« PoprzedniaDalej »
MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE.
telegraph companies more than is held in com- I have had $10,000 invested in telegraph com
PETITIONS. mon by other persons. I use them sometimes pany stock for a long time, and no dividends as others do. But everybody is interested in
The foilowing petitions were presented under . whatever have been declared. I do not see the rule, and referred to the appropriate comcheapening the cost of telegrams. It is pro- why we should impose less taxation on com- mittees : posed by sone that the Government shall take panies that declare dividends than on those that By Mr. BOUTWELL: The petition of charge of the telegraph lines of the country do not. It is unfair and unjust. I only ask | Joseph R. Hayes, and 92 others, of Lowell, and make them a part of the postal system of that the tax on the telegraph companies shall | Massachusetts, in reference to the tax on cigars. the Government. Of course you would not be made the same as that on the express comtax telegraphing should that be done. If you panies.
Also, a memorial from E. R. Knorr, in ref
erence to ocean charts. determine to tax it, then you must let it remain [Here the hammer fell.]
By Mr. ELIOT: The petition of the Bener: where it now is, under the control of private The question being taken on Mr. FARNS
olent Homestead and Relief Society of Savanenterprise. If you tax telegraph companies, WORTH's amendment to the amendment of Mr. you will simply add to the prices which will || SCHENCK, it was not agreed to; there being
nah, Georgia, praying for relief.
Also, the petition of Atlantic Insurance Combe charged for telegrams. If the chairman or ayes thirteen, noes not counted.
pany and others, of New York, praying for the any other member of the Committee of Ways Mr. SCHENCK's amendment was agreed to. erection of a breakwater at the entrance of and Means can give any reason why we should Mr. SCHENCK. I move that the commake a distinction in this respect between
Cuttyhunk harbor. mittee rise.
By Mr. FIELDS: The petition of Jefferson telegraph companies and express companies, The motion was agreed to.
P. Člyde and 86 others, asking a reduction in I would like to hear it. Mr. BENJAMIN. I would inquire of the having resumed the chair, Mr. Pomeroy reSo the committee rose; and the Speaker | the expenses of the military, naval, and civil
service of the United States. gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Farnsworth)
ported that the Committee of the Whole on if the telegraph line is the poor man's mail
the state of the Union had had under considroute?
IN SENATE. Mr. FARNSWORTH. It ought to be, but | particularly the special order, being the bill eration the state of the Union generally, and
Monday, June 15, 1868. it never will be while you impose a tax of three
(H. R. No. 1060) to reduce into one act and Prayer by Rev. A. D. GILLETTE, D. D., of per cent. upon it. to amend the laws relating to internal taxes,
Washington. Mr. SCHENCK. I will tell the gentleman || and had come to no resolution thereon.
On motion of Mr. WILSON, and by unaniwhy it is proposed to make the difference he
mous consent, the reading of the Journal of speaks of. As the law is now each of these
Saturday last was dispensed with. classes of companies is charged three per cent. A message from the Senate, by Mr. GORHAM,
PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS. upon its gross receipts. In this bill they are its Secretary, announced that the Senate had both embraced in one section. The express passed bills of the following titles, in which the
The PRESIDENT pro tempore presented companies, through their representatives, have concurrence of the House was requested :
two petitions of citizens of Ohio, praying the appeared before the Committee of Ways and An act (S. No. 534) relating to contested
introduction hand-looms and such material Means, exhibited statistics, and made state- elections in the city of Washington, District of among the Indians as will attract their attenments. After a revision of the whole subject, || Columbia ; and
tion and lead them to fabricate their own garand taking into consideration the amount of An act (S. No. 509) in addition to an act
ments; which was referred to the Committee capital employed, the amount of their losses passed March 26, 1864, entitled "An act in
on Indian Affairs. and their profits, and their ability to bear a addition to an act entitled 'Anact for the pun
He also presented a memorial of E. B. Ward, burden of this kind, the committee came to the ishment of certain crimes against the United praying a change in the inode of appointments conclusion that it was right and proper and just | States.'''
and removals and in the qualifications of all to put the tax upon express companies down
officers who are selected to execute the laws
LEAVE OF ABSENCE. to two and a half per cent. But nobody
for the collection or disbursement of moneys has undertaken to show to the committee that
Leave of absence was granted to Mr. Win; || belonging to the United States ; which was there was any reason for reducing the pres
Dom for one week, and Mr. BROMWELL for ten referred to the Committee on Finance. ent tax upon the telegraph companies. "The days.
He also presented a petition of Gabriel M.
ORDER OF BUSINESS. committee, from their knowledge on this sub
Thomas, of South Carolina, praying a removal ject, were inclinet to believe that the tax Mr. HOLMAN. I move that the House of the civil disabilities imposed on him by act ought to be left where it is. If the gentle- adjourn.
of Congress; which was referred to the Comman wants to know my own particular reasons Mr. SCHENCK. I believe the order was
mittee on the Judiciary. for coming to that conclusion, I can tell him. || by unanimous consent that the House continue
Mr. WILSON presented a petition of citi. The express companies cannot be started in in session till five o'clock. A bill has just granted to the Masonic
Hall Association of
zens of Vermont, praying a repeal of the charter opposition to each other without an enormous come from the Senate that it is desirable to act amount of outlay, while it costs compara- upon.
Washington, District of Columbia ; which was tively little to build a few miles of telegraph. The SPEAKER. That was the order of the referred to the Committee on the District of Thus competition springs up from time to time House.
Columbia. between different telegraph companies. Some Mr. FARNSWORTH. I move to proceed || A. D. Breed, of Cincinnati, Ohio, praying for
Mr. SHERMAN presented the memorial of fail in their struggles to secure a profitable to business on the Speaker's table. existence while others succeed.
But as a
confirmation of the land grant of June 3, 1856, general rule the profits from telegraphs have must be taken up in their regular order and
to the Selma, Rome, and Dalton Railroad been large in proportion to the cost of estab- | disposed of.
