet appeared for this refusal to obey the plain mandate of the law, and the lands remain in their wild state and without yielding any­thing to anybody. Not only are they utterly useless as they stand, but they embarrass the full and proper development of mines that are near them, or by which they are surrounded. They are in bodies too small and too detached to be available for the purposes of mining, except by companies operating coal mines near to them. They wo,uld be of little value, if any, to any other person or corporation, and no private owner would undertake to hold them a.gainst the larger mining enterprises operating in their vicinity:

The State of Alabama., as the owner of these parcels of land, in trust, and

not subject to taxation, can hold them until their fair value can be obtained, either by leasing or selling them to adjacent proprietors. In this way alon~ can it be expected, reasonably, that these lands can ever be of a.ny real value to any persons except the holders of large bodies of coal lands conti~uous to them. And in this way a fund can be raised that will probably mcrease every year for a great number of years, which the State of Alabama, as re­quired by this bill, will faithfully apply to the purposes therein declared. . It is a just and wise policy to use the remnant of these lands for the educa­tion of the children of the minin,e: and industrial classes who will occupy this mineral region and will bring its great wealth into the channels of commerce, through their skill and personal toil. This is a natural resource for these wise and benevolent purposes that Congress should not deny to the miners and producera of the metals that abound in the mineral regions of Alabama, where t he products of agriculture are meager and there fs no other impor­tan ~ inducement to labor except in the mines and furnaces. Education in respect of t hese industries will contribute greatly to the improvement of the people living in that country and will promote the welfare of the whole country.

No. 90'2. PROCLAMATION BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

In pursuance of an act of Congress of March 3, 1883, I, Grover Cleveland, Pres­ident of the United States of America, do hereby declare and make known that. a public sale of valuable Government lands will be held at the land o1llce in Montgomery, in tho State of Alabama, on Thursday, March 11, 1886, at which time will be o1Iered a portion of the lands not previously disyosed of that wer e reported to the General Land omce ~rior to the passage o the act as containing coal or iron, in the undermentioned townships and parts of townships, viz :

North of the base line and east of the St. Stephens meridian: Township 21, ranges 9 and 10.

South of the base line and west of the Huntsville meridian: Township 2'2, ranges 5, 8, and 9. Township 21 , ranges 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Township 20, ranges 2, ::!, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, and 11. Township 19, r anges 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11. Townsh~ps 18 and 17, r anges 1, 2. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11. Township 16, ranges 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11. 'l.'ownship 15, ranges 1, ~. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11.

South of the base line and east of the Huntsville meridian: Townships 21 and 15, range 1. Township 18, range 2, 3, and 5. 'l'ownship 17, r ange 3. Townships l(j, 14, and 13, ranges 3 and 9.

Lands appr opriated by law for the u se of schools, military, or other pur­poses or r ei;erved for railroad purposes, will be excluded from sale. The o1Iering of the above lands will be commenced on the day appointed, and will proceed in the order in which they are tabul!l.ted until the whole have been offered and the sales thus closed, but the sale shall not be kept open longer than two weeks, and no private entry for any of s~id lan :is will be admitted until the day after the close of the public offering.

All lands will be disposed of at not less than the minimum price of $1.25 per acre.

Lists of sectional subdivisions are in the hands of the dis trict omcers, and will be open for examination by those desiring to purchase.

Given under my hand, at the city of Washington, this 28th day of Novem­ber, A. D. 1885.

GROVER CLEVELAND. By the President:

WM. A. J . SPARKS, Commissioner of the General Lana Ojftce.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, GENERAL LAND OFFICE, Washington, IJ. C., IJec. 26, 1885.

POSTPONEMENT. By order of the President, of December 19, 1885, the above sale is postponed

to 'l'hursday, April22, 1886. WM. A. J. SPARKS, Commissione1•.

No. 903. PROCLAMATION BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

In pursuance of an act of Congress of March 3, 1883, I, Grover Cleveland, President of the United States of America, do here by declare and make known that a. public sale of valuable Government lands will be held at the land o1llce at Huntsville, in the State of Alabama, on Thursday, March 25, 1886, at which time will be offered a portion of the lands not previously disposed of that were reported to the General Land 01llce prior to the passage of the act as containing coal or iron in the undermentioned townships and parts ot townships, viz: .

South of the base line and west of the Huntsville meridian: Township 14, ranges 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11. Township 13, ranges 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11. Township 12, ranges 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11. Township 11, ranges 8, 9, and 10. Township 8, ranges 9 and 10.

South of the base line and east of the Huntsville meridian: Township 13, ranges 1, 3, and4. Township 12, ranges 1 and 10. Township 10, ranges 5 and 7. Townships 9 and 8, range 7. Township 7, range 8. Township 6, range 9. Townshi!JS 5 and 4, range 10.

Lands appropriated by law for the use of schools, military, or other pur­poses, or reserved for railroad purposes, will be excluded from the sale. '!'he o1Iering of the above lands will be commenced on the day appointed, and will proceed in the order in which they are tabulated until the whole have been offered and the sales thus closed, but the sale shall not be kept open longer than two weeks, and no private entry for any of saJ.d lands will be admitted until the day after the close of the public offering.

All lands will be disposed of at not less than the minimum price of $1.25 per acre. ·

Lists of sectional subdivisions are in the hands of the district officers, and will be open for examination by those desiring to purchase.

Given under my hand, at the city of Washington, this 28th day of Novem­ber, A. D. 1885.

GROVER CLEVELAND. By the President:

WM. A . J. SPARKS, Commission~ of the General Land Office.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The hour of 2 o'clock having arrived, the Chair lays before the Senate the unfinished busi·

1892. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 3913 ness, which is the resolution of the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. JONES] relative to President's message upon the appropriation of March 3, 1891, for payment to the Choctaw and Chiokasaw Nations for their interests in the Cheyenne and Arapahoe Reser­vation. By the order of the Senate the unfinished business is to be laid aside to-day, to be taken up to-morrow at the conclusion of the routine morning business.

Mr. CHANDLER. I notice by the reading of the reportthat President Cleveland offered these lands for sale, and, after ad­vertisement, they were withdrawn. The report says these•of­ferlngs at public sale were withdrawn and the sales were post­poned indefinitely by order of the President. But the report lfives no l:ltatement of the reasons why the attempt ·to r ealize money and put it into the Treasury of the United States was abandoned.

I am not myself averse to making donations of remnants of the public lands in the States to those States, and do not think there 1s any injustice in doing so. I certainly have no illiberality in my own mind in that connection; but the question necess3.rily comes up, as it seems to me from glancing at the bill and the report, whether or not this final closing out of all the public lands in the State of Alabama by donating them to that State for educa­tional purposes will not be followed by requests that similar do­nations shall be made to all the remaining States, certainly to all the remaining States which have within their borders only the remnants of public lands. The question certainly arises in my mind, as to which I need enlightenment, how far we shall go in this direction and where we shall stop. Does this bill follow others of a similar character, or is it the precurser of bills of a similar character which we shall be asked to pass?

This bill was reported from the Committee on Public Lands by the Senator from Alabama [Mr. l\10RGAN], in whose State these lands are located, I assume, with the concurrence of all the mem­bers of the committee. But here seems to have been a decision made that an attempt on the part of the President to realize the cash value of these lands and put it in the Treasury should be aban­doned, and in the place of that effort comes this proposition to donate all the lands to the State of Alabama in order that the State may use the proceeds of the lands for the promotion of in­dustrial education.

I am not p"I'epared to say that I shall vote against the bill, though I know there ~re Senators who have baen disposed to op­pose it. One Senator in particular I remember, who opposes the bill, is now absent. Certainly I should like a statement from the Senator, reiterating my requestandperhapsinterrupting him in the statement he was about to make, indicating how far this proposition as to Alabama may .require us to go in the case of other States.

Mr. MORGAN. Mr. President, the r eport which bas just been read, if any attention has been paid to it at all, gives a complete history of the legislation upon the subject of these remnants or fragments of coal lands remaining undisposed of in Alabama. In five minutes' time I would not undertake to go over that again. I trust the Senate has observed what has been said in the report.

In reply to the question of the Senator from New Hampshire, this bill has neither a precursor nor will it have a successor. It is a bill which stands entirely upon its own foundation, aside from and disconnected with every other scheme of legislation in the world that I have ever heard of or dreamed of. It is maie necessary by the fact that the£e lands have been p_ut in a very peculiar attitude or condition by the legislation of Congress, which did not at the time receive my entire assent.

The Senate has noticed first of all that while Mr. Schurz was Secretary oi the Interior, in order to execute th3 provisions of the coal-land laws of the United States he sent a geological ex­pert there for the purpose of defining and raporting to him what lands fell within the operation of those laws that had not there­tofore been disposed of. He made a list of them and file :l it in the Department of the Interior, and that list has been followed by the proclamations of the President offering these lands for sale: Those proclamations were put in for the sake of a perfect identity of the land. The area included in Mr. Winter's explo­ration was not a large one as compared with the whole body of the coal fields for the rea£On that he took the idea, it may be cor­r ect or it may be incorrect, but he took the idea, however, that the available coal lands in that pa~t of the State of Alabama were confined to an araa that was ab::;ut one-third of th-e entire coal measures, as they are called.

Mr. Winter made his report, in which he designated the lands still remaining in the hands of the United States Government as coal lands and others that were agricultural lands. They were little patches of land about on the small streams and down in the dales produced by the opposition of the high hills, upon which t.here have been settlements by different small farmers. They had not taken out, many of them, homesteadentriesor any

other entries for these lands at the time that legislation was pro­posed here, under an act which I have before me, to make a dis­position of the coal lands in Alabama.

