Εικόνες σελίδας
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

from what it was yesterday, more perhaps in consequence of what was said by the Senator from Ohio than any one else. Several Senators around me thought it was better to obviate an objection that he presented, that a person might be guilty of malfeasance in office, and it would be very hard if, under such circumstances, when he was turned out, and his successor appointed, a good man, he could not be paid until he was confirmed. The Senator from Ohio suggested that he might die after discharging the duties of the office for months, and in that way be entirely without I was disposed, so long as we could get at the object which I had in view, to accommodate the amendment as far as possible to the wishes of all, and hence I modified the amendment this morning. Now, it seems that in endeavoring to avoid Charybdis I have run upon Scylla, and the Senator from Maine says he cannot go for it as it is. If it is more acceptable to Senators to have it in the form in which it stood yesterday, it is certainly more acceptable to me in that form. That was my preference. I changed it at the suggestion of several Senators.


Mr. JOHNSON. Have the yeas and nays been called for?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas and nays have been ordered.

Mr. JOHNSON. We had better vote, then. Mr. TRUMBULL. There seems to be a disposition to pass upon it to-day in the shape in which we had it yesterday. I ask the Secretary to read the amendment as it was proposed yesterday.

The Secretary read as follows:

SEC.. And be it further enacted, That no person exercising or performing, or undertaking to exercise or perform, the duties of any office which by law is required to be filled by the advice and consent of the Senate, shall before confirmation by the Senate receive any salary or compensation for his services, unless such person be commissioned by the President to fill up a vacancy which has happened by death, resignation, or expiration of term during the recess of the Senate, and since its last adjournment.

Mr. JOHNSON. That does not provide for the case of a removal?

Mr. TRUMBULL. No, sir.

Mr. JOHNSON. Then ifthe President should find out that an officer is dishonest and remove him, and appoint a successor on the 5th of March, at the end of the Congress, that officer is not to get any pay until the next December. The question is, whether that is right? It may be a Cabinet officer or a collector of the revenue. I do not think the Senate, when they come to reflect upon it, will adopt a principle like that.

Mr. GRIMES. You will get plenty of men to take the offices.


What sort of men?

Mr. GRIMES. Good men. Mr. JOHNSON. Men from Iowa, perhaps. Mr. GRIMES. Yes, and from Maryland. Mr. RAMSEY. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of executive business.

Mr. HENDERSON. I hope the Senator will withdraw that motion for a moment until I can make a request of the Senator from Illinois. I hope that the Senator from Illinois will withdraw this amendment

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Minnesota withdraw his motion? Mr. RAMSEY. I do not like to do so. I am satisfied that the Senate are not prepared to vote on the question before them.

Mr. HENDERSON. I wish to make one remark.

Mr. RAMSEY. Will you renew the motion?
Mr. HENDERSON. Yes, sir.
Mr. RAMSEY. With that understanding

I withdraw the motion.
Mr. HENDERSON. The proposition pre-
sented yesterday by the Senator from Illinois
I like much better than the proposition pre-
sented to-day. The proposition as made to-day
admits the power of the President to remove.
I do not admit it.

The Senator from Maryland, in replying to me a short time ago, alluded to a case reported in 18 Howard, in which he stated that the court had decided that President Fillmore had a right

[ocr errors]

to remove a judge of a Territory appointed under an act of Congress. I sent for a copy of the book. I stated in my argument that the case did not contravene the other two cases relied upon by me; and if he will examine the case he will find that although that question was argued before the court, there was no decision made on it. I undertake to say that the power to remove by the President without the consent of the Senate has never been passed upon favorably by the Supreme Court. I have been unable to find such a case, and I am satisfied the case my friend relied upon does not support his views, because the court followed the doctrine that he regretted had not been followed in the other cases; they said that point was not before them. They merely decided that the writ of mandamus could not go be cause of their want of jurisdiction in the case. Therefore, the other point was not decided, and my friend will have to find some other case in order to sustain his view.

As I stated yesterday, I am preparing a bill on this subject. I think that an act of Congress ought to be passed placing this power in the hands of somebody, in one of the supreme judges or in the President, to remove an officer in the cases alluded to by the honorable Senator from Maryland. But if the Senator from Illinois insists upon his proposition, I shall vote for it as it now stands, because it does curtail the power to a certain extent. But I think the power of appointment ought to be denied positively to the President in the vacation; that is, the power of removing and then declaring that a vacancy exists which he can fill. So far as I am concerned, I am disposed to deny that power absolutely unless it be granted in extraordinary cases by act of Congress. Whenever an officer is appointed, and there is no limitation or duration fixed to the extent of his office, and there is no power expressly given by act of Congress for his removal, I deny the power of the President to remove him. I say the authority is perfectly abundant on that subject.

I promised my friend from Minnesota to renew the motion to go into executive session. He held me under some obligation to do it, and does yet, and I therefore renew the motion.

have modified its constitution and laws in conformity therewith, and shall have established an equal and just system of suffrage for all male citizens within its jurisdiction, who are not less than twenty-one years of age, the Senators and Representatives from such State, if found duly elected and qualified, may, after having taken the required oaths of office, be admitted into Congress as such: Provided, That nothing in this section contained shall be so construed as to require the disfranchisement of any loyal person who is now entitled to vote.

The proposed amendment was ordered to be printed.

Mr. BINGHAM. I give notice of my intention to offer an amendment which I send to the desk and ask to have printed.

The proposed amendment was accordingly ordered to be printed.


Mr. MOORHEAD, from the Commmittee of Ways and Means, asked leave to introduce a joint resolution to provide for the exemption of crude petroleum from internal revenue tax or duty, and for other purposes.

Mr. ROSS. I object.

Mr. MOORHEAD. The Committee of Ways and Means have unanimously recommended this joint resolution.

Mr. ROSS. I am not in favor of the proposition at all, and am not willing it should come in.


Mr. DAWES submitted a resolution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts on the state of the Union and the duties of the Government to the freedmen; which was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed.


Mr. DRIGGS, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill for the relief of Mary A. Ripley; which was read a first and second time, and referred, with the accompanying documents, to the Committee on Military Affairs.

Mr. ROSS. I ask leave to introduce a bill. Mr. MOORHEAD. Iobject.

Mr. ROSS. I demand the regular order.



Mr. STEVENS, from the Committee on Appropriations, reported back Senate joint resolution No. 75, making appropriations for the expenses of collecting the revenue from Mr. SHERMAN. I simply desire to get the sense of the Senate, and therefore I call for the The joint resolution was read. It approyeas and nays on that motion. I have no feelpriates $2,100,000 for the expenses of collecting about it. If the Senate desire to prolonging the revenue from customs. this matter until to-morrow they can do so; but I want to close it to-day.

The yeas and nays were ordered; and being taken, resulted-yeas 22, nays 13; as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Anthony, Davis, Dixon, Doolittle, Fessenden, Grimes, Guthrie, Harris, Henderson, Howard, Howe, Johnson, Lane of Kausas, Nesmith, Poland, Ramsey, Riddle, Sprague, Sumner, Van Winkle, Wilson, and Yates-22.

NAYS-Messrs. Chandler, Clark, Conness, Cragin, Lane of Indiana, Morgan, Morrill, Nye, Pomeroy, Sherman. Trumbull, Wade, and Willey-13.

ABSENT-Messrs. Brown, Buckalew, Cowan, Creswell, Edmunds, Foster, Hendricks, Kirkwood, MeDougall, Norton, Saulsbury, Stewart, Williams, and Wright-14.


So the motion was agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to the consideration of executive business. After some time spent in executive session, the doors were reopened, and the Senate adjourned.

TUESDAY, May 1, 1866.

The House met at twelve o'clock m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. B. BOYNTON. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved.


Mr. BOUTWELL, by unanimous consent, gave notice that he would propose to amend the "bill to provide for the restoration of the States in insurrection to their full practical rights," by striking out all after the enacting clause and inserting the following:

That whenever the above recited amendment shall have become part of the Constitution, and Tennessee or Arkansas shall have ratified the same, and shall

Mr. STEVENS. I simply want to say that the law of 1858, precisely in the words of this, has been acted upon ever since that time, being the permanent law; and that the large increase in the expense of collecting the revenue, being $300,000 more than it was, makes this necessary. It is an increase from $1,800,000 to $2,100,000. It reenacts the old law; or, rather, repeals it, and makes one precisely like it, with the addition of $300,000 a year, which is found necessary. That is the whole of the bill.

The joint resolution was ordered to be read a third time; and it was accordingly read the third time and passed.

Mr. STEVENS moved to reconsider the vote by which the joint resolution was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.


On motion of Mr. HIGBY, by unanimous consent, the Committee on Appropriations were discharged from the further consideration of the memorials of P. E. Saunders, and others, inspectors of customs in Detroit, Michigan, asking for increase of pay; also, the memorial of the Legislature of Minnesota, asking an appropriation for improving the harbors of Lake Superior; and the same were referred to the Committee on Commerce.

DESTITUTE PEOPLE IN THE SOUTH. Mr. ELIOT. I ask unanimous consent to introduce the following resolution for reference: Whereas it is represented, on civil and military authority and by official reports to the Freedmen's

Bureau, that an alarming condition of destitution among the white population and freedmen, extending to absolute want of food, exists in various portions of the South, and especially in Arkansas. Alabama, and South Carolina, and that without Government aid thousands may perish by starvation before the raising of another crop: Therefore,

Resolved, That the select committee on the freedmen inquire into the expediency of an appropriation of $100,000 for the immediate relief by rations of food to those thus destitute, giving preference in such relief to those whose personal property and supplies of food have been destroyed by the ravages of war, to be expended under the direction of the Commissioner of Freedmen, Refugees, and Abandoned Lands; and that the said committee have the right to report on such subject for consideration in the House at any time.

Mr. STEVENS. I merely wish to inquire of the gentleman from Massachusetts the necessity of this resolution. Yesterday the Committee on Appropriations reported a bill appropriating about eleven million dollars for this very purpose, and that bill is to be considered to-day in Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union.

Mr. ELIOT. That appropriation is not for this purpose.

Mr. STEVENS. It is for the purposes of the bureau.

Mr. ELIOT. This is rather more extended than that.

Mr. STEVENS. Then I have not the least objection.

Mr. ELIOT. This resolution is only for reference to the committee on freedmen's affairs. Mr. STEVENS. I thought perhaps the gentleman was not aware that the Committee on Appropriations had reported on this subject. Mr. ELIOT. Oh, yes, I was. Mr. STEVENS. That is all.

The resolution was referred to the committee on freedmen's affairs.

PAY DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY. Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I ask leave to report back, from the Committee on Naval Af fairs, House bill No. 197, to provide for the better organization of the pay department of the Navy, which has been returned from the Senate with amendments. The committee recommend a concurrence in the amendments of the Senate.

There was no objection; and the report was received, and the amendments of the Senate were concurred in, as follows:

[ocr errors]

On page 1, line seven, after the word "paymasters," insert and all passed assistant paymasters authorized by this act to be appointed who have not heretofore been appointed and commissioned as assistant paymasters, and all assistant paymasters hereby authorized to be appointed, shall be selected from those who have served as acting assistant paymasters for the term of one year, and who were eligible to appointment to the grade of assistant paymasters when they were appointed assistant paymasters as aforesaid." On the same page and line, after the word " ject," insert "however."


