all suits and actions that may have been instituted against the sureties, and to enter the proper discharges on the books of the Depart

ment.

Mr. HENDRICKS. I will say to the Senate that in 1829 Mr. Canby was appointed receiver at the land office at Crawfordsville, Indiana. In 1831, nearly forty years ago, there was a default. His bond was then a good one. A number of responsible gentlemen were upon it. In settling that default the Government, through the district attorney, took a large quantity of lands, and sold and otherwise disposed of those lands from time to time, and some bonds and some money. The Government considered the securities so good that they returned to Mr. Canby a large amount of lands in the State of Illinois. How those lands were disposed of can never be very well ascertained. The returns in the Treasury are very unsatisfactory. But it has gone on now about forty years, and there are only three sureties left who are responsible-Mr. Stevens, Mr. Palmer, who is a very old man, and Mr. Michael G. Bright, who is very frail and confined to his bed, and it will be a very great hardship to embarrass them with litigation about it. The security was ample at the time it was given into the charge of the district attorney; but it passed from one district attorney to another, so that it is impossible to say just how it does stand in the Department. The committee has made this report_entirely from statements derived from the Department, and I ask the passage of the bill.

Mr. WILLIAMS. How much does the Government hold against these men?

Mr. HENDRICKS. I cannot say. One estimate would be about three thousand dollars, while the interest, perhaps, would bring it up to ten or eleven thousand dollars. These sureties claim that the amount of assets placed in the hands of the district attorney, under a compromise with Mr. Canby, were several thousand dollars beyond the amount of the default. I wish to say that the last clause of the bill is not necessary. I thought a suit had been commenced, but the Department was simply preparing to bring a suit. Since the bill was introduced I received a letter from the gentleman in the Department having charge of the matter to know what action would probably be taken by Congress, so that he might decide whether to institute a suit, and I told him of the pendency of the bill.

Mr. EDMUNDS. Is there a written report? Mr. HENDRICKS. Yes, sir. Mr. EDMUNDS. Is it printed? Mr. HENDRICKS. No, sir; it was just made this morning.

Mr. EDMUNDS. I think the bill had better go over until to-morrow, so that the report can be printed.

Mr. HENDRICKS. Unless we get this bill through very soon it cannot pass the other House, and two of these gentlemen are very frail.

Mr. EDMUNDS. They probably will not die before to-morrow. We ought to see the report of the committee in print, so as to know the grounds on which it proceeds.

Mr. HENDRICKS. I have stated them correctly.

Mr. EDMUNDS. I do not doubt the Sena tor's statement, but it is impossible from merely listening here to understand how the case really stands. This relieving of sureties is rather a dangerous business. I move that the bili be postponed until to morrow, and that the report be printed. I shall probably have no objection to it on examination, but I desire to see the report.

The motion was agreed to.

BILLS INTRODUCED.

Mr. POMEROY asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S. No. 560) to transfer the Indian Bureau and Indian affairs from the Interior Department to the War Department; which was read twice by its title.

Mr. HARLAN asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S. No. 561) to incorporate the Citizens' Gas Company of the District of Columbia; which was read twice by its title, referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia, and ordered to be printed.

Mr. MORGAN asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to introduce a bill (S. No. 562) for the relief of the United States Express Company; which was read twice by its title, referred to the Committee on Claims, and ordered to be printed.

Mr. WILSON asked, and by unanimous resolution (S. R. No. 151) to drop from the consent obtained, leave to introduce a joint rolls of the Army certain officers absent without authority from their commands; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Military Affairs and the Militia.

NAVAL REGISTER.

Mr. ANTHONY submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Printing:

Resolved, That one thousand copies of the Navy Register for 1868 be printed for the use of the Senate. ARMY REGISTER.

Mr. ANTHONY submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Printing:

Resolved, That two thousand copies of the Army Register for 1868 be printed for the use of the Senate.

JOHN F. MASCHER'S PATENT.

Mr. CATTELL. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of a little bill introduced by me, which has been reported by the Committee on Patents and the Patent Office with an amendment. It is Senate bill No. 295.

The motion was agreed to; and the bill (S. No. 295) for the relief of Eliza Mascher, widow of John F. Mascher, was considered as in Committee of the Whole. The Committee on Patents and the Patent Office proposed to amend the bill by striking out all after the enacting clause and inserting the following:

That Eliza Mascher, administratrix of John F. Mascher, deceased, who obtained a patent No. 9611, for an improvement in daguerreotype cases, dated the 8th of March, 1853, with additional improvement, No. 134, annexed to said original patent, dated 19th of February, 1856, for fourteen years, which expired on the 8th day of March, 1867, be authorized to apply to the Commissioner of Patents for the extension of said patent for seven years, under the regulations now in force for the extension of patents, as if she had made application previous to its expiration, as required by law; and the Commissioner of Patents is directed to investigate and decide the application for extension on the same evidence and in the same manner as other applications for extension are decided: Provided, That the application for extension be made within thirty days after approval of this act, and the decision of the Commissioner be rendered within ninety days from the filing of said application in the Patent Oflice: And provided further, That nothing herein shall be so construed as to hold responsible in damages any person who may have manufactured or used the daguerreotype cases, with the improvement and addition aforesaid, or used cases containing the improvement and addition aforesaid, between the expiration of the patent and the approval of this act: And provided also, That the Commissioner shall be satisfied before granting such extension that it will insure entirely to the benefit of the said Eliza Mascher.

The amendment was agreed to.

The bill was reported to the Senate, as amended, and the amendment was concurred in. The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed.

UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION.