The question that was presented to Congress in a bill tha~ I had the honor to introduce here, I believe (and in the other House it was introduced by one of my colleagues from Alabama), was whether the coal lands which had not been taken up, those belonging to the Government of the United States, should re­main under the general coal-land laws of the country or should be regarded as they had been in Kansas, Missouri, Michigan, and several other States, as agricultural lands for purposes of public disposition.

These lands had first of all been offered for sale at public sale at $1.25 an acre at Huntsville, then the land district. After that the graduating act came in, and it provided that certain lands that had remained for such a length of time on the market un­sold should be sold at 25 cents an acre, that others which had remained a still longer time should b9 sold at 15 cents an acre, and others a still longer time should be sold at 12t cents an acre. These lands remained there. Although the knowledge of the existence of coal was common in the country no attention was paid to these lands. They were regarded as being entirely worth­less because they were not in c::mnection with transportation of any kind.• They were remote from any water transportation, and there was not a railroad, I suppose, nearer than 200 miles of any part of them.

So these lands were not taken up except by men who went and squatt~d on them and did not pay anything for them at all. Nevertheless these men were homestead claimants, and when we asked the Congress of the United States to change the lands from the ca-tegory of coal lands to agricultural lands we made provision in that act for the confirmation of the claim of every man .who was then residing upon any of them and claiming a homestead right or q ualifi.ed to claim a homestead right, thereby confirmin!! the title not of a very large number but of all the settlers who were there and who had occupied theselandswhich were supposed to b 3 agricultural or partially so. •

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is the duty of the Chair to inform the Senator from Alabama that he has spoken five min­utes.

Mr. MORGAN. I knew that I would not be able to explain the bill in the time prescribed by the rule.

Mr. ALLISON. I am very much interested in the explana­tion of the Senator f1·om Alabama, and if I can be accorded the floor I should like to ask him a question or two in respect to this matter.

Mr. MORGAN. I should be very glad to go on. I will say, if the S3nator will allow me, that this is the third time the bill has been r aported t) the Senate. It has hai very little opposi­tion at all from anybody, and that opposition has been founded entirely upon mistaken ideas of the facts, and I have never been able to get it up.

The PRESIDL.'TG OFFICER. Does the Senator from Iowa de­sire to ask a question of the Senator from Alabama?

Mr. ALLISON. I hope the Senator will be allowed to go on. Mr. CULLOM. By unanimous consent certainly he may be

allowed t::> complete his statement. Mr. MORGAN. I do not want to violate any rule, but it is the

third time the bill was reported from the committee, and it has been done after the most scrutinizing examination.

Mr. CHANDLER. I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Alabama may be allowed to proceed.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no objection the Senator from Alabama will be pel mitted to proceed. ·

Mr. MORGAN. I shall tryto economize thetimeveryclosely in order to get the facts before the Senate.

Now then, we confirmed in the act which I have before me here the title of those settlers to this land. So that really dis­poses of all the class in respect of whom the Senator from New Hampshire feels any concern-the people who had gone there and for years had been gathering there to take up their little homestead entries, or whatever you might please to call them. They were squatter locations. T hat bill was presented h ere to take these)ands out of the category of public lands, as has been done ip. the various other States, it being perfectly obvious that not one acre of them ever would sell, and no acre ever has sold, for either $10 or $20.

There is no chance to make any combinatian of the s ::>r t that is provided for in the coal-land 1aws upon these lands, because they are in scattered fragments lying a.b:mt in this place and that and the other, not happening to have been taken up under the $1.25 law, or the 25-cent law, or the 15-cent law, or the 12t -cent or any other law. They are mere fragments lying about that could not be used in respect of the provisions of the laws ot the United States that control the disposal of the coal lands. So Alab::tma was relieved, as these other States had been, from the

3914 OONGRESSIONAL REOORD-SENATE. MAY 4,

operation of those laws in respect of this fragmentary portion of this general body of land. Now, here is the act:

That within the State of Alabama an public landB, whether mineral or otherwise, shall be subject to disposal only as agricultural lands.

Tha. t puts them all on the footing of agricul turallands. Now­Provid~a. 'however, Th.at all lands which have heretofore been reported to the

General La.nd omce as containing coal and iron shall first be offered at pub­lic sale.

That provision was put in there by the Interior Department. They made a communication to the other House in which they insisted that the lands should be offered for public sale. Then I had not any idea in the world, no conception of an idea, that these lands could be made available for the purposes of education or anything else. I did not like that provision, but still it went into the bill. Now, the next proviso is as follows: Anaprovidedfurth~r. Th.a.t any bona fide entry under the provisions of the

homestead law of lands within said State heretofore made may be patented without reference to an act approved May 10, 1872, entitled "An act to pro­mote the development of the mining resources of the United States," in cases where the persons making application for such patents ha>e in all other respoots complied with the homestead law relating thereto.

Under that provision the Secretary of the Interior went on and confirmed a. great number of entries. I say a. great number, but that is not the fact, because there were not a great number of people there, but he confirmed all the en tries in fa ViOl' of these squatters exactly in conformity with what I wanted to be done, because I sympathize fully with the idea that the agriculturists shall have all the lands in the United States that are fit for ag­riculture, and I am in favor of the homestead laws; I have al­ways been a. warm adv.ocate of it, and I was here in this bill.

Now, the land was brought into that condition. The Pr~si­dent of the United States issued his proclamation to sell these lands. After the proclamation was issued, by the intervention of some person whom I have never been able to trace out, that proclamation was withdrawn. I went to Mr. Lamar, who was then Secretary of the Interior, and asked him the reason for it. He could not assign any reason. I asked him for any opposition or suggestion that might have been made by any private person a.ooainst the sale. There were none on the record. Twice I have c~ed on the Administration then in power and the Adminis­tration now in power for information of any complaint or ob­jection made by any person to the sale of these lands, and !have the official answer here from the Interior Department that there has been no complaint; that no objection has been lodged against it at all.

I have stood with my eyes open and my mouth open wondering how it could be that a law of that kind, peremptory in its char­acter, should ba refused execution by the Department of the In­terior, and why President Cleveland had ever seen proper to withdraw his proclamation, and I am as ignorant tc-day of the causes of it as the Senator from New Hampshire.

Mr. CHANDLER. Is it not to be inferred that there was no sale because there were no offers for the land? Is not that the natural solution of it? The lands were offered for sale. They could not have been sold without buyers.

Mr. MORGAN. They were not offered. The procla.lJlation was withdrawn before the sale.

Mr. CHANDLER. They were not actually put up? Mr. MORGAN. No. Mr. CHANDLER. Yet I understand the Senator to say that

no persons have complained that they did not have an opportu­nity to buy so far as he can learn by inquiry.

Mr. MORGAN. No persons complained that they had no op­pol·tunity to buy that I have ever heard of.

Mr. CHANDLER. When the Senator says the plain provi­sion of the law was not complied with he means that the law re­quired the question as to whether there were purchasers should have been decided by an actual offering?

Mr. MORGAN. As a matter of course; and the President of the United States made his proclamation provid.ing for the sale, and then before the sale took place withdrew the proclamation.

Mr. CHANDLER. Now, I will ask the Senator if there had been persons who desired to buy would they not have made their wishes known either by complaint to the Interior Department or in some way?

Mr. MORGAN. That is more than I know, whether they would or not. I suppose they would not have known anything about the President's intention to withdraw the proclamation. I do not wish to be unfair or unjust to anybody in the world about this matter, but I know from statements made to me by a distinguished capitalist in that country that a combination had been formed to buy all of these coal lands at the sum of $1,000,-000. They intended to go in and buy up these lands, and why did they want them? Not because independently the lands are worth anything to them or to anybody else or are of any great ac­count, but because they lay adjacent to properties which they had already ~ompassed and included in large schemes of pur-

chase. The President may have got ear of that; I do not know. I said nothing about it, although I would have said something about it if that sale had gone on.

From that time to this I have been watchful to see who it was who was thus interrupting the laws of the United States for the sale of these lands. I found that I could not get an administration to act upon it, but I could not find out who was objecting and wtio was interposing these objections. I could not move at all. There occurred to me then a thought, and it is a. very favorite th{)ught with me, that these fragmentary lands can b8 taken by the State of Alabama and held on to, the markets for them wat-ched, and the necessities of these large mining proprietors observed, and that the State can work out of these la.nds afund for the education of the children of miners there who have no other fund to be derived from an agricultural or any other source that we can contribute or that anybody else can contribute to their education.

Certain gentlemen a.nd ladies in the city of Birmingham have started on their own private a-ccount a technical establishment, which has not yet been organized, but to which the subscrip­tions, I understand, of good money are $250,000, for the benefit of the horde of children of miners who have gone there to settle. I wish to say in bahalf of those miners in Alabama that we have been very careful, very prudent, I think very wise, in selecting and locating upon all the lands in that country the very best class of mining population that we could find. We did not want to ha~e the uproar of strikes and difficulties which occuramoncr people who are imported merely to work a few days and the~ perhaps go away. We wanted permanent settlers; and so it has turned out that there has never been a strike in the coal mines of Alabama amounting to more than ten or twelve hours a.t one or two smaller mines. The business of coal mining there has gone along profitably to the miner as well as to all concerned, ar:d certainly with great banefit to the general community.

Now, they are raising their children. They are poor men; they are hard-working men. I maintain that a school of technology, a simple plain school of instruction in mining, engineering, and in t.he properties of coal and coke, in chemistry, and the like of that, can be and will bemaintained out of thefund that! propose to devote to it in this bill, which will furnish to the children of these miners the only opportunity they can ever have to acquire a scientific knowledge of the business in which they are brought up and in which their fathers have made a living for them, and to which they are dedicated by the laws of society. So my liea1·t has been very earnestly set upon this, and I have been watching thE¥3e lands to see what harpy, what scoundrel might interfere here for the purpose of taking them up and uutting them in his pocket so as to deprive these children of these blessings and bene­factions.