Company, and extension of the time for comlishing them. They have, in general, paid Mr. HOLMAN. I hope the motion will not | pleting the road and for a change of location ; well. My friend from Pennsylvania [Mr. Co- prevail.
which was referred to the Committee on Public VODE] says that he has not found it so in his On the question of proceeding to business
Lands. experience; but I know that in cases of which on the Speaker's table, there were-ayes 44,
PAPERS WITHDRAWN. I bave some personal knowledge the stock of noes 28 ; no quorum voting.
On motion of Mr. HOWE, it was telegraph companies has been extremely profit- Tellers were ordered ; and the Chair appoint- Ordered, That D. A. Daniels have leave to withable. I am told that the Western Union Tele- ed Messrs. INGERSOLL and Holman.
draw his petition from the files of the Senate, and that graph Company has not realized any consid- Mr. INGERSOLL. If this motion prevails,
it be referred to the Committee on Claims. erable profits; but perhaps it has not been will it be in order to set aside bills in order to
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES. sufficiently long established. It must, how: || reach any special one?
Mr. VAN WINKLE, from the Committee ever, be considered that one cannot tell from The SPEAKER. They must be acted on on Pensions, to whom was referred a petition the returns of these companies whether they or referred in their order.
of citizens of New York, praying that a pension are or are not making profits. There are com- Mr. INGERSOLL. I move that the House be granted to Hannah Cook, submitted a report, binations made; there are processes called | adjourn.
accompanied by a bill (ş. No. 545) granting a waterings of stock, expansions of stock, &c., The SPEAKER. That motion is not yet pension to Hannah Cook. The bill was read by which companies, upon the statistical tables || in order.
and passed to a second reading, and the report presented, may appear not to be making profits Mr. BLAINE. Will it be in order to regard was ordered to be printed. for their stockholders, when, in fact, the enter- | it as five o'clock now by unanimous consent? He also, from the same committee, to whom prise is yielding large returns for the invest- The SPEAKER. It would be.
was referred the petition of Jane McMurray, ment. I yield the balance of my time to the Mr. BLAINE. I think we can so regard it. submitted a report, accompanied by a bill (S. gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. Covode.) Mr. SCHENCK. It will be five o'clock No. 546) for the relief of Jane McMurray. Mr. COVODE. Mr. Chairman, I desire that before a count is had.
The bill was read and passed to a second read. the tax on telegraph companies shall be put The SPEAKER. If the chairman of the ing, and the report was ordered to be printed. down to the same rate as that on express com- Committee of Ways and Means makes no He also, from the same committee, to whom panies. I know it to be a fact that the express objection it can be so regarded.
was referred the petition of John Sheets, subcompanies are making larger dividends than the Mr. SCHENCK. I make none.
mitted a report, accompanied by a bill (S. No. telegraph companies. I happen to be familiar The SPEAKER. Then the House stands || 547) granting a pension to John Sheets. The with this question. I have money invested in | adjourned till Monday at twelve o'clock. bill was read and passed to a second reading, both classes of companies; and from the one The House accordingly (at four o'clock and and the report was ordered to be printed. I I get dividends, while from the other I get none. Il fifty-nine minutes) adjourned.
He also, from the same committee, to whom
was referred the petition of Almanda Stack: back without amendment, and recommend its before the courts some importers of New York house, submitted a report, accompanied by a passage.
protested, and in the case of Napier vs. Hiram bill (S. No. 518) granting a pension to Almanda Mr. HARLAN. If there is no objection, I Barney the court lield that the importer was Stackhouse and the children of Parks J. Stack- should be very glad to have that bill taken up entitled to the allowance of both tare and draft house, deceased. The bill was read and passed | and acted upon now. I do not think there under the acts of 1799 and 1861. The Secreto a second reading, and the report was ordered will be one Senator who will oppose. It is a tary of the Treasury having acquiesced in the to be printed. very small matter.
decision of the courts, the duties exacted couHe also, from the same committee, to whom
Nr. POMEROY. It is merely a burying lot trary thereto and paid under protest were was referred the petition of Catharina Eck
in the city of Burlington, Iowa, that was re- refunded to the importers. These petitioners hardt, submitted a report, accompanied by a
served from sale by the United States for that ask that in cases where protests were not made bill (S. No. 549) granting an increase of pen- purpose, but which they have now abandoned. the same allowance be made to them as where sion to Catharina Eckhardt. The bill was read By unanimous consent, the Senate, as in there was protest. I have a letter from the and passed to a second reading, and the report
Committee of the Whole, proceeded to con- Secretary of the Treasury on the subject, which was ordered to be printed.
sider the bill. It proposes to confirm and vest I will read : He also, from the same committee, to whom all the title of the United States in and to a
TREASURY DEPARTMENT, March 4, 1868. was referred the bill (H. R. No. 1010) relating certain tract of land in the city of Burlington, Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt to pensions, reported it with amendments. Des Moines county, in the State of lowa, of your note dated the 24th ultimo, subunitting a letMr. HENDRICKS, from the Committee on described as being west of lot No. 978 in that
ter of Mr. Moses II. Grianell, of New York, addressed
to you under date of February 13, 1863, (which letter Naval Affairs, to whom was referred the bill | city, south of Valley street, west of Boundary is herewith respectfully returned) relative to secur(S. No. 486) to facilitate the settlement of cerstreet, and north of Market street, and which ing the enactinent by Congress of a resolution au
thorizing the return of duties exacted at the port of tain prize cases in the southern district of was originally reserved from sale by the Uni.
New York in alleged violation of law. Florida, reported it without amendment, and
ted States and dedicated to public burial pur: The excess of duties referred to in the communicasubmitted a report; which was ordered to be poses, in the “Independent School District tion of Mr. Grinnell was exacted by reason of nonof that city, to be forever dedicated to and eighth section of the general collection act of 1753,
allowance for "draft," as prescribed by the fiftyprinted.
