/
1894, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 51
. Infantry ann. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. To be second lieutena.nts, to rank from October 31, 1894: WEDNESD~Y_, IJecernber 5, 1894. 1. Corpl. ffiysses G. Worrilow, Company D, Thirteenth Infan try, vice Gerhardt, Twentieth Infantry, promoted. The House met at 12 o'clock m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. 2. Corpl. Frank J. Morrow, Company G, Sixteenth Infantry, E. B. BAGBY. vice Connell, Fifth Infantry, transferred to the Ninth Infantry. The Journal of yesterday's proceedings was read and approved. 3. Sergt. WilliamA.Raibonrn, LightBatteryF, ThirdArtillery, DEFICIENCY APPROPRIATIONS. vice Carson, Fourth Infantry, transferred to the Fourth Cavalry. The SPEAKER laid before the House a J.e.tt€r from the Secre 4. Corp. David G. Spurgin, Company C, Twenty-first Infantry, tary of the Treasury, transmitting estimates of deficiencies in ap vice Seay, Twenty-first Infantry, promoted. propriations required to meet the urgent needs of the Government 5. ... Sergt. James A. Lynch, Troop H, Eighth Cavah·y, vice for the current and prior fiscal years; which was refen-ed to the Parker, Fifteenth Infantry, transferred to the Fifth Cavalry. Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed. 6. Sergt. John W. L. Phillips, Troop A, Seventh- Cavalry, vice Loveridge, Eleventh Infantry, promoted. PERSONAL LOSSES OF LIGHT-HOUSE KEEPERS, ETC. 7. Sergt. Harry Clement, Troop K, Fifth Cavalry, vice Smith, ThB SPEAKER also laid before the House a letter from thB Sec Twenty-second Infantry, transferred to thQ Twentieth Infantry. retary of the Treasury, transmitting a statement of losses of per 8. Sergt. Robeft S. O:ffley, Signal Corps, vice Crain, Tenth In sonal property sustained b'y keepers and·othm· employees of the fantry, transferred to the Nineteenth Infantry. light-house establishment on duty in the sixth and eighth dis_.. ·9. Corpl. Edgar F. Koehle1·, Company C, Eighth Infantry, vice tricts; which was referred to the Committee on Claims, and ordered Ames, Eleventh Infantry resigned. to be printed. 10. Corpl. Murray Baldwin, Battery I, Second ArtilleryJ. vice EXPENSES OF FISH CO~SIO~. t Lewis, Eighteenth Infantry, promoted. The SPEAKER. also laid before the House a letter from the Fish 11. Sergt. Samuel P. Lyon, Troop A, First Cavah-y, vice Farns Commissioner, transmitting a statement of expenditu\'es made worth, Twenty-fifth Infantry, promoted. during the fiscal year ended June30, 1894, for propagation of food 12. Sergt.William T.Schenck, Troop I, First Cavalry, vice Vid fish; which w.as referred to the Committee on Merchant Marine mer, Tenth Infantry, transferred to the Tenth Ca~. and Fisheries, and Brdered to be printed. PROMOTIONS IN THE NAVY. REPORTS OF SERGEANT-AT-ARMS. Commodore Richard W. Meade, to be a rear-admiral in the The SPEAKER also laid before the House a report of the Ser Navy, from Septembe1· 7, 1894, vice Rear-Admiral Henry Erben, geant--at-Arms of the House of Representatives, showing reeeip.t.s retired. . and disbursements of his office from December 4, 1S93, to Decem Commodore Charles C. Carpenter, to be a rear-admiral in the ber 1, 1894; which was referred to the Committee on Accounts, and Navy, from November 11; 1894, vic.e Rear-Admiral Bancroft ordm'ed to be printed. Gherardi, retired. The SPEAKER also laid before the House a report of the Ser Capt. Robert L. Phythian, to be commodore in the Navy, from geant-at-Anus of the House of Representatives, transmitting a list September 7, 1894, vice Commodore Richard W. Meade, promoted. of the property in h:m charg~ which was referred to the Commit Capt. Rush R. Wailace, to be a commodore in the Navy, from tee on Accounts, and ordered to be printed. November 11, 1894, vice Commodore Charles C. Carpenter, J>l'O- · I FINDINGS OF THE COURT OF CLA.L\IS. moted. · The SPEAKER also laid before the House a copy of the findings Commander James H. Sands, to be a captain in the Navy, from of the Court of Claims in the case of F. M. Swanson vs. United September 7, 1894, vice Capt. Robert L. Phythian, promoted. States; which wasTeferred to the CommittBe on War Claims, and Commander Yat.es Stirling, to be a captain in theNavy, n·omSep ordered to be printed. tember 16, 1894, vice Capt. William R. Bridgman, deceased. The SPEAKER also laid before the House a copy of the find Commander William C. Wise, to be a captain in the Navy, from ings of the Court of Claims in the case of M. V. Brown vs. The November 11, 1W4, viee Capt. Rush R. Wallace, promoted. 'United States; which was referred to the Committee on War · Lieut. Commander William T. Burwell, to be a commander in Claims, and ordered to be printed. the Navy, from September 7, 1894, .vice Commander Jam-es H. The SPEAKER also laid before the House a letter from the as Sands, promoted. sistant cYerk of the Court of Claims, transmitting a list of cases Lieut. Commander John J. Hunker, to be a commander in the dismissed by the court December 11, 1893; which was refened to Navy, from Sep~mber 16, 1894, vice Commander Yates Stirling, the Committee on War Claims, and ordered to be printed. promoted. The SPE.A.KER also laid ·before the House a letter from the Lieut. Commander Franklin Hanford, to beaoommander in the clerk of the Court of Claims, ti·ansmitting a statement of all judg Navy, from September 21, 1894, vice Commandm· Joshua Bishop, ments rendered by said cotrrt for the year: ending November 30, retired. 1894; which was referred to the Committee on War Clainis, and Lieut. James D. Adams, to be a lieutenant-commander in the ordered to be p-rinted. Navy,from September 7, 1894, vice Lieut. Commander William PUBLIC BUILDING, NEWARK, · N. J. T. Burwell, promoted. Lieut. Richard Wainwright, to be a lieutenant-commander in Mr. ENGLISH of New Jersey.- I ask unanimous consent for the Navy, from September 16,1894, vice Lieut. Commander John thB present consideTation of the bill which I send to the desk. J. Hunker, promoted. The bill (H. R. 4796), supplemental to an act entitled "An act to authorize the purchase of additional ground in Newark, N.J., PASSED ASSISTANT ENGINEERS. adjoining the custom-house and post-office building, and for the Passed Assistant Engineer Joseph P. Mickley, to be a chief en improvem~:mt thereon and the erection of additions thereto," ap gineer in the Navy, from the 28th of August, 1894, vi~ Chief En proved March 1,1888, was read, with the amendments of the Com gineer Hugh H. Cline, retired. mittee on Public Buildings and Grounds. Passed Assistant Enginem· William H. Nauman, to be a chief The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gen engineer in the Na-vy, from the 12th of September, 1894, vice Chief tleman from New Jersey (Jtfr. ENGLISH]? Engineer Isaac R .. MeNary, retired. Mr. SAYERS. I object. Assistant Engineer Emil Theiss, to be a passed assistant engineer W A.R BETWEEN CHINA. A.ND J A.PAN. in the Navy, from the 1st of August, 1894, vice Passed Assistant Mr. BLAIR. I ask unanimous consent to submit a resolution Engineer Andrew M. Hunt, resigned. ~ for action at the present time. Assistant Engineer William H. Chambers, to be a passed assist The Clerk read as follows: ant engineer in the Navy, from the 28th of August, 1894, vice Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested, so far as Passed .Assistant Engineer Joseph P. Mickley, promoted. " not mcompatible with the public interests, to t1·ansmit to the House of Re:{> resen.tatives all the correspondence, by telegraph or otherwis.e1 between this ASSISTANT SURGEONS L~ NA.VY. Government and the Governments of China an.P. Jspan, respectively, relating Arthur W. Dunbar, a citizen of California, to bean assistant sur to the pending war betw.een those countries. geon in the Navy, from the 10th of October, 1894, to fill a vacancy The SPEAKER. IB there.objection to the present consideration in that grade. , of this resolution'( Theodom W. Richards, a citizen of the District of Columbia, to Mr. ENGLISH of New Jersey. I object. be an assistant surgeon in the Navy, from the 12th of November, Mr. BLAIR. I ask that the resolution be referred. 1894, to fill a vacancy in that grade. ~he resolution was referred to the Committee on Foreign Af farrs. SUP~~~ENT OF COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY. ORDER OF BUSINRSS. • William W. Duffield, of Michigan, to be Superintendent of the Mr. ROBBINS. Mr. Speaker, I ask nrumimons consent for the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey, to succeed Thomas C. pTesent consideration of Senate bill5 8, to repeal section 4145 of Mendenhall, resigned. Mr. Duffield is serving under a temporary the Revised Statutes of the United States, and to amend section commission issued during the recess of the S~nate. 4146, etc. · 52 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HQUSE. DECEMBER ~,
The SPEAKER. The bill will be read subject to objection. "In the next place, the number of these outstandin15 permits is small, and each and every one of them contains a clause authorizing their revocation by The bill was read at length. the Secretary of the Interior whenever,in his opinion, just cause Pxists for The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the present considera making revocation. I therefore think tnat the clause making summary and tion of this bill? absolute revocation of the permits should be omitted, and that power bo left where it is now, in the discretion of the Secretary. Mr. ENGLISH of New Jersey. I demand the regular order. "I also suggest that the bill be further amended so as to authorize th3 Sec The SPEAKER. The regular order is the call of committees retary of the Interior under pro:(>~r rules and regulations, in his di£:!:·etion, for reports. ' and in limited quantities,1 to permit timber to be taken from the public lands to be sawed for the use of or sold only to actual settlers for their individual The committees were called, there being no reports presented. use. With amendments as above, the bill will meet my approval. The SPEAKER. The morning hour for the consideration of "Very respectfully, bills begins at 15 minutes past 12 o'clock. "HOKE SMITH, Secretary. "Hon. T. C. McRAE, FREE USE OF 'TIMBER PUBLIC LANDS. Chairman Committee on the Public L-ands, Mr. McRAE (when the Committee on the Public Lands was · House of Representatives." called). Mr. Speaker, I call up for present consideration the pill DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, GENERAL LAND OFFICE, (H. R. 7854) to prevent the free use of timber on the public lands Washington, D. C., August ~ . 1894. and to revoke all permits heretofore granted in certain States, and ' SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt by reference from the for other purposes. · Department on August 1, 1894, for report, of a bill \H.1 R. 7854) "to prevent .. The bill was read, as follows: the free use of timber on the public· lands, and to revoke all permits hereto fore granted in certain States, and for other purposes." _ Be it enacted, etc., That section 8 of an act entitled "An act to repeal tim In responss to the portion of the bill which proposes to repeal that part of 3, 1891; ber-culture laws, and for other _purposes," approved March the act. the eighth section of th~ act of March 3, 1891, entitled ''An act to repeal the entitled "An act to amend section 8 of an act approved March 3, 1891, entitled timber-culture laws, and ..for other purposes" (20 Stat., 1095), and also the act 'An act to repeal timber-culture laws, and for other pnrposes1 approved of March 3, 1891, entitled "An act to amend sect'ion 8 of an act approved March March 3, 1891,' " and the act entitled "An act to extend the provis10ns of sec 3, 1891," entitled "An act to repeal the timber-culture laws, and for other tion 8 of the act entitled 'An act to repeal timber-culture laws, and for other purposes" (20 Stat., 1093), which relates to the institution of suits to vacate purposes,' approved March 3, 1891, concerning pros~cutions for cutting tim ber on public lands. to Wyoming, New Mexico, and Arizona,'' approved Feb and annul patents theretofore issued, I have to report as follows, viz: • I' The portion of section 8 of the act of March 3, 1891, referred to is: "That rnary 13,1893, be, and the same are hereby, repealed, and all free permits to suits by the United States to vacate and annul any patent heretofore issued shall only be brought within five years from the passage of this act, and suits ~¥\t~~~~~;~~ f};~g~~~~:;o~Ft1~8!~e%Ft~ddJ>Ji~~e~~~r;~a to vacate and annul patents hereafter issued shall only be brought within six acts or either of them be, and the same are hereby, revoked, and hereafter it years after the date of the issue of said patents." shall not be lawful to issue or grant permission to any person, firm, or cor .. It will be observed that this section makes no distinction, but applies to all poration to cut any timber on the public lands of the United States free of 1 charge: Pr01.tided, That nothing in this act shall be so construed as to pre patents. It is generally against public policy to place such limitations upon vent the Secretary of the Interior from permitting, under regulations to be the Government, and there are special reasons why the repeal of sa.id section prescribed by him, the use of timber and stone free of charge to bona fide 8 should be effected in order that the interests of the GoveJ..,'IDllent and, in settlers, residents\ and ;prospectors for minerals, exclusively for individual many instances, those of private citizens may be protected. T.he most important and ur~ent cases, probably, are those in which patents use, for firewood, ouilding, fencing, or prospecting purposes. have been erroneously and rmprovidently issued to land-grant railroad, Mr. McRAE. I ask that the report of the committee be read wagon-road, canal, and river-improvement companies. as a part of my remarks. These grants are numerous, some 150 in number, perhaps, and final adjust ments have been made in a very few of them; less than a dozen. If said" sec :Mr. DINGLEY. Is this a privileged matter? tion 8 should not be repealed, the time within which the United States could The SPEAKER. It is called up in the morning hour. legally bring suit for the recovery of lands patented prior to March 3, 1891, The Clerk Will read the report to which the gentleman from would expire March 3, 1896, about one and a half years from this time. It is known that considerable quantities of land have been erroneously cer Arkansas refers. tified and. patented under, these grants, and it is important that the Govern The Clerk read as follows: ment should have opportunity to recover the title thereto. If the portion of The Committee on the Public Lands, to whom was referre(l the bill (H. R. said section 8 referred to be not repealed, or sonw other action be not taken 785!) to prevent the free use of timber on the public lands and to revoke all modifying it, this opportunity can not be had for it is not possible to make permits heretofore granted in certain States, and for other purposes, have the exalll.lllations of these grants necessaryto discover the erroneously certi had the same under consideration, and report it back with the recommenda fied and patented lands\ which involves practically their adjustment within tion that it pass with the following amendment: the time prescribed witn the force available for the purpose. Strike out the following words in lines 16, l-7, 18, 1~, and 20: "And all free I earnestly recommend the passage of this bill, in so far as it relates to the permits to cut timber on the public lands heretofore issued or granted by the institution of suits for the recovery of erroneously certified or patented lands. Secretary -of the Interior or the Commissioner 'of the General Land Office The portion of the bill concerning prosecutions for cutting timber on the under s:tid acts or either of them be, and the same are hereby, revoked." public lands will be the subject of a further report. The first part of the section proposed to be repealed relates to the institution Very respectfully, of suits to vaca~ and annul patents theretofore issued and which fixed a limit S. W. LAMOREUX, Cornmissioner. ation of five and six years against the United States. The statute is general, The SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR. and applies to all patents. It is believed that there are many erroneous pat ents to land-grant railroad, wagon-road, canal, and river-improvement com DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR~ GENERAL LAND OFFICE, panies that can not be corrected or detected and the eases prepared for suit , Washington, D. C., .Augu.st 4, 1894. within the period of five years from March 3, 1891. It is not possible to finally ' SIR: I am in receipt, by reference from the Department for report, of a adjust all of these grants within this time, and if the act is not repealed or the letter dated the 1st mstant from Hon. THOMAS C. McRAE, chairman of the time extended many erroneous certifications will be confirmed. Committee on the Public Lands, Houso of Representatives, inclosin$ House The other part of the section relates to the issue of free permits to cut bill No. SSM, "To prevent the free use of timber on the public lanas and to timber on the public lands. There have be&n issued 171 permits, of which 39 revoke all permits heretofore granted in certain States, and for. other pm· are now in force, a list of which, furnished by the General Land Office, is poses," and asking for an opinion as to the proprioty and necessity for the hereto attached and made a pa1't hereof. The most of these are to the manu passage of said bill. facturers of lumber and some of them very large dealers. It is impossible to The committee also desires to know "whether the Department can finally get reliable data as to the value of the timber cut under the section in ques adjust the land grants and prepare for suits to vacate and annul such errone tion, but it is estimated to be several hundred thousand dollars' worth per ous and fraudulent patents as mar have issued prior to March 3,1891 annum. The committee is of the opinion that the practice of issuing these Within the five years fixed in the sectiOn proposed to be repealed and would free permits to manufacturers to cut timber from the public lands for profit be glad to be informed fully as to the number of permits to cut timber1 here should be discontinued and hereafter prohibited. The following Department tofore issued and also those now in force, giving the names and post-offices letters are made a part of this report: of each person, firm, or corporation, the extent of the authority, and what "DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, Washington, August 8, 1894. proportion of those who have received permits are manufacturers of lumber "SIR: I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 1st instant, inclos or operators of mines. The committee would also like to have an estimate ing copy of House bill 7854, entitled 'A bill to prevent the free use of timber of the amount and value of the timber cut from the public lands under the on the public lands, and to revoke all permits heretofore_granted in certain said act." States, and for other purposes.' Your letter and said bill were referred to Said bill proposes to r epeal section 8 of the act of March 3, 1891 (26 Stat., the Commissioner of the General Land Office for re:Qort thereon, and here 1095); the a-ct of March 3,1891 (26 Stat., 1093), amending said section 8 (and with I send you two reports in relation thereto made by that officer. The known as the "timber permit act"), its provisions applying to the States of report of the Commissioner in relation to the provision of the bill which pro Colorado, Montana, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, and poses to repeal existing law which requires that suits by the United States to Nevada, the Territory of Utah and the Di<>trict of Alaska; and the act of secure the cancellation of patents must be instituted within five yea.rs from February 13,1893 (27 Stat., 444), extending the "permit act" to the Territories March 3, 1891, I especially commend to your attention as .being fully respon of Arizona and New Mexico. The bill also revokes all permits heretofore sive.to the first inquiry contained in your letter. issued and prohibits granting permission to any person firm, or corporation "The statements of the Commissioner, I think, show the absolute necessity to cut any public timber free of charge, but gives the right1 to the Secretary for the repeal of the limitation to such actions which now exists, and which of the Interior to permit, under regulations to be prescribed by him, "the is an entire departure from the law as it has existed from the foundation of use of timber and stone freo of charge to bona fide settlers, residents, and tlie Government. I therefore concur in the recommendation of the Commis prospectors for minerals, exclusively for individual use, for firewood, fenc sioner in that behalf, in his letter of the 2d instant, and respectfully m·ge the mg, buildin~, or prospectin~ purposes." repeal of said law. ... That portion of the comm1ttee 's inquiry as to the adjustment of land grants ''With regard to that portion of the bill which prohibits the issue of per and the institution of suits, etc., was reported upon by my letter of the 2d mits in the future, I concur in the views of the Commissioner, as set forth in instant. his rep01't of the 4th instant, but I suggest the omission of the following There have been 171 permits issued to cut public timber. clause, be!rlnning on line 16 of the bill: • · There are now 39 of those permits in force. I present herewith a tabulated "'And a'll free permits to cut timber on the public lands heretofore issued statement (Exhibit A) giving the names and addresses of the parties to whom or granted by the Secretary of the Interior or the Commissioner of the Gen said permits were issued, and extent of authority to cut timber thereunder. eral Land Office under sa1d acts, or either of them, b-e, and the same are No person is given the right to cut to exceed 50 per cent of the merchantable hereby, revoked.' timber on the area covered by b'is permit. "My reasons for this suggestion are twofold. In the first place, it would I can not give the exact proportion of those who have received permits who doubtless work a great hardship and injustice to the present holders of per are manufacturers of lumber. Nearly all, however, who obtain permits manu mits, who, acting m good faith, under the law and the authority of this De facture lumber to a greater or less extent. Some are in that business solely partment, have incurred considerable expense in obtaining the necessary and on a large scale; others ont simply for the local demand of a small or scat plant and outtl.t to enable them to carry out the purposes for which the per tered community and only as the timber is needed; a few cut cord wood only. mit was issued; and also would cause much inconvenience to the settlers and The r ecords of this1 office do not show that any holders of permits are opera others who had made contracts with, or expected to get lumber from, the tors of mines, although as a matter of fact a good deal of timber eut unde. parties holding the permits. .. these permits goes to themines. • .· •