Three times the Committes on Public Lands, fully informed by printed reports and by t estimony brought before them of the whole situation, have recommended this bill, with some little variations in the phraseology and method of disposal. But when the case came up at the last session of Congress the then Sena­tor from Vermont, Mr. Edmunds, made objection that perhaps the bill had not sufficient definiteness to describe the land . So I put in here the proclamation of the President to leave no doubt about it. There can not be any doubt about the description. Then it wassuggestedalsothatthe State of Alab3,ma, instead of having all this right to sell a.nd lease and the like of that and come here for patents, should receive the lands by a straight donation in trust that the State would apply them to the purpo3es of tech­nical education in that quarter of the country.

Now, you may refuse to pass my bill, but then you have got to do one of two things. You have got to sell these lands and let them pass into the hands of these large corporations, or else you . have got to. repeal the proviso in the act of 1883 and let the lands go under homestead entry, for the law of homestead entry is all· the law we have now for their disposal. If you repeal it there will not be a homestead entry in that country, unless it is some entryman that will be put down there for the purpose of captur­ing the land by a big syndicate. There will not be one single honest homestead entry for agricultural purposes in that region, but the men who have already very large mming interests there will take Tom, Dick, and Harry, as they have done, and put them up in goods' box shelters, in shanties, so as to get the first call on the lands whenever the law could be repealed. It will take a long time to repeal that law, to get it out of the way. That will not be done in a great many years, if it is ever done at all; but I claim that these lands ought now to be dedicated to this purpose of education. You can not show that the Govern­ment of the United States will ever realize $10,000 or $5,000 from the sale of these lands in the shape that they are in now.

There is nobody but myself responsible for this measure whom I know anything about. I have not .conferred with any of my colleagues anywhere; I have not even conferred with the people

.1892. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 3915 down theTe, except that they have a '\ecy lively and cordial ap­probation of the course I a.m. taking in regard to it, for they know perfectly well that if the bill I ha\e before the Senate now does not succeed those lands will become merely a fund to at­tract the attention of speculators. The men who formed that million-dollar syndicate will come along and purchase the lands and drive off all other purchasers, if they are sold under the statute, or if they are homesteaded they will merely plant their stakes about, put in one man, and another, and another, as they have done her'6toforel having scoured the very purlieus of the ilarge cities of Alabama for the purpose of getting the very worst characters there that they could hire to go upon these lands under the pretense of calling them homesteaders.

So, Mr. President., I trust that the Senate of the United States will pass this bill and let us dispose of that little body. of land. It is only a small body in a circumscribed area, and there can be no objection to the measure unless the objection is in the direc­tion .of trying to get these lands at last in the ownership of these b:ig syndicates.

Mr. CHANDLER. Before the Senator sits down 1 should like to ask him a question. The bill provides for the donation to Alabama of the public lands now remaining subject to sale. Does that language interfere in any way with the rights of home­steaders and preemption claimants which were saved by the act of March 3, 1887?

Mr. MORGAN. It could not. All their entries have been confirmed.

Mr. CHANDLER. It saves them aJ.l? Mr. MORGAN. It is perfect in that respect. Mr. CHANDLER. Will the Senator state whether he thinks

that the Legislature of Alabama in dealing with this subject in its discreti<m will be able to make pr~per headway .against this band of speculators? ·

Mr. MORGAN. The band of speculators are trying to get the title. If you give the title to Alabama, of course they have made all the headway they can.

Mr. CHANDLER. They do not seem to have obtained it, but :under the proclamation of thePresidentthetitleof the landnow is in the United States. Wepass ittotheStateof Alabama, and then may not the Legislature of Alabama., having this discretion, be in soma danger of being seduced into an improper disposition of the lands by ·these speculators? What is the plan of the Sen­ator with reference to enabling the State of Alabama to realize money out -of these lands for industrial education?

Mr. MORGAN. I am willing to trust my life, fortunes, char­acter, and reputation, and that of my children, to the honor of the State of Alaba~ and I think in doing that I can trust this little body of coal land to the -people of that great Common-wealth for a fair disposition. ·

Mr. CHANDLER. I will ask the Senator how Alabama is going to get money out of it?

fr . MORGAN. I propose to leave that to the Legislature. I think it will be several years before Alabama can !l."ealize much of the school fund out of it, but they will have to do it by wait­ing. As soon as speculators fin-d 1the State has possession of the title, they will undertake to make arrangements for the pur­cb.ase of these fragments which they want to add to theirpos­sessiona, and the State will be theri} to protect itself and the her­itage we propose to bestow upon them .. It will be remembered that the Senator's State, New Hampshll'e, the great State of Texas, and all the original thirteen States of the Union got every foot of their public land when they came into the American Union. They came in with this enormous dowry of land, and we have .got nothing except a few little reservations that we have been able to pick up here and there. While I have no complaint to make of Congre<:...s about it at all, when we come to a purpose of this sort I think the Senate ought to credit us with good faith, because the very object of bringing the measure here for con­sideration is the public education of a poor class of people who are unable to take care of themselves.

I do not think it is nooessary that I should defend the State of Alabama in the past, or present, or prospective in regard to any­thing, but I will call the Senator's attention to one fact about the honor of Alabama. During the war we owed a public debt of about $5,000,000 in London. We got the coin in the State of Alabama and we put it upon blockade runners, and every install­ment of that debt was met by gold coin shipped from the State of Alabama through the blockade to pay our debt. So I do not think that we are under the slightest possibility of impeachment as to public integrity. We may have done some very unwise things and all that, but so far as the public integrity of the Legis­lature and State of Alabama is concerned, its character certainly is as high as any Commonwealth in the American Union.

Mr. CHANDLER. The Senator will not understand me as undertaking to impeach the honor .of the LegisLature of Alabama; but I thought it was quite right, inasmuch as the inducement

offered by this bill for the grant of these lands by the United States is the expectation that they will be useful in promoting industrial education in Alabama, to ask the Senator, whether he succeeds in his expectation or not, how he hopes to realize any considerable sum of money from these lands which have been so useless in the hands of the United States.

Mr. MORGAN. The Senator from Missouri [Mr. VEST] has just informed me that his State took the coal lands that we con­ceded to her under a similar law and sold them out, and put the money in the treasury for the benefit of the common schoolfund. No complaint has been made against any State, and need not be. There will not be any occasion. It is not a very large fund. I will say to the Senator from NewHampshire that my idea about it is that the State will find bidders for these lands in small par­cels from the d.if'feren t large syndicates whose lands abut against them. As is well known, you can not establish a coal mine at all except upon a large area of land.

Youcannotestablishacoalmine upon a quarter section or a half section of land. You havegotto driveshaftsandall that sort of thing, and it would be utterly futile to expend a great amount of n;10ney when you have no coal area of more than a quarter section or half section. It requires section upon section to induce men to put their money into such a scheme. Here are these little pieces of land they could not get hold of, lying around them in different locations in the coal field, and the State of Alabama of course will be able to realize from these lands by selling them in parcels to these larger bodies of men as they want them. They want them and would like to gain the whole of them, and perhaps they would be willing to give a good deal of money if they could get them all into one possession. If a club could be" formed to buy

·them all up and then speculate upon them these large holde1·s would have very great advantage, and I do not want that to be done.

I think I have explained the bill, Mr. President. ThePBESIDING OFFICER (Mr.HARRis in the chair). The

question is on concurring in the amendments made as in Com­mittee of the Whole.

The amendments were concurred in. The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read

the third time, and passed. ·

MRS. SARAH J. WAGGONER.

The bill (S. 1708) for the relief of Mrs. Sarah J. Waggoner was considere-d as in Committee of the Whole.

The bill was reported from the Committee on Pensions with an amendment, in line 10, before the word" dollars," to strike out "thirty" and insert "twenty-five;" S{} as to make the bill read:

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, au­thorized and directed to place on the pension roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of Mrs. Sarah J. Waggoner, widow of Louis C. Waggoner, late a corporal in Capt. John E. Crouch's Company, Regiment of Tennessee Volunteer Infantry, Florida war, of 1836, and pay her a pension of 325 per month.

The amendment was agreed to. The bill wa.s reported to the Senate as amended and the amend­

ment was concurred in. The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read

the third time, and passed.

CUARTEL LOT IN MONTEREY, CAL. Mr. COCKRELL. Order of Business 465, Senate bill 2599,

was :passed over yesterday at my instance. I ask that it be 11ow considered.

The bill (S. 2599) releasing the right, title, and interest of the United States to the piece or parcel of land known as the Cuartel lot, in the city of Monterey, Cal., was considered as in Commit­tee of the Whole.

Mr. COCKRELL. Yesterday I proposed an amendment and called the attention of the Senator from Oregon [}t!r. DOLPH] to it, who reported the bill. Now, I propose an amendment, to strike out all after the word "Monterey" in line 7 and insert. It will leave the bill just in the form it was in the last Congress when it was passed by the Senate.

Tbe PRESIDING OFFICER. The Secretary will report the amendment moved by the Senator from Missouri.

The SECRETARY. It is proposed to strike out all after the wor_d "Monterey,11 in line 7, in the following words:

That the city o! Monterey, Cal., is .hereby designated as the trustee o! the origina.l grant made by the Mexican GoYernment of pueblo lands to the pueblo of Monterey, a.s the successor of said pueblo, to hold the sa.m.e in trust for the uses and purposes of the original grant, and confirmation is hereby made to said city of .said lands as patented No>ember 19, 189L ·

The amendment was agreed to. The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amend­

ment was concurred in. The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read

the third time, and passed.

I

3916 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. M.A_y 4,

CENTENNIAL MEMORIAL. Mr. CULLOM. By request I offer a concurrent resolutionfor

reference to the Committee on the Library. I think the Sena­tor from Indiana [Mr. VOORHEES] was to have done so, but he is not here.