Mr. CORBETT. I move that the Senate take up Senate bill No. 215, which was reported

from the Committee on Indian Affairs, and afterward recommitted.

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, resumed the consideration of the bill (S. No. 215) to vacate and sell the Umatilla reservation in the State of Oregon.

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

That the superintendent of Indian affairs for the State of Oregon is hereby authorized and directed, if practicable, to negotiate a treaty with the Indians now living on the Umatilla reservation in said State, providing for the relinquishment by said Indians to the United States of their right and claim to said reservation, and for their removal to some other reservation to be selected in said State or in the Territory of Washington, and to be described in said treaty, and the sum of $2,000 is hereby appropriated for the purpose of defraying the expenses of negotiating said treaty.

shall be made in said treaty securing to said Indians

SEC.. And be it further enacted, That provision

the full value of their lands, together with the value of all improvements thereon, and no part of said lands shall be sold for less than $1 25 per acre.

Mr. CORBETT. I move to amend the amendment by inserting in line nine of the first section after the word "reservation," the words "or reservations;" so that the Indians may be divided, a part put upon a reservation in Washington Territory, and a part upon a reservation in the State of Oregon, if it shall be necessary.

The amendment to the amendment was agreed to.

The amendment, as amended, was agreed to. The bill was reported to the Senate, as 'amended, and the amendment was concurred in. The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed.

EXPORTERS OF DISTILLED SPIRITS.

Mr. MORGAN. I move now to take up House bill No. 764, which failed yesterday, and on which a motion to reconsider was entered.

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to consider the motion of Mr. SPRAGUE, to reconsider the vote by which the bill (H. R. No. 764) for the relief of certain exporters of distilled spirits was rejected. The motion to reconsider was agreed to. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question now is on the passage of the bill. Mr. EDMUNDS. Let it be read for informmation.

The bill

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. will be read as it now stands amended. The Chief Clerk read as follows: That the act of January 11, 1868, entitled "An act to prevent frauds in the collection of tax on distilled spirits." be so construed as to permit rum, which, at the date of the passage of said act, was already distilled or redistilled and intended for export, and actually contracted for to be delivered for exportation, to be withdrawn, removed, and exported from the United States under such transportation and export bonds and regulations as were required therefor immediately prior to the passage of said act, and as shall be provided for hereafter: Provided, That all such spirits shall be actually exported within sixty days from the passage of this act; and that before any such exportation shall be permitted, proof in writing shall be furnished by sworn evidence, to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, that such liquor was in fact at the date mentioned intended for export, and distilled or redistilled for that purpose or actually contracted for to be so exported. And upon failure to so export the same within said sixty days the tax thereon shall become due and payable, and the bonds given for the transportation and export thereof shall be forfeited and collected as in case of such bonds not canceled according to law.

Mr. SHERMAN. The word "liquor" in the proviso ought to be stricken out and the word "rum" substituted.

Mr. COLE. I would rather oppose this suggestion, for a very good reason which I can state. I suppose the bill ought to include whisky as well as rum.

Mr. SHERMAN. I will state to the Senator that we have already stricken out alcohol, so that the bill is now confined to rum, and the latter clause of the bill ought to conform to the first.

Mr. COLE. It seems to me that that would

operate very much against a certain trade which has sprung up on the Pacific coast. Within three or four years past quite a considerable trade has sprung up between San Francisco and the mouth of the Amoor river. The prin cipal article in which this trade consists is whisky; and, as I am well informed, some forty thousand gallons were contracted for prior to the passage of the law of the 11th of January last. It has been manufactured since that time; but the bill that was then passed interfered with its exportation, thus breaking up that trade which is a growing trade and likely to be valuable to the country. If this one article of that trade is stricken out we destroy the trade; the trade itself will probably be broken up. The merchants engaged in it cannot carry on the trade unless this article is included. Now, if this bill is to be passed relieving any parties from the operation of the act of the 11th of January, I think it should be so broad as to include those persons who entered into contracts for the exportation of this liquor.

I will state further that there is no probability of any fraud being practiced on that coast. There has not been at any time any charge of fraud in connection with the whisky trade on that coast. I do not know what liability there may be to fraud on the Atlantic coast; but if there should be some little liability here, it will only be a liability that must exist very generally at present.

I ask, therefore, for the reason I first stated, that the bill be so amended as to allow the exportation of whisky. It is only for the accommodation of this one trade, this new commerce which is springing up between our coast and the Amoor river, which will in a few years become a very extensive and valuable branch of commerce. I hope that that will not be excluded from this bill, and that the merchants who have made contracts there will not be cut off entirely by the use of the word "rum" instead of the word "spirits" or "liquor," which was originally in the bill.

Mr. MORRILL, of Vermont. I ask my friend from California if he had not better wait until the bill which the Committee of Ways and Means are now preparing comes up. It will provide for the trade to which he alludes. I presume that bill will be before us in the course of a week or ten days.

Mr. COLE. The suggestion would be forcible if it were not for a singular circumstance. These supplies must be put into the Russian possessions at the mouth of the Amoor river early in the season, and it is very important that this restriction be removed speedily; else the whole trade for this entire season will be utterly broken up. If they are not allowed to export this whisky immediately, or very soon, it will be altogether too late for the season, and the trade will be broken up, and will go into the hands of the other countries. That is the reason why, as I believe, this should be included now; there should be no delay.

Mr. SUMNER. Does the Senator reduce his motion to form?

Mr. COLE. It is not necessaryThe PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question now is on striking out the word "liquor" and inserting "rum."