1894. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 53
It is rmpossible to give a.n estimate of the amount and value of the timber limitation of six years against the United States for correcting cut from the public Ia.nd.s under said act that would be in any way satisfac t-ory. In this particular this office has been practically prevented from en mistakes, fraud, and errors in patents issued or thereafter to be forsing the relmlations owing to the limited means at its disposal, nor has it issued is repealed by this bill? The Interior Department has been ena.hled,l:.hrough the small force of agents, to collect any reliable data requested that the time be extended, unless the limitation be c.n these points. I think it is safe to say, however, that the value of the tim repealed. It is unusual have a statute of limitation against ber that has been cut under these permits would amount to several hundred to thousand dollars. the Government of the United States. The Committee on Public The regulations formulated by this Department to carry out the intent of Lands believe that it ought to be repealed, and so report. There the act of Marqh 3, 1891, are sufficient for that purpose, but owing to the were ninety-eight millions or more acres of public lands granted utterly inadequate force of special agents to properly supervise the working of the J>ermit system, and at the S&IIle time perform other duties required of to railroads and States for railroads, the certification of which them, has made the regulations practically inoperative and placed it beyond necessarily involved a great many mistakes which the mosthonest the power of this office to effectively control the cutting of public timber. and careful official could not avoid. These errors which have But aside from this it seems to me that the time has arrived when the Gov ernment can not afford to give away its timber. necessarily crept into the lists and patents of such vast quantities It is well enough that settlers, residents, and mineral prospectors should of land can not be corrected within the time now allowed bylaw. be allowed the free use of timber for their individual needs; but firms and A failure to extend the time or repeal the limitation will confirm corporations ,that are in the lumber business simply for profit should be obliged to buy- their supplies as other concerns throughout the country do. many errors and perhaps some frauds. Moreover it IS unjust that they should come into competition, on a. free basis, The other part of the section sought to be repealed authorizes with parties1 who have acquired timber by the purchase of lands under the the issuance of free permits for timber on public lands. Urlder timber and stone act of June 3,1878, or otherwise. This reason seems es;pe cially forceful as regards corporations, residents of the States where operatmg that authority, as stated in the report, over one hundred permits by articles of incorporation, but whose members, in some instances, are non have been granted, authorizing the cutting of large amounts of residents. Hence, nonresidents are deriving an income from a. commodity the timber on public lands, without price, in many cases, as that should be held for the sole penefit of residents of the States where the timber exists. shown in the report, to an extent of over 2,000 acres. These priv In another respect the act of 18!Jl has always seemed to me unjust. It ileges are said to be worth from $1,000 to $40,000 per annum to the applies only to certain States and Territories; and no good reason can be persons and corporations engaged in the manufacture of lumber. advanced why it should not be extended to all of the puolic-land States and Now, we believe that all power to grant such privileges ought to Territories if it is to remain a law. For the reasons above given, I am satisfied that it is best for all interests be repealed. that the law under whicl:i these free timber permits are granted should be The last proviso to the bill authorizes the Secretary of the In repealed, as ~rovided in House bill No. 7854; and I therefore recommend the terior to permit the use of timber by- passage of said bill. The_])apers referred are herewith returned. Bona fide settlers, residents, and prosJ_>ectors for minerals, exclusively for Ve17 respectfully, - individual use, for firewood, fencing, building, or prospecting purposes- EDW. A. BOWERS, but not for- manufacturing purposes, as in the law sought to be Acting Commissione1·. The SECRETARY OF TR)!l INTERIOR. repealed. Mr. McRAE. r now ask the Clerk to read section 8 of the act It see~s U? me ti?-at the proposi~on is so fair ~hat there ought to of March 3, 1891, which is proposed to be repealed by the provisions ?a no ~bJection to It. !!'he _Committee .on Pll;blic Lands are unan- of the pending bill. rmous m the recommendation that this section 8 ought to be re- Mr. PICKLER. I rise to a parliamentary inquiry. ...:pealed. . . . The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. If t?ere IS no gentleman wh~ de~rres to ask aJ?-Y questions about Mr. PICKLER. Has this been considered in Committee of the the-bill, or to be heard concernmg It, I sh?uld like to have a ,vote. Whole heretofore? ~!· HERM~. As I understand, this merely ext~nds to the The SPEAKER. The bill is on the House Calendar. The Chair pnvilege of .cutting trmber fr!'le, but dpes not al?perta~ to those is not informed as to how it was considered heretofore. other pro~10ns of the law which perrmt the cutting of timber for Mr. McRAE. It is not necessary to consl.der it in Committee of a stated pnce. . . the Whole, and even if ithadbeennecessary,apointoforderwould ¥r· McRAE. _N_o; It has no refere_nce to the. timber-la!ld law. now be too late. , It IS only to prohibit the free use of ~ber, which we believe has The SPEAKER. That was not the inquiry of the gentleman ~een to some. e~ent apused. you wpl obser~e that the word from South Dakota, but whether this had been considered hereto- manufactunng was mserted ~ section 8, which we seek to re- fore in Committee of the Whole. peal, and under that manufactunng c~ncerns worth hundreds of Mr. PICKLER. The point of order does not come too late arly- thousands of dollars have secured perrmts worth, as I have already how. The report has just been read. stated, fr9m $1,000 to $40,000 a year.. The SPEAKER. That was read in the time of the gentleman . Mr. HERMANN. It has no relation whatever to the stone and from Arkansas. • trmber act. _ . . Mr. McRAE. I have been occupying the floor in the discussion Mr. McRAE. None whatever. I ask th~ preVIous questiOJ?-. of the matter for some time. _ Mr .. PICKLER. I hop; the gentleman Will not call the previous The SPEAKER. The point of order must be made before con- question. , . . · / sideration of the bill commences. Mr, McRAE. How much time do you WISh? . Mr. McRAE. There is no appropriation carried by this bill; it Mr. PIC~ER. I do not know. I want to ask about It. In does not involve any expenditure or charge upon the Government the _I·epo~t It IS stated: . &nd is a great saving of property. It IS believed that ther~ are ~ny erroueous paten~ to lanl!-grant railroad, ...... wagon road, canal, and rrver rmprovement e9mpames that can not be cor- M r. PICKLER. It IS a disposition of the public domam, how- rected or detected and the cases prepared for suit within the period of five ever. years from March 3, 1891. It is not possible to finally adjust all of these grants Mr. McRAE. No, sir; it is a bill to prevent the free use of the ~;~~o~~!~C:."t.i~n~ :~ ~co~!:3~ealed or the time extended ,many timber on the public domain in certain States. I ask the Clerk to read section 8 of the act of MaJ.·ch 3, 1891. Is the object of this to interfere with the issuance of patents to hi h · t b al d b this 1 · these parties? w The Cle~k :e~1:S follo~s: aw. - I "' Mr. McRAE. No; but it is to give more time to correct errors in any patent. If an erroneous certification has been made to a Be it enacted, etc., That section 8 of an act entitled "An act to repeal tim ber culture laws, and for other purposes," approved March 3,1891, be and the raih·oad, this law requires the discovery of that error and the same is hereby amended so as to read as follows: - bringing of suit to cancel the patent within six years. "SEC. 8. That suits by the United States to V&C9-te and annul any patent :Mr. TAWNEY. What is that fixed time? heretofore issued shall only be brought within five years from the passage of this act, and suits to vacate and annul patents hereafter issued shall only Mr. McRAE.' It was six years from March 3, 1891. I believe be brought within six years after the date of the issuance of such patents. it will expire in a little over a year from now. The Department offi And in the States of Colorado, Montana, Idaho,_ North Dakota, and South Da cials say "they can not possibly examine and properly adjust all these kota, Wyoming, and the District of Alaska, ana the gold andsilverregionsof Nevada and the Territory of Utah in any criminal prosecution or civil action grants within that time; consequently this statute of limitations by the United States for a treSJ.laSs on such public timber lands or to recover running against the United States will confirm ·whatever errors timber or lumber cut thereon It shall be a defense if thedefenda.ntshallshow may have been made in these certifications. It is only to I'emove that the said timber was so cut or removed from the timber lands for use in such State or Territory by a. resident thereof for agricultural, mining, manu the limitations against the United States and to enable errors to facturing or domestic purposes under rules and regulations made and pre be corrected, if there are errors. They have not been able to adjust scribed by the Secretary of the Interior and has not been transported out of all the grants under the act of 1887. the same, but nothing herein contained shall operate to enlarge the rights of any railway company to cut timber on the public domain, provided that the Mr. REED. Does this repeal the limitation entirely, or only Secretary of the Interior may make suitable rules and regulations to carry extend it? out the provisions of this act, and he may designate the sections or tracts of· Mr. McRAE. It repeals it. land where timber may be cut, and it shall not be lawful to cut m: remove any timber except as may be prescribed by such rules and regulations, but this Mr. REED. Why should you do that? act shall not operate to repeal the act of J nne 3, 1878, providing for the cutting !ir. McRAE. Because it is unusual to have it. I believe it is of timber on mineral lands. the first time that any SU'Chjimitation has ever been sought to bo - Approved March 3, 1891. applied against the United States. 1\fr. :McRAE. Mr. Speaker; as will be observed by the reading Mr. REED. Is it not for the interest of the commnnit.y that of this section which is sought to be repealed there are two pur there should be a definite fixing of title at some time or other? I poses to be accomplished by the passage of this bill. First, the can understand very w~ll how it should he desirable that the Gov-
;S - CONGRESSio-NAL RECORD-· HOUSE. DECEl\ffiER 5, ernment should not be prevented by a; statute of limitations from. Mr. McRAE. .All cases. Whether the fraud or e~Tor has been making corrections within a reasonable time; out ili seems-unnec committed by an individual or by a railroad company this section essary to give it eternity in which tu make the cm-rections. applies. · • Mr. McRAE. The theory upon which Congress has-always leg :Mr. PICKLER. The Government now has five years in which islated is that the Government will correct these-errors as soon as to bring suit against the- settler who has committed fraud. Now possible. It is for the interest of the Government, which should you propose to repeal that-limitation and giTe the Government an represent the people, to see that these titles are-quieted and all unlimited time to bring such suits. clouds removed as quickly as possible, and I assume that this will Mr. McRAE. Yes, sir; but there is no trouble about the set- be done; but during the last Administration and d:uring· this Ad tl~ , . ministration the Department has been unable to examine and l.fr. PICKLER- I know there has been greater trouble along :finallv adjust the many large grants, covering 98,000,000 acres, that line to settlers in theWest than in any other direction. Their and for that reason the committw thought it would be better to great trouble has I>een the 1.mcertainty as to their titles, never repeal the limitation. knoWing when they are secure. · · Of course the Department might be satisfied with a longerthne, l\Ir. McRAE. But my friend will remember that the trouble to but it seems to the committee that it had better be repealed. the settler always comes in getting his patent. Now, this limita Mr. REED. Why not make some modification, bringing. this tion ai>J?lie.s to cases after the patent has issued. I agree with the thing to an end. It is reasonable that we should .meet with some gentleman that time and time again the settler is hru:assed by difficulties about land matters, because I am quite well aware trumped-up charges of fraud after his entry, and is deviled almost that so far as the public lands are c.onceTiled it is necessary for a. to death in getting his patent; but I do not think the gentleman man to live in a State having public lands in order to understand can show fifty cases of suits ln·ought by the Government to cancel the bearing of the various propositions presented; but it seem& to patents issued to settlers, either for mining orhomestead laws. me, speaking from a distance, as I dol that it is. reasonable there Mr. _TAWNEY. I can show you one instance in the Sta.te of should be a time beyond which the Government should not have :Minnesota where there is involved the ce~-ti:ficate to at-least 50,000 the right to seek reclamation. When the Government undertakes acres of land. to deal with its citizens and sell them land, or give them land, Mr. OUTHWAITE. Where the patents have been issued to the there ought to be a time when the. Government. is quit of the settlers? 1 whole matter; and if six years is not enough, why not name some Mr. McRAE. Did not the difficulty to which. the gentleman limitation, instead of going back to the old idea.. that a man's title from 1\linnesota refers g1·ow out of some railroad grantr- may be investigated at any time if only the Government is to JUr. TAWNEY. The land was certified by the Government to investigate? The statutes of limitation. are intended for the bene the State for the benefit of the railroad company, and later it was fit of the community, not for exact, but for that kind of rough sold to the settlers-. justice necessary in the world. 1\fr. McRAE. That is not the case with which we are deaiing Mr. McRAE. But they-have never yet been invoked against here. Tlte patents in that case were not issued to· the settlers. a sovereign. \ Mr. TAWNEY. Well, the ceTti:fications are by the courts held Mi·. REED. I know. That is because of the prevalent idea. of to have the same force and effect a.s patents. the sovereignty and, of its having extraordinary rights, It is one J\.Ir. McRAE. That is the trouble about this limitation. Now, of the commonest things in human. nature to cling to a lot of as ifthere are found remaining cases lik;e-that, the titles will be con things long after. they have ce.as.ed. to be of importance- ar advan firmed under this Iaw. I speak of patents to individual settlers. tage. There was a time when it was necessary to protect sover Of course, in the adjustment of these grants reat frauds and eign rights, but that time seems to have passed by. wrongs have been committed, as in the case o · the Des Moines Mr. McRAE. I think not. River grant and othenr, but-the difficulty has all grown out of the Mr. REED. We ought to look at the sovereign just the same grants, and those very cases show the necessity of giving-the Gov as we look at the rest of the world. It is a question of pure con ernment time and opportunity to correct errors that may be made venience and advantage- to the aommunity; it is: not ar fetich. by the Department. Mr. McRAE. Then you would make the Government respon Mr. TA.W~TEY: In. the case refen·ed to by me the· Government sible in an action in any court as you- would. individuals, remov has brought suit to cancel the certifications to at least 5'0, 000 acres ing all statutes of limitations against all actions. of land in Southern ·Minnesota because ot the change in the rule Mr. REED. Thatbynomeans is the case. I would not prevent as to when the rights of the companyattached to the land. Now the United States being sued in a great many cases where the these lands have all passed into the- hands- of bona fide ptirchasers United States is not suable now. I want tp permit the United for\'alue. They were certi:fi.eu to the State twenty-seven years - States to have the advantage of any definite length of time. For ago, and the lands are occupied by actual settlers who ha.ve paid instance, I think great injustice is- done by the United States re a valual1le consid-eration for them and made valuable iinprove fusing to settle accounts. It does not follow because I think the ments thereon; yet now, after twenty-seven years,. the Govern dignity which hedges around. the so-vereignty ought to be broken ment has brought-suit and seeks to cancel these certifications_a-nd into that it should be broken down. The only question here is destroy the title of these settlers to their lands because of its own whether it is an advisable thing for the good of the people who erroneous interpretation of the law twenty-seven years ago. This deal with the-United States in,. the matter of public lands to have suit was brought before this limitation was enacted by Congress.. some statute of limitations. I state these facts to show that some limitation is neceB.sary to Mr. MaRAK Itis n.ot so much the dignity of the sovereignty protect- the rights of innocent purchasers from the original' pat that I am concerned about as the inability of the sovereign in tliis entee. case to act. It must act in all there cases through the House, Sen ]fr. McRAE. I hardly think the law would apply to that1rind ate, and Executive. They'IIIUBt always agree upon a_given propo of case unless it arose out of the adjustment of a grant. fu the sition before the will of the sovereign can be known. It must set case stated by the gentleman the Government did not deal_di· agents to work to correct errors that the individual in the exer rectly with iJhe settler~ the settler bought from the railroad com· cise of all his faculties, acting freely, is quickly a~le to de~~e pany, I presume, and must look to it. what he ought to do and what he wants, and! subnnt that this IS the Mr. TAWNEY. Yes, si:r; the settlers bought u·om the railroad reason why the statutes should not run against the UnitedState.s. company and the· Government now seeks to destroy the basis of It is not alone the interest of the United States, bttt the interest of their title, which :is ~patent from the Government to the State. the people, who will be- entitled to the land r~stored if errors have Twenty-seven years have elapsed since it was issued; yet now the been committed, to have them corrected. - Government attempts to overthrow that title. This illustrates Mr. REED. That is precisely what I am getting at. why there should be some limitation beyond which the Govern 1\fr. McRAE.. And they have the right, if errors have been. com ment shall not be permitted to impeach its own patents. mitted, to have time, without limit, for .correction. To have Mr. PICKLER. I find this langua.ge in the report: ~se en-ors and frauds corrected is of the utmost importance to The statute is general and applies to all patents. It is believed that there settlers on the public land, and they should have it. are many erroneous patents to land-grant railroad, wagon road canal and river improvement companies that can !19t be corrected or detected a.nd the Mr. PICKLER. This whole bill is against the settler. cases prepared for suit within the period of five years from March 3, 189L It Mr. McRAE. Oh, no. . is not possible to finallfhadjust all of these grants within this time, and if the Mr. OUTHWAITE. It is in the interest of the settler. Ex- ~tc~~r:E_ealed or t e time extended many erroneous certifications will plain the nature of the grants. Mr. PICKLER. It prevents the settle:r f:rom getting his patent Now, as I understand, along with the class there referred to as well as the corporation. this bill applies to all other classes, including settlers. M:r. McRAE. All the g:rants to railroads or wagon roads, as Mr. McRAE. Yes; if the patents have been issued. well as private property, must be adjusted within this time; and Mr. PICKLER. Well, is it fair that after a settler has obtained if tlfey are not adjusted, why whatever errors may be in the cer his patent, and after the Government has had five years in which tifications when made are confirmed and made binding upon the to discover fraud:, the time should be still further extended for the Government. Government to bring suit against the settle:v to annul hi,s patent? Mr. OUTHWAITE. Are homestead casesinclndedin this section? Mr. McRAE. After an experience of a· h't\n.dred years the ~r..-
• 1894. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 55
