gold under existing laws, and selling the excess, $10,000,000 at a time, in the market seems to me to be very vicious. On the other hand, it is an evil and a burden to commerce that $100,000,000 should be kept idle in the Treasury; and I am very much embarrassed in knowing how to vote. Perhaps to the extent that accumulations have already taken place, it will be safe to vote for the proposition, hoping that the proposition which ought to be adopted will be provided for before long.

Mr. CONKLING. It seems to me that the amendment as now modified by the mover obviates both the objections which we heard from the honorable Senator from New Jersey, [Mr. CATTELL.] I was impressed with his statement that the proposition at first was one to employ coin to extinguish the least costly obligation of the Government, and I should have been embarrassed in voting for the proposition had it stood as a substitute for the whole bill. Now, the two propositions taken together provide for the issue of three per cents. to be held as a reserve; and to that I am unable to appreciate the objections assigned by the honorable Senator from Wisconsin.

I understand in a word the history of that matter to be this: originally a reserve was to be held by the banks of lawful money, thereby meaning legal-tender notes, the promises to pay on demand of the United States. Under that authority the banks assumed to hold compound-interest notes, notes bearing interest at the rate of six per cent., payable semi-annually, the accruing interest itself bearing interest. Whether that was within or without the permission of the law was questionable; but that question has been condoned, and the banks were permitted thus to hold, and they still hold, a large sum of compound-interest notes. Upon and for these notes the United States is liable. They are matured and therefore the liability is immediate, as much so as it can be upon these call three per cent. certificates. It seems to me that that answers in large part the argument of the honorable Senator from Wisconsin.

repeat no harm can come. If there is an overplus, has anybody of late made an argument and satisfied the people of this country, or the two Houses of Congress, that beyond this large working residuum, working balance or deposit, whatever you please to call it, of $40,000,000, it is worth while to hoard gold in the Treasury for some unexplained reason? I know that heretofore arguments have been made on this subject, and I think I may say truly that those arguments have expired by their own terms. Those arguments have exhausted themselves in the actual experience of the occasion. Nobody is more competent than the honorable Senator who sits on my right, [Mr. CATTELL,] to enlighten us on that subject, and he has stated, I have no doubt, with candor, exhaustively, all that can be said in favor of this proposition; and I think he will agree with me when I say, that giving the utmost force to all his suggestions, it leaves him and leaves me at liberty to conclude that, beyond $40,000,000, or some such sum conceded to be sufficient as the residuum remaining on hand, the surplus gold in the Treasury ought to be disposed of.

But, Mr. President, I have heard the sug gestion made since this debate has proceeded that we are withdrawing from the Secretary a discretion on this subject and assuming it ourselves. Yes, sir, we are; and in that respect I submit this proposition stands in marked advantage and has marked recommendations when compared with another proposition for which this will presently be put aside. Here is one single point of administration, a simple proposition which has been viewed round and round by the business community of the country and by Congress. As far as its isolation, its simplicity, and our long experience with it go to enable any person, Secretary of the Treas ury or others, to determine what is right, we ourselves are enabled to form an opinion; and therefore, when we legislate with regard to it, it seems to me that we do not invade that wholesome discretion which ought to be left to the Secretary of the Treasury.

But, Mr. President, if we do invade that discretion, if we arrogate to ourselves what ought to be left to administrative action, what shall be said of the funding bill, as it is called, which waits upon this measure? There is a subject into which various and complex con

question which if in private business it were to be determined by an individual, a firm, or a corporation, it might well be said that we should cut according to the cloth; that our way should be felt; that that mode of disposing of it should be resorted to which belongs peculiarly and alone to administration, to experiment, and to discretion; and yet the Senate is not stopping as to that.

But he said further, that we became at once responsible to this amount for the circulation of these banks. Why, sir, the Government is responsible now for every shilling of national bank circulation. We hold bonds to indemnify the Government against that responsi-siderations and elements enter. There is a bility; but failing those bonds or not, still the Government stands as the guarantor of every farthing of national bank circulation. Therefore I do not see that we increase our liabiliiy at all by the issuance of these certificates. It so happens, however, that the peculiar function, the characteristic quality of these certficates is such that they have an extrinsic value; and therefore the banks, perforce, if you please, will accept them when the public at large would not; so that I can see and appreciate the truth and the force of the suggestion made by the honorable Senator from New Jersey that here is an exceptional instance in which, for peculiar reasons, we are able to extend a certain portion of the debt at an interest so cheap as three per cent. Very well, sir; that is an argument upon which I am willing to vote for that portion of the bill.

Now, the Senator from Illinois proposes, this matter being disposed, that gold accumulated in the Treasury shall be sold at monthly periods, down to $40,000,000. What is the answer to that? It is, first, speaking of the present, that the current payments of the Treasury will themselves reduce to $40,000,000 the accumulated gold. Very well; then this is a harmless provision, and it will have nothing to act upon. To be sure, we shall take nothing in the present by our motion, but no detriment can come. That, I think, is enough to answer it, because the argument of the Senator from New Jersey presupposes that there is no dan ger and no harm in exhausting gold down to $40,000,000 or thereabouts. That, he says, is the operation of the present administration of the Government. If, then, there is no overplus upon which this provision is to take hold, I

Now, sir, without dwelling upon this, I insist that if this proposition of the Senator from Illinois be obnoxious to the criticism that it is taking hold of a discretion which ought to be lodged with the Secretary of the Treasury, the other measure which we are considering is so obviously and so hopelessly obnoxious that we can hardly expect properly to deal with the subjects which it embraces. I think this discretion has been left long enough with the Secretary, and I think the people of this country, and not only the people, but the experts in finance, bankers, business men, and political economists who have written about it, have been left long enough to grope in the dark for a reason, as the Senator from Indiana said, for, in the first place, raising a large surplus gold revenue, and then, beyond the working capital or balance in favor of which an argument can be made, holding it for some unrevealed purpose and in deference to some argument which, I repeat, has not yet been made, and in circumstances which are wholly unsatisfactory to the people of the country by whom this amount is raised and for whose interest it ought to be used.