[blocks in formation]


Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I yield for a moment to the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. SCHENCK.]

Mr. ROSS. I demand the regular order of business.

The SPEAKER. Then the Chair must arrest all other business but the regular order. Mr. SCHENCK. I hope the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Ross] will hear what he is objecting to.

Mr. RICE, of Massachusetts. I desire to offer a resolution to carry into operation the provisions of the bill just passed.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Ross] demands the regular order of business.

Mr. ROSS. I desired to offer a resolution a short time ago and objection was made, and I must therefore insist on the regular order.


The SPEAKER stated the regular order of business to be the unfinished business of yes

terday, being the consideration of House bill No. 481, entitled "An act to amend an act entitled An act to encourage immigration,' approved July 4, 1864, and an act entitled 'An act to regulate the carriage of passengers in steamships and other vessels,' approved March 3, 1865, and for other purposes.

The bill was reported without amendment, the pending question being upon ordering it to be engrossed and read a third time.

Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. This bill was reported from the Committee on Commerce, and with the report accompanying it has been printed for some time, and placed upon the files of members. It is a pretty broad bill in its provisions, and I desire members to examine it closely, as it may be broader than some members may be willing to agree to. But the committee believe that in consequence of the vast immigration to this country at the present time, and the character of the vessels in which these immigrants are brought to this country, it is important that something should be done immediately in this matter. The bill was read in full.

Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I move to amend the last clause of the section in relation to the enforcement of penalties, being section four of the bill, so that it shall read:

It shall be lawful for the Commissioner of Immigration, before or after suit brought, to compound any of said penalties, payments, or forfeitures, upon such terms as he shall think proper.

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. There is one section printed in this bill which has been inserted by mistake-section eight. I move to strike out the section.

The section was as follows:

SEC. 8. And be it further enacted, That all fines, penalties, and forfeitures recovered at the port of New York by virtue of this act, or any act hereby amended, except for death of passengers on voyage, shall be paid over to the superintendent of immigration at that city, to be accounted for by him to the Commissioner of Immigration, and disposed of by the latter as now provided by law.

The motion to strike out was agreed to. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. If no one desires to be heard upon the bill I will ask that the House vote upon it now.

Mr. DARLING. I hope the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. WASHBURNE] will not call the previous question upon this bill at this time.

Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I have no desire to call the previous question now if gentlemen desire to discuss the bill. This measure is no pet of mine; it is for the benefit of the constituents of the gentleman from New York, [Mr. DARLING.] If he desires to kill the bill, he may

do so.

Mr. DARLING. I agree with the distinguished gentleman from Illinois [Mr. WASHBURNE] as to the importance of this bill, particularly in relation to the port of New York and other ports of the Atlantic coast. But I had the honor, on the 29th of January, of introducing a bill amending the present passenger law in regard to the carrying of passengers. That bill, I understand, has been submitted by the committee to the Secretary of the Treasury and ported to the House by the committee, I shall has met with his approval. If it is to be renot object to some alterations being made in it. Otherwise I should like to have incorporated in this bill the first section of the bill introduced by me, which covers pretty much all the defective points in the present passenger law.

Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I would say, in reply to the gentleman from New York, [Mr. DARLING,] that the bill he has introduced is being considered by the Committee on Commerce, and will undoubtedly be reported upon favorably when that committee is called. There are some very important provisions in it, but they would be out of place in this bill. This bill is in aid of the Bureau of Immigration, and is one of very great importance to the city of New York. I have no particular interest in it myself; but I am somewhat surprised to see my friend disposed to embarrass the passage of this bill.

Mr. DARLING. I wish the gentleman from

Illinois to understand that I have no disposition or intention to embarrass the action of the House upon this bill; on the contrary, I very much desire its passage. Section three of this bill substantially embodies a portion of the provisions contained in the bill introduced by


I only desire to have it understood that the passage of this bill shall not prejudice, the passage of my own bill when it shall come before the House.

Mr. CHANLER. I desire to ask the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. WASHBURNE] if this bill has been recommended by any competent authority.

Mr. DARLING. I have not yet yielded the floor. I desire to move to insert after the words, "Commissioner of Immigration," at the close of section four, the words, "with the approval of the Secretary of State." The clause will then read:

It shall be lawful for the Commissioner of Immigration, with the approval of the Secretary of State, before or after suit brought, to compound any of said penalties, payments, or forfeitures, upon such terms as be shall think proper.

Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I thank the gentleman for his suggestion; I think the amendment is a very proper one.

The amendment was agreed to.


I move to amend by striking out in the third section the following words, beginning at the word "ship" in the second line:

Owned in whole or in part by a citizen of the United States or by a citizen of any foreign country, and.

This phraseology is mere surplusage; for who but a citizen of the United States or of a foreign country can own a ship? I suppose the gentleman from Illinois will not object to this amendment.

Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I have no objection to that amendment.

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. DARLING. I move to amend by striking out in the fifth line of the same section the word "fourteen," and inserting in lieu thereof the word "twelve," so that the clause will read as follows:

That in every passenger ship carrying passengers to or from the United States, all the male passengers of the age of twelve years and upward, who shall not occupy berths with their wives, shall be berthed in the fore part of the ship, in a compartment divided off from the space appointed to the other passengers by a substantial and well-secured bulkhead, without opening into or communicating with the aforesaid adjoining space.

Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I have no objection to that amendment.

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. CHANLER. I ask the gentleman from Illinois to give us some information relative to the fourteenth section. It strikes me this section gives a great latitude of power to the naval surveyors, and may operate injuriously with regard to immigration. This power may be exerted in such a way as to interfere improperly with those engaged in the business of bringing immigrants to this country. The gentleman will oblige me by giving some information in regard to the history and necessity of this section. For the purpose of eliciting an explanation I move to strike out the fourteenth section.

Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. This is one of the most vital sections of the bill. If we strike it out we may as well defeat the whole bill. I could not hear distinctly the remarks of the gentleman from New York, [Mr. CHANLER,] and do not understand precisely the ground of his objection.

As the law now stands, there are so many abuses in regard to the space which shall be occupied by passengers in these ships, that it is found necessary to authorize by law some specific officer to make the surveys. Hence, by this bill, it is made the duty of the naval surveyors at the various ports to attend to making the surveys. The want of such action and such authority has led to the greatest pos sible abuses, as the gentleman from New York must thoroughly understand.

Mr. CHANLER. I am fully aware that some

provision of this kind is necessary for the reg ulation of immigrant ships coming to this country. But the power proposed by this section to be given to the surveyor of the port is very great. He will hold in his hands the control of the whole business of immigration. I believe that the bill should contain some efficient provision with reference to the measurement of accommodations given to the immigrants. I desire that those accommodations should be the most comfortable and healthy. My object is not to prevent, but to aid and facilitate immigration. But it appears to me that by putting this immense power in the hands of a single officer we shall not so much facilitate immigration as enable the power of one man immigtal the whole system. There may be some stringent necessity for giving this extreme and unrestricted power to regulate the whole of the immense immigration into the port of New York. Unless such necessity exists, I think we should provide some system of checks, such as do not now appear in the bill.

I have risen simply to call the attention of the House to this section. I desire to make no opposition to the bill, nor to any proper and beneficent measure having the same object. But this bill has been brought forward with very little explanation. We should not, I think, be called upon to pass on such a measure without fully understanding it. Certainly we are entitled to have full information on this subject.

We are told that the section is vital, and that we might as well vote down the entire bill as to strike out this section. But that is no answer to the demand for information. If the gentleman has no practical information to give, the majority of the House can act under his leadership. My object is not to defeat the bill. I only ask whether the gentleman is able to give a plausible reason why so much power should be given to the naval surveyor as to control immigration across the Atlantic; that, indeed, it should be left entirely and exclusively in the hands of the surveyor of New York.

Mr. DONNELLY. The proposition of the gentleman from New York is to strike out the fourteenth section of the bill. I will say, in answer, that if the motion is adopted it will strike out the vital portion of the pending measure. Without that section the bill would be a nullity.

The bill is intended in the main for the protection of immigrants to this country from being overcrowded, as many of them are, on shipboard. We find when we permit such overcrowding we not only do great injustice to the immigrant, but we incur the danger to the country, as we have already seen, of having a terrible pestilence brought into our ports, and thence spread over the land.

The section provides that every vessel carrying immigrants shall be surveyed so as to ascertain whether overcrowding takes place; and where overcrowding does take place a penalty is imposed. It is the vital portion of the bill.

I think the House and country are indebted to the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. WASHBURNE] for pressing through this bill. It is not only a measure of safety for our own people, but of humanity to those whom our laws invite to our shores, who are to become citi zens among us, and whose immigration hither should be encouraged by every proper means. We must avoid these horrors of the middle passage," the recital of which, in the case of the vessels which have lately reached New York and Halifax, freighted with pestilence, revive the memory of the African slave trade. Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I demand the previous question.

[ocr errors]

Mr. CHANLER. If the gentleman demands the previous question, cutting off information, I must insist on my motion to strike out.

Mr. McRUER. I ask to amend the section so that it will read as follows:

SEC. 14. And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the naval surveyors at the various ports

to survey ships and vessels engaged in the carrying of passengers under the laws of the United States, and to certify under their hand and seal to the Commissioner of Immigration the spaces in each such ship or vessel on the various decks, said spaces to be classed as first and second cabin and steerage, and how many passengers the said ship or vessel may be entitled to carry under the laws of the United States in each of said spaces, classed as aforesaid, &c.

Mr. Speaker, my object in this amendment is to provide that a ship entitled to carry one thousand passengers, as follows: one hundred in first cabin, two hundred in second cabin, and seven hundred in steerage, shall not crowd the whole number into the steerage or overcrowd any other portion of a ship.

That is

Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. not applicable to this, but to another measure which the committee have been considering. I insist on the demand for the previous question.

The previous question was seconded and the main question ordered.

Mr. CHANLER's motion was rejected.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time and passed.

Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.


The SPEAKER announced the following as the select committee on the Provost Marshal's Bureau, &c.: Messrs. SHELLABARGER, WINDOM, BOYER, COOK, and WARNER.

Mr. DARLING, by unanimous consent, submitted the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to:

Whereas, reports are freely circulated, and charges made, that recruits were by fraudulent practices induced to enlist in the armies of the United States, in the city of New York and elsewhere, by officers of the Government, and other persons employed by such officers to aid in such fraudulent practices; and whereas it is alleged that such recruits when enlisted were deprived of their bounty and incarcerated in prison, and this bounty divided and shared between such officers and the persons who were employed by them, and also that persons engaged in the business of recruiting for the Army in the city of New York and elsewhere, were also defrauded by such officers and other persons acting in concert with them, and large amounts of money demanded and extorted from them, and that they were imprisoned until such demands were complied with, and were then immediately released; and whereas it is important that the truth of these grave charges should be speedily ascertained: Therefore,

Resolved, That the select committee of five appointed under the resolution of the 30th ultimo, be directed to investigate such charges, and that they have full power to send for persons and papers, and report the results of such investigation to this House as soon as practicable,


Mr. KELLEY. I ask unanimous consent of the House to submit the following resolution for the relief of the starving people of the mountain districts of Alabama:

Whereas it is reported by citizens of Alabama, in formal memorial to the two Houses of Congress, that many of the people of the mountain districts of that State are suffering from want of adequate supplies of food and that a considerable number of them have died of actual starvation: Therefore,

Resolved, That the President be requested to instruct the proper officer or officers of the Bureau of Refugees and Freedmen to inquire into the condition of said districts, and any other districts of the insurgent States, in which such suffering may be said to exist, and to relieve the people thereof, and provide them with corn and other seed for planting a crop sufficient for an annual supply to each family requir ing such relief.

There was no objection.

Mr. SMITH. To what class does it refer? Mr. KELLEY. Those who are referred to in the memorial I had the honor to present some time ago. They are white mountaineers of Alabama, who served in either army. They are the poor white people of northern Alabama. Mr. SPALDING. I hope the gentleman will insert the word "white."


Mr. KELLEY. I do not suppose there are any colored people in those mountains. demand the previous question.

The previous question was seconded and the main question ordered; and under the operation thereof the resolution was agreed to.

The question then recurred on the adoption of the preamble; and it was also agreed to. Mr. STEVENS moved to reconsider the vote by which the preamble and resolution were passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table. The latter motion was agreed to.


Mr. ROSS. I ask unanimous consent to introduce a bill for reference. I do not want to place myself in the condition of some other gentlemen claiming the credit of manufacturing this bill. It was one that was passed at the last Congress. It is a bill to construct a ship-canal for the passage of armed and naval vessels from the Mississippi river to Lake Michigan, and for other purposes.

The bill was read a first and second time, and referred to the Committee on Roads and Canals.


Mr. ROLLINS, by unanimous consent, submitted the following resolution; which was read, considered, and agreed to:

Resolved, That the Committee for the District of Columbia be instructed to inquire into the facts concerning the interruption of travel over Long Bridge, and report the reasons why said bridge is allowed to remain impassable for months.

Mr. ROLLINS moved to reconsider the vote by which the resolution was agreed to; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.


Mr. SCHENCK, by unanimous consent, from the Committee on Military Affairs, reported back without amendment Senate joint resolution No. 34, expressive of the gratitude of the nation to the officers, soldiers, and seamen of the United States.

The joint resolution was read the third time and passed.

Mr. SCHENCK moved to reconsider the vote by which the joint resolution was passed; and also moved to lay that motion on the table. The latter motion was agreed to.


Mr. MOORHEAD. I now ask leave to report from the Committee of Ways and Means a joint resolution to provide for the exemption of crude petroleum from internal tax or duty, and for other purposes.

The joint resolution was read.

Mr. ROSS. I supposed this was intended for reference.

Mr. KUYKENDALL. I object to the introduction of the joint resolution.

Mr. MOORHEAD. I will explain.

Mr. KUYKENDALL. I have no objection to an explanation, but I shall object after it is explained.

Mr. MOORHEAD. It was reported unanimously by the committee. A committee from the oil region came down here and showed a terrible state of affairs, arson and anarchy, in consequence of this act. These gentlemen appeared before the committee and satisfied us that it was a state of affairs that required prompt action. The same provision is in the bill. This will only make it act three or four weeks sooner.

Mr. KUYKENDALL. Why not send the soldiers to put the burning down?

Mr. MOORHEAD. That would be very expensive.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the consideration of this joint resolution? The Chair hears none, and the joint resolution is before the House.

Mr. KUYKENDALL. I do not withdraw my objection.

The SPEAKER. The Chair asked if there was objection, and paused, and no person objected.

Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. KUYKENDALL] did persist in his objection, and I am bound in justice to say that gentlemen all around here heard him. He objected when the Chair called for objection.

Mr. MOORHEAD. He did not object from his seat.

Mr. BROMWELL. I objected from my seat, but was not heard by the Chair.

The SPEAKER. If the gentleman objected from his seat it is good,

Mr. KUYKENDALL. I notified the Chair in time that I would renew the objection after the explanation.

The SPEAKER. If the gentleman states that he renewed it that is sufficient.

Mr. RAYMOND. I wish to say that when the Chair put the question whether there was objection the last time, I distinctly heard the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. KUYKENDALL] say "I object, of course.' It may not have reached the Speaker's ear.

[ocr errors]

The SPEAKER. If the gentleman from Illinois states that himself, that is enough.

Mr. KUYKENDALL. I objected certainly. Mr. MOORHEAD. I raise the point of order that the gentleman from Illinois was not in his seat when he objected.

The SPEAKER. The point of order comes too late. The objection of the gentleman from Illinois was in time.

Mr. MORRILL. I think the gentleman would not object if he would hear the bill fairly explained.

Mr. KUYKENDALL. I object to any article being, brought in here and exempted before the main bill is acted on. I do not know but that I shall object to exempting this article even in the main bill, but I certainly object to taking a particular article from the main bill to exempt it before anything else.

Mr. MORRILL. There are peculiar circumstances.

The SPEAKER. The bill is not before the House, objection being made.


Mr. STEVENS. I move that the rules be suspended and the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union for the purpose of considering the special order.

The motion was agreed to.

So the rules were suspended; and the House accordingly resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, (Mr. DONNELLY in the chair,) and proceeded to the consideration of the special order, being bill of the House No. 545, making appropriations for the uses of the Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Lands, for the fiscal year commencing January 1, 1866.

By unanimous consent the first reading of the bill was dispensed with; and the bill was then read by clauses for amendment, when no amendments were offered.

Mr. STEVENS. I move that the committee rise and report the bill to the House.

The motion was agreed to.

So the committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed the chair, Mr. DoNNELLY reported that the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union had had the Union generally under consideration, and particularly the special order, being bill of the House No. 545, making appropriations for the uses of the Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Lands for the fiscal year commencing January 1, 1866, and had directed him to report the same back to the House without amendment and with the recommendation that it do pass. Mr. STEVENS. I move the previous question on the engrossment of the bill.

Mr. BLAINE. I desire to ask the gentleman from Pennsylvania a question.

[ocr errors]

Mr. STEVENS. I yield for that purpose. Mr. BLAINE. In line twenty-four of the bill I notice an appropriation of $3,000,000 "for sites for school-houses and asylums.' Now, I have understood that land in the rebellious States has become very cheap by reason of the suppression of the rebellion, and if we are going into the building of schoolhouses on a scale large enough to require an appropriation of $3,000,000 for the mere purchase of sites on which they are to be built, it

seems to me to be a little "steep." I ask the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations to explain that.

Mr. STEVENS. The report of the Commissioner of this bureau, if the gentleman will turn to it, sets forth the whole matter. I hope the gentleman has read it. It shows most urgent need for this appropriation, because these school-houses, which have been built in a great many instances upon abandoned lands, at a very great expense even to some of the freedmen, have nearly all of them, by order of the President, been restored to the rebel owners; and now the Department is obliged to go into the purchase of lands for school-houses for these poor, willing people, or to have no schoolhouses at all. The estimate which has been made amounts to what we have reported in this bill.

There are now at this time, or there were

at the time the report was made, between a hundred and a hundred and fifty thousand scholars, and there are now over two hundred thousand, who are all to be turned out unless this appropriation is made. I think it is the most wholesome provision that could be made; and that no like sum of money will be paid out for a better purpose. They have never had half the number of school-houses they should have had for the purpose of accommodating even the present number of scholars.

Mr. ASHLEY, of Ohio. I think this claim in relation to school-houses should be transposed; it is now somewhat imperfect.

Mr. BLAINE. With land at $500 an acre, an appropriation of $3,000,000 would be enough to purchase sites for fifty thousand schoolhouses.

Mr. STEVENS. Imove to amend the clause in relation to school-houses and asylums by inserting after the word "sites" the words "and buildings." It will then read: "For sites and buildings for school-houses and asylums, $3,000,000.'

[ocr errors]

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. That was the very clause in regard to which I desired to make an inquiry of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. STEVENS.] We could not hear the conversation of gentlemen on the other side, and do not know what that clause was intended to mean. seems to be a very large sum for sites for asylums and school-houses.


Mr. STEVENS. It has been amended so as to include sites and buildings.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. That makes a very different thing of it.

Mr. BANKS. I would inquire what is the nature of the transportation for which this bill makes an appropriation of $1,980,000.

Mr. STEVENS. I understand that, by the operations of the Government in restoring the forfeited and abandoned lands to their former owners, a great many of these freedmen must be transported to other places; the Department has been driven by the action of the Government to transport many of these people to other places.

Mr. BANKS. It seems to be a very large sum for transportation alone.

Mr. STEVENS. It is for transporting both refugees and freedmen. And the amount of money expended at this moment for refugees it will be found is more than double the amount expended for freedmen.

Mr. MORRILL. I would ask the gentleman from Pennsylvania if he will not consent to have this bill go over for a day or two, in order that it and the report of the Commissioner may be examined. I perceive that it appropriates

$11,500,000 and more, which is certainly a very large sum, and the bill should be fully understood by the House.

Mr. STEVENS. I had supposed that every gentleman who felt any interest in this matter had examined the subject and knew all about it. The bill is based upon reports of the Commissioner made since the 1st of December. Mr. KASSON. Will the gentleman from Pennsylvania allow me a word?

Mr. STEVENS. Certainly.

Mr. KASSON. I am inclined to think,

upon looking over this bill, that it was prepared with reference to another condition of facts. I was not in our committee when this bill was passed upon by them. But my impres sion now is that the sums named in the bill are based upon facts, to a certain extent, that do not now exist. For example, very many of the persons for whom transportation was origi nally designed, whether refugees or freedmen, have already been transported to their homes, or to places where they have found employ ment. I say this is my impression. Whether my impression is correct or not, I think we ought, as the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. MORRILL] suggests, to take sufficient time to ascertain whether it is not practicable to cut down this large amount of appropriation. If the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations [Mr. STEVENS] knows that I am in error, of course my reason for delay is without foun dation. But I think we ought to take a little time to examine into this bill.

Mr. STEVENS. I know only what the Commissioner of the Freedmen's Bureau, General Howard, has informed me. Twice within the last week he has urged me to have this bill passed, stating that it was impossible to go on with the operations of that bureau unless this bill be passed. All the transportation and all the clothing which the bureau has been supplying is to be paid out of this appropriation, and it is the urgency of the case which induces me again to call the previous question.

Mr. ROSS. I move to lay the bill on the table; and on that motion I call the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered.

The question was taken; and it was decided in the negative-yeas 27, nays 91, not voting 65; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Ancona, Bergen, Boyer, Chanler, Coffroth, Dawson, Denison, Eldridge, Finck, Glossbrenner, Grider, Aaron Harding, James M. Humphrey, Marshall, Morris, Niblack, Noell, Samuel J. Randall, Ritter, Ross, Shanklin. Sitgreaves. Smith, Strouse, Taylor, Thornton, and Winfield-27.

NAYS-Messrs. Alley, Allison, Ames, Delos R. Ashley, James M. Ashley. Baker. Banks, Baxter, Beaman, Benjamin, Bidwell, Bingham, Blaine, Blow, Boutwell, Brandegee, Bromwell, Buckland. Reader W. Clarke, Sidney Clarke, Cobb, Conkling, Cook, Cullom, Darling, Dawes, Defrees, Deming, Dodge, Donnelly, Driggs, Eliot, Garfield, Grinnell, Griswold, Abner C. Harding, Henderson, Holmes, Hotchkiss, Asahel W. Hubbard, Chester D. Hubbard, James R. Hubbell, Hulburd, Ingersoll, Jenckes, Julian, Kasson, Kelley, Kuykendall, Laflin, George V. Lawrence, Loan, Longyear, Lynch, McClurg, McKee, McRner, Moorhead, Morrill, Moulton, Newell, O'Neill, Orth, Paine, Patterson, Perham, Phelps, Pike, Plants, Raymond, Alexander II. Rice, Rollins, Schenck, Shellabarger, Spalding, Stevens, Stilwell, Trowbridge, Upson, Van Aernam, Burt Van Horn, Ward, Warner, Elihu B. Washburne, Henry D. Washburn, William B. Washburn, Whaley, James F. Wilson, Stephen F. Wilson, Windom, and Woodbridge-91.

NOT VOTING-Messrs. Anderson, Baldwin, Barker. Broomall, Bundy, Culver, Davis, Delano, Dixon, Dumont, Eckley, Eggleston, Farnsworth, Farquhar, Ferry, Goodyear, Hale, Harris, Hart, Hayes, Higby, Hill, Hogan, Hooper, Demas Hubbard, John II. Hubbard, Edwin N. Hubbell. James Humphrey, Johnson, Jones, Kelso, Kerr, Ketcham, Latham, William Lawrence, Le Blond, Marston, Marvin, McCullough, MeIndoe, Mercur, Miller, Myers, Nicholson, Pomeroy, Price, Radford, William H. Randall, John H. Rice, Rogers, Rousseau, Sawyer, Scofield, Sloan. Starr, Taber, Thayer, Francis Thomas, John L. Thomas, Trimble, Robert T. Van Horn, Welker, Wentworth, Williams, and Wright-65.

So the motion to lay the bill on the table was not agreed to.

Mr. LAWRENCE, of Ohio, who was absent during the call of the roll, stated that if present he would have voted in the negative.


A message in writing from the President of the United States was received, by Mr. COOPER, the President had approved and signed bills his Private Secretary, who also announced that of the following titles:

An act making appropriations to supply deficiencies in the appropriations for the public printing for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1866; and

An act for the relief of George R. Frank, late a captain of the thirty-third regiment Wisconsin volunteer infantry. FREEDMEN'S BUREAU APPROPRIATION-AGAIN The question recurred on seconding the demand for the previous question.

Mr. STEVENS. I withdraw the demand for the previous question, and move to amend by reducing the appropriation from $3,000,000 to $2,000,000.

Mr. SPALDING. That is right.

Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. I understand that the committee on freedmen have given this subject some examination; and I desire to suggest to the gentleman from Pennsylvania whether it would not be well to refer this matter to that committee, that they may report upon it.

Mr. STEVENS. There seems to be some difficulty among gentlemen around me, because they are not well informed in regard to this matter. I desire to say a word of explanation.

These commissary stores, for instance, are stores furnished out of what is already on hand. These stores, instead of being sold, have been furnished, and are still being furnished, to these freedmen, and they are charged to this bureau. These stores are furnished, not only to the freedmen, but also to the refugees in much larger proportion.

One word as to the necessity for appropriations for transportation. I have in my hand a note from General Howard, stating that without an appropriation it is impossible for him to furnish the necessary transportation to these people. Numbers are flocking into this city to whom he desires to furnish transportation; but he cannot do so. He has gone as far as the Secretary of War will allow him to go under the present appropriation. I will ask the chairman of the committee on freedmen [Mr. ELIOT] to state whether these things are necessary or not.

Mr. ELIOT. In reply to the inquiry of the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. STEVENS] I will state that this subject has not been particularly examined before the committee on freedmen. But I have personally, as a member of the House, taken some pains to ascertain, by inquiry at the office of the Commissioner of the Freedmen's Bureau, in regard to these items of appropriation; and I should be very glad to answer any inquiry which any gentleman on the floor may feel disposed to put concerning the propriety of any of these items.

In respect to the appropriation that is called for in connection with the quartermaster's department, I would state that except the clothes which properly belong to women and children, all the clothing has been obtained from the quartermaster's department at the values of the articles. They have been charged, so far as they have been heretofore obtained, to the bureau. The estimate is made here showing the amount which will be wanted during the coming year, not to go into the market and purchase clothing, but to go to the quartermaster with requisitions, so that clothing which would otherwise be sold for half price-for there is a very large amount on hand-will be sold to the Freedmen's Bureau at full price. It is not taking money from the Treasury at all; it is simply to enable the Freedmen's Bureau to purchase from the quartermaster's department clothing which that department has now on hand. That does not, of course, include the clothing for women and dependent children.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. I desire to inquire in reference to the first section of the bill. I notice that it provides these sums shall be appropriated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the support of the Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Lands, for the fiscal year commencing January, 1866. I want to know what the support of abandoned lands means.

Mr. ELIOT. That is simply the title of the bureau. The law creates a bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Lands.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. First the bureau is provided, and then we have freedmen, and next abandoned lands.

Mr. ELIOT. It is the name of the bureau, and that is all. In regard to the transportation I will say a word.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. Allow me to ask another

question before the gentleman proceeds. Has this expense been incurred, or is the appropriation to be hereafter used? If a part has been incurred, what portion is hereafter to be used?

Mr. ELIOT. Which appropriation does the gentleman refer to?

Mr. ELDRIDGE. I mean in the aggregate. Mr. ELIOT. It would be impossible to answer that question accurately; a portion has been used and a portion is to be used.

In regard to transportation, about twentytwo thousand refugees and freedmen have been transported, and those twenty-two thousand have been charged by the quartermaster's department to the Freedmen's Bureau. That has all to come out of this appropriation. It is estimated that about forty-four thousand will want to be transported. If the gentleman desires it I will state who they are and what they are. There are in this District, because of the war and because of the demand for labor, some four or five thousand who can have homes provided for them by the Government, and who will cost nothing to the Government when they have been removed to these homes. They cannot get there now, and a part of this is to pay that expense.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. How much of the three millions for sites for school-houses and asylums has been expended?

Mr. ELIOT. There has been no money appropriated for or expended in the purchase of lands or buildings I am aware of.

I will say, Mr. Speaker, there is no school the expenses of which have been borne by the Government. It has never paid for any tuition. All the expenses of tuition have been defrayed by benevolent associations of the North and West. There are some thirteen or fourteen hundred teachers employed, and there are some ninety to one hundred thousand scholars.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. Idesire to know whether this $3,000,000 has been founded upon any report?

Mr. ELIOT. It has been.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. How, if that $3,000,000 || be necessary, can $1,000,000 be stricken off, without consultation with any committee or bureau, without impairing the efficiency of this service?

Mr. ELIOT. It cannot be done. This estimate of $3,000,000 was founded upon a certain amount for each school and for a certain number of schools, so much for each school. In some portions of the South the price of land and building is larger than in other portions. The estimate, so far as it could be, has been accurately made at the Department. Striking down the appropriation $1,000,000 it will disable the bureau from accommodating as many as if it had $3,000,000.

Let me say there are a great many scholars, children of white people, who are instructed as well as the children of freedmen.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. On what report is the estimate made?

Mr. ELIOT. On the report submitted by the Commissioner of the Freedmen's Bureau; and on a report in reply to the Committee on Appropriations.

My friend from Pennsylvania [Mr. STEVENS] has either here on his desk or at his room a communication from the Commissioner stating in detail the items which he wants, and the reason why they are needed.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. But I wish to know if the committee have made any report upon which we can act intelligibly upon this or any other item in this bill.

Mr. ELIOT. A report has been made from the Bureau of Refugees and Freedmen; the gentleman will find it among his documents.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. What I ask is whether the committee have made any report. Mr. ELIOT. What committee? Mr. ELDRIDGE. The committee reporting this bill.

Mr. ELIOT. No, sir.

Mr. GRINNELL. I will state that we considered this item for school-houses and asylums

[blocks in formation]

Mr. NIBLACK. Does this constitute a permanent system or a temporary one?

Mr. ELIOT. It must necessarily be temporary as we all presume. It is one of those things which we cannot get clear of. It is temporary, but it costs something now. Let me say that the buildings which have been heretofore used for school-houses have been taken from the rebels who had formerly occupied them. School-houses were deserted and abandoned here and there which could be made available. But now these buildings have been taken from the possession of the bureau and have been substantially returned to the owners, and the time has come when these one hundred and twenty-five thousand children, white and black, will be taken from their buildings unless the Government for a season interposes.

Mr. CHANLER. Will the gentleman allow me to ask upon what authority he makes the assertion that if the public school-houses in the South erected for the education of white children are returned to the white people of the South, the white children will be kept out of school?

Mr. ELIOT. I have not said any such thing. Mr. CHANLER. I understood the gentleman to say that unless this appropriation was made for these school houses which have been seized by the Government, formerly held by the rebels, now used for white and black children, these children will be turned out. He made that assertion, and I want him to state upon what authority he can show this House that the white children of the South are educated by this bureau; and I want him to show by what authority the education of the white children will be lessened by not following out his plan.

Mr. ELIOT. I cannot consent to get myself into a controversy with the gentleman now.

Mr. CHANLER. I do not want any controversy. I want an answer to the question.

Mr. ELIOT. If the gentleman has got through I will try to answer him. I have not said that the white children of the South were educated with the black children. I have said no such thing. Nor have I stated anything from which such an inference could be drawn. What I said was simply this: that in conducting the affairs of the bureau, education has been given to the children of refugees as well as to the children of freedmen. And this: that where a school-house which has been used, or another building which has been used for the education, under the administration of the bureau, of freedmen's children and of white children, shall have been taken from the bureau, that school would be broken up unless the Government interposed. That is all I designed to say.

Mr. CHANLER. Then I suppose I misunderstood the gentleman.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. I certainly understood the gentleman to say that the white and black children were educated together,

Mr. ELIOT. Well, I hope I have put it right now. I did not mean any such thing as that. Mr. ELDRIDGE. That is not the fact, then? Mr. ELIOT. I do not know anything about it. I suppose all shades of color are to be found there, and it would be hard to distinguish some of them from white.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. If that is the case, then the gentleman referred to these mixed races only.

Mr. ELIOT. The gentleman must inquire of his Democratic friends; they know much more about that than we do. [Laughter.]

Mr. ELDRIDGE. I do not think they understand the Freedmen's Bureau better than the gentleman does. He has been the father of that measure, if not of any of these colored | children. children. [Laughter.]

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »