Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The order to print will be made if there be no objection. The Chair hears none.

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE.

A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. MCPHERSON, its Clerk, announced that the House had concurred in the report of the committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the bill (H. R. No. 51) to establish a Bureau of Freedmen's Affairs.

ENROLLED BILL SIGNED.

The message also announced that the Speaker had signed the enrolled bill (H. R. No. 684) to provide for Acting Assistant Treasurers and depositaries of the United States in certain cases; which thereupon received the signature of the President pro tempore of the Senate.

LEGISLATIVE, ETC., APPROPRIATION BILL.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The special order is the bill (H. R. No. 649) making appropriations for the legislative, executive, and judicial expenses of the Government for the year ending the 30th of June, 1866; which is now before the Senate as in Committee of the Whole.

Mr. SHERMAN. As this bill is some forty || pages long, it is scarcely worth while to read it in full at first, unless some Senator desires that it shall be read, as it must be read in detail in order to consider the various amendments. It will take probably an hour to read the bill through, and nobody will listen to that reading. I suggest, therefore, that the bill be read in detail, and that as each amendment is reached it be acted on in its order.

Mr. SUMNER. If I understand the Senator, he means that the bill shall be read on, and as we come to any amendment of the Committee on Finance we shall act upon it.

Mr. SHERMAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. SUMNER. I think that is the best way. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. That course will be taken if there be no objection.

Mr. HALE. I want to know for what reason this bill has preference of a special order which was made on my motion, at the suggestion of the Senator from Wisconsin, [Mr. DOOLITTLE,] about a week ago. I attempted to address the Senate on a matter of interest some two or three mornings successively by installments of a few minutes each time, and at the suggestion of the Senator from Wisconsin the resolution on which I was speaking was postponed and made the special order for this day a week ago, I think. It has been constantly overridden ever since by unfinished business or something of that sort. How the Senator from Ohio now gets in his bill ahead of me I do not understand. I wish to be corrected from the record if that resolution is not the special order which should now come up regularly.

Mr. SHERMAN. That was an old special order which is superseded by this.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair will inform the Senator from New Hampshire that it appears by the record that the resolution to which he refers was made the special order for Thursday of last week, but was then passed by, and thereby lost its place. This bill was made the special order for to-day by assignment of the Senate.

Mr. HALE. It was only passed by because the Chair decided that the unfinished business had precedence of it.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. That displaced it.

Mr. HALE. Then does not the special order take its place when the unfinished business is out of the way?

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chairis of opinion that it does not. The unfinished business displaces it as a special order until it shall be reassigned. If the unfinished business had been disposed of the same day, it would have been the next special order.

Mr. HALE. But the unfinished business occupied several days.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. special order lost its place.

Then the

Mr. SHERMAN. If the Senator from New Hampshire simply desires to make his resolution the special order for some future time, I have no objection.

Mr. HALE. That is all.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. That motion may be entertained by unanimous consent.

Mr. HALE. I move that the resolution be made the special order for next Tuesday, at one o'clock.

Mr. SUMNER. I suggest that a bill has already been made the special order for Monday which may be debated and run over into Tuesday. It is the bill regulating commerce among the States, and the Senator from Michigan, who has it in charge, has declared it to be his purpose to keep it before the Senate until it is voted upon. Mr. HALE. But I suppose that I can get the Senate to make the resolution the special order again, or else say that I shall not have the floor at all. I do not much care which.

Mr. CONNESS. What measure is proposed to be made a special order?

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair understands it to be a resolution offered by the Senator from Kentucky, [Mr. DAVIS.] Is there any objection to the motion of the Senator from New Hampshire?

Mr. CONNESS. I object.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection being made, the motion cannot be entertained. The Secretary will read the bill before the Senate.

The Secretary proceeded to read the bill, and as he reached a portion that the Committee on Finance proposed to amend, the question was put on the amendment.

The first amendment was in line fifty-three, to strike out "ten" and insert "twenty," so as to appropriate $20,000 for reporting the proceedings of the Senate in the Daily Globe for the first session of the Thirty-Ninth Congress.

The amendment was agreed to.

The next amendment was to insert after line fifty-four, among the items for "contingent expenses of the Senate:"

For paying the publishers of the Congressional Globe and Appendix, according to the number of copies taken, one cent for every five pages exceeding three thousand, including the indexes and the laws of the United States, $12,900.

For one complete set of the Congressional Globe and Appendix for each Senator in the Thirty-Ninth Congress who has not already received them, $6,800.

The amendment was agreed to.

The next amendment was to increase the appropriation for Capitol police, on the part of the Senate, from $10,234 to $19,170.

The amendment was agreed to.

The next amendment was to strike out lines seventy-three, seventy-four, and seventy-five, as follows:

For removing the unsightly high fence, or ralling, which has been erected in the old Hall of Representatives, $100, or as much thereof as may be necessary.

the contingent expenses of the Senate. It is really a fence or railing put up by virtue of an act of Congress passed at the last session for the protection of the sculpture and other works of art in the old Hall of the House of Representatives. This is a strong, firm railing, erected after reflection and consideration, intended to protect the property. The complaint made in the debate in the House was that it was not a small railing which would not impede the sight.

The amendment was agreed to.

The next amendment was in line one hundred and five, to increase the appropriation, on the part of the House of Representatives, for the pay of the Capitol police, from $13,920 to $19,170; and to increase the aggregate appropriation for annual salaries paid by the House from $104,178 to $109,428.

The amendment was agreed to.

The next amendment was to insert, after line one hundred and sixty-one, the following:

For completing the tiling of the floor of the old Hall of Representatives, under the same authority that the work has already been done, $3,875.

The amendment was agreed to.

The next amendment was in line two hundred and twenty-three, after the word "laws," to strike out the words "in pamphlet form;" in line two hundred and twenty-five, to strike out "seventeen" and insert "thirteen," and after the word "thousand," to strike out the words "one hundred and twenty-five;" so that the clause will read:

For publishing the laws and in newspapers of the States and Territories and in the city of Washington, $13,000. The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. TRUMBULL. The amendment which has just been adopted leaves the sentence imperfect and ungrammatical. It now reads:

For publishing the laws and in newspapers of the Stutes and Territories, &c.