tleman can find only a few isolated cases where the Government The SPEAKER. In the absence of objection this amendment has brought suits to annul patents issued to settlers, or where the will be conside1·ed as agreed to. , - settlers have had any such trouble after their patents have been There was no objection; and it was ordered accordingly. issued. The trouble of the settler comes before the issue of his Mr. McRAE. I yield five minutes to·the gentleman from Col- patent, and in those cases the fraud is generally detected before orada r.Mr. BELL 1. patenting. Mr. :13ELL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, if !remember rightly the 1\-Ir.PICKLER. Afterthepatentisissued.theGovernmentought act which this bill proposes to amend was passed because of the to be estopped, and ought not·to be allowed to raise a question of great difficulties arising in the Western States from a suspension this kind. · of titles. During the latter part of Mr. Cleveland's former Ad Mr. McRAE. It ought not to be estopped if fraud has been ministration there was a suspension of the issue of final patents to perpetrated.' Government lands, the effect of which was to arrest improvements Mr. PICKLER. But the Government ought to be satisfied on in Colorado and various other States. Then, furthermore, no one that point before it issues the patent. Such a provision as is here can cut timber in either of these States specified here because of ,proposed would unsettle our titles. That is the trouble. the fact that every man does not own a sawmill. This act, as I Mr. McRAE. I would have no objection to a proviso that this understand it, was passed for the purpose of checking the right of bill shall not apply to pate11ts issued by the Government to indi- -the Government to interfere with titles after five yea1·s, and, in vidual settlers. On the point of limitation all I want is proper the second place, the provisions of the act relative to cutting tim time in which to enable the Department to correct any errors that ber, or allowing the defense that the timber -was cut for the purpose may have occurred. of use in the State where it was cut, were enacted so that a saw- Mr. BOWERS of California. There are 119 suits already begun mill man might cut timber for an entire community of ranchmen against settlel's holding patents. • • • or miners. But when you strike out this provision of the law, as· Mr. PICKLER. I desire, with the consent of the gentleman is now contemplated, every man must have his own sawmill or be from Arkansas, to offer an amendment. able to cut his own lumber, or else under the provisions of this The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from Arkansas yield for act it can not be cut at all. an amendment? As the law stands now, Mr. Speaker-and we have a case of that Mr. McRAE. I will hear it ~ead. kind on the Colorado and Utah line to-day, whel'ein the line had The Clerk read as follows: been crossed by a mistake and the lumber cut and brought into At the end of line 28 insert the following: Colorado for the purpose of building a great flume for mining pur- " Provided, That this act shall not apply to patents issued to indhidual set- poses-the Government agents say to the parties that they are tiers." amenable to the statutes because the lumber was not cut in the Mr. PICKLER. Does the gentleman accept that amendment? Sta.te of Colorado, but was reallj cut across the line in Utah. Mr.' McRAE. I have no objection to it. Now, this section of the law is to enable a sawmill man to cut The SPEAKER. If thel'e be no objection, the amendment will lumber for the entire community, or to permit a sawmill man to be considered as agreed to. cut lumber for the miners in a certain region;· but the amendment There was no objection. of the law as proposed strikes out that provision, and, when thu M.r. McRAE. Now there is an amendment of the committee 1 stricken ouf;, each man must have his own sawmill or he can not which I ask may be repurted. Icutlumberatall. Thehardshipundersuchc.ircumstancesisplain. The Clel'k read as follows: As I h~ve already stated, this section of the statute was provided Strike out, in lines 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20, the following: by reason of the fact that under the former Administration of 11-.Ir. "and all free permits to cut timber yed, th~ lands are rap1dly bemg denuded of timber at a rate lars as to number, names, and locations can be easily obtained by that IS alarmmg, even when they have to pay for them; and to now 1·eference to the report. say that the Gov.ernment should permit the p~ople of Col_oraq.o Mr. HARTMAN. I would like to offer an amendment which I and these other BlX or seven States to hav-e thenght to cut timber think the gentleman from Arkansas will probably accept. free of charge on all of this vast body of the public lands, worth any- The SPEAKER. In the absence of objection the committee where from $5 to $25 an acre, is pasSing strange. I can not under amendment which has been read will be considered as agreed to. stand how any IJ?.an can advocate it as just to the settlel's. That There was no objection; and it was ordered accordingly. any Representative should stand here and advocate such a policy Mr. McRAE. I have examined' the amendment of the gentle- ~ems. to be so lll!-l'easonable that it hardly requires an answer. It man from Montana fMI·. HARTMAN], and I have no objection to it. 18 asking SOIJ?.ething for nothing. It is a privilege to one section The SPEAKER. 'The Clerk will read -the amendment sent to not allowed mothers. . the desk by the gentleman from Montana. All that this bill does, so far as the individual patents are con- The Clerk read as follows~ cerned, is to leave the limitation of six years, and so far as the After the word" minerals," in line ~,insert" and all persons engaged in the land grants are concerned it repeals all 1imitation and allows the business of milrlng." , Government to correct enors and expose fraud. ' It prohibits all 56 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. DECEMBER 5, I
further permits to tak~ timber frC?m the p~b~c domai?- except for 11?Jllber for hif' buildiD;gs_and ~prov~n;u~nts requires the opera the :purposes s~t f~n:th m the prs>VIso to thiS bill; ~hat Is t? S!1Y, ex- tion of sawmills, and 1t IS an rmpossibility that every settler in ; clus1velY: for md1VIdual use, for firewood, fencmg, bmlding, or I the West shall own a sa~ill or be able to control it for the manu prospectmg purposes. It seems to me that that much the settler facture of lmnber. Therefore the very wise provision in section ought to have, and. that no _fair-minded man ought to ask more. 8 w~s ena?ted, that it shall be a sufficient defense for the cutting I want Congress to emphatiCally say to the Secretary of the In- of trmbermall,casesforthesettlertoprovethattheuseof thattim terior that he shall not hereafter issue a single permit to a man or ber is for domestic purposes and within the State; and this very corporation engaged in manufacturing lumber to cut timber from wise provision will be stricken down if this section 8 is repealed the public domain free of charge. There is proof already before because that provision is only found in section 8, to which refer~ the Committee on the Public Lands that such privilege in one case ence is made, and which it is here proposed to repeal. was worth as much as $40,000; and, in fllCt, I am informed man- rHere the 4ammer fell.] · • utacturm;s have stated that they ~_ould pay that amount for ~he Mr. McRAE. Mr. Speaker, I repeat again that the bill gives to nght which they have been exerCismg, but there was no authonty settlers the free use of wood and trmber for firewood for fencing to take pay._ I see no reason why the G:overnment, ~hich shoul_d and for buil~ings, and it occurs to me that the settl~rs ought not protect the mterests of all the people alike, should giVe away this to ask anything more. Indeed, I know they do not. Now just valuable property without any consideration, and, so far as I am why the Congress of the United States should make these e'xten- concerned, I in~nd to pro~st against _it. sive free grants of timber to private individuals and corporations ' I ask the preVIous question on the bill as amended. / I am unable to understand. I find that in Wyoming, represented Mr. BOATNER. Before the gentleman demands the previous I by the gentleman, permits have been issued under the act of question I should like to ask a question. March 3, 1891, to the following persons, for the nmnber of a~res Mr. McRAE. Certainly. stated: • Mr. BOATNER. Do I understand the gentleman to state that Acres. the statute of limitation is to continue to-run after the issuance of John R. Todd .....• ------·----···------···----···--···------········ 1,920 the patents? s. L. Iiams ______---··----···----·------·-·------·------2,560 Mt. McRAE., Yes·, with reference to the p atents issued t 0 in- A.M.Frank Bunce M. NewelL ______,.______2,400800 dividual settle1·s. Xfilliam E. Grimes and Neil Cunnington ...... ••... ______1, 920 Mr. BOATNER. That is to say, the Government can not con- ... ~ephen N. Leek------~------·--·------·---·-·------1,280 test a patent except within five years after its issue? The timber on 10,000 acres of land in one State granted from Mr. McRAE. In six years. December 5, 1893, to May 31, 1895. Mr. RA WLll~S. I wish to ask the gentleman this question: In It seems to me ,incredible that a,ny gentleman should stand certain States there is no provisioh for the sale or other disposition upon the floor of this House and insist that the Government of of the timber land. That is the ca.se in Utah-- the United States owes to the owners of sawmills in the West all 1\fr. McRAE. No, that la.w is general, and applies everywhere. the logs they may see-fit to cut for domestic use.' Mr. RAWLINS. In the timber-land States, but that does not There is no reason in it, no justice in it, no fairness to the indi- include the Territories. vidual holder of timber, and no fairness to those who would pro- Mr. McRAE. Ithinkitisgeneral, and applies everywhere now. teet the forests of our country from being denuded, and a great Mr. RAWLINS. Not as the law now is, tmless it is affected by wrong upon the settlers who may in future want the lands for this bill. ' . homes. We should stop it. Mr. McRAE. Yes, as it is now, without this. It was not orig- Mr. PICKLER. We have a law now that will cover all these inally so, but it was amended in the last Congress so as to make tb.iilgs; and the only point about your bill is that the Government it of general application. - does not have time in the five years to look them up and investi Mr. COFFEEN of Wyoming. I wish a little time on this, and gate them. with the Speaker's permission I wish to ask the gentleman from I Mr. McRAE. That is not the poin~ now under discussion. Un Arkansas from what quarter is this bill urged? der this free permit system, whenever it is claimed that it is nec- M.l·. McRAE. It is u.rged because the Committee on Public essary for manufacturing pm·poses, the Department is required to Lands think it is a good one. I introduced it on my own respon- issue these permits; and these I have named are for the State of sibility, and the Commi~ee on Public ~ands and the Interior De- Wyorn!ng:, ~epreseilted by th~ gentle'ma.n who has just spoken. partment have indorsed It. - ' - . These mdiV1duaJs have been giVen thousands of acres of the most Mr. COFFEEN of Wyoming. Mr. Speaker, I ask for a little valuabl~ ~ber land, agaffi:st the rights of the settler. Upon time on this. - what prme1ple can the sawmills demand that they shall have free Mr. McRAE. How much time does the gentleman want? all the logs they wa.nt to cut when they sell them in the State Mr. COFFEEN of Wyoming. Three or four or five minutes. where the sawmill is situated? . Mr. McRAE. How much time have I? Mr. PICKLER. Do not they have the permission of the SeCI·e- The SPEAKER. The gentleman has twenty-two minutes. tary of the Interior? Mr. McRAE. I will give the geJltleman three minutes. Mr. McRAE. Yes; and the power to grant this right we want Mr. COFFEEN of Wyoming. Mr. Speaker, I wish to say in gen-~ to take away from him by this bill. eral terms that the operation of the timber laws a.s to the cutting of . Mr. PICKLER. You said awhile ago that they had th~ same timber in the West was not satisfactory until the passage of the law nght. now sought to be repealed. Prior to the passage of this law there Mr. McRAE. I s'aid the settler. The difference between this wereconstantcontroversiesarisingoverthestumpage,intheefforts proposition and the one the gentleman has in mind is that the of the Western settlers to gettimber for the improvements of their present law now authorizes permits for'manufacturing purposes. lands and claims as required by law. The requirements of our Mr. PICKLER. Then the Secretary has given this permission, land laws have ~mpelled settlers to make buildings and improve- and you claim that they have abused it. ments, to carry on the development of their cla?ms before they Mr. McRAE. You are mixing the t~? propositions. . could make proper proof upon the land. Tha~ bemg_t~e ca~e, and Mr. BOATNER. I~ there any P!O~s1on of law .bJ:' which the no proper provisions having been made for th~u· obtammg timbe1:, Secretary of the Intenor c~ sell this trmber where It 1S npcessary this very section 8 was enacted, together With the other proVI- for the purpose of developmg the country? sions of the law, to enable the' settlers of the West to obtain tim- Mr. McR;A-E. No; but we have endeavored to gi'ant him such ber without violating the laws of the land. . power by ~ill H. R. 119. Mr. BELL of Colorado. Strike out that provision and every Mr. HAUGEN. Why not apply the principle you have been man must h!ve a sawmill to get the benefit of the act. speaking of to this bill? Mr. COFFEEN of Wyoming. Yes, the gentleman n·om Colorado Mr. McRAE. I have sought to pass that bill for the past fifteen is right. Sti·ike this out and you go back. to the difficulties from ~onths, and have not yet suc?eeded: . . . _ which we have endeavored to escape, and mdeecl ha.vebeenescap- Mr. HAUGEN. Why not msert It m this bill? ing, by the passage of this law of 1891. Therefore I hold that the Mr.:J\icRAE. Because I do not want to mix the two. When we passage of this bill as now proposed will stop the beneficent results have taken from these men and corporations the right to cut timber of the law we have had since 1891. In this law it s provided, as the free then we can give to the manufactJtrers the right to cut timber gentleman says, that settlers in the West may obtain their tim- at a reasonable stumpage value under proper regulations; but so ber free of charge. Yet they are compelled· to develop and im- long as you give a half dozen States the right (it is not given to prove their lands under the-land laws before they can make proof your State) to cut timber free their representatives will stand here unon them, and if this bill now proposed shall pass, there is left to oppose the passage of any bill that requires payment, as they no convenient way by which settlers in the West can obtain per- have done since the beginning of this Congress. mission to cut .timber for the proper and legal development of Mr. BOATNER. Do you mean to say that all this timber has their claims. Again, I wish to enforce and strengthen what' has been given to these sawmills free? been said by the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. BELL]. ·While it Mr. McRAE. It ha.s; and it is estimated that it will amount to may seem that nnder this bill privileges are given to the settlers, perhaps $300,000 a year. yet, as a matter df fad, the method by w~ch the settler can obtain Mr. OUTHWAITE. Three hundred thousand dollars a: year1 1894. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 57
Mr. COFFEEN of Wyoming. It is granted if it can be used for Mr. PICKLER. And of warrants hereafter to be issued, too, manufacturing purposes. I suppose. Mr. McRAE. Yes; to be sold in the State where cut. Mr. McRAE. Of course, if any are issued herea,!ter under the act Mr. COFFEEN of Wyoming. Will the gentleman permit this of June 2,1858, but I do not know of any proposition to issue war- question? The sawmills in that State, against which yon are mak- rants under any other act. . ing complaint, are theynot limited by this law to furnish that lum- Mr. PICKLER. Has the gentleman made any estrmate as to ber to the settlers who need it? how ma.:ny o~ these warrants a.re out or how many acres of land Mr. McRAE. They are limited in the sale of the llim.ber to the Ithe y would cover? pe·ople of the State; but theymaysellittoamerchant, to a banker, ~Ir .' McRAE. Not definitely. to a lawyer to a doctor, or any resident if he wants to use the Mr. PICKLER. What section of the country is especially in- lumber in the State. Now, there is no reason in the world why terested in this bin? the people of your State should have the timber of your State Mr. McRAE. No section pariicularly. Anyone who holds a given away to the sawmill men. I do not believe the people in land warrant under the law now can only sell it to a man who your State want it that way. . wants to commute his homestead or purchase land in Missouri; it Mr. CDFFEEN of Wyoming. Yes, they do. How can the set- can not be used in the payment of desert lands cr any other kind tier provide himself with lumber except through the sawmills? of lands for which the law requires payment to be made. Mr. McRAE. It could be done by cutting their logs for them- Mr. PICKLER. Is tp.e bill :eported un~nimously? selves and having them sawed...... Mr. M;cRAE. Yes, srr. It~ a Sena;te bill. . . Mr. COFFEEN of Wyoming. They will have no sawmills m The bill was ordered to a third reading, and It was accordingly the State then. · read the third time, and passed. Mr. McRAE. Yes, they will. I represent one of the greatest On motion of 1\Ir. McRAE, a motion to reconsider the vote by sawniill districts in the United States, and I know something which the bill was passed was laid on the table. about sawmills; and I know that they can and will be run with- PROTECTION OF FOREST RESERV .A.TIONS. ou'ti free ?mber.: I ask for the previous question on the engross- Mr. McRAE. I call up the bill (H. R. 119) to protect public ment, third. reading, a;nd passage of the bill. . . . forest reservations. The prev10"!JB question was ordered, and under t~e opera¥on I The SPEAKER. This bill is on the Union Calendar. The hour thereof. the b1ll was m:dered to be ~ngros~ed for a t¥rd ~eading; has neariy expired, only two minutes remaining, and, if there be an:d, bemg engrossed, It was according}y Iead the third time, and no objection, the hour will be considered as closed and this bill passed. . . · . b will go over until to-morrow. qn motio~ of .Mr. McRAE, a ~otion to reconsider the vote Y Mr. PICKLER. Will that bill come up to-morrow, Mr. Speaker? which the bill was passed. ,:was laid on the table. The SPEAKER. Calling it up to-day, the committee will have EMMA .A.. RIPLEY. . . one. hour for its consideration to-morrew. Mr. McRAE. .Mr. Speaker, I novy call "!JP the bill '(S. 447) to Mr. -PICKLER. If the gentleman would consume his full hour authC?rize the Secretary of the Inten.or to Issue a duplicate of a to-day, would he still be entitled to any time to-morrow on this bill? certam land warrant to Emma A. Ripley. The SPEAKER. Yes. The rule is that each committee shall . The bill was read, as follows: · be allowed an hour; but if at'the end of the hour there is a bill Be it .enacte~, etc .. That the Sec:retary of t)le Interior be, and he is hereby, I under consideration, then, if it be necessary to consume so much auth9nzed 1!<> ISsue to Emma A. Rtple"y duplicate of one Portei11eld land war· time the committee are entitled to an hour on the next day for rant ISSued m pursuance of the act of Congress approved Aprilll, 1860, num- • . . . bered 60 for 40 acres upon satisfactory proof of ownership and loss of same, the consideration of that bill. and the execution of' a bond, with good. and sufllcient sureties. in double the Mr. PICKLER. Well, the longer this bill goes over the better market value of the warrant so to be issued, to be aiJproved by the Secretary I am satisfied of the Interior, conditioned to indemnify the United States against the. pres- · ' • · entation by an innocent holder of the alleged lost warrant; ~d that sa1d du- PRINTIN~ BILL. plicate shall have all the legal force and effect as had the ongmal. The SPEAKER. The morning hour has expired, and the gentle- Mr. PICKLER. Let us hear the report. man from Tennessee [Mr. RICHARDSON] calls up the conference The report (by Mr. McRAE) was read, as follows: . - , report on the printing bill. The Clerk will report the title. The Committee on the Public Lands, to. who~ was referr~d the bill (S. «?'' The Clerk read as follows· to authorize the Secretary of the Intenor to ISSUe a duplicate of a certain · land warrant to Emma A. Ripley, have had the same under consideration and - A bill (H. R. 2650) providing for the public printing and binding and the report it back with the recommendation that it do pass. Idistribution of public documents. · For the facts, the c~mmittee adopts the Senate report ·No. 211, Fifty-third· M.r. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker I hope that Congress, second sesswn, and the Department correspondence. - . . . . • . The bill was ordered to a third reading; and it was accordingly after the full and complete discusswn of. this bill which we had read the third time, and passed. 1 on yesterday we can now_get a ':ote upon It. So far as I am con- On motion of Mr. McRAE, a motion to reconsider the vote by cerned I do no~ care. to ~cuss I~ further, and unless some other hich the bill was passed wa-s laid on the table. gentleman desrres discussiOn I will now ask for a vote. w Mr. COOMBS. Mr. Speaker, I ask the gentleman to consent to • MILITARY BOUNTY LAND wARRANTS, ETC. at least fifteen minutes' discussion on each side before calling the Mr. McRAE. Mr. Sp~.aker, I ca~ up ~e Senate bill. (S. 6~9) previous question. to provide for the ~location and satisfaction of out~tanding mill- Mr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. I will ag1·ee to that. tary bounty, land warrants and certificates of location under sec- Mr. MORSE. I want about three minutes on this bill. tion 3 of the act approved June 2, 1858. 1\Ir. WARNER. And I want to occupy some time. The bill was read, as follows: Mr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. All right; but I hope that Be it enacted, etc., That in addition to the benefits now given thereto by law-1 ~entlemen will consume as little time as possible. all ~tisfi~d mili~ry boU?-tY land warra"!lts under any act of Congress, ana Mr. COOMBS. Mr. Speaker I think that when we adjoln.-ned unsatisfied mdemmty certificates of locatiOn under the act of Congress ap- t d b f this' H d th · · proved June 2, 1858, whether heretofore or hereafter issued, shall be receiv- yes er ay every mem ~r o . ouse was .n;n. er e rmpress10n able at the rate of $1..25 per acre in payment or part payment for any lands that the present Public Printer had no critiCISm to make upon e~tered under the desert-land la~ of ~rch 3, 1887, entitled. "A;l act to pro- this bill. It seems that in the replies of the gentleman from Ten VIde for the sale of desert lands m certam States and Terntones " and the t ti th t b · t h . f . d ot t th - t amendments thereto, the timber-culture law of March 3,1873, entitled "An nesse.e o q:ues ons on a su Jec e Ie ene n. o e p~ese~ act to encourage the growth of timber on the Western prairies," and the Public Pnnter, but to the one who preceded him. If this bill amendments there¥>; the timb~r and stoue law of. Jun!3 3, 1878, entitled"~ were limited simply to the question of the distribution of public act forth~ sale of tim1>er lands m the States of Califorma, Oregon, Nebras!ra, documents I should have no criticism to make upon it· but it con- and Washington Territory," and the amendments thereto, or for lands which . • . may be sold at public auction, except such lands as shall have been purchased templates fundamental changes In the conduct of the affarrs of from any Indian tribe within ten years last past. the Printing Office, tending to bring it back to the old order of The SPEAKER. The question is on the third reading of the bill. things which prevailed when there was so much corruption in Mr. PICKLER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to hear the report on that office. . . that bill read, or to have some explanation of it. Congress took cognizance ·of those-evils, and placed the respon- The Clerk read the ~port in part. sibility for the proper conduct of the office on the slioulders of one Mr. McRAE.- Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will permit me I man, appointed by the President, made him give a sufficient bond, think I can save some time by explaining briefly the point in this and held him responsible in penalties. This bill, in many of its bill. . The act of March 2, 1879, took away from the holders of provisions, undoes that system, and by irresponsible commissions, warrants the right to use them except in 11'Iissonri and in the com- not necessarily composed of experts, relieves the Public Printer of mutation of homesteads. It almost repudiated the military war- his responsibility and checks the efficient working of the office. rants. This bill authorizes their use in payment of desert lands We are called upon to-day, without adequate discussion of these · or any other kind of lands that can be paid for in ca-sh under the points, to pass upon this very great question. I hold in my hand law. Thebilldoesnotprovideforanynewmethodfordisposing of some observationsof'the Public Printer upon the bill, and weare lands, but it authorizes the use of land warrants heretofore issued bound to give them due weight, because he is there and sees and at the rate at which they were issued, $1.2·5 an acre. It provides undeTstan\ls the working of his office. From th.e e observations for the redemption of the wan·ants. · i~ appears that in many cases the provisions ofthis bill, if enacted