The concurrent resolution was read and referred to the Com­mittee on the Library, as follows:

Resolved by the Senate (the House of Rep1•eaentatives concurring) , That the sanction of. Congress is hereby given to the acceptance by the President of the United States, for preservation in the archives of the executive department, of one copy ot the •' State edition" of a memorial entitled "The Adminis­trators of the United States Government at the Beginning of its Second Century," in accordance with the terms of the contract executed September 4, 1891, between the World's Columbian Exposition and James D. McBride.

COURTS IN OKLAHOMA TERRITORY. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Calendar will be proceeded

with. The bill (S. 2240) to extend the jurisdiction of courts in Okla­

homa Territory over certain classes of crimes, and for other purposes, was considered as in Committee of the Whole.

The bill was reported from the Committee on Indian Affairs with amendments.

The first amendment was, in section 1, line 3, after the words "courts of," to strike out" said" and insert" the;" in the same line, after the word" Territory," to insert" of Oklahoma;" and in line 4, after the word '' any," to strike out ''case of murder, assault with intent to kill, assault with intent to do bodily harm, assault and battery, rape, assault with intent to commit a rape, robbery, arson, and larceny," and insert ''crime;" so as to make the se'ction read~

That the jurisdiction of the courts of the Territory of Oklahoma shall ex­tend to any crime committed within the body of said Territory, or in any lands or reservations attached to said Territory tor judicial purposes, and it shall not be any defense that the offense was committed by an Indian upon another Indian of the same or any other tribe.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, to strike out section 2, in the follow­

ing words: SEC. 2. That when such offense is committed on an Indian reservation or

other public lands of the United States not opened to settlement (not merely reserved for public uses) the prosecution shall be in the name of the United States of America, and the expenses shall be paid by the United States.

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. VEST. I move to strike out the first section of the bill as

amended down to the word "crime," in line 7, and to insert: That the courts of the Territory of Oklahoma shall hereafter have exclu­

sive jurisdiction of all crimes-Changing the word '' crime" to ''crimes." Mr. CALL. Does that leave the body of the section as it now

stands? Mr. VEST. It will leave the bill as it. is. 'l'he way the bill

reads now it extends the jurisdiction-to any crime committed within the body of said Territory, orin any le.nds or reservations attached to said Territory for judicial purposes.

Mr. COKE. I will ask the Senator if he proposes that this court shall take the jurisdiction now exercised by outside courts?

Mr. VEST. It of course will take that jurisdiction. Mr. COKE. Of all the outside courts? Mr. VEST. The effect of the amendment would be togive ex­

clusive jurisdiction to the courts of Oklahoma Territory over all crimes committed wit.b.in that Territory and the reservations which are attached to it for judicial ·purposes.

Mr. President, I have had occasion repeatedly to express my opinion on this subject, and I undertake to say now that no valid argument can be made against this amendment at all. On the other hand, every argument that is possible it seems to me is in favor of the amendment as proposed.

I wish to call the attention of the Senate to just one single fac t. I have before me the report of the Attorney-General of the ex­penses of the different judicial districts of the United States for the year 1891. That is the last report made. In the great city of New York, which is in thesoutherndistrict of New York, there being three districts in the State, the expenses of the Federal courts during 1891 were $39,365.88. In the eastern district of Texas, where the Federal court at Paris has jurisdiction over the Indian Territory under the law of Congress, the expenses for 1891 were $205,220.49, more than $150,000 in exces:3 of the ex­penses in the great city of the country. Not only that, but in the western district of Arkansas, where the Federal court at Fort Smith has jurisdiction over the Indian Territory, the ex­penses fo!' 1891 were $-±8,277 .0-±, or $9,000 in excess of the expenf)es of the Federal courts in the city of New York.

In the districtof Kansas, where the Federal court has jurisdic­tion over the Indian Territory, the expenses for 1891 were $22,-777.99. In the eastern district of Missouri, where is located the great city of St. Louis, the expenses were only $19,237.50 for the same time. In illinois, for the northern district, where the great city of Chicago is located, the expenses of the Federal courts for

the same year were $9,052.63. In Pennsylvania, for the eastern district, where the great city of Philadelphia is located, the ex­penses of the courts for the same time were $12,058.44, or $10,000 less than the court in Kansas, nearly $195,000 less than the dis­trict in Texas where the court with Federal jurisdiction over the Indian Territory is located, and $36,000 less than the expenses of the court for the western district of Arkansas.

Mr. COCKRELL. And that additional expense has been in­cm·red under the claim to get good jurors?

Mr. VEST. As my colleague sugaests, the argument that has h eretofore been made as overwhelming in favor of this extra­ordinary anomaly of jurisdiction in making outside courts in the States have the. jur~sd~ction to drag these Indians away and try them before alien JUries was that you could not get a jury of suffi­cient in tellig ance in the Indian Terri tory. I have here on my desk a letter from the late governorofOklahomaTerritory in which he ~ta~s that there is not ~he slightest difficulty about obtaining JUries. I have also a letter from the present judge of the court there, a citizen of my own State, who says that the juries in Ok­lahoma Territory compare now favorably with those in any of the adjacent States. The great complaint made by the Indians now is that there are too many white men among them, that rail­roads have been constructed there. The natural and irresistible overflow of population from' the adjoining States has rendered the jury system there equal to that in any of the States of the Union, I might say cartainly equal to that in any of the States in the West and South.

Mr. President, either in the line of economy or in that broader and more extensive view of the question which involves the civ­ili~ation of the Indian why should we drag .these Indians out of the Territory? After giving them a governor, a court, a judge, a clerk, and amarshaJ why should we dracr them out and try them before white juries in communi ties w he~e thev have never been thro'!ll into. jail without friends, with all the prejudices of ~ front1er agamst them? And then we say to them, forsooth, imi­tate us and learn our civilization and obey our laws! . It seems to me that if there were any argument in the world

that could induce those Indians tore bel acrainst the Government it would be the treatment we have impo;ed upon them in this coercive process. I have labored incessantly for nearly fifteen years in the Senate to do away with this outrage, but the local mfl uences have always defeated it. There are the saloon-keepers, the tavern-keepers, and the storekeepers in FortSmi th, and Paris, and the town inKansaswhere thecourtisheld, allof whoma.rea close corporation to defeat any such legislation. They want prisoners brought there, and witnesses brought there, and attor­neys brought there in order to put money in their pockets. They care no more for the Indians than for so many bales of goods that are to be used for commercial purposes.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired. The amendment of the Senator from Missouri will be stated.

The SECRETARY. It is proposed to strike out all of the first section down to and including the word "crime," in line 7, in the following words: ,

That the jlll'isdiction of the courts of the Territory of Oklahoma shall ex­tend to any Clime.

And to insert: That the courts of the Territory· of Oklahoma shall hereafter have exclu·

si ve jurisd.iction of all crimes.

· So as to make the bill read: That the courts of the Territory of Oklahoma shall hereafter have exclusive

jlll'L'ldiction of all crimes committed within the body of said Territory or in any lands or reservations attached to said Territory for judicial purposes; and it shall not be any defense that the offense was committed by an Indian upon another Indian of the same or any other tribe.

Mr. CULLOM. This bill comes from the Committee on In­dian Affairs. I see that the chairman of that committee is not present.

Mr. COCKRELL. The Senator who reported the bill is in his seat. The Senator from Alabama [Mr. MORGAN] reported the bill from the Committee on Indian Affairs.

Mr. CULLOM. Then! have nothing further to say. I thought probably th '3 bill was reported by either the Senator from Con­necticut [Mr. PLATT] or the Senato.r from Arkansas [Mr. JONES]. I se3 neither of those Senators present.

Mr. MORGAN. The bill came from the Committee on Indian Affairs, I will say to the Senator, by way of the Committee on the Judiciary . . It was referred to that committee first and they sent it to us.

Mr. CULLOM. I agree with the Senator from Missouri [Mr. VEST].

Mr. MORGAN. I do, too. Mr. CULLOM. I think this bill ought to be passed. There

certainly has been an unnecessary expense incurred and a great outrage committed upon those Indians in the manner in which justice has been administered there.

1892. ,CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 3917 Mr. VEST. I ask the indulgence of the Senate for a minute or

two, in order to explain the status of the legislation now on the 1ubject.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. ·If there be no objection, the Senator from Missouri may proceed. The Chair hears none.

Mr. VEST. The first act which passed Congress, and which I had the honor to introduce, is Public Act No.9~, "An act toes­tablish a lJnited States court in the Indian Territory, and for other purposes," which was reported from the Committee on the Judiciary by myself, passed theSenate,wasamendedin the other House, and afterwards put in its present form by a comq1ittee of conference. The jurisdiction of the court which was established in the Indian Territory-and that was the first court ever estab­lished there-is defined in the following language:

SEo. 5. That the com·t hereby established shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over all offenses against the laws of the United States committed within the Indian Territory as in this act defined, not punishable by death or by imprisonment at hard labor.

SEC. 6. That the r.ourt hereby established shall have jurisdiction in all civil cases between citizens of the Unitea States who are residents of the Indian Territory, or between citizens of the United States or of any State or Territory therem, and any citizen of or person or persons residing or found in the Indian Territory, and when the value of the thing in controversy or damages or money claimed shall amount to $100 or more.

That was the extent of the jurisdiction which I could obtain for this court in conference, for I was one of the conferees. It will be noticed that this is somewhat upon the line of the jurisdic­tion conferred upon the Federal courts generally by the judiciary act of 1789. Afterwards, when we pass3d the Oklahoma bill, as it was called, an amendment was made to the judicial jurisdic­tion in thefollowing language:

•And the jurisdiction of the United States com·t established under and by virtue of an act entitled "An act to establish a United States court in the Indian Territory, and for other purposes"-

From which I have just read-approved March 1, 1889, is hereby limited to and shall extend only over the Indian Territory as defined in this section; that the ~ourt established by said act shall, in addition to the jurisdiction conferred thereon by said act, have and exercise within the limits of the Indian Territory jurisdiction in all civil cases in the Indian Territory except cases over which the tribal courts have exclusive jurisdiction; and in all cases on contracts entered into by citizens of any tribe, etc.