Mr. SUMNER. It seems to me that is a merely verbal question.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It is merely to make the bill consistent with itself.

the other bill. There is an urgent necessity for the passage of the present bill. There are considerable interests that are now in jeopardy from this delay, and if the Senator presses his proposition on this bill I fear he may endanger the whole.

Mr. COLE. It may be a matter of necessity and urgency on the part of manufacturers of rum in Massachusetts; but it is a matter of equal necessity and urgency on the part of those gentlemen who are manufacturing whisky in California. They do not manufacture rum there, but whisky to supply this particular trade. I assure Senators that these contracts had been entered into before the law of January 11 was passed. To enforce that law against them will result in very great disadvantage to those persons who have engaged in the trade and entered into these contracts. I do not wish to jeopardize the passage of the bill; but time is certainly all-important so far as these contracts in San Francisco are concerned.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Ohio moves to strike out the word "liquor" and insert "rum," to make the bill consistent with itself. That amendment can be made by common consent. The Chair hears no objection, and it is made.

Mr. COLE. Now I move to insert the words "and whisky" after the word "rum" where ever it occurs.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The motion is not in order, inasmuch as the bill has been read the third time.

Mr. COLE. If the amendment I have suggested cannot be made by unanimous consent, will move to reconsider the vote by which the bill was ordered to a third reading.

Mr. SHERMAN. The motion to reconsider involves the question whether we shall repeal the act of January last, because, as a matter of course, if you allow the exportation of rum and whisky under rules and regulations now provided or hereafter to be provided, it is a repeal of the act of January last, no more, no less. That act was intended to prevent the exportation of whisky and prevent its being moved from distillery to distillery, and has stopped off certain frauds, so that there are now held in Government warehouses something like twenty or thirty million gallons of whisky.

The Senators from New England have represented that a trade to a small amount in New England rum is still carried on with Africa, and they have made pretty strong appeals all around the Senate, as I see, to relieve that trade at this particular season. For myself, I think it wrong to pass the bill, even limited to rum, and I shall vote against it in any form in which it is put. But certainly the proposition of the Senator from California will open wide the door to fraud in regard to all whisky now on hand. It is utterly idle to attempt to restrain frauds in whisky if you allow the exportation of it, in the face of the repeated cases that have occurred in this country of fraudulent exportations at New York and elsewhere. Merely because they are carrying on a small trade between San Francisco and the Amoor river is no reason why we should endanger the revenue from the vast bulk of spirits now held in the warehouses of the country. It is a very delicate subject to interfere with, and I trust Senators will avoid anything like changes on a subject of this kind without the most careful consideration.

ther than as it may apply to contracts made prior to that time for the exportation of liquor. It does not repeal the law; it leaves it as it is except as it applies to those particular contracts then entered into. It is for the sole purpose of relieving persons who make those contracts from the dilemma in which they were placed by the passage of that law after they had made their contracts. I cannot see how it will jeopardize the success of the bill if the word" whisky" is included with "rum ;" and I therefore move the reconsideration. Mr. WILLIAMS. I was opposed to this bill

in its original form, and when it was under consideration at a prior day I made some objections to its passage; and I shall now oppose its passage if whisky is inserted in the bill, though I am willing, under existing circumstances and upon the information that I have received, to vote for the bill if its operations are confined to contracts made for the exportation of rum. I should be very willing to so amend this bill as to accommodate the particular traffic to which the Senator from California refers; but he must see that if the word "whisky" is inserted in this bill it opens wide the door to the commission of fraud everywhere in the United States, and it allows those frauds to be committed in all the States everywhere, and in undertaking to benefit that particular interest, or that particular trade, we break down all restrictions upon the whisky traffic, and enable persons who are so disposed to evade the revenue laws of the country.

I was informed, when this bill stood in its original shape, that there were persons in Cincinnati and elsewhere in the large cities of the country, with hundreds of barrels of whisky, who were ready to avail themselves of the provisions of this bill by defrauding the revenue, as this enabled them to transport the whisky under pretense that it was for exportation. It is under that system that the great frauds, or many of them, have been committed, and it was found necessary to repeal absolutely the law allowing bonds for transportation to be given so far as whisky was concerned.

It is represented that there is rum in the New England States, which is an article exclusively manufactured there, I believe, for which contracts were made prior to the passage of the act to which this bill re fers, and this simply allows those persons who contracted to sell that rum to send it out of the country by giving transportation bonds. It is a fact, also, that there has been no fraud, or at least few, if any, frauds committed upon the revenue in the exportation of rum; but all the great frauds have grown up out of the whisky traffic, and if we insert "whisky" in this bill we simply open up transactions which we have undertaken to prevent by the act of 11th of January, to which this bill refers.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The ques tion is on reconsidering the vote by which the bill was ordered to a third reading.

Mr. SUMNER. The Senator from Oregon [Mr. WILLIAMS] has very correctly stated this case; and I must say that I hope the bill will not be opened to amendment. I do not mean to express any opinion on the question raised by the Senator from California; but I do think that this present bill had better be kept by itself without any embarrassment from the larger question of whisky; you cannot name the word without embarrassment.

Now, this bill meets a specific case. There is a well known commerce, being the commerce with Africa, which at this moment centers in all parts of Boston and Salem. There is also a little of it in Providence, but its main home on this side of the water is in Boston and Salem. An essential element of that commerce is the New England rum. I am sorry to say so, but so it is; without that the commerce must fail. I understand that at this moment there are several vessels that for months have been lying idle in the harbor of Boston, and there is one also in the harbor of Salem waiting for this act of justice on the part of Congress, so that they may export this article in pursuance of the contracts which they had actually made before the act of Congress in January last.

This bill is simple; it is precise; it applies to that single case; it relieves a commerce that stands by itself, and it affects the distillers and also the ship owners, both of whom must suffer largely without this relief.

I do hope that the bill will not be embarrassed by any extraneous question. The parties who are to be benefited by this bill are entirely blameless; they have never fallen under any suspicion of fraud or of fraudulent attempt

to violate the laws; they are not involved in the "whisky ring;" they have nothing to do with it; they stand apart from all that extensive transaction. They are associated with what is known as the African commerce; and I beg to assure the Senate from what I learn from my correspondence I have here a dozen letters from excellent persons, merchants and others, in Massachusetts, who are interested in this commerce, who assure me that without the relief of this bill, that commerce must suffer very much, involving very serious loss to individuals.

Mr. COLE. I beg to assure Senators that there is no disposition on my part to embarrass the passage of the bill; but when the bill was originally reported it was broad enough to cover the case to which I have made allusion. I was not in my seat yesterday when the bill was first called up. I was here in time to vote for its passage. I supposed, as reported, it would be applicable only to such contracts as were made in good faith for liquor to be exported prior to the 11th of January. I do not appreciate the statement made by the Senator from Oregon, to the effect that it will open the door for fraud. I do not know how any liquor can be exported under this bill, except such as was contracted for like that to which I have made reference in California, before the law of the 11th of January. I have been watching for this bill a long time, and urging the committee to act upon it for the benefit of the trade from San Francisco to the Amoor river. A great deal of delay has taken place necessarily in bringing it up, from the pressure of other business; and now when it is brought up, I assure the Senate it will work great disappointment, and will be ruinous in its effects on persons in San Francisco if it is passed in the form to which it has been changed, to include only rum instead of liquor. I regret very much that that change has been made. I hope that the bill will be so modified as to permit these contracts in San Francisco to be fulfilled, as well as the contracts made in Boston and Salem.

Mr. NYE. When this bill was under consideration yesterday I opposed it, and should do so to day but for the fact that I have consulted thoroughly with the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts now absent, [Mr. WILSON,] and he assures me that it is all right. I think when we get a certificate from him that African rum is all right that will be sufficient for the rest of the Senate. [Laughter.] Therefore I shall cease to further oppose the bill. I sympathize strongly with my friend from California, and shall vote at the proper time for the privilege which he asks, to allow the manufacturers and traders of San Francisco to trade with the Amoor river. But that cannot be delayed more than a week, and I am apprehensive that it will embarrass the bill now. I think we had better let these merchants go, and especially I appeal to my friend from California, upon the certificate of my distinguished friend from Massachusetts that the traffic is right, not to interpose. It will form a good precedent, one of which I shall avail myself in assisting to pass the proposition of the Senator from California when that comes up. I think we had better let this bill pass as it is. I think it is the best first step that can be made toward the success of that which he and myself both desire.

Mr. HOWE. I voted yesterday against the passage of this bill, and I believe I shall vote against the reconsideration.

Mr. SUMNER. It has been reconsidered. Mr. HOWE. I understand the question to be on the reconsideration.

Mr. SUMNER. The question now is on the reconsideration of the third reading of the bill.

Mr. SHERMAN. As I understand the state of the question, if the Senate should refuse to reconsider the previous votes the question will then again recur on the passage of the bill. We have already reconsidered the vote on the passage of the bili.

Mr. HOWE. So I am just now reminded. I was not aware of the state of the question.

The question now is on reconsidering the third reading of the bill.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. That is the question. Unless that is done no amendment can be made to the bill.

Mr. HOWE. Well, sir, as I was opposed to going back at all, of course I am logically opposed to going back any further. The trade for which the Senator from California wishes to provide, I apprehend, is not of any very essential importance to the country, though it may be to the parties engaged in it. Looking at the last report we have on the subject of commerce and navigation I cannot find that any distilled spirits of any kind were exported to any part of the Russian possessions in Asia. As to the rum traffic, which it is said the Sen. ator from Massachusetts sitting by me [Mr. WILSON] certifies to be all right, I think that is of less importance than is generally supposed. I tried yesterday to ascertain what it did amount to. I have consulted the same authority to which I just now referred, the returns to the Treasury Department, and I find that the whole amount of spirits distilled from molasses exported to all the ports of the world was but one million seven hundred thousand gallons, which is not a very heavy export; and of that quantity one third was exported to Turkey; about eight hundred thousand gallons were exported to the British possessions in Africa, and thirty thousand to Liberia. That is not, I submit, a very important trade to provide for; and if it be true that the export of one million seven hundred thousand gallons imperils, endangers the collection of not less than $150,000,000 of internal revenue which we have lost for the last two years on this one article of whisky, I think we can well afford to sacrifice the whole trade. We ought to have at least $175,000,000 of revenue from this one article of whisky. We consume in this coun. try beyond all question one hundred million gallons of spirits of all kinds.

me

Mr. STEWART. If the Senator will allow

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The morning hour having expired, the unfinished business of yesterday, being the joint resolution (H. R. No. 201) in relation to the Rock Island bridge, is before the Senate.

Mr. POMEROY. If the Senator from Iowa, [Mr. HARLAN,] who has charge of that measure, will allow it to be laid aside informally, I should like to take up the bill that was discussed some time yesterday informally on the motion of the Senator from Michigan, [Mr. HOWARD.] If there be no objection, I trust it will be laid aside, and that the Senate will proceed to the consideration of Senate bill No. 256.

Mr. HARLAN. If it can be done informally, so that the unfinished business shall not lose its place, I shall not object.

Mr. SUMNER. I hope the Senate will proceed with the consideration of this question until it is settled. We can close it in ten or fifteen minutes. I do not wish to debate it. Let us bring it to a close.

that was under consideration at the expiration of the morning hour.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. That bill is before the Senate, and the question is on reconsidering the vote by which it was ordered to be read a third time.

Mr. STEWART. I merely wish to remark to the Senator from Wisconsin that if his objection to this bill is predicated on the ground that by not passing it we shall get any more revenue I think he has not familiarized himself with the workings of the department. I do not think it makes much difference what amount of distillation we have so far as getting anything into the Treasury during the next six or eight months is concerned. There does not appear to be anything gained in that way in any event. If he can show whereby this would make any change in that regard, the argument would be good.

Mr. HOWE. I should like to inquire of my friend whether he rose to put a question to me or to tell me something?

Mr. STEWART. To tell you something. Mr. HOWE. I wish the Senator had done that before I started. I want to have the benefit of all the information I can get on the subject before I commence to discuss it. I am much obliged to him for his information. I am inclined to think I cannot rely upon it very safely, and it will not do for the revenue department to rely upon it.

I was about saying that I think we ought to have $175,000,000 per annum from this article. We consume one hundred million gallons of distilled spirits in this country annually. If two dollars a gallon were paid on it it would give us $200,000,000. I do not think we ought to be irrational enough to exact payment on all that is distilled, until we get purer than we are to-day. We are now getting about a million a month. The rest of it goes out without paying anything. One of the grand contrivances, as we are told on all hands by those who are familiar with the workings of the revenue laws, which I am not and do not profess to be, for getting this article into the market is this pretense of exporting it, putting it aboard ship free, and bringing it back and landing it somewhere and throwing it on the market.

Mr. STEWART. There is where you are mistaken. It is a mistake to suppose that because that is one of the grand contrivances if you stop that you prevent frauds. Since we have stopped that they have contrived some other mode to accomplish the same result and get it out.

Mr. HOWE. This stops one of the modes; and the question I wish to present to the Senate, without spending any time in the argument of it, as the friends of the measure want a vote upon it, is whether we can afford to imperil this great revenue for the sake of fostering this trade which amounts to so insignificant a sum.

Mr. SUMNER. If I thought that the present bill, if passed, would imperil by a hair's breadth the revenue to which the Senator refers, I would not vote for it, nor utter one word in its favor.

Mr. HARLAN. I desire to ask of the Sen

mous consent.

Mr. EDMUNDS. I object.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection being made, it cannot be done without a motion.

Mr. SUMNER. I move that it be laid aside informally.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. That is objected to.

Mr. HARLAN. Is the joint resolution No. 201 before the Senate?

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It is, being the unfinished business of yesterday.

Mr. SUMNER. I move that the unfinished business be postponed for an hour, in order that we may proceed with the consideration of the pending question.

The motion was agreed to.

Mr. SUMNER. Now I move that the Senate proceed with the consideration of the bill

another point. We have laws prohibiting the introduction and sale of whisky and rum to our own savages, and I understand this is a bill to open the trade with a similar class of people in Africa. I should like to know if, in his opinion, it would be good policy for a Government like ours to foster a trade which can be carried on in no other way, as we have heard here during the discussion of this bill, than by the introduction of rum?

Mr. SUMNER. I do not propose to foster it at all. I simply propose that the Government should repeal a law by which it interfered on the 11th day of January last with existing contracts for the exportation of this article, it being in the main exported to the African coast and the Mediterranean. It is an essential article in that commerce, for what use, for what purpose, I do not know; I have never inquired. I only know, on the reports

of merchants and others who are interested, that this article has been regarded as essential to commerce. I have here among the letters before me one from the superintendent of exports and drawbacks in Boston, from which I will read a passage, as follows:

The joint resolution of 11th January bears very heavily on the merchants engaged in the African and Mediterranean trade. Not a vessel has sailed for the coast of Africa from this port since, and the business is becoming very much deranged.

"Spirit, though by no means the whole, is so important an article in a cargo for the African coast that on the trial of Ames Oaksmith for piracy, testimony was introduced to show that he had no spirit on board, and therefore that it could not be a legitimate African voyage.

Boston has now almost a monopoly of the African trade, but if it is crushed out and killed for a time, when it revives, if it ever does revive, it will not be in Boston. Messrs. Jasigi, Goddard & Co. told me a few days since that they should load a vessel for the Mediterranean, shipping American cottons largely, if they could only ship some five hundred barrels alcohol at the same time."

Alcohol, as the Senator from Maine [Mr. FESSENDEN] remarks, is struck out. I have another letter here from a person who is engaged in the manufacture. He says:

"Please do not consider my case individual: for I assure you that it is representative; and that there are other material interests suffering from the law of which I compain. I am a distiller producing New England rum only; and that entirely for export.

Now, sir, the law of January 11, 1868, prohibiting the export of spirits in bond bears heavily upon me and very heavily upon my patrons. My warehouse is full of rum; my distillery closed; my workmen with their families dependent upon me for support; my patron's vessels lying at their wharves month after month: their contracts with foreign merchants unfulfilled; their agents in foreign countries at great risk and expense idle; and their business here dying. All this and much more my space will not permit me to write is in consequence of an unconstitutional law which benefits no one, except manufacturers and dealers in illicit whisky. Neither myself nor my patrons have ever been engaged in traffic in distilled spirits in the United States; nor have either ever been accused at law of any fraud or attempted fraud upon the Government."

He then proceeds to give several reasons, and he adds at the end:

"The law of January 11, passed for the avowed purpose of preventing frauds, and thereby increasing the revenue from distilled spirits, has failed in both purposes, and has had the effect to kill the only legitimate traffic in spirits existing to any noticeable extent in this country at the time of its passage, namely, the distillation and sale of rum in bond for export..

The rum in warehouse, to which I have before alluded, was made on contracts entered into in good faith with well known exporters previous to January 1, 1868."

There is the whole case. The rum to which this is applicable is held now under contracts made anterior to the act of Congress which it is proposed to repeal.

As to the inquiry of the Senator from Iowa I will add another word. There is a plain distinction between the two cases to which he calls attention. The Indians are our wards, and directly under our influence. Here is a commerce extending along the coast of a continent and entering the Mediterranean. One of its essential articles is now in question. In return for this article we receive palm oil, ivory, coffee, and ground-nuts. What is done with the rum I cannot tell. I know not that it becomes the destructive agent which it is unquestionably when in the hands of the Indian. If the Senator would impeach the present trade with Africa, so far as it embraces this article, I do not see easily where he will stop. Our revenue is now increased by duties on foreign brandies. Shall these be abandoned? Our railroads transport whisky and rum. Shall we forbid the transportation? In putting these questions I present the difficulties involved in the inquiry of the Senator. For myself I regret this commerce. I wish that it did not exist. But it does exist. Considerable interests are embarked in it under the expectation of good faith on the part of the Government. I am unwilling to see these sacrificed; and this is all my present object.

Mr. MORRILL, of Vermont. I merely desire to correct the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. Howe] as to this trade being entirely without value or consideration. If he will examine the reports prior to the war he will find that the trade was very considerable. I

have before me the commerce and navigation report for the year ending June 30, 1860, which shows that the spirits made from molasses that were exported amounted to two million eight hundred and fifty-five thousand gallons; and in some years it will be found that it was more than double that. But the trade, although not of large aggregate amount, is quite important in relation to palm oil and ivory. Ivory is an article that is growing exceedingly scarce and dear for the last few years, and Great Britain and other countries are very eager to obtain a monopoly of it. This trade picks up a very considerable amount of ivory, which they must obtain from England unless we get it ourselves. It is important in that respect that we should be able to continue this trade.

Mr. SPRAGUE. I entered this motion for reconsideration at the instance of gentlemen from the other House, without a thorough and full investigation. I did it somewhat upon the idea that it was beneficial to New England that the bill should be reconsidered, and that it should pass. The important consideration is simply this: the bill of January last was enacted to prevent frauds, and so that the Government should obtain a larger revenue from whisky and spirits than it otherwise would be able to obtain. The question with me is, whether or not, after the passage of that law, the Government, in fact, has obtained a larger revenue from spirits. The contrary is the fact. You are obtaining no more revenue, I under stand, from the tax on whisky to-day than you were in January last, or prior to that time. Therefore, it is quite clear that the law in fact is a dead letter, so far as regards obtaining a larger revenue for the Government.

Mr. HOWE. Will my friend allow me to suggest what may possibly be an explanation of that fact, that we do not get any more revenue now than we did before the repeal of the bill?

Mr. SPRAGUE. Certainly.

Mr. HOWE. Is not this the explanation: since the repeal of that law, there has been greater difficulty experienced in getting these spirits on to the market, and, as a consequence, these spirits have not been put on the market nor exported, but are piled up in the warehouses. The Senator from Ohio stated yesterday that the lowest estimate of the amount now in the warehouses was twenty million gallons. That is one fourth of a year's distillation. He said other estimates placed it as high as forty millions. That is half a year's distillation. Now, having accumulated this whisky in the warehouses while this law has been repealed, is there not great reason to fear that restoring the law will simply provide the means of putting this accumulation on our own market?

Mr. SPRAGUE. You restore the old law, as I understand, for only a period of sixty days, and I believe the bill is now confined solely to the article of rum. It is clear to me. that during this short space of time there can be sufficient watchfulness on the part of the revenue officers in a general way or in shipments to other countries than Africa. This African trade is about the tail-end of the foreign business of New England. She had a little business with the West Indies, but Canada now takes that. The honorable Senator from Massachusetts, [Mr. SUMNER,] by the purchase of Alaska, has about used up our ice business. [Laughter.] We had a little export business to Africa, from which we got some palm oil and dates; but by the law of January last we shall lose that. I enter my protest, as usual, against any such legislation. I hope the Senate will consider that point and not consider the fact of the inability to execute the revenue law. I think it is a spectacle not well to be assented to and acknowledged that this Government is unable to execute its own laws and that in consequence of that inability it will go on from step to step cutting off the business and the trade of its people.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The ques

tion is on reconsidering the vote by which this bill was ordered to be read the third time. The motion was not agreed to. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question recurs on the passage of the bill. Mr. SHERMAN. I should like to have the yeas and nays on that question.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

Mr. HENDRICKS. I wish to inquire of the Senator from Ohio if the bill is now confined to rum that is manufactured for the particular purpose of exportation?

Mr. SUMNER. It is.

Mr. HENDRICKS. I wish to know whether, in such a case, it conflicts with the existing law?

Mr. SHERMAN. Rum undoubtedly is ardent spirits, and comes within the law of January last. As I said before, the only objection I have to the passage of the bill is not to interfere with the existing trade, but because I do not believe it will be possible to prevent the fraudulent exportation of spirits under this bill. I know that the gentleman to whom the Senator from Massachusetts refers will not do it, but others will do it under cover of the law.

Mr. SUMNER. I do not think any such trouble can arise under this bill.

Mr. SHERMAN. That is for the Senate to determine for themselves.

The question being taken by yeas and nays, resulted-yeas 26, nays 14; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Anthony, Bayard, Cattell, Chandler, Cole, Conkling, Corbett, Cragin, Dixon, Edmunds, Fessenden, Hendricks, Howard, Morgan, Morrill of Vermont, Nye, Patterson of New Hamp shire, Pomeroy, Sprague. Stewart, Sumner. Tipton, Van Winkle, Williams, Wilson, and Yates-26.

NAYS-Messrs. Davis, Doolittle, Ferry, Harlan, Henderson, Howe, McCreery, Morton, Patterson of Tennessee, Ross, Sherman, Trumbull, Wade, and Willey-14.

ABSENT-Messrs. Buckalew, Cameron, Conness, Drake, Fowler, Frelinghuysen, Grimes, Johnsen, Morrill of Maine, Norton, Ramsey, Saulsbury, Thayer, and Vickers-14.

So the bill was passed.

On motion of Mr. MORGAN, the title of the bill was amended so as to read, "A bill for the relief of certain exporters of rum."

EVANSVILLE MARINE HOSPITAL.

A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. LLOYD, Chief Clerk, returned to the Senate the joint resolution (H. R. No. 44) relating to the sale of the marine hospital at Evansville, Indiana, in accordance with the request of the Senate.

Mr. MORTON. As the joint resolution (H. R. No. 44) relating to the sale of the marine hospital at Evansville, Indiana, has now been returned to us, I move to reconsider the vote by which the joint resolution was passed by the Senate.

The motion was agreed to.

Mr. MORTON. I now move to recommit the joint resolution to the Committee on Commerce, and I desire to call the attention of the chairman of the committee to it. The motion was agreed to.

GREAT AND LITTLE OSAGE INDIANS.

The message also announced that the House had directed certain extracts from its Journal to be transmitted to the Senate; which were transmitted.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate the following resolutions of the House of Representatives, transmitted as extracts from its Journal:

Resolved, (as the sense of the House of Representatives.) That the treaty concluded on the 27th of May. 1868, with the Great and Little Osage tribe of Indians. both in its express terms and stipulations, and in the means employed to procure their acceptance by the Indians, is an outrage on their rights; that, in transferring to a single railroad corporation eight million acres of lands, it not only disregards the rights and interests of other railroad corporations in the State of Kansas, and builds up a frightful land monopoly in defiance of the just rights of the settlers and of the people of the United States, but it assumes the authority, repeatedly denied by this House, to dispose of those lands by treaty otherwise than by absolute cession to the United States, and for purposes for which Congress alone is competent to provide. Resolved, (as the sense of this House.) That the objects, terms, conditions, and stipulations of the aforesaid pretended treaty are not within the treaty

making power, nor are they authorized either by the Constitution or laws of the United States; and therefore this House does hereby solemnly condemn the same, and does also earnestly but respectfully express the hope and expectation that the Senate will not ratify the said pretended treaty.

Resolved, That a copy of the foregoing resolutions be transmitted to the Senate of the United States.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. What order will the Senate take on these resolutions?

Mr. SUMNER. Those resolutions of the House of Representatives relate to a matter which properly comes before the Senate in executive session. They do not properly appear here in the course of legislatíve business. I should desire, therefore, that they should be transferred to the executive business of the Senate and then referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.

Mr. POMEROY. I hope they will be printed.

Mr. HARLAN. Why not refer them directly to the Committee on Indian Affairs?

Mr. SUMNER. That can be done. I preface that motion, however, by expressing my regret that they were not presented to the Senate in executive session, as they concern the executive business of the body and not the legislative business.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The resolutions were considered in public session in the House of Representatives, and of course were sent here in public session.

Mr. HARLAN. I move that that they be referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. Mr. POMEROY, I hope they will be printed.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The resolutions will be referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs and printed, if there be no objection.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate a letter from the Secretary of the Interior, transmitting a copy of a communication from the Secretary of War, inclosing copies of letters from General Sherman relative to the treaty with the Sac and Fox Indians, now before the Senate; which was referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.

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, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate:

A bill (H. R. No. 1100) to amend an act entitled "An act to regulate the carriage of passengers in steamships and other vessels, and for other purposes;" and

A bill (H. R. No. 1261) amendatory of an act relating to habeas corpus, and regulating judicial proceedings in certain cases.

ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED.

The message also announced that the Speaker had signed the following enrolled bills and joint resolutions; and they were thereupon signed by the President pro tempore:

A bill (H. R. No. 867) for the relief of Jonathan Jessup, postmaster at York, Pennsylvania;

A bill (H. R. No. 1120) to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to change the names of certain vessels;

A bill (H. R. No. 1218) appropriating money to sustain the Indian peace commission and carry out treaties made thereby;

A joint resolution (H. R. No. 246) directing the Secretary of State to present to George Wright, master of the British Brig J. and G. Wright, a gold chronometer, in appreciation of his personal services in saving the lives of three American seamen, wrecked at sea on board of the American schooner Lizzie F. Choate, of Massachusetts;

A joint resolution (H. R. No. 268) for the relief of Robert L. Lindsay;

A joint resolution (H. R. No. 295) to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to remit the duties on certain articles contributed to the National Association of American Sharpshooters;

A joint resolution (H. R. No. 294) donating

to the Washington City Orphan Asylum the iron railing taken from the old Hall of the House of Representatives;

A bill (S. No., 164) to provide for appeals from the judgments of the Court of Claims, and for other purposes;

A bill (S. No. 280) granting a pension to Michael Hennessy, of Platte county, Missouri;

A bill (S. No. 377) to change the time of holding the district and circuit courts of the United States in the several districts in the State of Tennessee; and

A bill (S. No. 425) granting a pension to George Bennett.

HOUSE BILLS REFERRED.

The bill (H. R. No. 1100) to amend an act entitled "An act to regulate the carriage of passengers in steamships and other vessels, and for other purposes, was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Commerce.

The bill (H. R. No. 1261) amendatory of an act relating to habeas corpus, and regulating judicial proceedings in certain cases, was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

CENTRAL BRANCH PACIFIC RAILROAD. Mr. HOWARD. Inow move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Senate bill No. 256.

Mr TRUMBULL. I will inquire what will be the effect of that motion when the hour of two o'clock arrives. Will the joint resolution, which was the order of the day, then come up? The PRESIDENT pro tempore. I can hardly answer this question satisfactorily to myself. It was postponed.

Mr. TRUMBULL. For an hour, to enable the other bill to be disposed of.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. I suppose when that hour has expired the unfinished business will be before the Senate again.

Mr. TRUMBULL. If that joint resolution comes up at the end of the hour, I shall not object to this motion.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. I suppose it does under the rule, as I understand it. The question is on taking up the bill mentioned by the Senator from Michigan.

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, resumed the consideration of the bill (S. No. 256) relating

to the Central Branch Union Pacific Railroad Company.

Mr. POMEROY. When this bill was before the Senate on a previous occasion, the Senator from Iowa [Mr. HARLAN] was addressing

the Senate, and was broken off in the middle of a speech by the expiration of the morning hour. I suppose he desires to finish his remarks on that question.

Mr. HARLAN. So much time has elapsed

since this bill was before the Senate

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Before the debate proceeds, the amendment pending, offered by the Senator from Vermont, [Mr. MORRILL, will be read.

The Chief Clerk read the amendment, which was in lines twenty-four and twenty-five, to strike out the words "for any greater length of road than one hundred and fifty miles from" and to insert the word "beyond;" so that the proviso will read :

Provided, That no subsidy in United States bonds shall be allowed to said Central Branch Company beyond the termination of the one hundred miles on which bonds are already authorized to be issued on said line of railroad.

Mr. HARLAN. I was about to remark that it has been so long since this bill was before the Senate that it will be very difficult for me to begin now where I left off; and if a vote can be taken without further discussion I would much prefer to have the vote taken on the bill than to submit any further remarks myself.

Mr. EDMUNDS. I suppose I am not foreclosed by the observations of my friend from Iowa from saying something. I believe I was broken off, six or eight weeks ago, much in the same manner as the Senator from Iowa; and

in order to make myself understood, I shall have to begin at the beginning.

Mr. President, I have desired to investigate this subject with entire impartiality, and so far as i am conscious of my intellectual operations, I have done so. If I have failed to see the merit which the friends of this bill suppose it to contain, it is not because I have not listened to those friends in doors and out of doors, "in season and out of season," to their heart's content. Every suggestion that ingenuity could provide which should induce one to go for the bill has been made to me. Every sentiment which sympathy sometimes permits us to express has been appealed to. And so if I have felt obliged to come to a conclusion which differs from that of the Senators who advocate this bill, it has not been for want of investigation and for want of teaching.

But, Mr. President, the truth is, nevertheless, I believe, that any fair man who merely desires to do his duty in protecting the Treasury of the United States, and protecting the taxpayers whom he represents, must conclude that this claim has no just or legal foundation. This company may have been unfortunate under the circumstances that have taken place. It appears from their own statement, and I believe it, that they have been; that they find themselves with a hundred miles of railroad built from the Missouri river westward in the State of Kansas, not in any Territory of the United States, which does not pay running expenses. In a State that is rapidly filling up with population, as we are told; a State that is the garden of the West, that should support its population of millions, and will in due time, I dare say, this company finds itself now, after having received $1,600,000 of the money of

the United States in aid of the construction of its road, with a hundred miles of railroad and with expenses in running it so great that they are not met or satisfied by the income of the property. Now the company wish the United States to give them $2,500,000 more of its bonds, its credit, in order to enable them to prosecute that enterprise one hundred and fifty miles, as the bill provides, so as to connect with the great Pacific line which is to terminate at Omaha or somewhere near the one hundreth meridian west.

If we are in a condition to subsidize all the branches which are authorized by State authority, converging westward to the one hundredth meridian, from Iowa, from Kansas, from Missouri, and from all that great region of country, then this application comes to us with as good a ground for support as any application could. Those who are engaged in it are rehave spent their money economically; and spectable men unquestionably. I dare say they they have that natural desire for a reasonable margin of profits that all business men have. But the question is whether we can take the step of adding to our already somewhat large $2,500,000 more in aid of what is really, and stock of bonds of one kind and another, nothing else, a State enterprise, a company chartered by the State of Kansas, the length of whose whole line is in the State of Kansas, subject to the laws of Kansas, and to the laws of no other government or community on earth. That is the question.

Senators all know perfectly well that the theory of this Pacific railroad business was to have one grand trunk line from the one hundredth meridian west to the borders of California, and to permit as many branch lines in the States running from the Mississippi or the Missouri, or wherever else State authority might grant them, to connect there, as chose to do it. It is true that afterward, by the act of 1864, the line through Iowa, I believe, which comes out at Omaha or somewhere there, became practically a part of that great trunk line. And now we have the application of this company to become another part of this great trunk line. It appears to me, I am sorry to say, that there is no justification for such an application.

It is said, I know, and it is pressed with great