., 58 CONGRESSIONAL RECOIID~HOUSE. DEOE}.IBER 5·,
into la.w, would impede the working of the office, would relieve I claim that this bill is faulty in that respect; a.nd. close by say the Public Plinter of his proper responsibility, and, furthermore, ing what I said in the beginning, that so far as this bill applies to would open a road whereby the .Joint Committee on Printing the distributi.on of documents I believe in it thoroughly; I believe, could control the patronage of the Government Printing Office, as too, that the laws with relation to our public printing should be well as that of many other Departments of the Government. codified.. But I believe that the proposed legislation now befo}:e Mr. BOATNER. They Q..o that now. us should be perfected before it passes into la.w. I understand the Mr. COOMBS. I simply say tha.tsuchis the statement of those gentleman from Tennessee to agree with me that there are grave who ought to know. And this bill provides that under the threat defects in this bill; but he says it can be perfected aft-erward. Sir, of removing printing offices from these various Departments a no time is so good· for correcting errors as the present. whip can be brought to bear upon them to force patronage into It is not good policy to enact laws thatweknowto be defective, those offices. It also puts the va1·ious contractors for supplies in that open doors to con:uption, relying upon om· ability to change the powei of the commission ap~ointed to supersede the Public them in the future. Printer. ' I wish also most pojntedly to call the attention of the House to Mr. Speaker, if my time permits, I ask that theClerkreadsome the fact that the provisions of the bill whereby a committee of observations made. by the Public Printer in I'elation to the various Congress becomes an executive branch of the Government is un- provisions of the bill. precedented, and is dangerous ground for us to venture upon. The Clerk read as follow&: I regret that the short time allowed me has not.. permitted me to Page 6, section 16. This section is too broad. If it is desirable that the Joint go into details, but trust that the Honse will reject it. Committee on Printing should participate in the matter of purchase of the [Here the hainmer fell.l largo line of materials of all k:fuds (not including pape1: otherwise provided :Mr. W .A.RNER. 1\fr. Speaker, if there is one other man in this for) u...c::ed in the office it should be limited to arlicles specified in thiS act, and no\ include the large line of miscellaneous items of matQrial which: is neces- House who approaches, in his anxiety to see this bill p3B8, the sarily pmchased weekly, and the necessity for which can not he anticipated anxiety exhibited by the chairman of the Committee on Printing, until called for by the operations of the office. that ot,~~- man lB. myself Btlt srr· I am ot 't · d Page lj, section 9. Section 7 of this act provides thn,t the PuNic P1·inter shall ' = · · ' ' n qm.: e so can'Ie compare every lot of paper received under contract and accept it only when away, as I fear is the gentlem.:'ID from Tennessee, with the merits it conforms in every particular to the sample on which the contractwas based. of this bill as to be unable- to see what seem to me very serious Section 9 proposes to make a commission none of whom may be paper ex- defects in the meas:ure. perts. It is not wise or necessary to have a. commission by statute. The 0 th 3d d f A t 1a bef Public Printer shonld be left charged with the responsibility in this ma..tter. n e ay o ugus st, ore any conference report His superintendent of the pa;per warehouse fir, or should be, a paper expert. had been made, it was proposed to concur in the amendments of He, with such aid a-s the Public Printer desire&, cJID be sa-fely charged with a.ll the Senate on the ground that they were immaterial. The House the responsibility of examination in the xruttter of paper and material pnr- refused to concur,· and unon the motion of the gentleman from chased, after safeguards as to contracts and sam:ples ara provided f shall determin~ the condition of presses and other machinery and. material tives were bad. I have respect for the man who magnifies his used in the Government Printing Office, with a view to condemnation. officel and who is always willing to do more ~d mme for the In that case the amendment of the Senate, as will be seen, public servic~. ~ut when ~e. com~ to lo.ok at 1t from the sta~d transfigures a petty board of condemnation, ~hie~ the House point of a legislative body, it IS an rmpertinence for that commit pro1'-ided, and·which, upon the call of the PuJ:>lic Printer, was .to tee to ask for the power that is involv~d by the Senate am~nd determine the condition of old presses, machinery, and material ments and it would be a breach of public trust for us to put into used in the Government Printing Office. Instead,_ the Senate their hands the power to control the patronage of this great public amendment changes this board, which, under the influence of office, with its thousands of skilled employees, utterly unpmtected the Joint Committee on Printing-for it is given tJ;le power to des by the civil.. service law. ignate one of its members-is to pass on all supplies f?r the Gov 1\ir. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman ernment Printino- Office and foi· the Government bmdery. In from Massachusetts [Mr. MORSE} desires three minutes, which I other words, by that Sena te ame?dmen~whlch it~ propose~ to yielcl to him. leave in the bill-it is sought to giVe the JOmt comnuttee practical 1\Ir .. MORSE~ :Mr. Speaker, lam in favor of this bill, but I take control of all the purchases and deJ?.veriea by the contractors to advantage of the latitude al!owed i!l this debate to call attention this enormo118 office of all the material there used. to an item of printin~ iD; another Depar~enftof the G~ve~nment. Further, on page 13 it is provided.. by a Senate. amendm~nt that The Bureau of Pnnting and Engravmg IS now prmting our the Public Printer, with the approval of the .Tomt C 60 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. DECEMBER. 5, That refers to contracts for paper, and the only point in it is prepared with great care. It is the result of the labors of the that it provides that the joint committee shall approve the bond joint committee, not simply of this, but of two preceding Con that this contractor is to give. Surely, no man can imagine that gresses. The bill as presented has been presented in its present a member of Congress wauld attempt to use any power given to shape almost for the last four years in the different branches of him to approve a bond of that kind to prevent any contractor of Congress, and has been fully discussed in all its different bearings. fering to do so from furnishing paper to the Government Printing I stated on yesterday that every line and section of this bill was Office. prepared when the Public Printer, the immediate predecessor of Then the gentleman, objects because power is given the Public the present efficient Public Printer, was present, aiding, abetting, Printer to abolish some branch printing offices with the approval and assisting in trying to prepare a bill that would conduct the of the Joint Committee on Printing. Mr. Speaker, ther~ are business of this great printing department properly. about four or five branch printing offices in this city, and it is not It was not to get advantage of anybody; it was not to take necessary to abolish them, I suppose. I do not suppose they will partisan advantage of anybody. We had the assistance not only ever be abolished; but if the time comes when they should be abol of the Public Printer, but of the foreman of printing, of the fore ished, the former Public Printer, 1\Ir. Palmer, stated to the com man of the bindery, and of all the experts in that great working mittee that he would not like to abolish them without the ap department of the Government. We had the testimony of the proval of Congress or some representative of Congress. There experts of this Honse who have been engaged in handling docu fore it was provided that the joint committee simply would act ments, and also of the experts in the other branch of Congress with him in approving his course in abolishing the offices hereto who had been so engaged. We called before us experts from the fore established by law or put into operation by regulation of one various Executive Departments of the Government. We called or other of the Departments. the superintendent of documents, Dr. Ames, who has been re Well, then, the gentleman objects because if it becomes neces ferred to here. We had the benefit of his testimony and his long sary for the Public Printer to lease some extra wareroom that experience in handling documents, and I wish to say here that should be approved by the committee. Why not let it be ap his suggestions, from his familiadty with the subject, were worth proved by somebody? The Public Printer wants it to be approved a great deal to us in preparing this bill. by somebody, simply as a protection to himself, to prevent criti J\IIr. COOMBS. I will ask the gentleman whether Dr. Ames cism and avoid controversy. The Committee on Printing do not approves of all the provisions of this bill. want to lease any property to the United States so far as the mem Mr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. I will answer that, because bers of the Honse committee are concerned, and I suppose so far I have his opinion in writing, and it is not marked "personal." · as the Senate committee are concerned. The gentleman from [Laughter.] New York [Mr. CooMBS] undertook to have read some sugges Mr. COOMBS. I have it in WTiting, too. tions made by the present Public Printer upon certain sections in 1\fr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. Well, I say that Dr. .Ames this bill. 'does favor this bill. First, however, I will say that it is immate I do not see any use of bringing the present Public Printer into rial whether he does or not. . this issue. He is not opposing this bill. I had a note from him Mr. COOMBS. Butyouhave citedhim as anauthorityinfavor this morning marked" personal," for which reason I will not read of the bill. it; but inasmuch as the gentleman from New York h;ts qu'Oted Mr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. Yes, and I will show you from him, I will read one sentence. He says: that he does favor it. At the same time he is le~slated out of · The memorandum which I furnished as presented is confirmed by the facts. office by the bill, and it could not be expected, considering human I do not pretend to have had time to digest this bill as I would if I had time. nature, that he would be warmly in favor of all of its provisions. And then he says that he need not be quoted. Mr. HOLMAN. He is in favor of the bill, though, all the same. Mr. BARNES. Does he say he i~ in favor of the bill? That 1\fr. RICHARDSON of Tenneseee. Here is his language, in a sentence does not indicate it. report made by him to the Secretary of the Interior. It has not Mr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. He says this. He ~ys- yet been printed for the public, but I have an advance copy of it and I read what he says. He gave me this copy himself this morn I told Mr. Co.oMBS of the merit of the codification of the laws a.s in this bill. ing, and it is as follows: Mr. DUNN. Everybody is in favor of that part of the bill. The printing bill also favorably modifies the classifl.cation of documents and But he does not say he is in favor of the bill. , aims to prevent hereafter accumulations of undistributed documents, such as now encumber certain folding rooms of the Government. As a whole, the Mr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. He does not point out any bill is the most oomprehensive and the best relating to this subject that has objections.· ever been presented to Congress, and, with certain modifications which may Mr. COOMBS. Oh, yes. be -yet made, not in the least affecting its integrity, its enactment into a law, Mr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. Except that he says in cer :~c~\~e~~.;:gi~J ~:cff:1~r~~t~c;fo::tf~~g~~~· without question, sub- tain points and details the bill could be made more perfect. There is an express declaration of this ~entleman, an official Mr. COOMBS. And these we are powerless to get at. who has expert knowledge on the subject, In favor of the bill as Mr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. If there is any place in this it is presented here now. He handed it to me this morning in my bill where there is a defect in the details and it is one that is nee- committee room. And I repeat here and now that Dr. Ames does • essary to correct, the Committee on Printing is a privileged com favor the passage of this bill. Not that he favors every section, mittee in nearly all matters referred to it, and they will take im every item, every line in the bill, but substantially he favors the mediate steps to reform those irregularities in those matters to bill; and I sa.y again that his testimony before the joint committee which he refers. I only want to SS;Y this, because the, criticisms was yery important and valuable in aiding us in preparing the of the gentleman do not reach the merits of this bill at all except bill. He attended many sessions ot our committee by our request in some insignificant way. . while we were preparing the bill, and gave us very valuable assist Mr. COOMBS. Ohl ohl . ance. M.r. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. The cdticisms of gentlemen Mr. COOMBS. And I say that I have a list of some twenty to-day are simply in reference to the contracts for paper, and in amendments that Dr. Ames suggests to this bill. reference to leases, and in some other immaterial matters. Mr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. Well, I could suggest one 1\fr. DUNN. Will the gentleman allow me to askhimone ques hundi·ed amendments. But the question is, is this bill a sub tion? stantial improvement? Does it tend in the right directi9n? Is Mr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. Yes. there anything improper in it? Now, I have discussed the bill Mr. DUNN. Now, if this letter of the Public Printer is "per quite fully-- sonal" at all, it is ''personal" in all. If a portion of it is to be Mr. COOMBS rose. read, we have a right to the reading of the whole of it. That is Mr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. The gentleman from New all. York has had his time, and I do not want to enter into further Mr. RICHARDSON ofT"ennessee. Then thegentlemancanread discussion with him now. it. [Handing the letter to Mr. DuNN.] But inasmuch as it is 1\fr. COOMBS". I only want to ask you a few questions. Yon marked "personal," I stated I would not put it in the RECOR:6. lt have said that these suggestions of the Public Printer that I have is not meant to be a private letter. read-- Mr. DUNN. I say that the Public Printer is opposed to this Mr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I can not go bill; and I pledge my honor as a member of this Honse that he is into further discussion with the gentleman now about the Public opposed to it. Printer, when I have read fronihis personal letter, and when he Mr. WARNER. Can not we have harmony restored by having told me this morning that he had not had time to digest the bill. all the letter printed except the word '' personal? " (Laughter.] That, I am sure, is true. This bill is the result of years of earnest Mr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. The gentleman can read the work on the part of men who have had the time, who have taken letter. It was marked "personal," and I would not have referred the time to digest this subject, and who have done their Vf1fY best to it at all had not the gentleman from New York [Mr. Coo~Bs] to present a satisfactory bill. Now, while I do not claim that printed his memoranda. there may not be defects in the bill, I do undertake to say from The bill is not perfect in all its details. It may be subject to my experience that it is a vast improvement upon the present law, just criticisms in some immaterial matters. But the bill has been and I np.dertake to say further that it ~ be of great assistance 1894. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. to the Committee on Printing in the next House of Representa- Lefever, Montgomery, Richardson, Tenn. Strong, · tives. - Linton, Morse, Robbins, Swanson, Maguire, Moses, Rusk, Talbott, Md. I do not know who will compose that committee. I take it-if Marsh, Murray, Russell, Conn. Tawney, ~ am not giving out a secret-that I shall not be chairman of that Marshall, Neill, Russell, Ga. Taylor, Tenn. committee in the next Congress. [Laughter.] I think that the Marvin., N.Y. Northway, Ryan, Van Voorhis, Ohio McCall, Page, Sayers, Wadsworth, gentleman who will fill the Speaker's chair in the next House, and McCleary, Minn. Paschal, Scranton, Walker, will designate the committees, is not likely to confer that honor McCreary, Ky. Patterson, Sherman, Washington, upon me. [Laughter.] I have the next Speaker in my mind's McCulloch, Payne, Smith, Wheeler, Ala. McDowell, Pence, Snodgrass, Wheeler, ·ill. eye, and I might mention his name, but I refrain from doing so. McEttrick, Pendleton, Tex. Springer, White, [Laughter.] But, Mr. Speaker, whoever has charge of the sub McGann, Perkins, Stallings, Williams, Miss.· Ject of printing in the next House will find that this bill, which I McKaig, Phillips, Stephens~ . Woomer, McNagny, Pickler, Stone, C. vv. Wright. trust will then be a law, will give him great assistance. I wish I Mercer, Quigg, had time to go again into some of the details of the bill, but I must Stone, W. A. NAYS-97. . \ not do so. Under the existing law a concurrent resolution has had ,Abbott, Crawford, Latimer, Reed, to be presented in this House or in the other House of Congress in Alexander, Dalzell, Layton, Reilly, order to print every single document that is printed for Congress. De Armond, Lester, Ritc-hie, ~~~?N.H. De Forest, Little, Schermerhorn, It is necessary first to get the consent of the Speaker for recogni Bankhead, Denson, Livingston., Settle, tion, and then to elbow one's self in some .way to the front in the Barnes, Donovan, Lockwood., Shell, ,morning hom· to secure consideration for such resolutions. I speak Bartlett, Dunn, Loudenslager, 8perry, Earwig, Erdman, Lynch, Stockdale, of documents which are printed every year. Beckner, Gardner. Mahon, Stone, Ky. This bill provides that all those annual publications which at Beltzhoover, Geissenhainer, Mallory. Tarsney, present are provided for by concurrent resolutions shall be printed Berry, Grady, Martin, Ind. Tate, Bowers, Cal. Graham, McAleel", Terry, • without the necessity of such action by Congress. They will be Bretz, Hall, Minn. McDearmon, Tracey, printed under this 'general law authorizing the work to be done, Brickner, Hare, McLaurin, Turner, Ga. thus saving the time and trouble now expended in gett:i,ng recog Bundy, Harter, McRae, Turpin, Cabaniss, Haugen, Meyer, Tyler, nition and consideration for these resolutions. The bill, in my Cadmus, Henderson, N.C. Moore. Updegraff, judgment-and I make the statement on the sworn testimony of Caruth, Hepburn, Morgan, Wanger, , experts-will save $200,000 every year to too Government of the Catchings. Herman, Mutchler, Warner, Clancy, Hine ~ , O'NeiL Mass. Wells, United States. It does not increase expenditures, nor does it take Oonn, Hooker, Miss, Outhwaite, . Wise, ·away from this House or from its committee any of their powers. Coombs, Hull, Pearson, Wolverton. I repeat here and now that the committees of the two Houses are Cooper, Fla. Izlar, Pendleton, W. Va Cooper, Tex. Kribbs, Pigott, left equal under this bill, and that the Senate committee has no Covert, Lane, Ray. sort of priority or advantage over the House committee. They ANSWERED "PRESENT "-2. are left entirely equal in every respect. . Cooper, Ind. _ Curti<>, Kans. In view of the vast saving I have described and of the great ad NOT VOTING-115. vantages which this bill will confer on us in 'the immediate distri Adams. Ky. Dinsmore, Houk, Robertson. La. bution of six or eight hundred thousand volumes of documents Adams, Pa., Dockery, Hudson, Robinson, Pa. now molding in the a.lcoves of the basement of this Capitol, and in view of the other vast reforms to which I might, if I chose to fl~~~~~n. ~e;;;w. ~~on, N.Dak. ~t~~s. Allen, Edmunds, · Jone.S, Simpson, ocpupy the time, refer, and which I have heretofore pointed out Avery. Ellis; Ky. Loud. Sipe, in great detail, I think the bill ought to pass. I move the previous Baker, Kans. English, N.J. Lucas, Somers, question, Mr. Speaker, on agreeing to the confe1·ence report. Bartholdt; Fielder, Maddox, Sorg, Belden, ' Fithian, Ma gner. Stevens, Mr. DUNN. If the gentleman will allow me the time I would Bell, Colo. Fyan, McDannold, Storer, like to ask him one question. Bingham, Gea·ry. McKeighan, Strait, Mr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. I will yield for a question. Black, ill. Goldzier, McMillin, ijtraus, Blair, Goodnight, Meiklejohn, Sweet, Mr. DUNN. I would like to know whether the gentleman used Boen, Gorman, Meredith, Talbert, S. C. the word "abetting" in its full sense-whether he meant to con Bower, N.C. Griffin, Mich. Milliken, Taylor, Ind. vey the meaning which the word ordina,rily implies. Branch, Hager, Money, Thomas, Mr. RICH4RDSON of Tennessee. I do not remember to have Breckinridge, Haines, Moon, Tucker, Bryar, Hall, Mo. N ewlands, Turner, Va. used the word. · Bunn, Hammond, Ogden, Van Voorhis~ N. Y Mr. DUNN. You said that the former PublicPrinterwas with Burnes, · Harrison. O'Neill, Mo. Waugh, you, aiding and abetting you in this matter. Caminetti, Hartman, P aynter, Weadock, Campbell, Hatch, Post, Wever, Mr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee. I do say that the. former Capehart, Hayes, P owers, Whiting, Public Printer was with us, aiding and abetting in the preparation Causey. Heard, Price, Williams, ill. Clark, Mo. Heiner, Randall, Wilson, Ohio of this bill; and I maintain that we prepared a good bill, which Clarke. Ala. Henderson, ill. Rayner, Wilson, Wash. ought to pass. If the gentleman is satisfi~d with his display of Cogswell. Henderson, Iowa R eyburn, Wilson, W.Va. wit, I am. I move the previous question on agTeeing to the con-· Cooper, Wis. Henry. Richards, Ohio, WoodarC'. ference report. . Culberson, Hopkins, Pa. Richardson, Mich. The question being taken, the previous question was' ordered, So the report of the conference committee was agreed to. . there being on a division (called for by Mr. WARNER)-ayes 122, The following pairs were announced: · noes 0. . Until further notice: The question being. taken on agreeing to the conference report, Mr. GOODNIGHT with Mr. HAGER. there were on a division (called for by Mr. WARNER)-ayes 85, Mr. ALLEN with Mr. RANDALL. noes 28. -- · Mr. SoRG with Mr. VAN VOORHIS of New York. Mr. DUNN. I call-for the yeas and nays. Mr. ALDERSON with Mr. SwEET. The yeas and nays were ordered, 26 voting in favor thereof _, Mr. CLARKE of Alabama with Mr. LouD. more than one-fifth of the last vote. Mr. HATCH with Mr. PosT. Mr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee and Mr. DUNN were appointed as Mr. RoBERTSON of Louisiana with Mr. WILSON of Washington. tellers to act during the call of the yeas and nays. Mr. MoNEY with Mr. AITKEN. The question was taken; and there were-yeas 139, nays 97, an- Mr. CULBERSON with Mr. COGSWELL, swered " present" 2, not voting 115; as follows: . For this day: YE.AS-139. Mr. JoNEs with Mr. REYBURN. Aldrich, Chickering, Draper, Harris. Mr. MADDox with Mr. MooN. Apsley~ Childs, ElliS, Oreg. Hendrix, , Mr. WOODARD with M.r. MEIKLEJOHN. BabcOcK, Cobb, Ala. English, CaL Hicks, Mr. HARlttSON with Mr. WEYER. Bailey1 Cobb, Mo. EBloe, Hitt, Baldwm. Cockran, Epes, Holman, Mr. DINSMORE with Mr. ADAMS of Kentucky. Bell, Tex. Cockrell, Everett, Hooker, N.Y. Mr. DOCKERY with Mr. HENDERSON of Iowa. Black, Ga. Coffeen, 'Wyo. Fletcher, H opkins, ill. On this vote: Bland, Coffi.n,Md. Forman, Hulick, Boatner, Cornish, Funk, Hunter, Mr. McMILLIN with Mr. CuRTIS of Kan s a.