Therefore, I shall vote for this amendment, relying upon the fact that if there is no surplus upon which it can take hold, it will do no

harm; and if, beyond the surplus for what it provides, there is a quantity of gold in the Treasury, that gold should not be there, but should be sold to extinguish the most expens ive interest-bearing obligations which go to enhance the burden of taxation under which the people of this country are compelled to groan.

Mr. SHERMAN. If this amendment is to pass I call the attention of the Senator from Illinois to an amendment that must be made, unless he wishes entirely to stop the payment of interest upon the public debt in coin. The amendment as it now stands provides that when the amount of gold shall be reduced to $40,000,000, exclusive of the gold certificates, then the excess shall be sold. I submit to him this consideration: that the amount of payments maturing at a single time are from thirty to thirty-six million dollars. On the 1st of July and on the 1st of January interest matures, and is payable on each of those days to the amount of between thirty and thirty-six millions, and that amount is increasing daily as the seven-thirties are being converted into the gold notes. The result is that on the 1st of December, for instance, if the balance in the Treasury was $45,000,000, the Secretary would be bound to sell all above $40,000,000, and then on the 1st of January he would be unable without exhausting the entire surplus, to meet the interest of the public debt.

I know that there is a strong feeling against the hoarding of this gold, and at one time I introduced a proposition here limiting the amount to $50,000,000. I did not press it, because the argument was urged with a great deal of force that the very presence of this gold in the Treasury, although it was a loss of interest to the Government, operated as a great safety-valve to prevent speculations in gold and to prevent the rise and fall of gold. However, I do not wish to discuss it.

If the Senate choose to add this as an additional section to this bill the amendment ought to be made that I now suggest: to insert in line eleven, after the word "given," the words "and exclusive of interest accruing within sixty days thereafter;" so that it will read:

Till the amount of coin in the Treasury, exclusive of that for which gold certificates of deposit shall have been given, and exclusive of interest accruing within sixty days thereafter, shall be reduced to the sum of $40,000,000.

For instance, suppose this bill had been in force on the 1st day of July last. There are $99,914,000 in the Treasury in coin. Taking out the certificates leaves about eighty-two million dollars. The amount maturing on the 1st of July is $31,000,000. Alaska will consume $7,000,000 more, and the expenses of our foreign intercourse and the expenses of our Navy abroad, all of which are paid in gold, might sweep every dollar of gold in the Treasury, a contingency that I think the Senator ought to provide against. I think the amount of the limit he has put, $40,000,000, is entirely too low. Then, any sudden fluctuation or falling off of customs might leave us without money to pay the interest of the public debt.

With this statement I am perfectly willing to leave the question. I do not think this section ought to be added to a small bill providing for $25,000,000 of three per cent. certificates a mere temporary measure-nor do I think the Senate ought to adopt it without full consideration.

Mr. MORTON. I simply wish to say that the adoption of this amendment now will have the effect to provide that the surplus gold in the Treasury shall at no time hereafter exceed $40,000,000, and is equivalent to the declaration on the part of the Government that the legal-tender notes never will be redeemed. That is simply what it amounts to. We provide that the gold shall never accumulate to exceed $40,000,000, and we are saying to the nation that the legal-tender notes which we have promised to pay in gold never will be paid, because we have determined that we will not accumulate the gold with which we can do it. Mr. TRUMBULL. I do not think it is say

in

ing any such thing, as the Senator from Indiana supposes, to the people; and I do not suppose that the credit of this Government depends on the amount of gold that it has in its Treasury. Does the Senator from Indiana, or the Senator from Oregon, who urged this suggestion, suppose that the credit of this Government, which owes to-day $2,500,000,000, depends upon the amount of gold it hoards up in its Treasury rather than upon the wealth of the nation, the production of the nation, and the enterprise of its people? It is the wealth of the country, the enterprising population we have, the vast productions and resources of the country that give the nation credit. It does not depend upon $40,000,000 or $80,000,000 that is hoarded up in the Treasury. The Senator from Indiana is not more in favor of specie payments than I am. I am in favor of returning to specie payments, and I wish some measure could be adopted to day looking to an early resumption of specie payments.

There is great force in what the other Senator from Indiana [Mr. HENDRICKS] said, that we ought not to collect more gold than we need. I do not believe in burdening the people with taxation and collecting money for the purpose of selling it. I agree with him that our tariff ought to be so adjusted as not to collect more gold than the necessities of the country require. But no proposition is suggested in regard to the tariff. This surplus has been coming into your Treasury; it has been lying there for years; and shall we keep it there? This measure will not prevent a reduction of the tariff. I shall be ready to unite with the Senator from Indiana whenever a fitting occasion offers to reduce the tariff, so as not to allow more gold than we need to be collected. That is no reason, however, for keeping gold in the Treasury. I hope that the amendment I have suggested will be adopted.

One word, however, in reply to the Senator from Ohio, who says that $40,000,000 is not a sufficient surplus, and then he illustrates by what would have been the condition of the Treasury on the 1st day of July last if this proposition had been in operation. Why, sir, the $40,000,000 would have met every obligation, and more, too, and we are constantly in the receipt of gold. I presume the receipts of gold during the month of July will amount to fifteen or twenty millions; I do not know the precise sum.

Mr. SHERMAN. They amount to about ten million dollars a month now.

Mr. TRUMBULL. The receipts for the first quarter of last year, as I have already shown, were more than $48,000,000-more than $16,000,000 a month.

Mr. SHERMAN. The actual receipts are about one hundred and forty-five million dollars a year now.

Mr. TRUMBULL. Have the receipts for any year within the last three years been as low as $145,000,000? The receipts were $156,000,000 in 1866-67, and for the first quarter of 1867-68 $48,000,000. I should be glad to know if the Senator can inform me what the actual receipts were for the fiscal year ending the 30th of June last?

Mr. SHERMAN. The accounts have not been made up yet.

Mr. TRUMBULL. I suppose not; but we have two quarters I think; certainly we have the first quarter.

Mr. SHERMAN. I think it will be about one hundred and sixty million dollars for the whole of last year.

Mr. TRUMBULL. That is $40,000,000 more than the interest upon our entire debt that is payable in gold; so that we are receiving all the time more than we have to pay out. There can be no danger in reducing the surplus down to $10,000,000. Suppose it does take nearly all of it; so much the better. We do not want a dollar of surplus in the Treasury for any other purpose than to meet the calls upon it. Certainly the Senator from Ohio would not be in favor of keeping a single dollar in the Treasury if he knew he would always

have the means coming in to meet every obligation. It is only for that particular purpose that you propose a surplus.

Mr. EDMUNDS. Are the greenbacks obligations?

Mr. TRUMBULL. They are, in one sense, obligations.

Mr. EDMUNDS. In what sense?

Mr. TRUMBULL. They are such a kind of obligation on the part of the Government that I suppose they ought to be redeemed at some time or other.

Mr. EDMUNDS. What in?

Mr. TRUMBULL. We ought to redeem them in coin, unquestionably. As to these other obligations I am not disposed to say how we ought to redeem them. That question is not necessarily involved in the present discussion. The suggestions I was giving were in reply to those thrown out by the Senator from Ohio; and, according to his own statement, these $40,000,000 would be ample to meet any call that might come upon the Treasury at any time.

Mr. CATTELL. I beg the Senate to come to a vote on this question. The Senator from Ohio, the chairman of the Committee on Finance, has very kindly allowed the funding bill to run along now for more than an hour. I only wish to say, in regard to the amendment of the Senator from Illinois, that it is a very big question, and opens a wide field for discussion, and it ought not to be attached to a bill to which it has no positive relation, at any rate in its present shape. It is a question, as has been seen already, on which there is a wide diversity of opinion on this floor, and there will be a wide diversity of opinion in the other House. I think the bill which I have had the honor of advocating here is so plain and so simple that it will pass this Chamber, freed from this amendment, and pass the other House without difficulty. I shall be very glad to listen to the Senator from Illinois on this question when it comes up in a distinct form, not trammeling a little bill of this kind at the close of the session with so big a measure, one on which so wide differences of opinion are held. Therefore I rose now, without entering into the discussion of that question on its merits, to say that I hope for that reason the amendment of the Senator from Illinois will not prevail.

Mr. TRUMBULL. I am not disposed to take up time about it.

Mr. SHERMAN. I call for the funding bill. I think that this bill is going to lead to a long discussion, and therefore I insist upon the regular order.

Mr. CATTELL. I think we can get a vote

now.

Mr. SHERMAN. I am perfectly willing to yield, if we can get a vote; but I am satisfied that we cannot. I know other Senators want to discuss it. I call for the special order.

Mr. CORBETT. Mr. President

Mr. CATTELL. May I make an appeal to my friend from Oregon to allow a vote to be taken, unless he feels compelled to say something upon it?

Mr. CORBETT. I have been trying to obtain the floor for an hour to make some remarks on this bill. I think it is a very important bill, one that should not be considered in haste, and on which all the Senators should be heard who desire to speak upon it.

Mr. SHERMAN. Then I call for the regular order.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The regular order is before the Senate, it having been passed over by common consent.

Mr. STEWART. I wish the chairman of the Committee on Finance would let me pass a bill, that will take but a minute or two, removing political disabilities from certain persons. It is very important that it should go through in order to remove the disabilities from a large number of persons, who are necessary to the organization of the southern Legislatures.

Mr. SHERMAN. That would lead to debate.

Mr. STEWART. I do not think anybody will want to discuss it. If they do I will withdraw it. I only ask for five minutes.

Mr. SHERMAN I insist upon the regular order of business.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The regular order is before the Senate.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Believing that a 70te can be taken very soon, and that much of the time which has been expended this morning will be wasted unless we do get a vote, I was going to move that that be postponed until the bill introduced by my colleague is voted upon.

Mr. SHERMAN. I think when the bill is taken up the next time the Senate will be in a better temper for voting. I do not believe a vote can be had to-day upon it. That is my opinion. I hope we shall proceed with the funding bill.

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE.

A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. MCPHERSON, its Clerk, announced that the House had passed the following bills of the Senate:

A bill (S. No. 454) for the relief of Samuel N. Miller; and

A bill (S. No. 486) to facilitate the settlement of certain prize cases in the southern district of Florida.

The message also announced that the House had passed the following bills and joint resolutions, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate:

A bill (H. R. No. 387) to fix the compensation of the United States depositary at Chicago;

A bill (H. R. No. 1096) making an appropriation of money to carry into effect the treaty with Russia, of March 30, 1867;

A bill (H. R. No. 761) to construct a wagonroad from West Point to Cornwall Landing, all in the county of Orange, State of New York;

A bill (H. R. No. 1427) to establish certain post roads; and

A joint resolution (H. R. No. 340) for the relief of Peter M. Carmichael, surveyor of the port of Albany.

ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED.

The message also announced that the Speaker of the House had signed the following enrolled bill; and they were thereupon signed by the President pro tempore of the Senate:

A bill (S. No. 454) for the relief of Samuel N. Miller; and

A bill (S. No. 486) to facilitate the settlement of certain prize cases in the southern district of Florida.

HOUSE BILLS REFERRED.

The following bills received from the House of Representatives were severally read twice by their titles, and referred as indicated below:

A bill (H. R. No. 387) to fix the compensation of the United States depositary at Chicago -to the Committee on Finance.

A bill (H. R. No. 761) to construct a wagon road from West Point to Cornwall Landing, all in the county of Orange, State of New York-to the Committee on Military Affairs and the Militia.

A bill (H. R. No. 1096) making an appropriation of money to carry into effect the treaty with Russia, of March 30, 1867-to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

A bill (H. R. No. 1427) to establish certain post roads-to the Committee on Post Offices and Post Roads.

A joint resolution (H. R. No. 340) for the relief of Peter M. Carmichael, surveyor of the port of Albany-to the Committee on Com

merce.

THE FUNDING BILL.

The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, resumed the consideration of the bill (S. No. 207) for funding the national debt, and for the conversion of the notes of the United States, the pending question being on the amendment

offered by Mr. WILSON to the amendment of the Committee on Finance.

Mr. HENDRICKS. Mr. President, it was my desire at this time to submit some rather extended remarks to the Senate upon the political questions now occupying public attention; but the condition of my health to-day will only allow a brief reference to them.

I have observed for some days past a purpose on the part of Senators who represent the majority to avoid the position of the defensive, and to assume, if possible, that of the offensive in this political contest. In my judgment, that is neither practicable nor possible on their part; it is not in the nature of the case. For eight years the Federal Government and most of the State governments of the North have been controlled by the party now in the majority in Congress, and it is not possible that that party can avoid a response to the people upon the questions that attract public attention.

Waiving an inquiry into the conduct of that party during the war, which they claim it is not just to make, and confining the inquiry to the three years since the close of the war and the return of peace, there are certain important questions that must be answered. And, first, the people will desire to know very distinctly and emphatically what has been done with the $1,200,000,000 that have been collected from them under the internal revenue law and the tariff system since the 1st day of July, 1865. I know that $400,000,000 may be accounted for at least in part in the payment of interest upon the public debt. Then the people will want to know how it is, independently of the interest upon the public debt, that it has taken $800,000,000 to carry this Government through a period of three years, when in a time of peace it used to require but from sixty to seventy or eighty million dollars annually. The people will wish to know during this contest whether this enormous sum of money, which has put the citizen everywhere over the land upon the observance of the strictest economy to respond to the demands of the Government, has been expended in the promotion of the public welfare, or whether it has been expended in the promotion of the interests of a party; whether it has been expended to extend the enterprises of the country, or to maintain in the southern States that system of government which has gradually proceeded from step to step in arraying one race against another; whether it has been expended in genuine acts of benevolence and kindness, or in maintaining a political system by which the colored people have been organized throughout the South into a political party; in other words, whether this enormous sum that has been wrung from the people has been expended for their benefit, for the promotion of their interests and for their good, or for other purposes; and no arts of the orator or ingenuity of the sophist can avoid an answer to that grave, direct, and important inquiry.

Why is it, sir, that in a time of profound peace it has cost $100,000,000 a year to support an Army of fifty-six thousand? The people especially will want an answer to that question when you propose to elect t the Presi dency the head of that Army, who for a portion of that period was not only the General of the Army, but the Secretary of War. They want to know how it was that during the administration of the Department by him it cost at the rate of $120,000,000 to support the War Department and Army, when it used to cost but $1,000,000 to the regiment. The people will want to know why it is that in a time of profound peace, when we have no war, except inconsiderable strifes on our borders with the Indians, $95,000,000 were expended, in the fiscal year before the last, to maintain the Army, independent of bounties, and that for the quarter when the candidate for the Presidency was the Secretary of War, it cost about thirty million dollars, or at the rate of $120,000,000 per annum; $2,000,000 to the regiment; $2,000 to the man. The people will want the majority in Congress, when they demand the continu

ance of power beyond this period of eight years, to answer why it is that so much money is drawn from them by the extraordinary power of taxation, that it may thus go to support the most expensive military system that has ever been known in the world.

I might speak of some of these expenditures. I might speak of that favoritism in a small way which has shown itself in the publication in the newspapers that are favored by special legislation in the District of Columbia of notices for inconsiderable Army supplies upon the Rio Graude, and at the distant forts, when it was impossible from the date of the publication that any man could receive information by such publication which would enable him to compete in the bidding. I might speak of other expenditures of like sort, indicating a favoritism not worthy of any political party that claims the confidence of the country, but I will not occupy so much of the time of the Senate.

The people will wish to know during this contest why it is that the Supreme Court has been denied the right to inquire into the constitutionality of the legislation of this Congress. The people know that the Supreme Court was established as one of the securities to their liberty, as one of the props and pillars underneath their institutions. They want to know why this prop and pillar has been stricken down, and for what political and party purpose it has been done. If your legislation be constitutional, valid, and right, then the people will wish to know why Congress should shield itself in its enactments from that inquiry that the Constitution intended should be had in regard to all legislation.