Sections 34 and 35 of the same act are as follows: SEC. 34. That original jurisdiction is hereby conferred upon the United

States court in thefndian Territory to enforce the provisions of Title XXVIII, chapters 3 and 4, of the Revised Statutes of the United States in said Terri­tory, except the offenses defined and embraced in sections 2142 and 2143: Pro­vided, 'l'b.at as to the violations of the provisions of section 2139 of said Re­vised Statutes, the jurisdiction of said com·t in the Indian Territory shall be concurrent with the jurisdiction exercised in the enforcement of such provisions by the United States com·ts for the western district of Arkansas and the eastern district of Texas: Provided, That all violations of said chap­ters 3 and 4 prior to the passage of this act shall be prosecuted in the said United States court.s,respectively,the same as if this act had not been passed.

SEc. 35. That exclusive original jurisdiction is hereby confen-ed upon the United States court in the Indian Territory to enforce the provisions of chapter 4, Title LXX, of the Revised Statutes or the United States entitled "Crimes against justice," in all cases where the crimes mentioned therein are committed in any judicial proceeding in the Indian Territory and where such crimes affect or impede the enforcement of the laws in the com·ts es­tablished in said Territory: Provided, That all violations of the provisions of said chapter prior to the passage of this act shall be prosecuted in the United States courts for the western district of Arkansas and the eastern distr{ct of Texas, respectively, the same as if this art had not been passed.

These are the only act& in regard to jurisdiction, civil and criminal, in the Indian Territory, and it can ba stated in one sen­tence that the result of all of it was that the jurisdiction over the higher classes of felonies was given to the outside courts, namely, at Paris, at Fort Smith, and in Kansas, giving to the court m the Indian Territory which we established originally; by the act from which I have tirst read, jurisdiction over offenses for man­slaughter in the second degree down. In other words, you can take an Indian, when his life is at stake, and drag him over to Fort Smith and try him before an Arkansas jury, or take him to Paris, in Texas, and try him before a Texas jury 1 or carry him to Kansas and try him before a Kansas jury, and that is called giving a man a right to trial by a jury of his peers!

If that man, however, has stolen a horse, or if he has cut tim­ber on the public land, or if he has be:m guilty of manslaughter in the second or third degree, you can then indict him and try him at Muscogee, in the Indian Territory. This is the splendid example of judicial justice which we hold out to those Indians when we ask them to accept our civilization and fit themselves to become citizens of the United States!

Mr. CULLOM. The proposition of the Senator from Missouri is to try them for all offenses at Muscogee before whatever court is there?

Mr. VEST. My proposition-and it is the only one which is based upon absolutely equal justice-is to try these Indians in the court in the Indian Territory which we established and to which we gave jurisdiction over that Territory.

Mr. CULLOM. I have always believed that to be right, but we have never been able to succeed in changing the law hereto­fore.

Mr. VEST. Not one single argument, in my judgment, can be made against it. The juries are just as good there as you can find anywhere. We have a United States judge appointed there.

Mr. PERKINS. If the Senator will permit a. suggestion, I think the reason why this jurisdiction was not conferred upon the courts in the Indian Territory when we considered the bill from which the Senator has read, was upon the theory that com­petent juries could not be obtajned in the Territory.

Mr. VEST. I know that was the reason assigned. Mr. PERKINS. And it was thought necessary to go to these

States to. get competent jurors; I think the experiences of that court have demonstrated the error of that position.

Mr. VEST. Entirely. The governor of the Territory, the judge of the Terri tory, and everyone who has lived in the vicinity of that Terri tory knows that you can get just as good juries there as you can in Missouri, Arkansas, Texas, or any other State~ Just as good juries can be obtained there now. I pass through the Indian Territory two or three times every year, and all the evidences of civilization are found along the line of the railroad.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the amend­ment proposed by the Senator from Missouri.

Mr. COKE. I think perhaps it would be better to have the bill go over than to attempt to dispose of it under the five-mm­ute rule. There are several Senators who are interested in it who are not ,present, and I should like to have them present when it is disposed of. ,

Mr. MORGAN. Before that order is taken, however, I should like to say a word about the bill, if the Senate will indulge m~. The attorney-general of Oklahoma Territory came before t~ Committee on Indian Affairs after the bill had been before t~e Judiciary Committee and the Senate had then referreQ. it to the Committee on Indian Affairs, and he said it was impossible fQr him to administer the law in that country so as to protect hij;, man life and human property in their present conditions; that certain reservations had been made of jurisdiction in certaiij. cases in favor of the Federal courts at Paris, Tex., at Fort Smith, Ark., and at Fort Scott, Kans., as I remember, and it made a divided power; that the Indians for one character of offenses in Oklahoma were triable by the Oklahoma Territ~rial laws, and for·cther offenses they were triable by the laws of Kansas, and so on.

Now, the proposition was this, which is exactly in line with what the Senator from Missouri proposes in his amendment and which I think is really expressed in the bill itself, though I make no objection to his amendment-the proposition was that Oklahoma being a Territory like all other Teritories, and these Indians being about all of them to become citizens of the United States under agreements eit.her then pending or actually con­summated! the jurisdiction of the Oklahoma courts should ex­tend equally over all classes of citizenship, negroes, Indians, white people, Chinamen, and everybody else, so as to complete the jurisdictional power of Oklahoma Territory. The committee thought that it wag a correct proposition and reported this bill, and while I admit that the Senator from Missouri has made it a little more definite in its expression, at the same time I have no objection to his amendment at all. It carries out the idea of the committee.

Since that time the title to these lands bas been extinguished by contracts. Not all of them have been ratified and confirmed as yet by the Congress of the United States, but they will all be, and the Indians come then upon the footing of citizenship of the United States as completely as any of us. That being true, I do not see any reason at all why for any offense that an Indian may commit against another Indian (for that is the class of of­fenses which are now cognizable outside, I understand, or for any other offenses the party should be carried away from his Terri­torial government.

I reported a bill the other day frvm the Committee on Indian Affairs to create a new county out of eight Indian tribes up in the northeastern corner of the Indian Terri tory, bounded on the east by Missouri and on the north by Kansas, with the full consent of all of them. They will enter the Territory of Oklahoma, if that bill is passad, under the title of the county of Cayuga, and it will be a most admirable county in respect of its citizenship, enlight­enment, prosp3rity, industry, good order, and everything of that kind. If we pass the bill which the committee have recom­mended_those Indians wiil b3 brought right in under the laws of Oklahoma just as if they were all white people, and there is no reason at all why the government of the Territory of Oklahoma should not dispose of all the property rights and other personal rights of an Indian just as well as it should dispose of the rights of a white man, or a negro, or any person else.

So I fully concur with the amendment of the Senatm· from Missouri, and I am very sorry that the Senatorfrom 'l'exas thinks it best that the bill shall go over. However, as he objects, of course I can not resist the objection.

3918 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. MAY 4,

Th~ PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Chair understand the Senator from Texas to object to the further consideration of the bill? r

Mr. COKE. I ask that it may go over. Mr. COCKRELL. Without prejudice, retaining its place on

this Calendar. Mr. COKE. Without prejudice. Mr. MORGAN. Very good. . The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas ob­

jects to the further consideration of the bill. It will retain its place on the Calendar, going over without prejudice.

OSAGE RIVER BRIDGE. The bill (H. R. 5354) to authorize the construction of a bridge

Q.Cross the Osage River between the town of Warsaw and the mouth of Turkey Creek, in Benton County, Mo., was considered as in Committee of the Whole.

The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, or­dered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

BRIDGE AT QUINCY, N.DAK. The bill (S. 2334) to authorize the construction of a bridge

across the Red River of the North at Quincy, N.Dak., was con­sidered as in Committee of the Whole.

The bill was reported from the Committee on Commerce with amendments.

The first amendment was, in section 3, line 1, after the words Has a," to strike out" high span'; and insert" high;" in line 2, after the word" bridge," to strike out "and shall contain" and insert "with;" in the same line, after the word" span," to in­sert "'or spans;" in line 3, after the word '' dimensions," to insert "and locapion;" in line 4, after the word "span," to insert " or spans; " and in the same line, after the word ''shall," to strike out "be maint.ained on the main channel of the river at an ac­cessible and navigable point" and insert "have a. clear headroom of 36 feet above the high-water plane of 1882;" so as to read:

That said bridge shall be constructed a.s a high bridge, with a span or spans of such dimensions and location as the Secretary of War shall prescribe, which said span or spans shall have a clear head room of 36 feet above the high-water plane of 1882, and the piers of said bridge shall be parallel with, and the bridge itself at right angles to, the cUITent of the river. •

The amend~ent was agreed to. The next amendment was, in section 4, line 5, after the word

"county," to strike out "or;" in line 11, after the word "at," to strike out "all" and insert "averagelowandhighwater,"and in line 19, after the word "be,"· to insert "commenced or;" so as to make the section read:

That any bridge authorized to be constructed under this act sha.ll be built and located under and subject to such regulations for the security of navi­gation of said- river as the Secretary of War shall prescribe: and to secure that object the said county commissioners shall submit to the Secretary of War, for his examination and approval, a design and drawing of the said bridge, and a map of the location, giving, for the space ofone-halfmileabove and one-half mile below the proposed location, the high and low water lines upon the banks of the river, the direction and strength of the currents at aver­a.gelowandhighwaterstages,with the sounding, accurately showingthebed of the stream, and the location of any other bridge or bridges, such map to be su1llciently in detail to enable the Secretary of War to judge of the proper location of said bridge, and shall furnlsh such other information a.s may be required for a full and satisfactory understanding of the subject; and until snch plan and location of the bridge are approved by the Secretary of War the brldge shall not be commenced or built; and should any change be made fn the plan of said bridge during the progress of construction or after com­pletion, such change shall be subject to the approval of the Secretary of War. . .

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. PLATT in the chair). The word "of" is omitted in the print in line 7. The word will be inserted. The question is on agreeing to the amendment of the committee.

The amendment was agreed to. . The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amend-

ments were concurred in. · ' The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read

the third time, and passed. ARTIFICIAL STONE PAVEMENT PATENTS.

The bill (S. 716) for the relief of the owners of the Schillinger patents was considered as in Committee of the Whole. It proposes to confer juris.diction on· the Court of Claims to hear and deter­mine the claims of John J. Schillinger, and his assignees and their licensees, for•compensation for the use of the patented in­ventions of John J. Schillinger in the laying of the artificial stone pavements in and about the Capitol grounds, under the direction of the Architect of the Capitol, between October 11, 1875, and October 18, 1881. •

The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, or­dered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

PUBLIC BUILDING AT CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA. The bill (S. 795) to provide for the erection of a public building

at Charlottesville, Va., was considered as in Committee of the Whole.

The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, or­dered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

KLAMATH RIVER INDIAN RESERVATION LANDS. The bill (H. R. 38) to provide for the dispo.sition .and sale of

lands known as the Klamath River Indian Reservation was con­sidered as in Committee of the Whole.

The bill was reported from the Committee on Indian Affairs with an amendment, to strike out all after the enacting clause and insert:

That aU of the lands embraced in what was Klamath River Reservation, in the State of California, as set apart and reserved under authority of law by an Executive order dated November 16, 1855, are hereby declared to be sub­ject to settlement, entry, and purchase under the laws of the United States granting homestead and preemption rights and authorizing the sale of min­eral and timber lands: Provided That any Indian now located upon said reservation may, at any time withiii on-e year from the passage or this act, apply to the Secretary ot the Interior for an allotment of land for himself and, if the head of a family, for the members of his family, under the pro­Visions of the act of February B, 1887, entitled "An act to provide tor the al­lotment of lands in severalty to lhdians on the various reservations, and to extend the protection of the laws of the United States and the Territories over the Indians, and for other purposes," and, if found entitled thereto, shall have the sam-e allotted as provided in said act or any act amendatory thereof. And the Secretary of the Interior may reserve from settlement., -entry, or purchase any tract or tracts of land upon which any village or set­tlement of Indians is now located, and may set apart the same for the per­manent use and occupation of said village or settlement of Indians. And any person entitled to the benefits of the homestead laws of the United States who ha.s in good faith prior to the passage of this act, made actual settlement upon any lands within said reservation not allott-ed under the foregoing pro­viso and not reserved for the permanent use and occupation of any village or settlement of In.dians, with the intent to enter the a.me under the homestead laws shall have the preferred right, at the expiration of said period or <One year, to enter and acquire title to the land so settled upon, not exceeding 160 acres, upon the payment therefor of $1.25 an acre, and such settler shall have three months after public notice given that such lands are subject to entry within which to file in the proper land o:m.ce his application therefor; and in case of conflicting claims between settlers the land shall be awarded to t .he settler first in order of time: Provided, That any portion of. said land more valuable for its mineral deposits than for agricultural purposes, or for its timber, shall be entered only under the law authorizing the entry and sale of timber or minerallands: .MtdprO'Oidedfurthe1', That the heirs o! any deceased settler shall succeed to the rights of such set tler under this act: Provided furtker, Thattheproceedsarising from the sale of said lands shall constitute a fund to be used under the direction of the Secretary of the Interior for the maintenance and education of the Indians now residing on said lands and their children.

Mr. COCKRELL. The Senator who reported the bill, I .see, is not present, and there is a point or two in it that it may be necessary to have him present to explain.

Mr. FELTON. I thfuk I can explain it to the Senator's sat is­faction.

Mr. COCKRELL. There is no.written report with the bill. Therefore we can ascertain nothing exceptwhat is upon the face of it. Thewhole House bill has been stricken outa.ndanamend­ment proposed as a: substitute by the Senate committee, and there is some difference between them. I should like to know how much land there is in the reservation and how many Indi­ans are upon the reservation. The substitute has a provision in it which authorizes the Indians tO make a selection of land in severalty, and the allotment is to be made to them. How long are the lands to be reserved under the bill in order to give the Indians an opportunity to make that selection? There is not a particle of a provision in the bill tothateffect, as I understand it.

Mr. FELTON. It must be made within a year. Mr. COCKRELL. The Indian has a. ·year within which to

make his selection of the land, and what is to become of the land prior to that time? When the year ·ha.s expired there "ivill not be a foot of land upon which he can make the selection. There is no land reserved by the provisions of the bill, and it will be disposed of if it is worth anything. As we know, the pre.ssure to enter upon all these reservations is very great. I should like to have some explanation of these things before action upon the bill. ·

Mr. FELTON. This bill passed the other House and came to the Senate. It was objectionable in that form to the chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs and to the chairman of the subconimittee which considered it. As the Senator is aware, committees usually do not move without getting a recommenda­tion from the appropriate Department, and the committee in this case had the recommendation of the Interior Department to draw the bill as it is reported. The bill is entirely satisfactory to the chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs, and to the Senator from South Dakota [Mr. PETTIGREW], who reported it.

The facts of the case are these: The Klamath Indian Reserva­tion was set apart by ~ proclamation of the President some twenty years ago, I think. I am not positive about the time. It never has been used as an Indian reservation.

:Mr. COCKRELL. What is the size of it? Mr. FELTON. It is about 20 miles long, and I suppose 2

or 3 miles wide. The tortuous, steep bank of tho river forms almost all of it. There is an Indian reservation within 20 miles of the .river, where these Indians can go if they uant to

1892. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 3919 do so. The number is variously estimated at from 40 to 60 In- the Whole. It proposes to pay theN ational Bank of New Haven d.Ums. Practically they have no business. They are peculiar $3,519.15. · Indians. They are creatures of their environment. They are The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, or-as mild as they may be. dered to be engrossed for a third reading, re.ad the third time,

The bill makes provision for them to select allotments in sev- and passed. eralty; and if they have Indian villages, which they have not, Mr. CAMERON. I move that the Senate adjourn. it allows them to retain those, and it gives them ayear'sJ.ime The PRESIDING OFFICER. TheSenatorfromPennsylvania within which to make selections. moves that the Senate do now adjourn. [Putting the question.]

Mr. COCKRELL. Right in that connection, suppose all the Mr. CAMERON. I move a call of the Senate. There is no lands are taken up in three months after the Indian reservation is quorum here. opened, what will the Indians then b,ave to select from after ThePRESIDINGOFFICER. TheSenatorfromPennsylvania they have come to the conclusion to make a selection? There is suggests the absence of a quorum. The Secretary will call the the material point in the bill. · roll.

Mr. FELTON. The point is simply this. There are now a The Secretary called the roll, and the following Senators .an-great many settlers upon that land. It is not practically an In- swered to their names: dian reservation. It never has been used for that purpose. The provisions of the bill open the land to settlers after providing, as I before stated, in regard to the Indians, and lands more valu­able for timber or mineral deposits shall be entered under the timber act and the mineral land laws. Of the arable lands I would not undertake to say just how many acres there are, but I do not think there are 1,000 acres on the whole margin of that river. A few of these Indians live at the mouth of the river, I understand, fishing and hunting and working for the white peo­ple. They are nomadic Indians.

I can say to the Senator that this bill has had the scrutiny of the Interior Department and been approved by it. It has had the scrutiny and approval of the distinguished Senator from Ma sachusetts [Mr. DAWES], who is always alive to the interests of the Indians. I can see no reason why the bill should not be passed, and these lands allowed to be entered for the use of set­tlers. All the money that comes from the sale of the lands the bill provides shall b;8 used for the purpose of taking care of these Indians.

Mr. COCKRELL. I understand that, but if there is any ex­pee ta tion that an Indian will take an allotment and make a selec­tion of it, I see no provision to reserve the land. If the land is 'vorth anything at all, as a matter of course the very moment it is opened it will be taken up, and then if an Indian wants to take land there will be nothing to take.

l\1r. FELTON. The Indian has one year within which t~ make his selection.

Mr. COCKRELL. But there is not an acre of land reserved from settlement and cultivation out of which he can take it after that time. He must take it as quickly as it is opened or he will have no chance.

Mr. FELTON. I say he has an entire year within which to make the selection.

Mr. COCKRELL. The Senator does not seem to catch the point. H e bas a year within which to select, but these lands are to be opened upon the passage of the bill to settlement. Sup· pos every acre of land is taken inside of thirty days and at the end of six months an Indian wants to select a piece for allot­ment in severalty, how is he going to do it? It has not been re­sen·ed. There is no provision for reserving it. There is no re­st riction upon it, but it is opened to settlement immediately u~on the passage of the bill, and there will be nothing for the InJ.ians to select.

1\Ir. FELTON. I will frankly say that I do not think there is ·aa Indian out of the forty or fifty who are there who will ever take an allotment.

Mr. COCKRELL. That is what I am trying to get at, be­cau e if there are any Indians there who are going to make any selections of land in severalty this bill does not protect them at all.

l r. F ELTON. The whole matter was carefully considered by the committee , and there is no doubtbutthattheindianswill have ample opportunity tom~etheirselectionsif theysodesire.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment reported by the Committee on Indian Affairs.

The amendment was agreed to. The bill was r eported to the Senate as amended, and the amend­

ment was concurred in. The amendment was ordered to be engrossed, ·and the bill to

be read a third time. The bill was read the third time, and passed. l\1r. FELTON. I move that the Senate request a conference

with the House of Representatives on the bill and amendment. The motion was agreed to. By unanimous consent the Presiding Officer was authorized to

appoint the conferees on the part of the Senate, and Mr. PETTI­GREW, Mr. DAWES,andMr. JONES of Arkansas were appointed.