The word "and" after the word "laws " should be stricken out.

Mr. SHERMAN. The word "and" should have been included in the brackets, and ought to be stricken out.

The PRESIDING officer, (Mr. FOSTER in the chair.) That amendment will be made if there be no objection.

Mr. SHERMAN. It is due to the Senate that I should explain that Messrs. Little & Brown, who have heretofore published the laws of Congress, have informed us by letter and also in person that they cannot publish the laws at the old prices. They ask, I think, half as much again. After a full examination and conference with the Committee on Printing, it was deemed advisable to

Mr. SUMNER. Why should we strike that print them at the Public Printing Office. Accord

out?

Mr. SHERMAN. The committee found that the fence or railing was erected in the old Hall of the House of Representatives by order of Congress, made at the last session, and that it is not unsightly but is very serviceable, and indispensably necessary to protect the sculpture and valuable property placed behind the railing. In order to see the cause for this clause, we examined the debate in the other House and we also examined the Commissioner of Public Buildings and the architect who prepared the plan, and after a full examination we were satisfied that the clause was inserted in the bill under a misapprehension. At any rate, even if it was the desire of Congress to remove the railing, it should be done by a simple order or joint resolution, and not by such a clause as this in an appropriation bill, characterizing the work as unsightly and improper, and authorizing somebody, it does not say whom, to remove it, and appropriating $100 for that purpose. The truth is that the clause was hastily inserted in the appropriation bill in the House of Representatives, and did not come from any committee. It was done on the motion of a single member, probably without very much consideration. Mr. SUMNER. I would simply remark that as this fence is in the part of the Capitol that, if I may so say, rather belongs to the House of Representatives than to the Senate, I should be disposed to leave to the House the jurisdiction of the matter.

Mr. SHERMAN. Then it only shows the haste with which it was put in, because the item is inserted among the items of appropriation for

ing to the estimates furnished to us, they could be printed at the Public Printing Office just as well and in the same form precisely that they are now printed by Little & Brown. Extra copies of the laws are now printed at the Public Printing Office; and, on the whole, we concluded it was better to discontinue the arrangement with Little & Brown, so far as they were concerned, rather than increase their compensation.

As this is a matter that will probably excite some objection in certain quarters, I deemed it proper to call the attention of the Senate to it, so that they may know they have acted upon tha question.

Mr. TRUMBULL. I should like to inquire what has become of the contract heretofore made for this publication. Has it expired by limitation of time?

Mr. SHERMAN. The contract is only in the nature of an appropriation from year to year for this pamphlet copy. The original contract was for so many pamphlet copies of the laws in a certain style. That has been renewed from year to year by an appropriation. I can state to the Senate that there can be no controversy about the contract, because Little & Brown do not look upon it as a contract binding upon them, and they will decline to print for the United States the number of copies heretofore printed at the price heretofore paid. There can be no controversy, therefore, as to the existence of this contract, because both parties regard it as abandoned, and the effect of withholding the appropriation will be to abandon the contract with Little & Brown. They say they cannot furnish these pamphlet

copies at the price they were heretofore paid, and we must either give them an increased price or else we must print them somewhere else.

Mr. TRUMBULL. I would like to inquire further what arrangements, if any, have been made for side notes and indexes to these laws. The Senator from Ohio is aware that in the edition published by Little & Brown they have side notes and indexes, and references frequently to other statutes. Some arrangement ought certainly to be made, if it has not been already made, to continue these notes. They were very useful in the examination of the statutes, which have now become so voluminous.

Mr. SHERMAN. That matter has been looked into also. The present marginal notes and indexes were prepared by a clerk of the State Department for Little & Brown, and Little & Brown paid that clerk, I believe, some compensation for that work.

Mr. SUMNER. Four hundred dollars.

Mr. SHERMAN. But the marginal notes and indexes for the edition published at the Government Printing Office are also prepared at the State Department, and, in the opinion of the Committee on Printing and in my opinion, they are better than those prepared by Little & Brown; so that every year we prepare marginal notes for the copy printed at the Government Printing Office, and a better index than is furnished by Little & Brown. Both indexes, however, are prepared at the State Department. If the index prepared by Little & Brown is considered better than that prepared by Congress, all we have got to do is to set the clerk in the State Department who prepared that index to prepare the index for a congressional edition.

Mr. JOHNSON. I should like to know from the chairman of the Committee on Finance what additional price Little & Brown are willing to continue the work for. Having frequent occasion to use the book, it appears to me that the work, from the time they have undertaken it up to the present time, has been most admirably performed. The paper itself is of the very best kind; the print is remarkably good; and the marginal notes, by whoever prepared, are all, I think, that is necessary to inform the reader of the contents of each section. It is very desirable, if there is to be a change, that the form of publication should be precisely the same with that which has been heretofore printed. I understood the honorable member to say that the committee were of opinion they could get the work done cheaper at the Public Printing Office than by increasing the price which Little & Brown heretofore received. 1 should like to know how much additional price they do ask.

saving will be produced by the proposition of the Finance Committee. We print one edition of the laws for distribution as a congressional document; and that can be printed in the same style as the present edition, to be bound uniform with the Revised Statutes, and the type-setting of one edition will be saved. I believe that the edition printed by the Senate and House of Representatives at the last session was found by gentlemen of the profession, in its index and marginal references, to be at least equal to the Boston one, and I think it was superior.

we now have published by Little & Brown are very convenient. They are illustrated by these side notes to which reference has been made, and by good indexes. I hope that in any change that may be made these conditions will be preserved. I do not know what means have been taken in order to secure them; and I should like to ask the chairman of the Committee on Printing whether any means have been taken in order to secure the continuance of the conditions under which the statutes have been heretofore edited and printed. Mr. ANTHONY. I understand that the editMr. JOHNSON. I do not know what editioning and printing of the statutes is done under the the chairman of the Committee on Printing refers

to.

Mr. ANTHONY. The Senator has it in his hand.

Mr. JOHNSON. This has no marginal notes, and is inferior in every respect to the edition of Little & Brown.

Mr. ANTHONY. It has marginal references, has it not?

Mr. JOHNSON. I do not see any. It has an index. The index is very good, but the paper is very inferior.

Mr. ANTHONY. I hold in my hand the Acts and Resolutions of the second session of the ThirtySeventh Congress, and that has marginal refer

ences.

Mr. JOHNSON. The book I have here is the laws for the last session, and this has none. Is it the purpose, if the work is to be printed at the Public Printing Office, to print it in the same form as Little & Brown have heretofore done?

Mr. ANTHONY. Certainly. There are no marginal notes to the last edition of the laws, but there will be no difficulty in preparing them. The man who prepares them for Little & Brown is a clerk in the State Department, and he can prepare them for the Public Printer.

Mr. SUMNER. This is perhaps a more important matter than some which on their face may seem to be more important. It certainly is not unimportant how the statutes of the country shall be printed. They ought to be printed, in the first place, uniformly with the previous statutes; and I wish to call the attention of my friend, the chairman of the Committee on Printing, to that point, that in any arrangements that may be made for the printing of the statutes hereafter, reference should be had to the existing statutes, so that the series shall go on with a certain uniformity. Mr. ANTHONY. Undoubtedly.

Mr. SUMNER. Without that uniformity the statutes will have a bad appearance, and they may be inconvenient in use. In the next place, we must consult accuracy. There must be very considera

Mr. SHERMAN. I have now the letter ofble care in the superintendence of the publication. Little & Brown before me. It seems that the old price was thirty-seven and a half cents per copy, and Congress took eleven thousand copies. The average size then was about one hundred pages. They say the size has increased to four or five times the old size, and the price of paper, materials, &c., has increased two and a half times. They do not state how much they would furnish them for. They say it is impossible to furnish them at the present prices, and probably they would ask six or seven times as much as we now pay.

Mr. JOHNSON. The expense of printing them in the Public Printing Office would also be increased. You will have to buy paper, and employ bands, and the price of paper and labor and everything else has increased in proportion.

Mr. SHERMAN. But in the Public Printing Office we already set up the type to print these identical laws; we already have them indexed and notes prepared for them by the Public Printer; and the only additional expense is the paper and the additional impression.

Mr. ANTHONY. There is no reason why an edition of the laws uniform with that published by Little & Brown may not be published at the Public Printing Office, in precisely the same style, and with considerable economy to the Government. The work is edited here now; the proof is read here; and that would be better and more conveniently done if it were printed here than if it were printed in Boston. I was not disposed to interfere with this contract so long as it existed and was to be carried on by both parties at the old rates; but I have no doubt a considerable

Then they must also be edited. That, as I understand, was secured through the contract with Little & Brown. They always, from the beginning, kept a competent person, latterly a gentleman who had been on the bench and who had retired, to superintend the publication, and who performed what may be called the editorial labor. He made those side notes, and also the index. I do not understand that the index was made, as the Senator from Ohio, in rather an off-hand way said, by some clerk. It was made by an eminent member of the bar. It is a service that cannot be performed by an ordinary person. It must be performed by a man who has a certain familiarity with the statutes of the country, and with the language of legislation. Only such a person can make a proper index.

I do not know that this subject properly comes up for consideration now, but I make these remarks in order to bring the attention of the Senate to the question. I do not wish that we should take a leap in the dark; that we should pass from the very good system which we now have of publication by competent publishers, like Little & Brown, to something that is vague and unknown. The publications of the Government, as a general rule, do not compare with those by private publishers. You have only, for instance, to go to the publications of the statutes before the contract with Little & Brown in order to see what we gained by handing over the publication of our laws to a private firm, rather than undertaking to print them ourselves. Look at any of the old volumes, and you will find how crude they are; you can hardly use them. But the volumes that

|

direction of the State Department. I thought it was done by some employé of the State Department; but I am not sure of that. It is to be done to the satisfaction of the State Department, and it must be so done under the system that is now proposed. I do not see any reason why it cannot be done at the Public Printing Office as well as in Boston. The comparison which the Senator from Massachusetts suggests between the statutes as printed by Little & Brown and the statutes as printed before they took the contract would be a very unfair one indeed; because the statutes, before they took the contract, were printed by private contractors, whose only object was to make all the money they could out of the Government, and they were printed on the poorest paper and in the most slovenly manner. But since the public printing has been done by the Government itself, it has not only effected a great saving, but the printing has been done in a handsome manner. For instance, look at the Rules of the Senate which each Senator has on his table. It is a book fit to be placed in any gentleman's library, and does not cost more than two thirds as much as it used to cost under the old system. Little & Brown have performed their contract, I think, to the entire satisfaction of the Department and of the country, and no fault whatever is to be found with them. But when the Government Printing Office was first erected and organized, the intention was that all the Government printing should be executed there. The printing of the Supreme Court requires the greatest care and accuracy of any printing that is done by the Government; and it was at one time proposed that that printing should be done, as it was done before, by certain private contractors, but the Senate decided that it should be printed at the Public Printing Office; and I believe it has been done there to the entire satisfaction of everybody. The Senator from Maryland can answer as to that better than I can.

Mr. JOHNSON. It is very well done.

Mr. ANTHONY. I see no reason why these laws cannot be published as well by the Government Printer as by the Boston publishing house. But at the same time I desire to bear my testimony, with the professional gentlemen of the Senate, to the accuracy and general elegance with which they have printed the laws.

Mr. SUMNER. Allow me to ask my friend if there should not then be some legislation or resolution of Congress on the subject directing the State Department how these volumes shall be printed.

Mr. ANTHONY. I think there is no such regulation now. I understand it is merely in the nature of an appropriation.

Mr. SUMNER. The Senator does not meet my point. What assurance have we that the statutes will continue to be published in the same shape that we have them in now-uniform?