The people during this contest will wish to know why it is that the executive department has been stripped of that power which has been conferred upon it by the Constitution; why it is that Congress has assumed to itself all those powers which, for nearly eighty years, were exercised under the Constitution by the executive department; and for what purpose of good to the people this was intended. Why is it that from the Executive has been taken the responsibility for the execution of the laws? Why is it that to the Senate has been assumed that responsibility? Why is it that Congress has said that the power to remove from office shall be taken from the Executive, when that power has been exercised, and as I believe according to the spirit of the Constitution, and as I know, according to the construction of the fathers, by the Executive all the time; and that in the Senate, a many-headed body, where responsibility is divided so that it lights upon no particular individual, a responsibility should be assumed which is worth nothing to the people and guaranties nothing to the fidelity and security of the public service.

ing to everything demanded by the North, acquiescing in the results of the war in every respect whatever, Congress came in and, exciting a strife with the Executive, stopped, and to some extent defeated, that restoration policy which was bringing again permanent union and permanent prosperity. That ques tion will be asked by a sensible, thinking peo ple. and it is for the majority in Congress, and for their partisans over the country, to give a direct, plain, and unequivocal answer.

The people will want to know in this connection why it is that by this political controversy that Congress has gotten up with the Executive, striking down the policy that was then almost a success, the return of trade, production, and of prosperity have been indefinitely delayed. They know, as Senators know, that from the time when this controversy was gotten up by Congress to break down the policy of restoration, then almost completed, the productions of a large portion of the country have from year to year fallen off, and that the exports which those productions furnished, enabling us to keep up the balance of trade somewhat in our favor, have fallen off so much that in a large degree that balance has been made up in gold and in the Government securities. The people want to know why it is that trade cannot be allowed to return to its ancient channels; that the industries of the country are not encouraged, but that, on the contrary, they are kept in that disturbed condition that investments dare not be made by capital, and that labor is afraid to make an effort even if capital should be invested.

The people will ask one further question, what has been gained by this controversy, like the question that in former times was asked by the grandchild of the grandfather in relation to the great battle,What has all this been about?" Senators know very well that when the Thirty-Ninth Congress met the work of restoration, according to the policy of r. Johnson, was almost completed. Constitutions had been adopted in the southern States abolishing slavery, or declaring it abolished forever, repudiating the southern debt, and making every pledge to the Federal Union which northern sentiment demanded; but Congress intervened against that policy and interposed its own, and now the people, after two or three years of delay, of distraction, of the disturbance of trade and commerce, want to know what has been gained by it. When you come to answer that question to the people you can. not show them a single southern constitution which any republican mind can say is a better constitution than had been adopted under the Johnson policy, unless you say it is a better constitution because the negroes are enfranchised and a part of the whites disfranchised, and the power in a great section of the country taken from the white men and given to the colored men.

The people will want to know why it is that after the close of the war, after there was no longer a rebel soldier with a gun in his hand, after the South had amended its constitutions and changed its laws according to the demands of the North in every particular, after they had declared slavery abolished, secession a

why, then, in one third of this country did the

and establish in their stead military governments; why was it in that work you made the civil law subordinate to the military law; the judge upon the bench subordinate to the commanding officer; and gave to a military officer the power to drive the legislators from the halls of legislation, and to substitute men of his own selection in their place, and subverted all the principles of free government, recog nized, honored, and revered in this country, and established in their stead a system of gov ernment that finds no parallel in any of the countries of the world since the days of the proconsuls. To that question, it seems to me, it will be difficult to find a suitable answer. It is not enough to say that in neighborhoods

there were broils and murders. Why, sir, some time ago I read to the Senate, from one of the papers published in this city, a telegram coming from the central portion of Alabama that the fifth white man had been murdered in the same neighborhood, and no notice whatever had been taken of it; and that, too, under the government, military, powerful, and despotic, which you had established there.

Mr. President, when the people of the country demand to know of their legislators why civil law is subordinated to military law, why the judge upon the bench is stripped of his robes of office, and in his stead there is substituted a military commander to decide upon the rights of the people; when they demand to know why in secret commission and military court the citizen is tried for a criminal offense, or touching a civil right, why these things are done in this country in a time of profound peace, some grave and weighty answer must be given them.

They will want to know why it is that you pretend for the time to repudiate on the part of Congress the right to establish negro suffrage in the northern States and yet establish it in the southern States; why it is that you rally upon a platform attempting to avoid the responsibility of this issue at home, and yet would seek to establish such a system of suf frage in ten of the States of the South; and what answer will you give? Do you tell the people of the North that they are not interested in the question of suffrage in the southern States? You cannot make that answer, for this fall it may occur that the negro votes of the South will decide the presidential election. It may occur that a majority of the electoral votes in the North will be overcome by the negro votes of the South. It may not so occur; but yet if it does occur, and if the colored people of the southern States, holding the balance of political power in this country, shall decide who is to be the President and the Vice President of the United States, is not that coming home, as a practical and direct question, to every northern man; his vote being overcome by the vote of the colored man of the South, and that, too, by an act of Congress? So that the people of the North will want to understand how it is that you pretend not to force upon them negro suffrage at home, and yet establish it in ten of the States of the South.

The people will want to know why, in a time of peace, the rights of the citizen have been trampled under foot, and the ancient writs of the law which protect and secure them in their property and in their personal liberty have been abrogated; why it is that instead of the courts of law where men are heard face to face, the witnesses called face to face, the jury from the neighborhood hearing all the evidence, deciding the case, why that mode of trial in court has been abolished, and in its stead has been established the military court, where there are none of the guards and securities for justice that a thousand years of experience have shown to be essential?

Mr. President, the two parties into which the people of this country are now divided have declared their platforms of principles; they have put their tickets in nomination; and it is for the people now to decide which set of principles they will adopt, and which set of candidates they will elect. Upon this subject I have but very few remarks to submit.

In my opposition to the ticket that was nominated at Chicago I never expect to place it upon personal grounds. I recognize the gentleman at the head of that ticket as an eminent military man, and his associate as a distinguished civilian. Against them, personally, I expect never to express a sentiment. I oppose their election because they have become, by acquiescing in their nomination, the representatives of the sentiments that have controlled Congress for the last three years; because they stand upon a platform which is objectionable in part and equivocal in part.

The convention at New York has expressed

40TH CONG. 2D SESS.-No. 253.

its views in a platform which in no section can be misunderstood. The man that runs may read and understand. The plainest as well as the most learned will interpret it alike. It declares our views and our purposes so distinctly and emphatically that the people are not and cannot be misled.

The contrast between the two platforms struck me with great force as I listened to the Senator from New Jersey [Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN] some minutes since, as he read one of the sections of the Chicago platform declaring that the public debt must be paid in accordance with the letter and the spirit of the law. What does that mean? My colleague would say, I have no doubt, that it means one thing, and the Senator from New Jersey would claim that it means another, a very different thing. Many Senators claim that the spirit of the law is that the bonds shall all be paid in gold; while other Senators, eminent and clear-headed, say that it means they shall be paid in greenbacks, if Congress chooses so to pay them.

The resolution of the Democratic convention is as follows:

"Payment of the public debt of the United States as rapidly as practicable; all moneys drawn from the people by taxation, except so much as is requisite for the necessities of the Government, economically administered, being honestly applied to such payment; and where the obligations of the Government do not expressly state upon their face, or the law under which they were issued does not provide that they shall be paid in coin, they ought in right, and in justice, be paid in the lawful money of the United States."

The resolution declares that, unless the obligation issued by the Government, or the law authorizing its issue, expressly provides that it is to be paid in gold it may be paid in lawful money.

The law authorizing the issue of the fivetwenties provided for a lawful money, and declares Treasury notes, with the legal-tender clause, to be lawful money; and neither the law nor the obligation provides that these bonds shall be paid in gold.

Governor Seymour stands upon this platform, and I claim that the platform explains itself, and standing upon the platform his position is not and cannot be misunderstood.

I had thought of reading one or two other of the resolutions adopted at New York, in contrast with the resolutions adopted at Chicago, to show that at New York positions were assumed plainly, distinctly, directly, so that the people could not be misled by anything that was there said. But, sir, as it would likely take more time than I am able to occupy this morning, I will not go further in that direction.

With a platform explicit and direct upon all the great questions that now attract public attention, it only remains to inquire who are the men that stand upon it. I need not, in addressing either the Senate or the country, occupy much time in speaking of Governor Seymour. He has been long known to the country as one of the first of her statesmen. A ripe scholar and profound thinker, in times and in positions of great difficulty he has done the State much service. He has filled posi

tions the highest in this country except that to which he has been nominated, and to which, in my judgment, he will be elected. A statesman cool in thought and efficient in action he will command the confidence of the country.

I know that criticisms have been made upon his conduct during the war. I am glad that it requires but a sentence to answer all criticisms. So efficient was he as the Executive of the great State of New York, in the raising of troops, and especially in the aid he gave to the Government about the time of the battle of Gettysburg, that Mr. Lincoln returned him, in the most earnest and emphatic manner, his thanks.

He is an eastern man, but he is acceptable to the Northwest. We know from the sentiments that he has always expressed that he is not a sectional man. He is a man who, at the head of this Government, will recognize all sections, and respect and labor to promote the interests of each. While the chief Exec utive of the State of New York he favored,

publicly and privately, that policy which would encourage the producers of the great Northwest. He favored on the part of the State of New York the adoption of a policy that would allow our heavy freight to pass over the State canal almost without charge; and if his policy had been carried out to the extent that he desired the Northwest would have been benefited to the extent of millions of dollars. A national man, fair to all sections, he may well receive the support not only of his own but of that section from which I come; and I believe that he will receive a support, whether sufficient to control the votes in the South or not I will not say, but a cordial support in that section of the Union. Whether he can obtain the electoral votes in the southern States will depend, in my judgment, upon the question whether the military are kept organized in those States, and the Freedman's Bureau, with its party machinery, to control the elections.

Of General Blair, the candidate for the Vice Presidency, I need say but little to the Senate. He was at one time a member of the other branch of Congress, and recognized by all as possessing high attainments and abilities. Talented, generous, and brave, he will receive an enthusiastic support. Connected with the Army, and participating in some of its grand movements that have made its heroes immortal, his name and fame will be cherished and guarded by his late associates in arms. The criticisms, sharp and ingenious, that have been made upon the views which he may have expressed upon the condition and rights of the people of the subjugated States will not be heeded by the people when they reflect that you have shut the door of the Supreme Court against all inquiry in regard to the legislation which he has denounced. You have declared that your legislation shall not undergo that review and examination which the Constitution itself contemplated. You have declared that the judiciary shall not decide whether your acts of reconstruction are constitutional and valid. You have therefore left it to the executive

to decide for itself.

Mr. President, I believe that the highest interests of this country demand the election of this ticket, and that it will be elected, and that the country will again be restored to permanent peace-peace that rests not upon subjection to despotic power, but upon the restored supremacy of the Constitution and the rightful authority of all the departments of the Government, and to a prosperity as enduring as that peace.

Mr. STEWART obtained the floor.

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. If the Senator will yield the floor I desire to make a report from the committee of conference on the miscellaneous appropriation bill.

Mr. STEWART. Very well.

CIVIL APPROPRIATION BILL.

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine, submitted the following report:

The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments to the bill (H. R. No. 818) making appropriations for sundry civil expenses of the Government for the year ending June 30, 1869, and for other purposes, having met, after full and free conference have agreed to recommend, and do recommend, to their respective Houses, as follows:

That the Senate recede from their amendments numbered 124, 18, 21, 32, 34, and 57.

That the House of Representatives recede from their disagreement to the amendments of the Senate numbered 2, 6, 8, 9, 20, 26, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 48, 56, 58, 59, 60, and 61, and agree to the same.

That the House recede from their disagreement to the first amendment of the Senate, and agree to the same with amendments, as follows: strike out of said amendment the words "five hundred," and insert in lieu thereof "two hundred and fifty;" and at the end of line twelve, page 1, of the bill, add the following: Provided, further, That all necessary letter-press printing and book binding, in all the Departments and bureaus shall be done and executed at the Government Printing Office, and not elsewhere, except registered bonds and written records, which may be bound as heretofore at the Department."

That the House recede from their disagreement to the seventh amendment of the Senate, and agree to the same, with an amendment, as follows: in lieu of

said amendment insert the words "two hundred and seventy-five;" and the Senate agree to the same.

That the House recede from their disagreement to the tenth amendment of the Senate and agree to the same, with an amendment, as follows: strike out of said Senate amendment the words "and eight;" and the Senate agree to the same.

That the House recede from their disagreement to the twelfth amendment of the Senate and agree to the same, with the following verbal amendment: strike out of said amendment the word "California," where it occurs, and insert the word "California" after the word " vicinity."

That the House recede from their disagreement to the thirteenth amendment of the Senate, and agree to the same, with the following amendments: strike out the word "two" in line one of said amendment and insert in lieu thereof the word "one;" and strike s" from the word "tenders" in line two; and in line three of said amendment strike out the word eighty" and insert the word "forty;" and the Senate agree to the same.

That the House recede from their disagreement to the sixteenth amendment of the Senate and agree to the same, with an amendment, as follows: strike out of said amendment the word "fifty" and insert in lieu thereof the words "twenty-five;" and the Senate agree to the same,

That the House recede from their disagreement to the seventeenth amendment of the Senate and agree to the same, with the following amendment: in lieu of the words stricken out by said amendment insert the following: "Five of the six steam revenue-cutters stationed upon the northern and northwestern lakes and their tributaries shall be laid up, and that no more of the money appropriated by this act shall be paid on their account than so much as may be necessary for their safe and proper care and keeping, and that;" and the Senate agree to the same.

That the House recede from their disagreement to the twenty-third amendment of the Senate and agree to the same, with an amendment, as follows: strike out of said amendment the words "seventy-five" and insert in lieu thereof the word "fifty;" and the Senate agree to the same.

That the House recede from their disagreement to the twenty-fourth amendment of the Senate, and agree to the same, with an amendment, as follows: at the end of said amendment add the following: "Provided, That said building, when completed, shall cost not more than $100,000;" and the Senate agree to the same.

That the House recede from their disagreement to the twenty-eighth amendment of the Senate, and agree to the same, with an amendment, as follows: at the end of said amendment add the following: **Provided, That the Mint of the United States and branches shall continue to refine gold and silver bullion, and no contract to exchange crude or imported bullion for refined bars shall be made until authorized by law;" and the Senate agree to the same.

That the House recede from their disagreement to the twenty-ninth amendment of the Senate, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows: strike out of said amendment the words "five thousand" and insert in lieu thereof the words "twentyfive hundred;" and at the end of said amendment add the following words: " to be expended under the direction of the Commissioner of the General Land Office;" and the Senate agree to the same.

That the Senate recede from their disagreement to the amendment of the House to the thirty-first amendment of the Senate, and agree to the same. That the House recede from their disagreement to the forty-third amendment of the Senate and agree to the same, with the following amendment: strike out of said amendment the word "five;" and the Senate agree to the same.

That the House recede from their disagreement to the forty-fourth amendment of the Senate and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows; strike out of said amendment the word "five," and insert in lieu thereof the word " twenty;" and the Senate agree to the same.

That the House recede from their disagreement to the forty-fifth amendment of the Senate and agree to the same, with an amendment as follows: strike out of said amendment the word "twenty;" and in lieu thereof insert the word "ten."

That the House recede from their disagreement to the fifty-first amendment of the Senate and agree to the same, with an amendment as follows: at the end of said Senate amendment add the following: " to pay William H. West for services rendered in taking care of and keeping safely the bonds held in trust by the Secretary of the Treasury for the benefit of the Smithsonian Institution from March 1, 1850, to July 1, 1863, $2,500, to be paid out of the Smithsonian fund;" and the Senate agree to the same.

That the Senate recede from their disagreement to the amendment of the House to the sixty-second amendment of the Senate, and agree to the same. That the House recede from their disagreement to the sixty-third amendment of the Senate, and agree to the same, with amendments as follows: strike out all of said amendment after the word "office," in line seven, and insert in lieu thereof the following: "Provided, That all the moneysstanding to the credit of the 'Patent Fund' or in the hands of the Commissioner of Patents, and all moneys hereafter received at the Patent Office for any purpose or from any source whatever, shall be paid into the Treasury as received, without any reduction whatever, and the sum of $250,000 is hereby appropriated for salaries and miscellaneous and contingent expenses of the Patent Office and for withdrawals and for moneys paid by mistake, to be disbursed under the direction of the Secretary of the Interior; and it shall be the duty of the Commissioner of Patents to communicate to Congress at the commencement of every December session a full and detailed account of moneys received for duties on patents, and for copies of

records, and drawings, and all other moneys received by virtue of said office, and of all moneys expended by him under and by virtue of this provision for said contingent and miscellaneous expenses and for salaries, and the names of persons to whom such salaries are paid and the amounts thereof paid to each."

That the House recede from their disagreement to the sixty-seventh amendment of the Senate, and agree to the same, with an amendment, as follows: at the end of said amendment add the following: Provided, That no part of this property shall be sold or transferred without the consent of the United States first had and received."

L. M. MORRILL,
J. HARLAN,
C. COLE,

Managers on the part of the Senate.
E. B. WASHBURNE,
B. F. BUTLER,
J. B. BECK,
Managers on the part of the House.

Mr. MORRILL, of Maine. I perhaps ought to make a statement in regard to two or three points of this report, which provide matters of legislation outside of an appropriation, which

I should like the Senate to understand so that hereafter it may not be said that they were taken by surprise. As a general thing I am opposed to legislating on these appropriation bills, and I should be very glad for the relief of the committee if the rule of the Senate was the same as that of the House of Representatives that no matter of legislation should be put upon these bills; but it is otherwise, and the practice is otherwise. What I want to call the attention of the Senate to, and particularly of the Committee on Finance, is the first amendment, which is in the appropriation for the necessary expenses of carrying into effect several acts of Congress authorizing loans. The Senate agreed to appropriate $1,500,000. The conference committee agreed to a reduction of $250,000 upon the ground that there has been so much reduction in the expenditures under the tax bill that possibly that may be sufficient; but we have agreed to that with an amendment relative to the printing in that department which is now very large. We have no means of estimating it; it is not so large of course as the printing establishment proper, but it has grown to very large dimensions; in that establishment a great deal of printing for all the Departments and all the bureaus, of a character over which Congress has not the slightest control, is done; and the cost of it of course we have no information about, and the expense of which it is impossible for us to tell. This is a proposition that all the letter-press printing and binding for the Departments and bureaus hereafter shall be done at the general printing establishment of the Government, except in relation to the binding of the registered bonds and blank books that are peculiar to this department and bureau, and which may more appropriately be done there.

That is one point. Another is in regard to the mints. It may have been noticed that there is a provision in one of the amendments that the refining of gold shall continue to be done in the Mint and branch mints in the country, and that no contract shall be made by the Secretary of the Treasury to the contrary; that is, he shall be authorized to make no contract by which the refining shall cease to be done in the mints. I may be permitted to remark, perhaps, that yesterday a bill passed the House of Representatives repealing the laws on the subject of refining in the Mint and branch mints of this country. The law stands in this wise: in 1853 an act was passed authorizing the director of the Mint at Philadelphia, whenever a private establishment was capable of doing the refining then being done at the Mint, to cease refining at the Mint.

In 1861 this provision was extended to all branch mints, so that it came to be regarded as the settled policy of the Government that it was not worth while for the Government to do the refining in the Mint and branch mints, provided it could be done by private estab lishments. The Committee on Appropriations were not very well informed on this subject, but it seems to have been the policy since 1853 to discountenance the refining of bullion in the public establishments of the Government, for what reason I do not know; probably it was

thought that it would be done to better advantage in private establishments. Now, upon an apprehension that there was some contract about to be made on the Pacific coast, which was prejudicial to the general policy of the Government and the general interests of the miners particularly, a bill passed the House of Representatives such as I have referred to; and this proposition in this bill is made in some sense to meet what are supposed to be the reasonable expectations or demands on the part of the House who passed that bill. As it now stands, it will be seen that the laws on this subject remain as heretofore; but the Secretary of the Treasury is prohibited from making any contract for refining. Whether he ever had that power I do not know; or

whether he ever undertook to exercise that power I do not know. I suppose that the policy that has existed since 1853 will continue to exist under these statutes, so that where at any mint or branch mint it is found that a private establishment is refining under circumstances more favorable to the Government than it could be done by the Government, still that policy would be pursued. That is all there is of that.

Then we make a change in regard to the Patent Office fund, which is a radical change and which the Senate ought to understand. This provision provides that the Patent Office fund so called, a fund arising from established fees in that department, shall be covered into the Treasury of the United States. That is the amount of that. I understand the fund to be about a quarter of a million dollars; and all the funds which shall arise from fees in that establishment hereafter are to be paid into the Treasury of the United States, and $250,000 is appropriated out of the Treasury for the payment of the current expenses of the establishment. This branch of the service is entirely, I may say, conducted at the discretion of the Commissioner of Patents. I do not know that there are any complaints against the Commissioner of Patents now, or that there have been heretofore of any abuses. But it is a very extraordinary exercise of discretion to be deposited in any Department or bureau of the Government. This establishment, from very small beginnings, beginning, I think, with a Commissioner and two or three clerks, has now grown up so that the expenditure the last year was between six and seven hundred thousand dollars, all collected and disbursed entirely in the discretion of the Commissioner. He receives it all and disburses and expends it all, with no oversight or supervision from any quarter, not even under the direction of the Secretary of the Interior. But then I say, in justice to the present incumbent and his predecessors, that I know of no complaint. Still this fund has grown to such dimensions and the discretion is so very great that, in justice to the officer himself and the department itself, it would seem that the money as it arises should go into the Treasury of the United States and be paid out under such limitations and conditions as apply to other funds. As this is so radical a change and upon an appropriation bill, I thought it my duty to state thus much to the Senate that hereafter it shall not be said that they were taken by surprise.

Mr. SHERMAN. I wish to ask the Senator a question as to the construction to be placed on one of these amendments. I am not familiar with the technical language in which these provisions have been made; but the first proviso added is "that all necessary letter-press printing and book binding in all the Departments and bureaus shall be done and executed at the Government Printing Office and not elsewhere, except registered bonds and written records may be bound, as heretofore, at the Department."

That applies to all printing except that connected with money. The tax law now under consideration contemplates the possibility of new stamps which are really in the nature of Government bills, being printed at the Treasury Department for safety. I ask whether this would prevent that?