Mr. WILLIAMS, from the Committee on used by the school district for public school on articles paying specific duties.
tion of specific duties; and Treasury circular of March (H. R. No. 1157) to cede to the State of Ohio
21, 1861, directed that allowances for tare, drait, &c., the unsold lands in the Virginia military dis
The bill was reported to the Senate without were to be made in accordance with sections fitty
eight and fifty-nine of the act of 1799, which were trict in said State, reported it without amendamendment, ordered to be engrossed for a
again brought into operation. ment.
third reading, read the third time, and passed. But in view of Treasury circular dated March Mr. SUMNER, from the Committee on
24, 1817, directing that draft and tare should not be
allowed on the same article, the former applying to Foreign Relations, reported a bill (S. No. 551)
Mr. FOWLER asked, and by unanimous con- merchandise in bulk and the latter to goods in packto carry into effect the two several decrees of
ages, draft was not allowed at the port of New York the district court of the United States for the sent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S. No.
ou goods in packages. It was, however, allowed on district of Louisiana in the cases of the British
552) to provide for the better security of life such goods at the ports of Boston, Philadelphia, and on board of steamboats and steamships and
Baltimore, vessels Volant and Science; which was read,
In order to test the point before the courts, some and passed to a second reading. other vessels; which was read twice by its title,
importers protested at the port of New York; and, and referred to the Committee on Commerce. in the case of Napier rs. Barney, the court held that He also presented a letter from the Secre.
Mr. NYE asked, and by unanimous consent, the importer was entitled to both draft and tare tary of State, addressed to the Committee on
under the acts of 1799 and 1861. Foreign Relations, in relation to the cases of obtained, leave to introduce a joint resolution
The Department having acquiesced in this decision, (S. R. No. 145) in relation to the coast defense; the duties exacted contrary thereto and paid under the British vessels Volant and Science; which was ordered to be printed.
which was read twice by its title, and referred protest were refunded to the several importers. But Mr. HOWE, from the Committee on Claims, to the joint Committee on Ordnance.
no authority existed to refund to those who had not
paid under protest; and it is for the relief of the latter REFUNDING OF DUTIES.
class. I understand, that the resolution above reto whom was referred the petition of Robert
ferred to is desired. Ford, submitted a report, accompanied by a
Mr. MORGAN. I move to take up for The case may be considered an exceptional one, bill (S. No. 550) for the relief of Robert Ford. consideration Senate bill No. 448, for the
in view of the fact that draft was allowed at the The bill was read, passed to a second reading, return of certain duties erroneously exacted.
ports of Boston, Philadelphia, and Baltimore, and
was not allowed at New York. This was in effect a and the report was ordered to be printed.
The motion was agreed to; and the bill (S. violation of the clauso in the Constitution (urticle Mr. POMEROY, from the Committee on No. 448) to refund duties erroneously exacted
one, section seven,) which declares that "all duties,
imposts, and excises shall be uniforın throughout the Public Lands, to whom was referred the bill in certain cases was read the second time,
United States. (H. R. No. 554) making a grant of land to the and considered as in Committee of the Whole. Under these circumstances, I am of opinion that
the proposed legislation would be eminently proper. State of Minnesota to aid in the improvement It proposes to direct the Secretary of the of the navigation of the Mississippi river, Treasury to refund to importers in the city of
I am, very respectfully,
H. McCULLOCH, reported it with an amendment. New York, in moneys receivable for duties,
Secretary of the Treasury. Mr. WILSON, from the Committee on Mili- the excess of duties exacted and paid upon Hon. EDWIN D. MORGAN, tary Affairs and the Militia, to whom was importations and merchandise subject to spe
United States Senate, Washington, D. C. referred the bill (S. No. 410) making appro
cific duties, made subsequent to the passage of I have here, also, the circular of Mr. Secre. priations for the repair, preservation, and con
the tariff act of the 2d of March, 1861, and tary Chase, dated March 21, 1861, in which it struction of certain public works in the Terri: prior to the passage of the act of the 14th of || is stated : tory of Idaho, and for other purposes, asked || July, 1862, caused by the non-allowance by the "That in allowances on account of tax, draft, &c., to be discharged from its further consideration, collector of the port of New York for draft on goods subject to specific duty under the new tarifi, and that it be referred to the Committee on
officers of the customs will be governed by the proupon such importations, as provided by sec.
visions of the fifty-eighth and fifty-ninth sections Appropriations; which was agreed to.
tions fifty-eight and fifty-nine of the act to of the general collection act of March 2, 1799, which, He also, from the same committee, to whom | regulate the collection of duties on imports are again brought into operation." was referred the bill (S. No. 355) authorizing and tonnage, approved March 2, 1799.
This bill and these papers were before the the construction of a bridge across the Mis
Mr. FÉSSENDEN. I should like some Committee on Finance, and they thought souri river upon the military reservation at explanation of that bill. I do not understand the claim was entirely just, and they have Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, reported it with what it is.
unanimously reported in favor of the bill. If amendments.
Mr. MORGAN. The act of March 2, 1861, necessary a limit can be fixed on the amount Mr. THAYER, from the Committee on provided for the collection of specific duties. to be paid, which I will propose if it is deemed Military Affairs and the Militia, to whom was A circular from the honorable Secretary of needful. referred the bill (S. No. 371) relative to the the Treasury, issued to collectors of customs, The bill was reported to the Senate. military reservation at Fort Dalles, in Oregon, dated March 21, 1861, directed allowances for Mr. MORGAN. It is supposed that the reported it without amendment.
tare, draft, &c., to be made in accordance with amount of duties to be refunded is not far from Mr. POMEROY, from the Committee on
sections fifty-eight and fifty-nine of the general || $50,000, but so as to have the amount large Public Lands, reported an amendment intended
collection act of 1799, which were again brought enough to cover all demands I will offer this to be proposed to the bill (H. R. No. 267) to into operation. Allowances for tare and draft amendment: declare forfeited to the United States certain were made in the ports of Boston, Philadel. And the sum of $60,000, or so much thereof as may lands granted to aid in the construction of
phia, Baltimore, and other ports throughout the be necessary, is hereby appropriated out of any railroads in the States of Alabama, Missis.
United States, under the act of 1861 and under inoneys not otherwise appropriated, to carry into sippi, Louisiana, and Florida, and for other the Treasury circular referred to, in accordance
effect the objects of this act. purposes; which was ordered to be printed, with the uniform practice of the Government
It is not known exactly what the sum is, but and recommitted to the Committee on Public
under all previous specific tariff acts; but the perhaps it is well enough to make the approLands. collector of customs at the port of New York
priation $60,000. did not make any allowance for draft in cases
The amendment was agreed to. SCHOOL LOT IN BURLINGTON, IOWA.
where tare was allowed, declaring that both Mr. CONNESS. I would inquire of the Mr. POMEROY. The Committee on Public | allowances could not be made on the same Senator who has charge of this bill whether Lands, to whom was referred the hill (S. No. article ; in other words, that tare only should there is any correction necessary to be made 469) confirming the title to a tract of land in be allowed on merchandise imported in pack- touching the collection of duties in any other Burlington, Iowa, have had the same under ages, and draft only in cases of merchandise ports; whether New York is the only place in consideration, and directed me to report it Il imported in bulk. In order to test the point which those collections were made illegally and
improperly; whether the committee inquired the same force and effect as any other judg. | The Navy Department paid them upward of as to tbat? ment of the Court of Claims.
three hundred and twenty-two thousand dolMr. MORGAN. It would appear that the Mr. DRAKE. I have simply to say, sir, || lars, and this board, though they stand upon Treasury circular issued in 1861 was carried unless some Senator calls for information with the very same footing as the others, the very into effect in all the other ports of the country. regard to this resolution, that the whole thing terms of the contract being identical, the alterMr. Barney was the only collector who ob. was incidentally discussed the other day in con- ations identical, the delays identical, allow jected.
nection with the bill which was urged by the them not one cent though they are five hundred Mr. CONNESS. That appears by the in- Senator from Indiana (Mr. HENDRICKS] to and thirty-three thousand dollars nearly out of vestigation ?
pay certain sums of money to certain contract- pocket. So in the case of the Manayunk, where • Mr. MORGAN. Yes, sir; that appears by ors. If there is any point on which any Sen- The whole increased cost was nearly three hunthe investigation.
ator desires information to show the justice of dred and forty thousand dollars, one hundred The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a || allowing the men concerned in the construc- and sixty-six thousand and some odd hundred third reading, was read the third time, and tion of these vessels to go into the Court of dollars were allowed them by the Department, passed.
Claims and establish their claim under the nothing allowed them by this board at all, and CONTRACTORS FOR IRON-CLADS.
terms of the act of March 2, 1867, I am ready they are one hundred and seventy-two thouto give that information.
sand dollars and upward out of pocket. So in Mr. DRAKE. I move that the Senate take
Mr. WILLIAMS. I should like to ask the up the joint resolution (S. R. No. 100) for the
the case of the Tippecanoe, Miles Greenwood, Senator if he does not propose by this resolu- on the same facts, is one hundred and seventyrelief of certain contractors for the construc- tion to refer to the Court of Claims such claims six thousand dollars and upward out of pocket. tion of vessels of war and steam machinery. as were submitted to and rejected by this board So in the case of the Etlah, the builders are
The PRESIDENT pro tempore put the ques- of commissioners. Is not that the fact? upward of one hundred and fifty-six thousand tion on the motion; but before announcing the Mr. DRAKE. Mr. President, the act of dollars out of pocket. result,
March 2, 1867, entitled "An act for the relief The fact is that this board allowed an acMr. STEWART. That resolution will cer
of certain contractors for the construction of count of five of these vessels built in the eastern tainly lead to discussion, and I desire to call up
vessels of war and steam machinery," author- States the amounts specified in the bill that to-day, and I should like to do it in the morning ized the Secretary of the Navy - to investigate was passed here the other day, and on the hour, a bill to remove political disabilities.
the claims of all contractors for building ves- other four of the nine built in the western Mr. DRAKE. I hope the Senator will allow sels of war and steam machinery for the same States they allowed not one single cent; and me to call this resolution to come up now. under contracts made after the 1st day of May, Mr. STEWART. Let me make a single 1861, and prior to the 1st day of January,
yet the circumstances under which they were
built were precisely the same, the contract the remark. It is necessary that the bill to which || 1864,” which investigation was to be made upon same, the specifications the same, the delays I refer should be considered to-day, in order a basis specified in that act. that the State governments may go into opera
on the part of the Government the same, the
Mr. WILSON. What was the basis? difference in the price of gold during the period tion. It will relieve a large number of persons Mr. DRAKE. It was as follows: who have been elected to office, and it is very
of building the same! Still this board allowed
"Ha sball ascertain the additional cost which was nothing. important that the bill should be passed to-day. necessarily incurred by each contractor in the com
Now, then, the simple request here is “ Let Mr. DRAKE. Mr. President, did the Sen. pletion of his work by reason of any changes or alterate agree to take up the joint resolution I menations in the plans and specifications required, and
us go into the Court of Claims: we had no delays in the prosecution of the work occasioned by clear showing before that commission ; we tioned or not?
the Government, which were not provided for in the sent in our request; they never gave us an The PRESIDENT pro tempore. That is the original contract; but no allowance for any advance question pending now. in the price of labor or material shall be consid
opportunity to go before them; or at least they ered unless such advance occurred during the pro- never asked of us any explanation; they never Mr. DRAKE. I appeal to the Senator from longed time for completing the work rendered necesNevada in this matter. I do not see that there sary by the delay resulting from the action of the
gave us an opportunity to come in there and Government aforesaid, and then only when such
show them how it was that we were damaged. is any necessity for discussion over this resolu
advance could not have been avoided by the exer- Let us go before the Court of Claims, not for tion. The whole matter has been extensively cise of ordinary prudence aud diligence on the part a general demand upon the Government, but discussed in connection with the bill that was
of the contractor, and from such additional cosi, to
let us go there upon the very specific terms of passed the other day. I think the Senate can such sum as may have been paid each contractor for the act of March, 1867, and if we cannot there come to a vote upon it immediately without any reason heretofore over and above the contract
show a case whereby we are entitled to relief debate ; and as I have never asked the Senate
price, and shall report to Congress a tabular state-
more than this board granted us then let us before, I believe, to take up any matter in the the contractor, a description of the work, the contract be turned out. We know that we are to go morning hour I should be very glad to be price, the whole increased cost of the work over the
there and to stay there years before we get gratified in this instance.
contract price, and the amount of such increased
this money or any part of it, before we can get Mr. STEWART. The taking up of the bill ment as aforesaid, and the amount already paid the
any allowance." We know, as I do know and I have mentioned is no particular gratification contractor over and above the contract price.
state to the Senate, the fact that some of those to me. It is a matter of public business which Now, Mr. President, I will state in a few concerns were bankrupted by these contracts; must be done ; but I withdraw my opposition words exactly how this matter stands. There and all that they ask is for the poor privilege and am willing that the resolution of the Senator are quite a number of vessels concerning which of going into the Court of Claims and showing should come up.
the claims of the contractors were submitted ; their whole case there ; and if, under the terins The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The ques but I take the cases of nine of them, all of of the act of March 2, 1867, they are entitled tion is on taking up the joint resolution for one class, all built under precisely the same to anything, let the court award it, and if they consideration.
contract, all to be built for the same sum of are not, let the court say they are not, and there The motion was agreed to; and the Senate, money, and all of them costing very largely || is the end of it. That is all that is asked. I, as in Committee of the Whole, proceeded to
above what the contract price was. For in- | sir, appeal to the Senate on behalf of worthy consider the joint resolution (S. R. No. 100) for || stance, here are three together built by the inen who have actually been ruined, some of the relief of certain contractors for the con- firm of Secor & Co. and the firm of Perrine, | them, by this whole transaction; and if it is struction of vessels of war and steam machinery. Secor & Co., to wit: the Manhattan, the Te. not a case where they can be allowed to go
The preamble recites that Congress, by an cumseh, and the Mahopac. They cost over there and show themselves entitled under this act passed on the 2d of March, 1867, provided || and above the contract price $1,236,101 22. act of March 2, 1867, not otherwise, to some for the investigation by the Secretary of the | The Navy Department paid over and above additional compensation, then of course the Navy of the claims of all the contractors for the contract price $521,195 58, leaving a bal- Government will suffer naught by it. building vessels of war and steam machinery, ance of excess over the contract price and that Mr. CHANDLER. Mr. President, I do not and that pursuant to that act the Secretary of amount of $714,905 64. This board that was know the facts in regard to the contractors for the Navy appointed a naval board for the invest organized by the Secretary of the Navy under these vessels, but I believe the vessels were igation of the claims in question, and that it the act of March 2, 1867, allowed to those indi- iron-clads of a light draft, which were ordered appears that the provisions of said act have not | viduals $115,539 01, leaving unprovided for || during the war. I remember that the Combeen fully conformed to in the findings of the $599,366 63. That is one case.
mittee on the Conduct of the War was directed board ; and Congress having neither the time Mr. WILLIAMS. I do not know that I'fully || by the Senate to investigate into the condition nor means for the careful legal investigation understand the Senator. Was this $115,000 of those iron-elads, and the Presiding Officer which the importance of the subject demands, allowed by the board in addition to the $500,000 || and myself were on a sub-committee that did to relieve it from the further consideration of | paid?
investigate their condition. We went to Bosthe subject, and as a final settlement of the Mr. DRAKE. Yes, sir; that was in addi- ton and Brooklyn and examined them, and we claims of the contractors, the resolution pro- tion; and yet notwithstanding all that the Navy | found that of the twenty there was not one that vides the claims for building vessels of war Department paid them was above the contract would float, but they would all go to the botand steam machinery, referred to in the act price, and uotwithstanding the $115,000 allowed tom as quick as iron not worked into vessels. entitled “ An act for the relief of certain con. by the board, these individuals have nearly Mr. DRAKE. Will the gentleman be so tractors," &c., approved March 2, 1867, be || $600,000 of excess of cost over the contract | good as to state if that was the case with any referred to the Court of Claims, which is hereby | price for which there is no provision.
of the eight named on the margin of this paper ? vested with jurisdiction under that act, wliose Now, pass on to the Oneota and the Catawba, Mr. CHANDLER. I do not remember. duty it shall be to investigate and determine built by another concern. Upon these two Mr. DRAKE. Very well; I hope the genthe claims of the several petitioners upon the vessels the whole increased cost was upward tleman will be specific. principles of that act, and its finding is to have ll of six hundred and sixty-five thousand dollars. Mr. CHANDIER. In that case the Navy
Department, finding that they had committed a allowed on behalf of six of them certain sums lution providing for the appointment of a board blunder, had built some twenty iron.clads at a of money, and it rejected all the rest of them ; to ascertain the losses sustained by these con. cost of many millions of dollars which would and that, too, when the circumstances con- tractors. That board was organized according not float, undertook to reconstruct them, make nected with the building of the whole of them to that resolution, and reported the losses sus. them over, turn them into torpedo boats or were absolutely almost identical. And it is a tained by the contractors, after five months of something of that kind. After they had been very singular feature of this case that the five session, hearing evidence upon the subject, and reconstructed, made over, and turned into vessels of one particular class, of which there requiring each contractor to make an exact torpedo boats at a vast expense, they were not were nine, that were selected for the granting statement of every expenditure in the building halt as good as they were when they would go of this aid were built in eastern ports, and the of each vessel. That report, with the evidence to the bottom direct.
four where the aid was denied were built in to a considerable extent, came before the Com Now, sir, I do not know whether these are western ports. It may have been an accident, mittee on Naval Atlairs, and it became my among those vessels or not; but after all, that but it is a very significant accident. These •duty to examine it. I was satisfied that these should have no effect upon the claims of the vessels were all built under the same circum- | parties had sustained loss to a large amount. contractors, though it does reflect upon the stances, that the specifications for the construc- The loss amounted very nearly to two milNavy Department. They had no right to build tion of them were withheld for long periods, in lion dollars, and I thought that a fair percenttwenty vessels that would go to the bottom the case of the nine vessels of the same class for age of the loss ought at least to be paid, and I when their armament was on board, and then two years from the time when they ought to advocated such a bill, and it passed the Senthey had no right to undertake to turn them have been furnished. During that time gold It went to the House of Representatives into torpedo boats, at a vast expenditure, and went up from 118 to 282, and was fluctuating based upon that report. The House Commitmake them worse than they were when they between 150 and 282 the most of the time. tee of Claims was not willing to agree to the would go to the bottom. Still the contractors Every single article that entered into their con- bill. Finally an agreement was arrived at, and undoubtedly obeyed the directions of the Navy struction was of course greatly increased, the the bill passed which has been referred to by Department, and are entitled to compensation. delays caused by the Government itself being the Senator from Missouri, authorizing the I have nothing to say with regard to the merit the cause of loss by that increase of price. appointment of another board, but restricting of these contractors, but I have something to Now, I beg to submit, in opposition to the it in the rule of allowance to this point: that say with regard to the merits of the Navy remarks of the Senator from New Jersey, that no allowance should be made except the loss Department.
the report bears upon its very face the want of was occasioned by the act of the Government. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. President, complete and thorough investigation. Why That board was organized, and made its reI was one of the members of the Committee should there be six vessels selected out of port at this session. My knowledge of the on Naval Affairs who dissented from this report. thirty-one, and twenty-tive built under the case, as I gathered it from the papers that The chairman, the Senator from lowa, LMr. same circumstances completely rejected? That came with the report of the prior board two GRIMES,) and myself did not recommend that shows that there was not sufficient examination. years ago, satisfies me that this last board has this joint resolution should pass. I understand Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. May I ask my not been just to these parties. I wish to make the case to be simply this: the contract price friend a question? Does it appear anywhere no complaint of the Departinent of the Navy. for these vessels was, in round numbers, that the circumstances of the twenty-five ves. I think that the Secretary and the heads of $14,000,000. By reason of delay and altera- sels were like those of the six? I think with bureaus intend to do what is right, but I betions the contractors claimed to be paid as much propriety you might say that if an lieve that they are under an influence, because $10,000,000 inore. The Department allowed arbitration allowed carpenters and architects they made the contracts, because the reguand paid them $5,000,000 of those $10,000,000. an extra price for building six houses, there- lated the construction of the vessels, because Then Congress passed the act of 20 of March, fore they must allow the same advance on any they interposed the changes in the plans and 1867, which appointed a commission and au- other twenty-four houses that inight be built specifications to such an extent that ibey can. thorized that commission to find out what more in the course of the year.
not, in my opinion, do justice to these parties. Was due them; and that commission did find Mr. DRAKE. Asto nine of them I can state That board was organized under the Departout, aud reported that $157,000 more were due; the facts to be these, and they are the great points ment; it was not a board provided for by Con: not $5,000,000, but $157,000; and the other in this investigation. I stated them the other gress; that is, the persons who constituted day we passed a bill appropriating that money, day: that the contract called for the delivery the board were not selected by Congress, but so that it may be paid. Now they ask for lib. of the specifications to the contractors at the selected by the Department. erty to go into the Court of Claims to have the time of the signing of the contract; that none
Mr. FESSENDEN. Who were they? whole subject again investigated. My objection of them were delivered until twenty-eight days Mr. HENDRICKS. I forget now. to that is ihat there is no evidence wbatever afterward, and that from that time on for two Mr. DRAKE. The Secretary of the Navy before Congress that the finding of the com- years the complete specifications were not de- called the board under the act of March 2, mission was not perfectly accurate and just ; livered, though it is a fact that the contract 1867. and until there is some such evidence I think called for the construction of the vessels within Mr. HENDRICKS. Has the Senator from it ought to be final.
the period of six months. And so during all Missouri the names of the board ? Again, if we are determined that no adjudi. that long time of the high rate of gold these Mr. DRAKE. I have their report here. cation shall stand, if we set aside every finding | contractors had to go on and construct that Mr. HENDRICKS. Will the Senator give that is made by commission and by the De- work, with the prices of everything doubled, the names ? partment, we finally shall get a sum of money trebled, and quadrupled, by reason of the rise Mr. DRAKE: Commodore J. B. Marchand, that will be satisfactory to the claimants, and in the price of gold.
Chief Engineer J. W. King, and Paymaster such as Congress wants to pay,
Mr. NYE. I should like to ask the honor. Edward l'oster constituted the board. Mr. WILLIAMS. I should like to ask the able Senator a question. I think he is labor- Mr. HENDRICKS. I have no criticisms to Senator if this $5,000,000 that was paid to ing under a slight mistake in regard to the make on the board; I dare say they are excelthese men in the first instance was ascertained character of that report. The board reported | lent gentlemen; but I think that they have disby a comunission ?
simply upon five, but I do not understand that allowed in many cases where an allowance Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. No; that was they reported adversely on the others.
ought to be made. I think there are many of paid by the Department.
Mr. DRAKE. They simply set it down in these contractors who ought to be relieved Mr. WILLIAMS. Without any examination the table “none,” “none,' &c. That is all. under the law of 1867 who are not relieved by by a commission?
Mr. NYE. Not an adverse report. If the
that report. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Without a com- Senator will turn to the report made two years
Now, I wish to call the attention of Senators' mission being appointed; then a commission ago upon the same subject he will find that to this fact: that the first board said that the was appointed.
these vessels were reported upon for various losses sustained were in the neighborhood If there is to be a review and another adjudi- amounts.
of two million dollars, and the last board cation of this subject I think it ought to be by Mr. DRAKE. If it be not the will of the allowed only about two hundred or two huna commission, and not by the Court of Claims, Senate that under the circumstances these con. dred and twenty-five thousand dollars-a very for I do not see how the Government can tractors, who are ruined by these contracts great difference. The Senate was willing to detend itself, how it can be prepared to bring unless they can get some relief, should have the pass a bill upon the basis of giving a per cent. out the truth there. All these contractors can poor privilege of going into the Court of Claims, of the first allowance. I think that this last go to the Court of Claims with their books and and there asking the court to give them such report is not what it ought to be. I say this their agents and state what they believe to be relief merely, simply, as the Government has after an examination of the case. As far as I their view of the case, while the solicitor and said it is willing they should have under the could, I went through the testimony, and so I the Government will be without means of act of March 2, 1867, then I have done my believe did the Senator from West Virginia, meeting these allegations, when, if we have a duty to them, and I have nothing further to | [Mr. WillEY,] who was on a sub-comınittee commission, they can without being tied dow say.
with the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Nye) and by the rules of evidence examine the whole Mr. HENDRICKS. Mr. President, I felt myself. We undertook to ascertain what were subject themselves and come to a just conclu- it to be my duty to vote in comunittee for this the losses of these parties, and I am perfectly sion. But I do not see upon what is based the joint resolution, and I think I am authorized satisfied that this award does not do justice. I application to have another hearing until it in supporting it in the Senate. I do not think do not wish to find fault with the gentlemen appears that there is something erroneous in the facts stated by the Senator from New Jer- who composed the board, or to say that they the finding of the commission.
sey are conclusive against these parties. In were governed by improper motives. I have Mr. DRAKE. That commission had before the first place, some three years ago the Sen- no doubt they acied honestly; but I think they it the cases of thirty-one different vessels. It li ate, then in executive session, passed a reso- have fallen short of doing for these contractors
what ought to have been done under the act Mr. FESSENDEN. Exactly; but the ques. says he is not going to debate it. I think we of 1867. Inasmuch as there is such a great dif- tion in my mind is whether it has not been can get through with this resolution in a few ference between the reports of the two boards tried before this commission, and rejected be. minutes. Let us try it for fifteen minutes. is it not now proper thai Congress should refer cause the increased cost was not occasioned Mr. SHERMAN. If that is done there will the case to the Government's own court, to be by any action of the Government. The other be a struggle about the order of business. decided upon competent evidence to be pro- bill was distinguished from that case, because Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. I gave notice duced by the contractors and by the Govern.
the losses there provided for were occasioned, on Saturday that I should ask the Senate to ment itself? We have no occasion to distrust to the extent to which the commission made proceed to-day to the consideration of the this court; it is of our own organization. We allowances, by the action of the Government. legislative, executive, and judicial appropria. have no reason to distrust the principles upon
If that distinction exists between the two tion bill, and I think it very important to bave which the court shall make an allowance, if classes of cases I want to know why an allow- that bill considered; but still, if the regular any be made, because we prescribe them. We ance should be made here.
order can be proceeded with, and there is a say that the court shall not allow for anything Mr. HENDRICKS. Whether the board dis- prospect of concluding it to-day, I should not unless it shall be made to appear that the loss allowed a claim in any particular case because like to antagonize this bill with it, and will was occasioned by the act of the officers of the there was no loss, or because if there were a content myself with giving notice that I shall Government. If in any case the Government | loss it was the fault of the contractor himself, try to call it up to morrow. changed the plan and specifications of the ves- I am not prepared to say; but of course their Mr. SHERMAN. I hope the Senator from sels after the contract was made, and thereby | allowance is based upon one prðposition or Missouri, upon the statements made, will withdelayed the construction of the work, caused | the other. Now, these contractors are not draw his motion, because it will only lead to a loss to these pariies, the court is directed to satisfied with that, and they ask Congress to a struggle about the order of business. make an allowance. Does any Senator object allow another trial, a review in a court where Mr. TRUMBULL. The Senator from Maine to that? Ought it not to be so? When I they can introduce testimony. They claim that || has already announced that he wishes to-morexamined the case two years ago, I had before they were not allowed a full hearing before this row to call up the appropriation bill. This me a statement of the advance in wages and || board, and it is worthy of the consideration of resolution will take longer some other time materials. I regret that I have not got it the Senate that this board made up its adjudi- than now, and from the indications I think we here. It would astonish Senators to look back cation in a very short time. I know that to can get through with it in a few minutes. and see how rapidly wages went up in our
hear the evidence and to examine all these Mr. SHERMAN. I gave way on Saturday, workshops ; how rapidly iron and copper and cases would take a good many months of a and I trust the Senate will now go on with the all those things that enter into the construction court that was to go through them and to hear | special order. of vessels and of engines advanced in price the evidence orally. The first board sat, I Mr. TRUMBULL. Let us have fifteen minupon these men. Six months of delay was think, five months, but the last one a very short | utes for this resolution. enough to ruin a contractor; a year was posi- time; how long I cannot say. The Senator Mr. DRAKE. I only ask fifteen minutes. tive ruin unless he was a man of wealth. In from Missouri, I believe, did make a statement, If we cannot get through with it in that time some instances I believe, in some classes of but I do not recollect what the time was. I shall not press it further to-day. iron, the price went up one hundred per cent. Now, I think I am justified in saying that if The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It is moved in one year.
I were hearing this case as a judge I would that the special order be postponed for titteen Wbat was the effect? A contract was made || feel authorized to grant a rehearing. I do not minutes. according to which the specifications were to be believe that justice has been done. The plain- The motion was agreed to; there being on a furnished immediately. In some cases those tiff asks a rehearing, to go before the Govern. division-ayes 17, noes 11. specifications were not furnished until long ment's own court upon testimony that may be The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The joint afterward, as the Senator from Missouri has introduced according to law, and have the resolution (S. R. No. 100) for the relief of stated. The contractors could not go on; they question decided after full argument and hear- certain contractors for the construction of ve'swere delayed. In other cases the specifica || ing, and then that that decision shall stand. I sels of war and steam machinery is before the tions were furnished and afterward changed,
am not afraid that the Government will suffer || Senate as in Committee of the Whole. the vessels increased in size and capacity, the by that course. I am not satistied to see these Mr. HOWE. I move to arnend the resoluengines increased in capacity and power, and men stripped of their fortunes in an enterprise tion by adding the following proviso: the effect was to delay the construction of the that commends them to the gratitude of the Provided, Tbat no claim shall be so referred in work, and these men had to buy their materials country, instead of to constant loss and the fav.:r of Secor & Co., Perrine, Secor & Co.; Harrison and hire their hands when everything cost destruction of their estates.
Loring; the Atlantic Works, of Boston; Aquilla
Adams; M. F. Merritt; Tomlinson, Hartupee & Co.; them two dollars instead of one, and that
Mr. HOWE. Mr. President
or to Messrs. Poole & Hunt, or any or either of thein. because the Department furnished the specifi
Mr. SHERMAN. Unless there can be a The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The quescations or changed them after the work should vote on this joint resolution, I feel it to be
tion is on this amendment. have been far on toward completion. I do || duty to call for the special order of the day. Mr. HENDRICKS. That is not right. The not think these men ought to sustain this loss. Mr. DRAKE. I hope this resolution will Senate voted down the principle of that amendI know if they were doing work for me I could
be allowed to pass.
ment the other day. not consent that they should stand it. If I debate is over. I have nothing more to say Mr. HOWE. Perhaps they will do it again had changed the plan of a house built for me about it. I only ask for a few minutes indul.
to-day. I want to try it on. after the contract was made and it had been gence.
Mr. HENDRICKS. After full discussion commenced, I should feel that I could not live
Mr. SHERMAN. I understand other Sen.
it was voted down. in comfort in the house unless I compensated ators desire to debate it. I have no objection Mr. HOWE. The Senator from Indiana said the contractors for that loss.
to the vote being taken, but the special order a short time since that, having investigated the Mr. FESSENDEN. I wish to ask the Sen. comes up at one o'clock.
facts in reference to these contracts, he believed ator a question. Some one, I do not remem- The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Will the there ought to be a new trial, that justice had ber who it was, the other day, in stating the Senate pass by the special order intormally? not been done the contractors by the board case on the other bill, said that the principle
Mr. DRAKE. For a little while.
recently appointed by the Secretary of the upon which this last report was made up was
Mr. FESSENDEN. I object to that.
Navy. He may be right in that; but there to allow for all losses that had been occasioned Mr. DRAKE. I suggest to the Senator from should be an end to these rehearings at some by delays or by changes on the part of the Maine that this matter will take but a few
time. So far as the parties named in this Government; that they picked out all those minutes.
amendment are concerned, they have had two cases and made an allowance, but they did not
Mr. FESSENDEN. The Senator from Wis- || rehearings, two judgments in their favor, and make an allowance cases where the losses consin wishes to speak, and I may want to say I understand they have another claim growing were not occasioned by the action or want of something myself.
out of these very contracts pending before the action on the part of the Government, thus Mr. HOWE. I do not want to occupy any Secretary of the Navy now; and here is a joint distinguisbing between the classes of cases. time. I want to offer an amendment.
resolution which proposes to give them'a third For this reason it was said there were two The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection rebearing in the Court of Claims. I think that bills. That bill was passed, and now this bill, is made to laying aside the special order in
is too many. as I understand it, is to provide for claims made | formally. It can, therefore, only be laid aside The Senator says that the principle of this against the Government on general principles on motion.
amendment was voted down by the Senate the on account of the rise of prices, &c., bat Mr. DRAKE. I move that the regular order other day. I think he is slightly mistaken about where the increased cost was not occasioned be laid aside for a little while, just to get that. There was a bill before the Senate the by the action of the Government itself. through with this matter.
other day to pay the very parties mentioned in Mr. TRUMBULL. This is confined spe- Mr. SHERMAN. I assure the Senator that the proviso a certain sum of money awarded to cifically to the law of March 2, 1867.
while I am in favor of his resolution, and shall them by this board of naval officers. Knowing Mr. FESSENDEN. The other was.
vote for it, I see around me a disposition to that it was to be followed by the joint resoluMr. TRUMBULL. This is.
debate it, and I trust, therefore, the Senate tion now before the Senate I tried to secure Mr. FESSENDEN. It may be; but that will go on with the regular order. I will agree the assent of the Senate to an amendment statement was made on the other bill which to take up the resolution at any other time, for which should make the sum provided in that was passed the other day. I have examined the question.
bill a full discharge of all claims those parties Mr. HENDRICKS. I will state to the Sen- Mr. TRUMBULL. 'I am inclined to think had against the Government growing ont of ator from Maine that this is simply an applica- the debate will be short. The Senator from these contracts. The Senator from Indiana tion for a new trial under the act of 1867. Wisconsin wishes to offer an amendment, but was willing to concede a part of that, but not