NATIONAL NEW HAVEN BANK.

'J_'he bill (S. 234) for the relief oftheNational New Haven Bank of th<." State of Connecticut was considered as in Committee of

Aldrich, Daniel, Manderson, Allen, Dolph, Mitchell, Allison, Felton, .Morgan. Bate, Frye, Paddock, Berry, George, Palmer, Brice, Gray, Pasco, Butler, Hansbrough, Peffer, Call, Harris, Perkins, Casey, Higgins, Platt, Chandler, Hill Power, Cockrell, .Jones, Ark. Proctor, Coke, Kyle, Pugh, Cullom, McPherson, Quay,

Ransom, Squlre, Stewart, Stockbridge, Turpie, Vest, Walthall, Warren, White, WliSOll.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Forty-nine Senators have an­swered to their names. A quorum of the Senate is present. The question recurs on the motion made by the Senator from Pennsylvania that the Senate do now adjourn.

Mr. CHANDLER. On that I ask for the yeas and nays. Tbe yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded.

to call the roll. The PRESIDING OFFICER (when Mr. PLATT'S name was

called).• The present occupant of the chair is paired with the Senator from Virginia [Mr. BARBOUR]~

Mr. TURPIE {when his name was called). I am paired gen­erally with the senior Senator from Minnesota [Mr. DAVIS], who is abs~nt, I will therefore withhold my vote.

Mr. WALTHALL (when his name was called). I am paired with the Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. DIXON].

Mr. WILSON (when his name was called). I am paired with the Senator from Georgia [Mr. CoLQUITT]. I do not know how he would vote. If he were present I should vote" nay."

The roll call was concluded. ~ Mr. HARRIS. I am paired with the Senator from Vermont

[Mr. MoRRn..L], who is absent, and being absent I suppose he is in favor of adjourning. I vote" yea."

The result-was announced-yeas 21, nays 25; as follows : YEAS-21.

Aldrich, Cockrell, Jones, Ark. Bate, Daniel, Kyle, Berry, =· McPherson, Brice, Morgan, Butler, run~ Palmer, Cameron, Perkins,

NAYS-25. Allen, Dolph, Power, Allison, Frye, Proctor, Call, Gray, Pngh, Casey, Mitchell, Sanders, Chandler, Paddock, Sawyer, Coke, Pasco, Shoup, Cullom, Peffer, Squlre,

NOT VOTING--42. Barbour, Felton, Irby, Blackburn, Gallinger, Jones, Nev. Blodgett, Gibson, La. Kenna., Carey, Gibson, Md. McMillan, Carlisle, Gordon, Manderson, Colquitt, Gorman, Mills, Davis, Hale, Morrill, Dawes, Hansbrough, Pettigrew, Dixon, Hawley, Platt, Dubois, Hiscock, Sherman, Faulkner, Hoar, Stanford,

So the Senate refused to adjourn.

Quay, Ransom, Stewart.

Stockbridge, Vest, Warren Whit.a.

Teller, Turpie, Vance, Vilas, Voorhees, Walthall, Washburn, Wilson, Wolcott.

TELEPHONE LINE ON VIRGINIA COAST. Mr. FRYE. The bill {H. R. 7727) to authorize the construction

of a telephone line on the coast of Virginia, from Cape Charles to Assateague Island, in aid of the preservation of life and prop­erty, is Order of Business 592 on the Calendar. The Depal't­ment is very desirous that that bill shall become a law, if it is passed at all, so that a contract maybe made immediately for the building of this telephone line. It iB a telephone line between seven life-saving stations in Virginia. There is no communica­tion between them now, and there were seventeen disasters there the last season. I ask unanimous consent that tha.t bill may ba acted upon.

Mr. BATE. I call for the regular order. I object.

• t

3920 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. MAY 4,

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee objects to the request of the Senator from Maine.

Mr. BATE. Let us go on with the Calendar in order. The PRESIDING O.B,FICER. The next bill on the Calendar

will be proceeded with. MARIAS. WHITNEY.

The bill (S. 817) granting a pension to MariaS. Whitney, was considered as in Committee of the Whole.

The bill was reported from the Committee on Pensions with amendments, in line 4, after the word "roll," to strike out "sub­ject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws;" in line 6, after the word "Whitney," to strike out "as mother" and insert "stepmother; '' and in line 8, at the end of the bill, to add the words ''at the rate of $12 per month;" so as to make the b"ill read:

Be i t enacted, etc., That the Se~reta.ry of the Interior be, an:l he is hereby, authorized and directed to place on the pension roll the name of Marla S. Whitney, stepmother of John M. Whitney, late acting assistant surgeon United States Navy, at the rate of $12 per month.

Mr. COCKRELL. Let the report be read in that case. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator desire to

postpone action on the amendments of the committee? Mr. COCKRELL. Let the report be read first. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The report will be read. The Chief Clerk read the report submitt~d by Mr. GALLINGER

March 23, 1892, as follows: The Committee on Pensions, to whom was referred the bill (S. 817) grant­

ing a pension to MariaS. Whitney, have examined the same and report: A similar bill passed the Senate during the second session or the Fifty­

first Congress, but was not reached for consideration in the House. The main facts are that claimant married the father of John M. Whitney in the year 1854, at which time the son was 11 years of age. She care:l for him as a mother until he enliste:l in 1852. He was a member of a Massachusetts cavalry regiment, and subsequently hospital steward and acting assistant surgeon, his last duty being on the steamer Norwich. While acting in that capacity he was drowned August 16, 1864, in the St. Johns River, Florida.

The testimony shows that soldier contributed to the support or tl.is father and stepmother, and also that claimant is destitute and advanced in years. Being a stepmother she can not secure pension through the regular channel, and as a necessity comes to Congress. The claim seems meritorious in every particular, and your committee recommend the passage of the bill, with the following amendments:

In lines 4 and 5, strike out the words "subject to the provisions ana limita­tions of the pension laws;" in line 6, strike out the words " as mother" and substitute the word" stepmother," and add to the bill the words " at the rate of $12 per month."

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendments proposed by the committee.

The amendments were agreed to. The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amend­

ments were concurred in. " The bill was ordered-to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

DABNEY, SIMMONS & CO. Mr. ALLEN. I ask unanimous consent that the order by

which the bill (S.1426) for the relief of Dabney, Simmons & Co., of Boston, Mass., was indefinitely postponed be reconsidered, and that the bill be placed on the Calendar.

The PRESIDING OFB'!ICER. Has the bill been once on the Calendar?

Mr. ALLEN. It has not. It was adversely reported by the Committee on Claims and indefinitely postponed.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. When was it reported? Mr. ALLEN. It was reported April27, 1892. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington

asks unanimous consent that the yote by which the bill indicated by him was indefinitely postponed on the 27th day of April be reconsidered, and that the bill be placed on the Calendar with the adverse report of the committee. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and it is so ordered. The next bill on the Calendar will be proceeded with.

ABIGAIL L. FINNEY. The bill (S.1356) granting a pension to Abigal L. Finney was

considered as in Committee of the Whole. The bill was reported from the Committee on Pensions with

amendments, in line 6, after the word" of," to strike out "Abi­gal" and insert "Abigail;" and in the same line, to add the words "dependent mother of Sylvester P. Finney, late of Company E, Tenth New York Heavy Artillery;" so as to make the bill read:

Be it enacted, etc. , That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to place on the pension roll, subject to the provi­sions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of AbigailL. Finney, de­pendent mother of Sylvester P. Finney, late of Company E, Tenth New York Heavy Artillery.

The amendments were agreed to. The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amend­

ments were concurred in. The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read

the third time; and passed. The title was amended so as to read: "A bill granting a pen­

sion to Abigail L. Finney."

D. D. T. FARNSWORTH. The bill (S. 2465) for the relief of D. D. T. Farnsworth, of Up­

shur County, W. Va., was considered as in Committee of the Whole.

The bill was reported from the Committee on Claims with an amendment, in line 5, bafore the word "dollars," to strike out "one thousand two h\!lldred" and insert" one hundred .and sev­enty-six;" so as to make the bill read:

Be it ena-cted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby. authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not other: wise appropriated, the sum of $176 to D. D. T. Farnsworth, of Buckhannon. Upshur County, w. Va. , in full satisfaction for use and destruction ot property by the Federal Army during the war of the rebellion.

The amendment was agre~d to. The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amend­

ment was concurred in. The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read

the third time, and passed.

CITIZENS' BANK OF LOIDSIANA. The bill (S.145) to authorize the Court of Claims to hear and

determine the claim of tha Citizens' Bank of Louisiana, etc., was considered as in Committee of the Whole. It proposes to con­fer jurisdiction on the Court of Claims to hear and enter up judg­ment, as if it had original jurisdiction of the case, on the claim of the Citizens' Bank of Louisiana, with interest thereon, against the United States, growing out of the seizure and covering into the Treasury of the United States of c3rtain moneys of that bank by Gen. B.]'. Butler, commanding the United States forces in Louisaina 1862.

Mr. COCKRELL. In line 6 I move to strike out the words "with interest thereon."

Mr. WHITE. Those words were left in by mistake. Mr. COCKRELL. I am glad to know it, because I hoped the

committee were not proposing to deviate from the rule. Mr. CAMERON. Mr. President, I do not think there is a

quorum present. ThePRESIDINGOFFICER. TheSenatorfromPenn ylvania

suggests the absence of a quorum. Under the rule the roll will be called.

The Seeretary called the roll. Mr. JONES of Arkansas. It being evident that no quorum is

present, I move thJLt the Senate adjourn. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair thinks that that

motion is not in order until it is determined from the roll call whether a quorum is present.

The following Senators answered to their names: Aldrich, Felton, ' Morgan, Allison, Frye, Paddock, Bate, George, Palmer, Berry, Gray, Pasco, Butler, Harris, Pe1Ier, Call, Jones, Ark. Perkins, Chandler, Kyle, Platt, Cockrell, McPherson, Power, Coke, Manderson, Proctor, Daniel, Mills, Pugh, Dolph, Mitchell, Quay,

Ransom, Sanders, Sawyer, Shoup, Stewart, Stockbridge, Turpie, Vest, Warren, White, Wilson.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Forty-four Senators, not a quorum, have answered to their names.

Mr. JONES of Arkansas. I move that the Senate adjourn. Mr. DOLPH. On t:p.at I demand the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas

moves that the Senate adjourn, on which motion the Senator from Oregon demands the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded to call the roll.

Mr. WARREN (when Mr. CAREY'S name was called). I wish to announce that my colleague [Mr. CAREY] is absent from the city. He is paired with the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. IRBY]. ·

Mr. MANDERSON (when his name was called). I am paired with the Senator from Kentucky [Mr. BLACKBURN]. I do not know how be would vote if present, and I therefore abstain from voting.

Mr. WALTHALL (when his name was called). I am paired with the Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. DIXON].

Mr. WILSON (when his name was called). I am paired with the Senator from Georgia [Mr. CoLQUITT]. If he were present I should vote'' nay."

The roll call was concluded. Mr. MILLS (after havincr voted in the negative). Is the Sen­

ator from New HampshireLMr.GALLINGER] recorded as voting? The PRESIDING OFFICER. He is not recorded. Mr. MILLS. Then I withdraw my vote, as I am paired with

that Senator. Mr. TURPIE. I am paired with the senior Senator from

Minnesota [Mr. DAVIS], and therefore withhold my vote.

1892, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 3921 The result was announced-yeas 19, nays 26; as follows:

Barbour, Berry, Butler, Cameron, Cockrell,

Aldrich, Allen, Allison, Bate, Call, Casey, Chandler,

Daniel, George, Gorman, Han-is, Hill,

Coke, Cullom, Dolph, Felton, Frye, Gray, Kyle,

YEA8-19. McPherson, Morgan, Palmer, Pasco, Pugh,

NAY8-26. Mitchell, Paddock, 1 Pelrer, Perkins, Platt, Power, Proctor,

NOT VOTING-43. Blackburn, Gallinger, Jones, Ark. Blodgett, Gibson, La.. Jones, Nev. Brice, Gibson, Md. Kenna, Carey Gordon, McMillan, Oa.ruSie, Hale, Manderson, Colquitt, Hansbrough, Mills, Davis, Hawley, Morrill, Dawes, Higgins, Pettigrew, Dixon, Hiscock, Quay, Dubois, Hoar, Sherman, Faulkner, Irby, Stanford,

So the Senaie refused to adjourn.

Ransom, Squire, Stewart, Vest.

Sanders, Sawyer, Shoup, Stockbridge, Warren.

Teller, Tu.rpie, Vance, Vilas, Voorhees, Waltha.ll, Washburn, White, Wilson, Wolcott.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question recurs on the amendment proposed by the Senator from Missouri ~fr. COCK­RELL] to the bill under consideration.

EXECUTIVE SESSION.

Mr. QUAY. I move that the Senate proceed to the consider­ation of executive business.

The motion wa.s agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to the consideration of executive business. After ten minutes spent inexecutivesession thedoorswerereopaned, and (at4o'clock anC. 5 minutes -p.m.) the Senate adjourned until to-morrow, Thurs­day, May 5, 1~92, at 12 o'clock m.

NOMINATIONS. Executive ?Wl]'linations ?'eceived by the Senate May 4,· 1892:

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY.

Ferdinand B. Ear hart,of Louisiana, to be attorney of the United States for the eastern district of Louisiana, vice William Grant resigned.

CONSUL.

Richard Lambert, of San Francisco, Cal., to be consul of the United States at Mazatlan, to which office he was appointed dur­ing the last recess of the Senate, vice Edward G. Kelton, re­signed.

PROMOTIONS IN THE ARMY.

Infantry arm. First Lieut. Daniel H. Brush, Seventeenth Infantry, to be cap­

tain, May 2, 1892, vice Howe, Seventeenth Infantry, t>etired from active service.

SecondLieut. Daniel B. Devore, Twenty-thirdlnfantry, to be first lieutenant, May 2, 1892, vice Brush, Seventeenth Infantry, promoted.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. WEDNESDAY, May 4, 1892.

The House met at 12 o'clock neon, and was called to order by the Speaker.

Prayerbythe Chaplain, Rev. W. H. MILBURN, D. D. The Journal of the proceedings of yesterday was read and ap­

proved. ADDITIONAL ROOM SPACE. ADJUTANT-GENERAL'S OFFICE. The SPEAKER laid before the House a letter from the Sec­

retary of War, transmitting a copy of a letter from the Adjutant­General, representing the necessity for additional room space for his office, to accommodate the division of military information as reorganized and enlarged, and recommending that the request be complied with; ordered to be printed, and referred to the Com­mittee on Appropriations. URGENT DEFICIENCY: SUPREME COURT, DISTRICT OF COLUM­

BIA.

The SPEAKER laid before the House a letter from the At­torney-General, transmitting a petition signed by the criers and bailiffs of the supreme court of the District of Columbia, and recommending that an urgent deficiency ~propriation be made covering this subject-matter; ordered to be printed, and referred to the Committee on Appropriations.

XXIll-246

SENATE BILLS REFERRED.

The SPEAKER. 'rhere are quite a number of Senate bills that came over day before yesterday, the titles of which have been printed in the RECORD. If there be no objection, the Chair will refer them without having them separately read at the Clerk's desk.

There was no objection. The bills and references are as follows: A bill {S. 453) granting a pension to Eliza Conroy-to the Com­

mittee on Invalid Pensions. A bill {S. 520) granting an increase of pension to Oliver P.

Goodwin-to the Committee on Pensions. A bill {S. 789) for the relief of Warren Hall-to the Committee

on Claims. A bill (8. 1140) for the relief of John C. Smith, Milton Evans,

and others-to the Committea on the Public Lands. A bill (S. 1143) granting a pension to Mary A. Wise-to ' the

Committee on Invalid Pensions. A bill (S.1279) for the correction of the military record of Wil­

helm Spiegelburg-to the Committee on Military Affairs. A bill {S. 1348) for the is3ue of ordnance stores and supplies to

the State of Nebraska to replace similar stores destroyed by fire­to the Committee on the Militia.

A bill (S. 1535} to increase the pension of Andrew J. Monroe­to the.Committee on Invalid Pensions.

A bill (S. 1777) for the erection of a public building at Selma, Ala.-to the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds.

A bill {S. 1975) for the protection of livery-stable keepers and other persons keeping horses at livery within the District of Co­lumbiar-to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

A bill (S. 2007) for a public building at Altoona, Pa., and ap­propriating money therefor-to the Committee on Public Build­ings and Grounds.

A bill (S. 2087) for the relief of Charles Fletcher, alias James H. Mitchell-to the Committee on Military Affairs.

A bill (S. 2092) to fix the price of lands entered under the des­ert-land laws-to the Committee on the Public Lands.

A bill (S. 2161) to provide for and to punish the crime of per­jury before the United States local land offices-to the Committee on the Judiciary.

A bill (S. 2481) to place Dunbar R. Ransom on the retired list of the Army-to the Committee on Military Affairs.

A bill {S. 2575) to provide for the sale of certain lots in the District of Columbia-to the Committee on the District of Colum­bia.

A bill (S. 2605) granting a pension to Mrs. Adelia New, of In­dianapolis, Ind.-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE. By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted to Mr.

RoCKWELL, for ten days, on account of important business. NEMIAH GARRISON, ASSIGNEE.

:Mr. WINN. I ask unanimous consent for the present consid­eration of the bill which I send to the Clerk's desk.

The bill was read, as follows: A bill (H. R. 3508) for the relief of N emiah Garrison, assignee of Moses Perkins.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assemlJled, That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, authoriZed and directed to pay Nemiah Garrison, a citizen of the State of Georgia, the sum of $750, out of any money in the Treasury not other­wise appropriated, in accordance with the judgment of the Court of Claims in the case of Nemiah Garrison, assignee of Moses Perkins vs. The United States.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the present considera­tion of this bill?

Mr. HOLMAN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to have some ex-planation of it. The report, I suppose, accompanies the bill.

Mr. WINN. Certainly. The SPEAKER. The Clerk will read the report. The report was read, as follows:

The Committee on War Claims, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 3508) for the relief of Nemiah Garrison, assignee of Moses Perkins, submit the fol­lowing report:

This claim was submitted to the Fiftieth Con~ess and a report was made thereon by the Committee on Claims. As the mvestigations of your com­mittee have led them to substantially the same results as those arrived at by the committee of the Fiftieth Congress, it is deemed unnecessary to recapitu­late the facts. A copy of the report in the Fiftieth Congress is attached hereto for information and made a part of this report.

Your committee recommend that the bill do pass.

[House Report No. 610, Fiftieth Congress, first session.] The Committee on Claims have considered House bill No. 7109, for there­

lief of the executor or administrator of the estate of Nemiah Garrison, assignee of Moses Perkins, and recommend that it do pass, with the follow­ing a.mendment: Strike out the words "with interest." in line 7.

This matter received the favorable consicleration of the Committee on Claims in theForty-fi.fth Congress. The following report from that commit­tee is adopted and made part hereof:

"The Committee on Cla.ims, to whom was referred the bill H. R. 906, have had the same under consideration1 and present the following report thE"reon:

"The facts upon which this cla.un are based were investigated and dete~