Mr. ANTHONY. That would be so obviously proper that I suppose the Secretary of State would give such directions, or the Superintendent of Public Printing would see the propriety of it without any directions.

Mr. SUMNER. I ask, would it not be advisable to have some definite action on that point by calling the attention of the Senator's committee to it?

Mr. ANTHONY. I think it very likely.

The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. POMEROY in the chair.) This amendment having been agreed to, the reading of the bill will be proceeded with.

The next amendment was in line two hundred and sixty to strike out the word "which" and insert the word "who."

The amendment was agreed to.

The next amendment was in line two hundred and seventy-three to strike out the word "which" and insert the word "who."

The amendment was agreed to.

The next amendment was in line two hundred and eighty to strike out the word "which" and insert the word "who."

The amendment was agreed to.

on Finance have inserted it here in its proper place.

The amendment was agreed to.

The Secretary continued the reading of the bill down to the following clause:

For compensation of the clerks in the office of Military Justice, $7,200.

Mr. JOHNSON. I will inquire of the chairman of the committee, what is "the office of MilJustice?"

Mr. SHERMAN. Judge Holt is the head of that office.

The next amendment was in lines three hundred and twenty-five, three hundred and twenty-itary six, and three hundred and twenty-seven to strike out the words "and for additional compensation to clerks in same Department: Provided, That the temporary clerks herein provided for may," and to insert the word "to;" in line three hundred and twenty-eight, after the word "services," to insert "$25,000;' ;" and also to strike out the following proviso:

And provided further, That the Secretary of the Treas ury may award such additional compensation to clerks as in his judgment may be deemed just and may be required by the public service, $250,000; but the said Secretary shall not have the authority to award any such additional compensation to such clerks after the 1st day of July, 1866. So that the clause will read:

For compensation of temporary clerks in the Treasury Department, to be classified according to the character of their services, $25,000.

It

Mr. SHERMAN. The Committee on Finance have reconsidered their proposed amendment on this item and desire to withdraw it. It is necessary for me to make an explanation in regard to it. This provision of law is somewhat new. authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to employ temporary clerks, and to give additional compensation to the clerks now in the office and to all the officers of that Department, and places at his disposal a fund of $250,000 for that purpose. The Committee on Finance were not disposed to intrust the Secretary of the Treasury or any other officer of the Government with this power, not from any want of confidence in the Secretary of the Treasury, but simply because the principle was a bad one. The compensation of these officers ought to be fixed by law and ought not to be changed. But we are met with this difficulty: some of the officers in the nature of experts in the Treasury Department cannot be retained in their present positions unless there is some mode of increasing their compensation. These officers are now very much needed by the banks that have organized throughout the United States and in other employments of a peculiar character, and it is impossible for the Secretary to retain these person in his employment unless he can give them additional compensation. The Committee on Finance thought it better not to embark in the general system of an increase of salaries; and on the whole we deemed it better to adopt the provision made by the House of Representatives, and place at his disposal a fund out of which he might increase certain salaries as the exigencies of the public service required. This provision confines the increase to one year, to the next fiscal year. In the last appropriation bill, we appropriated, I believe, $200,000 for the payment of temporary clerks in the Treasury Department. Many of those clerks are now made permanent by this bill. This appropriation will enable the Secretary to employ temporary clerks, and also in certain cases to increase their salaries. We have to leave the distribution of this money to his discretion. I hope, therefore, the amendment of the Committee on Finance will not be concurred in. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the amendment reported from the Committee on Finance.

The amendment was rejected.

The next amendment was to insert after line five hundred and fifteen the following:

For defraying the expenses of the Supreme Court and district courts of the United States, including the District of Columbia, and also for jurors and witnesses, in aid of funds arising from fines, penalties, and forfeitures, in the fiscal year ending June 30, 1865, and previous years, and likewise for defraying the expenses of suits in which the United States are concerned, and of prosecutions for of fenses committed againt the United States, and for the safe-keeping of prisoners, $500,000.

Mr. SHERMAN. I will state that probably by an oversight the House of Representatives have neglected to make the ordinary appropriation for the judiciary fund, unless they designed to put it on some other bill, and the Committee

Mr. JOHNSON. Is that the title of it? Mr. SHERMAN. Yes; it is called the Bureau of Military Justice, and was organized at the last session of Congress.

hereby authorized and empowered to levy a special tax not exceeding one quarter of one per cent. for the purpose aforesaid.

Mr. JOHNSON. I am not sure, and I suppose we ought to ascertain, whether this county is not named the "county of Washington and Georgetown."

Mr. GRIMES. Oh, no; it is the "county of Washington." It is right as the committee propose to amend it.

Mr. JOHNSON. Very well.
The amendment was agreed to.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendments reported by the Committee on Finance have now been gone through with.

Mr. SHERMAN, I have several other amendments to offer from the Committee on Finance.

The next amendment was in the appropriations for the Mint at Philadelphia, in line seven hun-On page 8, line one hundred and eighty-three, I dred and thirty-eight, to insert the words "ores and" before the word "coins;" so that the clause will read:

For specimens of ores and coins to be preserved in the cabinet of the Mint, $300.

The amendment was agreed to.

The Secretary continued the reading of the bill to the eight hundred and ninety-seventh line.

Mr. JOHNSON. I did not notice that the Secretary had progressed so far. I am instructed by the Committee on the Judiciary to propose an amendment at the end of the eight hundred and eighty-fourth line.

move to strike out "fifty" and insert "ninety;" so that the clause will read:

For lithographing and engraving for the Sente and House of Representatives, $90,000.

Mr. JOHNSON. I move to insert at the end of the eight hundred and eighty-fourth line, on the 37th page, this provision, which the Committee on the Judiciary have determined ought to be inserted:

For the repair of the building at St. Augustine, Florida, heretofore used for holding the courts of the United States for the northern district of Florida, $3,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary for that purpose.