~ . Boutelle, Cousins, Gear, Hutcheson, Mr. WILLIAMS of Illinois with :Mr. lKIRT. Broderick, Cox, Gillet, N.Y. Johnson, Ind. Mr. BLAND. My colleague, Mr. FYAN, is absent on account Bromwell, Cram, Gillett, Mass. J ohnson. Ohio be Brookshire, Curtis, N. Y. Gresham, Kem , · of sickness. I ask that he excused. Brosius, Daniels, Griffin, Wis. Kiefer, The SPEAKER. Without objectio:rt; the gentleman from Mis Brown, Davey , Grosvenor, souri [Mr. FYAN] will be excused indefinitely on account of sick Burrows, Davis, Grout, ~~f~re, ness. Bynum, Dingley, Grow , Lacey. Cannon, Cal. Dolliver, H ainer, Lapham, There was no objection. Cannon, ill. Doolittle, Harmer, Lawson, The result of the vote was announced as above stated. 62 . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSEo DECE:rtiBER 5, On motion of Mr. RICHARDSON of Tennessee, a motion to to conform to and obey such order of the Commission, but only until the de cision ot the court upon the hearing. In all other respects the provisions o! reconsider the last vote was laid on the table. section 16 of this act for the enforcement of the other orders and require REPJ)RT OF INTERSTATE COMMERCE COIDIISSION. ments of the Commission, including those relating to appeals to the Supreme Court of the United States. shall app1y to sucn a. proceeding." The SPEAKER, by unanimous consent, laid before the House a SEC. 2. That section 6 of said act, as amended by an act approved .March 2 letter from the chairman of the Interstate Commerce Commission, 1889, be, and the same is hereby, amended by adding thereto the following clauses at the end of-the present section: transmitting the annual report of the Commission to Congress; "The copies of schedules and tariffs of rates, fares, and charges filed with which was referred to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign the Commission, as herein provided, shall be preserved as public records in Commerce, and ordered to be printed, the custody of the Commission and shall be receivable in evidence as being prima facie what th~r purport to be for the purpose of in>estigations by the AMENDMENT TO INTERSTATE-COMMERCE ACT. Commis... of the com~ion." · # not only to control the transporlatiDn but it has enabled it to con SEC. 6. Tliat a new section be added to said actim.JILediately after section 16, trol the markets in which the beef products are sold, and the priee to be numbered as sec_tion 16a. "SEC. 16a. That after a recommendation, decision, or order has been made of every bullock on every fannin the South and West. That is a by the Commission in a proceeding, any party thereto may at any time make grievance that ought to be remedied. . · a.p1Jlication for a rehearmg of the same, or any matter determined therein, It may be asked ·if the inteTstate-commerce law does not :fu:rnish and it shall be lawful for the Commission, in its discretion, to grant such rehearing if sutH.cient reason therefor be made to appear. Applications for an adequate remooy. It has penalties a-ttaching td the crime- of rehearing shall be governed by such general rules as the Commission may allowing rebates and cutting rates and granting favors to large 64 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. DECEMBE:R 5, shippers. But you mustbearinmind that the law asitisnow writ fore the Commission, upon which the Commission acts, ought to ten is not enforced, because it is so framed as· to fix the penalty only be made record evidence, and if an order of the Commission is to on the shipper and the officials of the railroad companies. When be reviewed in the courts it ought to be done upon that reCord, a crime, therefore, is committed, the shipper and the officials of and if the court desires further evidence upon the subject it ought the railroad companies arealikeparticepscriminis. Consequently, to be taken through the instrumentality of the Commission itself, when a shipper receives a rebate and is indicted in one of the and the Commission should be given the oppOI'tunity when the c.ourts, the officials' of the railroad, although they may be offered further testimony is taken to modify its order, if it sees proper to as witnesses in the case, simply answer, "We can not testify, for do so, and to make a supplemental report to the court. we will not cri.m.i.mtte ourselves." And so when one of the officials Now, again, the committee are of the opinion that the law of the railroad company is indicted, the answer comes back on the ought to be modified so as to require raih·oad companies to indulge part of the shipper, '' I Will not testify, because my testi.m.gny in more publicity, to answer all questions propounded to them, would result in criminating myself under the law." and at the instance of the Commission to make annual reports Mr. TERRY. Will tbe gentleman permit an inten-uption just showing fully their entire transactions for the current year. there? This is the general purport of the reasons for the proposed leg- Mr. PATTERSON. Yeis, sir. islation. · Mr. TERRY. I will ask the gentleman from Tennessee if, in Now I will discuss the bill. The first section of this bill pro the law as now proposed by him, any provision is made whereby vides: parties can be compelled to testify. . That it shall be unlawful for different and competing common carriers. Mr. PATTERSON. I think so; and when I come to that part subject to the provisions of this act, to enter into any contract, agreemen~ or arrangement for the division or apportionment among themselves or with of the bill I will explain it. other carriers of the whole or any portion of their traffic, or any of their Mr. TERRY. That 1s what I wish to know, as I have not been gross or net earnin~. able to find any such provision in the bill. - - That is simply an affirmation of the law as it now exists; and Mr. PATTERSON. Very well; I will come directly to the then the bill provides that they may enter into written conti·act, provisions of the bill, and will briefly review the various sections arrangement, or agreement for a division of their net or· gross of it. ' earnings and file it with the Interstate Commission; and unless Now, as the law stands it is practically impossible to secure a the contract is disapproved within twenty days by the Commission, conviction either of a shipper or of any official of a railroad com because in its judgment it will result in unreasonable rates, un pany. Again, it is incontestibly true that railroads enter into just discrimination, or inefficient service to the- public, or other various arrangements among themselves for the division of busi wise contravene the policy of the law, it shall go into effect. ness; but these a1·rangements are illegal, and the result is that Then the section goes on and provides that the Commission shall there are constant breaches of these illegal arrangements, and it have jurisdiction at all times over that pooling arrangement or throws the business of railroa-ding into inextricable confusion. contract, to investigate, to look into its operations, and see how it I desire to impress upon the House that, so far as freight and affects the public. passenger rates are concerned, they are cheaper in this counti·y Mr. MARSH. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a ques than in any other country on the globe. For instance, the passen tion? ger rate in this country is only 2.14 cents per mile, while it is 2.91 Mr. PATTERSON. Let me explain the bill, and then I will cents in France and Germany. answer questions. I would' rather take up the sections and go l\ir. MALLORY. That is the cost, not the rate. through them and then yield to questions. Mr. PATTERSON. No, it is the rate; and the freight and pas I repeat, after the pooling arrangement has gone into effect it senger rates of this- country are about 35 per cent lower than they is within the jprisdiction of the Commission to investigate it, to are in Great Britain. So that the American people have not much inquire into its operations, to see how it affects the public; and if reason to complain of the general average, on the amounts charged the Commission should at any time conclude that it has the effect by the ;railroads for passenger and freight rates. Their grievance of subjecting the public to unreasonable rates or unjust discrimi lies in the discrimination which takes place in laying the burdens nation or to inadequate service, or that it otherwise contravenes on some people and lifting them from the shoulders of others; in the policy of the interstate-commerce law, then it is in its power placing the lightest burdens upon the great shipper, and making to disapprove that contract; and by virtue of the disapproval the them heaviest upon the shoulders of the small shipper. contract, at a time fixed in the order-not less than thirty days Mr. CANNON of illinois. If the gentleman will allow me, from the time it is entered-is to become wholly inoperative. there is just a question of fact that I should like to be informed Mr. MARSH. I would like to ask the gentleman a question a.bout. You say that the rates to the public are less in this country riO'ht there. ·. than abro~d, whereas the gentleman from Florida [Mr. 1'.1A.LLORY1 Mr. PATTERSON. I would greatly prefer to explain the bill challenges that statement, and says it is the cost to the railroaa without being interrupted. which is less. I do not know what the fact is, and I should be The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman can not be inter glad to know now. rupted without his consent. Mr. PA•rTERSON. Well, now, I will state-- Mr. PATTERSON. Some members of the committee, and I Mr. CANNON of illinois. I wish to know which statement is confess that I was one of them; insisted that the order of the In correct. terstate Commission should have the effect of putting a permanent Mr. PATTERSON~ It is the costof transportation. Theaver end to the pooling arrangement, that it should be its death, that age cost of transporting a passenger 1 mile in those countries is it should no longer or ever thereafter be enforced at all. How 2.91 cents, and in this country it is 2.14 cents. ..The average cost ever, it was insisted by others that that ought not to be done with of transporting a ton of freight 1 mile in those cou:t;t.tries is 1.46 out giving the companies composing the pool the right to appeal cents. In this country it is only 0. 97 of a cent. to the courts and to have the order of the Commission reviewed, Mr. CANNON of illinois. Does that mean the cost to the rail- on the ground that the courts were the last resort of all litigants, road o1· the cost to the customer? and that under every system the right ought always to exist of a Mr. PATTERSON. That is the cost of ti·ansportation. ~ final appeal to them. Very well, the matter was finally settled in Mr. CANNON of illinois. To the customer or to the raih·oad? the committee by providing in the bill that, after the order of Mr. SNODGRASS. To the railroad. disapproval was entered, the pooling contract or arrangement Mr. PATTERSON. I understand to the railroad. should become inoperative; but the pooling railroads should have Mr. HAUGEN. Does the gentleman know what the charge is? the right to fil~ a petition in the circuit court of the United States Mr. PATTERSON. Let me explain the bill, and when I get asking for a 1·eview of the order, and that an appeal could be taken · through with that then I shall be glad to yield to any question. from the decision of the circuit court·to the Supreme Court of the Mr. HAUGEN. While you are on this point I should ~like to United States, and then the court of last resort could pass upon lmow about this. the order of disapproval. Mr. PATTERSON. When I get through I will yield. Now, Mr. COX. Will my colleague yield to me one moment? Mr. Speaker, there is another difficulty in regard to this interstate Mr. PATTERSON. I would much rather go through with the commerce law, and it is in respect to the procedure under the law. bill. The Interstate Commerce Commission is placed at great inconven Mr. COX. I wanted to call your attention to one feature of the ience in enforcing it, by reason of the inadequacy of the procedure bill. - section of the law. For instance, if a complaint is made before Mr. PATTERSON. I would rather you would do that after I the Commission, and the Commission issues an order, and that or get thi·ough with the discussion of the different sections of the der is brought before the circuit court of the United State for re bill. view, the evidence taken before the Commission is no evidence Mr. COX. You have run over the point of it. \ whatever before the court, and· the court proceeds to try the case Mr. PATTERSON. I will run over the points in the bill, and de novo. then I will yield. Now, the result is that in a majority of cases the Commission Now, Mr. Speaker, during the pendency of this petition in the passes upon one case, whereas the court passes upon another. circuit court of the United States for a review of the order dis The committee are of the opinion that all the evidence taken be- approving the contract, and during the pendency of the appeal tf> 1894. CONGRESSIONAL . RECORD-HOUSE. 65 . the Supreme Court' of the United States, the pooling cont~·act is city of Chicago there were in a single year as many as a hundred nugatory; it is in abeyance, and unenforcible during these pro and seventy-three thousand, instances of false shipment. The ceedings in the courts, and it can only be enforced after the de false shippers were not brought to justice by the railroad com cision has been rendered by the Supreme Court of the United panies. Why? Because the companies are not allowed to make States reversing the action of the Commission. a division of then· earnings, either gross or net, and the result ·is Mr. MARSH. Mr. Speaker-- that they are wholly dependent upon these shippers and will not The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Tenn resort to prosecuting them because it might affect then· business· essee yield? injuriously. But as soon as you allow the railroad companies to Mr. PATTERSON. No; I will Hot yield to any gentleman while enter into this arrangement for the division of their gross or net I am explaining the bill. . earnings the effect will be that every railroad which is a party to Now, I desire to call the attention of the House to another pro the arrangement will be interested in bringing every fraudulent vision in the bill, and it is this. As the law now stands all these shipper to justice. t proceedings take their place upon the Calendar, and they remain The first part of this section is intended to reach and punish the there as other causes for distribution until they happen to he fraudulent shipper, the man who practices a fraud upon the rail reached in the order of the business of the court. This law so road company, and does it to the de..triment of the company and amends the existing law as to give these cases precedence over all of the public at large. The second provision of this section is in other cases. They are put upon the same footing as cases in which tended to punish, not the officer, not the agent, not the clerk, not the United States Government is a party. the superintendent of the raih·oad company, but the company Very well. There is another feature of this section, of' the bill, itself for a violation of the interstate-commerce law. And, Mr. and it is this. Suppose the Interstate Commerce Commission, on Speaker, I desire here and now to impress upon the House that I complaint being made, should come to the conclusion that the regard this provision of the proposed bill as of vital importance. rates were unreasonable, or that there was unjust discrimination When you propose to indict the clerk or the agent or the super_. by the pool, or t~at it failed to furnish adequate facilities to the intendent, there is sure to be some public sentiment in his favor, pubiic, m that it otherwise contravened the policy of the inter and there is likely to be an evasion of punishment; but when you state-commerce law, then the Commission might choose not tore take the corporation itself by the throat and make it amenable to sort to the extreme remedy of disapproving t-he pool, and in such the courts of the country, when you make the corporation ame case it coulc1 order the rates changed, it could order the discrimi nable to the grand juries, and when the petit jurors have a rigl;J.t to nation to be discontinued, it could order adequate facilities to be pass upon its derelictions and to punish it by a fine not exceeding furnished to the public, or it could order that the policy of the $5,000, for each violation of the law, then you will find that the general law should not be contravened. grand juries and the petit juries of the country will very quickly That order could be entered up by the Commission, and the put down unreasonable rates, unjust discriminations, inadequacy Commission could go into the circuit court with its petition, mak of service, or other contraventions of the interstate-commerce act. ing the railroad companies a party, and file the evidence upon They will inquire into these things. The railroad corPorations which it had acted, ancl thereupon the court, upon that shomng, themselves are thus brought directly before the courts, and for would be authorized, if a prima facie case was made out, to issue the first time made amenable to the people. And I would rather a preliminary injlmction compelling the enforcement of the order trust the petit juries and grand juries of the country to remedy of the Commission, and the ca-se would then go to final trial in due these evils and punish these derelictions on the part of corpora course. -That is the first section of the bill. tions tha.n all the commissioners in the land. The second section of the bill is, in my judgment, a very impor Now, I desire again to point out that the bill is so framed that tant one. It is this: Under the existing law tne testimony taken there ca.n be no excuse for not testifying. A part of this section before the Interstate Commission is not practically evidence in is aimed at the fraudulent shipper-the man who commits a fraud court. The Commission is not a court. It simply takes the testi upon the railToad company. The railroad company and its offi mony for its own convenience, and when the case goes before the cials have no part or parcel in this matter; they are not only in court it proceeds ab initio .to take testimol}y, to investigate, and terested in the conviction of the party who has committed the to decide upon the case as made out in court. The result is that fraud, but all the officials and employees of the company are com it has been the practice of the railroad companies, in many in petent witnesses against the fraudulent shipper. Again, the offi stances, to pay no attention to the proceedings before the Inter cials, the clerks, agents, and employees of the railroad companies state Commerce Commission, but when the order of the Commis are under no circumstances indictable. Consequently, they are sion is entered, then they file their petition in the circuit court to always competent witnesses against the fraudulent shipper· and review that order, and they proceed to take testimony ab initio, competent witnesses against the railroad company which violates an& the case is tried upon that testimony without regard to the the law. record made before the Commission. I now pass to the fourth section of the bill. Under the existing Now, in order to remedy that defect the second section of-this law, when the Commission is examining into a grievance it simply bill provides that all of the proceedings before the Con:unission; aU takes the oral testimony of the witnesses and enters its order upon contract8, all freight rates, all reports, all docum:entary evidence, that testifnony. There is no provision in the law for the perpetu and all testimony taken even by parole, must be filed with the Com ation of that testimony. The fourth section gf this bill requires naission before it renders its decision. All this material is made a that all oraltestimony shall be taken down by stenographJ, shall public record, and there is further provision that a copy of this be reduced to writing, and filed with.the record before the Com evidence and these records, certified by the secretary of the Com mission enters its order. Thus the testimony taken becomes a part mission, shall be used as evidence in the courts. The result will of the record of the Commission, and goes before any court which be that everything which transpn·es before the Commission will may review its action. go into the record, and, to the extent of its materiality, will be The fifth section is the procedure section of the act. It provides competent evidence to be submitted to the court in reviewing the that all testimony taken before.the Commission which enters into proceedings of the Commission. its records (and it all enters into the record when a petition is Mr. TERRY. Rightthere I would like to ask a question. filed for a review of the action of the Commission) shall go up to Mr. PATTERSON. I would rather answer questions when I the court ancl be a part of the case before the court, and the court get through with my explanation of the bill. is required to pass upon the case as it was presented before the Mr. TERRY. But my question is right on the point you are Commission. But if the court should see proper to order other now discussing. evidence to be taken, this section provides that the couTt shall Mr. PATTERSON. I understand that; but I would prefer not direct the Commission to take the evidence; and the Commission to be interrupted now. I will answer questions later. on taking further evidence under the order of the court may The next section, section 3, is the penal part of the bill. As the modify, if it.sees proper, the order which it has a1ready made, and law now stands there are two classes of offenders-one is the ship may make a supplemental report to the court. The court then per and the other is the official agent or represe:p.tative of the rail passes on the case as presented in the original record, on the orig road company. These alone are punishable under the law. The inal report or order of the Commission, and also upon the new corporation itself is not punishable. This bill makes two classes evidence taken under the order of the court and the supplemental of offenses. First is the offense committed by the fraudulent ship report of the Commission. per, by the man who makes a false bill of lading, a false entry, a By this method we would estat>lish about the kind of relation false weight, and thereby cheats the railroad company. He is to between the Commission and the courts of· the country which is be punished by a fine not exceeding $5,000. The other is the of established between an inferior and a superior court; that is, the fense committed by the railroad company itself, and this is made superior court passes upon. the ca-se which was presented to the punishable by a fine not exceeding $5,000 for every violation of the inferior court; or, if other evidence is offered, it is offered through mterstate-commerce law. Under existing conditions the railroad the instrumentality of the inferior court, with an opportunity on companies have been greatly imposed upon by false and fraudulent the part of the Commission to modify its order if the new evidence shippers. shall warrant it in so doing. The statistics show that in transporting freights from the cities The latter part of thi~ection provides for the treatment of cases of New York, Boston, Philadelphia, and.Baltimore alone to the where, under-the Constitution of the United States, the parties are X:XVII-5 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. DECEl\IBER 5, entifaed to trial by j~. There is nothing very special in that written pool can do such pooling as it wants to and be exempt provision; it is substantially upon the lines of the other proceedings. from interference, as I understand his argument. It must be borne in mind that all these proceedings in the courts Mr. PATTERSON. Not at all; and I am glad my fliend from are not only upon the record which has been submitted to the Com Arkansas puts the question, because I see he has been led into an mission, but by this bill all these cases are given precedence over error which I apprehend is common. other litigation in the court, and they stand in court in the same Now, you see that this pooling law, this section authorizing position_as if they were cases in which the Unitecl States Govern pooling under certain safegua.rds and restrictions, does not do ment itself was a party. away with the effectiveness of existing law. It does not interfere A new section is added to the interstate-commerce a~t called with the control of the railroads .by the Interstate Commerca "Section 16a." This section simply provides for rehearings be Commission. It does not interfere with any jurisdiction which fore the Commission; that is to say, if the Commission, upon a the Commission has already upon the raih·oads, but on the con wven case, enters an order that a rate is unreasonable, or that trary, the existing law is still enforcible, and this bill goes along there is an unjust discrimination or a contravention of the exist and in various ways provides for its more efficacious enfor'cement. ing law, or a failure to furnish adequate service to the Govern It simply adds to the existing law. What I mean to say is this: ment, there can be, upon a petition of any party aggrieved, a re That where a raih·oad enters into a pooling arrangement it thus hearing; the order previously made may be affirmed, reyersed, or subjects itself to all the extraordinary powers conferred upon the modified. The bill furthermore provides that, even though the Interstate Commerce Commission by the first section of this bill; case may go to the court and be there affirmed, that shall not pre but where a railroad is not embraced in the provisions of this vent the Commission, upon a new petition and upon new evidence, section, then it remains subject to the interstate-commerce law rehearing the case and modifying or changing existing conditions. as it exists to-day; and iHhis bill is passed it remains subject not The seventh section of the bill provides, Mr. Speaker, an au only to the existing law, but, if it goes into a pool, to the extraor thorization to the Interstate Commerce Commission to requ:i]e the dinary powers also conferred upon the Commission in the pending railroad companies to furnish their annual reports to the Co:lnmis bill. That is the position I have been endeavoring to sustain. sion, and provides that these shall be furnished on the 30th day of :Mr. TERRY. But the gentfeman forgets that his amendment June of each year. · It then goes on and prescribes howtheyshall to section 5, which is the only section that provides against pool be fm'Ilished, and how full such reports shall be; that they shall ing-- comprise practically all the transactions of the companies, affect Mr. PATTERSON. That is true. ing freights and transportation of passengers, etc. It provides Mr. TERRY (continuing). Then if this section is amended, also that if the railroad companies shall fail to comply with the and it is the only section that provides against pooling, if it does order of the Commission in this respect within a limited time not allow you to go after any railroad except those roads which that they shall be liable to a penalty of $25 a day for each day have entered into a written contract for pooling their roads, by that they are in default. what law and under what provision of law can you proceed against The last section of the bill provides that all causes now pending the roads which do the same thing without entering into a written in the courts under the original act shall be tried and heard upon contract? existing law, and not upon this bill .that we aJ:e now attempting to Mr. PATTERSON. Oh, well, th~ othe1· sections of the bill pro enact into law. vide for that. This, Mr. Speaker, comprises the various provisions of the bill. Mr. TERRY. This is the only one. I desire now to call the attention of the House for a few moments ~fr. PATTERSON. Oh,no;notatall. Goon and read the inter to two or three amendments suggested, about which there is a state-commerce law. Why, all themachineryforregulatingrates good deal of controversy, and then I will be through explaining upon railroads is independent of the pooling section. the bill, and will answer any question that may be asked in ref Mr. TERRY. I understand; but I am speaking of thematterof erence to it. In line 30, on page 2 of the bill, we find these words: pooling, and this is the section that forbids pooling. '' not been disapproved." The amendment suggested by the com Mr. PATTERSON. Nowletmeillustrate. SupposethePenn mittee is to strike out the words " not been disapproved," and to sylvania Railroad Company should enter into a pooling. arrange substitute the words "become operative." Well, there is no ob ment with its line of 1·ailroad running from Philadelphia to the jection to that amendment. It simply makes the language more city of Chicago. That railroad would be in the pool, an..rl would grammatical, in my judgment, and perhaps somewhat clearer. be subject to all the extraordinary powers and jurisdiction con The next amendment is in line 36 of page 2, and is to strike out ferred by the first section of this bill upon the Interstate Com the words contained in the text of the bill, '' or by any party merce Commission. Now, suppose that the Pennsylvania Rail thereto,~· and substitute "upon traffic embraced therein." I have road Company owned a line of railroad in the State of Florida, or to-day seen probably twenty telegrams sent to the various mem in the State of Texas, that was not within the pool at all. Then, bers of the House, requesting them to vote against what is known so far as that railroad was concerned, it would not be subjeet to as the Sewell amendment. The amendment I have just quoted is the extraordinary jurisdiction conferred in the first section of this what is called the Sewell amendment, about which there is some bill, but would be left under ·the jurisdiction of the Commission controversy. This amendment, however, I am directed by the just as it exists to-day. Committee on Inte:r:state and Foreign Commerce to offer. So far Mr. TERRY. Yes; but you have so amended section 5 that it as I am.. individually concerned, I do not think it cuts any impor could not touch the railroads not in the pool. tant figure with reference to this bill. Mr. PATTERSON. Not at all, my friend. You are entirely There are friends, however, of the measure who believe that the mistaken. words '' or by any party thereto " would enable the Commission Mr. TERRY. . I should like to see why. Section 5 is the only to reach out after a railroad company which is not included in section in the bill that makes this declaration against pooling. any pooling arrangement whatever; that is to say, if the Penn Mr. PATTERSON. I understand that. sylvaii'ia Railroad Company owned a railroad in Texas it would Mr. TERRY. Well, now, youprovideby youramendmentthat enable the Commission to resort to the extraordinary jurisdiction any railroad not in the pool shall not be subject to the powers of given in this section in dealing not only with the railroad embraced the Commission. How, then, can it be subject to the powers of in the pool, but with one entirely outside of the bill. Now, I do the Commission if you say it shall not, this being the latest ex not believe the law as originally written means any sueh thing. pression of the legislative will? However, some gentlemen think it does and have insisted that Mr. PATTERSON. I will explain again to my friend that so this amendment shall be offered iri order to remove that objec far as the railroad companies are concerned that are embraced in tion, and the committee have instructed me to offer the amend a pooling arrangement the Interstate Commerce Commission ment, and I have done so in pursuance of such instructions under this bill are granted extraordinary powers to deal with the simply to strike out the words "by any party thereto/' and sub pool, to deal with the pooling contract, to deal with the railroads stitute, as I have said, the words'' upon traffic embraced therein." which have entered into the pool; but so far as railroads are con My construction of the language of this section is that it only cerned which are not embraced in any pool they have not the has relation to the arrangement, contract or agreement, known extraordinary powers, but the ordinary powers conferred by the as a pooling ar.rangement, which is authorized to be entered into interstate-commerce law, as it now stands, on the Interstate Com~ by this section, and has no relatipn whatever to a railroad which merce Commission. is not included within the contract or arrangement. That is my Mr. STOCKDALE. I shouldlike to havealittleinformationon construction of the aot as heretof9re written; but as I have said, this point. Suppose a certain number of railroads go into a pool, there is some difference of opinion, and I have- been instructed to and another railroad wants to enter that pool, can it do so? offer that amendment. Mr. :MALLORY. Not without their consent. Mr. TERRY. Will the gentleman from Tennessee permit me Mr. PATTERSON. Only by agreement )Vith the other rail just there? · roads. Mr. PATTERSON. Ce1·tainly; I will yield to an interruption. Mr. STOCKDALE. Another point on which I should like to Mr. TERRY. I wish to ask the gentleman if, according to his have information is this: Does this bill provide that the railroad'3 construction, the only railroad the Commission can get after is in the pool can prosecute a fraudulent shipper on a railroad not in one tha.t has gone into a pool, while one that has not gone into a the pool? 1894. ·CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 67 Mr. PATTERSON. My judgment is that anyone cari pTosecute to-think that by use of the words "or any party thereto" you .a criminal, whether he is in a pool or not. can reach ont, and notwithstanding the Pennsylvania Railroad Mr. STOCKDALE. Then these raih·oads in the pool could.have Company when they have entered into the pool ha-ve only included shippers prosecuted for shipping on a railroad out of the pool? the road between here and Baltimore that it will place it within Mr. PATTERSON. How is that? ..... the power of the Commission to apply these extraordinary powers Mr. STOCKDALE. I should like to have that information. I to all the other roads owned by that company. Now, I do not am only seeking for information. think that .is a proper construction. I believe that the proper con- • Mr. PATTERSON. I understand that, and I shall be very glad structi:on of this bill is that the Interstate Commission has only to give it to you if I can. . power to apply these extraordinary remedies to the railroads Mr. STOCKDALE. Suppose that a number of railroads go into embraced .in the :pool, and that the words '.' OT by any party the pool. thereto" have reference to the contract under·which the _pool is MI-. PATTERSON. WeR? being conducted. Mr. STOCKDALE. Now, if these railroads in the pool_prose Mr. W.,ANGER. Will the gentleman permit a question? cute the man who ship~ on another railroad, is that not destroying :A:fr. PATTERSON. With pleasure. competition? · M.r. WANGER. The criticism, a.s I understand it, of the union Mr. PATTERSON. Not at all. I will explain to my friend committee on transportation, manufacturing, and commercial that this is a.fraudulent shipment that is refened to. It is a fraud interests of Philadelphia is that the insertion of the words "upon on the common carrier that we are seeking to punish. Take a traffic embraced therein" is not sufficiently comprehensive, and case that was stated to me where a man shipped gold as-starch, in the late J.\.fr. M~Murtrie makes that a prominent feature of his order to get the cheaper rate. criticism of the amendments. · He says: . That was a fraJid on the· common carrier, and anybody who It is impossible for me to conceive a reason justifying the control ·over the should :::ee proper to go before the grand jury and bring out the traffic embraced in the agreement and excluding it as to tra.ffic that is af fected bY the agre·ement though not embraced in it. The one is just as much facts could prosecute the shipper to conviction. I do not suppose the consequence of the agreement a.s the other. The effects are as direct. the railroad company, simply as a railroad, .as a corporation, would Now, would there be any objection on the part of the gentleman go into the prosecuting business, but its officials would. That is in charge of this bill t.o add after the words '' upon traffic embraced the object of the law. Now, there is one other point I want to call therein" the woTds '' or affected thereby"? It seems to me that attention to. would-meet the criticism. Mr. BRYAN. I want to ask the gentleman if the words in line Mr. PATTERSON. We.will consider the amendment sug 36 of page 2, which· the amendment proposed to strike out, were a gested. I desire to say to the House, however, that so far as I .am part of the original act. individually conc.erned, I do not attach any great importance to MI-. PATTERSON. Of the interstate-commerce law? this amendment, either one way or the other. I do not think it Mr. BRYAN. Yes. amounts to much. Mr. PATTERSON. Oh, no. Mr. COX. I would like to ask my colleague a question. Mr. BRYAN. Simply a part of your bill, but not a part of the The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from law. Tennessee r"Mr. PATTERSON] has expired. Mr. PATTERSON. That is all. Mr. CANNON of illinois. Mr. Speaker, I move that the gen Now, just one word more. So far as this amendment is con tleman's time be extended until he concludes his remarks. cerned, I desire to say that while individually I will support it There was no objection, and it was so ordm·ed. because it has been adopted by the committee, I do not believe it ::M:r. P~TTERSON. Now, J\1r. Speaker, thereisasecondamend to be a material amendment either one way or the other. I have ment there, which is to strike out the words '' or any party thet·eto," been occupied for two years upon this bill and know it was not on line 44, page 3. Then online 57, page 9,I am instl·ucted by the the purpose of the framers of this bill to subject any raih·oad'to committee to offer an amendment to strike out the words "p1·ima the extraordina1·y jurisdiction of the Commission, except such facie." · railroads as were embraced in the pooling arrangement; and I do ::Mr. RYAN. What words do you propose to insert there? not believe it means to extend that extraordinary juriSdiction to Ml·. PATTERSON. None. The amendment is to strike out the every piece of railroad pToperty which a railroad company may words "prima fa-cie." The provision, as it stands, readS: own, entirely disconnected from the road embTaced in the pool. In construing and applying the provisions of this section the act, omission, Jtir. MALLORY. If the gentleman will allow metto interrupt or failure of any officer, agent, or other person acting for or employed by any him. The case cited by the gentleman does not exactly cover the comnfon carrier, althou~h unauthorized or forbidden, shall nevertheless iu grounds of such a case as where the Pennsylvania Railroad Com every case be deemed pl'liila facie the act, omission, or failure of such carrier. pany owns another railroa.d in Texas or in Florida. It is possible, By striking out the words ''prima facie, n the provision will read and I think not at all improbable, that this pooling arrangement that the act of the officer or agent shall be deemed to be the act, may relate to certain specific classes of freight included in certain omission, or failure of the carrier. In other words, the amend kinds of goods, excluding from the pooling arrangement other ar ment makes the railroad company conclusive!J liable for the acts ticles transported over the roads that constitute the pool. It of its agents o1· employees. Now, I will answer my colleague's seems to me that the ebject that was in view when we inserted question. · "by any party thereto" was to guard against the use of the pool Mr. COX. My question is this: After your pooling contract is ing arrangement by railroads for the purpose of enhancing their made and approved by the Commission, suppose a railroad does power to oppress in the arrangement with any road not included not desire to go into that a.rrangement, and will not agree to it, in the pool. It seems to me very plain that we should keep this what are you going to do with that railroad? language in, and not insert that which the gentleman offers- Mr. PATTERSON. My answer is, that that railroad company 1\Ir. PATTERSON. I have never before heard the construction remains subject to the interstate-commerce law, just as it is to placed upon it that has been placed upon it by my friend. Now, day, subject also to the amendments which we propose in this bill. my understanding of the difference between certain conditions on ::M:r. COX. So, whenev& a railroad company agrees to go into this point is simply this: 'rhere are certain railroad people in the a pooling contract, and that contract is approved, and then the country who are apprehensive that if the bill is enacted into law railroad company does not go into it, that company takes its as it was o;riginally reported by the committee, that by reason of chances with the-commission. the use of the words ''by any party thereto," then the Commission Mr. PA"'TTERSON. It takes its chances with the Commission can reach out its hands and, by reason of its extraordinary juris under the law as it exists. But if the raihoad company chooses ·diction over the pool, eontTol raih·oadproperties, by the same ma to go into the pooling arrangement, then it is subjected to the ex chinery, not embra-ced in it, and that the Commission may seize on traordinary jurisdiction provided in the first section of this bill. a dereliction of duty of a Tailroad company nat embraced in the ::Mr. NORTHWAY. Will the gentleman please turn to page 7, pool for the purpose of dealing with the pool; and they }\1sist that line 13, and tell us what is meant there by the words" or device"? t under .the provisions of this section of the .bill there should be no Mr. PATTERSON (reading). railroad subjected to this extraordinary jurisdiction unless it be That any person, and any officer or agent of any corpor3.tion or company, embTaced in the pool. and any member of any firm or partnership, who shall deliver property for transportation to any common c~rrier, subJect to the provisions of this act, Now, they apprehend that that construction will be placed upon or any person, corporation, company, firm, or partnership, for whom as con it. I do not think so. I do not believe that a fair interpretation Ri.gnor m· consignee any such carrier shall transport IJ'I'operty, who shall, of this section means anything else than that the Commission knowingly-anci.willfully, by false billing, faLse classification, false weighing, false "report of weight, false representation ~f the contents of any package, may deal with th~ parties to the pool by these extraordinary or by any other misrepresentation, deceit, or device, obtain or seek to obtain methods. In other words, that the extraordinary jurisdiction transportation for su:ch prope~ at less than the regular rates then est..'\b- given to the Commission in respect to the pooling arrangement lished, etc. ·a only applies to the railroads embraced within the pool, and when Mr. NORTHWAY. Now, whatdoestheword "device"usedas you deal with the Pennsylvania Railroad Company in respect to a there mean? pool you only deal with that railroad which the Pennsylvania Mr. PATTERSON. It ~ans anymeans by which fraudis Railroad Company enters into the pool. . committed. In other words, l'l{ i'1 the usual language of criminal Now, upon the contrary, there are other gentlemen who seem -statutes. Here is an _offense defined~the commission of a .fraud 68 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. DECEMBER 5, upon a railroad company. The bill enumerates certain acts that If we had not such a provision in the bill railroad companies, shall be held to constitute such fraud, but if the fraud be perpe after thek pooling an-angement had gone into effect and been dis trated by any other means, by any other "device," it shall still be a approved, could, within thirty days before it ceased to be opera fraud and be punished as such. tive, come round and file it with the Commission again, and it Mr. NORTHWA~. But you must give the w01·d "device" a would become operative before the expiration of ihirty days. literal interpretation, and it means "any other way." Now, a Consequently, these lines were written in the bill so that if any ma.n may be honest and yet may seek to obtain a lower rate of thing of that kind should be attempted, the Commission, upon transportation than the current one, but you propose to fine him inspection, may say, "Wedonotlikethiscontract; it contravenes $5.000 for making such an attempt. . the policy of the law; it makes unjust ~rimination and unrea Mr. RATTERSON. If my friend will read back a little he will sonable rates; and we will disapprove it in the first instance." find that the bill provides that whoever shall do any of these Mr. CANNON of lllinois. On that point, will the gentleman things "knowingly and willfully" shall be subject to the penalty permit me to say, it seems to me it is not material whether in the provided in the bill. My friend will see, therefore, that it is im first instance the Commission shall approve the agreement or not. possible for the offender to be honest if he does these things know If it were on its face an agreement fo1· a division of earnings be ingly and willingly. tween certain points, it seems to me the Commission would nrob Mr. NORTHWAY. "Knowingly"impliesknowledge only; not ably be compelled to approve it. That portion of the section does guilt. Yet you propose t<> punish a man for seeking by any means not bother me, but I have difficulty on another point. Suppose to procure lower rates of transportation. . the agreement goes into effect, and suppose the railroad company Mr. PATTERSON. Well, I think that construction is perhaps by virtue of that agreement should practice extortion upon the overstrained. · public, or suppose there should be any other grievance, it is made Mr. CANNON of Illinois. I should like to put two or three the duty of the Interstate-Commerce Commission to observe the questions to the gentleman about the first section of this bill. I workings of the companies under the agreement, and it ha,s the want to see whether I understand it. power to annul the agreement. That seems to be perfectly proper, Mr. PATTERSON. Very well. and if they exercise that power then it is annulled. Mr. CANNON of Illinois. As I understand, it is proposed to N"ow, if your bill stopped there, if it went no further than that, change the law which prohibits pooling in certain cases. Where I should be inclined to think that, if it passed at all, it would be there is not an agreement coming within specified provisions the properly guarded. But I want to call the attention of the gentle pooling law will apply to all roads? • man to the fact that he permits a review, by this bill, to be had Mr. PATTERSON. Yes. by the com-ts, and the courts can reverse the futerstate-Commerce ·Mr. CANNON of lllinois. ~ow I understand further (and I Commission. want to see whether :[_am con·ect) that different companies may Mr. PATTERSON. That is true. meet and agree upon a division of business or earnings between Mr. CANNON of lllinois. That is throwing, as I understand particular points. it-and I wish to call his attention to it-throwing on the courts Mr. PATTERSON. Yes. not the exercise of their ordinary rightful and judicial power to Mr. CANNON of lllinois. And if that is not disapproved by protect persons and property, or to settle disputes between par the Commission it is a lawful contract? ties, but an entirely different power, an administrative power. It Mr. PATTERSON. Within twenty days. seems to me, if the gentleman will bear with me a moment-- Mr. CANNON of illinois. Now, let us suppose a case. If-the Mr. PATTERSON. With pleasure, for I am very glad to hear roads between St. Louis and New York, for instance, agree as to the gentlem:m from illinois. what the division should be, would not that in practice stand, as Mr. CANNON of lllinois. It seems to me that if we are going a matter of course? Does the gentleman think that there would to give the railroads the right to make pooling agreements, that be in any case a disapproval by the Commission? it is absolutely proper that we shall vest a power somewhere, ,yjth Mr. PATTERSON. Yes, I think so. Now let me make an ex somebody, whose attention is directed all the time to the matter planation to my friend. We provided in one of the billswhich we of administration, and if there are abuses to go to the extei!t of prepared (there have beenanumberof reprints) that such an agree annulling that agreement altogether, and that that body, whether ment should not go into effect unless the Commission approved. a board or a commission, shm.:tld have the last guess. Now, the Commissioners were unanimously of the opinion· that We are granting this favor, it must be remembered, by legisla they did not want such a provision in the bill, because-- tion, and if'the railroad wants to avoid the exercise of that power, Mr. COOPER of Florida. I beg the gentleman's pa.rdon; that is then let it fail to extort. If it extorts or otherwise fails to per a mistake. form its duties to the public under cover of these agreements :Mr. PATTERSON. Well, I do.not think it is. whioo we a1·e authorizing, there should be an immediate remedy Mr. COOPER of Florida. I have the evidence here in the record, by canceling the agreements, and in my judgment the action of and I have the statement from a member of the Interstate Com the Commission should be final. merce Commission that this bill is not approved by the Commission. :Mr. PATTERSON. Iamglad to hear the remarks of myfriend Mr. PATTERSON. I never said that it was approved by them. from lllinois and his criticisms, and desire to ask the a-ttention of Mr. COOPER of Florida. I have it here on record where the the inembers present briefly to the response I shall make to him. chairman of the committee said positively, and two members of Mr. Speaker, it is necessary to consider for a moment the history the committee said inferentially, that there ought to be absolute of this bill. More tha.n two years ago a bill was offered allowing, control in this matter by the Interstate Commerce Commission. under certain restrictions and limitations, poolin~ contracts to be Mr. PATTERSON. My friend has gone off upon a matter which entered into by the railroad companies. That bill permitted the I was not discussing. I have not said anything which justified at pools to be taken to the courts on proper orders, and that is the all the remarks he has made. I have never said that the individual hitch in this matter from the beginning with the committee. members of the Commission approved this bill; I have not intimated I desire to say to my friend from lllinois that I for one declined any such thing. I say, however, that the Commission is of opin to support a bill that did not make the order of the Commission ion that legislation on this line is proper. There may be some di the end of the pool; and I was in favor of cutting off all appeals vision of opinion among the Commissioners in respect to the ques whatever to the court. I desire, moreover, to say to him that I tion. But what I have said, and what I now repeat, is that when believeiwasoneof the lastmembersof the commit tee who yielded the question arose whether we would place in the bill a provision his views on that question. Furthermore, I will say to my fiiend that no pooling contract should go into effect until it was positively fromFlorida[Mr.COOPER] that someof the membersof the Inter approved by the Commission or whether the bill should be fi·amed state Commerce Commission did object that the order of the Com in the form in which it now is, the Commissioners themselves ob mission was not made final. jected to the provision that the contract should not be effective Now, we have had this question under discussion on this par until they approved it. ticulal' feature of the bill, as I have said, for more than two yearf,, Some of the Commissioners we1·e disposed to think that that and I wish to impress this fact on my f1iend, because my views are part of the law ought to be stricken out altogether. But the rea somewhat modified since the consideration of it began. At last, son we insisted that it should remain as it is now written is this: Mr. Speaker, the courts are the final arbiters of all rights. They If gentlemen will carefully study the provisions of the bill on are the last to decide on the r;ights either of corporations or of in this subject they will see that when this pooling arrangement is dividuals, and on reflection I believe, and I believe the lawyers entered into, then, unless the Commission comes forward and, on here will bear me out, that there is scarcely an instance in our inspection, disapproves within twenty days, it becomes a legal con history where any contract has been permitted where the ultimate tract. Reading the section further, it will be seen that after the rights under it have not been determined judicially. an·angement becomes effective, the Commission, if it should as Now, here is a question brought before the Interstate Commerce certain that rates are unreasonable, that there is an unjust dis Commission. It is alleged that a pooling a.rrangement was en crimination, a failure to furnish adequate facilities to the public, tered into the effect of which is to bring a.bout unreasonable rates, or that the pooling arrangement otherwise contravenes the inter or unjust discrimination, or inadequate facilities to the public, or state-commerce law, may proceed to disaffirm the pooling con that it otherwise contravenes the policy of the interstate-commerce tract, which thereafter becomes w.holly inoperative at the expira law. The Commissionmakesupitsrecord, and on thatentersitsor tion of thirty days from the time the order is entered. der disapproving the pooling arrangement; and when tho.t order is \ 1894.- -coNGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 69 entered the pooling arrangement becomes inoperattve; it ceases to . tained by thes~ corporations-because they generally have· the ba effective or enforcible during the existence of that order. Now, best, and they are always lookin~ after their own interests, and to say that this order shall be ultimate and final upon all parties with the public upon the other s1de, with nobody so greatly in without any appeal, and that no court shall review it, that the terested in looking after their interests-! am afraid that when Supreme Court of the United States, the court of la-st resort of the court, upon the recor~ comes to exercise its discretion upon • the American people, shall not pa-ss on the equities of that case, the bare c-ease presented upon paper, without knowledge of the I say that is not in accordance with our ideas of law. That view res gestre which, coupled with the action of the pooling companies, of it I do not think meets the approval of the lawyers on the com led the Interstate Commerce Commission to annul the agreement- mittee, nor do I believe it will meet the approval of the lawyers ! am afraid we might get a reversal when a reversal ought not to of this House. be had; and I will say right in that line that my observation is I desire to say that when I firstt considered this question I was that that great judicial body that ha-s the last guess in this coun very firmly fixed in the opinion that when the pooling arrange try has performed its duty well in the main throughout the past; ment-this pooling contmct and the operations under it but my observation is also that when yon throw a duty of admin was reviewed by the Commission the Commission should act istration or a political duty upon that court, then it becomes like promptly and disapprove the contract and annul it, and that that other bodies that perform similar duties. should ultimately be the end of it. I was strongly persuaded that ' Mr. PATTERSON. Now, does the gentleman-- / the law should be written in that way. For :more than twelve Mr. CANNON of Illinois. I will conclude right there. I may months I stood by that contention. But I confess that on mature be wrong upon this,_ and I have not yet made up my mind whether reflection, debating the question with my associates on the com I shall vote for this bill. rLaughter.] I mean what I say. I have mittee and various other gentlemen interested in the matter, I not yet made up my mind whether I shall vote for this bill if it is have concluded that if the pooling arrangment is annulled by the not amendea. ·~. order of the Commission, and becQmes thereby inoperative and I am inclined to think that it ought to be amended; and I thank unenforcible, the validity of the order itself might well be re the ·gentleman for having allowed me this much time to amplify viewed not only.\bY a circuit court, but especially by the Supreme a little upon the question that I asked him and upon his answer Court of the United States. · thereto. I confess that I am one of those who do not doubt either the in .M:r. PATTERSON. Now, M1·. Speaker, I a.m. very glad to hear tegtity or the justice of our courts. I believe that they will do my friend; and right in connection with what he said I desire to light, and I . believe that to allow a review in the circuit court impress upon the House this fact: That in the creation of the In and then an appeal to the Supreme Court, as provided in this bill, terstate Commerce Commission the law was expressly devised so will bring about uniformity of decision on this s"Q.bject. And as not to confer upon it judicial powers. furthermore, it guarantees the public not only against any captious Mr. CANNON of Illinois. It has no judicial powers. decision upon the part of the Commission, but against any captious Mr. PATTERSON. It is not a court. N ow, the gentleman decision upon the part of any district or circuit judge. And complains about the com-ts having jurisdiction in this instance. where rights are involved, they can not finally be passed upon I desire to call the attention of the House to the fact that in all until they reach the court of last resort. And if the American the orders given by the Commission under the bw as it now ex people can not depend upon the deliverances of that court, then our ists affecting railroads, and doing away with these discriminations, institutions a;re a failure. every one of them is subject to review in the com·ts of the United So, on reflection, debating this question fully and ca,refully, I States-courts sitting as courts of equity. have come to the conclusion that while the order of the Commis Let me say briefly, that there are many criticisms that can be sion ought to have the effect to put an end to the agreement, to placed on a bill involving legislation so important as this. This make it unenforcible and to suspend all operations under it, yet particular bill has been under discussion for more than two years, I furthermore believe that that order should be reviewed in the and it is, in a mea-sure, a compromise. It is, in a measure, the courts, that an appeal ought to be allowed to the Supreme Court result of mutual concessions on the part of gentlemen belonging of the United States, and that all parties, the railroad companies to the committee, and an attempt has been m ::tde to repQrt a wise, and the Commission alike, ought to abide the final decision in conservative bill that will be a vast improvement on existin~ law. equity of that great tribunal. Now I will yield to the gentleman from Louisiana. who desrres to Mr. CANNON of Illinois. Will the gentleman yield to me just ask me a question. for a minute? Mr. BOATNER. I desire to call the attention of the gentleman Mr. PATTERSON. Yes, with pleasure. from Tennessee to this point: The gentleman ha.s just stated that Mr. CANNON of Illinois. It is right on that point and just at in the statute creating the Interstate Commerce Commission it was this time I should be glad to say a word, for I am really trying to carefully provided that the Commission should not have any judi get right on this bill myself. cial functions. Mr. PATTERSON. I know that. Mr. PATTERSON. Yes, sir. Mr. CANNON of illinois. As I understand it, under the pres Mr. BOATNER. Now, I find in this bill that you leave to the ent law no pooling agreement can be made between railways as discretion of the Commission the approval m· disapproval of any to traffic. This, as I understand it, is a proposition to make an pooling agreement? exception to that law in certain cases; to allow railways to pool Mr. PATTERSON. In the first instance. their earnings. Now, in practice that will cover, as I believe, all Mr. BOATNER. Yon do not consider that a judicial function, railways upon all agreements that they will make, because the yet you provide that the decision of the Commission shall be sub agreements will be general in terms; but l0t that be as it may. ject to review by the courts. Now, then, does it'not follow, as a The agreement is made. It becomes legal. It is an agreement necessary consequence, that the action of the Commission in the that cut~ off competition. I am not prepared to say that it ought first instance must be judicial or that the ac.tion of the court in not to- be made in proper cases and enforced in proper cases. the second instance can not be judicial, because the court is called After the competition is cut off, suppose there is a refusal of suf upon to review and pass upon the identical question upon which ficient rolling stock, or there is extortion upon the public by vir the Commission has acted, to wit, whether a proposed agreement tue of this agreement. Then it seems to me that it is perfectly to pool earnings should be allowed? / competent for us to provide by this legislation, as we are confer Mr. PATTERSON. I will suggest to my f1iend that judicial ring a new right, the terms upon which it shall be enjoyed. This tribunals very frequently review proceedings that are not judicial. is done by 6-iving the Interstate Commerce Commission power to They may reviewthe action of a town council. They may review cancel the poolin~ agreements. Now, the bill does that. It seems the action of a returning board. They may review many things to me that there IS no body so competent, so constant in action, done by various instrumentalities of government which are not that can so safely be trusted to do this, and to do it summarily in judicial, and because the court has the right tD pass upon the the proper case, as the Interstate Commerce Co1lUllission. order of the Commission disapproving the contract does not make Now, the gentleman says, somewhat plausibly, but after all it the action of the Commission disapproving necessarily a judicial seems to me not satisfactorily, that there ought to be an appeal to one or that of the court unjudicial. the courts to revise the exercise of the discretion by the Interstate Mr. BOATNER. I do not think the gentleman from Tennessee Commission; but this is a power conferred upon the railways to can find an instance in which a court has reviewed the action of a pool. The discretion is given to the Interstate Commerce Com returning board, or of a town council, or any other body except mission to legalize or to cancel, but there we can stop. There is to ascertain whether that body had acted in accordance with law no right of person or property which can bring these cases into and within its functions as prescribed by law. Now, in this case the courts unless we give it by legislation; so that when the bill there !s no specification of the conditions under which the pooling proposes that there may be a petition filed in the courts, and a hear arrangement shall be allowed. The bill says tha..t- · ing as to whether the Interstate Commerce Commission has wisely it shall be lawful for such common caiTierS' to enter into such contracts, agreements, or arrangements, enforceable between the parties thereto that is exercised a discretion in canceling this contract, it is throwing an to sa.y: Every such contract, agreement, or arrangement (hereinafter wrmed1 administrative duty upon the courts not in the ordinary course contract) shall be in writing and fil£\1 with the Commission created by this of their business; and I fear that the result will be that, while the act, and shall become lawful and enfQr~able between the parties thereto at the expiration of twenty days from the tiling thereof, unless the Commission. contract will be annulled pending litigation in the courts, when shall m the meantime, and upon inspection thereof, make an order disap the case goes to tlie courts. wi.th the best counsel that can be ob- provmg1 the same. 70 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. DECEMBER 5' That leaves it entirely to the judgment of the Commission-- A MEMBER. How is he going to get his money back? 1\Ir. PATTERSON. Not at all. Read on. Mr. COX. Yes, what is his practical remedy? The idea of my Mr. BOATNER (reading): colleague, as I understand, is 1:,Jlat these shippers (and there ar-3 and it shall be the duty of the Co:mm:ission to make such order of disapproval vast numbers of shippers in small amounts)' after they have pro- • whenever, upon such inspection, it shall be of opinion that the operation of tested against the overcharges of the railroad company, must file any such contract would result in unreasonable rates, unjust discrimination, their claim before the railroad commission. Do I correctly UTI inferior service to the public, or otherwise contravene any of the provisions derstand my collea~ue? of this act. ~ A MEXBER. They can go to court. It is altogethe1· a matter for the judgment of the Commission J\Ir. COX. Oh, no; it would be no remedy for one of these small whether the contract would result in unreasonable rates or 1.mjust shippers to go to the Federal court to recover the amount he had discrimination or inferior service. Now, to give the court the been overcharged. The expeB.se of such a proceeding would power to review this action of the Commission would be, in my amount to more than the freight. Now I want to ask my col judgment, to put them in the place of the Commission; to direct league this question in order· to get right down to the bottom of them to exercise in the second instance the exact function which this matter: A shipper puts his freight 011 a train and the com- you impose upon the Commission in the first instance; and I do "1-~. him t h I t t kn h th 11 hi not see how you can escape from the conclusion either that the pany Cilal.·ges 00 muc · wan ow ow e sma 8 p- per under this bill is to get back the °extortionate rates he has functions imposed upon the Commission in the fu·st instance are paid. That is the whole question. judicial or that those imposed upon the court are. In other words, Mr. pATTERSON. I will answer m-y friend by saying that the court must decide the precise question which. there are two or three remedies. In the first place, the shippe~: may J\!r. PATTERSON. I will state to my friend from Louisiana go before the Interstate Commerce Commission and ask the Com that under the existing interstate-commerce law the Commission mission to deal with the derelict railroad com})any. In the second has the right to make orders on the railroad companies and to do place, he may go before the grand jury of any Federal court and various acts of that kind, and yet, under our judicial system, these obtain an indictment against the railroad company. Then, again, are not regarded as decrees, as judgments of the Commission. he is authorized in this bill to bring a civil action on the case for They aTe ministerial acts. They are all reviewable in the courts, all the damage he has sustained. Those are the three remedies. md an appeal may be taken finally to the Supreme Court of the A MEMBER. There could be no other· 1·emedy. United States. Now, to come back to this provi"Sion of the bill. Mr. COX. None except one, which would be to prevent the Here is a contract which the railroad companies enter into, and railroad company from charging that extortionate rate. the bill provides that if the Commission, upon inspection· of the Now, if my colleague will allow me to add a word further, I contract, sh.. the courts. Now, suppose, on the other hand, the contract should Mr. PATTERSON. No, I do not think that is exactly the right 4> be approved by the Commission, but that the shippers at some pm;- construction. ticular point, 1\femphis, for instance, shouldobjecttothecontract, Mr. BRYAN. Is not that the substance or effect? how would tl}.ey get into court? Mr. PATTERSON. No, that is not the provision, though such J\.fr. PATTERSON. Thatsuggestsathoughtin connection with may be the ultimate effect. the line of your inquiry. The Commission stands in all these pro:- Mr. BRYAN. Well, is it not true that when an appeal is taken ceedings for the public. from the Interstate Commerce Co:rfunission to the court the Com- Mr. BARNES. But suppose it does not happen to? mission comes in as a party and must represent the public in that :Mr. PATTERSON. The Commission acts for the public, and proceeding? thelaw·asitnowexistsandasitwillexistunderthisbillprovides Mr. PATTERSON. Yes; it represents the public side of the that the Commission may file a petition to enforce its orders, and question. aU. that. The shipper, therefore, is not a pru·ty to thepooengcon- Mr. BRYAN. So that on one side you have the railroad com tract. He may come in and file his petition and get the 0om.lhis- pany, an-interested party, and on the other a public body, simply sion to act on his case; but, at the same time, ther~ are no· parties acting officially? to the pooling arrangement except the railroad companjes, and Mr. PATTERSON. Yes. the Commission is the agency of the Government, which has the 1\Ir. BRYAN. Is not that a proceeding so much in favor of the power under the law to disapprove the pooling contract. railroad company as to be almost ex parte? J\Ir. COX. One other question. Here is a shipper who ships :Mr. PATTERSON. I think not. goods over a railroad, no matte1· what may be the amount, and Mr. COX. Of course it is. who claims that the chru·ges are unjust; what do you do with him Mr. PATTERSON. I think not. I think the public can well under this bill? Let us get down to the practical working of the rely on the Commission to protect its interest. It was created for thing. The shipper has sent his produce over the Tailroad and, that purpose and I have no doubt it will do its duty. the railroad charging him a certain amount., he claims that that During the course of Mr. PATTERSON'S remarks the following charge is unjust. Now, w]+at is he going to do under this bill? proceedings took place: Mr. PATTERSON. If a shipper thought that he had been dis- J\fr. HAUGEN. I ask that the amendments which the gentle- criminated against 1.mjustly, or that he had been charged an un- man has brought to the attention of the House in his remarks may reasonable rate by a raih·oad company that was in the pool, and I be printed in the RECORD to-morrow morning, so that we may were his counsel advising him, I would tell him to file a petition fully understand what. they are. to the Interstate Commerce Commission. And I would ask the MJ.·. PATTERSON. Mr. Speaker, it has been requested that the Commission to disapprove the pooling contract and put an end amenOm.ents which I offered to-day shall be inserted in the RECORD to it. And in addition to that I would tell him to go before the of to-mmTow morning. I ask that that be done. nearest grand jury or United States court and have the railroad The SPEAKER. If any amendments have been offered, the company indicted. Chair is not informed of the fact. Mr. COX. Then the gentleman's idea is this: The shipper has Mr. PATTERSON. There ru·e four amendments which have put 1ris freight on the train, the railroad company has charged been offered-very short amendments. . him too much, and he has protested. Now, in such a case, he I The SPEAKER. Any amendments which t~e g-entle~an may must go before the Interstate Commerce Commission to ha.-e it 1 have sent to the desk may be read. but the Charr 1S not informed settled whether the charge was right or wmng? of any amendments having been offered. Mr. PATTERSON. Will the gentleman state his point again? M.r. PATTERSON. The amendments ha\e been sent to the Ml·. COX. I will. The shippe1· has put his freight on the train, Clerks desk. the railroad company has charged him too much, as he thinks, The SPEAKER. That is not equivalent to offering ~em. and he protests. Now, under this bill, what is he going to do? Mr. PATTERSON. Well, I offer the amendments which I have Mr. PATTERSON. I have told the gentleman. sent to the Clerk's desk. ,. 1894. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 71 The SPEAKER. Four amendments can not be offered by the :M:r. WILSON of West Virginia. I wish to state that this is the gentleman at once. ordinary motion to distribute the President's message. The mes Mr. PATTERSON. Well, I ask tb.at the amendments be read sage is in Committee of the Whole, and I ask unanimous consent for information and printed in the RECORD. · that the committee be discharged from the further considel'ation The SPEAKER. The Clerk will read the amendments.· of the message, and that it be considel'ed in the House as in Com The Clerk read as follows: mittee of the Whole for the purpose of making this distl'ibution. .Amend by striking out the words "not been disapproved," in line 30, page The SPEAKER. · The Clel'k will read the l'esolution submitted 2, and inserting the words "become operative." . by the gentleman from West Virginia. In line 36, page 2, strike out the words ' or by any party thereto" and lllSert the words "upon traffic emb1·aced therein." The Clerk read as follows: Amend by striking out the words "or any party thereto," in line 4!, page 3. R esolved, That so much of the annual message of the President of the Amend by strikmg out the words "prima facie," in line 57, page 9. United States to the twD Houses of Congress at the present session as relates The SPEAKER. These amendments can be offered at this time to our foreign relations, together with the accompanying correspondence · d · h R Of and documents, be referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. . only for information or to be prm.te m t e ECORD. course That so much as relates to the national finances, the public debt and the the Chair could not recognize the gentleman fi·om Tennessee to public revenues, to treaties with foreign countries relating to revenue ques exhaust the right of amendment. Other gentlemen may have tions, and to the wants and conditions of the Treasury be referred to the dm ff Committee on Ways and Means. amen ents to 0 er. Tha.t so much as relates to the appropriation of the public revenue for the :M:r. PATTERSON. I have been requested to ask that these be support of the Government, as herein provide~, namely, for the le!J!smtive, printed for information. executive, and judicial expenses, for sundry civil expense:;;, for fortifications Mr. HAUGEN. They were simply read for information. and coast defenses, for pensions, for the bistrict of Columbia, and for all deficiencies, be referred to the Committee on Appropriations. Mr. WISE. I ask unanimous conse'nt, as this is an important That so much as relates to banks and banking and currency be referred to bill and a number of members can not procure copies, that an the Committee on Banking and Currency. 't · ted That so much as relates to the jqdiciary of the United States, to the adminis- ord er b e rnad e t 0 have 1 reprm · tration of justice, and the organization of courts be referred to the Committee The SPEAKER. Without objection, that order will be made. on the Judiciary. , There was no objection. That so much as relates to the mints of the United States and to the pur Mr. HEPBURN. I want to ask the 2'entleman from Tennessee chase and coinage of gold and silver bullion be referred to the Committee on ~ Coinage, Weights, and Measures. this question: Suppose that the Interstate Commerce Commission That so much as relates to the merchant marine a...YJ.d fisheries and to tol1Ilf1ge had disapproved a pooling contract because of unreasonable rates, dues be referred to the Committee-on Merchant Marine and l!'isheries. and the question goes to the courts, and the order of the Commis- That so much as relates to the commerce of the United States, domestic and sion is reversed-in other wurds, that the court does not regard the b0~=it~teo~co~~~~::a~~~e1~ 6~~~~~:~a Canal be referred to the rate as unreasonable and allows it-how will that adjudication That so much as relates to rivers and harbors and their improvement be ~ # t th · hts f h · h b · hi ti · t th referred to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors. ' c:w.ec e r1g o ~ s lpper W 0 may nng s ac on agams e That so mnch as relates to a,o-riculture and forestry, to the destruction and corporation for unreasonable charges? · eradication of diseases of domestic animals, and to the inspection of cattle Mr. PATTERSON. Well, I would say this, that I do not think and g:rk products intended for shipment to foreign countries, be referred to . it would be res adjudicata. I have not thought, however, upon thrThatX:U:O~~o~~~f:;t~the military establishment be referred to the that phase of the question, as it has not been presented to me, and Committee on Military Affairs. · I do not think it is material to the controversy. That so much as relates to the naval establishment and to the construction Your point~ if I understand it, is this: Suppose that the Inter- fffa;{!_tional vessels for the .Navy be referred to the Committee on Naval state Commerce Comm:ission should disaJlprove the pooling con- That so much as relates to the post-offices and -post-roads and to the carry tract on the ground that a certain rate was unreasonable, and then ing of the foreign mails be referred to the Committee on the PoSt-office and an appeal should be taken from that ruling to th.e Supreme Court Post-Roads. of the United States, which court should reverse the action of the on~~:~bll~cf~~tes to the public domain be referred to the Committee Commission on the ground that it was reasonable, how would that That so much as relates to the relations of the United States with the Indian affect the shipper who had brought suit against the railroad com- t?r~:tb:O~~~~~ ~~~~~f:~rvil0 s~~~~~~~~ed to the Committee on pany? Reform in the Civil Service. · Mr. HEPBURN. Or might do so. toTthhaetCsooiDIDimu~ttehaesornelalntvesali1pdpeensnsii?onnss .for service in the civil war be referred Mr. PATTERSON. Or might bring suit for subjecting him to P~ _ such unreasonable rates? That is a legal pronosition, and I do That so much as relates to the militia of the United States be referred to - .t:" t;he Committee on the Militia. not think it would be res adjudicata, although I may be wrong on That so much as relates to the manufacturing industries of the United States that point. be referred to the Committee on Manufactures. - I now yield the floor to my friend from Florida [:Mr. COOPER]. That so much as relates to the Dilfl;rict of Columbia, other than appropria- .. will recogmz'e the gentleman from tions therefor, be referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia. The SPEAKER. The Chali That so much as relates to the. Pacific raih·oads be referred to the Commit- Florida in hi~ own right. tee on the Pacific Railroads. . Mr. COOPER of Flol'i.da: .Mr: Speaker-- . th'!'~:r~~t~J;~ as relates to the Territories be referred to the Committee on Mr. WILLIAMS of Mis81SS1Jlp1.. If the gentleman from Flonda ~ That so much as relates to the census be referred to the Committee on Ap- Will yield to me for a moment, I wish to suggest that it is late, Pl'Opriations. . . . and with his permission I move that the House now adjourn. That so l?luch as relates to the ~!~~~:;Ion of life on railways be referred to · · ld h fl f h t the CoiDIDittee on Railways and . Mr. 90 0 P~ of Florida. I yre t e oor or t a purpose, ThatsomuchasrelatestoquarantinerefP11ationsandforeignimmigration reserving my nght. " be referred to the Committee on ImmigratiOn and Naturalization. The SPEAKER. The ~i~ht. of _the gentleman will be preserved. The SPEAKER. Thereisnocommitteeon the Eleventh Census. Mr. ~LIAMS of MlBSISSlppl. Then I move that the House · Mr. WILSON of West Virginia. I ask to strike that out. do now adJourn. The SPEAKER. That will be stricken out, if there be no ob- E1\'1WLLED BILLS SIGNED. jection. Mr. PEARSON, from the Committee on Enrolled Bills, reported Mr. GROW. Is this a motion to refer the message to the Com- that they had examined and found truly enrolled a bill (H. R. mittoo of the Whole House on the state of the Union? · 1219) granting a pension to Mary 1\:lartin; when the Speaker ~igned The SPEAKER. This is a request for unanimous consent to the same. discharge the Committee of the Whole from the further considera- OFFICE FORCE, 'DEP .A.RTMENT OF JUSTICE. tion of the President's message, and for the consideration of the The SPEAKER (pending the motion to adjourn) laid before the resolution which has been read. House a letter from the Acting Secretary of the Treasury,-trans- 1\i r . GROW. Would the subject of the message itself be open mitting estimates of deficiency in appropriation for office force in to discussion on that proposition? the Department of Justice, submitted by the Attorney-General; The SPEAKER. Not upon this request for unanimous consent. which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and This is a request for unanimous consent to discharge the Commit- ordered to be printed. t t ee of the Whole on the state of the Union from the further con- LEA. VE OF ABSENCE. sideration of the message, and to adopt this resolution in the House. By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted as follows: 0~ c o~rse without unanimous consent the Honse must go into To Mr. GORMAN, indefinitely, on account of sickness. Comm1ttee of the Whole. T M w · d finit 1 t f · kn of his :M:r. GROW. On the m essage? 0 r. .A.UGH, m e e y, on accoun SIC ess The SPEAKER. On this resolution. daughter. ° To MJ.·. MADDOX, for to-day, on account of sickness. J\Ir. GROW. And then the m essage would be open to discussion? DISTRIBUTION OF PRESIDENT'S MESS.A.GE. T'.o.e SPEAKER. Yes; this resolution would be open to discussion. :Mr . GROW. Then I will object to it, if that is the only way to Mr. WILSON of West Virginia. If the gentleman from 1\Iissis- get th e discussion. sippi will permit me, I wish to offer a formal resolution-- The SPEAKER. The gentleman from P ennsylvania objects. The SPEAKER. There is a motion to adjourn pending. The gentleman from M"'IBsissippi moves that the House do now ad- Mr. WILSON of West Virginia. I hope the gentleman from jom·n. Mississippi will withdraw that· motion for the present, so that I - The motion was agreed to. may offer this resolution. . Accordingly (at 5 9'clock and 1 minute p.m.), the House ad- Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. Certainly. JOnrn.ed. 72 CONGRESSJONAL RECORD-SENATE. DECEMBER 6, PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS. SENATE. Under clause 3 of Rule XXII, bills and resolutions of the follow ing titles were introduced and severally referred as follows: THURSDAY~ December 6, 1894. By Mr. LITTLE: A bill (H. R. 8076) providing for a temporary Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. W. H. MILBURN, D. D. government in the territory occupied by the Five Civilized Tribes of The Journal of yesterday's proceedings was read and approved. Indians, to be known as the Territory of Indianol~to the Com mittee on the Territories. REPORT OF INTERSTATE COMMERCE COQISSION. By Mr. DINGLEY: A bill (H. R. 80-77) anthorizing the estab The VICE-PRESIDENT laid before the Senate a letter from the lishment of lights, fog signal, and beacon on the Kennebec River, chairman of the Interstate Commerce Commission, transmitting, Maine-to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. in accordance with the provisions of the act of Congress to regu By Mr. WISE: A bill (H. R. 8078) to authorize the acquisition late commerce, the eighth annual report of the Interstate Com or certain real estate in the city of Washington, D. C., and the merce Commission; which was referred to the Committee on In erection of a Government printing plant thereon-to the Commit terstate Commerce, and ordered to be printed. tee on Public Buildings and Grounds. ADJOURNMENT TO MONDAY. By :M:r. DAVEY: A bill (H. R. 8079) to amend the act entitled Mr. GORMAN. I move that when the Senate adjourn to-day I • ''An act to authorize the construction' of a bridge across the Mis it be until Monday next. sissippi River above New OrleanB, :• approved January 26, 1893-to · The motion was agreed to. · the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. By Mr. LIVINGSTON: A bill (H. R. 8080) to provide for a site .,PETITIONS. for the Government Printing Office, and for the erection of suit Mr. PALMER presented a petition of local union No. 80, able buildings for that printing office thereon-to the Committee Cigarmakers' International Union, of Danville, ill., and a peti on Public Buildings and Grounds. -. tion of local union No. 47, Cigarmakers' International Union, of By Mr. WARNER: A bill (H. R. 8087) to amend an a-ct entitled Quincy, Ill., praying for the passage of House bill No. 7756, author "An act authorizing the appointment of receivers of national izing the appointment of a nonpartisan commission to collate in banks, and for other purposes," approved June 30, 1876-to the formation and to consider and recommend legislation to meet the Committee on Banking and Currenoy. probleiUS presented by labor, agriculture, and capital; which were By Mr. WHEELER of Alabama: A joint resolution (H. Res. 1·eferred to the Committee on Education and Labor. 232) to fill vacancy in the Smithsonian Institution-to the Com BILLS INTRODUCED. ' mittee on the Library. 1lh·. MARTIN introduced a bill (S. 2364) for the r_~lief of Silas By Mr. HOOKER of Mississippi: A joint resolution (H. Res. 233) P. Keller; which was read twice by its title, and rEtferred to the to repeal so much of section 3 of the act of January 14, 1875, en Committee on Indian Affairs. titled "An act to provide for the.resumption of specie payments," He also introduced a bill (S. 2365) for the relief of Northrup & as authorizes the Secreta.ry of the Treasury to issue bonds, etc. Chick; which was read twice by its title, and referre~o the Com to the Committee on Ways and Means. mittee on Indian Affairs. By Mr. BLAIR: A resolution calling upon the President of the. Mr. SHERMAN introduced a bill (S. 2366) for there "ef of Sam United States for certain papers and information relating to the uel Cole; which was read twice.by its title, and, with the accom war now pending between China and Japan-to the Committee panying papers, referred to the Committee on Military Affairs. on Foreign Affairs. Mr. McMILLAN introduced a bill (S. 2367) for the relief of By Mr. PICKLER: A resolution asking the Secretary of the Helen Larned; which was read twice by its title, and referred to Treasury to furnish a list of soldiers of the late war discharged the Committee on Pensions. from his Department since the 4th day of March, 1893, and cause Mr. GALLINGER introduced a bill (S. 2368) granting a pension of said discharge-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. to Elizabeth A. Colby; which was read twice by its title, and By Mr. BERRY: A resolution to pay M. M. Roberson for extra referred to the Committee on Pensions. services-to the Committee on Accounts. Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon introduced a bill (S. 2369) to correct the military record of John Fox, of Albany, Oreg.; whioh was PRIVATE BILLS, ETC. read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Military Under clause 1 of Rule XXII, private bills of the following ilffairs. . titles were presented and referred &s follows: Mr. LODGE introduced a bill (S. 2370) for the relief of John C. By Mr. BYNUM: A bill (H. R. 8081) for the payment of Cutter; which was read twice by its title; and referred to the $1,537.28 to George W. McCray-to the Committee on Claims. Committee on Mjlitary Affairs. By Mr. TRACEY: A bill (H. R. 8082) for the relief of Celia Free ~WITHDRAWAL OF PAPERS. man-to the..... Jommittee on Invalid Pensions. On motion of Mr. HAWLEY, it was Also, a bill (H. R. 8083) for relief of Elizabeth Como-to the Ordered, That the papers on file in the office of the Secretary of the Senate Committee on Invalid Pensions. in the case of Walter Sniff{lns, introduced in the Fifty-first Congress, be Also, a bill (H. R. 8084) for relief of Jeremiah Stokes-to the withdrawn from said files, under the rules of the Senate. Committee on Invalid Pensions. .A.NTO IO M.AXIMO MORA. By Mr. WHEELER of Alabama: A bill (H. R. 8085) for the relief Mr. DOLPH. I submit a resolution calling for the continued of Newton L. Crow-to the Committee on Pensions. correspondence in the Mora case, for which I ask immediate con Also, a bill (H. R. 8086) for the relief of Terah C. Daniels-to the sideration. We have a part of the correspondence before the Com Committee on Pensions. · mittee on Foreign Relations. It is a matter referred to in the By 1\-I.r. WILSON of West Virginia: A bill (H. R. 8088) to re President's message. move the charge of desertion from the record of James Evans, The resolution was considered by unanimous consent, and 3.o