I send to the Chair the papers which were before the committee. They show that the build

Mr. SHERMAN. I trust the Senator will allow the usual course to be taken; let the amending now is in no condition at all to be occupied ments of the Committee on Finance be disposed

of first.

Mr. JOHNSON. I did not know you had any others.

Mr. SHERMAN. We have several yet.
Mr. JOHNSON. Very well.

The next amendment was after line eight hundred and ninety-seven to strike out the following clause:

For salaries of additional clerks in the office of the Assist $11,500.

by the court. The committee were unanimous in thinking the appropriation ought to be made.

Mr. SHERMAN. Is St. Augustine in our undisputed possession now? I am very much afraid that if we spend this money the guerrillas may interfere with the building after we put it in order.

ant Treasurer at Boston, which are hereby authorized, jured by being occupied by United States troops.

The amendment was agreed to.

The next amendment was in line nine hundred and two, after the word "treasurer" to strike out the words" of the Mint," so that the clause will read:

For salaries of clerks, messengers, and watchmen, in office of the Assistant Treasurer at Philadelphia, $18,300. The amendment was agreed to.

The next amendment was in line nine hundred and forty-nine, to strike out the proviso to the following appropriation:

For necessary expenses in carrying into effect the several acts of Congress authorizing loans and the issue of Treasury notes, $2,000,000.

The proviso is as follows:

Provided, That no further expenditures shall be made for the experimental system of hydrostatic printing by the Treasury Department until such experiments shall have been definitely authorized by law, and a distinct appropriation made therefor.

Mr. SHERMAN. I trust the Senate will allow this amendment to be passed over informally for the present, as I have another proviso to offer as a substitute, and let the whole matter be acted upon together.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be passed over if there be no objection. The next amendment of the committee was in line one thousand and eleven, after the word "clerks," to strike out the words "be and the same;" at the end of line one thousand and sixteen, to strike out the word "the;" in line one thousand and seventeen, after the word " proportion," to strike out the word "equal;" in line one thousand and nineteen, after the word "Washington," to strike out the words "and Georgetown;" and in line one thousand and twenty, after the word "county," to strike out the words "be and they;" so that the clause will read:

For salaries and other necessary expenses of the Metropolitan Police for the District of Columbia, $110,000. And the compensation of said Metropolitan Police force, officers, and clerks, is hereby increased fifty per cent. upon the amount hereby appropriated, commencing on the 1st day of July, 1865, said increase to be borne by the cities of Washington and Georgetown and the county of Washington, in the District of Columbia, in proportion to the number of patrolmen allotted severally to the city of Washington, to the city of Georgetown, and the county of Washington, and the levy court of said county are

Mr. TEN EYCK. It seems that the courthouse for the repairs of which this amendment is proposed has been very much dilapidated and inIt has been occupied by the troops of the United States, and in consequence of their occupancy these repairs have become necessary. This remark applies to the building itself, but does not apply to a wall which it is, proposed to repair. But I have received no information that the building is not now occupied by United States troops, or that if it shall be repaired by the Government it will not be again occupied by United States troops and injured in the same way by their occupancy. So far as I am concerned, I think an appropriation at the present time for this purpose is premature. I am opposed to the amendment.

Mr. JOHNSON. The amendment is the recommendation of the Committee on the Judiciary. The papers which I have sent to the Chair were communicated to the committee by the Interior Department, and they show that the house is now needed for the use of the court, and that it cannot be used unless repairs are made to it, and the repairs can be made within the limit of the appropriation. We have a court there now; we have recently appointed a district attorney, and if the court is to be used at all, it ought to have a building to meet in.

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. SHERMAN. I have a few more amendments to offer from the Committee on Finance. On page 18, line four hundred and thirty-three, I move to strike out "three thousand" and insert "twelve thousand five hundred," so as to make the clause read:

For repairs of the Patent Office building, $12,500.

We have the statement of the Secretary of the Interior showing that the appropriation contained in the bill is totally inadequate, and on the showing made we could not refuse to increase the appropriation. I can have the letter read if any Senator desires.

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. SHERMAN. In line nine hundred and twenty-four, on page 38, after the word "of,” where it first occurs, I move to insert the words "officers and;" in line nine hundred and twentysix, after the word "Treasury," to insert "and the tenth section of act of March 3, 1853, making appropriations for the civil and diplomatic expenses of the Government for the year ending

the 30th of June, 1854;" and in line nine hundred the Treasury Department, and the subject gave and twenty-six, after the word "such," to insert rise to a great deal of feeling. This proviso was "further," and in line nine hundred and twenty-inserted in this bill by the House of Representaseven to strike out "$38,060" and insert "$50,- || tives on the motion of a member, and came to us, 000;" so as to make the clause read:

For salaries of additional clerks, and additional compensation of officers and clerks under act of August 6, 1846, for the better organization of the Treasury, and the tenth section of act of March 3, 1853, making appropriations for the civil and diplomatic expenses of the Government for the year ending the 30th of June, 1854, at such further rates as the Secretary may deem just and reasonable, $50,000.

I ought probably to explain this amendment. Under the sub-Treasury act, as it is called, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to employ additional clerks and to give additional compensation in certain cases to clerks already employed for extra work, sometimes done at night, sometimes done under circumstances which demand additional compensation. The ordinary appropriation is about what is stated here, $38,060; but the Secretary also finds it necessary to give additional compensation to certain persons employed in that bureau who are called officers and clerks-the assayers and some other officers that would not be reached by the word "clerks." An appropriation was called for for additional clerks at Boston. It will be remembered that that clause has been stricken out, and the amount of this appropriation is increased so as to enable the Secretary to award compensation and to employ, if necessary, additional clerks at Boston out of this fund.

Mr. SUMNER. Do I understand that the same thing is accomplished by this?

Mr. SHERMAN. Yes, sir. It is found necessary also to give additional compensation to officers and clerks in the assay office, and therefore I have moved to insert the descriptive words of the act organizing the assay office in New York so as to cover the whole in this appropriation.

Mr. HARLAN.I desire to be informed on this subject. Will this appropriation place the amount of the increase of the salaries of the clerks at the discretion of the head of the Department?

and we were therefore compelled to examine into the subject of the hydrostatic printing. A subcommittee of the Committee on Finance was appointed to examine the matter. I was not a member of the sub-committee, but they gave the subject a very careful and patient investigation. It was also examined by the Committee on Finance. I can only state generally, without going into the voluminous papers that relate to it, that we were all satisfied that the experiments in hydrostatic printing were, to say the least, beneficial in some respects; and we were satisfied, I believe without exception, that the plan of printing in the Treasury Department was wise and economical, and that the preparation of the paper and the printing of all the notes and securities of the Government should be carried on in the Department. Whether the hydrostatic mode of printing is the best in the world, we were not experts and could not say; but from the best testimony we had before us from persons on both sides, we were satisfied that in some respects it was a success, and on the whole we thought it very unwise by a provision of law to refuse to the Secretary of the Treasury the right to print by this mode of printing, if there was any doubt about it. So far as I am concerned, I would not deny the Secretary the power to print in this particular mode unless it was perfectly clear from the experiments had that the mode was not a proper one. We concluded therefore to strike out the proviso.

The amendment I now submit authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to settle with Stewart Gwynne the disputed claim about which so much has been said. In regard to that I can only say that the Secretary has the power under the law as it now stands to settle this claim. He can pay for the presses and materials used in printing. The power conferred on him by the law is ample for that purpose; but at the same time, as he says himself, he felt a delicacy about paying this claim when, as he knew very well, it was disputed, and was alleged by some to be improper. He thought that Congress should take the re

Mr. SHERMAN. That is so by the law now. The sub-Treasury law which was passed many years ago authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to make additional compensation in certain cases, and every year since that time an appro-sponsibility of directing the mode in which the priation has been made for the purpose, sometimes more and sometimes less. This does not change the present law, except that it extends the authority to the "officers" as well as the "clerks."

Mr. HARLAN. Is it intended to include another class of persons besides those embraced in the old law?

Mr. SHERMAN. It does. It includes officers as well as clerks. That is the material change. Under this, the Secretary of the Treasury may pay some of the money to the officers of the subTreasury as well as to the clerks. The officers are, the assayers, and the Assistant Treasurers, and others.

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. SHERMAN. I now move in lieu of the following proviso on page 39-

Provided, That no further expenditures shall be made for the experimental system of hydrostatic printing by the Treasury Department until such experiments shall have been definitely authorized by law, and a distinct appropriation made therefor

To insert these words:

Provided, That the proper accounting officers of the Treasury be, and they are hereby, authorized and directed to examine and adjust the accounts of Stewart Gwynne for printing presses, machinery, material, and labor furnished and supplied to the Treasury Department, and for expenditures under the authority of the Secretary, and to award to him such sum as may be equitably his due, to be paid from the appropriation for the expenses of national loans: Provided further, That for items furnished or supplied under contract, no greater sum than the contract price shall be allowed: And provided further, That before any payment shall be made, the said Stewart Gwynne shall, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury, fully convey and secure to the United States the right to use said presses and any additional number thereof, with their machinery and future improvements, in the Treasury building or any other buildings directed by the Secretary, for any and all printing the Government may desire for its own use and purposes.

The subject of the Treasury Department print ing has been controverted a great deal, and very much has been said about it. I believe an examination took place in the House of Representatives by a committee of that House in regard to the mode of printing the United States notes in

claim should be settled. To meet this point the provision was drawn up, requiring the account to be made out in the usual form as a voucher against the United States, and to be submitted to the accounting officers to be settled by them. That is the effect of the amendment. I do not think it gives any additional power to the Secretary of the Treasury; it simply requires that this claim shall be presented in the usual form, shall pass through the various accounting offices, and be settled according to the principles here laid down. If the Senate desire to go into the whole of this controversy, I have the papers here before me, and they can enlighten the Senate on the subject. I give this brief statement simply to present an outline of this controverted matter to the Senate.

[ocr errors]

Mr. GRIMES. I am extremely anxious to have a decision upon a point of order on this question. It is seldom that a point of order is raised against the Committee on Finance, but I will raise a point now and submit it to the decision of the Chair. The point is that this is a private claim in behalf of Mr. Stewart Gwynne, and that under || the rules of the Senate it cannot be put on an appropriation bill, even on the motion of the Committee on Finance. If I am overruled in this point the flood-gates are opened, and the Senator from Ohio and the Senators who are associated with him upon the Finance Committee must expect hereafter to take the consequences of the decision which they ask the Senate to make in this case. I submit the point of order that this is a private claim.

Mr. SHERMAN. I am very desirous that the rules of the Senate shall be enforced strictly against the Committee on Finance, because I shall seek to enforce them on all others. If there is any doubt about the point of order, I would rather the claim should be excluded. But the reason why it does not come within the rule is this: the provision is already contained in the bill that affects this claim, that destroys this property; the provision as it comes to us from the House of Representatives denies the Secretary of the Treasury the right to use these machines for printing on the

hydrostatic principle. It is here. We cannot refuse him the right to use them without affecting the claim of Mr. Gwynne, or whoever owns the presses. The amendment I offer now is simply a substitute for the proviso. The proviso itself affects the claim, and the amendment also affects it. I admit that I do not think the amendment would be proper if the House had not already inserted in the bill a provision which affects this claim. If the point of order is decided against the amendment, I shall be very happy to get rid of the controversy in this way; but we felt it to be our duty to report the amendment.

The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. POMEROY in the chair.) The Chair will inquire of the Senator from Ohio whether this appropriation is to carry out any law of Congress? If so, the Chair will decide that the amendment is in order.

Mr. SHERMAN. The appropriation is already made. There is no appropriation in the proviso. The fund is already provided for in the preceding clause of the same paragraph, which is in these words:

For necessary expenses in carrying into effect the several acts of Congress authorizing loans and the issue of Treasury notes, $2,000,000.

That is the appropriation; and the question now is whether any portion of this money shall be applied to the payment of Stewart Gwynne.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no appropriation made in the amendment, there is no question of order involved.

Mr. JOHNSON. The first part of the clause contains the only appropriation, and the proviso is merely to say that out of that appropriation certain things shall not hereafter be done. What is hereafter to be done, according to that proviso, is that no portion of that $2,000,000 shall be expended for carrying out further the experiment of hydrostatic printing at the Treasury Department until such experiments shall be definitely approved. I understand that this kind of printing has been going on for a year or two, whether successfully or not is not the question. Dr. Gwynne has been permitted to have rooms in the Treasury-no doubt the Department thought they had authority to authorize it-and he has been apparently an officer of the Treasury Department, and he has gone into the community and he has purchased a variety of machinery; he has purchased these presses. The persons with whom he contracted were under the impression-I know it to be true as to some of them-that they were dealing with the Government. For example, he contracted near Baltimore for the building of some of these presses, and the work has been furnished, and it has been used by the Government to some extent. A portion of it is still undelivered; has been ready to be delivered, and has only not been delivered because the contractors, supposing, as I have stated, that they were doing the work for the Government, were advised by the investiga tion by the other House that it was doubtful whether Dr. Gwynne had any authority to bind the Government. But the Government has received some of the presses, the Government has the presses now, and the Government has been using the presses.

Then there are two questions: first, whether you will limit the Secretary of the Treasury so as to control his right to go on with this kind of printing, although he may think it the best kind under the circumstances; and, second, whether, after you have permitted an individual to go into the country and contract large debts, apparently on the credit of the Government, and you have got the machinery which has been furnished under those contracts, and you hold the machinery still, you will not pay for it. There is due, as f understand, some thirty-three or thirty-four thou sand dollars-I do not know exactly how much the amount is in the aggregate-for what has been furnished in that way. It seems to me very clear that the Government ought to pay for it; and all that will be done by striking out the proviso and substituting the amendment proposed by the Committee on Finance, is to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to audit the accounts and to pay only such as he thinks are just. The Government, having received the labor and the materials which have been furnished, as I have said, upon the credit of the Government, it should pay for them.

Mr. GRIMES. I have no controversy with

the Senator from Indiana, or with anybody else in regard to the merits of the claim of Mr. Stewart Gwynne. There may be a legitimate and honest debt due to him from the Government of the United States. The only question before the Senate is whether or not the attempt to provide for the payment of the claim by the amendment proposed by the chairman of the Committee on Finance is not a violation of the rules of the Senate.

Mr. CLARK. That question has been decided.

Mr. GRIMES. I do not understand that it has been decided; but if it has been, I appeal from the decision of the Chair.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair inquired of the Senator from Ohio if this amendment was to carry out any existing law, and if so, the Chair said he would decide it to be in order. But as the amendment makes no appropriation the Chair decided that the question could not be raised.

Mr. GRIMES. Will the Chair permit me to read the 30th rule of the Senate ?

30. No amendment proposing additional appropriations shall be received to any general appropriation bill, unless it be made to carry out the provisions of some existing law, or some act or resolution previously passed by the Senate during that session, or moved by direction of a standing or select committee of the Senate, or in pursuance of an estimate from the head of some of the Departments."

If the rule stopped there, I admit that my point of order would not apply to this amendment, but it goes on to say:

"And no amendment shall be received whose object is to provide for a private claim, unless it be to carry out the provisions of an existing law or a treaty stipulation."

What does this do? This proposition directs that the Secretary of the Treasury shall investigate the claim of Stewart Gwynne and "award" to him. What is meant by that? As my friend from Vermont [Mr. COLLAMER] well says to me, it means to pay. It means nothing else. How are you going to get rid of this last clause of your rule, "no amendment," no matter where it comes from, no matter what committee may propose it, "no amendment shall be received whose objec is to provide for a private claim, unless it be to carry out the provisions of an existing law or a treaty stipulation?" Is there an existing law here that is proposed to be carried out? Is there any treaty stipulation here? Does not the argument of the Senator from Maryland admit that this is a private claim? Has he not told us how this private claim originated? Has he not told us that persons have claims through Mr. Stewart Gwynne, men of whom he purchased these materials, thinking that they were selling them really to the Government when in fact they were selling to Stewart Gwynne to the amount of $34,000? So far as this particular case is concerned, I have no interest in it, but I want the rules of the Senate observed.

Mr. JOHNSON. The honorable member from Iowa has misunderstood me. I have not said that whatever claim Stewart Gwynne may have is, in the sense of that rule, a private claim, by any means. All that I said was that he had gone into the country and had contracted for this material, and it was furnished by the persons who made the contracts with him, as they supposed, to the Government. How was he authorized to go abroad and buy that machinery and bring it in and put it in the Treasury Department? Was it done without any law? I presume there was a law that authorized it.

Mr. GRIMES. Will the Senator point us to the law?

Mr. JOHNSON. I do not know all the laws. I suppose there was some general law. I take it for granted there was some law that authorized it. I understand the chairman of the committee to say that the Secretary had authority to do. what was done, and the only question is whether he did it; and I understand him also as saying that the present Secretary thinks he is authorized to pay the claim.

Mr. GRIMES. Then why does he not do it? Mr. JOHNSON. He is unwilling to take the responsibility of doing so because the subject itself has been a matter of investigation at the instance of the House of Representatives; but as far as the law is concerned, if I am correctly informed, he believes that he was properly employed by the Secretary of the Treasury, and having been

properly employed, there is an obligation to pay him. What I referred to was the great practical hardship, the great injustice, even if there was any doubt upon the subject, of permitting this man to hold himself out as an officer of the Government, apparently an officer of the Government, acting under the actual authority of the Secretary of the Treasury, contracting all these debts for the Government, and then not paying those who dealt with him on the credit of the Government. I do not know what the amount is.

Mr. GRIMES. It may be all true, and from what I have heard from others as well as from the Senator from Maryland, I have no doubt it is a fact that great hardship has been suffered by various persons who have had transactions with Stewart Gwynne. I am not going to controvert the fact that Mr. Stewart Gwynne has an honest, substantial claim against the Government. That is not the question now in issue before us. I admit that he has for the purpose of this argument. But what has that to do with the question whether or not this amendment comes within the rule? If he has an honest claim it is excluded from this bill by the rule; if he has an honest claim it cannot be put in this way.

The Senator from Ohio says that the Secretary of the Treasury can pay it now. Undoubtedly he can, under the provision appropriating $2,000,000 for necessary expenses in carrying into effect the several acts of Congress authorizing loans and the issue of Treasury notes. We have made a similar provision in a previous appropriation bill. Under that provision the Secretary of the Treasury, if he believed these hydrostatic presses were necessary in order to carry into effect the law of Congress authorizing him to do this printing, might pay for them. Why does he not pay the claim? Why are we asked to come in here and interpose in behalf of this particular man when equal hardships have been inflicted in thousands of other cases upon honest creditors of the Government? Is Stewart Gwynne the only man who has an honest claim against this Government unpaid?

Mr. CLARK. That is not the point.

Under

Mr. GRIMES. I should like to know what the point is. I should like to see where the point is that makes this an exception to the rule. Mr. CLARK. I will state, if the Senator will allow me, what is the state of the case. the provision of the law, without the amendment the Secretary undoubtedly has power to pay for this printing to Stewart Gwynne, but as this has been a disputed claim he wants it to go before the proper accounting officers of the Treasury, so that it shall go upon the record that the claim is a just one, and that it is adjudicated by the accounting officers before he pays it. That is all he requires. He desires that Congress shall direct it to be done. It is not to make any provision for paying a claim that would not otherwise be paid, but simply to specify how this claim shall be examined.

[ocr errors]

Mr. GRIMES. Does he desire that it shall go on an appropriation bill?

Mr. CLARK. No, but it is in the appropriation bill before; the amendment does not put it there.

Mr. SHERMAN. I am disposed to give a good deal of attention to the point made by the Senator from Iowa, because I desire to enforce the rule strictly myself, and therefore, if there is any strength in the objection made by him, I desire to give it full effect; but I have modified the amendment so that I think he will admit that it does not come within the rule, and I should like to have him examine it in the modified form with that view.

The rule simply forbids an amendment to be offered providing for a private claim in a general appropriation bill. That is a very wise rule, which ought not to be departed from. In this case there is a general appropriation for certain purposes, for carrying on this printing bureau. There is no doubt about the power of the Secretary of the Treasury to take a portion of this money and pay for printing by the hydrostatic process, or any other means. Consequently, so far as the amendment I offer is concerned, it is not for the benefit of Mr. Gwynne. It is not offered for his benefit. It is really for he benefit of the Secretary in this respect. Here is a claim that is controverted and disputed, about which a great

[ocr errors]

If he

deal has been said in the other House. passes upon it, and pays it in the usual way, he pays it out of a special fund on his own examination. The purpose of the amendment is simply to require this claim of Stewart Gwynne to undergo a supervision and an inspection, and an examination that it would not undergo were it not for this amendment. That is the only effect and the only purpose of it. I will now read it as I have modified it:

Provided, That the proper accounting officers of the Treasury be, and they are hereby, authorized and directed to examine and adjust the accounts of Stewart Gwynne for printing presses, machinery, material, and labor furnished and supplied to the Treasury Department, and for expenditures under the authority of the Secretary, and to report to him such sum as may be equitably due said Gwynne.

I have stricken out all about making an award, and then I provide further that no payment shall be made until Stewart Gwynne shall file in the office of the Secretary of the Treasury a release for all patents and of all claims growing out of improvements in the Treasury Department. That is to avoid the objection which has been made that these improvements have been made in the Treasury Departments out of money furnished by the Government, and that the Government ought not to pay for any inventions made by its officers in experimenting for the benefit of the Government. That is right enough, and this amendment is intended to protect the Government against any claim by Stewart Gwynne or his associates for any patent right. That is the purpose of the amendment. It does not seem to me to be subject to the objection; but if it is, I do not want it to go on the bill.

Mr. CLARK. I would suggest to the Senator from Ohio to divide his amendment. The one proviso has no connection with the other really, and the question of striking out and inserting is under our rules indivisible.

Mr. SHERMAN. I will submit it, then, as a separate amendment. The motion to strike out the House proviso is one thing, and the motion to insert is another.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from lowa withdraw his point of order? Mr. GRIMES. Are these to be offered as separate amendments?

Mr. CLARK. Yes.

Mr. GRIMES. Then I withdraw the point of order.

Mr. COLLAMER. I take it that the question now is on striking out the proviso as it is in the House bill.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is the question.

Mr. COLLAMER. I desire to hear something about this matter from the committee who are said to have examined it. I understand that the proviso which it is now moved to strike out is to stop this experimenting with that hydrostatic press business. I have a general information that there has been expended on that experiment something over a third of a million of dollars, between three and four hundred thousand dollars already, and if any work is produced from it of any value, it is more than we are informed. I do not understand that this proviso prohibits the use of these presses. It is that no further expenditure shall be made with the experimental system of hydrostatic printing.

Mr. CLARK. What they call the experiment is the use of the presses.

Mr. COLLAMER. The proviso is that the Department shall make no more expenditures on the system. If they can use it as it is, there is nothing here to prohibit that. No one, surely, will deny that. If the Secretary can use the presses he has now, he may use them. The men who have examined the subject have stated to the community, and I believe it is generally understood, that the experiments have gone far enough; the amount exper:ded is extravagant, and we do not want any inore experiments about it. If what they have is of any use, let them go on and use it. I hope the sub-committee who have examined into the subject will inform us in regard to it.

Mr. CLARK. I was one of the sub-committee who went to make an examination of this method of printing. I did not go so far in the examination as I should like to have done before this debate occurred, nor so far as I intend to go before I get through with the matter; but I went

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »