-CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE.

1902. -CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 6895 the Mather Power Company to construct experimental span in minal Railway ·Company to construct a bridge am·oss the White Niagara River .at Buffalo, N. Y.-to the Committee on Interstate River in Arkansas; . and Foreign Commerce. . A bill (H. R. 4103) granting a pension to William C. Hickox;

Also, resolutions of Jewelers' Association and Board of Trade A bill (H. R. 7679) granting an increase of pension to Franklin of New York City, favoring the Ray bankruptcy bill-to the Snyder; Committee on the Judiciary. A bill (H. R. 8794) _granting an increase of pension to Henry!.

Al o, protest of the Pure Oil Company, of Pittsburg., Pa., · Smith; {lgainst the passage of the ·ship-subsidy bill-to the Committee on .A bill (H. R. 9334) to amend an apt to prohibit the passage of the Uerchant Marine and Fisheries. special or local laws in the Territories, to limit the Territorial

By Mr. SMITH of Kentucky: Papers relating to the claim of ind.ebtedness., and for other pm:poses; Rebecca Spencer for board and attention given to si-ck soldiers A bill (H. R. 10545) granting an increase of pension to Solo-and for feeding soldiers during the civil war-to the Committee mon P. Brockway; on War Claims. A bill (H. R. 12420) granting a pension to Wesley Brummett;

By Mr. STEVENS of Minnesota: Resolution of St. Paul Turn- .A bill {H. R. 12828) granting a pension to Mary E. Culver; ver:ein, in favor of the South African republics-to the Committee A bill (H. R. 12865) Tegulating the use of telephone wiTes in on Foreign Affah·s. the District of Columbia;

By:Mr. SUTHERLAND: Petition of D. L. Sprague and other A bill (H. R. 13278) granting an increase of pension to Levi H. citizens of Utah, in favor of House billi! 178 a.nd 179, for the repeal Collins; and of the tax on distilled spirits-to the Committee on Ways .and A joint resolution (S. R~ 105) supplementing and modifying Means. j certain provisions of the Indian appropriation act for the yeaT

.By Mr. WRIGHT: Resolutions of _Fomona Grange, No. 7, of ending June 30, 1903. · Susquehanna County, Pa., favoring House bills 3521 and 3575, to . PETITIONS AND MEMO.RI.A.LS enlarge the jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Commission- . · . to the Committee on Interstate and F.ol'eign Commerce Mr. PLATT of New York presented resolutions adopted at a

· • ' mass meeting of citizens ·of Ticonderoga, N. Y., favoring the pur--------- ; -chase by the United States Government of the old forts at Ti-

.conderoga and Crown Point in that State; which were referred -to the Commitliee on Military Affairs .

SENATE. . TUESDAY, June 17, 1902.

-The Senate met at 11 o'clock a. m. Prayer by Rev. F. J. PRETTYMAN, of the city of Washington~ The Secretary pToceeded to Tead the Journal of yesterday's

proceedings, when., on request of Mr. GALLINGER, and by unanimous consent, the further reading was dispensed with.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore, Without objection, the Journal will stand appro-ved~

OKLAHOMA, ARIZONA, AND NEW MEXWO.

Mr. QUAY~ Mr. President, I desire to gi-ve notice at this time that on Thursday next, after the conclusion .of the voting upon the Nicaragua Canal bill, I shall move to discharge the Committee on Territories from the bill {H. R. 12543) to enable the peo~l.e of Oklahoma~ Arizona, and New Mexico to .form constitutions and State governments and be admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the -origin-al States, and that the Senate shall proceed to the consideration of the bill.

He a1so presented a petition of sundry citizens of Brooklyn, N. Y., praying for the enactment of legislation providing that eightbours shall bethemaximum woTk day in all trades and employments; wbich was ref.erred to the Committee on Education and Labor.

Mr. CULLOM presentedapetitionof the illinois State Agency, of Chicago, ill., praying for the enactment of legislation providing for the :fimtl adjustment and settlem.ent of the swamp-land indemnity due the State of Illinois nuder the act of CongreBs approved March 3, 1855; which was referred to the Committee on Publie Lands.

He also presented a resolution adopted at the Fifth International Congress of Criminal Anthropology, held at Amsterdam, Holland, favoring the .establishment of psycho-physical laboratories for the practical application of physiological psychology to sociological and abnormal or pathological data, etc.; which-was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor.

He also presented petitions of the International Association of Machinists, Ameri.can Federation of Labor, of Springfield; of

liESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. the International Association of Machirusts, American Federation .A message from the House .of Representatives, by Mr. C. R. of Labor, of East St. L~uis, and of the International Association

McKENNEY, its enrolling clerk, announced that the Honse had of Machinists, American Federation of Labor, of Batavia, ·all in passed with ame-ndments the following bills; in which it requested the State of Tilinois, praying for the passage of the so-called eightthe concurrence of the Senate: hour bill; which were -refen-ed to the Committee on Education

A bill (S. 640) to extend the provisions, limitations, and benefits and Labor. of an act entitled ~'An act granting pensions to the s.urvivom of Mr. BLACKBURN presented a petition of sundry citizens af the Indian wars of 1832 to 1842, inclusive, known as the Black Kentucky, praying for the adoption of certain amendments to the Hawk war, Creek war, .Cherokee disturbances, and .Seminole internal-re-venue law relative to the tax-on distilled spirits; which war; '' . was referred to the Committee -on Finance.

A bill (S. 4850) to increase the pensions of those who have.lost Mr. WELLINGTON. I present-a memorial of the general as-limbs in the military or naval service of the United States or are sem.bly -of Maryland relative to the use o'f Maryland ,granite in totally disabled in the same; and the constr-uetion of the United States custom-house at Baltimore,

A bill (S. 5269) to provide a .commission to secure plans and in that State. I ask that the memoTial be printed in the REodesigns for a monument or memorial to the memm·y of Abraham ORD and referred to the Committee .on Public Buildings .and Lincoln, late President of the United States. Grounds.

The message also announced that the House had passed the The memoria-l was referred to the Committee on Public Build-following bills and joint resolution; in whleh it requested the ings and Grounds, and ordered to be printed in the REUORn, .as concurrence of the Senate: follows:

A bill (H. R. 10933) to provide for the erection, at Frederi-cks- Joint resolu_tiun No. il-Joint resolution ·of the general assembly of Mary-burg, Va., of the monument to the .memory of Gen. B:ugh Me1·cer, lana, requesting the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States Gov-which it was OTdered by Comrress, on the 8th da;v of April, 1777, ermm!-nt to require the use of Maryland granite in the construction of the

...., J United States custom-house at Baltimore, Md. should be erected; Whereas a new custom-:h<=mse ii.9 to be constructed by the United States

.A bill (H. R. 12141) to amend an act entitled "An act amend- Government-at Baltimere, Md. and ing section 4708 of the Revised Statutes of the United Sta.tes, in Whereas the State of Maryland produces asiineand durable a granite as

el ti to · t · d ·a d the1•e :is produced else-where: Be it . r a on pensrons o remarrre WI ows; an Re&o"Lved by the general assembly of the State of Maryland, ThattheSecre-A joint resolu-tion (H. J. Res. 6) in relation to monument to tary of the Treasm-y of the United :States Government be, a.nd he is hereby~

prison-ship martyrs at Fort Greene, Brooklyn, N. Y. requested to require that in the ·construction and erection of the Unitea

ENROLLED BILLS &IGNED.

The mesBage further announced that the Speaker of the .HollSe had signed the following enrolled bills and joint resolution; and they were thereupon signed by the President pro tempo-re-:

A bill (S. 3057) appropriating the receipts from the sale -and disposal of public lands in -eertam States and Territo1·ies to the const ruction of irrigation works for the reclamation ·of arid lands;

..A. bill (S . .3992) granting an ;increase of _pension to David Jlri. JicKnight;

A bill (S . .3060) authorizing the New;port Bridge" .Belt :and ~.er-

States custom-house at Baltimore, Md .. granite stone produced from the quarries of the State .of MarJC].and be used. •

Be it further 1·esolved, "That the secretary of state be, and he is hereby, aut1wrized to tr.ansmit a copy of .the..c:e resolutions., under the seal of the Sta-te to the said Secratary of the Treasury of the United State~ and to each of th6 Senators andRe_presentatives now in Congress from this ;:;tate.

Witness our liands February 19, 1902. NOBLE L. MITCHEliL,

bpeaker of the House of Delegates. JOHN HUBNER,

President of-the Sena,U • THE STATE DF .MARYLil"'D, M:XECUTIVE D.EJ!ABTl\IEJ\""r.

I. John W&lte.r ~governor ·of the -State of ·Maryland, and having control of :the _great seaLthereof, do her-eby ceri:icy that .the foregoing is ~

6896 · CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. J UNE 17,

true copy of joint resolution No. 3, of the general assembly of Maryland of 1902.

Witness my hand and the great seal of Maryland. Lo~dl~~ the city of Annapolis on the - day of--, in the year of our

By the governor. [SEAL.)

JOHN WALTER SMITH.

WILFRED BATEMAN, Sec1·etmy of State.

Mr. WELLINGTON presented resolutions adopted by sundry citizens of Baltimore, Md.: at a mass meeting held under the auspices of the Polish National Alliance in that city on May 5, 1902, favoring the erection of a monument to the memory of Brig. Gen. Casimir Pulaski; which were referred to the Committee on the Library.

1\fr. DRYDEN presented a petition of the Trades and Labor Federation, of New Brunswick, N.J., praying for the enactment of legislation providing for the irrigation of the arid lands of the West; which was ordered to lie on the table.

He also presented a petition of the Burlington County Retail Liquor Dealers and Hotel Keepers' Protective Association, of Burlington, N. J., praying for the adoption of certain amendments to the internal-revenue law relative to the tax on distilled spirits; which was referred to the Committee on Finance.

Heal o presented a petition of sundry citizens of Wayland, N. J., praying for the repeal of the duty on beef, veal, mutton, and pork; which was referred to the Committee on Finance.

He also presented petitions of Jers.ey City Harbor No. 6, American Association of llfasters and Pilots of Steam Vessels, of Hoboken, and of Enterprise Harbor No. 2, American Association of Masters and Pilots of Steam Vessels, of Camden, in the State of New Jersey, praying for the enactment of legislation granting pensions to certain officers and men in the Life-Saving Service, etc.; which were referred to the Committee on Pensions.

He also presented a petition of Newark Lodge, No. 240, International Association of Machinists, of Newark, N. J., praying fer the passage of the so-called eight-hour law; which was referred to the Committee on Education and L abor .

He also presented petitions of the congregation of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Bordentown, and of the Christian Endeavor Society of the Presbyterian Church of Vineland, in the State of New Jersey, praying for the enactment of a Sunday-rest law for the District of Columbia; which were referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

He also presented petitions of Hotel W aiters and Cooks' Local Union No. 337, of Trenton; of the common council of Hoboken; of the board of fire commissioners of Hoboken; of the McKinley Club of Elizabeth; of the Edward L. Brown Post, No. 44, Department of New Jersey, Grand Army of the Republic; of the Lincoln Club, of Paterson; of the board of water commissioners of Hoboken; of Journeymen Barbers' Local Union No. 381, of Hoboken; of the Trades and Labor Federation of New Brunswick, and of Plumbers Local Union No. 168, of Hoboken, all in the State of

·New Jersey, praying for the enactment of legislation increasing the compensation of letter carriers· which were r eferred to the Committee on Post-Offices and P ost-Roads.

He also presented petitions of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union of New Jersey; of sundry citizens of Tenafly, Haddon. Heights, Atlantic Highlands, Elwood, Closter, Daretown, Elizabeth, Hamburg, Toms River, Paterson, Dover, and Island Heights; of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union of Aron; of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union of Bridgeton, .and of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union of Junction, all in the State of New Jersey praying for the enactment of legislation to prohibit the sale of intoxicating liquors in the Capitol building and at immigrant stations; which were referred to the Committee on Immigration.

Mr. F AIR.BANKS presented the petition of John H. McFarland and 52 other citizens of Boundary, Ind., praying for the passage of the so-called immigration bill; which was referred to the Com-mittee on Immigration. -

Mr. LODGE. I present a memorial of a committee appointed at a recently held meeting of persons, irrespective of party, interested in the policy pursued by the United States toward the P hilippine Islands and the inhabitants thereof, and also the condition of affairs in those islands. I ask that the memorial be printed in the RECORD a~d referred to the Committee on the Philippines.

There being no objection, the memorial was refened to the Committee on the Philippines, and ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows :

The honorable the Senate and the House of BOSTON, June - , 1~.

Representatives of the United States: The undersigned would respectfully represent that they are a comntittee

appointed at a recently held meeting of persons, irrespective of par ty, interested in the p~licy :pumued by the United States toward the Philippine Islands and the _u~lhab1tants. thereof. As such they were instructed to mvestiga~ the COJ?.dition of affa1r~ connected therewith, and take such subsequent action as nnght seem. expedient . . Having, to a certain extent, performed this duty they now subnnt the followmg

MEMORIAL.

It is n<?t our presen~ purpose to discuss any controverted questions connected With events which have recently taken place in the Philippine Islands. or to call in question the policy which either has been pursued by the United States or which it is proposed to pursue in regard to these islands or the inhabitants thereof. In the performance of the duties imposed upon us these matters have to a greater or less extent en"'aged our attention, and theresults at whic~ we arrive !llay not improbabfy .be brought to your notice at some future time. Certam facts, however, which seem to us of much import are not open to dispute. To these, and the conclusions to be drawn from them as to us the exigency seems great and immediate, we now r espectfully invite your attention.

It is apparent that, as an outcome of the policy and course of ~Wtion hitherto pursued, which may or may not have met the approval of those we represent, certain things have resulted:

The United States, as a nation. has assumed charge of communities of Asiatic descent, occupying many islands of an archipelago at a great distance from our nearest continental possessions. Those communities numberin~ millions, are of a race wholly distinct from ourselves, with' other traditions and habits, speaking foreign, and, in many cases, unknown tongues. The acquisition of the Philippine Islands and their inhabitants.: whil~ imposin~ on us treaty obligations, has b ee.n followed by. prolongea warlike operations marked by acts of fierce resiStance, not qmckiy overcome, on the part of the Filipinos, and by military severities on our part of a character unprecedented in our annals. Those islands are now held by us par~ly l}nder military law andp.artlY. under c~vp. aut!Jority, bu~ in ;1b olute subJection. In the course of this miXed admirustrat10n of affau' no inconsiderable degree of friction has existed, and app:1rently still does exist, between our military and civil representatives. Such could, indeed, hardly be avoided. In the pros~cution of ~itary: movements the. establishment of camps of concentration for the Inhabitants of large districts has been thought expedient; and the people of those districts of both sexe3 and all ages thus gathered from their homes and usual vocations have thel·ein been C?m~elled to !fve with sanitarY. results concerning which. <?nlY very indeftmte mformat10n has been rece1ved. In the course of miht.·wy operations also large regions have been devastated, towns have been burned, and the food supply of the country destroyed. It has hence resulted that when the inhabimnts have been returned from the camps of concentration to their former places of abode they have found their shelters gone and tile means of subsistence greatly impaired or wholly ln.cking. It is known that the epidemics usually and1 indeed, inevitably, incident to such a state of affairs are now raging in the islands, though only very partial statistics a.s r espects mortality are made public, if, indeed, they are in any wise obtainable. Ext ensive districts inhabited by our dependents have thus been scom·ged and are now stricken with war, famine, and pestilence.

For the peo:P.le thus affiicted, whether excusably or otherwi'ie, America stands responsible. That responsibility can not be evaded. Those people luve, moreover, no means of communicating directly with us. Removed by the width of an ocean, they are unable to make their situation known whether to ask for aid and relief or to obtain r edress of grievance3, if such exist. They have not been invited, perhaps, not even permitted, to speak unless they seemed to approve of our doings. But they are still our subjugated dependents. To us, and to us only, can they look, and from our decision they have no appeal.

Such being, as we undersU:Lnd, the undisnuted facts, we desire, respectfully, to represent that the Congress of the-United States, as the supreme lawmaking authority, is of necessity the grand inquest of the American people. It alone possesses the power necessary adequately to deal with a situation such as now exists. The inquiry at present being carried on by one of your honorable bodies has unquestionably been productive of valuable r esults-results the far-reachin~ importance of which, both to the people of this country and to the Filipmos,., it would, in our judgment~ not b e easy to exaggerate. But that inquiry has a1So demonstrated to us-ana we think must have satisfied all careful observers of its course-that no inquiry instituted in this country, and carried on under similar limitations, can possibly meet full present requirements.

It i<> plain that, at best, only odds and ends of evidence, sb·ay scraps of information not always of unquestioned authenticity, are forthcom.in~ or obtainable; the dependent communities are not represented; one side, m a conflict of races, debarred from testifying, remains, and must r emain, substantially unheard, where not in a measm·e dumb. To reach any satisfactory results inquisition must be made on the spot and among the people concerned-the dependents of the United States, our so-called subject races. Under these circumstances did we ourselves, the tmdersigned, r epresenting an unrecognized constituency and clad with no official authority. undertake to go out to the Philippine Archipelago, or to send there a committee of om· number, we would have no power to gather evidence, to elicit facts, or to prescribe remedies. We could at best appear merely as volunteers, and, as such, would probably be ordered at once to retm·n whence we came. It would be altogether otherwise with those coming from t.he Congress of the United States, and members of it. Its delegates would represent the full dignity, authority, and nower of the American people. To them every som·ce of information would be accessible, while their mere presence would >astly improve the situation.

The facts being thus, we respect fully ask, on behalf of om·selves and those we represent, that the Congress of the United States will forthwith nrovide for the appointment of a committee of investigation of its own millibar, to proceed at the earliest practicable moment to the Philippine Archipelago, and there enter upon such an investigation as will cause the people of the United States to feel assured that full informat ion is being eli"ited, that all grievances will b e considered, that any measures necessary to the protection. and a reestablished prospe1'ity of our dependents will in due time be instituted, and that, in the light of the fullest possible knowledge of i'R.ctB and conditions, the Ame~·ican people may form their judgment of the p olicy so far pursued, as well as that to be adopted for the future.

Wefurtherdes:iretopoint outafullprecedentfor the appointment of such a joint Congressional committee of inquiry. In the year 1865, at the close of our civil war, when a state of affairs not alto~ether dissimilar to that in the Philippine Archipelago existed jn the so-called Confederate States, cognizance was taken of the fact, and Congress, by a concurrent resolution of December 13, acting as the grand national inquest, appointed such a committee as is now suggested. Com nosed of six member'S on the part of the Senate, and nine membei'S on the part of the House of Representatives, William Pitt Fessenden, of Maine, was chairman on behalf of the former, and Thaddeus Stevens of Pennsylvania, on behalf of the latter, while among those composing the committee were James W. Gr'rmes Jacob M. Howard, Reverdy Johnson, E. B. Washburne, Justin F. Morrill, Roscoe Conkling, and George S. Boutwell. The committee thus composed then made, as respects thereg-ion which had constituted the so-called Confederacy aninvestigationsimilal' m character to that we now ask for as respects the Philippine Archipelago.

We would accordingly petition your honorable bodies that such a jomt special committee be now provided, and that it be of sufficient size to command public confidence by·containing representatives of both parties and advocates of all different hnes of policy, to the end that full information may

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 6897· be elicited and the greatest possible volume of variant light shed upon the duties and o.bligations which this people have had forced upon them or voluntarily assumed.

We would further respectfully request that this committee be so constituted as to enable it to cover the entire field of investigation within the limited time at its disposal. To make this possible it should be accompanied by a body of experts, military and civil, representing the medical, sanitary, industrial, and other Ecientific phases involved in the great and complex problem to be considered, and upon which the committee will be called in-

. telligently to pass. On the spot, and in this way only, we submit, can the American people be

properly and fully advised as to the duties and obligations now imposed upon them. As a portion of the people, realizing those obligations and impressed with a not undue sense of the responsibility which has been incurred, we submit this memorial, and ask for it your early and favorable consideration.

CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. ANDREW CARNEGIE.

By C. F . A."" . C.SCHURZ.

EDWIN BURRITT SMITH. HERBERT WELSH.

. Mr. FRYE presented resolutions adopted by the Maine Medical Association, at Portland, :Me., favoring the establishment of a sociological laboratory; which were referred to the Committee on Education and Labor.

He also presented the petition of James Selden Cowdon, praying that all reservoirs in the city of Washington be abolished, and for the location of a filtration plant at a.point beyond Cabin John Bridge, Maryland; which was referred to the Committee on the Disb:ict of Columbia.

He also presented resolutions of .the Fifth International Congress of Criminal Anthropology, adopted at Amsterdam, Holland, favoring the establishment of psychological laboratories; which were referred to the Committee on Education and Labor.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES.

Mr. GALLINGER, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, to whom was referred the bHl (S. 5329) authorizing the President to appoint Lieut. Command~r William P. Randall, retired, United States Navy, a commander on the retb."ed list, reported it with an amendment, and submitted a report thereon.

He also, from the same committee, to whom was refened the bill (S. 4905) authorizing the President to nominate Lieut. Commander Arthur P. Osborn to be a commander on the retired list of the Navy, reported it with amendments, and submitted areport thereon.

He also, from the Committee on Pensions, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 11890) granting an increas~ of pension to James Brown, reported it without amendment, and submitted a report thereon.

He also, from the same committee, to whom ·was refeiTed the bill (H. R. 6481) granting an increase of pension to Millen McMillen; reported it with an amendment, and submitted a report thereon.

Mr. WELLINGTON, from the Committee on the District of Columbia, to whom was referred the bill'(S. 4779) relating to the office of the secretary of the· District of Columbia, reported it without amendment, and submitted a report thereon.

He also. frQ.ID the same committee, to whom was referred the joint resolution (S. R. 85) to amend the highway extension plans of the District of Columbia, submitted an adverse report thereon; which was agreed to, and the joint resolution was postponed indefinitely.

Mr. HANSBROUGH, from the Committee on Public Lands, to whom was referred the bill (8. 6091) extending the time for making final proof in desert-land entries in Yakima County, State of Washington, reported it without amendment, and submitted a I~eport thereon.

He also, from the same committee, to whom was referred the bill (S. 4815) to grant certain lands to the South Platte Canal and Reservoir Company, reported it with amendments, and submitted a report thereon. ·

Mr. GA1.IBLE, from the Committee on Public Lands, to whom was referred the bill (S- 6138) to set apart certain lands in the State of South Dakota as a public park, to be known as the Wind Cave National Park, reported it without amendment, and submitted a report thereon.

He also, from the same committee, to whom was refened the bill (H. R. 11062) to amend an act entitled "An act to make certain grants of land to the Territory of New Mexico, and for other purposes," reported it with amendments, and submitted a report thereon.

. CONSULAR REPORTS.

Mr. PLATT of New York, from the Committee on Printing, reported the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and a.greed to:

Re.~olved, That there be printed the usual number of copies of the message from the P resident of the United States transmitting reports from the consular officers of t he United States, giving an account of each consulate and

• Signature authorized by cable.

XXXY--432

consular a~ency, showing the principal industries and expor ts, the surround-· ing climatic conditions, the general cost of living, and Similar information, in r esponse to Senate resolution 594, Fifty-sixth C'ongress, second session.

BILLS REFERRED TO COURT OF CLAIMS.

1\{r. WARREN, from the Committee on Claims, reported the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to:

Resolved, That the Senate bills Nos. 2142, for the relief of the legal representatives of J. J. Abrahams, deceased; 205, for the relief of the Allaire Works, of New York; 6013, for the relief of the Atlantic Works; 204. for the relief of Hannah E. Boardman, administratrix of William Boardman, deceased; 1181, for the r elief of the e3tate of James Brown, d eceased; 200, for the r elief of the le~al representatives of George :M:. Clapp, of the Washington Iron Works; 1309, ror the relief of Everett B. Curtis, administrator of John J. Cm·tis, deceased; 5, for the relief of the legal representatives of Paul Curtis, deceased; 879, for the r elief of the executors o~. James B . Eads, d eceased; 3737, for the relief of the legal representatives of Gardner & Lake; 16TI, for the relief of the Globe Works, of Boston, MaES.; 3843, for the relief of the legal representatives of Hillman & Streaker; 6051, for the r elief of .Amos L. Allen; 3705, for the relief of Harrison Loring; 5008, for the relief of the legal r epresentatives of Edward Lupton, deceased; 006, for the relief of the legal administrators of Daniel McLeod, deceased, of the South Brooklyn Works; 904, for the relief of Anna M. Mershon, administratrix of DanielS. Mershon, deceased; 1217, for the relief of the legal representatives of N eafie & Le:yx; 15<:-4, for the relief of Sarah E. E. Perme, widow and administrat rix of William Perine, deceased; 347, for the relief of Poole & Hunt; 2693, for the relief of the legal representatives of Pusey, Jones & Co., of Wilmington, Del. ; 207, for the relief of George W. Quintard, of the Morgan Iron Works; 1186, for the relief of Kate B.eaney Zeiss, administratrix of William B. Reany, surviving partner of the firm of Reaney, Son & Archbold; 633, for the r elief of the legal representatives of John Roach, deceased; 703, for the relief of George T. Sa.mpson; 4104, for the relief of the legal rep1·esentative!:l of Jeremiah Simonson, deceased; 3186, for the relief of Thomas Stack; 4972, for the relief of the estate of F. Z. Tucker; 1091, for the relief of the Portland Company,of Portland, Me.; 3738, for the relief of the estate of George W. Lawrence, deceased, and 6043, for the relief of James F. Secor, surviVIng partner of Secor & Co., be referred to the Court of Claims for findings of fact under the provisions of the act of March 3, 1887 (such findings to include any facts bearing upon the question of the loyalty or disloyalty of claimants "dm·ing the war; any ascertainment by a board or boards of officers authorized by the Secretary of the Navy of how much the vessels of war and steam machinery mentioned in said bills cost the contractors over and ·above the contract price and allowance for extra work; what, if any, sums have been paid to claimants on account of such additional cost; what evidence has been filed in said court a.s to the causes of such increased cost), and report to the Senate in accordance w ith section 14 of said act. -

l\fr. WARREN. I have prepared a report in the matter of certain war vessels built in 1862 and 1865 to . accompany the resolution just reported by me from the Committee on Claims, referring to the Court of Claims for findings of fact 31 several bills representing claims against the United States on account of the building of certain boats and machinery for the _same, including areprint of the findings of the Selfridge and Marchand boards. I move that the matter be printed as a report coming from the Committee on Claims.

The motion was agreed to. BILLS INTRODUCED.

Mr. MORGAN introduced a bill (S. 6180) for the relief of the estate of Solomon Smith, deceased; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Claims.

Mr. McENERY introduced a bill (S. 6181) for the relief of Matilda M. Fairex, administi·atrix of the estate of Daniel Fairex, deceased; which was read twice by its title, and, with the accompanying papers, refer!'ed to the Committee on Claims.

Mr. MILLARD introduced a bill (S. 6182) granting an increase of pension to Lila L. Egbert; which was read twice by its title, and, with the accompanying papers, referred to the Committee on Pensions. ·

He also introduced a bill (S. 6183) granting an increase of pen sion to Susanna V. Wells; which was read twice by its title, and, with the accompanying paper, referred to the Committee on Pensions.

:Mr. WELLINGTON introduced a bill (S. 6184) granting a pension to Henry J. Hardy; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Pensions.

Mr. JONES of Arkansas introduced a bill (S. 6185) for the relief of Thomas D. Ruffin; which was read twice by its title. and referred to the Committee on Claims. ·

Mr. FAIRBANKS introduced a bill (S. 6186) granting an increase of pension to John F-. Wildman; which was read twice by its title, and, with the accompanying paper, referred to the Committee on Pensions.

He also introduced a bill (S. 6187) granting an increase of pension to William H. H. Cain; which was read twice by its title, and, with the accompanying paper, referred to the Committee on Pensions.

.AMENDMENT TO DEFICIENCY APPROPRI.A.TION BILL •

. Mr. TALIAFERRO submitted an amendment proposing to increase the appropriation to pay the Independent Line Steamers, of Tampa, Fla., in full settlement of all claims against the United States for damages .to . the ste~mer Manatee from $624.18 to $1,344.18, intended to be proposed by him to the general deficiency appropriation bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ap~ propriations, and ordered to be printed.

6898 CONGRESSIONAL. RECORD-SENATE. JUNE 17,

HOUSE BILLS REFERRED. The following bill and joint resolution were severally read twice

by their titles, and referred to the Committee on the Library: A bill (H. R. 10933) to provide for the erection, at FI·edericks

burg, Va. r of tJJ.e monument to the memory of Gen. Hugh Mercer, which it was ordered by Congres&on the 8th day of April, 1777, should be erected; and

A joint resolution (H. J. Res. 6) in relation to monument to prison-ship martyrs at Fort Greene, Brooldyn, N.Y.

The bill (H. R. 12141) to amend an act entitled "An act amending section 4708 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, in relation to pensions to remarried widows, was read twice by its title and refeiTed to the Committee·on Pensions.

ELIZABETH A. TURNER. The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid befo1'e the Senate the amend

ment of the House of Representatives to the bill (S. 5856) granting an inCI·ease of pension to Elizabeth A. Turner, which was in line 8, before the word "dollars," to strike out "sixteen" and insert " twelve."

1\Ir. GALLINGER. I move that the Senate disagree to the amendment of the House of Representatives and I'equest a conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon.

The motion was agTeed to. By unanimous- consent, the President pro tempore was author

ized to appoint the conferees on the pr.rt of the Senate; and Mr. GALLINGER, Mr. PRITCHARD, and Mr. TALIAFERRO were appointed.

PE.."llfSIONS TO SURVIVORS OF INDIAN. W .A.RS. The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate the amend

ments of the House of Representatives to the bill (S. 640) to extend the provisions, limitations, and benefits of an act entitled "An act granting pensions to the survivors of the Indian wars of 1832 to 1842. inclusive, known as the Black Hawk war, Creek war Cherokee disturbances, and the Seminole war," app~·oved July 27,1892, which were, on page 3, line 2, after the word "into," to insert "the," and after the word "service" to insert "of the United States."

Mr. GALLINGER. I move that the S-enate agree to the amendments made by the House of Representatives.

The motion was agreed to. MONUMENT TO ABRAl:lAM LINCOLN.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the- Senate tha amendments of the House of Representatives to the bill. (S. 5269), entitled' "An act to provide a commission to secure plans and designs for a monument or memorial to the memory of Abraham Lincoln, late President of the Uirited States," which were, on page 1, line 5, afteir the word "State," to strike out "and," and in line 6, after the word'' War," to insert" and Representative JAMES D. RICHARDSON·."

Mr. WETMORE. I move that· the Senate disagree to the amendments of the House of Represenmtives and request a· conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon.

The motion was agreed to. By unanimous consent, the President pro tempore was author

ized to appoint the conferees on the-part of the Senate; and Mr. WETMORE, Mr. HANSBROUGH, and Mr. VEST were appointed.

INCREASED PENSIONS FOR r:oss· OF. LIMBS. The PRESIDENT protein pore laid before the Senate the amend

ments of the House of Representatives to the bill (S. 4850) to increase the pensions of those who have lost limbs· in the military or naval service of the United States or are totally disabled in the same, which were, on page 1, line 6, after the word" duty," to insert" from wounds, injury, or disease originating prior to August 4, 1886;" in line 8, to strike out "forty-five" and insert "forty;" in line 11, to strike out" fifty" and insert" forty-six·" on page 2, line 1, after the word" joint," to insert" or where the same is in such a condition; " in line 2, to strike out "or are totally disabled in the same;" in line 3, to strike out "sixty" and insert "fifty-five;" and in line 6, after the word "month," to insert:

And that all persons who, in like manner, shall have lost both feet shall receive a pension at the rate of $100 per month: Provided, however, That this act s~all not be so construed as to reduce any pension under any act, public or pr1vate.

S:.,..o. 2. That the pensions of all persons who served one year or more in the Army or Navy of the United States, and who, under· the act approved June 27,1890, and the acts amendatory thereof, are drawing or hereafter shall be entitled to draw a _pension at the rate of. $12 per month, and who are or shall become so disabled from injuries or disease as to require the frequent and periodical aid and attendance of another person, shall be increa ed to $30 per month from and after the date of the certi:fl.cate of the exRmining surgeon or board of examining surgeons showing such degree of disability and made subsequent to the passage of this act.

Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President, this is a bill which passed the Senate a little while ago increasing, the pensions of the maimed soldiers of the country. The othe:c House not only: amended it in

the matter of rates, but has made it apply only to soldiers who received: thei:r disabilities prior to the Spanish war. The House has likewise attached an amendment to the bill increasing from $12 to 30 per month the pensions of soldiers under the act of J nne 30, 1890, who had one yea.D's service and who ~-equired the periodical attendance of another person.

I will say, that it may be understood by Senators and by the soldiers of the country, that the amendments dest1·oy the purpose of the bill and that in allhuman probability no legislation on this subject will be had at the pre ent session of Congress.

I move the reference of the bill and amendments to the Committee on Pensions.

The motion was agreed to. PAYMENTS FROM CUBAN FUXDS.

The PRESIDENT pro te'mpore. The Chair lays before the Senate a resolution coming over from a previous day, which will be read. . The Secretary read the 1·esolution submitted yesterday by Mr.

TELLER, as follows: Whereas it seems impractica. ble to prepare durin~ this session of Congress

an itemized statement showing the collection and dlSbnrsement of all funds for the whole period of the military occupation of Cuba; and

Whereas it is important that a statement be now made of the accounts hereafter named: Therefore, be it

Resolved, That the Secretary of War be, and he is hereby, directed to send to the Senate the following:

A full itemized statem~nt of all payments made out of Cuban funds to any persons or corporations, if any, for the purpose of promoting "reciprocity" between the United States and Cuba, at any time during the military occupation of Cuba by the United States, and whether such payments were authorized or approved by the Secretary of War.

l\fr. TELLER. The junior Senator from Connecticut [Mr. PLATT], who asked that the resolution might lie over, is not present.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Shall it lie on the table, subject to the call of the Senator?

Mr. TELLER. Yes; I suppose that is the course he really wanted to have taken.

The PRESIDENT pro· tempore. The Chair hears no obJection to the request. The resolution will lie on the table, subject to the call of the Senator from Colorado.

ORDER OF BUSIXESS, Mr. STEWART. Mr. President--The PRESIDENT pro tempore. For what purpose does the

Senator rise? Mr. STEW ART. To speak on the Nicaragua Canal bill. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from California

[Mr. PERKINS] wa,s. recognized last night and is entitled to the floor.

Mr. STEW ART. I had given notice before. Mr. PERKINS. The notice of the Senator from NBvada upon

the Calendar says 2 o'clock. Mr. STEWART. No; I said immediately after the morning

business. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Calendar shows that the

Senator gave notice that at 2 o'clock he would. address the Senate. ·

Mr. STEW ART. Very well. UNITED ST'ATES PR!SONERS.

Mr. HOAR. I should like, with the leave of the Senator frbm California, to have a bill passed to which there will be no objection. It is the bill (H. R. 14411) to regulate the commutation· for good conduct for United States prisoners. It has passed the House. and was drawn in the Attorn~y-Ge;neral's Department. I should like to ask the Senate to put 1t on Its passage. It is a humane bill that ought to be acted· on.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from California yield for that purpose?'

Mr. PERKINS. I will yield if the bill does not invite discussion.

Mr. HOAR. If it does I shall withdra-w it at once. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The bill will be read for the

information of the Senate. The Secretary read the bill; and by unanimous consent the

Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, proceeded to its consideration.

The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment. ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed. ·

Mr. HOAR. With the leave of the Senator from California I should like to make one statement about the bill which has just passed.

I recehred a gre~t many <?Ommunications from different parts of the conn try saymg that 1t ought to· apply t.> cases· of prisoners s~ntenced heretofore~ and undoubtedly that would be quite deSlrable, but there· was a very serious doubt in the minds of members of the committee-of the constitutional power of Congress to pass a bill of that so1't which should apply to sentences heretofore ·

I ·

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 6899 imposed. Therefore the committee thought it unwise to include such a provision.

S.A.L.A.RIES OF POST-OFFICE CLERKS.

Mr .. MASON. I ask unanimous consent for th-e consideration of the bill (S. 4949) to provide for the classification of the salaries of clerks employed in post-offices of the first and second class, simply for the purpose of having an amendment made, and then having the bill reprinted as amended.

There being no objection, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole. proceeded to consider the bill.

Mr. MASON. I move to amend, in section 1, on page 2,lin-e 4, by triking out the word" may," before the word" be," and inserting "shall;" so as to read:

Who, at the date of July 1,1902, shall oo receiving a salary less than $1,000 perannum. ·

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. ::M:ASON. I now ask that the bill may be printed as

amended, and I give notice that to-morrow morning I shall ask for its consideration.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. McCoMA.S in the chair). If there be no objection, an Ol'der will be made to reprint the bill as amended.

ISTHMIAN CANAL.

The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, resumed the consideration of the bill (H. R. 3110) to provide for the construction of a canal connecting the waters of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.

Mr. PERKINS. Mr. President, the Pacific coast States are especially interested in the construction of an isthmian canal that wil1 connect the waters of the Pacific with those of the Atlantic. For thirty years or more. this subject has been uppermosp in the minds of the people of the Pacific coast States. They believe the construction of such a canal wo~ld place our people and the products of om· lands more easily in the markets of the world, thus saving a voyage around Cape Horn of 15,000 miles or a journey aero s the continent.

The consensus of opinion, I think, has been in favor of the Nicaragua canal The concessions that have been made by the Nicaraguan Government have been liberal and generous. Those of the Costa Rican Government I never heard questioned nntil yesterday, when the distinguished Senator from South Dakota [Mr. KITTREDGE] advanced, to my mind 1 the first view that under the constitution of the Republic of Costa Rica they were prohibited from making a concession for building a canal through the-ir terIitory. If that is true, Mr. President, the legal minds of our country have been laboring under an erroneous impression. But be that as it may, the remarks that I propooo to make this morning are intended to show the advantages, as I understand them, of the Nicaraguan route over that of any other route that is known. It possibly will be shown that the San Bias or Darien route or the .Tehuante-pec route or some other route has peculiar natural advantages over any other route when there is a probability of a law being enacted that will enable this Government to acquhe jurisdiction to construct a canal.

pany. It goes on further to state that-we shall pay $7,000,000. The conditions under whioh we shall make the payment are clear; there is not any ambiguity in it, but when it comes to fixing the rates for the privilege of a canal through the State of Colombia it is quite a different story.

It impresses me as a business man, as I gave it a cursory reading yesterday, that there is not a lawyer in the Senate who would advise one to accept a franchise and spend any money under the privilege of that franchise, thinking he had something from a county or State that was of value, because there is no limit fo1 the rate of payment. It simply provides that three years before

. the expiration of the fourteen years they ·shall fix a reasonable aD.Ilillty, and there shall be taken into consideration the present price of the usufruct of the railway, as well as the compensation that is to be stipulated for the use of the zones for the additional administrative expenses that the construction of the canal will impose upon Colombia, and also the advance payment of $7,000,000 and the comparative cost and conditions upon which the United States reasonably would be expected to acquire concessions satisfactory to it in respect of any other canal.

But how does it fix those rates, Mr. President? It goes on to provide that there shall be two representatives from the State of Colombia, two representatives from the United States, and if they can not agree, which of course they would not, then the fifth arbitrator is called in, and it is provided that-

The president of such high commission shall be the president, for the time being, of the International Peace Tribunal of The Hague, and the determination reached by said commissi?n1 by a m.ajority vote, .concerning f>?.Ch fair and reasonable annuity that lS w be_pa1d to Colombia by the Uruted States in conformity with this article, shall be binding upon the contracting parties.

THE HAND OF THE FOREIG!\~.

That virtually places the fixing of the rate of compensation per annum that the United States shall pay for its canal, the right of operating it through the State of Colombia, if we acquire the Panama route, at the rental the president of The Hague Peace Conference shall name. He lives 3,000 miles or more away from the United States; he has no common interest with us; and yet by memorandum of the treaty that is to be made he virtually fixes the rate. He can confiscate that railroad or canal and all that we have expended there, and we have no rights whatever in it according to the memorandum of this convention.

If these rates arenotsatisfactorilyadjusted, thenArticle XXVI provides that-all the concessions granted by this convention shall be forfeited, and all the works, principal and accessory, machinery, and properties of the canal shall become the property of the Republic of Colombia, and the same Republic shall reeover its actual rights over the Panama Railway without any obligation to return any of the sums that it may have received in conformity with this convention.

In any ordinary franchise there is a provision made that · the rates of toll shall not be less than to pay a certain sum per annum · upon the investment therein made. There is no such limitation here. The 1·ate fixed can be whatever the president of The Hague Peace Conference may name, and we are virtually in his power. As I said, it may result in a confiscation of the property.

I was surprised when I gave a cursory reading to this document FEW ADV.A..NT.A.GES IN THE COLOMBIAN TREATY. yesterday to see that the interests of the United States were in no

If, as the Senator from South Dakota has stated, the constitu- way protected by this propo ed tl·eaty, and I can not, therefore, tion of Nicaragua does not give that country a right to make this as a business proposition, seriously consider such a measure. I concession to the United States, certainly the memorandum of would not as an individual or as one representing a private comthe convention that is proposed between the United States and pany or corporation, and surely as one of the representatives in Colombia, which has been sent to Congress by the Secretary of part of a great State I can not cast my vote in favor of a measure State, does not give us many advantages in Colombia. While the that leaves every dollar invested by the United States there virSenator was delivering his very able speech yesterday I took oc- tually in the hands of the president of The Hague Peace Tribunal, casion to look ov~r this protocol or draft of a convention which which might amount, as I said before, to a virtual confiscation of it is proposed to enter into between these Governments. That every dollar we put in the property. between the United States and Nicaragua is clear and forcible; PANAMA E!\~.A..ILs POLITICAL AND Fm.A..l~OI.A.L DIFFICULTIEs. there is no ambiguity in it; it is concise and to the point. It says But, ::M:r. President, some canal we are all in favor of, There the Republic of Nicaragua leases in perpetuity for all time to the is no doubt as to the necessity of an isthmian canal or as to who United States the exclusive right to construct, own, and operate shall build it. It is to be built, and built only by the United a ship canal through the territory of Nicaragua to connect the States. The only question remaining to be solved is that relating Atlantic and Pacific oceans. There are no strings tied to that to the route to be selected. We have hitherto looked only to provision. It is clear and concise and to the point. The provi- the route across Nicaragua; but now, unfortunately, that route sion follows that we are to pay a certain sum of money per annnm which all of us formerly looked upon with mo1·e than doubt has for this privilege for a certain length of time. been brought forward as an alternative, and we are compelled to

What does this suggested treaty with Colombia propose to do? make choice between Nicaragua and Panama. At first glance it I looked at it yesterday while the distinguished Senator was will appear to many, doubtless, that there is not much difference making his speech. I view it only as a business man. I venture in availability, but I think that a careful study of the problems to say if the Senator were my counsel seeking a franchise in my presented by the Panama scheme which has been proposed by State for the right to build a turnpike road or to construct a feny the Isthmian Commission will result in ~ decision in favor of the or bridge across a ri-ver upon which I might coll~c~ the tolls, ~e Nicaragua route. :wo-q.I~ say, '' Yon can not accept any such proposition as there IS In my opinion, to take hold of the Panama scheme; which has m this memorandum." - had as its principal characteristic from the beginning fraud of

soME oF THE DISADVANTAGES. the most gigantic kind, will involve this country in political and What does it do, Mr. President? It goes on, first, to provide :tmancial troubles that may be far-reaching and disastrous. We

that Colombia shall cease to receive 250,000 peT annum for the are asked to give to the French canal company $40,000,000 for privileges which we are to inherit of the Panama Raih·oad Com- a 50-mile railroad, old machinery, and plans, and for the right

. 6900 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE . JUNE 17,

to utilize the excavations which it has made at a cost to the French people of about $.260,000,000 in cash.

It will be noted that the sale of the property and assets of the old company to the new was upon the express condition that the property and rights thus transferred should reve1·t to the estate of the old company in liquidation upon default in the completion of the canal within the time fixed in the concession. It will also be noted that the old company has a claim upon the new of 60 per cent of the surplus income after paying all expenses, charges, and stipulated dividends, the sum thus paid to be properly distributed by the liquidator. It will still further be noted that this ag~·eement, according to the statement of the New Panama Canal Company, in Senate Document No. 188, Fifty-sixth Congress, first session, page 31, was by private contract.

FRENCH PEOPLE HAVE AN INTERET IN PANAMA.

The persistency with which M. Hutin, president of the New Panama Canal Company, pressed on the Isthmian Commission a claim to a share in the profits of the canal after completion would seem to have in view this obligation. It was only at the last moment that it was dropped.

We could, I believe-Wrote M. Hutin to Admiral Walker-

continue to maintain that our claim is just and well founded. But he finally announced that-

we are now prepared to relinquish totally our claim to a share in the even· tual profits of the management of the canal, having in mind that this surrender constitutes on our part an act of conciliation, which must be taken into account during the discussion of our other propositions.

This claim of a share of the profits, as well as the provision for the return to the old company of its property and assets, in case the canal was not completed in accordance with the concessions, is in the interests of the stockholders of the old company, who number 600,000 or 700,000 French citizens.

Mr. MITCHELL. Eight hundred thousand. Mr. PERKINS. I am on the conservative side, and I shall

endeavor to be so in all the statements I make. Mr. MITCHELL. I will say to the Senator that the figure I

state is the testimony of the representative. Mr. PERKINS. The value of the property, assets, etc., can be

returned to them thJ:ough the purchase money given for them by the United States, so their interests are prot-ected as to that, but the price of their consent to this transfer of property to the new company was the 60 per cent interest in the canal earnings, from which they were to partially recoup themselves for the losses they had sustained. I think it may be questioned whether a private contract thus entered into for the benefit of half a million or more F1·enchmen can be abrogated by the pre ident of the new canal company. Through this agreement the stockholders of the

. old company are given an interest in the profits of the completed canal. It is part of the assets of the old company and, it would seem to me, can not be transferred to the United States without furnishing good ground for an action to recover. If such ground exists, it is not improbable that the French Government would be able, by championing the rights of so many of its citizens, to very greatly embarrass the United States in the prosecution of the work of building the canal, even if it did not ultimately enforce its claim of an interest in the undertaking.

LOSS THROUGH THE PANAMA RAILROAD.

The United States mustpurchasethe stockof the Panama Railroad Company, which will require the expenditure of $7,000,000. All of it must be bought or the United States will have partners in the canal enterprise. At present the new canal company holds all but 1,100 shares, these latter being owned in this country and in Europe. Whether they can be secured by the United States at a reasonable figure is very doubtful. The owners hold the key to a very importa.nt position, and will not, it is likely, yield it for a payment of a mere par value. What they would exa.ct from such a rich interested party as the United States can only be conjectured. If they offered to sell, it is sure that they would demand a large sum-far g~·eater than the United States would pay. As it would not be policy to begin work until the shares were secured, negotiations to that end would be continued indefinitely, to the corresponding delay of construction.

Supposing, however, that the UnitedStatesse~uredall tJ:eshares at par. Their cost would be $7,000,000, but w1th them It would also assume obligations as follows: Mortgage bonds, bearing 4t per cent interest. $2,504,000; sinking-fund subsidy bonds issued to the Colombian Government, bearing 6 per cent interest, $996,000. Total, 3,500,000, less cash assets, $438,569.33, heldJanuary15, 1902. Supposing the incredible, that these assets should remain practi-

- cally at that figure when the canal is pm·chased by the United States, the latter will be under obligations of nominally $3,000,000. But it will be noted that the bonds bear a very high rate of interest-higher than the holders can obtain in other investments. They will not, therefore, sell at par; they will demand more; they will undoubtedly deem that, to secure the interest the¥ are now

receiving, they must receive as much as, at 3 per cent, will bring them this sum. The sinking-fund subsidy bonds, therefore, will be held for $1,992,000 and the mortgage bonds at $3,756,000. This will make the total indebtedness $5,748~000. bringing up the cost of the Panama Railroad to the United States to $12,748,000. But there must be a diversion of this railroad, which the Commission estimates will require the expenditure of $1,267~500. The Panama Railroad, therefore, would actually cost the United States $14,015,500.

WHERE $13,000,COO WILL GO.

But the Commission says that the earnings of the railroad dur· ing the construction of the canal will be so g~·eat that its indebtedness can be easily paid. It is of interest to know, however, who would pay these increased earnings. The increased work, outside of hauling food and clothing for laborers employed, would be that incident to the construction of the canal, and of course the United States would be the one from whom the charges would be collected. If the earnings of the road, which belong to the United States, have to be paid out in settlement of the road's indebtedness, it is clear that this indebtedness is paid by our Government. The Commissions assumption, therefore, that the debts of the road will not have to be paid by the United States is without foundation. The Government must stand ready to pay the whole sum represented by the bonds.

But, says the Commission, "After the completion of the canal its commercial profits will probably cease, but it will have a value incidental to operating the canal." That value can not be more than the cost of constructing 50 miles of railroad, which, at the very liberal estimates of $40,000 per mile, will amount to $.2,000,-000. All the rest of the expenditures on account of the road will be a total loss to the United States, and this loss will aggregate nearly $13,000,000.

But, assuming for the sake of argument, that there will be no financial or political complications by purchasing the French excavations, the question remains, Is the Panama route preferable to or even as good as that through Nicaragua? It seems to me that there is good evidence that the Panama route is far from the best. The questions presented have been studied by United States engineers and naval officers, and convincing arguments against Panama have been made.

COli!P ARISON OF THE TWO ROUTES.

In his report of the problems relating to interoceanic communi- . cation by way of the American Isthmus, made by Lieut. John T . . Sullivan, U.S.N., in 1883, in response to a resolution adopted by the Senate of the United States, adopted at a time, I think, when ex-Senator Chandler was Secretary of the Navy, he reports the following disadvantages of the Panama route. This is not what I say, but what a distinguished naval officer reported to our Government:

(1) The prevailing calms of Panama Bay. (2) Want of materials for the purposes of construction. (3l The large annual rainfall. (4 Character of some of the swamp lands on certain portions of the line. (5 A doubt as to the sufficiency of the water supply at all times. . (6 The unhealthfulne£S of the country. (7) Greatly increased cost by the necessity for purchasing at a high figure

the right of way from the Panama Railroad Company. Against these disadvantages are placed the advantages of the

Nicaragua Canal, as follows: (1) It is in a favorable geo~raphical position, being in the region of the

trade winds, and is especially ravorable to the United States. (2) A canal constructed here will cost less than half as much as by any

other route.

de~!>lo I~~~~~~~'l!~ ~~':!~B~;1~~c!.es~u~ce~ a¥g!~~:~~ ~~~~~~~ of goo:f stone, but it is not suitable for dimension stone. It will answer very well for concrete. There is plenty of limestone, and the kilns now in operation produce an excellent quality of lime suitable for hydraulic works. Bamboo, which would de useful in the works connected with the restoration of Graytown Harbor, can also be obtained in the country.

(4) It offers no engineerin$ difficulties that are not easy of solution at a. moderate expense. The difficulties to be encountered are such as are met with and overcome in all engineering works of this kind.

(5) It is a. fresh-water canal, and will perform an important office in clean-ing the bottoms and boilers of vessels passing through the canal. • .

(6) It offers splendid facilities for dockage and repairs on Lake Nicaragua, and 1t is not improbable that Pa.tterson'sgrand scheme of establishing a distributing center for the commerce of the world may find its realization on the shores of Lake Nicaragua.

(7) All materials needed for the construction of the canal are close o.t: hand.

(8) All plant can be conveyed by water communication already established and for which no royalty is to be paid. Between the lake and the Pacific several passable roads exist, and wllatever other roads might be required ove1~ this short distance can be readilr made at inconsiderable cost.

(9) The mean annual rainfall1s comparatively small. (10) The important physical feature of the route is the existence of Lake

Nicaragua. It is not only capable of supplying twenty times the volume of water which the commerce of the world would re~uire in the locka~e of ves-

. ~h~fi~~~ ~~t!~~ ~t~;~~;~~It.~08~e~'lici~or2,8&~~~~i~a~~b~~! relieves the San Juan Valley from extensive floods.

THE PAN .A.M.A. ROUTE CAN NOT BE USED BY SAILING VESSELS.

These are some of the -economic advantages of the Nicaragua Canal, as set forth by an impartial officer of the United States.

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 6901 Navy. From a strictly maritime point of view, the advantages of Nicaragua are made equally plain.

Lieut. Frederick Collins, U. S. N., made, in 1880, before the Select Committee of the House of Representatives on the Oceanic Canal, the following statement relative to the winds and their relation to sailing vessels to and from the termini of the proposed Nicaragua and Panama canals:

No less person than Lieutenant Maury, "the father of the Physical Geography of the Sea," is said to have proclaimed that even if the Isthmus of Panama were to be divided by a convulsion of nature, it could never become a highway for sailing vessels on account of these unfavorable winds, calms, and currents.

It is certainly true that the prevailing meteorological conditions and oceanic currents in the vicinity of the west coast of the Isthmus of Panama are exceedingly unfavorable for either the approach or departure of sailing vessels.

In 1872 I had occasion, under directions from the Bureau of Navigation, to make a close examination of this subject, the results of which were published in Commander Selfridge's r eport of his surveys on the Isthmus. As a result of these investi~ations I was led to conclude that, comparatively speaking, no great difficulty need be experienced in getting; from the vicinity of the Bay of P anama to a place where good winds might oe found. A cons1dera ble detour from the most direct route would be necessary in most cases, it is true, but a careful computation gave only ten days as the average time that would be consumed in getting a sufficient offing to secure good winds, provided the correct route was pursued.

Now, ten days can hardly be considered a sufficiently formidable loss of time to preclude the use of the Isthmus route by sailing vessels; were it open. Indeed, in comparison of the time that would be saved on most voyages, ten days are a bagatelle. But if ten days can be saved by one Isthmus route that must be lost by another, then it becomes a matter of vital interest. And if in the comparison of two routes it can be demonstrated tha t one of them will bring our east and west coasts nearer by ten days than another, it appears to me that tllis fact alone would be sufficient to decide us in our choice.

I propose now to demonstl·ate beyond the possibility of denial, by_ a consideration of the winds and currents of the Pacific Ocean, that the Nicaragua route will. give even a greatez: gain than that as compared with Panama. or any route south of Panama on a voyage from New York or New Orleans to San Francisco.

LIEUTENANT MAURY'S SAILING DIRECTIONS.

Lieutenant Maury made an extensive examination of the subject and found that, in leaving the Bay of Panama for the North Pacific coast, a sailing ship must either proceed directly west, if the most favorable wind is found , but usually must shape her course south and make her westing south of the equator. In his sailing directions he says:

If he can get west here with a good breeze, he should crack on, and when his good wind fails him steer south again. * * * Therefore, in coming out of the Bay of Panama, and after crossing 5° north in any season, make a southwest course if the wind will allow. If the wind be southwest, brace up on the starboard tack; if it be south-southwest, stand west if -it be a good working breeze. But if it be light and baffiing, with rain, know that you are in the doldrums, and the quickest way to get clear of them is by making all you can on a due south course.

DIFFERENCE IN TIME IN FAVOR OF NICARAGUA.

Lieutenant Collins then explaiiied to the committee the courses that must be taken by sailing vessels from the western tennini of the Panama and Nicaragua canals to reach San Francisco. Comparing the distances and times, the result as given by him is as follows:

Miles. Days.

AN EMPHATIC STATEMENT.

In a letter to Captain Pim, royal navy, Lieutenant Maury has · this to say as to the comparative merits of the Panama and Nicaragua canals, still quoting Lieutenant Collins:

"The great importance of one or more good commercial highways across Central America being admitted, the whole question of route resolves itself pretty much into a question of cost of construction and facility of ingress andegre~ by sea to and from the opposite termini; the latter is an affair of winds and currents, and their influence is powerful. Panama has the advantage of land transit; Nicaragua hn.s the advantage in winds, terminal ports, and climate. The first is obvious, but to place the latter in a clear light som e little explanation is neces&'l.ry. * * * I have spoken of the calm belt about the equator. Panama is within its range. * * * It is difficult to convey to any one who has never experienced these calms an idea of the obstinacy with which they vex navigation. We are all familiar with calms at sea which last for a few hours, or even a day, but here they last for days and weeks at a time. I h ave known vessels going to or from Panama to be detained by them for months at a time. * * * On one occasion the British Admiralty, wishing to send one of their vessels into the Arctic Ocean from Panama in time to save the season, had h er towed by a steamer through this calm belt and carried 700 miles out to sea before she could find a breeze.

"These remarks apply to the approach and departure by sea to or from the Pacific terminus of any route across the Isthmus of Panama or Darien, and even with greater force to theAtrato and others on the South American side of Panama. In short, the result of my investigations into the winds and cuiTents of the sea, and their influence upon the routes of commerce, authorize the opinion which I have expressed before and which I repeat, namely: If nature, by one of her convulsionshshould rend the Continent of America. in twain and. make a channel across t e Isthmus of Panama or Darien as deep, as wide, and as free as the Straits of Dover, it would never become a commercial thoroughfareforsailingvessels, saving the outward bound and those that could reach it with leading winds. * * *

"We come now to the Nicaragua routes. * * * It is to this part of the Isthmus that we must look for a route that shall best fulfill the present requirements of commerce. * * * Vessels under canvass would in the main do the fetching and caiTying for the Nicaragua route, which for reasons already stated they can not do for Panama. The aggregate amount of this tl·ade is immense, and it is neither accommodated for Panama nor Panama for it. * * * You will observe at a glance that the Isthmus of Panama or Darien is, on account of these winds and calms, in a purely commercial point of view, the most out-of-the-way place of any part of the Pacific coast of intertropical America."

"The foregoing quotations from this eminent authority," says Lieutenant Collins, "certainly substantiate fully the deductions that I have already drawn from my own investigations. Better than that, they prove that my prejudice in favor of Nicaragua, if I have arry, has not led me to overstate the case in its favor, but that, on the contrary, in my desire to keep within indisputably safe bounds I have greatly understated 1t."

WHY SAILING VESSELS DO NOT USE THE SUEZ CANAL.

It has been claimed by some critics'that sailing tonnage would not figure appreciably in the traffic of an isthmian canal, and that in consequence the matter of winds may be disregarded in selecting the best location. This assertion is based, in the first place, on the fact that no sailing vessels, practically, have used the Suez Canal. If they will not use the canal at Suez, it is urged, they will not use an isthmian. It is a fact that no sailing vessels have passed through the Suez Canal since 1874, except during the time of the Turko-Russian war, in 18'77-78, when a few sailing ships came through from Calcutta with Indian troops. But it appears from the report of United States Consul-General Long at Cairo that there is a very good reason why.sailing vessels will not use the Suez Canal. He says:

5,350 3,240

The absence of sailing vessels in the canal is explained by the difficulties of navigation in the Red Sea. The extraordinary number of sailing vessels

37 lost in the Red Sea (which is full of dangerous reefs and shoals) during the 23 years 1872-73 seems to have effectually discouraged further attempts.

Difference in favor of Nicaragua.------------------------ 2,110 14

On the return the difference in favor of Nicaragua is not so marked, but varies from five to six days. Lieutenant Collins then says:

The foregoing figures speak for themselves. They show that a canal at Nicaragua will bring New York or New Orleans nearer to San Francisco by nineteen days than will a canal at Panama or any of the proposed routes ~f~~o~1fc~~eJ!~:1~;!;;s~~ent can be necessary to show the direc-

A comparison of routes to other ports of the Pacific, while perhaps of less importance, is so interesting that I will ask your patience while I state briefly

' the results, without going into details. To China, Manila, or J apan the difference in favor of the route from Nica

ragua over that from Panama is 800 miles and five to six days. To the Sandwich Islands the difference in favor of Nicaragua is 1,100 miles

and seven to eight days. To India, Batavia, Australia, and New Zealand the difference in favor of

Nicaragua is 400 miles and two to three days. Returning from China, Manila, Japan, or the Sandwich Islan the differ

ence in favor of Nicaragua is 600 miles and fom· to five days. Coming. now, to a comparison of routes to ports on the west coast of South

America, we rmght naturally suppose that here the Nicaraguan route would b e at a marked disadvantage as compared with Panama; but, curiously enough, such is not the case. A comparison shows that even to Valparaiso or Callao there is a difference of 200 miles and one to two days in favor of the route from Nicaragua over that from Panama. On the return from these places we find the sole instance in which the route to or from Nicaragua t-Efs~:fna f~~~ ~~~::~~-e difference being a bout 500 miles and four days,

All the foregoing distances are given in nautical miles. which contain 6,080 feet each, while the ordinary or statute mile contains but 5,280.

The fore~oing results have r eference to sailing ships and the savin~ for steamers Will not be nearly as large. amounting, in fa.ct; only to the direct distance between the two Pacific termini. This is about 650 miles, and as it would be gained both ways, it would amount in the round trip to San Francisco to a saving of 1,300 miles, which in a 10-knot steamer would be a matter of five days. ,

Thus it is evident that dangers to navigation in the Red Sea prevent sailing ships from using the short cut to the Orient, and not any disadvantages presented by the canal itself. Were it not for the difficulties of approach to and departure from the canal, it would be used as universally as it is by steam vessels.

So it would be in the case of a canal at Panama. The difficulties and dangers that would be experienced by sailing ships in the Gulf of Panama would prevent them from ever using a canal through the Isthmus at that point. So this class of tonnage would have to be eliminated from the consideration of the earnings of the enterprise. And that the loss in earnings would be very great there can be no doubt, when we consider how great a proportion of the trade of the Pacific to and from the Atlantic Stat.es and Europe is now carried in sailing ships. For the port of San Francisco alone the arrivals and departures of ocean-going sailing vessels equal or exceed those of steam vessels in the same trade.

SAILING TONNAGE OF SAN FRANCISCO.

In 1898 there were 494 arrivals of sailing ships, aggregating 530,092 tons, against 330 steam vessels, aggregating 592,865 tons; while the clearances were 419 sailing vessels, of 464,153 tons, against 331 steam vessels, aggregating 567,547 tons. In previous years the proportion of sailing vessels and tonnage is the same or· greater, so that it is safe to say that for this port (and the same can be asserted for the other Pacific ports of the United States) the sailing tonnage in foreign trade equal~ the steam tonnage. In the grain-can-ying trade of this port alone over 200 sailing vessels are employed each year, and there is no likelihood that the number will be diminished, for the sailing vessel is the most economical carrier of this kind of freight. And as wheat is carried from the Pacific coast almost exclusively to Europe, it will

6902 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JUNE 17,

be at once seen that a canal at Panama would prevent its use to fully 500,000 tons of shipping in the wheat trade alone, which would only too readidly take the short cut through a canal at Nicaragua. Taking account of other than the grain trade, it is probable that the selection of the Panama route would prevent fully 1 000,000 tons of sailing ships from using the isthmian canal. Not only would the canal lose yeaTly a very large amount in tolls, but a very considerable commerce of the world would not be benefited by the canal. Its object would be · only half accomplished.

When the great r esom·ces of our Pacific States, from Mexico to Alaska, are more fully developed; when, as in the case of California , instead of nine persons to the square mile, as we have now, the number shall have increased, as it will increase in the next decade, to twenty or thirty persons to the square mile, our products for export will double or quadruple in value, and so in that propor tion will the demand for vessels to transport our surplus to foreign countries be increased.

WRY THE SAILING VESSEL WILL STAY. 1 But it is sometimes argued, and it has been so argued upon this floor again and again, that the sailing ship is going out of use, and so need not be given much c~sideration. But those who are interested in maritime affairs lmow that the day of the sailing vessel is not yet closed, and will not be while the free winds from heaven blow to fill her sails. The ports of the world, especially those of the Pacific, are filled with the tall masts of sailing fleets. There are trades and routes from which they can not be driven, and new designs, and such class of ships, barks, and five and six masted schooners, are contributing to the maintenance of the saili:ng tonnage of the world. By means of these new designs the cost of operation is being constantly reduced and an element of economy introduced into the ocean carrying trade. With a canal through Nicaragua which could be used by such vessels, an impetus would be given to this class of ocean carriers, especially to those engaged in trade between the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of North, South, and Central America. The result would be a lower average of ocean freight rates than would be the ca~e were the Panama Canal built, excluding from this trade vessels moved by wind power, the very cheapest motive power known in the world. Commerce, therefore, would be benefited more by the Nicaragua than by the Panama route.

GREAT LOSS IF SAILING VESSELS CAN NOT USE THE CANAL.

Prof. Lewis Haupt, a member of the Isthmian Canal Commissionr is distinctly and emphatically of the opinion above set forth. Professor Haupt not only gave this phase of the question particular attention as his part of the work of the Commission, but came to it with the great advantage of having served on two previous commissions which studied the problems involved in an isthmian canal. He has been over both routes. Although he signed the report of the Isthmian Canal Commission which g-ave a verdict in favor of Panama, he did so for these reasons, as stated to the Senate Committee:

I bag leave to say that while conceding to the wishes of the majority and signing a report in order to make it unanimous, and so, if possible., to secure legislation at this session., I still feel and did then that there were certain economic, physical, engineering, sanitary, and commercial advantages inherent to the Nicaragua ronte which gave it a. decided preference over the P anama route.

In this, of course, I do not consider the cost of the concessions, nor especially the cost of constructing the canal, but I think the others are of so preponder ating weight a.s to overbalance any difference in the latter two items. The economic advantag-e is, a priori, the m ost important factor in the operation and utility of an mteroceanic waterway, and that is briefly summed up in the r eport of t h e Commission by the statemen t that the Nicaragua Canal posse&es an advan tage between home ports of one day for all north-bound commer ce-that is, wnether it b e of European or American origin, or whether it has its destination in the Orient or North Pacific ports-and for all Gulf ports it would save about two days.

I have made an estimate of that Eaving, based upon the average cost of moving vessels of abou t 3,000 t ons capacity, which I have figured at about $250 a day . Some of t h ese vessels hav e cost as high as $1,000 a day t o operat e and maintain., and som e of them a s low as $100 a day; but taking it at that average and estimating on a basis of 10,000,000 tons, of which, say, 75percent is north bound, the economy on t hat basis would amount to abou t $650,000 a. year on steam alone: But a s a large per centage would be carried by sail if this r ou te be opened, the economy would probably b e 50 per cent more, or about 1,000,000.

PANAMA AWAY F R 0::\1 THE P ATH OF COMMERCE.

Professor Haupt further testified that the Panama route is directly away from the path of commerce , or nearly at right angles to it, so that every mile of the canal is a detour from the direct line of traffic, which is-a violation of a sound engineering and economic principle, while every mile of the Nicaragua route is in the line of or is near the line of traffic as it is possible to place it. So that the differ ence in the length of the route which :is urged as an objection to the Nicaragua route :is in reality no objection whatever.

The only fault that 'I find with Professor Haupt is that he signed the majorityreport of the Isthmian Canal Commission. If I had a conviction, as I have, that th-e Nicaragua Canal route is the best and the most economical route I would do just what I am doing t~day. I would give the best reasons ' ! could why we sh ould

adopt it. I would be consistent, as I was when I fu·st espoused it twenty or thirty years ago, when I was president of the Chamber of Commerce of San Francisco. My course would be northeast until I was satisfied that some other course was the proper one to steer. I think the Professor has permitted the opportunity for a good bargain to influence him, if I may say so. He is like Mrs. Toodles, who could not go into a store without buying something if it was cheap. So I think the Professor was fascinated with the apparently cheap price at which the Panama Canal, which had cost so much money, although the work which had been done is of no practical value, could be purchased. He thought it was a great bargain, and so he permitted his convictions that the Nicaragua route was the best to be influenced by the chance of a good bargain, and he joined with the majority of the Commission in recommending its purchase because it had cost so much and we could get it so cheaply.

Mr. FAIRBANKS. If the Senator will permit me, does he think that the testimony of a man who holds such unstable opinions would be of any value upon this subject?

Mr. STEW ART. I should like to inquire, if that be so, why spend so much money on such a project as that of the Panama Canal?

Mr. FAIRBANKS. We are not proposing to spend this money upon his present opinion.

TONNAGE EQUALLY DIVIDED BETWEEN SAIL AND STEAM.

Mr. PERKINS. In answer to my friend from Indiana, I would say if nature has not given us in the Nicaragua route all these gTeat advantages, why is it that my friend from Indiana and so many of his associates try to raise so many objections against it and urge us to buy the Panama Canal route, a scheme which was conceived in iniquity? As to the work that has been done there, it is of no practical benefit whatever, so far as the construction of a canal is concerned. I will show later on, I think, if figures amonnt to anything, that it iB an impracticable thing to build a dam there. We can damn the proposition, but whether we can damtheChagressuccessfullyandhavealakethatwillremainthere during the dry season and will not wash away in the wet season is a question.

As to the total tonnage of the United States, Professor Haupt states that it is about equally divided between sail and steam, so that to benefit ocean commerce to the greatest extent the canal must be suited to the use of both kinds of ocean transportation. He confirm.s the opinion given above that the sailing ship will hold its own because of the greater economy in operating them, and instances as proof of this the rapid increase of large six and seven masted vessels of schooner rig.

I want to say to my distinguished friend from Indiana that to a layman- and I only speak from a layman's standpoint-his conclusions remind me very much of decisions I have heard rendered in courts. The judges reasoned splendidly; their arguments were all on my side of the case, but when they drew their conclusions they decided against me. Their arguments were good, but they decided differently from the way they reasoned. So it seems to me with P rofessor Haupt ~n this case. He reasons splendidly for the Nicaragua route, but he signs, with the majority of the Commission, on the other side.

THE ROUTE OF A SAILING VESSEL FROM PANAMA.

The Atlantic Refining Company, of Philadelphia, proposes to carry its oil in sailing vessels. Coal and all cheap material needed in manufactures are carried in this way, and will doubtless always be. For all of this traffic the Panama Canal would be prohibitory, for the reasons before set forth. In discussing this phase of the quostion Professor Haupt called attention to the fact that a sailing vesse1 going out of Panama Bay in order to m ake the best time to San Francisco would have to sail south to or near the Gallapagos Islands, on the equator, then west 1,500 miles in order to take advantage of winds and currents.

I want to say to my friend from Indiana that I have been becalmed in the doldrums about 5° south of the equator for six. weeks, when there was not wind enough there to fill the sails , and we brailed them up in their gaskets to the mast. For six weeks we remained there in the doldrums, as I have said, with hardly a reath of air, certainly with not enough wind to creato what we call a cat's-paw, with the water as smooth as gla s.

It has been statad to me by r esidents of P ana.ma-Professor Haupt testified, confirmed by the consular reports, in

which it is printed-that v essels hav e been longer in gettin$ out of tho bay and reachin~ t heir port of destination-Valparaiso or San .t<'ranc:isco-t han the time reqmred to sail from New York via Cape H orn.

He said the usual time iB two or three weeks getting out of the bay, and he related an experience of the captain of the Pacific Mail steamer Golden Eagle, who, on leaving Panama, passed a sailing vessel 40 miles from that port, bound in, and after making the round trip to San F rancisco and back, found the same vessel, on his return, still10 miles from Pan~ma, and still bound in.

1902: OONGRESSIONtAL. REOQRD~NATE .. 6903 HUNDREDS Oll! MILES OF TOWING PROPOSED.

Tbwing would. not bring with· it any advantage, for even, to tow a sailing vesser outside of Panama Bay would require twice the towage needed through.th8" Nicaragua Canal, and then she would not be in a position to catch favoring tides and omTents. If · such.. vessel were towed 130 or 150 miles from Panama, m~king the length of towage equal to that through the Nicaragua Canal, it wa -asked by Senator HARRIS-if this extra towing would not be. sufficient to . get the vessel out to sea, to which Professor Haupt replied :

ternational Commissionl composed of_14 engineers of world-wide reputation from France, Germany, England~ Russia, Colombia, and the United States, agreed upon a :plan for the. formation of a lake. at Bohio. This lake was to be ma-de by. the construction ofan earthen dam 1,286 feet long. and a .maximum height above the surface of the river of 67 feet, impounding a lake of 21-! square miles. The extreme heighb from the bottom of the. foundation was fixed at 93-! feet. In this plan it·was proposed to have a second dam at a higher level atAlhajuela, .to serve as a. first regulator of the Chagres floods, and to _prevent them from entering_ Bohio Lake furiously, as the '' total volume of the fre hets would certainly produce currents detrimental" and.dangerous- to navigation."

That is true in part, and yet when the -vessel . gets 100 to 150 milesc out she has not got as good winds or as fa1'ara.ble cUI'Tents as- if she were at Brito, some 1m or 400 miles farther, because all the time that she is-being tow-ed she is moving southwardly or away from the line of her traffic and must sail back if northbound. The geographic position is such that it is a detour WHAT E~T ENGINEERS TIITh"K. which ought to be a1'oided, and this is possible by the other route. I think" The omission of the dam at Alliajuela would necessitate the-that covers the question raised by Senator HARRIS as to the -physical condi- t . h . tions with this closing rema.rk

1 that inasmuch as we -are building·a canal for increase of several me ers more m eight [of the Bohio Dam], a scheme nnan

all classes of ve sels, that the ractor of using sail ought to be very carefully imously looked upon as overbold. considered, and in thatrespectTbelieve ·frrmly that the Nicaragua Canal is Again, in. ano.ther part of the report., the. commissioners state greatly preferable to one at-Panama: that-

Under such conditions:of navigatiorr, it can readily be seen by this solution (of a second dam] is the only one meeting the conditions-for those least experienced in nautical affairs that no sailing- ship· ~~~!iJe::3 ~;b~~!L without giving . the Bohio Dam such proportions- as would venture the passage by the Panama Canal. The. Bay of Panama would kill this ti·affic for the canal•as sm·ely. as the Red= And again! Sea has killed it fur ·the canal at-Suez. I submit: that· there is no Considering the impartance of that structure in relation to tlie &'tfety of· economl·c consi'deration whi'ch has been or can be raised in con- the canal itself, it was deemed that here, more than anywhere elSe, it; was

necessary to be. very cautious, and consequently the maximum elevation of 20 nection with the choice of routes for an isthmian canal which meters (65:5 feet) was fixed uponasthat of thelev~lof the lake to be foi"Dl.ed would J·ustify the Congress of the United States in deliberately by the building of the Bohio Dam. * * * Such is. the result to which we

· f · l h lf f_ are led in considering direct feeding through the. Chagres if we do not wislir choosing a route which would dl'lve rom1tnearyone- a o indeterminirrgthepi·op:ortionstobegiventothemainst'ructureofthatpla.n, the t-raffic. which. is waiting to take advantage of a canal, and to deviatefromtheprudentruleswhich thecommissionconsiderasabsolute. which could and would use the alternative route. In the light of this report of 14 of the most eminent engineers

THE ENGINEERING PROBLEM. of Europe and:.America; can not the plan of' the United States Considering the two canal routes from the point of view of Isthmian Canal Commission be. considered· too bold? Is there not

the engineering p1ublems presente.d. and the manner in which it room to question the · soundness of their decision and an opporis proposed to solve them, the conclusion is inevitable that the tunity given for the entrance of doubt as to the stability of the · Nicaragua route should be selected by the United States. Where dam propose<f by it at Bohio, and its efficacy at all times·should grave doubt exists as to the efficacy of the plans- adopted for one it stand?· route, while there ie- acknowledged' to be absolute certainty in TH» nomo DAM Too noLD A SOHEME:

the case of the other, there can, it seems to me, be no hesitation In the first pla-ce, the United States Commission has increased. in choosing the route from which the. element of doubt is·elimi- the length·of the dam from 1,286 feet· to 2,54.6 ,feet: has raised its nated. crest from 67feet to 100 feet, and' its totallieightfrom the ·bottom·

It is- acknowledged that the Bohio Dam is the vital point of the of the. foundation ~from 93! feet to 228-feet, while the. pressure of Panama. CanaL It is absolutely necessary in order to obtain a. water against it is-raised'ft·om about- 65· feet- to 92 feet. Here is· supply of water for. na.:vigation. It therefore should be con- a. structure which indeed the commission of engineers woula· unstructed in such a manner as to render it safe beyond· the shadow doubtedly condemn as far· '' too bold.'' Not. only is the limit of of a doubt, and to do this considerations of economy should not perfect safety in height above river level, as established by them, be too closely regarded. It is evident that in the case of'the exceeded'by 49 'per cent and the depth of water by 37-percent, Conchuda Dam~f the Nicaragua route the Commission. has not but the length of dam is doubled, making- the pressure ·of water done so. The dam there proposed is built of stone on a rock against it 2.74:times-as- great. And: to retain this· great lake an foundation and firmly anchored by running it 200 feet or more earthen.dam is-proposed of-proportions which.eminentengineers intu the hills on each side. The site selected. by tlie Nicaragua condemn. as "too bold," wliile at Conchnda a solid stone dam, Canal Commissioners at Boca San Carlos was condemned· by the firmly -anchored in abutting hills, is· required· to hold in check Isthmian Commission for the reason that at-that site the· greatest simply a pool less than a third as wide and not so deep. Besides, depth of rock. upon which the dam.ioundationmust be laid was 120 this, · in the case of the Bohio Dam. 310 feet_ of the core must tie

1 feet. At the Conchuda Dam the greatest depth.is-82 feet. " This laid by the pneumatic process at a depth-of 128 feet below the sea question of depth of foundation,'' says the Isthmian Commission, level, a depth not hitherto attempted, . I am informed. There is ''is very imnortant, because the foundations will probably have to thus a doubt as to the ability to lay at this depth a structure of ·be placed by the pneumatic process, and the depth (82 feet) is such a character as to meet all the requirements of-the oase. well within that at which the foundations of many bridge piers And mor.e than this. It is very doubtful whether the Boliio have been built by the same method." I think that this dam, Dam, as planned by the Isthmian Commission, will, even if sa tisconstructed as planned by the Iethmian Commission, will be ex- factory as to strength and durability; accomplished what is exposed to no danger of injury from any cause; but I do not think pected of · it. It will be remembered' that the commission of the Bohio Dam can be so considered. engineers :r;nade a second dam at Alhajnela a necessary-part of'

THE Bomo·n.A.M. the plan of a llike at Bohio. In this, says the commission-In the first place, the Commission says that " for rea-sons- of would be stored the volume of water necessary for the water supply and

economy " an earth dam has been seleeted for Bohio. As it is· operations of the canal during periods of deftciency in the natural output of the Chagres, and that portion of the excess of the freshets which must be

even more vitally necessary to Panama than the Conchuda Dam retained in order to restrict the oscillation of Bohio Lake to its strictly is to Nicaragua, from the fact that it collects the necessary water, necessary limit, and thus avoid too. great fluctuations of its surface. while the Con.chuda Dam simply regulates-an ah·eady inexhausti- A SEco~"D RESERvom 1\"l!:CESSARY. ble supply, it is hard to see why economy should be exercised in The United States·Isthmian Canal Commission, while omitting its case and not in the other, unless for the purpose of making a the-second reservoir from its plan, has in view its contingency, favorable showing. fur the Panama route. The Bohio Dam is- and acknowledgeS: that it will be necessary when the traffic of the twice as long as that at Nicaragua and 85 per cent higher: mak- canal exceeds 10,000,000 tons per ye.ar. Even our own. Commising. its-vertical section 3.70 times as large. If the Panama. Dam sion, the1·efore, states-that at some time this second big dam must were constructed' of the same material as that at Nicaragua, it be built at Alhajuela., while the European and American experts would cost $15,000,000, even if the clam itself were no thicker. contend that it must be constructed at the same time as the Bohio Being higher and1Ionger, safety would demand thicke1· masonry, Dam, in order to insm·e unimpeded n..1.vigation of the canal. That and its cost would thereby be increased". If it were made only 20 it must be built, therefore, is ce.rtain, the only question being per cent thicker, the total cost would be $18,000,000, which would that of date. Its cost, in consequence, must be taken into account wipe out the difference in cost-in.Ia.vor. of the Panama route and in estimating the tota~ cost of the canal· to the United. States. make ·the cost of the Nicaragua Canal less than that of Panama No estimate is- given· by the Isthmian Commission, but as that by a round $6,000,000. ·body advises a stone dam it is probable that its cost wilL be at

But an earth dam having been determined upon, let us- see least thatof the structure at Conchuda, or over $4,000,000.' By whether it is as satisfactory as it importance in connection with •that sum, then, .must. the cost of the canal to the United States· the ·canal demands. be increased, and still further augmented-by the cost o£ a rai.h-oad\

The TechnioaLCommission, which~ made exhaustive studies-of 1to the site of' the. dam, which, at $75,000 J?er mile, would cost the problem for the New Panama<0anal Company, and the:-In-- '$750,000, ora total of $5,000,000 ' for"the.adilitional 'water supply

6904 CONGRESSIONAL REOORD-SENA'fE~ JUNE 17,

Added to this must be the cost of additional lands required for the Bohio Dam and spillway, which the Isthmian Commission in its report of January 18 says are necessary. The estimated cost of these lands is not given, but will of necessity be considerable an9- must bo added to the cost of the Panama Canal as given bv the Commission. w

Mr. President, I might go on and give my own views and experience in the constnlCtion of dams for the storage of waters, for I have had some very considerable experience in that line, but I deem it much better to offer the testimony of these experts, who have given this subject-matter their personal and careful consideration, than to criticise their mode of constructing a dam and discuss the probability of its being able to withstand the great freshets and the great fall of water from the heavens in that country. MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION UNCERTAIN .AS TO THE FE.A.SIBILITY OF THE

BOHIO D.A.M. The opiilion as to the uncertainty attending the construction of

the Bohio Dam is borne out by the testimony of the members of the Isthmian Canal Commission before the Senate Committee on Interoceanic Canals. Admiral Walker gave evidence that everything, so far as a canal is concerned, depends on the stability and efficiency of that dam. Here is an extTact from the testimony on that poirit:

Senator liA..RRIS. Mr. Morjson not only objects to the cost, but he has some apprehenffion with regard to the construction of the dam [at Bohio]. He says It involves "novel and untried features. Few enrvneers even among

~~~th:~~~k1 !.~~jh£[ Jg;fe~ c~~t~c~tl~u~~nr~ cK~e~ro: ~~1a¥~: climate and other surroundings are enormous."

Admiral W .A.LKER. Ye ; it will be a difficult work. Senator HARRIS. He also speaks in another place in this article of the ex

treme difficulty of getting the work of the caissons at the bottom and making the foundation water-tight. In fact, he says here, "The design involves the extension of pneumatic work to unprecedented depths, involving special details in making the joints between the caissons," and it is owing to his doubt, apparently, of the success of the work that he strongly recommends the other plan.

Admiral WALKER. I think he agreed that the work could be done, but he thought there would be a large savin~ of money in building a different style of dam, and that the style of dam which he advocated would be a sufficiently good one. It was a question of seepag6--{)f how much water would go under the earth dam which was proposed by the French engineers and that which is proposed by Mr. MoiTison, whether enough would go under to make it dangerous. .

Senator HARRIS. The fact is with regard to the Bohio dam that the futm·e of that is just as much an unknown quantity as the future of the dam at Conchuda? .

Admiral W .A.LKER. I should say it was more of an uncertain feature. It is a greater work and a more difficult work to build. The Conchuda dam I look upon as practically settled.

Senator H.A.RRIS. So that we know no more about the possibilities and contingencies at Bohio than we do at Conchuda; in fact, less? ·

Admiral W .A.LKER. We know less about the contingencies at B<>hio, but that is the only point in the whole line about which we are at all uncertain.

Senator HARRIS. But that is the vital point. Admiral WALKER. That is the vital point. Yes, it is vital to the canal,

because the safety of the canal depends on the integrity of the dam in both cases. * * * I know of nothing along the Panama line which is not well within engineering precedents with the exception of the dam at Bohio, which is a very large work and would have to be carefully considered.

THE CONCHUD.A. D.A.M IS SAFE AND PRACTICABLE. From this evidence before the committee it thus appears that

Admiral Walker considers the Conchuda Dam, on the Nicaragua route, as practically settled. No question regarding its safety or efficacy can be raised. But it is wholly different in the case of the one vital point on the Panama route-the Bohio Dam. Engineer Morrison, a member of the Commission, intimates that few engineers feel that they could construct it, but that if undertaken the difficulties would be enormous. .As an alternative he proposed a dam of a type which the Commission regarded unsafe. So these two advocates of the Panama route can not agree on a practicable and safe dam for that route.

A.nd here another member of the Commission testified as to the difficulties if not impracticability of the Bohio Dam. Professor Haupt, before the Senate committee, emphasized the importance of this dam to the canal, stating that the integrity of the entire line depends on the ability to build and maintain it. But he had grave doubts as to the possibility of doing so, pointing out the fact that the experience in sinking caissons in bridge work 110 feet, which it is claimed has been done, gave no ground for belief that a concrete wall could be laid at a depth of 128 feet. The character of the work to be done is entirely different, as he thus explained before the Senate committee:

CHARACTER OF WORK .AT BOHIO. Mr. H.A.UPT. A bridge pier is usually composed of only one isolated struc

ture placed upon bed rock or other suitable material, whereas in this case there are a series of those structures which must be placed in juxtaposition" and then the space between them outside of this bell or caisson must be fillea in and made impermeable. Otherwise the dam will leak at the bottom under the pressure, and that is the serious part of this question.

These caissons are supposed to be pl!tced as nearly contiguous as possible, and then the spaces between them are filled in by "fillers," or what might be called dowels, set in grooves between the caissons. If the grooves do not come exactly opposite, there is difficulty in getting those spaces closed, and the whole space between the ends of the abutting caissons must be filled thoroughly with concrete or impermeable material, although concrete is not

·entirely impermeable. * * *

In the drawings shown for the Bohio Dam, in studying it critically recently, I noticed the caissons are notshownasgoingentirelyto rock through their whole base, but one edge of them only rests upon the rock and the other edge on sand.

Senator H.A. WLEY. When you speak of rock do you mean granite? Mr. HAUPT. It is the kind of rock met at that particular place; the borings

show h~d rock. I do not remember the character of it. It may b e a hard limestone. The caissons must be sunk farther really than the depth to the surface of the rock, because if one edge touches on the edge of a slo;pin~ rock ~~~~u~~ f>:ee~~:~~~ and the whole bed be leveled off for the ent J.re ength

Senator H.A.RRIS. Do you mean to say that the Commission did not provide for an excavation to level bearings of each caisson?

Mr. HAUPT. That is what the drawings show. I was surprised to find it so. In the case of the Panama Dam it is not1 as it is in this case at Nicaragua wh~re the caissons are shown.as pene~ating the line of rock throughout ~heir whole lengths; bnt at Boh1o the prmt shows that the bottom line is half m rock and half in earth. Of course that would be a failure, and it is probably an oversight on the part of the draftsmen which has escaped the criticism of the committee having it in charge. I presume, however, that the estimates are based upon the sinking of those caiSSons into the rock and the leveling off of the bed for a bearing.

Senator FOSTER. Are there any such unknown or uncertain elements en· tering into the construction of the Nicaragua route?

Mr. HAUPT. No; there are not. Senator HARRIS. There really is no point alon~ the entire Nicaragua

route-no qu~stiOD; which is.not well within the limitation of ordinary, you may say, engmeermg experience?

Mr. HAUPT. That is correct; yes, sir. There are three possible dam sites, either of which would be better than that one, on the Nicaragua route. Each dam site is better than that. The San Carlos dam site is better and so is that at Ochoa; so is the present Conchuda, and it is possible by further boring that we may find a still better site.

INSUFFICIENT D.A.T.A. .AT BOHIO. Professor Haupt read to the committee the final report of the

Commission, a description of the borings made at Bohio, which shows that sufficient data was not secured as to the physical conditions of the foundation on which the dam must rest, lack of which data intl:oduces an element of uncertainty that, added to the defective structure of the core-wall foundation, will condemn the Commission's plan in the eyes of any impartial engineer.

It is essential- · Says Professor Haupt-

that the gorge be absolutely sealed by this core wall, and that involves the fundamental idea that the foundations shall be so placed on solid rock as to prevent seepage.

This fundamental idea has been carried out at Conchuda, but not at Bohio.

Mr. Morison, in his testimony before the Senate committee, acknowledged that there were uncertainties in regard to the practicability of the Bohio Dam as planned by the Commission.

If- •

He said-you come right to the facts, I do not consider that the so:Wtion of the dam given by the Commission was the wisest one.

NEW .AND UNTRIED PROBLEMS. Colonel Hains, in his testimony, speaking of the Bohio Dam, in

answer to the question whether he thought the dam as planned by the Commission a safe one, said:

I do not think that the question of the best type of dam for that place has been definitely settled. * * * You see these borings came in v ery late, and we got up that plan for that dam; but before any dam is built down there I suppose the engineer that undertakes it would want to take a thousand more bormgs.

Senator HARRIS. I have one more general question that I wish to ask you. Is there any engineering work on the Nicaragua line that is not easily within the limits of present engineering experience and knowledge?

Colonel HAINs. On the Nicaragua? Senator HARRIS. Yes. Colonel HAINS. I think not. Senator HARRIS. There is no work there, either in the way of dains or

locks or cuts, that involves any new and untried problems? Colonel HAINs. No, sir. Senator KITTREDGE. Is there on the Panama? Colonel HAINs. I don't think there is in Panama unless it is this dam. Senator H.A.RRIS. Well, I thought we ha d discussed that, and I will put

the additional question and refer to what Mr. Morison says. Mr. Morison thought it involved "new and untried problems," the construction at this dam.

Colonel H.A.INS. Yes. Senator liA..RRIS. And you agree with that? Colonel HAINS. Yes; I agree with that. Colonel Ernst, in his testimony, said that the Conchuda Dam

as planned by the Commission '' is a much easier dam to build and a better dam than the Bohio Dam."

General Abbott testified that the plan of the Commission for the Bohio Dam "approaches the limits of uncertainty."

Whatever more evidence there may be as to the uncertainty surrounding the practicability of the Bohio Dam as planned by the Commission, it seems to me that sufficient evidence has been adduced from members of the Commission itself to render it certain that the Congress of the United States should not adopt tho Commission's recommendation. On the other hand, there can bo found, I think, no word of criticism of the plan proposed for tho Conchuda Dam. It is practicable and safe, presenting no engineering work that is not within the experience of engineers. With this evidence before the Senate I do not see how it can select the Panama route. Common prudence will forbid it from investing nearly $200,000,000 of the people·s money in an undertaking

1902. CO-NGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 6905 where the vital part of the work presents so much uncertainty and fails even to inspire confidence in those who planned it.

STE.AMSIDPS CAN GO THROUGH THE NICARAGUA CANAL UNDER THEIR OWN STEAM.

An effort has been made to show that the Nicaragua Canal as planned would be less available for shipping tlian that at Panama on account of more curves and sharper curvatures. But Admiral Walker, when questioned by the Senate committee, testified that there would be no differ ence between the routes in this respect. Vessels can pass through both canals without difficulty, as appears from the following testimony:

Senator H ANNA. Do you think that any large ship-the maximum-sized ship-operating in this canal could go around these bends without the aid of a tug? I mean steamship or otherwise.

Aamh·al W ALK.ER. I think they would go without a tug by both canals. Senator HANN .A.. Could they make all the turns? Admiral W .A.LKER. I think so. Senator H ANNA. Suppose the wind was blowing pretty hard? -Admh·al W .A.LKER. If there was a strong breeze, it might occasionally

cause some trouble. By the Nicaragua line there would at times be a considerable current from the lake to the Conchuda Dam; with a strong wind blowing and a strong current they might have difficulty without a tug, but under ordinary circumstances I think they would go through without diffi-

culty . · D'd t C · · k t his · f Senator HARRIS. 1 no the omm1ss1on wor ou t question o cur-vature in detail in such a manner as to show clearly that no curvature is estimated in this work which would involve any difficulty in a vessel passing through ther e? .

Admiral W .A.LKER. I think there are no curves that would involve any particular difficulty ordinarily. Of course, with a strong wind blowing or with a strong current, a lar~e ship might get into some trouble.

Senator HARRIS. That might happen anywhere on either route. Admiral W .A.LKER. Yes; but both routes are practically good enough for

steamers to pass through with their own power. •

DIFFERENCES OF CURVATURE IN THE CANALS.

Although in the matter of curvatures there is a considerable difference in favor of Panama, thi-s difference is equalized on the Nicaragua route by making the canal wider at the turns. Admiral Walker testified that this widening was made in every case. He also stated that there is one curve on the Panama route that is sharper than any on the Nicaragua route. But as planned, according to the Isthmian Commission, a vessel can go through the Nicaragua Canal as safely and as easily as it can through that at Panama. On this score there can be no choice between the two routes. This is the opinion of the Commission. In this connection it must be remembered that on the Nicaragua route there are only 73.78 miles of canalization against 36.41 at Panama, the rest of the route being slack-water river navigation for 39.37 miles and 70.51 miles of lake navigation. The slack water of the river, whose channel is straightened by cutting through points of land, is really an arm of the lake through which there is discharged 76,000 to 63,000 cubic feet of water per second against an average annual discharge of only 3,200 cubic feet per second for the Panama Canal. With twenty times as much water over the San Juan arm of the lake as is available for the Panama Canal, and with unlimited water in the lake itself, it is easily seen that the navigation of 110 miles of the Nicaragua route will be virtually only a part of the voyage, and that comparison with Panama is possible-only 73.78 miles against 36.41 miles for Panama-considering the 13 miles through Lake Bohio .as lake navigation. But, as before stated, the Com,mission is of the opinion that there is no ground for choice between the two routes on this score.

SOME MISLEADING DATA.

There have been introduced as an argument in favor of the Panama route the replies of navigators to a set of questions purporting to give conditions to be met with in navigat ing the two canals as planned. When we consider the nature of the data on which the questions were based, not much wonder may be felt at the character of the answers, for the data in the two most important cases were misleading, unintentionally no doubt, but still misleading. These ship captains were asked concerning the difficulties of navigating the Nicaragua Canal, with "over ten curves more than twice as sharp as those on the Panama route." Now, a curve that is twice as sharp as another is one which has only one-half the radius, which is a very serious matter, and it'Can not occasion surprise if the ship captains chose the ten curves with twice the radius of the short ones. But the fact is that the shortest curves on the Nicaragua route are not by any m eans twice as sharp as the sharpest on the Panama line, leaving out of consideration the curve from the harbor at Colon, which is by far the sharpest on either line.

L eaving this out of the case, then, the shortest curve on the Panama route is found to be of 6.243 feet radius, while the shortest on the Nicaragua route is 4,045 feet, approximately two-thirds of the radius of the Panama curve. The sharpness of the curves thus stand to each other in the proportion of three-thirds for Panama to two-thirds for Nicaragua, which makes the Nicaragua curve just one-third sharper than the Panama instead of twice as sharp. Thus, the actual curvature being in the proportion of four-siXths instead of three-sixths, the captains were questioned

upon the basis of a curvature just 25 per cent sharper than actually exists.

Now, there are nine more curves of under 6,000 feet radius, running from 4,175 to 5,927 feet on the Nicaragua route, all of greater radius than that referred to above, to be compared with .this short curve on the Panama route, so that the error of data becomes progressively more flagrant as we proceed through the canal. In fact, the proposition placed before the captains is so widelymisleading that the answers that they gave on the comparative difficulties of navigation have no material bearing on the condit ions as they will exist when the canal is constructed.

WHY THE EVIDENCE OF CERTAIN N.A. VIG.A.TORS IS NOT CONCLUSIVE.

On another very important point the data piaced before them was equally misleading. Here is the question that was asked them:

Consider both canals open and yourself bound from New York to San Francisco in a sailing ship, using the Nicaragua Canal you would have to be towed through the entire·length-187 miles.

Through the Panama Canal you would also be towed 47 miles. By keepin~ your tug which would take you through the Panama Canal and letting it ww you st1·ajght out to sea 140 miles, you are out of the calm belt and have wind, having towed the same distance only as you would to have gotten through the Niearagua Canal. ·

In view of all t he conditions, winds, curves, calms, etc., governing each route, which canal would you use.

The answers are unanimously for Panama.. But are the conditions fairly stated here? I respectfully sub

mit that the evidence is that when you get 140 miles away from Panama you are no more likely to catch a breeze than you are at Panama itself, where, in the days of the stampede to the California gold diggings, passengers on sailing ships in Panama harbor saw steamers leave on the run to San Francisco and return therefrom before they could find wind enough to start on their journey to the land of gold. LieutenantMam·y states, regarding the calms within whose range Panama lies , that he has known vessels going to or from Panama to be detained by them for m :mths at a time. He says, as previously stated:

On one occasion the British Admiralty, wishing to send one of their vessels bto the Arctic Ocean from Panama. in time to save the season, had her towed by a steamer through this calm belt and carried 700 miles out to sea before she could find a breeze.

It is evident that the captains, in answering the above questions, assumed when it was erroneously said that they would find "wind " 140 miles out that a fair wind up the coast was meant. This, however, is practically never found. As will be seen· from Lieutenant Maury's sailing directions, the only two courses open are to sail south-usually to the equator-about 600 miles, and then work westward for about a thousand more. Under such circumstances it is easy for even a landsman to see that there is no ground whatever to choose the Panama instead of the Nicaragua route, as from Brito a sailing ship is almost sure to at once catch a breeze and bear away on her course. You know, Mr. President, that there the trade winds prevail, and in this longitude, for certain seasons of the year, those winds blow continuously, and the vessel at that point receives the trade winds. The answersof the captains, therefore, to these hypothetical questions must be taken with as many grains of salt as exist in the element on which they make their living.

Mr. HARRIS. Will the Senator from California allow me? Mr. PERKINS. Certainly. Mr. HARRIS. I will state that the chart submitted by the

Hydrographic Bureau shows clearly the state of facts which the Senator from California suggests, that the hundred and forty miles towage would practically amount to nothing in reaching the trade winds.

Mr. PERKINS. I will say to the Senator that before he came into the Senate I read the sailing directions which were given by Lieutenant Maury, author of the theory of winds and currents of the ocean and a world-wide acknowledged authority upon the subject-matter. I think, as the Senator has stated, there can be no question as to the correctness of the position which he takes.

HEALTHFULNESS OF THE TWO ROUTES.

As to the healthfulness of the two routes thm:e seems to be no room to question the very great superiority of Nicaragua. In its r eport the Commission did not indicate a preference, contenting itself with calling attention to the fact that during work on the maritime canal in Nicaragua the health of the working force was good, while the mortality at Panama was notorious. Colonel Hains testified that in regard to sanitary conditions the advantages are decidedly in favor of Nicaragua. Mr. Noble also thought that the advantages would be on the side of Nicaragua. Admiral Walker said that people would be more likely to contract sickness on the Panama line because th e Isthmus has been a highway for hundreds of years, while on the Nicaragua route there have been practically no inhabitants. The consensus of opinion on this point is clearly and emphatically in favor of Nicaragua, and, as has been testified by engineers, the question of healthfulness of climate has a .. very important bearing on the cost of the work. There can be no question about the fact that

6906 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE .. JuNE 17,_

because of the· health cond'itioru; the canal at Panama will cost fl·om 25 to 50 per cent more than at Nicaragua.

Irr respect to miiita:ry advantages I do not think there cau be any question as to the superiority of the Nicaragua route. This is acknowledged by Colonei Ha.iru!, wh"O points out- the fact that it is the horler line between the two coasts of the United States.

In industrial ami commercial value Colonel Hains- is also of the opinion that Nicaragua has: the advantage. In this opinion I think everyone will concur, for it is well known that there is an opportunity- for- development of a large and rich adjacent country, under favorable clima..tic conditions, whereas the condition of the Isthmus of Panama, after the years during which it has been a highway of travel, is practically no better developed than when. it was a possession of Spain.

T.HE QUESTION OF TIME OF CONSTRUCTION.

Another advantage of the Nicaragua route, as planned, is the time necessary for construction-only eight years against ten for Panama-with the chances in fa-vor of reducing the time on the former route and none on the latter, where the conditions to be met are as fully known as is possible in advance of further actual work. The Commission has figured vm·y closelyon Panama, but very liberally on Nicaragua. The chances of a reduction of time for the latter are far greater than for the former. · In fact, all th-e greatest difficulties of the Nicaragua route are known~ but it is. doubtful if, in spite of all the work done at Panama, all difficulties of that route hacve been realized. This· is a point which has been. raised by Mr. Lyman E. Cooley, the. eminent engineer who constructed the Chicago drainage canal, and who has personally examined both. isthmian routes. He puts- the situation very tersely~ I consider 1t!r-. Lyman K Cooley one of the best engineering. authorities in this: or any other. country. The Chicago drainage canal, to my mind, is one of the great achievements of this- generation. The work has gone along quietly, with no display, with ru> talk, and.ye.t the economy with which it has been done and the stability with which the canaJ.. has.. been constructed conferthe highest encomiums upon those who have directed its work. 1\fr-. Cooley-says-:

And there is another element of doubt also as to. whether the Frenchmen Jmye not been up against! a..rea.} problem as to whetherit really was all stea.l and allincompetence, and whether Americans are at least twice. as honest and twice as competent, or three times as honest and three times as competent, or somewhere in that ratio. It depends on where you draw the line as to honesty and competency: between Americans and Fren.chmen.

If, in the aggregate, an .Americall! in honesty_and competency be worth SIX Frenchmen, then the last e::;tima te stands. If he is only worth four, you have· got to add: 50 per cent [to time and costl.

MORE OF l'i'IC.A.RAOUA'S ADVANTAGES .•

Another- advantage of the Nicaragua route- is the greater likelihood that material reductions. in cost of construction can be made th-ere than on the Panama route, owing to the extremely liberal estimates which the Commission has made and the greater numbm· of points where in future-reduced expenditures may on further examination be found possible.

Still another ad-vantage of the Nicaragua route is the lower lift of the lacks·, the highest on this route being 37 feet against 45 at Panama, the latter being not only beyond engineering precedents, according to Professor Haupt, but exposed to greater deterioratiorr if constructed. Besid-es tliis, two 45-foot locks in a. flight, making a practically continuous lift of 90 feet, would be far more liable to injury from earthquakes th-an tlie single lower lifts on the Nicaragua route.

The Commission estimates that the cost of maintenance of the Nicaragua Canal will be $1,300,000 per year more than that of Panama. But with this estimate Professor Haupt does not-agree. He testified before the Senate committee that the difference-would not exceed $n00,000. But it is probable that this excess can be materially reduced, as it would undoubtedly be found necessary to add to the eXl)enses incident to the. Panama route the interest on an entirely new set of ho pi tal buildings, as it is not probable that competent American physicians and surgeons would consent to place new patients in the existing structures, which are, and for years have been, infected with yellow and pernicious malarial fe-ver. The extravagance of the police--department is obvious. This is placed at $308,300 per annum at Nicaragua and $251,000 a.t· Panama, a difference. in favor of Pana.ma of $257,200, or more than one-half. All the figure& given are increased by a 20 per cent contingency. Adding- this to the· Nicaragua estimate of $008,300, we have furpolice at Nicaragua $609,960 annually. In the Philippines each United States soldier (including officers) is estimated to co t $1,500 pel: annum, and the cost at Nicaragua shuu..1d be rather-smaller than greater. On this cost the Nicaragua route will need 406 police force! An. energetic roam. would guarantee, I think, an. efficient se1'vice with 75 men-50 on eastern and 25. on western di-vision-in time of peace. fu war time an. army might be needed to aid at either route.

THE ARGUMENT D.A.SED ON COST OF MAJNTENANCE.

This, I think, is-a fair sample of, to say the least, the very-liberal estimates of the Commission as to the cost of maintenance.

That they are liberal, indeed, for the Nicaragua Canal is eviden.t. from the letter of Mr. Cooley, which waa read here the other day by Senator TUR..."'f..ER~ Mr. Cooley states-and the statistics given by him are convincing-that the cost of maintenance would, on a liberal estimate, vary from $1,100,000 to $1,500,000 per year,. or less than one-half the Commission's estimates.

But even assuming that the difference in maintenance is $1,300~000 in favor of Panama, should it be considered an argument in fa-vor of that route? I think. not for the reason that. from the Panama route are barred all sailing vessels, which could and wouTd use the Nicaragua route. What this means is clearly set forth by Mr. Cooley in his testimony before the Senate committee. He there said;

We will assume that a vessel can steam 3,000 miles for a dollar a ton. That is about the way: of re.ekoning-it when rates- are running normally. On long routes it is something better than that. On a sailing route between San Francisco and Liverpool or Portland and Liverpool on wheat it is, say, a third of a mill per ton per mila If you can s::~.ve 50:> miles, you save a sixth of a dollar on. every ton of· freight tli::o.t is going throug-h there. If it is 7,000,-000tons, tha..t is ,200,000a.year. Now1;youhavegot $10,.000,000capital to your credit on account of saving thls 500 mJ.les, and you have. got Sl,200,000 a year in saving on the total traffic on the cost of running it by the shorter route. This is an offset against. the excessive estimates for cost of operation and maintenance.

It is perfectly clear that the extra tonnage gained through sailing vessels would, in tolls, moxe than make up for the difference in maintenance of the Nicaragua Canal, while the direct gain to commerce would be- immense. The low rate by sailing ves el via Nicaragua would develop to an enormous extent the trade in coal, lumber, cotton, iron, and all bulky and cheap commodities, leading, in turn, to the-rapid increase-in the number of sailing f!hips. The trade in oil alone, which, as has been pointed out, is being transferred from steamf!hips to sailing ve sels, would be a very important feature of the Nicaragua. tr.affic. All the wheat and flour shipments to Europewould goviaNicaragua by sail. In fact, the possibilities of the Nicaragua route and their relation to commerce far outnumber those of a canal by the Panama route, compared with which the less cost of maintenance of th-e Panama Canal would be a mere bagatelle.

NB..A.RER TO ASIA BY NICA..R.A.GU.A..

Not the least of the benefits which the Nicaragua. route would confer upon Atlantic coast commerce would be the fact that it would place our Atlantic ports from 377' to 579 miles farther WJ.thin the- Asiatic zone of competition with EuTope than would the Panama route. In the sharp competition which we shall have from Europe in Asiatic markets this 500 miles more or less. is important. How important may be realized from the fact that when China buys from the world's markets as much per head as does Japan now-about $3-she will buy products worth $1,200,000,000. Every mile saved in transportation will give us a larger share of the vast trade- which the Orient is about to develop. If we have no ca:nal at all, we shall have little' share, comparatively, in Oriental commerce.

.A.N EMINEXT ENGINEER'S OPINION.

I do not. think that the case can be more concisely summed up than it is in a letter to me by the distinguished engineer of the Chicago drainage canal, Mr. Lyman J. Cooley, who not only has had more practical experience in canal construction than any American engineer, but who has critically examined both the Panama and Nicaragua routes. He writes:

1. As planned, I consider the Nicaragua. Canal to be the safest. It has no tandem locks, the Conchuda Dam is less formidable than. the one at Bohlo, and the cuttings are less menacing on account of length and depth.

2~ The estimates are more closely figured for Panama. The Commission in e:ffect so, states.

3. The actual cost (including purchase _priee) is more likely to exceed the. estimates for Panama on account of health conditions. The work in Nicaragua. can be done for the estimate by a syndicate on its own plans, as I have outlined in my testi:m.ony. What the cost will be under a different organization can not be judged until the programme and the men. who are to execute it.are kn.own.

4 and5. The watersupJ?lY at Nicaragua can not be questioned. The discussion of the matter has ansen through an endeavor to regulate the l ke level too closely. The SUilply provided at Panama is admitted to be inadequate for a.. large traffi.c, and is to be supplemented at a future time by a dam or dams in the upper Chagres basin. The water supply at Panama can probably be made sufficient for all future needs, though I am unable to say what would be the results of an extremely dry year. I do not r gard the water supply for Panama as at all comparable to th..1.t for Nicaragua.

6. As designed, tb.e Bohio Dam is not as safe as the Conchuda Dam. (See testimony as to dams.)

7. There is more money in the canal at Nicara~ua. for the contractor at the figures of the Commission. This would be e pecially true if the contractor can sul'>stitnte an equivalent canal at Nicaragua; no material change can be made at Panama.

You will note that I refer to an equivalent c:.mal. I believe the-eastern division at Nicaragua. can be treated differently and thus facilitate construction. shorten ti:m.e of passage, and reduce the cost of operation and maintenance.

Aside from technical questions, I believe that the Nicara-gua. route is greatly_ superior, for- the following reasons: tei~est!~ much shorter to 71i to 90 per cent of the trade in which we are in-

2. The healthfulness is greatly superior, both for construction and for operation and maintenn.nce.

3. The cmmtry 'has large natural resources, and is capable of inhabitation by white men, as much so as the Gulf coast of the United States.

• 1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE .. 6907 4. Military secmity is insured by a. population of our own citizens rather

than by fleets and fortifications. a. It is available for sailing ships, for which the Panama route is pl'ac

tically prohibitive. 6. It is most nea.l'ly an extension of our eoa.st line, and no foreign nation

can hereafter construct a canal within these limits, as they might if we built at Panama. -

7. The Panama route is tainted byscandalsandqueered by failures., which make it a disheartening enterprise from engineering and contracting standpoint.

8. The Nicaragua route has been accepted and advocated on its merits for twenty·six years before the American people, and has always been admitted as superior for a lock, even by the Frenchmen prior to their failure.

9. It is a diplomatic mistake to now assume that the recent French project is r&lly the meritorious plan and then _proceed t<> force a distasteful ba1•gain on the French shareholdel'S and virtually the French people.

10. The dignity of the United States requires that it abide by the uniform determination of its engineers ever since the Commission of 1876.

I trust that the foregoing covers sufficiently the points which you have raised. You are at liberty to make such use of this letter as you may soo fit in the inte rest of the common welf&re.

THE VOLCANO QUESTION.

The only argmnent which at this time- can~ it seems to me, receh--e any consideration whatever, is. that which makes nse of the fear inspired by the recent volcanic disturbances at Mru.·tinique and St. Vincent. Those terrible manifestations of volcanic energy are used by the friends of the Panama route to excite the imagination to picture the destruction of Nicaragua. Attention is called to the fact that there are-volcanoes in Nicaragua and Costa Rica, and it is therefore asserted that a canal located there would be liable to be overtaken by the fate which befell St. Pierre. They are dotted all over the maps here [indicating] , showing us that at any moment the slumbering volcano may belcbJ'orth and destroy this canal if it is constructed. Those volcanoes have increased and come into active operation to an alarming extent within the past few months, while this canal bill has been under consideratio~ and calculated to excite the fear of those who have read of the frightful occurrences in the island of Martinique.

But attention is not called to the fact that the volcano nearest to the line of the canal is 16 miles distant, and that whatever destructive results might follow an eruption could be only through accompanying earthquakes. And this subject of earthquakes was exhaustively studied by the Isthmian Canal Commission, which, in its report, states that-

The entire Isthmus between North and South America (including Panama) is a volcanic region. * * * No portion is exempt from earthquake.

The Commission found for points on the line of the Nicat·agua Canal a record of 14 earthquakes, only one of which, in 1844, cansed serions injury. At that time Rivas, 4 miles from the canal line, was almost destroyed and damage wa-s done at Greytown. The volcano nearest to the line of the canal is 16 miles from Rivas. The other volcanic cones vary from 40 to 200 miles distant.

THE HISTORY OF THE CITY OF RIVAS.

But, the Commission points out, Rivas has had a continuous existence since a period antedating the conquest. At Panama the Commission found a record of 28 earthquakes-twice a_s many as along the whole Nicaragua route. Of these, 12 occurred in the years 1882, 1883, and 1884. The most desti·uctive one occuned in 1621, when Panama was destroyed. The next in severi-ty was in 1882, when the front of the cathedral at Panama was tln·own down, the canal headquarters building cracked, the track and roadbed of the railroad tlu·own out of line, and the masonry of thTee or four bridges and culverts damaged. At Las Cruces the church was thrown down; at Colon some lives were lost and crevasses were opened, while the Jamaica telegrap"tl cable was broken. · The Commission then goes on to say:

The effect of the undulations of the earth's surface upon any structure increases with the h eight of the structure above the ground. A force which would leave the foundation intact might thr ow down a high wall.

The works of the canal will nearly a ll of them be underground. Even the dams are low compared with the general surface of the country, and with their broad and massive foundations m ay be said to form pa rt of the ground itself, as they are intended to do. The locks will all be founded upon rock. It docs not seem probable that w orks of this kind are in any serious danger of destruction by ea:rthq_uakes in a count ry where lofty chm·ches of masoru'Y have escaped with a few minor injuries.

I t is possible and even pr obable that the more a ccurately :fitting portions of t h e canal, such as the lock gates, may at times be distorted by earthquakes, and some inconve.nienoe m ay r esult therefr om. Th at contingency may be classed with t he acciden tal collision of ships with the gates and is to be provided fm· in t h e same way. b y duplicate gates.

It is p ossible aL"o that a· fissur e might opan which would drain the canal, and if it remained O:l;)en migh t destroy it. This _])Ossibility should not be erected by the fancy mto a t hreatening danger. If a timorous imagination is to b e the guide. n o gr ea;t w ork can b e undertaken anywhere. This risk may be classed with that of a great confia.gration in a city like that of Chicago, in 1871, or Boston, in 1872.

It is the opinion of the Commission that such da.nger as exists from earthquakes is essentially the same for both the Nicaragua and Panama routes, and that in neither case is it sufficient to prevent the construction of the canal.

On this point Professor Haupt, in his testimony before the Senate committee, said:

As to the question of seismic disturbances I would only add that it has been shown by students of seismolotn: that the presence of active volcanoes act as a safety valve for internal disturbances. and the n umber of cratei'S

along through Nicaragua and Costa Rica being quite large, it a.ffm-ds a vent for any inte1·nal stress of the earth, and therefore there are fewer injurious earthquakes in that se.ction of the· world than at Panama or elsewhere, and I was very much SU.."J>rised, in studying that subject, to find that the percentage of earthquakes was lower in Nicaragua than in almost any other portion of the world. Now, we have had some earthquakes in this country recently, one in St. Louis and one in Oregon, and many in California, so that, so far as that goes. it shows that there need be little anticipation of trouble from that source. ·

.A. SCIENTIST'S EVIDE..''WE .A.S TO SEISMIC DISTURBll~CES.

Prof. H. Pittier, a resident of Costa Rica, who has given the subject mo.st careful study, made a report to the United States Canal Board in 1895 concerning earthquakes in Costa Rica and Nicaragua, in which he says:

Although the whole of the main mountain range which rtms from the shores of the lake of Nicaragua to the southern bounda1·y of Oo3ta. Rica is probably of igneous origin, it may be asserted that the volcanic phenom~na are in their latest period of activity, as seems to b e generally the case all throughout Central America. Instead of the 20 volcanoes given for Costa Rica by Montessus de Ballore in his work, Tremblements d e t erra et eruptions volcaniques au Centrale-Amerique (Dijon, Eug~ne To bard, 1888) , there are in reality only fom· peaks or small mmmtain groups still showing signs of activity, viz, Mira.valles, Poa.s, 11-azfl, and Turialba. There is not a single active crater south of a line going along the railway and main road fl>om Limon to Puntarenas. I do not know of any r ecord of an er uption of the Mira valles since the times prior to the conquista. The Poas is a geyser subject to great variations in the intensity of Lts manifestations. The last eruption of Irazu, which took place in 1888---l:i9, was altogether insignificant.

Turialba. is probably the most recent and most lively of our fire mountains. From May, 1864, to the end of February, 1866, it kept throwing a.t intervals an enormous amount of cinders or volcanic sand, which was carried as far as the Pacific coast by the trade wind. When I visited Tm-ialba, in 18'79, I only found a la1•ge chimney opened in the wall of an old crater, and throuo>h which escaped continuously a hissing column of sulphurous steam. But all through the surrounding region the re were scattered evidences of far more active phenomena.

Since the foundation of our meteor ological observatory good series of seismic observ-ations have been taken at San Jose, and it is well to note here th..'\t, according to them, most of the shocks seem to be propagat€d in an undulatory way and in such a direction as to allow it to be supposed that they derive their origin in the volcanoes of Poas and Irazft. However, in the actual sta te of our knowledge conee1'Ding the Costa Rican seismology, it would not b e prudent to draw any positive conclusion as to that point.

As to the geological age of our volcanoes it can be asserted that the more ancient among them are posterior to the middle of the secondary period and that their greater activity took place posterior to the Pliocene epoch. * * *

I took evel'Y pains to find an instance of shocks having been felt at L imon or in the settlements along the Sara.piqui and San Carlos rivers during that period, but peJ'Sons of sound judgnient and perfect honesty, most of them foreigners, who lived for years in those places could not refer to even a single case. The:refore, I corisider it a sa.l'e conclusion to say that these seismic disturbances were almost invariably limited to the Cordillera and its imme-diate vicinity. * * * ~

Considered by themselves only earthquakes can not, in my opinion, be taken as a serious obstacle to the building of canals or railways in these countries. But it is not so when they occur in connection with the copious rains whieh chaTacterize om· climate. In itself the rain is a dangerous elem ent, which penetrates the soil, loosens the clay or argillaceous strata, and very often produces considerable landslides. The soil may be soaked with water without giving way, but a sudden seismic shock can easily bring on a catastrophe. However, the general topography of the zone crossed by the western division of the canal, as far as my knowledge of the region allows me to state, does not seem to admit the possibility of easy movements of the superiicia.l strata, and, moreover, the rain is much less in the Isthmus between Lake Nicaragua and the Pacific Ocean tba.n on the east-em slope, as may easily be seen in the last paper of Professor Harrington on Central American Rainfall.

NO GROUND FOR CHOICE.

The recent report that there has been, within a few months, activity of Nicaraguan volcanoes and destrudion of property by earthquakes at the upper end of Lake Managua, of which great use ha.s been made by the friends of the Panama route, proves to have been without the slightest foundation. President Zelaya, of Nicaragua, telegraphed, under date of June 1, to Minister Luis F. Corea that "the news published about recent eruptions of volcanoes and earthquakes in Nicaragua are entirely false.'' And let· ters from United States Minister :Merry, at San Jose de Costa Rica, recently received, state that there have been no earthquake shocks whatever along the line of the Nicaragua route for the past two months, while there have beenseveralalongthelineof the Panama CanaL This information is confirmatory of the observations of the Isthmian Canal Commission, that earthquakes a1·e more fre· quent at Panama than in Nicaragua. That danger from seismic disturbances are no greater at Nicaragua than at Panama may, I submit~ be accepted as proved, as far as it is possible to bring proof to bear upon this subject.

The Commission is decided in its opinion that there is no choico between the two routes on account of danger from earthquakes, which, should they occur, would, in its opinion, be likely to inflict little if any damage to a canal. And this view of the matter is strengthened, rather than weakened, by the experience of Martinique and St. Vincent, whm·e a canal situated 16 miles from Mount Pelee or La Son:ffriere would have met with no serious injury, if, indeed, it received any. Direct injury from an eruption, such as was occasioned at St. Pierre, which is only a few miles distant from the summit of Mount Pelee, is impossible at any point on the line of the Nicaragua Canal, for, as beforo stated., the nearest volcano is at least 16 miles away. Martinique and St. Vincent leave the canal question jnst where it was before. The1-e is, therefore, no valid reason for the Com· mission t o change i ts views on this subject. Whatever danger

• 6908 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JUNE 17, I

there might be to a canal in either location is from an earthquake, and, in the opinion of the Commission, there is in this respect no choice in routes.

THE FRAUDULENT CHARACTER OF THE PANAMA SCHEME.

The Panama scheme was conceived in fraud, and fraud has marked every succeeding step in its development. Should the United States, through misguided action of Congress, purchase what remains of an enterprise which has been a financial and moral curse to France, it will be found that the people of this counti·y have been the latest victims of a swindle of gigantic proportions, whose inception preceded the famous International Canal Congress held in P aris in 1879. I think it is important at this time to go back to the beginning and to show what were the first moves in this great financial game.

After the completion of the Suez Canal its success caused French enthusiasts to turn their attention to that other great need of commerce-a canal to join· the Atlantic and Pacific. All schemes proposed were submitted to De Lesseps, and all were encouraged. But it was not until men with prominent names came forward that he gavehissympathyandcooperation. Who these men were, why they proposed the scheme, and how it was adopted by the Paris· congress is thus told in a report made in 1880 by W. E. Johnston, delegate of the American Geographical Society to that congress:

These men were Messrs. Wyse, Turr, and Bixio. Lieutenant Wyse, of the French navy, is a son of a former English minister at .Athens, and his mother was a Princess Bonaparte, of the Roman branch of the family. General Turr is a Hungarian, and married Lieutenant Wyse's second sister. M. Bixio was a brother of the Minister Bixio of the provisional government of 1848. He died of fever on the ·Isthmus.

These gentlemen, backed by some bankers and personal friends, made their fi.rst visit to the Isthmus three years ago and examined one of the .Atrato routes. They came back sicJs reported Unfavorably, and after some months' consultation, in which M. de Lesseps took a. large part, it was decided that Lieutenant Wyse should return to the Isthmus and look at the Panama route, with the view of making that the affair on which they were finally to settle and as the affair to which the public in France would be most likely to subscribe.

The survey was made-how imperfectly was afterwards shown in the congress by the abandonment of all the figures, and of even the plan-the party returned to Paris, and last winter the plan of campaign of putting through the Wyse scheme was organized.

.An international congress was to be called, so as to give authority to the scheme; M. de Lesseps was to preside at the congress and issue the invitations.l and as the President had the right to constitute the congress as he saw nt, enough .v'rench members of the right sort were invited to counterbalance any opposition th.at might manifest itself. So far as Lieutenant Wyse and party were concerned, they sought first to reimburse themselves for the losses already sustained and for which they were resl'onsible to certain bankers and friends, and this ther, hoi?ed to do by forming a new company which would assume the responsibilities they had incurred.

This was the origin of the famous congress. It was not, as you see, a very high-toned affair; it was not intended that it should be. The object was to get out of an old debt by creating a new one, to be shouldered by some on•3 else. The digging of a Panama canal was a very distant and very problematic affair.

But it turned out that the congress became a very serious and very grave affair. .As eminent engineers from foreign countries began to arrive the hope of carrying out the prepared programme diminished. The great satisfaction which was at first manifested at the prospect of having a lar~e and respectable gathering soon gave place to sad reflections and sad sUrmiSes. The arrival ·of the two eminent .American authorities, Messrs . .Ammen and Menocal, was a death blow to their hopes, and although those two gentlemen were treated with the greatest consideration, it was felt by the leaders that their coming was a disaster and that a new base of operations would have to be adopted.

There is nothing, in fact, more curious in the history of caucuses than the evolutions of this congress.

Not only was the president of the congress named in advance, but so also were the officers and the committees, and even the work the committees were to perform. Nothing, it was intended, was to be left to hazard . .At the first meeting, at which were present the 136 members and above 000 spectators interested in the subject, nothing was done or allowed to be done but the reading of the names of the members, the names of the committees and their presidents, and an indication of the work they were to do.

The first meeting did not last. an hour. No one had a word.to say bu~ tp.e president and secretary, and this very summary way of treatin~ the distmguished guests who had come a long way to the "study" of the mteroceanic canal project ~as climaxed at the end by the preside:J?.t hastily adj<?ur~ng the meeting With the remark: "Gentlemen, we are gomg to rush this thing a l' .Americaine; we shall get through by next Tuesday."

Thus not only was the congress packed and manipulated so as to run through hastily and without fai.l the imperfect and Impossible scheme of Lieutenant Wyse, but the most distinguished and honorable experts from all parts of the world were invited to give the scheme their a.id and to cover it with their responsibility.

It was hardly dignified, therefore, for men holding the high rank of government delegates to take their seat in a congress which had been gotten up for a certain limited and w ell-defined object, and in which no proposition outside the programme stood the least chance of adoption.

THE CANAL CONGRESS OF I879.

Mr. Johnston then states that the facts and figures given by Admiral Ammen and Mr. Menocal were a revelation to the congress, which was thereupon compelled to take some serious consideration of the question. During the discussion which followed, one of the delegates, M. Spement, declared that if De Lesseps's plan of a sea-level canal was impossible," we must go to Nicaragua." Mr. Johnston then continues:

We were now brought face to face with the singular spectacle of a congress which had become serious and llonest, and which saw its way clear to the truth, and yet which was obliged to remain dishonest and carry out the original plan, no matter by wh~t means.

The reason of this singular atwmaly is easily understood. M . de Lesseps, Lieu tenant Wyse, and the bankers behind them, were pledged to the Panama

route, and could not ado:{>t another. That was the French route. The:r had been long manufacturmg enthusiasm for that ro]ite. The bankers and the public would not give a cent to any route that was not patronized by K. de Lesseps and Lieutenant Wyse. So that to abandon that route was to abandon entirely for Fran('.e the glory of cutting the interoceanic canal, and that was not to be thought of for a moment.

They have been claiming, as I have already told you, for years the m~ nopoly of this question; they claimed all the knowledge on the subject, and to back out now would be to lose all the money they had engaged in the scheme, all the money they expected to gain, whi.ch was a mountain, and to lose their popularity besides. The congress would have been dissolved without a decision rather than to have adopted another than the French route.

But how was this accomplished? M. de Lesseps's galloping congress was adjourned for several days; we heard no more of rushing the thing through ala .Americainej they had to stop to change their base. Lieutenant W :yse, with such of the engmeers as were pledged to this scheme, went to work m secret committee and labored night and day till they elaborated a new plan to cover, as they thought, the objections of Mr. Menocal, and withhof course, a much higher figure of costs. The committee having in charge t e estimares on the probable receipts and expenditures of the canal w ere instructed by the president to try and make the receipts cover the new estimate of costs, which they did with the greatest ease.

Again the .American engineers, backed this time by overwhelming arguments of Sir John Hawkshaw, showed that the plan was still defective; and again the congress was adjourned to give time to the Wyse secret committee to get up new figures and a new plan. The congress, which st~rted off on a gallop, had first dropped into a trot, and was now at a walk. .And all to allow Lieutenant Wyse to prepare estimates on diffi.c'ult details which he had never studied on the ground, and which, therefore, were only theoretical.

The majority of the en~Pneers lost their interest in the proceedings from thismoment, and became srmplelookers-on, while the meetm~ relap ed back into its original chara-cter of a congress for the benefit of Lieutenant Wyse and his party.

The assembly was now in a crisis. On the one side were the engineers; on the other the business men and the spectators. It looked at one time as it the Congress if called upon would have voted for the plan of Mr. Menocal by Nicaragua. "The charter of Mr. Wyse from the Colombian Government exa-cts the building of the canal by the most economical route, and to build it by: the dearest route is a violation and a forfeiture of the charter. But these difficulties, which were pointed out to the Congress, no longer stopped the proceedings. The Wyse party had now offered their ultimatum, which was an open cut without locks and with deversoirs, or side canals, the whole to cost $250,000,000 and to pay in receipts $18,000,000 a year. .At this point M. de Lesseps maae a lon~ speech. * * *

The effect of this speech wa.~ enormous. The .American engineers had shown that the Panama route, principally on account of the annual fall of 12 feet of rain, was impossible; that it never could be finished if commenced, nor made to pay a dividend if finished. It was all to no purpose. Lieutenant Wyse and his committee had but to retire to their consultation room to find at once in their own heads the figtU"es necessary to head off Mr. Menocal's estimates. It wa.s the game of "I see you and go you one better," played by men who had no cards, but plenty of money.

HOW THE BAIT W .A.S TAKEN.

Mr. SPOONER. What game is that? Mr. PERKINS. This is the language of the representative

from the Geographical and Geological Society at the convention in Paris . . It is an enigma to me. I have a slight knowledge of French. His report is made in English. The explanation of the game of cards I leave to some one who has made a study of that branch of science, of which Mr. Johnston was evidently an expert.

Mr. Johnston then describes the plan of voting by which measures we1·e taken to secure a decision in favor of the scheme. The result of this vote was 74 ayes to 62 nays and refusals to vote, out of a total of 136 registered dl3legates. Commenting on this, Mr. Johnston says:

.An analysis of the final vote will show that the able engineers who came to the congress with their minds free from prejudice ana with a desire to arrive at the truth are either to be found among the absentees or among those who abstained from voting.

Thus, a.s the majority for the Wyse scheme was small, as the neutral experts were o:pposed to it, and as the congress from be~inning to end was manipulated m the interest of that scheme, it may be said that, in an international point of view, the decision of the congress was no decision at all and that It is without force and not binding.

A BOHEME TO PAY PRIVATE DEBTS.

Thus was this vast undertaking inaugurated for the purpose of enabling several prominent Frenchmen to pay their debts to French bankers. Its result is well known. A company was organized, and realized from the sale of stocks and bonds $260,000,000. The items of receipt and expenditure, now a matter of court record, show that there was actually expended by the old company on the Isthmus $156,400,000.

But after the expenditure of this vast sum on the Isthmus itself, and the dissipation of $100,000,000 more in various ways with which the promoters of the scheme were doubtless well satisfied~ it was found that the actual work of constructing a canal haa. only really begtm.

Mr. McCOMAS. Mr. President--The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from Cali-

fornia yield to the Senator from Maryland? Mr. PERKINS. Certainly. Mr. McCOMAS. Was that 156,000,000 francs or dollars? Mr. PERKINS. I reduced it to dollars, as we are more familiar

with dollars, although all know the commercial value of the French franc. When, therefore, more money was needed, it was not forthcoming, and the company had to go into insolvency. This ended the first step in this stupendous scheme.

A NEW PHASE OF THE BOHEME.

But there were 600,000 or more F1·enchmen who had contributed the va-st sums that had so rapidly disappeared, and a clamor

• 1902 . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 6909 arose. The only thing to do was to form a new company, raise more money, and, if possible, complete the work. A new company was formed, to which the receiver of the old company, on its behalf, was a party, subscribing thereto, as did also, under compulsion, a considerable number of persons who were charged with having secured in a manner not too honest a considerable part of the $260,000,000 contributed by the French people, who were to have 60 per cent of the net profits of the canal. The sum of 13,000 000 in cash was secured by the new company, principally from those who had been charged with swindling the old one, and work was again begun on the Isthmus in accordance with new plans based on fresh surveys and examination of the ground. With the new company a new survey of the route became necessary, as it had been developed that practically nothing was known of the engineering difficulties.

A technical commission was appointed, composed of the most eminent engineers of Europe and the United States. The sealevel plan was at once abandoned, and surveys made for a canal with locks. It is reasonable to suppose, in view of the exigencies of the case and the absolute necessity for a report assuring construction at a not exorbitant cost, that the difficulties were minimized to the limit of safety under the need of a low cost of construction to induce subscriptions to the enterprise. It is these surveys which our own commission has practically adopted, with the exception of the Bohio Dam, in which case it has made plans which far exceed the limits of safety imposed by the technical commission. For the data obtained under such conditions, I will say parenthetically, the commission advises the United States to pay $2,000,000. But the difficulties developed proved to be so ·great that no more funds could be raised, and work had to be stopped. There was here a loss to the subscribers of questionable financial reputation and to bankers who backed them, and it became a question as to how to recoup themselves.

- THE UNITED STATES TO BE DRAGGED IN.

Nothing having a chance of success presented itself, except asale of the whole unsavory mess to the United States. No other scheme has been proposed; nootherplancould be devised whereby they could recoup themselves from a financial point of view, except selling this gigantic fraud to the United States. We all know how their offer was reduced from 109,000,000 to $40,000,000, and how, in order to secure the latter sum, the rights of the hundreds of thousands of Frenchmen who originally contributed, were sacrificed as far as an expression of willingness to do so can effect that result-not an expression by the people themselves who had put their money into it and who have subscribed to the stock, but by their trusted agents who were engineering the scheme. If the scheme proposed be successful, the suspected swindlers of the old company will get back the money they were compelled to subscribe to the new, and the United States will be brought face to face with half a million or so of Frenchmen who clearly have some rights in the matter, with an undertaking on our hands to complete for 144,000,000 a work on which the actual expenditure of more than $156,000,000 has made but a good beginning. This is the Panama scheme, pure and simple, and it means just this: Adopt the Panama route, and, in my opinion, no isthmian canal will be constructed by the United States.

Mr. STEW ART obtained the floor. Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. President--The PRESIDING OFFICER (:Mr. McCOMAS in the chair).

Does the Senator from Nevada yield to the Senator from Oregon? Mr. STEWART. I do. Mr. MITCHELL. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The absence of a quorum being

suggested, the Secretary will call the roll. The Secretary called the roll, and the following Senators

answered to their names: Aldrich, Deboe, Kean, Allison, Dillingham, Kittredge, Bacon, Dolliver, McComas, Bard, Dryden, McCumber, Bate, Fairbanks, McEnery, Berry, Foraker, McLa.urm, Miss. Blackburn. Foster, Wash. McLaurin, S.C. Burnham, Frye, McMillan, Burrows, Gallinger, Mallory, Burton, Gamble, Mason Cockrell, Harris, Milla.rd Cullom, Hawley, Mitcheil, Daniel, Jones, Ark. Morgan,

Perkins, Pettus, Platt, N.Y. Pritchard, Quarles, Scott, Spooner, Stewart, Teller, Wan-en, Wellington, Wetmore.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Fifty-one Senators have answered to their names. A quorum is present, and the Senator from Nevada will proceed.

Mr. STEWART. Mr. President--Mr. MORGAN. Will the Senator from Nevada allow me to

offer some paperi? Mr. STEWART. Mr. MORGAN. Mr. STEW ART. Mr. MORGAN.

In connection with the pending matter? Yes. I yield to the Senator for that purpose.

I have here an extract from the works of Mr.

Calvo on Costa Rica, and a communication from Mr. Corea, the minister of Nicaragua, on subjects relatingi;o this debate, which I ask to have read at the desk. ·

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Secretary will read as re-quested. ,

The Secretary read as follows: COSTA RICA.

Religion.-There was a concordat between Costa Rica and the Holy See, but the same was declared inconvenient for the nation and denounced in 1885.

The great majority of Costa. Ricans being of Catholic faith, the Government protects that religion and contributes to its support with sums from the national treasury.

The constitution only establishes tolerance of other religions, but deep in the hearts of all Costa Ricans are implanted the princi:ples of liberty in matters of conscience, in which each one should be guided by his own idea of right. -

Religions freedom advan~ed considerably from the year 1842, not only as to laws, b~t as to tolerance m ~11 class~s of people. In that year cemeteries were provided for non-Catholics, and m 1847 a Protestant congre&'a t ion was in existence. The present tolerance for other beliefs is obvious m the fact that the first church built in Central America, consecrated to a religion different from that of the country, stands to-day in San Jose, Costa Rica no more than 125 yards from the great Catholic cathedraL '

Public instruetion.-The constitution provides that elementary instruction of both sexes is obligatory, free, and provided for by the Government. The immediate supervision shall be for the municipality, the supreme inspection for the executive.

Every Costa Rican or foreigner is free to give or receive instruction in institutions which are not maintained at public expense.

The instruction given at public schools is laic. The efforts have been great and sustained to advance education, and it is

to be remarked that all those in office, through the different administrations that have come one after another, have constantly shown the greatest and most laudable interest in the matter, and always maintaining a system in harmony with modern ideas.

Laws.-Costa Rica was the first of the Central American Republics to effect complete emancipation from the Spanish and colonial laws and one of the fu:st countries of La~n- Amet:ica to pr~vide herself with ~w:s_ in harmony with new mode of political bemg and With the progress of civilization.

In the penal code, in effect since 1880, the death penalty is abolished as well a.s other humiliating and cruel punishments, and in 18S6 there wa8 promulgated a new civil code, in which are prominent the civil marriage, divorce and civil liberty of woman. · '

Matrimony is perpetual, and has for its objects procrea. tion and mutual support. It corresponds to the civil authority alone to act and decide on any demands relative to divorce and separation, as well as nullity or any other question relative to matrimony. -

The rights of faith and property are strictly observed and have never been infringed upon in Costa Rica, nor have retroactive laws been framed.

The sacredness of correspondence, the right to meet in bodies and and to petition, the right of habeas corpus, the liberty of the press, all are guaran· teed by the constitution.

Foreigners enjoy every civil right without being admitted to citizenship· or bein~ compelled to contribute heavy sums. Admission to citizenship may be applied at any time and will be granted on same principles as in most civilized countries, after one year's residence. Settlers are not obliged to become ~atm·alized citizens nor to pay forced contributions. They can carry on business and manufacture, possess real estate, buy and sell, navigate the rivers and coasts, and, subject to the laws, may exercise freely their religious creeds, marry, and dispose of their property by will.

Facts.-Costa Rica. has always be:m distingmshed by her strenuous efforts in the pursuits toward modern progress and by the unity of race and love of peace and labor which are characteristic traits of her patriotic children.

As a natural cau....'"6 of all what precedes, it is a fact, well known.~ that Costa Rica has not to-day, nor ever had at any time, claims presentea to her for !f3JJ?-a_ges or ~j~ies caused _by a.rbit~ary acts ~r_mea.sures on the part of her JUdicml or military authorities agamst the Citizens of other nations. Far from it, she opens her gates to them and freely gives them full liberty to enjoy and secure for themselves the treasures of her soil. (From J. B. Calvo's works on Costa Rica.)

Hon. JOHN T. MORGAN, United States Senate.

LEGACION DE NICARAGUA, Washington, D. 0., June 17, 1903.

DEAR SENATOR MORGAN: I have ~ust received your letter of the 16th instant in which you ask me f or an official statement concerning the truth of the asser t ion "that the Government of Nicaragua has been making sales or grants of public lands within a zone of 6 miles-3 miles of the center line of the canal route located by the Isthmian Canal Commission-and that such lands have been so disposed of since the date of the agreement between Nicaragua and the United States, dated December 1, 1900."

In answer I may say that there is no found.o'l.tion in truth for such an asser· tion. Under the agrarian laws of Nicaragua. the Government to dispose of public lands must first issue a decree, and the only decree issued by President Zelaya after December L, 1900, is the one dated September ZT, 1901, a copy of jt~~~BZ!~l~:-Ai~;ti~~g~st~t, is the one that has been misquoted, becauso

In article 5 of this same decree you will see that the officers who are affected by it are the governor of Bluefields, capital of the department of Zelaya otherwise known in time past as the Mosquito Territory, and the governOl!of the Comarcaof Cabo de Gracias aDios, which lies along the extreme northeastern coast of Nicaragua and north of the department of Zelaya.

The proposed route of the canal runs through the Coma.rca of SanJuan del Norte and_ the departme~t of phon tales on the At!a.ntic side and the department of Rivas on the Pacific side. The shortest distance between any point along the proposed route and any point within the department of Zelaya which lies closest, is 40 to 50 miles. ~

Therefore no decree has been issued by President Zelaya since Decembei~ 1, 1000, affecting the public lands within the 6-mile zone, and consequently nO> land has been ~?old or granted by the Government within the said zone.

You are at liberty, as you request, to make such public use of this information as you may deem proper.

I have the honor to remain, with sincere respect, youra, etc. , LUIS F. COREA.

Mr. MORGAN. There is also a translation taken from theDiario Oficial, Managua, which I ask to have printed without reading.

The PRESIDINQ- OFFICER. That order will be made, in the, absence of objection.

6910' CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE. JUNE 17,

The paper referred to is -as ·follows: [Translation. Taken f1'0m the Diario O.ftcial, Managua., September 'Z7, 1901.

Department of .finance and public credit.] The President of the Republic, considering tha.t in the tract of lands which

are n pt denounceable in the Atlantic litora1 there exist numerous farmed lands which the Government is in duty bound t<> advance and protect for the security of landed property and to facilitate the acquisition of the right of possession of these lots of land, in conformity with the decree of July 6, 1899, resolves:

:ARTICLE 1. To allow the actual possessors of public lands in the tract which has not been denounced in the eastern coast of the Republic to acquire the right of property of the lots which they may have cultivated or marked off. ,

ART. 2. The petition shall be .tiled before the governors of Bluefields or of ·oabo de Gracias a Dios, according to tha jurisdiction in which the land may ba located, within prooisel1 three months from the date of the publication of the present resolution; the petitioner being obliged to expres.s in his petition the boundaries, the kind of agricultural pursuits in which he has engaged, and tbenumber of m.anzanas cultivated.

ART. 3. The officials r eferred .to will secure information from two suitable witnesses to prove whet.her the land has really been cultivated or marked of!', and when this information is complete they will order it to be publis'hed by proclamations, insertin~ ooo in the newspaper of Blue.ftelds. In case that there has been no oppOSition, after twenty days have elapsed they . will award the land to the party interested, who must previously deposit its value in the correspondllig subtreasury within the eight following dayi?J complyins- with everything else relating to the agrarian law in force until they obtamed the grant of the title.

ART. 4. After the term referred to in article 2 has elapsed, or the eight days to which the foregoing article makes reference, and the deposit has not been made, the possessors will be considered as lessees, and will pay annually in advance the rent hereinafter expressed.

ART. 5. The governors of Blue.ftelds and of Oabo de Gracias shall appoint engineers who will form the registry of the survey of lands, which in future may be pos~d by lease according to this enactment; the expense of measurement and mal· king off of each lot being payable by the interested parties.

ART. 6. Wb:ile the measure is being made said officials shall procure information by means of witnesses, to ascertain which lots of cultivated or marked of!' land have not been procured by right or title according to article 2, and the approximate extent of each one of them. Having obtained full infol'mation in regaa-d to this matte1.· they shall notify the possessors that they are considtlred as lessees, cautioning them in the same act that they have to deposit the value of their lease within fifteen days.

When a possessor of public lands be considered as lessee because he has not paid the deposit within ·eight days referred t<> in article 3, the term for the payment of the lease will be reckoned from the following day after the

ex~~~~~.nuf;Jt::l't~\~:I:-irre has been made-it is ascert~ined thattbe num-ber ·of manzanas is in excess of that which has served as base to .fix the rent, the parties interested shall pay the difference in the coiTesponding subtreasury; and in case of excess it shall be discounted in the following payments.

ART. 8. If, after the I>Ossessors have been noti.fted that they are lessees, an-y one of them contends right of property or any other real right to the land ·and appeals or brings up opposition without presenting a title in dna form and registered, he is obliged to accompany a certi.ftca tion of the deposit of the value of the rent to get a hea,ring.

ART. 9. The price of each manzana Will be the 'following: :U it is 'Suitable for breeding live stock ____________________ ------ ____ ------ $5.00 If it is suitable for agx:icuiture ______________ ------------------------------ 8.00 If for agriculture beSides being comprised in a zone <>f 2,000 varas broad

along the margins of navigable nvers for large vessels _____ ------ ____ 10.00

For each ma.nZ&n.a of irrigable land $2 in excess will be paid. ART. 10. The value of the lease will be:

For each manzana of land suitable for grazing live stock ________________ 1.50 For each manzana of land suitable 'for raising live stock or for agricul-

ture __ -----_-----_-----.-.-------------.----------------------------------- 2. 50 For each manzana of land suitable for raising live_ stock, if it is com

pt-ised in a zone of 2,000 varas broad along the margins of navigable rivers for large vessels------------------------ _____ ----·-- - ----------- S. 00 ART. 11. The governors of Blue:frelds and of Cabo de Gracias a Dios will

notify at once the department or finance each time that a petition is .tiled before tnem, according to article 2, and of the acts they may issue considering as lessees the actual possessors of land1 according to article 6, expressing in either case the limits, the kind of agricultural pursuit, and the number of manzanas of the lot.

Be it communicated. Managua, September 20, 1901. Zelaya. The ministe-r of financ~Zelaya, R. ·

:Mr. STEWART. Mr. President, the climate of Panama is practically prohibitory of a canal at that locality if any regard is to be paid to human life. I have heard it asserted in this debate , that the climate of Panama is as good as that of Nicaragua. Of course those who have made that assertion are ignorant of the fa-cts. Climates in the Tropics are comparatively healthful where they have a sea breeze. Some of the tropical islands are as healthful as any part of the world; -but in places in the Tropics where . the1·e is no wind there must be disea-se.

The doldrums of :Pa,nama Bay are known to all navigators. I myself saw in the winter of 1849-'50 vessels lying in Panama Bay which had been there for months. After my arrival in. Califor- : nia I met persons who left New York and sailed at·ound the Horn and anived there before the passengers in the ships I left at Panama reached San Francisco. Vessels were frequently compelled to remain at Panama for six or eight months at a time before they could sail away. That bay is so situated that during ·certain seasons of the year they have no winds. 'Besides, vessels are compelled to sail as much as a thousand or fifteen hundred miles before they can get out of the bay and strike the trade winds to enable them to go-either north or south.

rt ·is only during the few months of the year that a favorable breeze prevails. During the rest of the time there is no breeze in Panama and no wind at all. Sometimes they have tremendous

il'ains there, but it is during only ce1·tain seasons of the year that they have any breeze whatever.

I knew something about Panama before the raili·oad was built. I crossed the Isthmus first in 1849. I went up the Chagres River in a canoe, and I have seen that river a good many times. The chief surgeon of the company which built the Panama Railroad was a friend of mine, an old schoolmate, by the· name of Stephen Rogers. My friend Rogers was chief surgeon dm·ing the whole construction of the road. Of the first party of men who went down there from New York he told me not one was able to do two weeks' work.

A very large number died, and the balance were taken back to New York. The company then got Chinamen, thin1..i.ng they could stand any climate. The Chinamen died almost as rapidly ·as the white people. It was perfectly shocking to hear of the number of Chinamen who died there, according to his account. The company then took natives of the Isthmus and tried to get them to work, but they could not stand digging up the soil. They were poisoned by it and had to quit, and the railroad company was almost in despair.

Then they tried negroes from Jamaica, who were in the habit of working in tropical soil, and they served pretty well. They built the railroad. I saw them upon the Isthmus after the road was built. They were great big, fine fellows physically. They did pretty much all of the work that has been done on the Panama Railroad and on the Panama Canal. White men can not live and work there. Any man liVing there has death staring him in the face all the time, and the reason why it is worse at Panama than in any other tropical place on earth is because there is less wind there dming a long season of the year. There is nothing to carry away the malaria. There is nothing to give the inhabitants fresh air. The most dismal place on earth is Panama dming the six or eight months when there is no wind blowing. I verily believe we will sacrifice more lives than the canal is worth if we build the canal at Panama. •

After I came into the Senate, Senator Conness, of California, offered a resolution, directing the Secretary of the Navy to furnish a report of surveys across the Isthmus. In response to this demand, Rear-Admiral C. H. Davis t·eported, in July, 1866:

There does not exist in the libraries of the world the means of determining, even approximately, the most practicable route for a ship canal across the Isthmus.

That was 'the short report he made. Nothing further was done in the matteT until General Gran .

was elected President, and called Commodore Am.men to Washing· ton and placed him at the head of the Bureau of Navigation.

I recollect that circumstance very well. President Grant sent for Mr. Conness and myself, who were interested in it before he did this, and discussed the ma.tter. He was very much interested. He had been over the Isthmus.

Congress had voted the money for the surveys and a commission was appointed in 1872 to report lipOD. the several results of the different expeditions that had already been or were to be sent out at the expense of the Government.

Previous to the election of President Grant there had been sporadic examinations under governmental authority of different routes extending over a period of many years.

The following is a list of the cana.llines and of the work done upon them by the American naval officers:

1. Capt. R. W. Shufel~ made an instrumental reconnaissance of the Isthmus of Tehnantepec in 18'12.

2. Oommander Ohester Hatfield, in 1872, and Commander E. P. Lull, in 1872 and 1873, made an examination, survey, and de.ftnite instrumental location of an interoceanic canal from the vicinity of Graytown, or San Juan del Nica. ragua, via Lake Nicaragua, and thence via the Rio del Medio and Rio Grand() to Brito.

3. Commander E. P. Lull made an examination, survey, and de.ftnite in~ strumentallocation for a canal from Navy Bay to Panama in 1875.

4. Oommander T. 0. Selfridge in 1870 examined and surveyed a route from the Gulf of San Bias toward the river Chepo; and Oomma.nder E. P. Lull in 1875 made further reconnoissances from the waters of the Ohepo toward the Gulf of San Bias.

5. Commander T. 0. Selfridge in 1871 drew several tentative lines from Caledonia. Bay to the waters of the Secubti and Morti, which are tributaries to the Chucunaque.

6. Commander Selfridge examined the Du Puydt line between Tuyra and Atrato via the Tanela River.

7. Commander Selfridge examined the Gogorza route via Atrat<>, Oaearica_ Tuyra1 and Cue rivers in 1871.

8. Lieut. Frederick Collins in 1875 examined and located a r oute by way of the Napipi and Doguado rivers.

Besides the above there was-9. An inspection of the Nicaragun. and Atrato routes, made in 18i4 at tho

request of the Secretary of Navy, by Maj. W. McFarland and Capt. W. H. Heuer both of the United States COrps of Engineers; Prof. H . .Mitchell United States Coast Survey; Gen. Jacob Amman, and Mr. D. S. Walton, civil engineer.

The different reports of these expeditions, covering a period of five years, are to be found in several thick volumes. The report of Commander Shufeldt, on Tehuantepec, is printed as Senate Executiye Document No. 6, Fortysecona Congress, second session.

The report upon the survey of Darien, by Commander Selfridge, was published in 1874 by the Navy Department.

The result of the Hat.fteld and Lull explorations were printod as Senate Executive Document No. 57, Forty-third Congress, :first session.

The reports of explorations and surveys for the location of cannls through

•

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 6911 the Isthmus of Panama, or by the valley of the Nipipi Riverhby Commanders E. P. Lull and F. Collins, were published conjointly in Was ington in 1875.

Finally, the reports of Major McFarland, General Ammen, and Professor Mitchell, of the commission of reinspection of 1874, were sent to the Senate by President Hayes in April, 1879· but. with the exception of that of Professor Mitchell, wh1ch will be found in the annual report of the Coast Survey for 1874 Appendix 12, they have not been printed in full.

All tttese reports are ex~austively: reviewe~ by Admiral A;mme!l, in his most important work entitled "The American Interoceamc Ship-Canal Question" 1880; and also by Lieut. J. T. Sullivan, in his Problem o~ In~roceanic Oommunicationhpublished by order of the Bureau of Navigation, Washington, 1883, to bot of which works we are much indebted.

The Commission was composed of Andrew A. Humphreys, brigadier-general and Chief of Engineers of the United States Army, etc.; C. P. Patterson, Superintendent United States Coast Survey; and Daniel Ammen, commodore and Chief of the Bu-reau of Navigation. .

This Commission was an abler commission than any other that was ever organized to investigate the interoceanic route across the Isthmus. It is not any disparagement of the present Commission to say that the Commission composed of these men was abler than any other. These men were conspicuous during the war.

They had been over the route and knew something about it. General Grant felt a deep interest in it. These men made actual surveys and did a great work. I have talked with them about the hardships of contending against .the terrible jungles t1uough which they had to cut their way. They cut their way across all these routes, making but a few rods a day. There is not one of the routes named through which the officers of the Army and Navy have not plowed their way with accurate surveys.

This Commission was appointed in 1872. The survey began before that. As soon as Grant was inaugurated he had the surveys commenced. He appointed a Commission to follow it up. Here is the report of the Commission; it is very short; it was sent to Congress by President Haye April18, 1879 (Senate Executive Document No. 15, Forty-sixth Congress, first session), but the surveys had been continued all through Grant's Administration:

W .A.SHINGTON CITY, FebruaMJ 7, 1876. The PRESIDEl<I"T OF THE UNITED ST.A.T'ES:

The Commission appointed by you to consider the subject of communication by canal between the waters of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, across, over, or near the Isthmus connecting North and South America, have the honor, after a long and careful and minute study of the several surveys of the various routes across the continent, nnanimously to report:

1. That the route known as the" Nicaragua route," beginning on the Atlantic side at or near Graytown; running by canal to the San Juan River; thence following its left bank to the mouth of the San Carlo River, at which point navigation of the San Juan River begins, and by the aid of three short canals of an aggregate length of 3.5 miles reaches Lake Nicaragua; from thence across the lake and tlirough the valleys of the Rio del Medio and the Rio Grande to what is known as the port of Brito, on the Pacific coaat~ possesses, both for the construction and maintenance of a c9.nal, greater an vantages and offers fewer difficulties, from engineering, commercial, and economic points of view than ony one of the other routes shown to be practicable by sm·veys s:;Jliciently in detail to enable a judgment to be formed of their relative merits, as will be briefly presented in the appended memorandum.

The data for the conclusions of the Commission will be found in the reports of the various surveys and examinations made under the direction and auspices of the Navy Department, copies of which are transmitted herewith.

A statement relatin~ to these sm·veys and examinations, with a brief account of the characteristic features of the routes, will be found in the accomptmying memorandum prepared by the Commission.

We have the honor to be, with high respect, your obedient servants, ANDREW A. HUMPHREYS,

Brigadier-General, Chief of Engineers, U.S. A., etc. C. P. PATTERSON,

Superintendent United States Coost Survey. DANL. AMMEN,

Commodore and Chief of Bureau of Navigation. Three greater names for purposes of this kind can not be found

in this or the former generation. They were men of high character, very cautious, very learned, who had given this subject very careful examination, In this memorandum they give a description of the Nicaragua route and the Panama route. Their description of the Nicaragua route is found on pages 4 and 5 of the above-named document, whiCh I will insert in my remarks without reading:

THE NICAR.A.GU.A. ROUTE. Commander E. P. Lull United States Navy, with; corps of junior officers

and Civil En~neer A. G. Menocall made the survey of this route. The summit level is,s:tesigned to be 107.62 teet above the two oceans, the surface of ~JI~~caragua being maintained at the highest water mark by a dam at

Two harbors must be constructed, one at or near Graytown, the other at Brito, on the Pacific.

The eastern division is 108.5 miles long, of which 42 miles is canal, extending from the proposed harbor on the eastern coast to and along the San Juan River to the mouth of the river San Carlos, at which point slack-water navigation of the San Juan begins, and, by the aid of three short canals, having an ag~gegate length of 3.5 miles, around the proposed dams in the San Juan (four m number), reaches to Lake Nicaragua, a distance of 63 miles of slackwate~· navigation.

The four dams alluded to are located as follows, with dimensions as given: No.1. Castillo, 940 feet long, 21 feet hi~h. No. 2. Balas, 1.196 feet long, 31.9 feet h1~h.

~~: ~: raa;~'!~·io:.2i.~}!~rfo~,f~~~ft h. Te!llift locks are required, of a.n average fift of 10.76 feet each. They are

all located on hard ground, and only at one location are two locks placed together.

Different parts of the San Juan River, utilized by means of dams for slaekwa.ter navigation, must be deepened by dredging, and to a small extent excavated in rock.

Owing to the great extent of Lake Nicaragua (2,800 superficial miles, to be further mcreased through the Castillo dam), which receives the silt of the watersheds that drain into it, the flow of water in the river is nearly egualized throughout the year so as effectually to prevent floods or freshets. This is an important consideration in its bearing upon the construction and the maintenance of the interoceanic canal works. The watersheds too, bordering on the upper San Juan, by reason of the trends of the San Carlos and other rivers are shown to be of limited exbmt, and do not seriously affect the rise of the San Juan. The water supply is sufficient for any possible contingency.

A later reconnaissance shows that a. shorter a.nd bettor location of the lower portion of the eastern division can undoubtedly be found.

The middle division comprises the lake navigation, a dit..hmce of 56.5 miles, with channels of approach at either end requiring dredging and other work.

The western division, extending from Lake Nicaragua to Brito, is 16 .~ miles long, and requires 10 lift locks, 1 tide lock, and a new channel for a part of the Rio Grande.

The deepest cutting is through a mere crest, 730 feet in height, and the excavations are not of extraordinary magnitude on this division.

The Commission has derived much advantage from the reports of Maj. Walter McFarland, Corps of Engineere, United States Army, Gen. Jacob Aro.men, and Prof. Henry Mitchell, of the United States Coast Survey; .reports based upon reliable information and personal observation in their inspection of the country and of various points on the line as located.

"Whatever differences may exist between the reports of Civil Engineer Menocal and those of the gentlemen referred to, it is conceded that the sur"¢-eys are sufficient to make an approximate estimate of the amount and chc'Oracter of the work necessary to construct the canal.

The questions relating to the enlargement of the works deemed necessary by :Major :McFarland, the construction of more extensive harbors, the relative cost of labor and material there as compared with the rates in our country, as well as the determination of the best location possible, will doubtless engage the careful attention of tho e concerned in its construction.

Respecting the magnitude of the harbors, it is to ba remarked that on the west coast the port of San Juan del Sur would serve as a. convenient port to await entrance to the canal, the actual dista.nco apart being about 5ruiles.

The sea is usually so smooth and bad weather so unusual that vessels can anchor off Brito itself1 in the open sea., to await the 1~E~rtunity of entering the canal Gales of wmd are almost, if not wholly, own in that region, and squalls are off the land, in no degree endangering the safety of a vessel at anchor off the coast. Nevertheless a heavy ocean swell rolls in, rendering ample breakwaters necessary to secure smooth water at the entrance to the canal.

More difficulties exist on the eastern coast, and a smooth anchorage would be desirable for vessels awaiting transit. But even there the anchorage, although disagreeable without shelter, would be regarded as safe. Here, as on the west coast, it is requisite that the entrance to the canal should have smooth water, which can only be secured by the construction of ample breakwaters.

Respecting the length of locks proposed (400 feet), the canal should be built for the class of vessels best adapted to extended navigation, which class would in general follow the routes of prevailing winds. Extreme length should be discouraged as well for a true economy as for safety of passengers. Vessels of exceptional length can go, as now, through the Straits of Magellan.

No doubt exists as to the entire practicability of constructing a.n interoceanic ship canal via Lake Nicaragua. If the work were conducted with ability and honesty, it could be completed within a moderate period of time and at a cost that would prove commercially profitable by the payment of tolls, moderate when compared with the loss of time, wear and tear, de· terioration of cargo, insurance, etc., that belong to voyages via Cape Horn or the Straits of Magellan. The cost of construction of the canal and harborshwith all their nece ary adjuncts-locks 400 feet in length and 26 feet . dept of water-may be set down as at least $100,000,000.

They dispose of the Panama route in a short paragraph, which I will read:

THE PANAMA ROUTE. At the request of the Commission, for reasons previously stated, the hon

orable Secretary of the Navy: caused a careful instrumental survey of this route to be made in the viciruty of the line of the Panama Raih:oad.

The proposed route is 41.7 miles long; has a summit level of 123.7 feet (surface of canal above the ocean}; requires a dam and feeder 10.5 miles long; a. retained dam at Obispo statlon; an aqueduct across the Chagres River; a. dee_p cut at the summit level t.81 miles lo.IW, with a mean depth of 102 feet and greatest depth of 197 feet; the constructiOn of the lift locks necessary to overcome the summit level, and, what is common to all of the routes, the construction of harbors on each coast. The deep cut would pr6'bably be subject to landslides, from which the Panama Railroad has suffered seriously, and the canal would be exposed to serious injury from flood. The excavation of the deep cut, involving the handlin~ and tra~ort of millions of cubic yards of materials, is of itself a very great undertaking, especially in such climate as that of the Isthmus.

The cost of the whole work, including that necessary in the harbor of Panama and at Aspinwall, is estimated to exceed by nearly 50 per cent that of the Nicaragua route.

They proposed to construct a canal, the only possible one, with a cut le s than 200 feet deep. They said that was difficult on account of the sliding character of the land. Anybody can see that who has seen the soapstone slipping the railroad down and the amount of work they have to do to keep up the railroad. But they did not propose to go. down with a cut 300 feet by any means. They did not p1·opose to build a dam down there and raise the water. They propose to go high up on the river, build a dam, run a tunnel through the mountain, and bring the water in that way. That kind of a canal would be possible. But it would have to be at a greater elevation than at Nicaragua, and it would cost a great deal more.

Such a canal would be possible at Panama, but it would not answer the demands of an interoceanic canal. A cut 7 miles long and 300 feet deep, as is now proposed, must be a failure. No powex on earth could prevent the slide of land on both sides from closing up the canal unless it was arched all the way. The

6912 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE. JUNE 17 . '

kind of rock met with in constructing the Panama Railroad Mr. PLATT of Connecticut. How many in all? showed how a canal would be affected. Mr. STEW ART. In another place it is summed up here.

But the greates.t obstacle, which I will discuss further on, is to Mr. ALDRICH. What is the Senator reading from? control the Chagres River by means of the proposed Bohio Dam. Mr. STEWART. I am reading from Rodrigues's History of The surveys and explorations upon which the report of the Com- the Panama Canal, which is said to be authentic. He copies it mission above quoted was based were made by engineers of the from the company's reports. There is no doubt about this being very highest character and with more care and diligence than accurate, because it is taken from the public reports: any other interoceanic survey. There have been no such exami- Such was the report of the first finance committee of the Panama Canal nations made since Commodore Ammen's work was done. Other Company. The poor 16,000 women and other shareholders were called upon,

l f 1 tati d l · d tr h not only to pay £400,000 for the concession-peop eo more or ess repu on an more or ess m us Y ave But also to aefra.y the expenses of the first fiasco of M. de Lesseps and the made some surveys, but no complete surveys have been made "propagandathatpreceded"it-thatistosay,the"internationalco:n~ress," under Government authority since Grant's Administration. the lecturlns tour of M . de Lesseps, the bl·ibmg of newspapers, the • •echni-

M MORGAN Th S t f N d th L 11 cal commisSlon," and travels of M. de Lesseps to the Isthmus and to _A,merica, r. · e ena or rom eva a means e u andcommissionsduetointermediarlesofallcla.6ses. Thenbesidestha.tthere

surveys? were commissions due to the "internationn.l svndicate "-g'l'eedy and useless Mr. STEW ART. The surveys made by Lull, Menocal, and middlemen. .As to the American syndicate, ft is one of the most shameful

others whose names appear in the list I have given. corrup~on fUJ?.ds ever r~corded in the hi"ltory of financial enterprises. Imagme this expenditm·e of £480,000, so that a few men in New York

After the Government of the United States had examined all might represent the company in America and cooperate with it when re-the routes and officially determined that Nicaragua was the best quested. To that fund is due the success which attended M. de Les eps' in-

te F h b th f M L · N 1 B vitation to the then Secretary of the Navy of the United States to accept the rou , a rene man Y e name 0 · umen apo eon ona- presidency of the syndicate, and no respectable bankers should ever have parte Wyse went to Panama and obtained from the Colombian participated in that costly fraud upon the shareholders of the Panama Canal Government a concession to build the Panama Canal. There was Company, as three firms in New York did. These men are challenged to no study or investigation of the route previous to the concession. show that they ever did anything for the company except lend their names, One M. Reclus had Spent On the l'sthmus fourteen days

1·n Apr·il, so that here in Europe M. de Lessepsmight say that "America was all right."

The three houses de3erve the hearty reprobation that will be visited some day 1878. between the 2d and 16th of that month. These were all the npon all who have intrigued. and plotted to obtain the money from the poor surveys required for the De Lesseps. O'l·eat en tern rise, or, more· French people. The corruption fund is inN ew York still; it is doing its work

o~ · .1:" of bribery and of systematic chicanery;. and the .Americans, who are consid-properly speaking, great swindle. ered so shrewd, whose press claims to throw light on all the dark corners of

Before organizing or attempting to float a company De Lesseps finance. have been bearing this insult to their good sense with singular called what he denomfuated a congress to meet in Paris to deter- equanimity. mine the best route. He fixed the number of delegates and This was written some time ago. It was not written since this stocked the congress in advance. De Lesseps himself made sev- matter came up. eral orations, and among other things he said: Imagine now a company in England formed on the basis of the Panama

I will not enter into the scientific question. I will only ask the technical Canal, paying £904,000 for preliminary expenses, besides £4e0,000 for an commission to tell us precisely what would be the expense of a canal :l niveau A.m.erican corruption fund, altogether £1,384,:100, not including £4.00,000 for (sea level)j what estimates can be made of that expense, and especially what the concession! The total amount called on the shares up to this time has the cost will be in future (after construction) for canals a niveau (sea level) been £5,000,000, and yet out of that sum nearly £1,800,000, or 30 per cent, was or for those with locks. Governments can encourage such enterprises; they spent at once on, or set aside for, the conceSSion and preliminary expenses! can not execute them. It is the public, then, on whom we must call; anu :Mr. PLATT of Connecticut. When was that written? :~:r ~lf~~thebe~~~~f:t~~elu~~.ask of you (if it is a canal with locks) Mr. STEWART. This book was written in 1885, when the

I will express my opinion. I consider that a canal with locks would retard matter was fresh. It was not written for this purpose. · navigation. From the experience we have had at Suez, a ship must not now Of course the whole scheme, the pretended international con-be delayed. There are a. thousand Philistines there who can load a ship of d h 400 tons in a.n hour. It is to be remembered also that it cost a ship of a thou- ference, was gotten up to etermine w ich was the best route, sand tons 2,000 francs for every day's delay. I have often been consulted on when our :mrveyors and engineers in this country had already this subject. I have always replied by dispatch that ships must not be de- determined it and everybody knew which was the best route. la.yed in their passage. They are informed that it will be well for them to · b · d b W wait the rise of the tide when they can not be sm·e of their being able to steer The concessiOn was o tame Y yse, who was a friend of De satisfactorily. (The Panama Canal, Rodrigues. ) Lesseps, and was undoubtedly either his agent or his partner.

Don Manuel M. Peralta asked the following question: One million eight hundred thousand pounds, or nearly $9,000,000, The American scientific commission decided on the Nica,ragua route, since paid for a concession that cost nothing , and preliminary expenses

it was demonstrated that the Panama route was impossible. Is there no incurred to deceive the people, stamp De Lesseps as a high-class ground for taking its decision into consideration? · · · al H tainl t b t 1 d tit thi f

M. DE LESSEPS. The Government declared that there was no imJ?ossibility cnmm · e cer Y can no e s Y e a pe e . for a. canal with locks, and that it could not assert that a canal a. mveau (sea Who will contend that De Lesseps was acting in good faith? If level) was impossible. The Government, in its fairness, was absorbed in one he was a-cting in good faith, why would he not examine the route idea only. before he entered ·upon the enterprise? If he thought he had an

De Lesseps would not consider a canal with locks. He wanted honest enterprise, why did he take from the people $9,000,000 to a sea-level canal for his swindling purposes. A man who would advertise it and deceive his victims? He made his congress deadvocate a sea-level canal across the Isthmus without ever having cide in favor of a sea-level canal. For what purpose was this visited that part of the world or having a survey made by anyone done? He himself stated: else ought not to be trusted. He wanted a sea-level canal for the In order to get the money of the people. purpose of getting money from the public, as he acknowledges in The outcome of this miserable business was a miserable fail-the speech above quoted.

The appointment of the committee to select a route discloses ure. The money spent for propaganda and that spent on the the scheme of De Lesseps. Persons who had never seen the lsth- canal did no good. Why should it be contended that the misermus served his purpose better than intelligent engineers who had able swindlers who are convicted of the Panama deal are more examined it. He wanted a favorable report for a sea-level canal worthy of confidence as to which is the best route than the Comat Panama and he took means to secure it. mission appointed by President Grant, which made its report

The vast sums which De Lesseps robbed the people of in float- based upon actual surveys, and which Commission was composed · h' h h , h t d t f 1 1 of the ablest and best men in the Navy? The Walker Commismg Is new sc eme s ow wny e wan e a repor or a sea- eve sion was the most comfortable one that ever visited the Isthmus canal with which to deceive the people. Rodrigues gives us the expenses of the formation of the Panama Company as follows: of Darien. It spent over a month in Paris and fifteen days at

As to the "expenses which M. Ferdinand de Lesseps has been forced t; Panama. It tells us in its report: incur in order to arrive at the formation of your company," the commis- On the 9th of Agust, 1899, the Commission left New York for Paris, where sioners reported as follows: the New Panama Canal Company opened to its members its records, maps,

"In the first place there are the ex-penses for the first issue made in 1879; plans, and profiles, and the results of the sm·veys made and the data collected for the propaganda. which preceded the formation of the syndicate of that by it and the old Panama Canal Com:pany. Mr. Mam·iceHutin, the directorsubscription; the outlay made on account of the different expeditions e:ent to general, Mr. L. Choron, the chief engmeer, and other officers of the company the Isthmus, and finally the expense with the recent issue of 590,0GO shares, in- received the commissioners with great courtesy and were ready at all times eluding placarding, advertising, postage, the transportation and the central- to assist them in making a study of this route in all its aspects. A special izing of funds, the expenses With the personnel, as well as all commissions meeting of the Comite Technique was also called to give the CommissiOners due to the bankers, intermediaries, and promoters, not only in France, but such oral explanations as they might desire, some of its members coming abroad. The total under this head amounts to 10,801,577 francs 59c., which from distant parts of Europe for the purpose. represent 1.8 per cent of the total capital necessary for building the canal. While in Europe the Commission also visited and examined the Ki~l Canal

'' To that sum * * * we must add the remunerationstipulated as profit in Germany, the North Sea Canal in Holland, and the Mancha ter Canal and forthemembersoftheinternationalsyndicatewhich was kind enough to make Liverpool docks in England, and returned to New York on th-e.~ 29th of o.d vances of considerable funds necessary for the formation of your company, September. suut:; which would have been lost by them had the public failed to respond to They were gone fifty days, and they spent about a month in their appeal. That remuneration amounts to 11,800,000 francs. * * * -

.. There is still an agreement made with the .American financial group Paris. What did they go there to get? What results? The results which has charged itself with the task of representing the company's mter- of a failure. When we already had surveys that were accurate est in the UnitN1 States. * * •* Such agreement brings us a liability of six and were made by disinterested parties, why did the Commission annual paymentS, p.s follows: 3,100,000 francs soon after the organization of the company; 1.400 000 francs payable one year after; and five payments of go to Paris to get information from the Panama 0 ompany of its 1,500,000 francs at the end of each of the five following years. Such expenses failure. They presented no plan. Our commissioners would not nhould appear in your annual budgets." t p ltl h th th L t b h Such was the report of the first finance committee of the Panama Canal accep anama, a 10ug ey were ere. e us see ow muc Compa!ly. time they spent at Panama.

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 6913 AI; the disturbed conditions in Colombia rendered it inadvisable for the

Commission to attempt to meet the President at Bogota, the State Department, at the request of this Commission, communicated with the Colombian authoritie through the United States pllnister ther e, and asJl;eq that a representative of the Government be appomted to m eet the com1mss10ners when they reached the country and give tJ?em such information and a~stan~e relative to their m i"!sion as he convemently could. In acc01·dance With this request, Mr. J. T. Ford, the consulting engineer of t:qe R epublic .in technical matters connected with the P anama Canal, was a.ss1gned to this duty. He m et them in his official capa.c·ty <!n their a:rriva~ a~ Pa~ma,. courteously expre. eel an entire willingness to aid the~ m. tpmr myestigatw~, and accompanied them from day to day upon their VIs:ts to different p omts upon the canal line and elsewhere during t heir stay up::m the IE.thmus. . .

Fifteen days were spent in the department of Panama, durmg which a:n investigation of the route from sea to !>t;a was made, as had been done m Nicaragua. The work was greatly fn.cilitated by the local officers of the New Panama Canal Company, who pl&ced two houses in Colon at the service of tho commissioner s, furnished a special ti:ain each day to tak~ them from point to point as the work progressed, permitU:d them to use the~r maps a!!-d plans, informed them a~ to the wor~ .then gomg on, accompamed the~ m their inspection of the lme, and exhibited to them tl!-e plant and mater1als purchased by the old canal comp~ny for col!-Structwn .purposes, much of which was stored in sheds and warehouses atdifferentpomtson the Isthmus. During this period the commissioD:ers went 9ver the entir~ line of the ~na.l from Colon to Panama, and exammed the sites fm.· the differen~ aUXIliary works. This included a trip to the upper waters of the Chagres, m th~ Alajuela region, and they returned in boats, dO as to have an opportumty of seeing the river.

Now, this is the investigation they made. It was just a junketing tour, and they were entertained a~ both ends. It has be~n suggested that that could not possibly mfluence them. Why did the officials of the company entertain them and treat them !f they could not influence them? There was nobody to entertam them on the Nicaragua route, but they were nicely entertained on the Panama route. It may not have had any influence, but why have the e entertainments and give them wine to drink and nice things to eat and all that kind of thing if it did not mean anything? I know that <is often done. •:Members of Congress and others get those attentions when their influence is desired.

These entertl:l.inments may not have influenced our commissioners. I hope they did not. Something appeared to have unsettled their understanding, for they wei·e first in favor of the Nicaragua and subsequently in favor of the French. If their reasons for the change satisfy them, I do not think the public will enjoy much of that satisfaction. Although they were unable to state with certainty that a canal can be built at Panama on the plan they propose, still they advise the Government of the United States to make an effort to place itself in the position of the New Panama Company. The new company has a contract with the. old to build a canal in ten years and give the old company 60 per cent of the proceeds. Instead of building the canal and can-ying out its contract with the old company, the new company proposes to sell to the United States for $40,000,000. It is too absurd for argument to contend that the new company has any power to sell anything unless the United States is willing to be substituted for the new company, build the canal, and give the old company 60 per cent of the proceeds after it is built. No legal quibbling can satisfy plain men that the new company can· sell out the old.

But, to make it appear plausible, it is proposed to turn the negotiations over to the President. If he can find any person or corporation who can make title to the United States, he is required to buy out the assets of the De Lesseps swindle and proceed to spend the money of the United States in an effort to construct a canal at Panama . . No doubt the President. with unlimited command of money, could buy out the thousands of French victims. He could undoubtedly buy out the knowing ones at his own price if he could satisfy them that they could get no more; but the thousands of ignorant victims, whose hopes have been excited by the glowing promises of the new company, will be harder to deal with, and it would undoubtedly take him yea1·s to perfect the title.

But if he will take time enough to satisfy all parties in interest that $40,000,000, or half that sum, is all the United States will pay, he can get the title at his own price, and it might be possible to commence the doubtful, if not impossible, undertaking of building a canal at Panama within the next six or seven years.

The criticism of the title of the Nicaragua Canal is hardly worth discussing. Both Costa :B,ica and Nicaragua want the canal, and there is no danger of any failure on theil' part in making title to the United States sufficient for the purposes of the canaJ for a moderate subsidy in money.

The Hepburn bill providing for the construction of the canal at Nicaragua has pas ed the House twice in response to a strong popular demand. The passage of that bill by the Senate would end the matter, and the construction of the canal would be commenced at once. It seems unfortunate, after the United States at great ex~.\).Eje has ascertained that the Nicaragua route is the best route, that the work of the commission appointed by Grant and the numerous surveys made during his eight years in the White House should be turned down and held for naught, and that the casual observations of the Frenchmen .Wyse and M. Reclus for fourteen days should be treated as a demonstration of

XXXV~3

the supe1imity of the Panama route over all others, for that was the only investigation made by De Lesseps previous to proclaiming to the world the feasibility of a sea-level canal at P anama. Am I ha.rsh in my conclusion that a sea-level canal was not De Lesseps's paramount object, when it is shown by the record of the Panama swindle that he and his coconspirators pocketed the sum of nine millions in launching the enterprise? How much more they took unto themselves while the wor]i: was progressing on the canal must be left to the imagination.

But suppose the President succeeds in buying the French title. He will have the Colombian Government to deal with. Does anybody suppose that that Government will not find ways and meam to extort money from the United States when it is ascertained that the French title has been bought and the President is comnelled to comply with any demands that Colombia may make? ~

The United States has for the last hundred years felt a lively interest in an isthmian canal, and it has been asserted over and over again that this Government must exercise a controlling influence over any canal, whoever might build it.

Why did not the United States protest effectively against the De Lesseps canal? There were two obvious reasons: .

1. From the surveys and explorations made during Grant's Administration it was not believed that it was practical to build a canal at Panama. The possible canal at that point suggested by Grant's commission, if it could be built, would be of doubtful utility.

2. Because the reckless and blind extravagance of the De Lesseps Company, proceeding as it did to spend money without an adequate examination, or without any examination at all, soon disclosed the fact that there was no bona fide intention on the part of the manipulators to construct a canal at Panama.

It is conceded that whatever route is adopted for a lock canal there must be a lake or r eservoir to supply the same with water. Nicaragua has a natural water supply. The Walker Commission says, on page 257 of their report:

The investigations made in connection with the regulations of Lake Nicaragua have demonstrated that that lake affords an inexhaustible water supply for the canal by that route.

Speaking of Panama in the same connection and on the same page, I quote as follows from the report:

The initial proposition, on the other hand, fm.· the Panama route is to form Lake Bohio so as to yield a water supply for a traffic of 10,000,000 tons, which can b~ supplemented when n eeded by an amount suffiCient for more than f~m· trmes that traffic, by means of the Alajuela reservoir. For all practical purposes this may be considered an unlimited supply for the Panama route. So far as the practical operation of a ship canal is concerned there-fore, the water-supply features on both lines are satisfactory. '

The Bohio Dam is not yet constructed, and the testimony bef?re the comm~ttee shows that nobody now living knows positively whether It can be constructed or not. It is proposed to sink caissons 130 feet below sea level. When this shall have been accomplished the race of men furnishing the laborers will be largely diminished. If it is possible for a human being to stand the air pressure 130 feet below the sea level at P·anama. everbody doubts it, and no member of the Commission was able to find reasons to remove his own doubts. •

I do not remember the exact height of the proposed Bohio dam. I ask the Senator from Alabama what is the whole heigllt of that dam? I know how far they have-got to go down to put in their caisson.

Mr. MORGAN. It is 190 feet. Mr. PLATT of Gmnecticut. From the ground up? Mr. STEWART. To the bedrock it is about 130 feet. :Mr. MORGAN. One hundred and twenty-seven feet. Mr. STEW ART. It is pretty near 130 feet . I have seen the

Chagres River when it was mad, and it is the most terrible stream I e\er saw. Right at the Isthmus, in the doldrums there, the rain comes clown like a cloudburst, and the 1iver rises with such rapidity that you are compelled to run to get out of tho way of it. I climbed up on the crags quite a distance to get away from it. I was afraid it would catch me. It was rising so fast that you could see it rising as the flood came down. When the flood · commences you have at once to seek sh elter in order to get away from it. I have never seen anything in my life like the rainfall in that country. It is now proposed to build a dam thEre, whem you have to contend with the disadvantages of such a river and such a climate.

Our engineers-Ammen, Humphreys, and Patterson-did not propose to build a dam at the point the Walker Commission now recommend. The Grant Commission proposed to sink a cut less than ~00 feet deep instead of 300, as proposed by the Walker Commission, and to carry the canal over the Chagres River i:Q.stead of damming that river. The Gra~t CommiEsion proposed to supply the canal with water by going up the Chagres River and constructing lakes or reservoirs and taking the water therefrom through a tunnel-an aqueduct into the proposed canal. Even then the Grant Commission suggested that it would -ue very


difficult to maintain a cut of the depth proposed by that Commission on account of the sliding character of the material through which the cut must be constructed.

I am aware that it is argued that there has been a great advance in engineering since ·the Grant commission made their report, but th e engineers who testified before the committee admitted that engineering had not yet advanced far enough to furnish examples or parallels of the proposed Bohio dam. I have seen no satisfactory solution of the difficulty suggested by the Grant commission of preventing slides :filling the cut, which has to be at least 300 feet deep. There is nothing in the evidence or the report of the Walker commission to show that a cut 300 feet deep in the sliding material on the Panama route can be kept open. Scien~e has not sufficiently advanced to solve that problem, unless it is proposed to make a cut several miles in width. It does not appear that there is anything in the surveys or maps of the bankrupt French company so far in advance of modern discoveries in science as to demonstrate the feasibility of either the cut or the Bohio dam. The Walker commission must h ave an idea that there is some occult knowledge in the refuse of the Panama failure or they would not suggest the payment of $2,000,000 for surveys and plans which nobody proposes to follow.

If there was nothing else objectionable in the negotiations of the Walker commission but the proposition to pay $2,000,000 for the French surveys, a prudent man would hardly employ that commission to negotiate for rat traps, much less to act as agents of the United States in transactions involving millions.

The great lake at Nicaragua, which the committee say contains an inexhaustible supply of water, already exists. It has about 800 square miles of watersheds and 200 square miles of lake surface. All the reports show that the wate1·· supply is abundant. There is a lake which is already made; it requires no impossible dam to create it.

There is no engineering proposition connected with the Nicaragua route the like of which has not been heretofore accomplished. Some of the work may be difficult, but all of the work to be done has a parallel elsewhere. Everybody knows that a canal can be built there.

At Panama you would have to make a water supply by the construction of a dam, the possibilities of which are an unknown quantity. It is suggested that a temporary dam must be built while the principal dam is being constructed. No one has demonstrated that there is time enough in the dry season to construct even a temporary dam. When the floods come, whether the design be for a temporary dam or a permanent structure, if it is not completed, it will go with the first flood. It never occurred to the Grant Commission, after years of careful surveys aL..od investigation, to build a dam at Bohio, but they regarded the plan suggested by them as even doubtful by reason of the sliding character of the material through which the cut they proposed must have been constructed. No one contends that there is no possibility of failure of the Walker Commission plan either in keeping open the cut or constructing the Bohio dam. Still Senators insist that the Nicaragua route must be abandoned, where no untried engineering difficulties exist, and the Panama route adopted, where no one can state with certainty that a canal is possible. Certainly what is proposed by the Walker Commission is fat· beyond engineering exper:j.ence.

I am unwilling to surrender a certainty for an uncertainty. I do not believe that a canal at Panama will ever be built. I fear the effect of the amendment. I do not charge anyone with such intention, but I very much fear that if the amendment is adopted it will defeat any canal during the present generation, and perhaps for all time.

Mr. PLATT of.Connecticut. Why? Mr. STEW ART. Because if yon abandon the Nicaragua route

and adopt the other, before you proceed very far with the work you will find that it will have to be abandoned, and there will be no canal.

The people have looked for the building of a canal at Nicaragua for many years. After the examinations which were made under the direction of General Grant were published throughout the United States the people settled down to the conviction that the Nicaragua route is the one that should be selected for a canal. That has been understood; and every year in the platforms of both political parties the building of a Nicaraguan canal has been advocated. .

The people do not speak of any other canal, and if you should now select this other route it will be regarded by the people as an abandonment of an isthmian canal. They know what the effect will be. They know that Panama is a pest hole and the worst place on earth. They know there is no wind there to blow away the miasmatic poisons engendered there, and they know tha,.t Americans can not live there. The people of the West, and particularly of California who have passed over the Panama route know what a terrible place it is. They know that nobody

can go there and live. On the contrary, at Nicaragua a breeze nearly always prevails, and it is a healthy country. Americans will go there and cities will be built. There is no climate on earth as bad as the particular spot where i t is proposed to locate the Panama Canal. This results n ot only b ecause it is in the Tropics, but because there is no air stirring, and the want of air is death to the navigation of sailing vessels. But that is not the worst of it-it is death to human life. Where you can have a breeze in the tropics there you can have health, but you can not have it without air. It is worse than a dungeon as far as air is concerned. It has been said that Panama is so sickly because so manypeople have crossed it and it has been used so long. There are many places that have been used a good while that are n ot sickly. I do not think the use of land or the use of a count ry makes it sickly.

In the agreements concerning Panama we are to take care of the sanitary conditions. We have not m oney enough to make Panama healthy. It can not be done. If you would go there in the seasons when the wind does not blow, you would see what a condition the people are in and how they suffer, and you would appreciate the terrors of living in such a place. I do not wonder that France wants to get rid of the Panama Canal. Of course these fellows want to make money out of it; but do you believe if it had been a practical scheme and could be developed under French engineers that the canal would not have been built by France, even after the French people had been robbed of $10,000,000 in floating the company? Even after all that occurred, if the French engineers had said, "Here is a perfectly practical scheme; we can build this canal and you can get your money back,'' the Fl·ench Government would have proceeded with the building of that canal. Do you believ~ that France, which is a strong nation, would ever have abandoned that work if the French Government had believed it feasible? No; it is only because they got reports from their engineers that it was an impossible thing that the French Government abandoned the enterp1·ise.

1\Ir. PLATT of Connecticut. Will the Senator permit me? Mr. STEWART. Yes. :Mr. PLATT of Connecticut. The Senator seems to think $40,-

000,000 is a great deal more than the Panama Canal is worth. Mr. STEW ART. I do not think it is worth a cent. Mr. PLAT-T of Connecticut. Then, why will the stockholders

in France have a right to complain if they are getting this immense price for the work already done there?

Mr. STEW ART. Because they will not get any of it. These fellows are going to sell them out. I think, as a principal, I would have the right to complain if my servant sold my horse and took the money himself.

Mr. PLATT of Connecticut. Will not the liquidator protect the stockholders?

:Mr. STEW ART. No; I do not think the liquidator has agreed to do that. This company is going to get $40,000,000 for a contract they have to build a canal; and, if they build it, they will have 40 per cent interest, and somebodyis going to get swindled. If you could see how crooked that company has been from the beginning, how much swindling has been committed, and read the criminal records and see how many have gone to jail, you would not want the United states subrogated to any rights in that canal. The United States ought not to be subrogated to any of the rascality connected with that canal. The company had ten miilions to start with, nearly five hundred thousand of which was spent in this country, and there has been great scandal about the expenditure. Why was it spent here? Why was $10,000,000 spent for the purpose of a propaganda? I tell yon that the thing is too rotten for us to negotiate with, particularly when we are to get something we do not want and get something that has been condemned by our engineers.

No man dare say that Ammen, Patterson, and Humphreys, who reported on the various interoceanic canal routes, were not eminent engineers and that they acted on ample information secured by many careful, practical engineers of the highest character. President Grant was an enthusiastic advocate of an intel'Oceanic canal. Abundant appropriations were made, and the investigation of the various routes occupied nearly all of his eight years in the White House. I watched the progress of these surveys, and, as I pa-ssed over the Isthmus frequently, I had some personal knowledge of the conditions and know that the Nicaragua route was selected, not from any personal interest or prejudices, but because it was demonstrated by the surv.eys and investigations made dming General Grant's Pl·esidency that it was the best, if not the only practical route. The 1·eport of Grant's Commission established that fact and the American people accepted it as final.

It is not shown that the Walker Commission have made an adequate survey of ·the Panama route. They have made no report and show no plan which will convince anyone that the cut of 300 feet they propose can be kept open. They show no plan of . a dam which they dare say is practicable. Their statements about

. (

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 6915 the climatic conditions are wide of the mark. Anyone need not visit the Isthmus- to 1mow that Panama must always be an unhealthy place when they are informed by a!l navigators ~nd by the inhabitants of the Isthmus that there IS no breeze m the Bay of Panama for months together that will :fill a sail. When the sun comes out afte1· one of the rains, or rather cloudbursts, that occur, the steam goes up from the land and the whole Isthmus is a cauldron of poisonous vapor. On the other hand, the reason why Nicaragua is a healthy place is because they have constant breezes from either ocean, which purify the atmosphere and make it a most healthful and delightful place of residence. .

After De Lesseps had decided without examination to build a sea-level canal for the purpose of robbing the subscribers, J;e visited this country to conoborate on his return what he had sa1d while he 1mew nothing of the subject. No attention was paid to him in this country except what was bought with the $2,400,000 spent in New York to manipulate public opinion in this country and to prevent opposition. He called on the President and was told that whenever a canal was built across the Isthmus the United States expected to have a cont1·olling interest in it.

If the De Lesseps scheme had been regarded as pradicable, ~t would have required more than $2,400~000 to have bought the SIlence of the United States. The attempt to build the canal by extravagant expenditures on an impossible route did n<;>t materially interest this Government. How different the attitude of the United States when the question of the Nicaragua Canal was under consideration. Men in the Senate went so far as to intimate a willingness to involve this c,puntry in war with England to protect that route. 'Why were the American people so zealous that they would fight England for the "Nicaragua route, while they we13 indifferent to the proceedings of the French on the Panama route? The reason was that the Grant Commission, who had examined all the routes, pronounced the Nicaragua route the best, and in fact the only practical route. And the same commission had condemned the Panama route.

I met people almost every day on the Pacific coa-st or in New York who had passed over the Panama Railroad while the De Lesseps company was e~gaged in wastl?g t~e money o~ the V'i?tims of that colossal swmdle, and they mvanably gave 1t as therr opinion that the French would never build the canal and did not believe that they had any serious intention of doing so.

When the bubble burst and thousands of poor Frenchmen who had lost their money were forced to realize the great swindle, Americans looked on in pity rather than in anger. The French courts of justice considered every extenuating circumstance, but were compelled to condemn and imprison the leading characters in the swindle.

But we are told that the Walker Comm.issi<>n has settled everything. It is no disparagement to the Walker Commission to say that in character, learning, and ability it was not equal to the Grant Commission composed of Humphreys, Patterson, and .Ammen. Besides, the Walker Commission got its information in fifteen days on the Isthmus, riding in Pullman cars and dining sumptuously in houses provided by the new company who were offering a canal they did not own for sale for many millions of dollars. Who would put such an examination under such circumstances against the examination of the commission appointed by Grant which was occupied for years in surveys and explorations? Nothing has been offered by the Walker Commission to shake the conclusions of the Grant Commission. But the Walker Commission, with nothing showing the practicability of the Panama route to offer, asks the United States to pay $2,000,000 for the discarded maps and surveys of the De Lesseps swindle.

I appeal to Senators before they decide that Panama is to the extent of $40,000,000 the better route to compare the reports of the two commissions and the chara.cter of the men. I beg leave to again read the report of the Grant Commission as to which is the better route:

WASHINGTON CITY, Feb1·ua1y 7, 1876. The PR:ru-...u>ENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

The Commission appointed iJ¥ you to consider the subject of communication by canal between the waters of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans acrossJ over, or near the Isthmus connecting North and South America, have the nonor, after a long, careful, and minute study of the several surveys of the various routes across the continent, unanimously to report:

1. That the route known as the ·~~:agua. route," beginning on the Atlantic side at or near Greytown, I · g by canal to the San Juan River; thenc.e following its left bank to the mouth of the San Carlos River, at which point navigation of the San Juan River begins, and by the aid of three short canals of an aggregate length of B.~ miles reaches Lak~ Nicara~; from thenc:;e across the· lake and through the valleys of the RIO del :M:edio and the R10 Grande to what is known as the port of Brito, on the Pacific coast, possesses, both for the construction and maintenance of a canal, greater advantages and offers fewer difficulties from engineering, commercial, and economic points of view than any one of the other routes shown to be practicable by surveys sufficient in detail to enable a _judgment to be formed of their reJ.a-· tive m erits, as will be briefly presented in the appended memorandum.

The data fer the conclusion of the Commission will be found in the reports of the various surveys and examinations made under the direction and auspices of the Navy Department, copies of which are transmitted herewith.

A statement relating to these surveys and examinations, with a brief ac-

coimt of the characteristic features ol the routes, will be found in the accompanying memorandum prepared by the Commission.

We have the honor to be, with high respect, yonr obedient servants, ANDREW A. HUMPHREYS,

Bl'igadie1·-Gene1·al. Chief of Enginee1·s, U. 8. A ., etc. C. P. PATTERSON,

Superintendent United States Coast S11.1"Vey. DANL. AMMEN,

Commodore and Chief of Bureau of Navigation.

I was familiar with most of the officers making these surveys. In addition to their written reports t!ley frequently descn"bed to me the great difficulties and hardships they experienced in getting through the jungles on the various routes. Their task was no easy one. It was the most difficult and arduous labor ever imposed upon officers of the Gove1·nment, but the task was well performed, on foot, making actual surveys; not in palace cars with luxuriant lodgings, in palaces built with French money, or in social dinings and winings in the gorgeous saloons of Paris.

The people of the United States, whether for good or ovil, desire the Nicaragua Canal. They are satisfied with the reports made on that route_ They are satisfied with the Nicaragua route, more particularly because no adverse report has ever been made by any engineer of respectability. Even the Walker commission, with all its French surroundings and leanings, tell us that the Nicaragua route is perfectly practicable, and that there is no engineering difficulty the like of which has not been overcome. Their doubts all relate to the construction of a canal on the route that they advise the United States to purchase for $40,000,000.

I would not grieve over the $40,000,000 wasted if I did not believe that the turning down of the Nicaragua route will delay, if not permanently prevent, the construction of any canal. ·

1\-Ir. GALLINGER. I will say to the Senator that if he will examine the platform of the last Republican convention he will notice that its r e'10mmendation is for an interoceanic canal.

:Mr. STEW AR'.r. Yes; but I hope at that time the Republican convention was not anticipating Walk~r's report.

Mr. GALLINGER. Possibly they were anticipating what is going to happen.

Mr. STEW ART. Yes; the Nicaragua Canal bill which has passed the House at two sessions may be sidetracked for the abandoned scheme of the French swindlers. When the people of the United States ask for a canal on a feasible route in a delightful climate and country they may be given the opportunity to buy an impossible route with $40,000,000 in a climate as destructive to human life as the Black Hole of Calcutta.

Mr. GALLINGER. lfthe Senator from Wisconsin wishes to go on at the present time, it is rather immaterial to me whether I speak on this bill now or not---

Mr. SPOONER. I yield with pleasure to the Senator. Mr. GALLINGER. I will speak very briefly, if at all. Mr. SPOONER. I can speak at another time. Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. P1·esident, for many yeaTs I have be

lieved that a canal connecting the waters of the Atlantic and Pad:fic oceans was a commercial necessity, and I have been equally impressed heret<>fore with the belief that the Nicaragua route was preferable to any other. That belief was strengthened when the Isthmian Canal Commission. in its preliminary reports,. favored Nicaragua, but when the same Commission, after a carefnl reconsideration and review of the case, including the amended offer of the New Panama Canal Company, expressed a preference for the Panama route, my views were sufficiently changed to lead me to carefully investigate the matter, which I have done, with the result that I am now thoroughly of opinion that the Panama route is the one that ought to be selected.

My impression is, Mr. President, that the people of New Hampshire have reached the same conclusion, at least I infer so from letters received on that · subject, three of which I will read, two of them being from accomplished engineers.

The first letter is from Mr. E. R. Brown, president of the Strafford Savings Bank, of Dover, N.H. He is an educated gentleman of large business experience, whose views are entitled t.o serious consideration.

Mr. Brown says: STRAFFORD SAVINGS BANK,

Dover, N. H., January 6. 190'$. D EA.R Sm: I sincerely hope that the Senate will give the Panama route

for the canal full consideration. I am in favor of this route for the following reasons: It has fewer locks and requires less time in transit, and may be made a sea-level canal. The annual cost of maintenance is much less. It has good harbors. It is not in the earthquake region. These are only a few among many reasons why it should be preferred over the Nicaragua route, but my main reason is that if the Panama route is selected there will never be a second canal eut to trouble us, or at least for many years, while if the Nicaragua route is taken the Panama Canal will be completed before many fears by some company or nation.

ery trUly; yours, E. R. BROWN. Hon. J ACOB H. GALLINGER,

United States Senate, Washington., D. C. The next letter is from an old gentleman in the State of New

Hampshire. Mr. Samuel Webber, of Charlestown, who in his

6916 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENA'l'E. JUNE 17,

early years was engaged in engllieering projects. He is now retired from active service, and notwithstanding he is advanced in years he keeps abreast of the times and has taken great interest in the matter of an interoceanic canal. I give the part of his letter which refers to that project:

CHARLESTOWN, N.H., June 9, 1902. MY DEAR DR. GALLINGER: I wrote you some two years since t.o "go

slow" on the isthmian canal, and the time is now coming for a move. From an engineer's view of the matter, I decidedly favor Panama. We can see pretty plainly what is to be done there, but we can not see bottom on the Nicaragua project, and I think it would be as likely to cost four hundred millions as not. ·

The objection to a dam at Bohio, on the Panama route, are not half those to the one at Ochoahon the Nicaragua plan, judgin~ from the reports you have e:ent me, and t e shorter routo and less time m transit dispel the climatic objections which are urged. I am decidedly in favor of Mr. HoAR's bill, if the financial arrangements with the FrenchandC<llombianinterestscan be made satisfactory and secure. I speak as a hydraulic engineer of some experience.

Yours, very truly, SAML. WEBBER. The third letter is from Prof. Robert Fletcher, who is the direc

tor of"the Thayer School of Civil Engineering at Dartmouth College, a gentleman of remarkable attainments and of a very wide knowledge on matters of civil engineering. He says:

Hon. J. H. GALLINGER, HANOVER, N.H., January 7, 1902.

United States Senator jro1n New Hampshire. MY DEAR SIR: Allow me to address you on a matter of large public inter

est, on which you will probably have to take action before long as a member of the Senate. Hoping that this may not appear impertinent, it is proper to give the reason for venturing this expression of opinion.

The question is that of the isthmian canal. It is proper to state that I have b een a close student of this question for some fifteen years; that the late president of the Maritime Canal Company, Hon. Hiram Hitchcock, was a friend and fellow-townsman; that a number of graduates of this institution were engaged for eomo years on the surveys prosecuted in Nicaragua by that company· that a 1-.mented colleague was a member of ons of the engineering commissions which made a r eview of the plans of the aforesaid company; that I have carefully studied the reports of the various commissions that have investigated the Nicaragua Canal scheme, having received copies of the published atlases and documents from both sides, and that on the basis of this ,Prolonged investigation it appears to me that, as an engineering proposition, the Nicaragua Canal scheme should receive little consideration, in view of the accomplished results and the favorable conditions and possibilities at Panama.

It is easy to see by a careful perusal of the recent report of the last Commission that c.onsideration of the engineering features alone would have compelled a report in favor of Panama; but that political c.onsiderations, questions of concessions, etc., rendered it inexpedient to allow questions of construction pureJ.y to determine the decision. Now, without assuming to be able to weigh these other considerations, it would appear that ultimately the question must be viewed in the light of common sense, and as to all c.onditions and contingencies from the engineering standpoint.

In view, then, of all the advantages and assured results gained at Panama, the reliable estimates for the future~ based on perfected plans, and the large amount of the world's resources a.ll'eady sunk there, it worud appear not much less than a stupendous folly to abandon all that n.nd to begin at a new point on a route nearly four times a-s long, with higher summit levels, nearly double the amotmt of lockage, three times the amount of curvature, and a confessedly much greater cost of operation ultimately, with problems of unknown magnitude to be worked out involving probably unsuspected additions to the cost. Afterweighingall these facts it would appear to an unprejudiced observer that some way must be found to do away with all political and legal obstacles and objections, and reduce the question to its lowest terms as a strictly engineering proposition.

Permit me to say that this expression, which you may judge obtrusive, is not prompted by any person or any interest whatsoever1 but by the simple desire of an impartial student to see the great enterpriSe of piercing this continental barrier accomplished in the best way and along the line of least resistance.

Yours, very respectfully, ROBERT FLETCHER,

Director Thaye·r School of Civil E nginee1-ing. ~fr. President, I do not propose to take the time of the Senate

in discussing many matters connected with this subject which have already received careful attention by Senators on both sides of the question. Suffice it for me to say that my investigations have fully persuaded me that there is much greater danger from earthquakes and volcanoes on the Nicaragua than on the Panama route. A country that prints a picture of a volcano on its postage stamps must not find fault with us if we conclude that there is danger from seismic disturbances in that latitude.

1..-ICAR.AGUA MORE EXPENSIVE. Again, I am persuaded that the Nicaragua route will be much

more expensive, including the cost of maintenance, than the Panama. If it be true, as the Commission asserts and as has been alleged over and over again in this debate, that it will cost $1 ,350,000 more annually to operate the Nicaragua than the Panama Canal, it follows that the real difference in cost in favor of Panama will be $72,500,000 instead of $5,000,000, an item that is certainly worth saving.

GREATER CURVES ON NICARAGUA. That the curves on the Nicaragua are more numerous and

troublesome than on the Panama route is admitted by all, and it is a very serious question whether the navigation of the Nicaragua Canal will be at all possible in the night. My investigations on that point leave me in doubt, which no one has seemed able to clear up. Mr. Morison, admittedly one of the leading engineers of the world, gives it as his opinion that night transit for large ships will not be possible on the Nicat·ag'ua li:he.

THE QUESTION OF TIME.

As to the matter of time, I do not find that the contention of the advocates of the Nicaragua route is sustained, even assuming that transit through both canals is placed on an equality; that is, that no advantage shall be claimed for Panama in the matter of night transit. The total length of the Nicaragua Canal, as shown by the report of the Isthmian Canal Commission, is 183.66 miles, and of the Panama Canal 49.99 miles. On the Nicaragua route ships will float in deep water on Lake Nicaragua for a distance of 41.78 miles, and on the Panama route the same advantage will be had for a distance of 7 miles on Lake Bohio. This will leave 141.88 miles of canal navigation on the Nicaragua line and 41.09 miles on the Panama route.

A careful calculation by experts gives the average time for a ship to pass through the Nicaragua Canal as sixty-four and onehalf hours, and for the Panama Canal twenty-one hours, being forty-three and one-half hours in favor of Panama.

The Isthmian Canal CommisEion gives t-he distance from the termini of the Panama route to New York and San Francisco, respectively, as 498 nautical miles iL. excess of that by the Nicaragua route.

A calculation will show that any steamer having a speed of 11t miles per hour will cover that extra distance in the time gained by passing through the Panama Canal, and it is equally certain that Panama is the shorter route to New York and San Francisco for all steamers having a speed of over 11t knots.

The distance between the Gulf ports and San Francisco to the termini of the Panama route is fixed by the Canal Commission as 700 miles greater by Panama. than by Nicaragua. That means that a steamer will have to make 16.1 knots per hour to overcome the increased distance in the forty-three and one-half hours that Panama gains in the transit of the canal.

It follows that from the North Pacific toN ew Orleans the Panama route is longer for slow steamers, about the same for mediumspeed steamers, and shorter for fast steamers. From the North Pacific toN ew York the Panama route is about the same for slow steamers; it has the advantage for medium-speed steamers and a decided advantage for fast steamers. From the South Pacific to New Orleans and New York the Panama route seems to have the advantage for all kinds of vessels.

Thus it will be seen, Mr. President, that the bugbear as to the increased time of the Panama route vanishes when the additional time required to pass through the Nicaragua Canal is taken into account.

HEALTH CONDITIONS.

But, Mr. Preside~t, I did not intend to go into a general discussion of the subject, and will not do so, preferring to leave that to other Senators. My chief purpose in participating in the debate at all is to endeavor to point out that the allegations made against the Panama route on the point of unhealthfulness m·e not borne out by the record. I do not mean to say that the country which will be traversed by the proposed Panama Canal is a healthy country, but I do wish to be understood as saying that many of the statements made on that point in this debate are contradicted by testimony of the highest possible character.

As an illustration of the extreme s;:ttements made, I will cite one that was repeated by the usually accurate Senator from Kansas, when speaking in behalf of the Nicaragua route, which was that every tie on the Panama Raili·oad represented a human life. That statement has done service for many years as an argument in behalf of the Nicaragua CaJlal, but evidently no one has taken the trouble to investigate its correctness.

Why, Mr. President, the absurdity of the statement is found in the fact that if every laborer employed on that railroad had died, the number would have fallen 50 per cent short of the ties that were laid. So we will pass that by as a bit of extravagance that has gained credence because of its frequent repetition.

The Senator from Alabama, in a lengthy speech delivered in this Chamber on the 17th of April last, devoted much time to a consideration of the climatic and health conditions of the I sthmus of Panama. He searched both ancient and modern history for material, and I am bound to confess that he presented quite an array of statements to sustain his contention. The Senator also has placed in the RECORD extracts from a book by Wolfred Nelson entitled ' ' Five Years at Panama,'' which extracts deal largely with the unhealthfulness of that country.

The Senator from Alabama quoted Mr. Colne as saying that the sum of $680,000 was expended for medicine from 18tH to 1890. As the Senator has denounced with eloquence and vigor the robberies and frauds committed by those who expended the money of the old Panama Canal Company, I wonder he did not assume that very likely these figures we1·e greatly in excess of the real expenditure for medicines. Certain it is, 1\fr. Pre ident, that if that amount of money was spent for medicine the unusual mortality can in part be accounted for on other grounds than that of climatic conditions.

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE. 6917

The Senator from Alabama also quoted from the testimony of General Abbot as to the large mortality among the Chinese coolies, but I note in the extract taken from General Abbot's testimony that he says:

The excessive death r ate was due, doubtless, not only to the climate, but also to the conditions and to the various races that were tried. It was not then known that the heavy work should be done by negroes. I have no idea-

Said General Abbot-that anything like the mortality then encountered will be repeated on any isthmian ~ne.

Commander Lucien Young's deposition was also used by the Senator from Alabama. Commander Young was very emphatic in his condemnation of the health conditions of the ·Isthmus of Panama, and to fortify his position he declared that-

So far as yellow fever is concerned, I would rather be in Havana than in Panama.

I wonder that it did not occur to the distinguished Senator from Alabama, when he introduced that testimony into his speech of two months ago, to call attention to the fact that in a few months yellow fever was stamped out in Havana by simple methods well known to the medical profession of the pre~ent day, which methods are as applicable w Panama or Colon as to Havana or any other city where yellow fever has heretofore found a habitat. · The simple, plain truth is that the Panama Railroad was built and the construction of the Panama Canal commenced without any adequate means having been provided to safeguard the health of the people. The soil was disturbed and innumerable disease germs were thus set free, precisely as they will be if the Nicaragua Canal shall be built; but it is safe to predict that if either canal is constructed the health authorities of this country will see to it that every known scientific expedient is put in operation to protect the workmen from contracting disease, and that every possible hygienic and sanitary law will be invoked in their behalf, and that means an entirely different condition of things from what prevailed when the Panama Eailroad was constructed.

THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY.

Now, Mr. President, I propose to give the other side of the story, which has not, as yet, figured in this discussion.

It has been my privilege to intimately know two men who spent many years on the Isthmus, and with whom I have frequently_ talked about the climatic and health conditions. Those men have frequently assured me that there is no more danger there from epidemic or contagious diseases than in any other tropical climate, and they asserted that there was very little danger, if proper precautions were exercised. Sustaining this view, I chanced to see in the Washington Post a short time ago the following:

"There is nothing in all this talk a bout the bad climate of Panama," said Mr. F. 1\futis Duren, of that city, at the Shoreham last night. "It is true that many deaths from fever occurred when the first canal company was at work in Panama, but the deaths w ere the result of the carelessness of the men. Frenchmen came to a tropical climate and thought they could live there just as they were accustomed to live in Paris. They stayed out in the night air, and paid no attention to the la.ws of health. If they had done the same thing in any other tropical country they would ha>'e died.

I have lived in Panama sixteen years, and know what I am talking about. All my life has b een spent in tropical countries, and I know that the climate of Panama is as good as the climate of Cuba. There are fevers in the Tropics which must be guarded against all the time. If the United States decides to build the Panama Canal, it will be found that a little care will be all that is ~ecessary to protect workmen against tlie maladies peculiar to the Tropics.

_ That seems to be good testimony, which I commend to those who have found nothing but disease and death in the climate of Panama.

Indeed, Mr. President. this very day a citizen of New Hampshire who is thoroughly familiar with conditions on the Isthmus assured me that the soil along the line of the Panama Canal has almost entirely been removed, thus minimizing future dangers from disease necessarily engendered by soil disturbance, and the same gentleman assured me that there are 10,000 well-acclimated laborers immediately available for work on the canal-men who are practically immune to the climatic diseases of 1.he Isthmus.

Mr. President , medical men know that there will be sickness and death in the construction of an interoceanic canal no matter which route is adopted, but in my opinion there will be little difference between Panama and Nicaragua. I have in my hand an interesting book entitled "Notes on the Nicaragua Canal," by Henry Isaac Sheldon. It is an able plea for a canal by the Nicaragua route , and every possible argument is presented in behalf of the author's views, yet in an addenda to his book he is forced to modify his statements r egarding climatic diseases as follows:

Some objections have been offer ed _to the views contained in the first editiol_l of_ thil? volume as to the favoraple cli~ati<? con4itions in Nicaragua which m fairness.should now be mentwned. In diScm:smg the subject with me men of experience, conversant with the effects of excavation in Alabama and other Southern States, when extensive local construction was in progress, have insisted that it will be impossible to conduct car:.al construction in Central America without encountering a great deal of malarial fever. I give also the comments of Sir L~ader Williams, made in London in July, 1897:

. "Your views about the health of the men when working in Nicaragua are too cheerful. Wherever earth ha-s been made by decaying vegetation, and you turn that earth up to the sunlight, fe-ver germs will escape, and you will

have malaria. These germs hold their life indefinite!¥, like the grains of wheat for centuries in the hands of the mummy in Egypt. I had fever among the men when digging the Manchester Canal, and that was in the heart of England. Your engineers and your contl"l:0tors must expect sickness in the construction camps in Nicaragua, and suitable allowance for it should be made in all the estimates and contracts."

1\Ir. President, the Senator from Alabama introduced some extracts from the testimony of Gen. Henry L. Abbot, which I beg to supplement with other statements made by that same distinguished gentleman. In his testimony before the Senate Committee on Interoceanic Canals, March 4, 1902, General Abbot said:

There are two other subjects which I think are worthy of the attention of the committee-the health question and the river Chagres.

Nobody claims that the climate of P anama or of any tropical r egion is conducive to health for natives of more northern clim es, but the dangers and difficulties at Panama have b een enormously exaggerated, and I thou~ht it might be interesting for the committee to have some absolute statistics on which they could depend. When I was at the Isthmus I visited Dr. Lacroisade, who is the medical director of the new canal company hospital at Panama, an admirable hospital built on a high hill back of the city, with fine buildings, and wit h the Sisters of St. Vincent de Paul as nurses.

We saw Dr. Lacroisade and we got from him, in tabular form, a statement covering the whole subject, so far as the canal r ecords go. These statistics are printed in France< but probably they are not known in this country, and I brought them and snould like to make them a part of my testimony.

These statistics begin in 1881, when the old company began the work, and extend from that time down to June 30, 1898, when Dr. Lacroisa.de made the report for us. Since that date I have taken the figures from the annual reports of the board of directors to the general meeting of the company, so that everything I offer is strictly official. * * *

I ask unanimous consent to place the table in the RECORD without reading. It is a very interesting table and I trust Senato1·s will examine it. ·

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair hears no objection, and the table will be printed in the RECORD. · The table is as follows:

Official health statistics of the Panama Canal.

Percentage of disease. · Percentage of mortality. Effective .

Year. force em- Diseases Diseases Diseases Diseases ployed. of due to Total. of due to Total.

Europe. climate. Europe. climate. ------1--------------------1881---------·-- 928 21.02 42.02 63.04 1.94 4.74 6.68 1882 ---------·-· 1,910 18.85 47.64 66.4!) 2.21 4.39 6.60 1883 ............ 6,287 ~.24 42.62 65.86 2.20 4.46 6.66 1884------------ 17,615 27.58 36.95 64.57 2.58 4. 08 6.66 1885 ..• ------- · - 15,215 11.93 49.14 61.07 1. 73 3.79 5.52 1886 ------·--·-· 14,935 14.01 43. 88 , 57.89 1.67 3.43 5.10 1887 ---------·-· 16,217 21.82 1 39.25 61.07 2.22 3.99 6.21 1888 --··----·--- 13,725 12.17 40.46 52.63 1.81 2.54 4.35

Means ... ~~~~ 61.58- 2.05 3.92 5.97

:-~=~:: ::~ ~-~~-~~~~y~::~~~J::t:::~:~: :::::::~: :::::: i~ ===::::::::: ~:~~ ::::=::::: =::::::::: ~:~ ~:~ 1·&1 ~·~ First half 1898. 3,630 ---------- ..... : .... 48.70 1.98 ~82 2:so

~!~r==:::: -- -·~:~~r ::::·:::::: ::::===::::::::::----I~-------:-~- --I~ Mean .... ~=-::-===- 47.60 ~--.-66-"'""2.82

•About. m:t~~T~~ Jt~t!:l~?ntinues to show r educed disease and death rates, both eli .

M1·. GALLINGER. General Abbot continues: Dr. Lacroisade's conclusions, after a residence of many years on the

Isthmus, are the following: •: T~e Central Ameri~n negroel?, and especially those of the West Indies,

res1st Its effects best, oWlng to their better endurance of the direct rays of the sun, t~ their_relative immunity from malarial influences, and to the~r absolute Immumty from the yellow fever . Hindoos Chinese and native A,fric~ns suffer m ore and, engaged in ha:tj work, yield readily' to beribari, ot whwh they have brought the germs. J!;uropeans can r esist the climate on condition of abstaining from-severe manual labor." . "Of 254 officers and agents sent by the old company between January 1, ~881 .• a.n_d August 31, 1883, and thus exposed to the early conditions, 40 died, mdicating: a percentage per annum of 7.20. Of the 9 a()'ents sent bY. the new company m.the first three and a half years only 3 diea." Heattnbutes the undoubted rmprovement of health on the Isthmus to better accommodations of .the laborers, to better drainage, and.especially to the fact that the ~xcavatwp.s have reached a leyel below ~he pOisonous emanations of decayIng orgam~ ~atter. The J?erwd of sel:'wus. sickness always to be expected at the begmmng of extensive excavatiOns m tropical r egions has already been passed at Panama. "Th~ logical ded~ction ~rom. th~se f~c~s and ~rt::s is that the excessive

mortality: ~ue _to dlSturbmg v1rgm SOil m the Tropics r emains to be encountered m Nicaragua, bu.t has been gone thrcugh with at P anama, and we may now assum~ that a normal state of health will prevail there if proper ~mtarv regulati~ms are enforced. Tho following figures from a recent officmlreport of MaJor Gorgas , M.D .. upon the health of Havana sustaL-1s this view:. The aver_age death _r:::.te for eleven years :W?S 48 per thousand; the maximum was, m. 1897, 106 ~n a tho~san,d. 'l.'he 1p1mmum wr.s in 19(;(_1, when 21 per thousand died. Durmg lfOl, ~P. 50 per 1.-hous..'l.nd died, which the Doctor says' compru·es vel-y favorably vdtb. lc~cin::; c:Yilized countries.'"

. I.~h to add .that it does com~are very .fav.orably with leading c1v1hzed countnes. I find that m the D1stnct .of Columbia for the ten years f1·om 1892 to 1901, inclusive, the death rate was

6918 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-_ SENATE. JUNE 17,

21.83. The highest was 24.74 and the lowest 19.48. Yet in Havana, where in 1897 there was a death rate of 106 in a thousand, after modern methods were employed to get rid of conditions that give rise to infectious and malarial diseases, the percentage ran down to 19.58, or equal to the lowest death rate in the District of Columbia for the past ten years.

The Senator from Ohio [Mr. liA.NNA] interrogated General Abbot as follows:

Right there, General, I understand that your judgment is confirmed by these figures and these data, that in the construction of the Nicaragua Canal you would have to go through pretty much the same conditions, in the turning up of the soil, until you reach a depth below which malarial diseases will l>e induced.

General ABBOT .. I have very little d!Jubt of it. The Co~sion.s.tate ~e same belief in thell' report; and I think that anyone who IS .f~~· With work in tropical regions knows that as soon as the surface soil IS disturbed extensively diseases which did not exist befor~ ~ likely to :00 developed_. I r emember very well in the early days when Illinms was coD.SJ.dered a terr1ble region for chills and fevers.

Senator H..u.;'NA. It was, too. General ABBOT. But that has passed away with the settlement and occu

pation of the country. I wi:If now give the be~ informa~on I have been able to obtain on the subJect of diseases and death m recent times on the railroad. I will read an extract from a letter from the second vice-president of the Panama Railroad, Mr. Drake: * * *

"I write concerning the mortality in recent yea!s am<?ng ~he employees of the Panama Railroad, to say that upon careful illVeshgation we find that we have a monthly average of 266 men upon our gold pay ro¥, mostly foreign, about equally divided .as to color, and that a~ol?g the white employees from the United States, r es1dent on the Isthmus aurmg the last five years, there have been 12 deaths from various causes; none, however, from yellow fever, and 1 by suicide." * * "' _ .

That gives nine per thousand. Mr. Drake further wr1tes: "We have an .every ¥lonthly silv~r Pll;Y r<?ll.of 1,~50 men, mostly_ colored,

in constant serVIce, which, as the time lS diVIded illto half days, IS drawn from a. force of fully 2,500 men. During the same period of five years there has been no serious epidemic in this torce •. or abnormal mortalio/. From among this force there are always patients m the company's hospital on account of disease or accident numbering from 5 to 20, but there are no records in this office as to the exact number of deaths."

It is interesting to note that in November, 1898, almost four years prior to the date of this testimony, General Abbot contributed an article to the Forum, from which I will read a para-graph or two: ·

The health of the personnel formerly caused trouble, coolies and other races not well suited to hard labor under a tropical sun being em~loyed. With negroes from the Briti;sh An~illes little. difficulo/ is n~w expenen9ed. This matter was carefully illVestigated durmg the mspection last s:e1-mg.J American engineers and employees on the canal and the Panama Railroa.a being questioned, the fine hospital near Panama, where the company provides for its sick, being visited, and the views of the medical ·officers and of the Sisters of Charity, acting as nurses, being obtained. All agreed that the dangers resultinff from th~ climate have peen much exagg~rated. The surgeon in charge or the hosp1t~ Dr. Lacr<?~e, who pas reSld~ on the Isthmus since 1887, after presenting full statistics covermg the Slck r eports for the past year of n. force of about 3,800 agents and laborers under employment, sa1d:

"Among the diseases attributable to the climate tho most numerous are simple marsh fevers, which h~ve n?t occasioned a single death. T.wo .diseases only belonging to the e1>1den;uc ~e haye appea.re~-the belliberl, of which there is no lon~er any questiOn (1t was Imported With negro laborers brought from Africa as an experiment and disappeared when they we resent back) and yellow fever. The latter, after having been absent from the Isthm'nsfor at least six years, was imported in 1897 and continued about six months, from March to August, whf:Ul it again disappeared after very light ravages (only six deaths).

"Thus it can not be considered that this pest is really epidemic on the Isthmus. From the other infections epidemics, such as variola, typhoid fever, diphtheria etc., the Isthmus appears to be almost entirely exempt. From the foregoing we may conclude that life on the IsthmliS scarcely incurs more dan~ers than elsewhere, even. for Eur<?peans who, afte~ the blacks of the British Antilles, appear ~ resiSt tp.e climate best. ReSld~nce her~ would

• then offer nothing alarmillg were It not for a constant feelin~ of fatigue and uneaSiness due to a temperature al}Vays high and an a.tmospnere saturated with moisture."

There appeal'S, therefore, to be no danger-Says General Abbot-

of serious mortality in the construction of the canal, if due care be taken to benefit by past experience in selecting the laborers.

I find in the report of the minority certain conclusions reached by them from the testimony taken before the committee, a paragraph or two of which I will read:

As to the comparative healthfulness of the regions tl-a.versed by the two routes we consider the advantages in favor of the Panama. The distance is short being traversed daily by the railroad within a space of three or four hom·s; the country is open and occupied by man, and the worst conditions of construction are now over. The enormous loss of life on the Panama line occmTed at a time twenty years ago, in the first days of canal construction, but continuous work and the natural operations of nature have made. the conditions quite free from former perils and now reasonably safe under proper hygienic conditions. The hospital service of the Panama Canal was extravagantly complete~.,.~u~ furnishes unparalleled.conveniences and service of this cha.rooter. The uruted States, however, will now get the benefit of this lavish but humane use of money.

The mortality records of the company are kept with the the accuracy of a government service, and in the official statement submitted by General Abbot it is conclusively shown that the conditions of health UI>On the Istnmus are now reasonably safe and not at all unusual or disturbing. At Nicara~, on the contrary, in a country never tl·aversed by man except for br1ef survey, the disturbance of the virgin soil is likely to be followed by mortality such a.s that which prevailed upon the Isthmus of Panama upon the openmg of the canal WOfkS there, now happily past at the latter place.

From the testimony given before the committee I will read a few paragraphs:

Senator HANNA. Some consideration has been given to the health of the respective localities. It is claimed, and I presume it is true, that during the time of .the construction of the Panama route there has been a great deal of

sickness from fever and from other causes along the route of the Panama Canal. Has that been entirely owing to the fact that it is a more unhealthy part of the Isthmus than any other?

Admiral W .ALKER. I don't know that it is. The Isthmus was very unhealthy in the early days. There was a great loss of life in building the railroad, and when they first went to work on the c..anal there was a good deal of sickness; but the surface material, from which the sickness is supposed to come, has been largely removed, and of late years it has been as healthy there as anywhere in a tropical countl-y.

Senator HANNA. Is it not likely that in the constructjonof the Nicaragua Canal, working a large force, turnin~ up the surface of the soil, and in dredging, that malarial conditions conduCive to fevers would arise?

Admiral W .ALKER. Certainly. Asitst!Lndsto-day Nicaragua is a healthier route, because there is no work of that kind being done and very few people to get sick, but when you get to turning up the ground there will be sickness there, as there would be anywhere.

Mr. NoBLE. As far as~resent conditions are concerned-that is, present sanitary conditions-I think the advantage is altogether in favor of Nicaragua. Now when work is undertaken on either route the conditions will be less favorable, owing to the stirring up of the mud in the swamps and the soil; stirring up the soil anyyrhere will increase the sickness beyond a. doubt.

Senator HANNA. On the Nicaragua route? Mr. NOBLE. On the Nicaragua. route or anywhere else. I wish to state that

when extensive work was undertaken on the Croton watershed for the water supply of New York some years ago-a pec~rly healthf~ situation one would think-there was a great deal of malar1a, although 1t had not been known before.

I should think that as the unfavorable conditions developed the aggravation would be greater, perhaps, in Nicara~ than in Panama, and what the total result would be under the new conditions I am not by any means certain, though I think the advantage would still be with Nicaragua.

Mr. MoRISON. I think the diseases at Panama are very largely due to artificial conditions. The Isthmus of Panama has always been an unhealthy place. It has been inhabited for fom· hundred years, and I think yon may say that there is not a water pipe or a sewer on the whole Isthmus. The city of Panama has never had so bad a reputation for sickness ·as Santiago de Cuba, and we know what has been done at Santiago de Cuba. I think that we know now how to handle sanitary conditions at Panama. * * * The first thing to do on the Isthmus is to get a supply of good water. There is plenty of good water on the Isthmus, but th~people do not have it; and the next thing is to dispose of their sewage. With those two conditions met, tlll'ee-fourths of the sickness on the Isthmus will disappear.

Colonel HAms. In regard to sanitary conditions, I think the advantages are decidedly with Nicaragua. The men that we had employed in Nicaragua, some of whom were there for a couple of ~ears, were s1ck very little. There was very little sickness among them. I do not think the health of the men in Nicaragua was as poor as you would find it in many places in the United States.

Senator HANNA. How would it be when you commenced your digging and stirring up the primitive soil and the decayed vegetation.

Colonel HAINS. Well, there is generally an impression that it will create different conditions. I am inclined to think that the conditions even then will be in favor of Nicaragua, because on the east side, where the most troublesome work and the great mass of the work is, the rains are so heavy. While these rains are detrimental to construction, I thinkt~k are beneficial so fa.r as hygienic considerations are concerned, and I · so far as the considerations of sanitary conditions are concerned the advantages are with Nicaragua.

The CHA.IRM..A.N. Well, Panama, according to testimony here, is a very much more unwholesome climate than Nicaragua?

Mr. BuRR. I do not think so, Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. Well, taking th-e facts as they exist-not conjectnres1 but

the facts as they exist, the data. we have-did you come to the conclusion that Nicaragua was more unhealthy than Panama?

~fr. BuRR. No; not more. I do not think there is any diffe~ence between them that is sensible. There is at Panama a great deal of sickness at the present time, manY. deaths, and there have been in the IJa:St; but it is a line of continuous population f1·om one ocean to the other and With one or two great centers of population. It is situated upon converging currents of travel along which many }leople from infected places are constantly P.assing.

There is absolutely nothing done there that makes for public health, and you have the natural results of the constant presence of yellow fever and other tl·opical fevers and ailm-ents belonging to such conditions, whereas on the Nicaragua route there is nobody there to be sick. The Nica.ragua route from Greytown to Brito is p1·actically an uninhabited country. There is a small .Population at Greytown, and steamships call there occasionally, and there IS a little business, but it is practically shut off from the outside world.

The little place of Castillo, approximately halfway from Graytown to the lake has a few people, constituting an isolated population. Fort San Carlos has~ small population. I suppose that perhaps 500 people at each one of those places woUld probably cover all the mhabitants. Outside of tha~there is nothing in the way of population on the whole :t;oute. from the Canbbea;n Sea. to the Pacific; but there have been dreadful ep1denncs of_yellow~ever ill Nicaragua in times past, as at L eon. From the accounts given of 1t there can be little or no doubt that it was yellow fever, and they have at Mana~ at the present time fevers which I was assured by Dr. Donaldson, the Uru ted States consul. are yellow fever, or something just as bad. * * "' .

I believe that if a large force of laborers were put upon the Nicaragua. Canal for its construction, and there were brought into that countl-y the seeds of disease that have been brought into Panama, there would be practically the same conditions to deal with at one place as in the other. It is equally malarial, naturally. The death rate of Nicarag'{U\, so far as anybody can know anything about it..t_ at Managua and other Nicaraguan towns, is appallingly high. In fact, Dr. ~o:r;ml~n ~self p..&d to ~ove out of the house in Managu~ where he was liV)llg With his_ family, up mto the suburbs on higher ground ill order to save himself from illness.

Colonel ERNST. The healthfulness of the Nicaragua line is better than that of the Panama line, but I.am not at all sa~fl.ed .that we can not very much improve the state of affa.1rs on the Panama line w1tb our modern appliances and with the lessons that we have been taught, the necessity of it, and I would not venture to go into the Nicaragua line with~u~ takiJ?.g equal precautions. I think it is absolutely necessary to have a ng;1d sarutary sys~m there, with a police system to enforce the rules, ~nd to illtroduce a copw~ water supply and take all the sanitary precautions that are necessary ill those unhealthy countries. They are both unhealthy; there is no doubt about that.

I find likewise in the testimony given before the committee that Mr. EdwardA. Drake and Mr. CharlesPainegavesomeinteresting facts. They have been in charge of construction work on the Isthmus for many years. Mr. Drake said: ·

We have a gold pay roll and a silver pay roll. The gold pay roll r~prosents the employees who are selected here and sent down there, who reside therer

1902. . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 6919 with their families, in the company's quarters. And I should like to say, and I should like to have it recorded, that, although much is said of the nonsa.lubrity of the Isthmus, during the last five years we have had among that colony of our employees~, among those whom we sent there, but twelve deaths.

The CHAIRM.AN. Twe1ve deaths among your employees? Mr. DRAKE. Amongouremployeessentfrom the United States. We have

a. total of gold pay-roll employees sent from here and on the Isthmus of 338.

I will pause, Mr. President, to say that a death rate of 12 out of a total of 338 in the period of five years is a remarkably small death rate for any city in the United States.

Mr. MORGAN. That was only on the gold pay roll, though. Mr. GALLINGER. Yes; but it is a remarkably low death

rate for any class of people anywhere. Mr. Drake, who was a responsible man, testifies that it is a fact.

Mr. PATh~. Those are on the gold pay roll? The CHAIRMAN. And how about the silver pay roll? -Mr. DRAKE. The silver pay roll represents the natives. There are 338 on

the gold pay roll, and ainong them we have had 12 deaths in the la.st five years, and only part of these due to climatic causes.

The CHAIRM.AN. How about the silver pay roll? Mr. DRAXE. The silver pay roll is made up of natives. There are 1,387 of

them. It is made up of Jamaicans and of people who live in the Tropics, and very naturally are exempt from diseases due to the climate,

The CHAIRMAN. What is the proportion of death among them? Mr.-DR.A.KE. We have not that record. That is not furnlshed to us. Mr. PAINE. There have been no epidemics since I have been there. Mr. DRAKE. I have been connected with the railroad for fourteen years,

and during that time we have had no epidemics. The CHAIRMAN. You have kept no record of deaths on the silver pay roll? Mr. DRAKE. The silver roll are natives. It would be keeping the statis

tics of the towns there. It is easy to obtain, but they live there. We em· ploy them and discharge them, and there is a constant coming and going.

I find further along in the testimony that the chairman asked Mr. Paine:

Have you any statement of the health of your employees, the railroad employees, includmg the hirelings the day laborers?

Mr. PAINE. We have no health reports with rega.t·d to any of our silver employees; that is, the men who are paid in silver, the natives and Jamaicans that we have there, except such as are in our hospital. We have a report every week showing the condition of the hospital, and generally we have from three to six or seven black men in the lower ward.

The CHAIRMAN. They are the silver men? -Mr. PAINE. They are the black men. The CHAIRMAN. The silver men are on your silver roll? Mr.PAINE. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. They are the day la.boret'Sf Mr. PAINE. Yes; that is, a force of-well, last month we had-Mr. DRAKE. One thousand three hundred and seventy-eight. Mr. PAINE. Those are the days' work-1,378 men continuously for a month.

That would mean one-half more men who are really employed; that is, they only work about half time, less than half time, I should say, that the J atna.icans avernge. We have a force of fDJ men paid in gold, and very often there are none of them in the ho~ital. and sometimes there are a.s tna.ny as five a.t once. I do not remember a.ny instance where there were more.

Again, Senator KITTREDGE asked Mr. Paine: What about the general sanitary condition all along the Panama Railway? :Mr. PAINE. There has never been any epidemic since I have been con-

nected with the company; no epidemic of any kind. They have had yellow fever in Panama among the troops, but I do not know of a single instance of yellow fever among om· men, among our employees, or among those of the canal company, except one, and that was a doubtful case. He was our agent at La Boca and Pana.ma.-Captain Beers. He had had yellow fever before and he said that he did not have it at this time, but his physician pronounCed it yellow fever, seemingly because it was convenient. That is the only case I have ever known among our employees.

The engineer in chief of the Panama Canal Company condensed much truth in a few words when he said in a recent publication:

The passage through the Nicaragua Canal, which will last a day and a half if navigation is possible during the night (a thing which many competent men consider impossible), and which will last three days if navigation is really impossible at night, will bring passengers and crew into contact with the land, and this will facilitate the communication between ships and shore of different diseases, such as smallpox, cholera., yellow fever, etc. The sanitary regulations1 quarantine, etc., will cause other risks of detention that ships would not have in a short canal like that of Panama, which can be traverSed between sunrise and sunset.

Mr. President, nothing has come to my attention which so completely demolishes the statements of those who have been trying to make it appear that Panama is a pest hole and Nicaragua a salubrious climate as an article in the Medical News of January 4, 1902, from the pen of George A. Soper, Ph. D., of New York City. Dr. Soper is known among scientists as a man of remarkable attainments, and his views on questions of sanitary science carry great weight. Dr. Soper's article is somewhat long, but its great importance will be a sufficient excuse fo-r placing it entire in the RECORD.

Mr. MORGAN. Has the Se-nator seen the reply of Dr. Stub. bert, who was the surgeon of the Maritime Canal Company, to

that article? Mr. GALLINGER. I will say that I have not. Mr. MORGAN. It is a very powerful refutation of it. Mr. GALLINGER. I wish it might have been fnrnished to

me. I know Dr. Soper very well by reputation. He stands very high among the scientists of the country. He has a reputation to sustain, and he has given the country the benefit of this article which has had very great weight on my mind on the question of the relative healthfu1ness of Panama and Nicaragua. Dr. Soper does not make extravagant claims for Panama, but he seems to have given due weight to every available fact connected

with the subject, and his conclusions are a complete refutation of many assertions made in this debate. ·

I will not 1·ead the entire article, but will ask permission to put it in the RECORD. I hope Senators will read it. It will be seen from it that Dr. Soper finds very little diffel'ence in the relative healthfulness of the two proposed routes, the advantage, however, being with Panama.

SANITARY ASPECTS OF THE PANAMA il--n ~'ICARAGUA CA...."\'ALS. [By George A. Soper, Ph. D., of New York.]

The Isthmian Canal Commission, appointed June 19,1899, to investigate the practicability and feasibility of var10us projects for constructing a ship canal across the Central American isthmus have submitted their report to the Congress of the United States. While the matter stands before the representatives of 'the people and a. final choice between routes is still o~en, it IS of interest to inqmre from a disinterested standpoint into the conditions :~~~ =~n~~ ~~~tfe'~o~~lth in the countries and along the routes

Upon the question of liability to, or immunity from, disabling diseases rests the problem of labor, and all persons are agreed that the greatest difficulty to be encountered in the construction of the canal will be the procurement of an adequate sup~ly of laborers and the pt·eservation of their health and efficiency. In VIew of this fact, it is tather curious that the exhaustive report of the Isthmian Canal Commission should not have discussed the question of health mo1•e thoroughly. In their report of 263 pages less than a. page and a half is devoted to hygiene, and in the 4D appendices which accompany the report there is no discussion of the subject presented.

Not only is the question of health a. factor to be considered in the construction of the canal, but when the canal is completed the rOle of this great waterway in promoting or endangering public health will be a subject of immense commercial importance.

General descripticm of the American Isthmus.-The Central American Isthmus in the most extensive meaning is about 1,400 miles long, and extends from the seventy-seventh to the ninety-fifth meridian of longitude and from the eighth to the eighteenth parallel of latitude. The ninth deree of latitude nearly bisects the route of the proposed Panama Ca.na, while the eleventh parallel cuts that of Nicaragua.

The general direction of the Isthmus is from southeast to northwest, the first 000 miles to the eastwtu·d being comparatively small jn width. It varies from a minimum of barely 30 miles to a. maximum of 120 miles. The land . is of volcanic origin and consists of mountain ranges which unite the Andes on the south with the great chain of mountains which extend along the western border of the United States. Below the mountains are manyp!ateaus, plains, and small stretches of land, some of which are but slightly elevated above the level of the sea. The mosta.va.ila.bleroutesforacanala.cross the Isthmus are considered to be the Nicaragua and Panama lines, which would have a. length of 183.66 miles and 49.09 miles, respectively.

Most observers writing on the health conditions natural to the low lands of the Isthmus describe the region as unhealthy to the natives and peculiarly fatal to Europeans. Since the ~eriod of the Spanish conquest many attempts have been made to coloruze Central Alnerica, but the foreigners of Spanish extraction are the only ones who have been able to withstand the climate with even a tolerable degree of success. The natives are described as inferior in the social scale, of a wan. sallow tint, with softness and puffiness of the tissues, poverty of the blood, extra large development of the stomach, and with a. tendency toward congestion of the liver and speen.

This is accompanied by a. state of languor, dullness of the intellip:ence and of the entire nervous system. Near the sea and along the lines of the proposed Panama. and Nicaragua ca.na.ls much of the land is low and comparatively flat, with slulntish waj.er courses and all the characteristics of a tropical vegetation. Putridema.na.!ions from decomposing organic tna.ttet'S prevail everywhere, and their deleterious effects, considered not as agencies of specific diseases, but more particularly as unwholesome gases, a.re evident.

The physiological effeets}often observed in the Tropics prevail on the Isthmus. The large amount of moisture which prevails in the air lessens evaporation from the skin and lungs and this condition1 with the continuous heat, shows its effect in loss of appetite, depression of spll'its, a.nd in disorders of the kidneys, stomach, and intestines. In new arrivals the body heat may reach an excess of 1° F. above normal, and frequentJy exceeds the temperature of the outside air. As a rule, however, the atmosphere is much warmer. This causes the metabolic processes, which in north&n climates turn a part of the food materials into heat. to be reversed, and the vital functions are then called upon to neutralize the excess of heat received in order to main-tain the body at a. normal temperature. .

This throws additional work upon the excretory organs, which, under other conditions, would be concerned in throwing off only a. portion of the products of the food absorbed. The excesS of work and alteration of functions described are important predisposing causes of disease as are the following physiological effects of hot, moist climates: A reduction of the pulse rate, d.ecrease in t•espiratory action, diminution in the number of red blood corpuscles, increase in pet'Spiration, reduction in saliva, gastric and pancreatic juiees and bile.

Health conditions along the Panam.a route.-At Panama the seasons are divided into two tolerably well-defined periods-the dry or winter and the wet or summer seasons. By this accidental concurrence of the seasons of tnarimum moisture and maximum heat, the humidity and efllm'ia from marshes and swamps reaches its greatest possible amount.

For 55 per cent of the time the winds blow from the northeast and northwest, and 35 per cent of the time from the sontheast and southwest.

The dry season includes the months of Jannary;Febru.a.ry, March, and April, the rainy season occupying the remaining eight months of the year. Duringthedryseasontheavera.getemperatureatColonforsixyears,1~1887, was79.5° F., with a monthly maximum of 90.9°, which occurred in January, and a monthly minimum of 68.(0

1 which was recored for the same month. During the rainy season tho IDaXImum average temperature for any month occurroo in October, with a record of 91.9° F. The minimum of temperature

' for any month of the year was 66.9° F., for August. The hourly ve.riatioJ). in temperature is greatest during the dry season,

when the change is, on an average, 7° F. between 4 p.m. and 7 a.m. each day. In the ra.iny season this difference is 5° F.

The humidity at Colon in 1881 was, on an average, 86 per cent during the rainy season and 77 per cent during the rest of the year. Only limited data. are available concerning humidity, but the probability is that it is very high at most points on th~ Isthmus. As the climate of this insular countt·y depends partly upon the influence of the sea, the temperature of the water of the Atlantic Ocean and tha.t of the Pacific is interesting. On the line of the Panama Canal the temperature of the Atlantic is generally 9° F. higher tl:an the P acific in February, with a difference of 1° F . in September. At Colon the mean temperature of the ocean is nearly that of the air, 79.90 F.

The barometrie pressure is very uniform, especially in the dry :P...ason, from which it appe&I'S that severe storms are uncommon; yet northers occm· occasionally and severe hurricanes have been kno-;vn on th<t Atlantic coast.

6920 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. J UNE 17,

. As a re~ult of fifteen years' records at Colon, the annual precipitation in mches which was measured reached a maximum of1M.89, with aminimumof 116.36 and a mean of 100.20. Rainfall records for four years at Panama show a maximum of 84.73 inches, a minimum of 45.59 inches, and an average of 68.77 inches per year. At Culebra the records for three years showed the rainfall per year varied from 64.25 to 98.97 inches.

As to the forms of disease most commonly met with Griswold says that four-fifths of a.ll sickness at Panama a:::e due to fevers. Severe bilious fevers, congestive fevers, and Chagres fever are not uncommon. According to Buel, t?e most sickly period is September, October, and November, during which pime dyse!J.tery is very. common, !'1-S is also a high degree of bilious fever which, m maligmty and fatality, falls little short of yellow fever. Foreigners seldom if eve.r, acquire the same immunity from local diseases as that enjoyed by the natives; they are frequently attacked by febrile disorders, and in the interim suffer from the depressing and debilitating effects of the climate. In March, April, and May fevers are at their minimum. Dysentery is common at the end of the ramy season and at the beginning of the dry season. Phthisis is :prevalent among thenatives,especiallyalongthe coasts .• Accordin~ to Wallis, "smallpox, yellow fever, and paludal fevers in their infinite varieties and forms are never absent in these intertropical regions, where they are truly endemic." Nelson, after an experience of five years at Panama, gives his approval of the statement long made with reference to the Isthmus, that it is the" Grave of the European." It has also been called the "Pesthouse of the Tropics," and Bigelow says that here truly "life dies and deat h lives."

In the contracts let by the old Panama Canal Company the latter was compelled to supply the labor. The total population of Panama was estimated at not abo>e 150,000, and as many thousand workmen were required for the work upon the canal, it was necessary to import labor from abroad. In the effort to supply the demand, many laborers were brought from the island of Jamaica, but of these many soon fell sick and died, and a large number of the remainder left the work to escape a similar fate. Other workmen came from Cartagena, the British Antilles, and the Lower Mississippi Valley. Of all the labor employed, the most hardy workers, as regards abilit;y to endure hardship and resist disease, were a tribe of Indians from the Magdalena River.

The sickness and loss of life amon~ the men engaged at work upon the canal has been variously stated. DaVIdson declares that of a force of 7,000 men, the company reckoned that about 1,000 men were always in hospital. From other sources we learn that the sickness and death rate among the laborers were very high. In Panama and its vicinity 37 engineers out of less than 100 are said to have died during the months of March and April, 1882. An observer declares "there was not a single French engineer who had been able to attend to the work beyond one year and a half, although the contract called for two." In September, 1884, it is said the canal company buried 654 officers and men. There were many sanitary abuses when the canal work was first begun, and the method of charging the contractors for the care of the men in hospital no doubt caused the laborers to be kept at work when they should have been under medical care.

The health conditions, as officially reported by French authorities, do not show the high mortalities from diseases incident to the clima.t.e which have been indicated by travelers and other independent observers. But Heffenger declares that it was impossible for him to gain access to the health records of the Panama Canal Company and that the impression gained by him after investigating the matter privately was that the public reports were garbled and incorrect. Dr. Heffenger states that he was informed by a leading physician of Panama that in the first eleven months during which preliminary work on the canal was under way, 65 officers and 800 men died of disease.

It is recorded by Liddell that of 382 patients treated by him between the middle of June and the succeeding May, 250, or more than two-thirds, were suffering from remittent fever with bilious, gastric, or enteric com~lications. Referring to the importation of labor for the Panama Railroad, Liddell says that the services of laboring men from the United States could not be counted on for three successive months. Before the end of the second month onehalf the force was on the sick list or enfeebled by sickness ah·ead:y sustained.

In this connection it is interesting to note that the Panama Railroad Companyi which has had fifty years' experience, along the line of the Panama Cana grants to its white employees from the United States two months' vacation every year.

The route of the Panama Canal follows low-lying valleys from the Atlantic terminus to a point within a few miles of the Pacific. Here, at what is known as the Culebra ridge, there is a section of several miles of mountain through which a deep excavation must be cut. It is probable that a large number of laborers would have to occupy the position for eight years. Next in importance are excavations and other work between Culebra and the Pacific.

There is a considerable diversity in the engineering problems connected with the Panama route, but the labor would be comparatively concentrated.

~~~mJ;~i~e~hT~~¥! C:,~f~r:~J:Wo~ ~ I~i~~~~bC:~~~~~~~~~~ has added 20 per cent to cover engineering, police, sanitation, and general

~~~~gH~~s~u~~6w~~~ ?eed~~\!~etff:!n~f:fto~ll~~~~ s~ie~~e Nicaragua Health conditions along the Nicaragua route.-Some 280 miles north of the

Atlantic entrance to the proposed Panama Canal is the city of Greytown, the easte>n terininus of the projected route of the Nicaragua Canal. Topographically, the country traversed by the line of the Nicaragua Canal consists of n. great central, basin-like depression, inclosed by coastal mountain ranges, whose peaks occasionally attain a height of from 5,000 to 7,000 feet. The Central Basin is occupied by two great lakes the waters of which flow eastward through valleys which open diagonally to the Atlantic Ocean.

The central depressibn descends to the Pacific through a short and narrow valley in the western coast range. The route is marked by swamps, lagoons, and river bottoms heavily overgrown with rank tropical vegetation. By far the largest share of the estimated cost of constructing the Nicaragua Canal is allotted to that part of the line which lies east of the lakes. Here are located extensive river and harbor improvements, several lqcks, and the Conchuda Dam, whose site is between Ochoa and Lake Nicaragua. It is thought that the canal would be eight years in building.

Much less is known about the climate and health conditions of Nicaragua than Panama. According to all sources of information, the tem~rature is fairly uniform throughout the year. The report of the Isthmian Canal Commission just published st-:ttes thr.t the tbermometerseldom reaches 95° F. nor falls below 70° F. The humidity i usually high, particularly on the eastern slope. As r ecorded for several stations in 1890 the humidity was never below 58 per cent and generally above bO per cent. It has been declared that the locality is beyond the cycloni.c d;stur bances of the West Indies and that heavy storms are rare, yet authentic accounts exist which show that northers and other similar atmospheric disturbances have occurred at infreguent intervals along the Atlantic coast. The northeast trade winds predommate.

Rainfall records show that there is no definitely wet nor dry s.eason on the eastern slope, but m the region of Lake Nicara.gua and on the west coast there is a distinct dry season from about the 1st of December to the Iniddle of Ma-y, during which rain seldom falls. During the dry season the prevailing wmds blow from the Atlantic coast and the moisture contained in the

atmosphere is precipitated before it reaches the central and western watersheds.

The rainfall at the Atlantic end of the Nicaragua Cana1route is the heaviest yet recorded for the American continent. The annual rainfall at Grey-town ave_rages ~60--270 inches anq has twice reached nearly 300 inches. Pomts at which. ramfall was noted m 1900 were: Graytown 266.10 inches; Ochoa, 158.83 mches, and Fort San Carlos, 89.34 inches. In 1S98 the rainfall at San J_uan (Gr~ytown) w~s201.64 inches; O~hoa, 170.~4 inches, and Brito, the PaCific ternnnal, 94.88 mches. The heaVIest recorded fall of rain in a short period occurred at Lake Silico, November 4, 1899, when 10.5inches fell in six ho:nrs, a~ average of l t inches per hour. On the same date 12.4.8 mches of ram fell.m twenty-four hours at Greytown. A fall of four or more inches per day IS not uncommon.

It is th~ testiiJ?-ony of d~sinterested observers th~t both coasts of Nicaragua are malanous, With a conSiderable amount of suffermg from malarial cachexia and enlargement of the spleen. · Dysentery is one of the severe diseases of the <:ountry .. A prevalence of feyer of the pernicious type has been noted, partic.ularly I!J. the .western portiOn o~ the country. The fever is generally hepatic, and Jaundice and hematemesiS are usually present. The mortality from pernicious fever is very high. As this disease carries so many of the characteristic symptoms of yellow fever, Stitt d eclares that able physicians frequently pronounce the two diseases to be identical.

Among the diseases not epidemic but Ifrevalent, may be mentioned those of an ent~ric na~ure, affections o_f the liver, such as hyperemia and tropical abscess, mternnttent and rennttent fevers, and pulmonary tuberculosis. The climate of the lake region is said to be particularly unfavorable to persons suffering from ;phthisis. The yearly reports made by the Maritime Canal Company of Nicaragua to the Secretary of the Interior of the United States, convey the impression that the health of the employees engaged upon the canal construction was satisfactory. About 1t per cent of those actually in hospital diedt including the patients who were adinitted for the treatment of accidental inJuries. About 51 ;per cent of all caseB of sicknes;; were fevers; there were no deaths from entenc diseases1 and only two-thirds of 1 per cent of the cases in hospital died of diseases contracted !n the country.

Commenting upon the records of the Maritime Canal Company, the Isth- . mian Canal Commission of 1899-1901 observes that "These operational however, were of a preliminary character, employing but a limited numoer of men. It is probable that when 10,000 or 20,000 men are assembled, and the rank soil is being turned up over a widely developed line of works, the experience will be different." There is very little impartial or antagonistic cnticism available concerning the health conditions which obtained at the works of the Maritime Canal COmpany, for very little attention has been given to . this project except by Americans who have long been prejudiced in its favor. ·

Comparison between the Panama and Nicaragua ,·outes.-A comparison of the conditions which make for and against health along the propm:ed lines of the Panama and Nicaragua canals may be summed up conveniently under the two following heads:

I. Which route would probably be freer from disease during the work of construction?

IT. Which canal would be more favorable to health after it was built? In discussing these topics it will be convenient to note some of the most

unfavorable conditions common to both routes and suggest very briefly means by which the rates of sickness and death may be kept as low as practicable.

I. Health conditions during construction.-The greatest difference in climate between the lines of the Panama and Nicara~ua canals is in rainfall. Panama has a dry season of four months with a ramy season of eight. No rain at all falls during the winter months, and in the rainy season the precipitation occw·s mostly as heavy showers which come on in the afternoon. _

On most of the Nicaragua line, particularly at the site of the great dam and about Grey Town, rainfalls throughout the year. The immediate effect of the constant rain in Nicaragua is to keep labOrers and others exposed to the elements in a drenched condition. Wet clothes taken off at night are put on damp the next morning, and worn so through the day. Sleeping garments removed after a night's rest are placed in rubber receptacles so they may be dry at night. The effect upon health of this constant wetting may be imagined. It is not reasonable that the human system should be able to long stand the debilitating effects which the wet apparel produces. Diseases of the respiratory or!;{ans, rheumatism, and fevers are consequently invited by the climatic conditions which occur between the lakes and the Atlantic terminus of the Nicaragua Canal. The western part of the route appears to be very similar to the Panama country so far as climate is concerned.

The range of temperature so far as the records at hand indicate, is somewhat greater at Nicaragua than at Panama. Daily chan~es of temperature, however, do not seem to be quite so marked. The humidity is higher, and the soil, by reason of a greater length of low swampy territory along the Nicaragua line, makes the northern route less acceptable than the Panama Canal would be from this standpoint of health.

There is little difference in the nature of the di£eases which are indigenous to the countries along the two routes. The history of the Panama Canal country is a black one, but in considering the records of sickness along this route, It must be remembered that grave sanitary errors were committed from the beginning, and that unfavorable accounts, arising probably in some . cases from commercial and national prejudices, have been collecting for a long time. The situation is very different with respect to Nicaragu.a. The country is comparatively new, and no such dama~e to its reput::~.tion has occurred. If it is said that but little disease can be cnarged against Nicaragua.: the reason is probably because little experience of any kind has been haa there.

ot::r0~v~~~ :;!d~~:Ch ~n~o:!eisn~;;~t~ ~~~Uo~:~~7U::f:1~d ':R which exist at Nicaragua as they are at Panama, and that smallpox and many minor tropicaldiseasesareprobably endemic in both countries. '!'he climate in each case predisposes the native and foreigner to sickness and f~vors the pro"'ress of the worst diseaees which may be brought into the country.

The ordinary habits of the natives and visitors who stay any length of time on the Isthmus are not calculated to increase bodily vigor and natural resistance to disease. Carelessness to exposure, indifference to obvious dangers of diet, lack of proper attention to bodily irregularities, and a strong appetite for spirituous liquora are conditions which r ender the people of the Isthmus especially liable to disease.

Following the precedent established by the Suez Canal enterprise and adopted by the promoters of t h e Panama and Nicarag:u.a canals, a department of ·health will in all likelihood be organized. The work which will naturally come before this sanitary organization will include the procwing and :protection of pure-water supplies, and the p1·ompt and permanent disposition of the daily wastes, which will occur among the thousands of laborers who will be gathered together in camps and ettlements. The housing and provisioning of the m en wiU no doubt form a division of the work, as will be the regulation of their hours and habits of toil and recreation. Medical inspections will be req nircd in order to detect 1 he presence of die eases and insanitary conditions, and ho pitals, with branches along t.he line, will be n ecessary to care for those who will inevitably sufferfrom accident P.nd sickness. If an arrangement can be made by which the physical condition of the

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 6921 laborers is examined, and perhaps vaccination practiced, before they areallowed to embark from their home ports for the works, the subsequent labor of the sanitarl organization will be greatly lightened.

The type o physique which has been found most able to resist the unhealthful conditions of the climate of the Isthmus closely approaches the best types already found there and in the neighboring islandS and on the Gulf coast of the United States. The foreigner least susceptible to disease in these tropical countries is a man of medium stature, square frame, dark complexion, thick skin, and mature age.

II. Health conditions afte:r completion of the canal.-The health conditions which are likely to obtain at the canal after its completion are worthy of consideration, sinbe a large population will probably gather along the route and an immense amount of traffic will pass through the great waterway. Tributar_y to the Nicaragua route there is a naturally rich and extensive country which would be opened up to traffic. On the line of the Panama waterway the country is rugged\ sparsely settled, and much less productive. At the present time tbe populatiOn along the Nicaragua route is slight, and cities near its terminals are not yet built. At Panama a railroad which has

~~~!~tJ:teef d~fe!~le ~~~t!!!.t1fh~a!:~:~f ~t,~~r!. the can~l. Two After the canal is built, infectious diseases will almost inevita?ly b~ brought

to the people of the Isthmus by the large amount of traffic which will result. Vessels will come from the cholera centers of Hongkong, Calcutta., Bombay1 Madras, Singapore, and the Straits Settlements; from the plague foci or

~:titJ~~~~~ ~ffh~W~~t fi~ilie~-:J11~~0ll~~et~e~~r6~0 0in~r85~il~~x{g~: gitude. ·

Comparing the two routes across the Isthmus from this standpoint, it is plain that the Panama Canal has a very marked advantage over the line which would pass through Nicaragua. It is much shorter. Ships in transit would be able to pass from ocean to ocean by the Panama. Canal in twelve h ours, while by the Nicaragua Canal thirty-three hours would be consumed. It may be urged that communication with the land in either case could be avoided, and that an efficient sanitary police could effectually protect the pe()ple and shipping against mut ually communicating disease.

Unfortunately, further thought shows that this would be a difficult matter. The temptation for sailors and others to seek the relaxation of a few hours on shore in t he middle of a long voyage and under conditions of apeculiarly alluring nature while the ships are slowly passing through the locks and narrow reaches of the canal is not to be denied. If to this temptation is added the certainty of being able to overtake vessels by railway after a night's debauch it is not clear how the Isthmus can certainly be prevented from b ecoming a focus of disease as well as a focus of trade.

It is extremely important that this great his-hway of commerce should be k ept entirely free of epidemics of infectious diseases, for the burdens which would be put upon shipping in the event, for example, of cholera. becoming pr&valent along the canal would go far to offset the advantages to be gained by making the short cut from ocean to ocean; nor would the fact that a vessel had loaded her cargo at a healthy port relieve her from suspicion of carrying dise~se. It is_doubtful if the 9ua.rantine officers of any healtp.y city would a·dnnt to pratique a vesael which had passed a day and a half m an infected country, whether the original ports of departure of that ship had been in a healthy condition or not. . ·

Another effect which the openin~ of the canal is liable to have upon public health will be that due to the rmproved chances of carrying disease between ports which will be brought nearer together by the canal. The southern ports of the United States and the Pacific coast will be brought in much closer contact with the unhealthy cities of Seuth America and the East by the opening of a transisthmian canal. The obvious r emedy here is the cleaning up of these unhealthy centers; but meanwhile t he insanitary condition of many of the ports of trade, both in the United States and South America, makes the danger dep endent upon a closer and more extensive traffic among them.

SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS. The principal conclusions reached in the foregoing inquiry may be conven

ientlv brought together in the following categorical order: 1. Both the Panama and Nicaragua routes pass through a country which

is extremely unfavorable to health. 2. The climate of Nicaragua and Panama. differ chiefly with re~ect to

fa~~~i!t ~~y~~~tation on the Panama route being distinctly the ess un-

3. Considerations of soil, topography, and the nature of the engineering work to be done are in favor of Panama.. Fewer m en would be required; they would be concentrated., and hence their health could be more easily protected.

4. There is practically no difference in the nature of the diseases to be anticipated, nor in the precautions to be taken to protect health in either case.

5. After construction the difficulty of controlling health conditions along the line would be greater on the Nicaragua route.

6. The shorter Panama route would cause passin~ vessels to be exposed to the possibilities of infection for a much briefer mterval. The danger of communicatin~ diseases to and from the Isthmus is fairly represented by the difference m time which it would take ships to pass from ocean to ocean by the two r outes.

7. The likelihood of the canal becoming a disea-se focus, thus interfering with commer ce, by requiring all healthy ports to quarantine against ships passing the Isthmus is much greater in the case of N icaragua than Panama.

8. Although the Panama health r ecords are much darkened by heavy losses of life by disease, this is not to be construed as evidence of the existence of conditions favoring a greater immunity from sickness along the N icaragua line. 1\fore lives have been lost at Panama b ecause more lives have been unnecessarily exposed. The exrerience of Panama is to be taken as a warning of conditions which are liab.e to be repeated on either route.

9. Whichever canal is selected extra.or dinary care will be required to maintain satisfactory health conditions during consti·uction and after com-pletion of the work. ·

10. Plans and preparations in detail for the organization of an efficient sanitary and medical department should be m ade as early as possible, so that the measures necessary for the prevention of disease may be carried on in harmony with the engineering projects.

REFERENCES.

1. Report of the Isthmian Canal Commission, United States Senate Docu-ment No.5 A Fifty-seventh Congress, first session.

2. Boyland, G . B:. Independent Practitioner, Vol. I, No.7, 1880. 3. Munson. Military Hygiene. New York, 1001. 4. Abbott, H. J. Monthly Weather Review, Vol. XXVII, No.5, 1899. 5. Omman:y a.nd Collin£on. Royal Geographic Society, December, 1867. 6. Grisw old, C. B. The Isthmus of Panama. New York, 1852. 7. Buel , William P. Am. Jour. Med. Sci., VoL XXXI, 1856. 8. W allis, D. Q. Report of State Board of Health of Louisiana, 1882. 9. Nelson, Wo1fred. Five Years of Panama, 1889.

10 .. Engineering, L ondon, April2, 1l>86.

11. Bigelow, Ron. J. Address before Chamber of Commerce of the State of New York, 1887.

12. Davidson. Geographical Pathology, 1892. 13. Canal de Panama., H.apport de la Commission, 1889. 14. Heffengen, A. C. Boston Med. and Su!.S"· Jour., Vol. CVI, No.16, 1882. 15. L iddell, J. A. New York Jour. Med., vol. VIII, 1852. 16. United States Geological Survey;.. 20th Annual Report, Part IV, 1898-1899. 17. Report of the Nicaragua Canal vommission, 1897-1899. 18. Pim and Seaman, Panama, Nicaragua and Mosquito. London, 1867. 19. Stitt, E. R. Report Surgeon-Gener al United States Navy, 1895. 20. Watson, J. M. Jour. Med. Sci., Edinburgh, Vol. XV, 1852.

Now, Mr. President, ·on this matter of health conditions in Panama and Nicaragua I have only to add that the United States Government is fully equipped with a service that will care for these malarial and infectious diseases wherever they exist under our control. We have stamped out yellow fever in Santiago de Cuba. We have stamped out yellow fever in Havana, a city that one of the witnesses of the Senator from Alabama pictured as being as bad as Panama. We have stamped out these epidemics · wherever they have prevailed in our _own country; and in my opinion we are fully prepared, if we construct a canal either along the Nicaragua or the Panama route, to stamp out the diseases which proved so disastrous to human life when the Panama Railroad was constructed, at which time all the laws of life and health were absolutely disregarded.

INTERESTING STATISTICS.

Mr. President, in connection with this subject it is interesting to recall the fact that in former years, before it was thought necessary to have clean streets, good sewerage, pure water, and efficient medical supervision, fearful epidemics of yellow fever and cholera were not unknown to Northern cities.

In 1699 yellow fever raged in Philadelphia, and again in 1762. In 1793 5,000 deaths occurred in Pennsylvania from yellow

fever. In 1792the same disease.carried off 1,792 people in Philadelphia,

and in 1798 3,645 deaths occurred from the same scourge in that city. - ,

In the years 1702, 1790, 1794, 1795, 1798,1805,1822, and 1867 yellow fever prevailed in New York City, some ·years to an alarming extent. _

In 1832 there were 4,000 deathsfromcholera in NewYorkCity, and in 1849 3,000 deaths. The same year there were 2,000 deaths from cholera in Buffalo, 5,080 deaths in Boston, and the epidemic raged in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Tennessee, and illinois. ·

Those scourges are now unknown to the Northern States, and they are practically stamped out in the South, just as they can be in Nicaragua or Panama. '

But, Mr. President, I have taken more time than I intended to, and I leave the subject for the consideration of others, contenting myself with the closing remark that the great natural advantages of the Panama route should not be abandoned because of the false cry that has been raised as to health conditions along that line. The preponderance of testimony refutes the arguments that have been made on the other side, and justify us in the conclusion that the climatic conditions of Panama are not such as should deter this Government from selecting that route as the most feasible one for an interoceanic canal.

Mr. MORGAN. Mr. President, if Panama has been the subject of a false cry about its healthfulness, it is the worst slandered country in the world, because I have never yet heard a person speak about it, I have never seen a newspaper that wrote about it that did not say it was the unhealthiest country in the world. The Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. GALLINGER] may have entirely overturned all that history has recorded on that subject, but I think I must content myself on that point by referring to the unanimous opinion of mankind, a judgment based on facts that are absolutely unanswerable, perhaps one of the leading and best authorities being Baron von Humboldt, who said it was the only • place where, for fifty years, yellow fever had appeared at any isthmian port, and where it was continuous and immnva.ble. We know that that is so.

Mr. President, I do not wish to appear in this•debate as frequently as I am compelled to do, but a great amount of care, labor, and responsibility have been thrown upon me, and I am compelled in honor and in conscience to-bring forward for the consideration of the Senate the facts which have not appeared in the history of this measure, except in certain papers and records that have been submitted here and in the testimony of witnesses, withont proper arrangement.

I desire this evening to bring forward for discussion a situation that has been created by the act of the President of the United States. The last time I was on the floor I read a statement from General Grant, after he was President, which showed that he had made a very careful examination of both these routes, taking up the t·eport made by Humphreys, Ammen, and others, to which the Senator from Nevada [Mr. STEWART] referred this morning. His statement on that subject~ it occurred to me, contain8d a.s

6922 CONGRESSIONAL RECO,RD-SEN ATE.

much good sense as was ever contained in any proposition made bymortal man, and it isnotatall unnatural that we should attribute such sensible things to GeneTal Grant.

Mr. President~ I claim to have a p-1·oper respect fur the so-lemn diplomatic acts, pledges, and agreements of our Presidents, without reference to the politics o-f their supporters- or my political antagonisms toward them. It is on this basis that I rest the P.ope and the belief that the action of President McKinley in the conduct of a great and dangerous imbroglio in China, and the conclusion he reached of which we know little, officially, is honorable, just, correct, benevolent, wise, and patriotic. I have equal respect for the motives and the conduct of President McKinley in obtaining the ag1·eements from Costa Rica and Nicaragua in December, 1000, that are called protocols, which have only been laid before Congres.s officiany:within a month past.

I honoT him for the correct, just .. benevolent, wise, and patri~ otic terms of those agreements and for the friendly regard for OUI' sister Re-publics, Costa Rica and Nicaragua, in which those agreements had their origin, and for the splendid and intrepid statesmanship that inspired them. _ A more trying and difficult group of questions was never dealt with or answered in ths clear mind and true heart of a courageous man than was settled in this simple act of quiet, firm, and wise resolve by President Mc~inley.

The first question in that difficult problem was: "'Shall a canai be opened through the American isthmus or shall the effort be abandoned?'' The answer was: "It shall be opened. n

"At what place?" was the next question. The answer was: ''"Through the valley of the San Juan River and Lalre Nicaragua."' "Who shall construct, own, and control the canal?,_, The answe1L was: "The United States."

In what way and by what authority .shall the right be obtained to do these acts that are little less than· sovereign? The answer WJ.S "By agreement with the sovereign Republics that own the country. They are our younger si tersl and in the sense of the protection we owe them thl·~gh our national relations toward them they deserve our most respectful consideration, our most honorable care, our most neighborly assistance in the one- great work which alone can bring these great Republics within reach of the distant coasts of the Atlantic and the Pacific, a work which the Creator has proYided them the opportunity to accomplishthrough lakes and rivers that only a slight diversion will cause to flow to the westward, as they now flow to the eastward, and connect the two oceans-without the strength to do the work."

The last and most trying question that arose was, Who shall prevent or hinder the performance of this plain duty?

To that question it was the soul of the American President that responded, not alone his wisdom or his courage. ''No nation under the sun shall prevent us,'' was the answer of President McKinley.

While the Senate and Congress were in strenuous debate as to the trne line of duty toward Great Britain in this connection, Mr. McKinley settled it by agreements with these States, then hesigned, sealed, and delivered, to become effectual when Congress should give its consent. He did not, as the Spooner amendment does-! speak of the one before the Senate-first declare that Congress shall decide on the route, and it shall afterwards be ratified by the Senate, acting on a treaty by a two-thirds vote. As to the Executive, the lines of duty were fixed in those agreements. The President believed that Congress should authorize them to be made. I fully agree with the President.

There were still other embarrassments that he encountered. The chief of these was the artful, persistent, and intrusive overtures and supplications of the Panama Canal Company, assisted by its powerful allies, the transcontinental railroads. The entire group, in one solid agreement, which included all the railroads from the Canadian Pacific to the Panama Railroad, brought all their power to bear upon the President, and have never ceased heir opposition to these agreements. He stood firm while life

lasted. Further on in my observations I will trace the insidious course

of the Panama Canal Company, that never pursued any course which did not leave in its trail the marks of disaster and the stain of discredit. Mr. McKinley knew its odious history as well as any man that lived, and he despised it as thoroughly. He learned these things from the watchful scrutiny that was his habit and is the safeguard of all honest public servants. He had studied the report of the committee of which Ron. John R. Fellows was the chairman, dated March 3, 1893, made to the House, of which Mr. McKinley was then a member, and he knew the story of peculation and bribery and of the monopolistic agreements of the Panama Canal Company, laid bare in that document, and how its most distinguished promoter had stated his anxiety to quickly obtain and earn his salary by "putting the Nicaraguans on their backs," as he declared.

That was while De Lesseps was in the full tide of his glory and was -permitting hundreds of millions of French money to be

squandered in con-upt contracts. And it was during the time that the American committee of the Panama Canal Company were the dispensers of French money in Washington. Mr. Me~ Kinley had even been worried an-d badgm;ed by Cromwell and other agents of that company by letters thrust upon him that I will presently:Eead to the Senate.

H& knew of the passage o:fi the bills in the Senate for the construction of the Nicaragua Canal and of the hearings. and report of the He:phnrn committee to the House of Representatives, in January, 1899'-, in which the whole subject of the merits of the Panama Canal was gone into, and he knew of the passage of the Hepburn bill in the HE}use, in May, 1900, from which he- copied the- very language of the agreement of December, 190(}.

He knew of the report o.f the Senate Committee on Interoceanic Canals, of 1\fay 16, 1900, of which the Senator from Ohio was a member, and that the committee denounced the Panama Canal Company in the terms which I will now qu"Ote and in other censures of like character L

That committee reported thus: This manifest p11rpose of this company to interfere with legislation by

asking the President to inform Congress of a state of facts, as alleged, of which Congress is "presumably withou_t knowledge "is an insult to the intelligence of Congress. It is an insolent invitation to the President to control the action of Congress so that they shall not act upon bills reported by committees in both Houses and u to be acted upon iri the House of Representatives May 1 and May 2, 1000, having for their purpose the adoption by the Govermnent of another isthmian ea.nal route, without awaiting the recommendation of the Presid~nt and the information, report, and conclusions of the Isthmian canal Commission awointed by the President under the a.ct of March 3; 1899."

It is a spectacle that is, happily, without precedent, that this foreign cor· poration, actin~ in a foreign country and without any recognition even of tne honesty of Its-dealings, while it has all the time been the subject of dis· trust by our Government, should ask the President to "advise the Congress of the facU; of the case.,_, far the purpose of opposing Congress in declaring and enforcing the uo.blic policy of our people and Government.

A bill that the.H"ouse had agreed to consider on the lstand 2ddays of May._ 1000, is severely censured by this speculating corporation, because its passage would destroy the hope of that contpa.ni' of unloading a. failing enterprise upon the United States under its proposal of February 28,1899, which is again renewed in this letter.

Aside from the. fact that said proposal contains suggestions that .vrovide for the robbery of the stockholders of the "old company" and the VIolation of the decrees of the courts of' France, it proposes a dn:ect violation of the statutes of Colombia, enacted in granting the concessions to that company, and a breach of our treaty of1846 with Colombia, which binds us to guarantee the sovereignty of that territory over the State of Panama.

The President has never answered said overture, nor has he responded to the suggestions and requests contained in the letter from Sullivan & Crom· well of April 30, 1900, but the Secretary of State has sent that letter to the chairman of the Committee on Interoceanic Canals in a communication as follows:

DXPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, May14, 1900. Han._ JoHN T. MoRGAN,

Chain11.an Ccnitmittee on Interoceanic Canals, United States Senate.

Sm: I 11ave the honor to inclose herewith copy of a letter addressed to the President by Messrs. Sullivan & Cromwell, ~eneral counsel for the New Panama Canal Company, expressive of the desil'e of the com,Pany that no action be taken by Con~ress upon the subject of an interocearuc canal between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans until the Isthmian Canal Commission, constituted under the a.ct of March 3, 1899, shall have completed its investigations and inquiries and reported to the President.

T.he-company's letter of February 28, 1899, referred to by Messrs. Sullivan & Cromwell, is printed an page. 4.1 of Senate Document No. 188, Fifty-sixth Congress, first session, but a copy is herewith inclosed for more convenient reference.

I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, JOHN HAY.

(Inclosures:) Letters from Sullivan & Cromwell, February 28, 1 99, and April30, 1900.

The commi~e made further declarations in that report which will be a source of pride to its members while they live and will do them honor in their graves. They say:

As the question of the building of the canal is not dependent upon any doctrine relating to the freedom of the seas, or its neutrality, or its use as a feature of military strategy, delay in its consn·uction, which may be fatal to its success, should not be the policy of Congress.

Delay in construction can not possibly advance the settlement of any question as to the use of the canal after it is completed.

. Such questions are convenient pretexts for delay on the part of those who oppose the wm·k of the construction, ownership, and control of the canal by the United States because they own competitive routes of interoceanic transportati.on, or by those who wish to place the control of this ¥ast source of wealth and power in the hands of syndicates of p1'ivate pe1'80ns; but the duty of Congress, in response to the will of the people so univermlly expressed, is that we should provide the means for instituting this great work, and that we should enable the President, a-s the Chief Executive and as the head of the diplomatic department, to proceed to do what is needful and proper to be doue to inaugurate tne canal. This bill provides such authority, yet it makes the President subject to the future power of Congress or the Senate, as he may find it best to proceed by agreement or by treaty in it8 execution.

The attitude of the American people, as it is presented in this bill, is at once proud, independent, self-reliant, and honorable, while it is properly considerate of all international obligations that may be justly demanded of our Government. It declares the right that belongs to our great Republic to provide for the general welfare of our people in the way that Congress shall provide, without ner¥ous apprehension that any nation will find in our action any just _ground of complamt or any reasonable criticism of the deci· sive promptitude of our determination.

Thero is no actual cause for such apprehensions, and the indulgence or the expression of them does not comport with the past history or the character of our people.

Believing tha.t a.ll other nations will regard our course in pursuing this vital duty to our country with the consideration that is due to the pressure

1902. CONGRESSIONAL -RECORD- SENATE. 6923 of this great subject upon the attention of Congress, our true a.nd selfr especting line of action is clear. It is that O<mgress will now provide the means and the authorit y for constructing a ship c nal in Nicaragua and Costa Rica, with their consent, and leave it to the Pr~sident, under the Constitution, to deal with any questions of a diplomatic sort that may be made by other nations in the pro !!Tess of his work.

Our plainest duty, after~ bill b ecomes a law, is to agree with Nicaragua and Costa Rica as to the t erms on which they will concede to the United States the right to build, own, and control a canal through their territories and to arrange wit h them the terms and conditions under which the canai shall be used by the contracting powers and by othm· nat ions. When these condit ions are thus settled by the powers that have the first and best right to settle them, a basis will be established on which further negotiations can be conducted with all other powers as to the privileges they shall enjoy in the use of the canal.

Until this is done no such just basis can exist. Mr. McKinley did not wait for the passage of the first Hepburn

bill to accept this suggestion in this statement of the committee. He proceeded in advance of it to secure the necessary rights from Costa Rica and Nicaragua, by the agJ:eements of December 1, 1900, and which, when they are obtained., fix every right positively, but leave the details, the plans, and the compensation, if any, to be determined by treaty with these powers upon the basis of that agreement. That is what we ought to do now and ought to have done long since. Colombia has never proposed to make such an agreement with us, and she can not possibly propose to do it, because her constitution requires that any contract that she makes with a foreign government shall 1--e first authorized by her congt·ess.

Whatever the Senator from Ohio may think of Mr. McKinley, I feel deeply grateful to him for having taken his line of action in December, 1900, in precise accord with the foregoing declarations of the committee, even to the copying of the text of the Hepburn bill into the agreements with Nicaragua and Costa Rica, in December, 1900~

After that report was made, and up to the date of the report of the minority of the committee made on the 31st day of May, 1902, which was signed by the Senator from Ohio, that committee has uniformly and earnestly supported and defended the wise and patriotic course of Mr. McKinley in signing the agreements of December, 1900, with Costa Rica and Nicaragua, without any hint of dissent.

What reason or occasion can now be found for abandoning and scouting this great act is more than I possess the power to discern, and no reason is stated by the mLTlority of the committee. The Senate has found it necessary and proper to rely upon the judicial fairness of the reports of its committees in order to get along with the public business. When objections exist of a gt·ave character to a diplomatic agreement such as this, signed, sealed, and delivered between the parties, it is due by any committee or any part of a committee that departs from that agreement to state some reason for it. ·

Until this minority report came in no one questioned the propriety or the binding force of those agreements, or that Mr. McKinley was tri.fiing with so serious a matter when he made them. What has aroused this new and sudden opposition to these honorable agreements I can not quite understand.

The facts that enter into the proper consideratio:p. of this great canal question are so numerous that it is scarcely possible in a report to present them in detail or even approximately. The Senate, unless it finds that its confidence is betrayed, is ready to accept the conclusions of its committees as p1·esenting the honest opinions of their membership, at least for what they are worth.

As no dissent has ever been expressed by a member of the committee of this action of President . McKinley in making these agreements with Costa Rica and Nicaragua, and it has been often refeiTed to and coinmented upon in its reports, it seems to me that it is entitled to the respect of the members of the committee, however it may be regarded by others.

The Hepburn bill confirms those agreements, while the Spooner substitute desti'Oys them.

When history -makes up its records of the a-cts of the · contemporaries of William McKinley, it will be found that no true Democrat has helped to destroy this wise, brave, and patriotic deed, performed in the quiet manner that is always characteristic of true greatness. .

Mr. President, when the Committee on Interoceanic Canals reported the House bill now before the Senate, the drafts of the conventions proposed for our consider ation by Colombia, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica had not been sent to Congress, and the committee, after earnest effort to ascertain what would be the cost of the concessions of the respective Governments, failed to gain that information. Consequently it had no basis of fact as to the cost of the two canals on which it could make a recommendation.

The result was that the committee made no report except to recommend the passage of the H ouse bill, for reasons that are aside from the co t of the concessions and are far more important, which have been stated t o t he Senate without dissent in the previous reports of the ccm mittee. So the committee reported the bill to the Senate, alcng with the hearings and without re-

peating its former reports, the conclusions of which the eviden-ce on the hearings still more fully sustained.

The Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. HoAR] afterward's offered a bill which was referred to the committee and was carefully considered.

In the meantime the proposed convention of Colombia and Nicaragua and a statement of the attitude of Costa Rica had been sent to Congress for information by the Secretary of State.

It was then possible to have a view of the subject that woula include nearly eve1·y possible phase of the question of the choice of the routes, and the committee was enabled on Mr. HoAR's bill to state its reasons more fully for recommending the Nicaragufl route. In doing this the committee made some comments on the attitude of Colombia and Nicaragua,asitisshown by their drafts of the proposed convention, which I do not now propose to repeat. But I respectfully ask that Senators will examine them.

Since December, 1900, the Committee on Interoceanic Canals have earnestly and carefully urged the passage of the House bill, of which Hon. William P. Hepburn is the author, because of its wise ad~ptation to the existing conditions at the time it was offered, and its still more appropriate application to conditions as they now exist.

That bill provides for the conditions on which the " protocols " of December, 1900, as the agreements were called, are to become fully obligatory, and this is its vital principle and most essential provision. If there are imperfections as to any matter of administration, they can be corrected hereafter without endangering the provisions for creating the canal.

These agreements fully define the obligations that Costa Rica and Nicaragua are ready to assum-e and -execute as to a canal on the Nicaragua route, and the Hepburn bill accepts them as they are stated in th.ase protocols. Such a.cceptance is a final disposition of several points in the situation that can not be settled with Colombia, under he1' constitution, except by act of her Congress · to authorize the making of such an agreement.

The chief of the e agreements are the definition of the canal route and canal zone, the terminals, and the perpetual and exclusive own-ership and control of the canal. Other important matters are settled by those agreements finally, and the further details of the plan of execution are left to be arranged by future negotiation. ·

The passage of the Hepburn bill will create :final relations with Costa Rica and Nicaragua on these points, which are vital to the canal. The passage of the Spooner bill would only authorize the Pre ident to open negotiations with Colombia, and will, if it is not amended adopt the draft of the proposed convention at least as a guide to the President in acquiring canal rights in Colombia.

The report of the committee on the bill of Senator HOAR states its reasons for refusing to recommend the convention proposed by Colombia, and again presents reasons for the passage of the Hepburn bill, which the committee has heretofore .on three or more occasions presented with unanimous concurrence. The committee has all the time stood firmly united upon the support of this great and wise policy of President McKinley, and the majority of the committee still adheres to it.

The minority abandon it in the statement of their views submitted to the Senate, and advise that Congress will direct the President to make an agreement with Colombia for canal concessions, and with the Panama Canal Company for the property it claims to own in connection with the Panama Canal and the Panama Railroad. This is done without pointing out the way by which such an agreement is possible to be made with Colombia under present conditions, or is even probable in -the future. If Colombia is honest and respectful to the comity between nations in diplomatic intercourse, her draft of a convention is a sincere declaration of her attitude, otherwise it is only a discreditable finesse.

The adoption of the Spooner substitute is a repudiation of McKinley's great agreements with Costa Rica and NicaTagua, which will necessarily release those States from any obligation to comply with them and must create a bad state of feeling toward us in those Republics instead of the sincere and honorable regard they have always had for the United States.

They will deeply feel the rebuff and will not again be willing to have the United States approach them on this subject, as Mr. McKinley approa-ched them with earnest and honorable importunity only to be snubbed by Congt·ess when some glittering fraud is presented to tempt our cupidity and to provide $40,000,000 as the pay of its conti·ivers.

Unless we are ready to perform our duty to the people of the United States, sword in hand and in defiance of the world's scorn and its com bin~ powers, we will not get an isthmian canal by an adl·oit bargain with a corporation that renounces the control of the State under whose laws it has its existence. We had better follow the advice of Ammen, Grant, Frelinghuysen, and Harrison, and the solemn agreements of :McKinley, rather than lay


aside an honorable and just course of dealing to follow the Panama Canal corruptionists, and the church party in Colombia by furnishing them money to oppress the liberal party there and to cut the throats of innocent people.

It is these people, in wicked combination, that the Spooner amendment compels us to deal with, in giving an offensive rebuff to Nica.ragua and Costa Rica , and in utter abandonment of the agreements made with them by President McKinley.

The committee has been right in each of its unanimous reports in support of those agreements, and the majority are still right in adhering to them, while the minority are wrong in repudiating them.

The Senate has been fully informed a~ to the character of Panama as a region of pestilence, the Senator from the granite hills of New Hampshire to the contrary notwithstanding, the constant and unceasing nursery of death from climatic diseases, and that this condition is beyond remedy unless we can change the climate and prevent the tides that purge the oceans and make the bays of Panama and Colon the dumping ground of their excrement.

The evidence is full, complete, unquestionable, and as irrevocable as history on the subject of the pestilence that has its summer and winter home at Panama.

The Senate is also fully informed as to the character of the population in the region of the Panama Canal; that it is not homogeneous; that it contains every variety of the human family, except the best va1ieties; that it is the theater of insurrection, internecine warfare, mob rule, and pillage, and has been so for more than sixty years; that it is under the pall of the concordat of 1886, which divorces people at their option who have been married according to civil law in any country, if the ceremony was not performed by a Catholic priest, and punishes whoever may speak or write in condemnation of that church or its priesthood, and controls the schools and the text-books from which the childxen are taught, whether the books are secular or religious.

The Senate knows that the civil war that has raged for three years in Colombia was largely provoked by that infamous concordat and by the frauds of the Panama Canal Company, and that the Colombian Congress has not assembled since it dissolved in 1898, in consequence of its refusal to extend to that company a further lease of life for six years. You can no more gather a congress in Colombia, sir, to sit there voluntatily, than you can find a hundred men who are willing to go to the jail in this city and stay there for a year. They will not risk their lives to get to the capital. You can not have a congress there until the present revolution is ended.

The Government of Colombia is now a simple dictatorship; and that is what we are asked to go down there and make a treaty with. Well, we should have to hold. it up after we made the treaty; we should have to spend more money to stiffen them to stand by the treaty than we would have to expend in buying out this fraudulent, corrupt Panama Canal project.

I b,0pe the Senate realizes the danger of undertaking to construct and maintain a canal in that country or the indefinite delay of waiting until the animosities have died out which have been excited by such conditions and are so bitter and so bloody.

The Senate is bound to·see that the alliance between the churchparty government and the Panama Canal Company is formed for the purpo8e of furnishing money to that government to repress the insurrection of the Liberal party and to pay off and discharge the corruptionists who have wrecked the old canal company and now propose to expire and in its last will and testament to sell the body of the new company to the anatomists for the dissecting table.

But if this is not enough to forbid us from fostering this alliance for the benefit of the transcontinental railways, I believe that we will at least halt in this line of action when we examine into the heavy exactions made by the railroads upon our suffering people under positive agreements between these companies and the Panama Railroad Company for the express purpose of such exactions.

The proofs are all in the records of Congress. They are complete, and no one questions them. I will only delay the Senate while I make a few quotations from the contracts, sworn statements of witnesses, and committ ee reports, that establish these abuses.

I read: APPE:SDIX A.

[House Report No. 2615, Fifty-second Congress, second session.] Tlie Committee on Rules, to whom were referred the resolutions heretofore

introduced by Mr. Fellows and Mr. Geary, respectively, reported the same back with the recommendation that the resolution herewith submitted be a.dopted in lieu thereof, viz:

. I will append this entire report to my 1·emarks lest some Senatoi· might have i t to sav that I had garbled the record. I have need to refer, though, only to parts of it. The part I now omit to read relateo tv the duties of the committee. The committee say in their repo.r't: Th~ Panama Railroad is a corporation under the laws of New York. and

its directory nnd the rights of ownership of its shares are governed by the laws of that State.

Something our honorable friends on this floor omit to notice entirely, that after we get through with the Panama Company and Colombia we have to go to New York and get an act of the legislature to authorize the United States to become the full owner of the company.

Your committee being instructed to ascertain whether any sums of money were expended by the Panama Canal Company, or its promoters\ for the purpose of preventing opposition in this country to the plans of sa1d canal has done its utmost in the limited time before the end of the present Congress to investigate this matter.

It has been unable thus far to trace directly or indirectly the exJ?:mditure of al!-y mon.ey whatever ~n a corrupt way to influence the legislative or executive action of the Umted States Government. It may be that il') investi~ation, however prolonged, after this lapse of time could be efficie.ilt in makmg such discovery, even if such corrupt use of money was made; but this is the subject of which your committee does not desire authoritati\'ely to express its. opinion. that fll!ther investigatio~ would be entir ely fruitlo3s.

Certam facts m relatiOn to the expenditur e of money on the ps.rt of the canal company, however, are distinctively proven.

In the year 1879 the original subscription to the stock of the Pan:mm Company was opened in France, of which countl.·y tho canal company, h;r its technical name of the Universal Interoceanic Canal Company, is p, corporation. The original subscription was an entire failru·e, and great weight must.be given to the op~on that it wa~ a failure principally on account of the. distrust a!'! to the attitude ~f th~ Uruted States toward this canal project which was umversally entertamed m Europe. ·

It is a fact too well known to have required testimony to be offered that the entire tone of the executive branch of this Government dur;n.,. t.he Administration of President Hayes, and the entire current of our diplonm tic correspondence was one of inten.'!e loyalty to the idea that not merely no foreign government, but no foreign corporation indirectly supported or controlled by any foreign government, should ever obtain any right to construct a canal across the Isthmus. In fact, during the two years preceding the clo:;e of the Hayes Administration the correspondence of our Government waskapt within ordinary diplomatic courtesy of protest on this subject only by thJ belief, which results have proved to be well founded, that the canal constructed on the plans and ideas of De Lesseps and his associates Wll-S an idle dream, practically hopeless of accomplishment.

It seems clear that the promoters of the canal company saw that no success would attend their efforts to obtain subscriptions in Europ e unless the public opinion of America on this subject should either be modified or that the people of Europe should be persuaded that the public opinion of the ' American people hl:l.d been modified. De Lesseps visited this country in the winter of 1M79--80, and a single instance will show how determined the pro- -rooters of the canal were, whatever was the popular opinion in thiscount1·y, that Europe should be persuaded that it was not hostile to the canal. On the very day of De Lesseps's alTival in Washington President Hayes sent his message to Congress affirming in strong terms the position of his Administration as to the Monroe doctrine in its broadest acceptation.

an at!~~~~~~ ~~ffc~;~ti~ a!~ei~~S:ili:~. t~~~~!~m~~fZ::e~t~~~ American friends, who had translated him this message, he at once telegraphed to Paris that the President's message had guaranteed the neutrality of the Panama Canal. This seemed to be the beginning of a great change in the tone of the press of Paris and of France, and from the time of De L esseps's visit fu this country there seemed to be an assurance that America was not . hostile, but, on the contrary..~. very friendly to the enterprise. It was after the return of De Lessepsto .t<'rancethat the decision was made that anAmeriean ·committee of men of prominence whose solid names would be a guaranty of the financial stability of the enterprise should b e selected.

I have pape1·s-which I will produce in the Senate if anyone wiohes me to do so-showing that Mr. De Lesseps in a colloquy in Paris with the Colombian minister boldly asserted that he was ready to throw off his garments and take up arms for the purpose of . fighting for Colombia against the United States, shortly after the · time that he was here making these representations to our people.

The report continues: The object of this is perfectly clear. It was to give a widespread public

impression that American capital, in the persons of some of its most respectable agencies, with ramificatiOns, correspondents, and connections in every finanCial center of all localities in the United States was backing the enterprise, and that Americans intended to become shareholders in the canal. It was intended first by the gentlemen who were selected to compose this committee to choose Geneml Grant to lend his name to this enterprise to give to this American committee not m erely financial weight, but the patriotic glory of a great name at the h ead of it, so as to impress the Americ.an people with its international or binational character.

General Grant having declined, it was clear that the next best thing to do was to secru·e the name, as chairman of this committee, of some gentleman widely known, of political experience and position, and, if possible,· one whose orthodoxy in tne past in relation to the Morn·oe doctrine would make his support of the canal project all the stronger in the eyes o:J: the American people. The American committee, by mutual a~reement, under suggestions from the :firul.ncial agents -of the canal company m Paris, nad already been composed of the great banking houses of J. & W. Seligman, Drexel, Morgan & Co., and Winslow, Lanier & Co., of New York.

Each of these houses was to designate one of its members to form the American committee, and the then Secretary of the Navy, Ron. R. W. Thompson, was decided upon as chairman, and in the autumn of lSl:iO the offer was made to him, through J . & W. Seligman, to· leave the Cabinet and assume the title of the chairman of the American committee, with a salary to be paid at not less than 1J'..5,000 francs.

The house of Se~man & Co., of London, in which the New York banking firm of J. & W. Seligman were interested, had been the financial agents of the Navy Department during the Hayes Administration, and perEonal acquaintance between the Seligmans and Mr. Thompson had been the consequence.

Testimony has been taken showing that this action on the part of the Secretary of the Navy was a great disappointment and surprise to Mr. Hayes, and he so expressed himself to others than J.I.Ir. Thompson. , It is clear that the whole tone of the Administration had been suspicious of and hostile toward the enterprise into which Mr. Thompson was willing to go, and it is perfectly clear that had no~ Mr. Thompson b een a m ember of that Administration, no controlling r eason existed for his selection as chairman of a committee intrusted, or supposed to be intrusted, with such great financial and commercial re ponsibilities.

Mr. Thompson tendered his resignation early in December, 1880, and it was formally accepted_ by the President a few days thereafter.

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 6925 The truth is. Mr. Thompson tendered his resignation because

the President demanded it, and it was accepted in five minutes or five seconds after President Hayes was informed of his becoming the chief promoter and president of this American committee to carry out De Lesseps's plan. This may be rugged history, but I think there is a great deal of credit in it toward Mr. Hayes.

I think the honorable President of the Senate, perhaps, was on the committee which heard the statement of De Lesseps when he declared that he was for a sea-level canal, and that if a lock canal was to be thought of Nicaragua was the only location.

It is si<>'nificant of the controlling r easons for the haste in which this matter of M1~ Thompson's resignation from the Cabinet was concluded by him, that we find him writing, on December 16, that arrangements shoulq b e J?ade that his salary sh ould begin on the 20th of December, m order that his friends might" be ~-ssured tha~ his position was fixe'!- beyo~d a peradventure," and that a promise to this effect •· would satiSfy his fr1ends aoo put the Nicaraguans on their backs."

Who were "the · Nicaraguans" to whom ltfr. Thompson referred? They were the men who had hopes merely that some future day might inaugurate a Nicaraguan Canal-hopes inspired by the confidence they had in the judgment of General Grant and in the honest, sincere, yes, severe fidelity of men like Humphreys and Ammen, who made the surveys there during six years to determine which was the best rout.e, and who had decided in favor of Nicaragua. That was all they had to do.

To "put the Nicaraguans on theiT backs" meant to nip_ the whole Nicaraguan idea in the bud and .to prevent any Amencan Congress from having the audacity to back up the opinions of these men that Nicaragua was a better route than Panama. Here in the galleries I have seen them day after day watching these proceedings, and they are here now looking upon us, the successors of the men who started this arrangement that caused poor Mr. Thompson to lose r eputation-! am afraid to lose it allfor he had an honorable reputation.

The committee proceed: It was at this time that the Forty-sixth Congress appojnted a special com

mittee to examine and report on interoceanic routes. At the same time the Committee on Foreign Affairs was charged with the examination and report upon the so-called "Crapo resolution," as to whether the Panama Canal project was a violation of the Monroe doctrine or was detrimental to Amencan mterests.

In the Senate the Burnside resolution to a similar effect was under consideration.

Your committee repeat that it has not found any evidence to show that any corrupt or improper means were used to stifle the investigation or the discussion of these resolutions. In fact, in spite of the arguments of 1\Ir. r.rhompson and the counsel employed by him to assist, the Crapo resolution was r eport.ed back to the House in a somewhat modified form, but with. a report ringing with true American patriotism, and a. manly, yet co~rvative as>ertion of the Monroe doctrine as it is generally understood m the United States.

The select committee on interoceanic routes also made a report strongly supporting the idea that the United States should control all transit over the Isthmus, at least in so far as to prevent any European or non-American nation from having a preponderating influence. But it will be remembered that it was at the short session of the Fortieth Congress, with a change of administration coming on the 4th of March, that these reports were made, as the present one will be, just at the close of the session, and your committee can see reasonable ground for the belief that theEe resolutions and reports were not acted upon sinwly from the general apathy of the House and the stress of other business at'" the close of the session.

Your committee find that for the n ext three or four years Colonel Thompson was exceedingly vigilant in watching the legislation of Congress and most active and able in his efforts and influence to postpone the consideration of any legislation, either directly or indirectly, tending to work an injury to the cause of the Panama. Canal Company. He appeared before committees, House and Senate, p ersonally and by prmted arguments anti briefs.

These, he thinks, had great weight in the defeat of the Nicaragua Canal plans in whatever .shap~ they came UJ?, but it is ~ot clear th!!-t, ou.ts~de ?f this, he had anythm~ directly to do With the shapmg of pubhc oprmon m this country or bringmg about what seems to have been an apparent acquiescence, or at least an indifference, on the part of the press and the people. So far as the testimony goes, the work of the American committee was altogether done by Mr. Thompson, and consisted of supervising purchases for a part of the time for the construction of the canal, and this persistent, watchful, and successful supervision of the legislation of the United States.

· I hope that these visitors who are he1·e in the galleries every dav have not the right to represent Mr. Thompson's ghost while they sit here and carry on that same work. Sometimes I am a little doubtful about it. Some things go on in the Senate, of which, I am informed, although I do not know, which look very queer.

'l'he m embers of the American committee other than himself were supposed by Mr. Thompson to have r eceived no compensation whatever except their commission as bankers and brokers in obtaining subscriptions and fur-

• thering the sale of the stocks and bonds of the canal company and in the handling and transmission of the very large amount of money spent in this count ry for the purchase of supplies of various kinds. _

It was the object of the committee to see that t o as great an extent· as possible the purchase of supplies of r aw material, of machinery and tools should be made m the Utaited States as an aid t o make it appear that America had no hostility but every reason to look with a friendly eye on this enterprise. The total amount of money for purchases of this kind passing through the single house of J . & W. Selio-man and distributed to American trade was upward of $40,000,000, and that house is not able to say that no further accounts of money came through other banking houses to be spent in America for sin:illar ends. This, however, was all spent by purchasing agents of the canal company, and their vouchers for their purchases were forwarded to Paris for approval. .

There was one thing, however, which struck the-only three salaried officers <>f the Panama Canal Company whose testimony we have been able to get

as an entire surprise. This fact is that these three banking houses named above r eceived, apparently for the loan of their names and for nothing else to this enterprise, the immense sum of 6,000,000 francs, or $1,200,000; $400,000 apiece, or $.-"{),000 a year, was paid these houses without the knowledge of the chairman of that committee, who all the time supposed that he was the important factor in this enterprise, and was himself receiving only half of that sum annually.

In fact, two years before the canal ~ompany we~t into liquidation it is in evidence that Mr. Thompson voluntanly reduced his salary by ono-half-that is, to $12,500-remaining in complete ignorance that the other members of the committee, of which he was still chairman, were still each receiving $50,000.

Mr. Thompson must have been overcredulous and too confiding to deal with men who were exploiting this organized fraud.

These banking houses .!rt;ate they had no specific duties to render in return for these subsidies; that they had no employment or interest to effect the sale of canal stock or bonds, and that, in fact, practically none were sold in the United Sta.tes. What influence was exercised upon the financial public opinion of the United States by the names of these three great banking houses, what indirect credit and popularity was given to the enterprise through their numerous correspondents and connections throughout the country~ is perhaps impossible now to estimate, but to effect this was the object of tne formation of this American committee; a committee which testifies that it had no regular meetings, and some m embers of which were never present at a meeting or knew whether any minutes were ever kept by the committee, while each of these houses was receiving $400,000. ·

This fact, if it is a measure of the general conduct and management of the Panama Canal Company, may possibly explain why it was compelled to go into liquidation as soon as it did.

There is another thing which shows the French estimate of the character of the American people, which seems to be that any sum of money that you shake at the Americans will cause them to do whatever you want done, if it is large enough.

That has been exemplified here when the drop was made from a hundred and nine millions to forty million dollars at one fall; when some $5,000,000 is held out before this august Senate as a reason for changing the policy of this Government and discrediting all the vast number of men who have advocated and testified in favor of the Nicaragua route and entering into a questionable bargain with a corrupt company. I am not misquoting, misstating, or exaggerating anything about this. They believe we are capable of it, and when this substitute is passed they will think they kno~ it in their own judgment, and the American people will believe it.

The only specific matter the three banking members of the American committee seem to have had in charge and to have accomplished was the purchase of the stock of the Panama Railroad Company by the canal company at a price more than double what i t had been quoted in the market for two or three years previous to the beginning of these negotiations. This stock had been selling from $140 to $150, and the result of the negotiationg a!ld contract of sale was that the P anama Canal Company purchased 68,500 shares out of the 70,000 shares of stock, at a price of $291-$250 a share for the stock, $41 and some cents on each share for certain "aS3ets" of the railroad company, the nature of which is not very clear.

As to the second part of the resolution refened to your committee, r elating to the situation in the past few years and at present of American commerce upon the Isthmus, your committee feels that it has obtained all the evidence needed to establish certain facts beyond controversy. ·

This was an American corporation, the controlling interest of it purchased by the Panama Canal Company.

On the 1st of February, 1878, the Pacific Mail Company, a corporation organized under the laws of New York, owning and running steamers between New York and ASRinwall on the Atlantic, and between Panama and San Francisco on the Pamfic, together with certain intermediate Central American and Mexican ports, made a contract for fifteen years with the Panama Railroad Company, also a corporation under the laws of New York. At that time there was no showing that there were any foreign stockholders in either of these two corporations. ·

This contract provided that the P acific Mail should have the exclusive right "to bill freight through" from New York to San Francisco, and vice versa, over the Panama Railroad, and all freight offered by others between these points could not be "billed through," but. would have to pay local rates on the isthmus railway. The sum paid for this was to be a lump sum of $75,000 a month to the railroad company, which, by modification, was afterwards lowered to $55,000 a month.

Corresponding every time. A remarkable fact about this contract is that it was the result of a con

tract made before that time between the P acific Mail Company and the Transcontinental Railway P ool, as at that date the Association of Transcon-tinental Railways was called. •

As I have read-That wa-s a contract whereby the Transcontinental Railway Pool, embrac

ing all of the roads b etween the Missouri River and the Pacific seaports and covering entirely all railway traffic between the Atlantic and Pacific seaboards, several of which had received large donations of public lands and the bonds of which the United States Government was guaranteeing, uaid the Pacific Mail the sum of $90,000 a month, which was afterwards reduced to ~;75,000 a month, for the consideration that the Pacific Mail would carry only 1,200 tons a month of freight each way between N ew York and San Francisco, and on that freight would allow the transcontinental pool to fix the price and rate to be paid.

That was the 11pshot of the contract, althou~h the form was a reservation of space for 1,2DO tons a month for the exclusive benefit of the Transcontinental R ailway roads-whether the steamers sailed full or half empty.

After the passage of the interstate commerce law had compelled the dissolution of the so-called "pool," a transcontinental railway association was formed, which, under some name or other, is still in existence; and down to the present tiW:e the Pacific Mail, subsidized by the Government in a lar/f; ~heo~~e:~~ J~t't~!st::m~ ~~~:V/~1ui~~ transcontinental railways to

These two contracts were so far practically parts of one and the same that the amount paid the Panama RaHroad monthly was fixed with regard to that paid to the Pacific Mail by the transcontinental ro:1ds, and when the latter was lowered from $90,000 a month to $75,000 the former was lowered from $"75,COO to $55,000. The object of this is frankly stated by the officers of both

6926 OONGRESSION AL RECORD- SEN ATE. JUNE 17,

the transcontinental roads and the Pacific Mail; it was to· maintain rates above the level to which they would fall if free competition between these sev:eral routes had continued.

When we pass the Spooner amendment in favor of the Panama route we will cut off every sailing ship in the United States from all possible access in competition with the steamers, and that same arrangement will be instituted again by the Senate, not nnder a contract such as that Pacific Mail contract, but by legislation.

It seems to be certain that a very large, if not an absolutely controlling, interest in the stock and directory of the Pacific Mail Company is owned by individuals and estates very largely interested in the stock and directory of the transcontinental roads; and it IS proven that the same individuals composing a majority of the directory of the Pacific Mail composed a majority of the directors present at the meeting of the Panama Railroad Company's directoryatwhich the contract between the Pacific Mail and the railroad company of February 1, 1878, was ratified and executed.

That this system hasforfifteenyears been diminishin.gcommerce between New Yo1·k and San Francisco across the Isthmus is not denied. It is stated, as a justification that the Transcontinental Railway Association, controlling as it did, under these contract.'!, the prices and traffic of the Pacific Mail, used the latter as an active factor to defeat- .

There we come to it-" used the latter as an active factor to defeat"-the cmnpetitiDn of sailing-vessel traffic around Cape Horn, and thus were able to maintain theratesof the raih·oad companies as against that of sailingvessel competition. If a contract of this kind was necessary at that time to prevent

competition of sailing vessels around Cape Horn, what will be the case when we have dug a canal and consecrated it to steamers, a canal that is an absolute- prohibition upon sailing ships? What will be the consequence?

The motive is the same; but the inducement is very much greater with the transcontinental railroads and the great steamship companies that wish also to get rid of this sailing competition through the Panama Canal. Sir, I would not under any conditions disable a great American industry like that for the accommodation of any friend or any man who ever lives in this world; We can not honorably do it.

It is obvious that this did not tend to increase American shipping or tend to the encouragement of the merchant marine of the commerce of the United States. · .

It seems to your committee that tliis state of things can not be beneficial to- the general interstate trade or commerce of the United Sta,tes, nor can it see that it is of any particular benefit to our trade with foreign countries. It is-stated that this arrans-ement between the Pacific Mail and the Transcontinental Railway Association came to an end in December last, which is just about the time that negotiations between the Panama Raih·oad Com~ pany and the Pacific JI.I.ail as to a renewal of the former contract seems to have fallen through. '

And it is likewise in evidence that the final check to the attempts at making a new contract between t~e Panama Ra~d Company and the· ~acific Ma.il was given by the followm.g letter to the VIce-president of the 1-ailroad com:Qanyfrom the controlpng memberof.the executive committee.of t~e Pacific Mail, who is also umversally recogruzed as one of the controlling llli fiuences of the transcontinental railways:

C. P. HUNTINGTON,$ BROAD STREET, New York, December ~8,. 1892.

CHARLES COUDERT, Esq., 68-70 Williavt street, N. Y.

MY Dlll.AB. Sm: Herewith I retm·n nwmorandum that you gave me on Monday. Of course this would not do, but it does seem to me .as though there could be such a contract made as would be largely beneficial to both interests. •

Yours, truly, C. P. HUNTINGTON. Whatever be the case in the last sixty days, it is perfectly clear to your

·committee that the Panama Railroad Company has for fifteen years been pre-vented by these arrangements from being a competitor with the trans-continental railway lines. . .

Your committee recommends that whenever, under prOVISIOns-of the act of March 3, 1891, "for ocean ~il service and. to pro~ote commerce," the Postmaster-General shall enter into contract With any line of vessels, a. clause shall be inserted in said contract to the effect that if said steamship line shall enter into any combination or arrangement with competing lines of traffic the result of which is to dimir$h traffic or ra:ise or maintain rates of fr~i~ht on American commerce, foreign or domestic,_ over what f~ee competition would effect, that said contract may be termmated forthWith by the Post(-master-General. .

Your committee regrets, so far as the ownership of nearly all the stock ~oes that the control of any American corporation, as the Panama Railroad IS, should be held in foreign han9B, particularlY in the J:mnds of the ~qui~ to~· Ol."receiver of another .corporatio~ als? f<?I~lgn-appol?~d bl for~Ign JUdicial authority and subJect to formgn Judicial supervlSlon. t fails to see, however that any law, treaty stipulation, or contract obligation has been violated by the purcha_ se of these railroad shares by the Panama Canal Co~pa.ny or that as yet any discrimination has been attempted against Am~ncan c~mmerce or any injustice practiced thereon on account of such foreign ownership of this stock.

If that committee of the House had had the benefit of the· testimony that came before the Committee of the Senate on Interoceanic Canals, they would have come to a different conclusion, because the Committee on Interoceanic Canals have presented proof of a number of contracts. The testimony shows them. The testimony of the secretary of the Panama Railroad Company sets out the terms of the contract intended to monopo&e the carrying trade o~ all c_ountries, ~ far f1S pos~ible, carried across the isthmian railway m competition with the mterest of the commerce of the United States. Thus are we bitten by the adder that we have- brought to our fireside in the winter time in a log that was frozen. ·

On another occasion, having no reference to canals, but to transcontinental railroads, Mr. Huntington was a witness on a committee that I had the honor to be a member of. He was under oath and I asked him the following question:

Your guaranty appears to be that thegrossearningsupon through freight and passengers between. New York and San Francisco to be provided to this steamshiP. company by the raih·oad companies shall be $75 000 per month. These railroad companies constituted the Transcontinental ASsociation?

Mr. HUNTINGTON. Yes. Senator MoRGAN (reading from the contract): "All the gross eaJ•nings of said steamers from through business between

NewYorkandSan Francisco each way shall go to and belong and be payable to said party of the first part or credited upon its said guaranty to said steamship company. In consideration of said guaranty of said party of the first part the said Pacific Mail Steamship Company promises and agrees that it will, at its own cost and expense, dispatch and run from the port of New York for Aspinwall not more than three nor less than two through steamers per month, and not more than three nor less than two steamers connecting therewith from Panama to San Francisco, and from the port of San Francisco or Panama not more than three nor less than two through steamers per month. and not more than three nor less than two steamers connecting therewithfromAspinwalltoNewYork, andthatsaidsteamshipcompa.nywill permit said party of the first part to fix the rates at which all their freight between New York and San Francisco and of passengerssha.ll be transported by the vessels of the steamship company from the port of New York to San Francisco, and from the port of San Francisco to the port of New York, and will furnish room on each of said steamers from New York and San Francisco~ respectively, and their connecting steamers for the transportation of ana will transport from New York to San Francisco and from San Francisco to New York all and only such passengers and such freight as may be obtained under rates fixed by said party of the first part to an amount as to freight not ex-ceeding 600 tons of 2,000 pounds each in case it runs two steamers per month. and 400 tons in case it runs three steamers per month upon any one steamer, the intent being * * * that the steamship company shall carry monthly an average of 600 tons per vessel in case two steamers per month are run or a monthly average of 400 tons per vessel in case three steamers per month are run.

* "' • * * * * "The understanding and intention of this agreement is that the party of the first part shall, through agents appointed by itself, have entire and exclusive control of an the otner business of the said steamship company between New York and San Francisco each way, and that no through freight or passengers shall be taken except at prices to be fixed by the party of the first part and by its consent, it being understood that mid control shall be exercised through the established agencies of said steamship company."

Now, Mr. Huntington, without going through this paper, It appears to be a. contract under which the party of the first part, representing several railroad companies, has a right to fi.x the freight upon a certain amount of tonnage on each of those vessels?

Mr. HUNTINGTON. Yes; that is it. Senator MoRGAN. Which was the largest amount-occupying nearly the

entire carrying capacity of the ship. The object of that was to be enabled, in competition with those steamships, to keep up the rate of charges on yonr railroads and on the railroads rep1·esented in this agreement without cutting.

Mr. HUNTINGTON. Yes; the object was to make us able to get paying

ra~S:.imtor MoRGAN. And this arrangement between the railroad companies r epresented by Mr. Smith and the steamship company represented by Mr. Gould put it in the power of Mr; Smith and of the roads he represented to fix the rate of freights both on the steamship line and on the ov-erland lines to any figure they saw proper?

Mr. HUNTINGTON. Any price that was fail.• and right. Senator MoRGAN. He was not controlled in any way by that consideration. Mr. HUNTINGTON. Wecouldnotraisetherates upon grain tonnage, which

is a low-priced tonnage, and which goes around Cape Horn. Senator MORGAN. It goes that way now? , Mr. HUNTINGTON. Yes; tonnage where the cost per pound is small. Senator MoRGAN. Was not the effect of this arrangement to put all the

freight south of San Francisco, going and. eolll.Ulg, under the control of these particular railroads~

Mr. HUNTINGTON. It extended over the whole coast. The Northern Pacific reached Seattl~ the Union Pacific reached Portland, the Oregon and California reached ·~·ehama Bay, and the Atchison and Topeka ran to San

Di~~~atol'" MoRG4N. How did it happen that this combination of 1-ailroads and steamship lines found it expedient to abandon their contract?

Mr. HUNTINGTON. I suppose it was on account of the cutting of rates. That is wh-y these agreements have always gone up.

Senator MORGAN. Cutting of rates b"Y, whom? Mr. HUNTINGTON. By some of the railroad lines. Se.nator MORGAN. Notby some of tho.3e included in the agreement? Mr. HUNTINGTON. I think so. If they had all a~eed upon a fair rate and

had all held to it, it was a very fair and proper thing to have done. I did not have much to do with the making of that agreement.

Senator MORGAN. The companies that came into the agreement-some of them-broke away from it?

Mr. HUNTINGTON. I assume that, because notice was given to withdraw from the agreement. ·

. Senator MORGAN. The withdrawal was not caused by competition from the Canadian railroads or fi·om the Northern Pacific?

Mr. HUNTINGTON. No; the Northern Pacifi.c was in the agreeme.nt, and I think the Canadian Pacific was in it.

Senator MORGAN. Then it was not competition from that quarter? Mr. HUNTINGTON. It may have been. Thei·e was a screw loose some-

w~S::S.tor MoRGAN. It was not the competition from the companies that were outside of th.e a~eement, but from those that were inside, that caused • you to have to break It up?

Mr. HUNTINGTON. I should F.ay so. . . , Senator MORGAN. Did the Panama Raih·oad have anything to do w1th

causing you to throw up this agreement? Mr. HUNTINGTON. I think not. S-enator MoRGAN. t..id not that railroad company raise the rates for trans

portation across the Isthmus? ~Ir. HUNTINGTON. The Isthmus rates we had nothing fi? do with. . Senator MORGAN. Did not the Panama Company notify you, or notify

Mr. Smith, that it would no longer be bound by that agreement? Mr. HUNTINGTON. I think not. Senator MORGAN. And that they would levy their usual chal'ges? Mr. HUNTINGTON. I think not. Senator MoRGAN. And was not the result of it that you had a lawsuit in

- New York about it?

., '• ;

- ~ .

•

.~ .•

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE.- 6927 Mr. HUNTINGTON. No; we never ha.d a lawsuit about it. Senat or MORGAN. Was not a suit in contemplationl' Mr. H UNTINGTON. That was on an old contract of 1872; not for San Fran

cisco bt'.siness at all, but on the w est coast of the coast of Mexico and with

th~=~1:~yg-~1~~0Tet0~~s a different contract? Mr. H UNTINGTON. Yes. Senator MoRGAN. How long did that 1872 contract runl' , Mr. HUNTINGTON. I think it ran some twenty years. Senator MORGAN. Who had that contract? Mr. H UNTINGTON. It was between the Pacific Mail Stoo.mship Company,

by Col. W. Park,_ I think, on the one side, and the Panama Railroad Company on the other. I ao not know who its president was.

Senat or MoRGAN. Was the Central Pacific interested in that contract which ran for nearly twenty years?

Mr. HUNTINGTON. No; none of the Pacific roads had a:nything t.o do with it?

Senator MoRGAN. That was a contract for the purpose of keeping down

co~~ii~,iiNGTON. Not between San Francisco and New York. As Iremember, they gave a certain price over the isthmus-a certain price per month.

Senator MORGAN. So that neither the Central Pacific or the Southern Pacific had any connection with that agreement?

Mr. HUNTINGTON. Not at all. It was before the Southern Pacific was commenced. It was in 1872.

Senat or MORGAN. Did yon make your money back which you paid to this steamship company-$75,000 a month?

Mr. H UNTINGTON. I suppose so. Senator MORGAN. You h e:l.l'd no complaint about not making it back? Mr. HUNTINGTON. I never heard any. It seemed a proper thing to do to

get fair rates. Senator MORGAN. How much money, in the aggrega~, was paid to this

steamship company presided over by Mr. George J. Gould dw·ing the continuance of this contract?

Mr. HmTTINGTON. Seventy-five thousand dollars a month, and it ran a.bout three years. That would make $2,700,000.

E!enator MORGAN. You collected that, of course, out of the people of California?

Mr. liUNTINGTON. If we did t he business we collected our freight upon it. We a.l ways do so b efore we deliver the goods.

Senator MonGAN. So that the loss of that sum fell upon them? Mr. HUNTINGTON. I do not understand that there would be a loss in pay

ing honest f1·eights on goods.

A cutting of rates by whom? He answered by some of the railroad lines, and then he proceeded to state that he thought this was a -perfectly right and fair transaction so far as the people of the United States were concerned,. because after all they were not -ma_de to pay more freight than they ought to have paid any way.

The most humiliating and repulsive feature of this entire situation, to the people of the United States. is the direct, constant, and offensive intrusion of the Panama Canal Company into the legislation of Congress, the hearings of committees, the deliberations of canal commissions, and the frequent presentation of letters of advice, and remonstrance to the Secretary of State, and to the President, rebuking the conduct of the House of Representatives, and its ignorance.

The accusation of the ignorance of the House of Representatives has been so harped upon by the agents of the Panama Canal Company that it has grown into a bad habit, into which the Senator from Ohio [Mr. HANNA] has fallen, inadvertently, of course.

Two leading characters have had charge of this campaign of false pretenses and misrepresentations-M. Hutin and Mr. Cromwell, who is general counsel for tltis company, and has a large eiperience in the hospital treatment of infirm corporations.

M. Hutin is aggressive and quick to seize upon and misunderstand the attitude of his diplomatic antagonist, and becomes testy when he is foiled and resorts to misrepresentation to drive his adversary into a corner. When he is defeated he breaks away from the contest and takes a dignified and defiant attitude, as he did when Admiral Walker refused to be placed in the attitude of making an offer to purchase the Panama Canal. He had made n o such offer, and so informed M. Hntin in liD.Jl1iBtakable terms. · Thereupon M. Hutin appealed to the P resident in a long and formidable address, taking care to omit from his statement of facts the ~ost important letter that Admiral Walker had written.

Thercmpon, l\L Rutin, more in anger than in sorrow, left the country and went to Paris. H e was in bad shape to face the storm that came upon him when the House passed the second Hepburn bill, now before the Senate. When it broke upon him he stood by the $109,000,000 which was the value of the canal and railroad pl'Operty as it had been appraised, and refusing to join the set that intended to capture the $40,000,000 for their own purposes, they turned him out of office and determined to become voluntary bankrupts, but to reserve the $40,000,000 from their schedule of their assets.

l\f. Hutin disappeared when his scheme failed, but Mr. Cromwell followed the sinking ship and kept a sharp lookout for the salvage.

As soon as the Panama Canal Company found they could not induce Frenchmen to put up the money to complete the canal that had caused France so much trouble and mortification of spirit to say nothing of the vast sums that the Panama Canal Company had filched from the French people of the middle classes, they turned to the United States a second time and put their case in the hands of a lawyer.

De Lesseps, when he made a like resort to the United States, in a li1re emergenc-y, opened the money chest of the old company and paid more than $4,000,000 into the hands of the American committee and dismantled a P residential Cabinet.

He worked high diplomacy, sustained by a plethora of money, and failed to get our Government snared in his trap.

The new company could not hope to succeed in open efforts to purchase leading characters after De Lesseps had failed so di astrously.

In the meantime Congress was moving toward the point we had finally reached, of the exclusive ownership and control of a canal by the United States, to be paidforby appropriations from the Treasury, and the only hope left to the New Panama Canal Company was to sell out to the Government.

To accomplish this feat was the loved task ~of Mr. Cromwell. This new movement, which was made indispensable by the fiat refusal of the French people to be a second time victimized, required adroit manipulation, and no one was so adroit as Mr. Cromwell. ·

He also had a keen appreciation of the innocent humor of the little Sunday-school girl, who, being asked to r ecite a Bible story, said: "The Bible does not tell stories. It tells the truth. It says that a lie is an abomination unto the Lord and an ever-present help in time of need." [Laughter.]

Mr. Cromwell opened his campaign of deception a-s to facts and concealment as to motives by giving to the President information of the excellent condition and bright prospects of the New Panama Canal Company.

To do this, in an official way, he sent a lette r to the Pre ident, dated Paris, November 18, 1898, signed by "J. Bonnardel, the president of the board of directors,' ' and certified by the secretary of the company, Ed. Lam pre, that distinguished counsel who came over here to give us his testimony as to what French law means, and he was examined before the committee.

No description of this letter would do justice to its apparent innocence, which is only the veneer of its crafty diplomacy. I will ask leave to insert it in the REcoRD. It is a most remarkable piece of adroit diplomacy. There is nothing like it that I have ever seen in any lawyer 's brief before.

Mr. MITCHELL. It is from Lampre? Mr. MORGAN. Certified by Ed. Lampre. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. WELLINGTON in the chair) .

The Chair hears no objection, and the letter will be inserted in the RECORD.

The letter referred to is as follows : [Translation.]

[Compagnie Nouvelle du Canal de Panama, 7 Rue Louis le Grand, Paris. Capital, 65,000,000 francs.]

To the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. PARIS, November 18, 1898.

Sm: The New Panama Canal Company believes it to be its duty to respectfully submit the following statement:

It is common knowledge that in 1889the Compagnie Universelle du Canal Interocea.nique de Panama, the old company1 fell into financial difficulties · a.fteraboutone-thirdof the canal had been firushed. The rights of t hat company then passed _judicial administration. A liquidator (receiver) was appointed by the judgment of the civil tribunal of the Seine under date of the 4th of February 1l:ih'9. During his administration (1889-1894) and with the authorization of the court, the greatest care was taken to preserve and maintain the work already donet a.nd a prolongation was obtained from theRepublic of Colombia of the time stipulated for the completion of the canal, thus preserving the rights of the company under its concession in their entirety.

In view of the advanced state of the work on the canal, and the considerable sum (at least 150,000,000) actually expended for canal workproperly so called, and for installations and plant, the logical conclusion followed that the very large cayital invested would be protecred through a reorganization of the affairs which took place successfully in the month of October, 1 94. At that time and with this object in view the undersigned company was organized under the general laws of France.

The company is a commercial association, formed exclusively upon private capital, and has no connection, alliance, or r elation whatever with any government, except the relations established by the concessions which it holds from the Republic of Colombia. 'l'he board of directors of the company is an entirely new board and composed of gent lemen of independent positions, having no official relation with the old Panama Company, and for the most part identified with large financial and comm.er~ial enterprises.

Pursuant to judicial sale, authorized by the court as aforesaid, the undersigned company in 189! became the sole owner of all the canal works, plant material, concessions, and other property of the old company. The title of the undersigned to this property is ther efore unquestionable, and has been officially recognized by the Go-..ernment of Colombia.

Sw-veys had been made by the old companyJ but the new company. while making use of them would not b a b ound by tneir conclusions. The board of direct~rs resolved at the start to examine and study anew all the questions involved, making use of the most r ecent improvements in mat erial and of the advances made in engineering.

It is needless for us to enumerate the difficulties and enormous expense involved in the choice of a definite plan for the execution of this work, which is one of the g1·eatest undertakings of our time.

Different plans, equally practicable but varying in probable cost, have b een studied. Many months have been spent in preparing, stud~g, andrevising them. This work ha-s not b een done has tily and superficially. Engin eers, chosen specia.lly f~tr their professional ability, h ave st udied the question in all its details-technical, cl.imatic, physical, geologic, and economic.

Though the skill of its own technical staff is worthy of the hi~hest confidence, the undersigned company, out of abundant caution and m order to place beyond criticism the final conclusions. caused to be appointed an International Technical Commission, c-omposed of engineers selected from different

6928 CONGRESSION:A~ RECORD-SENArE. J UNE 17,

nationalities, a course which assm·es to the company the benefit of the widest possible experience, the severest judgment, and the most independent conclusions. The International Technical Commission is compgsed as follows:

M. Robaglia., president, inspector-general of roads and bridges (retired). M. Bouvier chairman, inspector-general of roads and bridges (retired). General Abbot, Unitea States Enpneer Corps. M. Castel, inspector-general of mmes (retired). l\1. Daymard, chief engineer of La Compagnie Transatlantique. M. Fargue, inspector-general of r oads and bridges (retired) . M. Fteley, chief engineer of the Croton Aqueduct, New York City. M. Fulscher, private counselor to the minlSter of public works of Prussia,

formerly techiDcal director of the work of the Kiel Canal. M. Hersent, civil engineer. M. Hunter, chief engineer of the Manchester Canal. M . Kocb~ councilor of public works of Germany; director of Technical

Academy of Darmstadt; formerly member of the Imperial commission of the Kiel Canal.

M. Jules Martin, inspector-general of roads and bridges (retired). M. Skalskowski, formerly director of the department of mines to the min

ister of agricultm·e and lands of Russia. M. Sosa, chief engineer, Colombia. As to all statistical and economic questions the new company established

a special commission, presided over by M. P aul Leroy-Beaulieu, the eminent economist and a member of the Institute of France.

It; is certain that the members of these two commissions are the most distinguished and able men in their professions. No one of them would compromise his reputation and his honor, acquired by a long life of eminent servIces, by formula tin~ conclusions upon unfounded, incomplete, superficial, or uncertain informatiOn.

By the closest study of the subject; by actun.l inspection of the works of the canal, made by several of its members; by full discussion and by frequent exchange of views; by subjecting every problem to the critical judgment of all, thus obtaining the most varied opinions; b y all the methods and with all the care which the most advanced technical experience could sugg-est, this eminent commission of engineers has reached a unanimous conclueion, which has been officiall¥ communicated to this company, and upon which this company is pursurng the work of construction. These conclusions, signed by every member of the commission, establish the entire feasibility and practicability of completing the canal.

We do not doubt that you will be interested to learn the essential fe..<ttures of our plans, which have been vrepared with so much labor and care, and confirmed by four years of contmuous study.

1. The old company had already substituted for the proposed sea-level canal a system of locks. This principle, with important modifications and improvements, has been adopted by the new comvany.

2. The length of the canal from ocean to ocean 18 4t> miles. · 3. The locks will not exceed four on each slope of the divide; all locks will have a rock foundation, and all will have double lock chambers.

4. There is nothing in the physical conditions on the Isthmus to prevent a change from a canal with a system of locks to a sea-level canal should the latt er seam desirable in the futm·e.

5. The time of passage from ocean to ocean will be less than a day. 6. The harbors situated at eit her extremity (Panama and Colon) are not

artificial harbors; they are natural harbors, safe and satisfactory, needing but sligbt improvement. This fact is known to all the world, thanks to comm erce, which for almo3t fifty years has made use of the P anama route (th e Panama Railroad).

7. Two-fifths of the work on the canal has been actually constructed; the remaining three-fifths is in a fair way of complet:on. Durinc. the last four years thr ee or four thousand workmen, on an average, have been employed m working on the canal.

8. The company's concessions are unquestionable. The Republic of C{)lombia has given to the entervrise its cordial and sincere cooperation.

9. The existence and operation of the raih·oad, long ests.blished on the proposed line of t h e canal, greatly facilitates its construction.

10. No construction is planned which is not fully justified by practical ex-p erience.

F ormerly the greatest difficulties were: (a) The control of the floods of the Chagres River; and (b) The excavation of the Culebra Cut. The manner in which each of these difficulties is to besm'mounted is shown

with the greatest detail in the r eport of the technical commission, which we have the honor to present to you.

The condition of the new company is equally satisfactory. Its assets, including the work actually done on the canal, the buildings, the machinery, the material on hand, exceeds in value 500,000,000 francs, or $100,000,000, which yaluation has been made by a ~pecial comm.ission of which the foi'mer director of the National Academy of Roads and Bridges of France was chairman. The company has no mortgage or bonded indebtedness. The property is free from all meumbr ance. 'rhe company ,has no other debts than monthly pay rolls. Its c.ash reserve is largely in excess of its actual needs.

'l'he undersigned company also invites your attention to the provisions of its concession, particularly articles 5 and 6, which r eserves all rights to the Government of the United States seclU'ed by the treaty with the Republic of Colombia signed in 184Q and ratified in1848. ·

We have the honor to be, your obedient servants, · J. BONNARDEL,

The President of the Board of Directors. Certified by the secretary of the company.

ED.LAMPRE.

Mr. MORGAN. Mr. Cromwell saw Mr. Hay and notified him of the coming of this missive. The ship was slow on its voyage, and Mr. Cromwell wrote Mr. Hay on .November 28, 1898, as follows:

Mr. C1·omwell to M~ Hay. NEW YORK, November 28, 1898.

DEAR SrR: R eferring to the interview which you accorded m e on Friday last and to your gracious assurance that you would give audience to the director-general or the New Panama Canal Comp':l.ny and om·selves in connection with the presentation to the President of the communication which the New Panama Canal Company is a bout to make to the Government, I beg leave to advise you that by reason of the severe prevailing storm La Touraine was delayed in arrival until to-dav, and that we shall therefore not be able to translate the documents and prepare them for presentation before Wednes-

da!'wm advise you further of our coming, k~eping in mind the prefeFence which ym1 indicated, that the hour of conference be about 11 o'clock m the forenoon.

I have the honor, etc., WM. NELSON CROMWELL,

Arnerican Cottnselfw New Panama Canal Company.

fh_at ~as the ~troductory signal. This note magnifies the m1ssive mto the Importance of a great state paper and its presentation into the dignity of a solemn State function. What was the alleged purpose of all this parade? Only to give information of the splendid condition and happy prospects of theN ew Panama Canal Company?

Your lordship sees me as I profess to be, in happy state and p1·epa1·ed it would seem, to defy future adversities. But, knoWing your sweet benevolence, I_am here to honor yom· virtues ~Y ~nearly appeal to them if it should otherWISe be, and to bespeak your hosp1tahtv. Not to h "use a mendicant for I have no rags of beggary about me, but to welcome a gentleman of hoiwr should misfortune touch me with its envious bolt. '

M1'. Cromwell seems to have been sitting for his pictura when the playwright was thus describing a beggar's petition, disguised as a boastful assertion that he had no need of help.

Why should he then declare that this company was independent of France and had no relations to or connection with that Government? It was because the lawyer saw the danger in that point and wished to prevent the question from being made, as to the relations of France with this company.

Why did he venture on the gratuitous falsehood that this company became "the sole owner of all the canal works , plant, materia~? ~onc~ssions, and othe_r prop.erty of the old comp;tny "and that ·the title of t he undersigned 1s therefore unquestionable and has been recognized by the Government of Colombia?" Both of these statements were false . But what interest could the united statements serve if it was not the purpose of Cromwell when the letter was written to dispose of the canal property to the United States?

Cromwell knew that otherwise Mr. Hay could have no interest in this spectacular advertisement of the canal.

Why should he add the false statement that" the condition of the new company is equally satisfactory; that the company has no mortgage or bonded indebtedness; the property is free from all incumbrances; the company has no other debts than monthly pay rolls; its cash 1·esenre is largely in excess of its actual needs."

These statements are apparently so gratuitous and so foreign to any interest of the United States in the subject that the presentation of them would be a ridiculous parade of boastful nonsense if there was no other design except to give information to the United States.

The covert meaning of this approach to the President is found in the last paragraph of his diplomatic epiStle, as follows:

The undersigned company also invites your attention to the provisions of its concession, particularly Articles V and VI, wllich reserves all rights to the Government of the United States secured by b·eaty with the Repui>lic of Colombia signed in 1M6and ratified in 1898.

A most remarkable declaration was that. What does it mean that he would essay to inform the President of the United States that the rights of the United States under the treaty vdth Colom· bia were reserved by conti·act? Why should he do it?

I will read the next le.tter of 1\fr. Cromwell to Mr. Hay. which shows an outbreak of Congress against the President of Colombia on account of this canal, which resulted in the adoption of a resolution by the House of Representatives, the office of President vacant.

This letter darkly hints at the real purpose of Cromwell 's allusion to Articles V and VI of our treaty with Colombia. He sends another preliminary telegram to notify Mr. Hay of what is coming, a premonition of its g!·eat importance.

M1·. Cromwell to Mr. Hay. [Telegram.)

NEW YORK, December 5, 1898. Am writing you to-day toncerning the cable from Consul-General Hart

published Saturday. It is evident that the limited purpose and nature of the measure referred to is not fully r eported from Bogota, and is given undue significance.

WM. NELSON ClWl\IWELL, Counsel New Panama Canal Company.

He always signs his name in full. Mr. Cromwell to.Mr. Hay.

NEW YORK, Decembe1· 5, 1898. MY DEAR Srn; I beg l"':l.Ve to confirm the telegram which I sent you at 10.45

this morning, as per inclosure. · Upon my return I l earned through Director-General Rutin (who had pre

ceded me to New York) that the measure which had just been a cted on by one branch only of the Oolom bian Congress wa!'l a bill to authorize the executive to negotiate the terms of and to conclude a fm·ther prorogatlon of six years from 1904 for the completion of the canal under a communication which the company had addressed to the Government. in the fo1'm of which I inclose you a translation.

You will note that the company specifically stated to the Government that the prorogation was not a matter of absolute necessity, but w as desirable in the interests of commerce and navigation to enable an even deeper cut to be made (and which would reduce the number of locks to four), but which reduction w ould of course require more time than the plan adopted.

You will note that the bill proposed to confer power upon the Executive, and this happened to arise under extraordln~rypoliticalconditions ia Bogota. As you have probably been advised through official ch.'tnnels, a serious difference has recently been exiRting between the House of Representatives of Colombia and the President, the House having passed formal resolution declaring the office of President vacant, and refusing to recognize the qualification of the President before the supreme court.

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 6929 We therefore construe the action of the House of Representatives as only

a. part of the strife between the House and the President, and not a declaration of the policy of the nation or the Congress in respect of the Panama Canal, and as not evidencing hostility to the company itself. We are the more confirmed in this belief because of the uniform consideration and cordiality displayed by the Congress and the Government to the New Panama Canal Company, which we have no doubt their minister at Washington would fully confirm to you.

Our company has not the least apprehension regarding any prorogation of its concessions it may consider necessary in the future.

I have, etc., your obedient servant, WM. NELSON CROMWELL,

Counsel New Panama Canal Company.

If Senators, when they come to read this, will refer to the last clause of the letter which I have quoted, they will see what this man was driving at. .

The treaty of 1846-1848 bound the United States to protect Colombia in the ownership and sovereignty over Colombia. It also bound us to protect the transit across the Isthmus.

The Canal Company fancied that it saw in this revolt, which is still flagrant, the opportunity to turn over the canal to the United States, so that, in protecting the canal, it would be protecting its own property.

It wa a · bold movement of the reckless lawyer to involve the United States in a war, if need be, to get rid of Uris property by selling it, or an interest in it, to the United States. This ugly device was received in silence by Mr. McKinley, and Mr. Cromwell was thrown upon his ingenuity to al'l'ange another coup.

On the 21st of December, 1898, Mr.- Cromwell informed Mr. Hay that the Government of Colombia (which means the President) had signed the extension of the concession until1960.

This, of course, united the interests of Colombia and the Panama Canal Company in supporting the war of the President, at the head of the church party, against the Liberals, for which the canal company paidhim$1,000,000Frenchgold to carryon the war. It was an extraordinary transaction. They had to put up with it when they paid him a million dollars in gold, and they paid it to get the President to sign this last concession, which is the basis of their title to-day, a part of it, after Congress had refused to ratify it and declared the presidency vacant because the President had signed the concession fo1· a million dollars. That is the crowd that we are asked to shake hands with by treaty.

After that transaction Colombia was plunged into civil war. They are still fighting, and if we purchase the property of the canal company we must take the war along with the property, or if we do not buy ourselves into the conflict of arms the Libe1·al party will never forgive us for paying $1,000,000 to the church party to furnish them the sinews of war.

But to follow Mr. Cromwell. When he found that he could not inveigle the United States into . the dishonorable scheme of Mpturing the canal and railroad, because we had engaged to protect them, and that to own them would be the easiest way to protect them, the canal company then broke up the peace and unity of the Colombian Government, as I have shown from admissions in his own letter, by buying the consent of the President to sign an extension of the concession that Congress had refused to ratify. There is where that Government went to pieces; that is the rock on which it broke, and it stays there yet.

The French people were still unwilling, notwithstanding this extension, to put any more money into the canal, and he again approached the President of the United States with a proposition for the joint ownership of stock in the New York or New Jersey corporation, under the title of the New Panama Canal Company of America.

To accomplish this project it was becoming, in his opinion, to boast more loudly than ever of the wealth and power of his company and also to make a side lick at its rival, the ll:Iaritime Canal Company. That letter carries its own inte1·pretation, and it will be seen, as it is read, that it is the last bid of a desperate gambler in corporation stocks. ·

On the 28th of February, 1899, Mr. Cromwell addressed the following letter to the President:

Messrs. Sullivan & C1·omwell to Mr. Hay. NEW YORK, FebTuary 28, 1899.

DEAR Srll.: We beg leave to hand you herewith a copy of the communication which this day has been addressed to the President.

We are, etc., SULLIVAN & CROMWELL,

General Counsel.

~.Jr. Hutin and Messrs. Sullivan & Cromwell to the President. NEW YORK, February 28, 1899.

SIR: 1. The New Panama Canal Company has never proposed and does not seek any appropriation or financial aid from the Government of the United Sbtes in th9 completion of its can..<Ll.

What a heroic outburst of independence that is! 2. It places its canal'works on the Isthmus of Panama. subject to the ex

aminatiOn of this Government, or any special commission through whom it may be desired to make such examination, and will facilitate in every possible wav any such desire of the Government.

3. The Government will find that fully two-fifths of the canal works are already constructed; that continuously during the past four years from

X.XXV-4.34:

3,000 to 4,000 men, under a large force of engineers, have been and ar e now actually engaged upon its works; that all technical and physical problems have been solved by the eminent" International Engineering Commission," whose r ev.ort of November 18last is before you; that the canal is undoubtedly feas:tble and the harbors at both ends natural harbors and entirely satisfactory.

They say nothing about the eight millions it will take to fix the harbor at Colon.

That its concessions are perfect and unquestioned, and that the relations of the United States to the canal are especial and superior by reason of the "special and remarkable adv::mtages" secured to it by the treaty of 184:6 between the United States and Colombia, and which rights, whatever they may be, were scr upulously respected, observed, and confirmed in the concessions of Colombia to the Panama Canal Company, under which the canal is beina completed.

4. While the New Panama Canal Company does not seek any financial aid from the Government, it recognizes tho national sentiment ill favor of acquiring some pecuniary interest in any canal connecting the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Therefore, the New Panama Canal Company declares that if, as the result of any such investigation, the Government of the United States adopts the P<~.nama rout~ the compP.ny, if the Government so desires, will reincorporate under the lawa of the State of New York (under the l:l.ws of which State the Panama Railroad Company has existed for nearly fifty years), or of some other State of the Union-

It turned out to be the fate of New J ersey to receive that compliment-subject to the provisions of its concession, and vest its concessions and property in such corporation. It will also in said event accord to the United States such representation in its board of directors, and such opportunity to acquire an interest in its securities, as may be p ermitted by its concessions, which, of course, must be SCI'URulously observed.

And further, if the United States should desire to perpetuate or enlarge its existing rights and privileges, a cquired under said treaty of 1846-

That means if they should undertake to take the Panama route in order to protect it-the company will conform to such supplemental treaty as may b e entered into between the United States and Colombia.

We beg leave to say that yesterday, at a public hearing accorded . us by the Committee on Rivers and Harbors of the House of Representatives, w e submitted to the chairman and gentlemen of tllat committee a communication to the foregoing purport, and have the honor to be,

Your obedient servants, MAURICE RUTIN,

DiTector-Gene1·al of the New Panama Canal Company. SULLIVAN & CROMWELL,

General Counsel, New YoTk City. And on March 11, 1899, M. Rutin sent the following letter to

the President: · Mr. Hutin to the President.

COMPAGNIE NOUVELLE DU CANAL DE PAN.AM.A.., 45 Wall Street, New Ym·k City, Ma1·ch 11, 18D9.

To the PRESIDENT: Referring to the act of Congress approved on the 4th instant, respecting

an investigation of the Panama and NicaTagua can:1ls, the New Panama Can:1l Company, as one of tho subjects of the inquiry, respectfully invites attention to its communication addressed to you December 2,.,1898, and to its subsequent offers to the honorable Secretary of State, ana finally to its official proposition of February 27 bst, all of which contain the proffer and urgent invitation that the President or Congress make the fullest investiga tion of the calll'.l works, plans, seven concessions1 and status of the New Panama Company; and it also refers to the officml report upon the canal made by the Intern..'l.tional T echnical Commission November 16, 1893, and placed in your hands by us on December 2 last.

The said act of Congress is therefore in full accord with our repeated offers and our warmest desires.

We o.gain most r e.,--pectfully renew our proffer of the fullest investigation and our offer of a.ll the facilities to that end. But the subject is of such transcendent consequence to the United States, to the people of the world as well as to ourselves that we venture, with due respect, to submit this our petition that any commission designated to aid yon in making the investigation and comparison contempl:.tted by the act of Congress be composed of gentlemen of the wide3t experience, of exceptional character and unquestioned professional s~a.!!ding, and who are not embarrassed by public com-' mittalg m· previous r ecords fayorable or unfavorable to either one or the other project r.nd who have not heretofol'e served upon any canal commission.

The New Panama Canal ComJ;mnY does not present or suggest any name for membership of any commiSSion. I ts only petition is that the selection be of gentlemen whose conclusion will at once command public confidence, fully relying u:pon its abilit y to satisfy fair and impartial investigation of the merits of 1ts canal.

THE NEW PANAMA CANAL COMPANY, By MAURICE RUTIN, Director-General.

SULLIVAN & CROMWELL, Genera~ Counsel. What does that mean? Walker and Haupt and Hains had been

appointed by the President upon the Nicaragua Canal Commission and had made their report ad verse to this company, and here the New Panama Canal Company come in and make their bow to the President of the United States, and politely suggest to him that they think it would be very much better that he should not appoint any gentleman who has been upon any former commission, and the President forthwith appointed all three of them on the next commission. That was his way of answering such insolence.

Mr. Cromwell then proceeded, in New Jersey, under the general laws of that State, to take out a charter for the proposed company to cru.·ry out his offer to the President. It would require a long recital to set forth the wild absurdity of its alleged powers.

It is impossible to conceive of any law paper that is more grotesquely absur d. One is left in doubt, after reading this charter, whether it could have been intended as a serious proposition,

,


Some reference to the dates of Congressional proceedings will account for the frantic activity of Cromwell in pushing these schemes on the attention of the President and the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce and select committees, and on an Isthmian Canal Committee; and Mr. Lampre and Gen~ eral Abbot admit that the purpose was to defeat legislation in favor of t.he Nicaragua Canal.

General Abbot was a member of the Comite Technique that made the report on the2dof December, 1898, which was sent to the President, that Mr. Cromwell adopted as the basis of his seductive letters to the President, and he is still in the employ of the ~ e_w Panama Canal .Com pan~ and was summoned by the oppoSition to the House bill to testify on the hearings before the committee. He appeared on the 4th day of March, 1902, and on crossexamination he testified as follows.

:M:r. President, I shall not detain the Senate by reading that, but I will merely state the substance of it, which is that General Abbot, who had been in Paris with :M:. Hutin and M. Choron, the chief engineer of the company, took ship immediately and came here and went before the Hepburn committee of the House. After a most excruciating experience in trying to refresh his memory he arrived at the conclusion, after coming here, that the object was to prevent legislation in favor of the Nicaragua Canal.

M. Charon's testimon:~ is set out here, not in full, but all that relates to the subject is to the same effect, and I will a.sk leave to insert that and the otl:ter testimony in my remarks without reading.

The P RESIDING OFFICER. If there be no objection, therequest of the Senator will ba complied with. The Chair hears no objection, and it is so ordered.

The testimony as given by General Abbot is as follows: The CHAIRMAN. Were you the only member of the committee that was

r etained in the service of the company? General ABBOT. As far as I know, I am; I do not know. The CHAIR}JAN. You were employed immediately were you? Ge~eral 4-BBOT. Yes; I bad been doing work for the company in Paris, in

studymg this Cbagres problem. I had done a good deal of work in that way as a m ember of the Comite Technique, and bad written a number of memoirs on the subject in the line of my duty. Being interested in keeping up the record of the Chag1·es River to date, the company wanted that work continued.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you recollect about what time in 1900, what month and what date, you arrived in N ew York from Paris~

General ABBOT. I arrived in New York from Paris late in October. The CHAIRMAN. 1900? . General AJlBOT. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. You must ha\e been here before that, because you testi

fied on the 17th of January, 1899, befo!·e the committee of the House of Representatives.

Gen eral ABBOT. That was a special matter, for whlch I crossed from Paris and r eturned as soon as I had g1ven my testimony.

The CnAIR::U:AN. You came over on purpose to give your testimonyr General ABBOT. We came o\er-we were summoned before t he committee,

and the company wanted me to appear here, inasmuch as I un derstand the English language, and to be present at the bearings.

'.rhe CHAIRMAN. Were you summoned in Paris or here? General ABBOT. I really don't know. I bad no summone individually at

all. I simply came at the request of the company with its other officers to present the facts .

The CHAIRMAN. Well, that request was made in Paris~ General ABBOT. I really do not know. All I know about it came from the

compan_y. I did not receive any request from the committee of Congress. The CHAIRMAN. You received the request in Paris~ General ABBOT. From the company, certainly. The CHAIRMAN. And you crossed the ocean so as to attend before the com

mittee of the House of Representatives? General ABBOT. I was not so informed. I was informed by the company

that they would be very glad if I would accompany their dele~ation to the United States to assist them in presenting their case to the uovernment,

" and I came over with that object. The CHAIRMAN. W ere you then a member of the Comite Technique, or

were you employed by the company in any other capacity? · General ABBOT. I was a member of the Comite Technique at that time. The CHAIRMAN. After you went back in March, your labors terminated

on that committee, and you were then employed by the company as a consulting engineer?

General ABBOT. Yes; in the latter capacity since about the middle of190U. The CHA1RMAN. Did you remain in F1:ance or come here~ General ABBOT. I 1·emained in France for three or fom· months and then

I came here. The CHAIRMAN. What was the particulru· businese on which the company

sent you to tbe United States? General ABBOT. I do not understand the question. The CHAIR)!AN. What wa-s the particular business on which the company

sent you to the United States? General ABBOT. If you mean in 1899, it was to assist their officers in pre-

senting the case clearly before the Government. The CHAIR:\lAN. Have you been engaged in that from that time to this? General ABBOT. No. The CHAIRMAN. What other work have you done for the company here? General A nBOT. I have reduced the notes, the monthly record~ of the

Chagre River, and of the meteorological observations, forwarded from Pan-. ama. They are forwarded from Panama to me here, and they come. of

com·se. in the form of undigested material. I study them and deduce from them the daily discharges, etc., of the Chagres River at Alajuela, Gamboa, and Bohio, etc. I put the information into such form that it can be used for engineering purposes, and forwarded one cop.z of it to Paris and the other copy I have been forwarding to the Isthmian Canal Commission. That is all my connection with the company here.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, at the time you appeared here as a witness Mr. Choron also appeared?

Gen eral ABBOT. Yes. The CHA1RM.AN. He was then the chief engineer of the company, was he

· not? Genel'M.i ABBOT. He is now.

TheCBAIIDIA.N. And Mr. Cromwell appeared? General ABBOT. Mr. Cromwell was the leading counsel of the company The CHAlRMAN. And Mr. Curtis appeared? · General ABBOT. Mr. Curtis is arartner of Mr. Cromwell. The CHJ\IRMA.N. TJ?ose were al the witnesses that were brought before

that comnnttee of wh1cb Mr. Hepbm·n.was the chairman? Genera.l ABBOT. I gave my ~estimony, if I r ecollect rightly, on that matter. The CrrAIRMA::s-. What partlcular r eason was there for that assembla"'e of

witnesse here just at that time? "' General ABBOT. The r e!l.son was simply this, as I understand it: The Pan

ama Company had no intention. ~hatever of completing its canal otherwise than l?Y the usual method of ralSIDg the funds up to the time of the SpanishAmerJCan war. They were thoroughly familiar with the problem in Nicaragua; they k'"D.ew that no private company could possibly comJ;ete with the Pa;nama Company, and they made no attempt to make known what they were ~omg on t"!Je Isthmus. They were working as a private company in their !ffie ?f busmess, beca!Jse they he.d no fear of any private company operating m N 1caragua.

But as SC?On as t~e Ol·egon went around the Horn and this great enthusiasm arose m Amer1ca for .a~ ~stbmian can~l. a new possibility was presented to the company-the_possJbillty of the Uruted States Government building a parallel canal, wh1ch would ha>e a bad effect on their interests in two r espects; ~rst, by rend~I:ing it m<?re difficult to raise funds from prlvate sour<:es, w1th a prob~b1hty of bavmg to compete with a great Government run;nmg a parallel line; and, secondly, because the company would need some 15,000 or 20,000 of those West Indian negroes to complete the work The American company would demand a like number of laborer~ and ther~ w ould c~nsequently be a competition which would raise the-p~e of labor and also mcrease the cost of the construction of the canal.

For those reasons the company decided that it was important to inform this Government officially as to what they had done and what they were doing, so that the changed conditions at Panama should be understood here, and that our Government should understand how much better a canal could ~e made via Panama than via Nicaragua. This knowledge, perhaps, might m~uce our Government to reconsider t-he route, and perhaps to take stock or m some other manner assist the company in its great enterprise aud thus as~mre the construction of the best possible canal, and not the canal through N1caragua.

To accomplish this object it was necessary to present the facts fully before the Government, R.lld that was the object of the company when li-Ir. Rutin cam~ here aJ?d presented a copy ~f the r~port of the ComiUi T echnique to the PreSident within a month after It was Signed. From that time on the company bas desired that the United States Government should know what it is doing and should appreciate its claims, that Panama offers the best possible route for the isthmian canal.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, you got here and you testified on the 11th of Janua1·y 1899?

General AilBOT. Yes; about that date. I do not have the exact date in mind.

The CBAIR:MA.N. You left Paris some time before that? General ABBOT. I left P aris just before that and came directly her e . The CHAIRMAN. You came in company with Mr. Choron? General ABBOT. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. And who else? General ABBOT. M. Rutin. I think those wer e the only officers of the

company. The CHATR:llAN. You came here on purpose to make a statement before

the committee in the HouE<e of Representati\es? General ABBOT. M. Rutin asked me to come here with them, as neither of

them speak English and they thought that I could 1mderstand the technical questions better than they could, perhaps; and they therefore wished me to come with them and assist them in presenting the case to the United States Gove:;.·nment.

The CHAIRMAN. On the 21st day of Janua17, 1899, a bill had passed the Senate of the United SU>.tes for the purpose o aiding thls Maritime Canal Company by a vote of 48 to 6.

General ABBOT. I had forgotten that fact. In fact, I do not know that I ever knew it. I had nothing to do with those matters.

The CHAIRMAN. But yom· company knew about it? General ABBOT. I do not know. Perhaps they knew it. '.rhe CHAIR:KA....~. And thereupon your delegation set out to come to the

United States? . General ABBOT. Not at all in connection with that, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Why do you say so when you do not know? General ABBOT. Because I know very well that it was the passage of the

Oregon around Cape Horn that first suggested the idea. The CHAIRMAN. When did tho Oregon go around Cape Horn? General ABBOT. In the early days of the Spani h war. I can not give you

the exact date. The popular excitement caused by it in connection with an isthmian canalyut an entirely new face on the que 'tionin the United States. People who had. up to that time been lukewarm afterwards became enthusiastic advocates of the canal.

The CHAIR::U:AN. I understand you to say that practically your rills ion from Paris in the company of those two gentlemen, coming to Washington, had r elation to the passage of the ()!·egon around Cape Hm~ and not rela.tion, so far as you know, to the passage of a bill in the United States Senate, by a vote of 6 to 46, to aid the Marl time Canal Company?

General ABBOT. If I knew about that vote at the time I have forgott.en it. It had nothing to do with my coming, so far as I was concerned. I jmply came to assist these gentlemen in the pres~ntation of technical matters before the Government. It had b ecome very Important to the company to have the United States Government know what they were doing, owing to the interest in a canal caused by the passe.ge of the Oregon arouncl the Horn.

The CHAIRMAN. Did that company at that time propose to sell thls canal to the United States?

General ABBOT. I do not thlnk they wanted to do it. The CHAIRYAN. Did they try to get a loan from the United States? General ABBOT. No. As I understood the idea of the company, they wan ted

the United States to do with them what England did with the Suez Canal. England opposed, as we all know, with the utmost violence the construction of that canal. When they found that they could not stop it, they then, through one of the most brilliant diplomatic sti·okes that Disraeli ever di· rected, bought up the reserve stock of the Khedive.

Rumor has it that Disraeli paid £5,000,000 for what is now worth £20,000,000 and what has paid large interest ever since. I imagine that the idea of the company was that the United States might be willing to guarantee the:ir b onds on stock secm·ity and a conti·olling vote on the board of directors, the company being reincorporated in America, and in that way it could raise funds and thus prevent competition with a p arallel route. That was my idea. I did not get that understanding officially, but I inferred that.

General ABBOT. The company did not come with any idea of enlightening the Congress of the United States on the matter. They came h ere to prevent the serious injm·y to their interests whlch would result from the Government of the United States starting a. parallel line at the time when t h lly

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 6931 were about trying to raise funds for the completion of their wor~, and also to prevent a probable rise in the price of labor by the constructiOn of two canals at the same time.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, I want you to listen to that last answer which you made and see if you have stated what you desire.

The last answer made by General Abbot was repeated to him. General ABBOT. T hat is my understandin~, but I do not represent the

company in expressing it. It is my honest b elief. · The CHAIRMAN. What company do you r efer to, or what line do you refer

to there as a parallel line ? Genera1 ABBOT. The Nicaragua line. The CHAmM.A.N. Then you came for the p~ose of persuading the Gov

ernment of the United States not to build the N1caragua Canal? General ABBOT. We came to let the United States Government see what

their b·ue interest was-full knowledge of the facts would be the best thing for the United States as well as for the company.

The CHAIRMAN . .Are you not here now for that same purpose? General ABBOT. I am here to-day because I was summoned by you. The CHAIRMAN. No; I did not. Mr. HANNA summoned you. General ABBOT. Well, SeDP.tor HAJ\"'NA . I am here tmder orders. The CHAIRMAN . .Are you not brought here for the purpose of doing that

same thing-that is, preventing the Government of the United States from selecting the route parallel to the Panama route?

General ABBOT. That is a question for Senator HANNA to answer.

M. Lampre, the general secretary of the Panama Canal Company, testified as follows :

Tbe CHAIRMAN. What was the actual purpose and object of the letter to the President of the United States and the letters and telegrams of Cromwell, attorney, given with the message of the President of February, 1900? What was the a-ctual purpose and object of the letter to the President of the United States of the 18th day of November, 1898?

Mr. LAMPRE. As far as I can recollect, the l>urpose wa-s to lay the whole subject before"the United States; and at the time we stated that should the United States abandon the idea of constructing the Nicaragua Canal we were J.·eady to reor~anize under the laws of this country and to organize an American corpora bon to complete the Panama Canal, which we thou~ht the best routo and still think the b est route. That is why we laid the wnola subject oofora the United States at the time.

The CHAIRMAN. In addition to this cheerful picture of the resources of the company, these letters bo3.St of the conciliation of Colombia, and that the entire feasibility and practicability of completing the canal is established by the members of two commissions who w ere the most distinguished men in their professions. Why did not a canal that was so well fortified in its appeal to public confidence obtain the money to complete it by subsCiiptions among the French people who had already sunk S25Q,OOO 000 in it and only had the ditch, the buildings, the machinery, and the mate1ial on hand to show for this expenditure?

M. LAMPRE. Just as I to)d you, Senator, on account of the contemplated building by the United States of the Nicaragua Canal.

COMPAGNIE NOUVELLE DU CANAL DE PANiliA, 1.5 Wall Street, New Yark City, J,fm·ch 11, 1899.

To the PR-ESIDENT: Referring to the act of Congress approved on the 4th instant respecting

an investigation of the Panama and Nicaragua can2..ls, the New Panama Canal Company, as one of the subjects of the inquiry, resp ectfully invites attention to its commtmication addressed to you December 2, 1898, and to its subsequent offers to the honorable Secretary of State, and finally to its official proposition of February ?:1 last, all of whic)l contain the proffer and urgent invitation that the President OI' Congress make the fullest investigation of the canal works, pL.1.ns, seven concessions, and status of the New Panama Company; and it f!Jso r efers to the official report upon thQcanal madebythe!nternational Technical Commission November 16, 1898, and placed in your hands by us on December 2 la-st.

The said act of Congr eEs is therefore in full accord with our repeated offers and our warmest desires.

We r.gain m ost respectfully renew our proffer of the fullest investigation and our offer of all the facilities to that end. But the subject is of such transcenden t consequence to the United St.ates, to the people of the world as well as to our lves, that we venture, with due respect, to submit this our petition that any commission designated to aid you m making the investigation and comparison contemplated by the act of Congress be composed of gentlemen of the widest experience, of exceptional character and unquestioned professional standing, and who are not embarra<;sed by public committals or previous records favorable or unfavorable to either one or the other project and who have not heretofore served upon any canal commission.

The New Panama Canal Company does not present or suggest any name for membership of any commission. Its only petition is that the selection be made of gentlemen whose conclusion will at once comn1and public confidEmce, fullf relying upon its ability to satisfy fair and impartial investigation of the merits of its canal.

THE NEw P~AMA CANAL CmiPANY, By 1\1AURICE HUT~ Di1·ectar-General.

SULLIVAN & CRvMWELL, Gene-ral Counsel. Did that letter receive the approval of your company? M. LAMPRE. Yes, sir. Tbe CHAIRMAN. Then you proposed to dictate to the President of the

Unit..ed States whom he should not appoint on that board? M . LAJ\IPRE. We did not propose to dictate anything. We asked what

we thought we would like to get. The CHAffiMAN. Is not this a plain dictation: "You shall not appoint any

one who has been a member of the board heretofore?" · M. LAMPP-E. We did not propose to dictate anything, but only expressed our sincere desire as to that. We would not presume to dictate anything to the United States.

The CH .. HRMAN. That particular feature of this case, followed by another, led me to supp03e that we might expect any overture from your company that might be brought to our attention without respect to whether it was one that we oughtproperly to consider or not. That is the impression made on my mind, and I want to be frank in stating it to you. Any explanation necessary to be made about that, of course, is in order.

M. LA~IPRE. I have nothing to say to that. The CHAIRMAN. I notice here that Mr. Boyard, under the date of Paris,

January 6, 1900, says: "Board of management has resigned." M. LAMPRE. Yes, sir. Tho CHAIRMAN. That is the new corporation? M. LAMPRE. No, sir; the board of management ma-y resign and new direct-

ors are appointed; that does not chan~e the corporation at all with us. The CHAIRMAN. I did not say that It changes the corporation. M. LAJ\IPRE. I under tood you to say it was a new corporation. The CHAIRMAN. I said the board of management of the new corpora

tion. The next intervention of your company was of the 30th day of April, LOOO. That was at the time the Hepburn bill was under consid-

eration, and a day had been set aside as stated in the letter here, which I will enter in the record, but I will not read all of it, unless you want me to read it.

M. LAMPRE. No. The letter r~ferred to is as follows:

"WASHINGTON, Ap1·il SO, 1900. "The PRESIDENT:

"Permit us to refer to the communication addressed to you on February 28, 1899, by the Compagnie Nouvelle du Canal de Panama, and of which we attach a copy for your convenience.

"Tbree days after the above communication (and which was si.mi!a-r to that addressed to the River and Harbor Committ~e of the House, Ron. Theodore E. Burton chairman) Congress enacted the law of March 3,1899.

"Under the powers of said act the President appointed the 'Isthmian Canal Commission,' composed of Rear-Admiral John G. Walker, Ron. Samuel Pasco, Mr. Alfred Noble, C. E.; Mr. GeorgeS. Mor ison, C. E.; Gen. Peter C. Hains, Prof. William H. Burr, C. E.; Gen. Oswald H. Ernst, Prof. Emory R. Johnson, Mr. Lewis M. Haupt, C. E.

'In addition to its examination of all other possible isthmian routes the Isthmian Canal Commis3ion has made an oxha ustive examination of the plans and status of the company at Paris, where the r ecords of twenty years are preserved, and also personally has examined upon the Isthmus of Panama the actual canal and canal works of the company and the feasibilita of its ~J~~~~fh a~lo~~~~ 7~~ ~~!~~~ t~~ftef!. surveys, plans, an speci-

" The Isthmian Canal Commission has not yet made its report to the President, and, as we are advised, bas not yet completed its investigations and inquiries upon the technical and other subjects covered by the said act of March 3, 1899, nor has the President yet communicated to Congress his recommendations in the premises.

" In all these investigation!'! concerning the Panama Canal the company has made to the Isthmian Canal Commission the fullest exposition and explanations, without reserve or exception, upon every aspect of the subject concerning which the Commission has desired information, and also has delivered to the Commission full and detailed plans, maps, and specifications of the company for the complete excavation and construction of the Panama. Canal and canal works. These documents are great in volume and value, and represent the expenditure of a vast sum, as well as the results of many years of study in therr original preparation.

* * * * * * * "Tbe company has avoided any action or course which might by the Gov-ernment be deemed inconsistent with its said communication of February 28, 1899. ..

!'All this the company has done in full relianca upon the avowed purpose of the Government (as embodied in the act of March 3, 1899) of thoroughly and exhaustively investigating and reporting upon all possible isthmian canal routes, and in the reasonable expectation that in the meantime no action would be taken upon the subject by the Congress of the United States inconsistent with the expr essed purposes of said act.

"On the contrary, however, and presumably without knowledge of the foregoing facts, measures have been introduceu in Congress and are to be acted upon in the House of Representatives May 1 and May2, 1900, having for their purpose the adoption by the Government of another isthmian canal route, without awaiting the recommendation of the President and the information, report, and conclusions of the Isthm~an Canal Commission appointed by the President under the act of March 3, l b'99.

"We therefore respectfully request that the President advise the Congress of the facts of the case.

"We have the honor to be, your obedient servants, "SULLIVAN & CROMWELL,

"General Counsel Compagnie Nouvelle du Canal de Panama." The CHAffiM.AN. It is stated here: "On the contrary, however, and presumably without knowledge of the

foregoing facts, measures have been introduced in Congress and are to be acted upon in the House of Representatives May 1 and May 2, 1900"-

Those are the dates that were set apart by unanimous consent or by the rule of the House for the consideration of what was called the Hepburn bill, the same bill that was passed by the House the other day-" having for their purpose the adoption by the Government of another isthiDian-canal r oute, without awaiting the recommendation of the President and the information, report, and conclusions of the Isthmiam Canal Commission appointed by the President under the act of March 3, 1 99.

"We therefore r espectfully request that the President ad vise the Congress of the facts of the case.

"We have the honor to be, your obedient servants, "SULLIVAN & CROMWELL,

"Gene:ral Counsel Compagnie Nouvelle du Canal de Panama." Were they authmized to make that commlmication? M. LAMPRE. Most likely they were. I do not know about it. I have no

recollection of that at all. The CHAIRMAN. I was very much in hopes that the company did not

know anything about it. M. LA.MPRE. I do not-know; I can not tell. M. B<EUFVE. Is it not countersigned by M. Rutin? The CHAIRMAN. No; but it is signed by Sullivan & Cromwell, general

counsel of the company. M. LA:r.IPRE. He must have acted under the general powers be had as

counsel of the company. The CHAIRMAN. Very good; th~t binds the company? M. LAMPRE. I can not say that 1t does not. I do not know as to that. The CHATRUAN. It is addressed to the President of the United St!l.tes, in

the name of the Panama Canal Company, requesting the President of the United States to communicate certain facts by a messr.ge-ho could not do it in any other way-to the House of Representatives or to Congre s upon the statement here that "on the contrary, however, and presumably without knowledg_e of the foregoing facts, measures have been introduced in Congre ana aw to be acted upon by the House of Representatives May 1 and May 2, 1900, having for their purpose the adoption by the Government of another isthnlian canal route"-

That is the Nicaragua route-" without awaiting the recommendation of the President and the information, report, and conclusions of the Isthmian Canal Commission appointed by the Pre81dent under the act of March 3, 18:1.}."

That of course is an intervention on the part of these attorneys with the proper privileges and duties of a House of Congress.

M. LiliPRE. I do not know. The letter is not familiar to me. I could hardly presume to answer.

The CHAIRMAN. I did not suppose it was. I wanted to direct your atten· tion to it. That now is the latest intervention which has been made here for the purpose of inte!'rupting, deferring, preventing action by Congres3 on this great subject and free choice on the part of the Congress and the people of tbe United States as between the two canal routes of Nicaragua and ~~~~threi£~~- ~e~!:'.tion whether they will build any or have anything


Mr. MORGAN. Mr. President, these statements establish positively that all the movements of Mr. Cromwell, from the beginning of his conduct of affairs of the company in the United States, were directed to the purpose of defeating the Nicaraguan Canal movement, whether by the Government or by the Maritime Canal Company. If the Nicaraguan Canal could be defeated, the way was open to the Panama Canal, and in any event they had a paying property in the Panama Railroad.

The extraordinary folly and presumption of his letter to the President of the 28th of February, 1899, was intended to show the President that if CongJ:ess was willing to accept stock in a canal company he would remove the Panama Canal Company bodily from France and put all its assets into a New Jersey corpomtion and give the United States the privilege of becoming a stockholder and of appointing directors in theN ew Panama Canal Company of America.

The later letters, which I havejustread,showthatwhen Cromwell failed to ensnare the President with his New Jersey corporation scheme, he attacked the lion in his den and made direct and almost open war on the Nicaragua Canal bill, reported to the House in the Fifty-sixth Congress, and passed by the House on the 2d of May, 1900, by a very strong majority.

The bill was delayed in the Senate until the Fifty-sixth Congress expu·ed, and Mr. Cromwell had a rest from active operations.

In the Fifty-first Congress Mr. Sherman made a report from the Committee on Foreign Relations in favor of the Nicaragua Canal. He made a second report in the Fifty-second Congress.

In the Fifty-third Congress Mr. MoRGAN made a like report from the Committee on Foreign Relations.

In the Fifty-fourth Congress Mr. MoRGAN made a like report from the Select Committee on the Construction of the Nicaragua Canal.

In the Fifty-fifth Congress Mr. MoRGAN made a like report from the select committee, and the bill passed the Senate on the 21st day of January, 1899, by a vote of 48 yeas to 6 nays. A previous vote had been taken on one of these bills. It passed the Senate by a vote of 11 majority. For the last bill the Senator from Ohio [Mr. HANNA] voted. On the first occasion he was not here.

This action of the Senate put Mr. Cromwell in the state of agitation that caused him to address his first letter to the President, on the day of which I have read to the Senate.

In October, 1895, Ludlow's report in favor of the Nicaragua Canal was made to the President, and on June 1, 1896, the Committee of the House on Interstate and Foreign Commerce made a searching examination into the entll·e subject and reported a bill to construct a canal on the Nicaraguan route.

On the 17th of January, 1899, the House committee, of which Mr. HEPBURN was chairman, began a full and searching examination of the whole subject of the canal.

Mr. William Nelson Cromwell was the first witness to be examined, and he took charge of the French forces as general in chief, legal counsel, ·diplomatic functionary, orator, and witness for the Panama Canal Company.

He produced General Abbot, who was examined at gi'eat length, and Mr. Ch01·an, chief engineer of the Panama Canal Company, who was also examined at g1·eat length and made a supplemental statement of 10 pages of printed matter in behalf of Panama.

Mr. Fteley made a written statement covering 33 pages of printed matter in small type.

Mr. Cromwell was assisted by Mr. Curtis in conducting the examinations and both broke in with their statements when it was found necessary.

The witnesses for Nicaragua on that occasion were Alexander T. Mason, Hiram Hitchcock, and Lewis M. Haupt. The committee made no report on the Senate bill, but took a bold departure from the policy of Government aid to the Maritime Canal Company and adopted the policy of ownership, construction, and complete control of a canal by the United States, and the first Hepburn bill was accordingly reported to the House on the 7th day of December, 1899.

In the meantime, on December 1, 1900, President McKinley had entered into agreements with Costa Rica and Nicaragua which he knew would close the controversy and shut off Mr, Cromwell's intrusions into legislation relating to the canal.

The President passed to his new and greater estat-e believing that he had settled the canal question, if Congress would authorize the President to acquire the right to do so from Nicaragua and Costa Rica.

He understood the reasons for the choice he made as well as any man who has survived him, having been fully informed by Mr. Cromwell and other agents of the Panama Canal Company as to every fact and plea and finesse and misrepresentation they had to make. It is a shameful reflection on 1\fr. McKinley to say that he did not have the opportunity to understand the Panama r oute when he chose the Nicaragua route.

But what respect has Mr. Cromwell, or anyone who is opposed to any canal, for the decision made by Mr. McKinley, when th~ occasion is again presented for further delay and final defeat of the will of the American people at the behest of the great railroads?

In the opening of this Cong~·ess the House again took up the Hepburn bill and passed it. Cromwell was, for the fil'st time, belated by nine days' interval of time.

The Senator from Ohio has graphically depicted the sad period, but Cromwell rose to the occasion and opened a new campaign. I refer only to what the record discloses of his action. I would not dare to follow him when he is not on the surface.

His next appearance was, as counsel for the Panama Canal Company, in the role of chief negotiator for Colombia, in formulating the draft of the p1·oposed convention that is before the Senate as the expression of the purposes of Colombia as to the g1·anting of canal rights to the United States.

He puts another letter into the diplomatic files, which is to stand as the key of interpretation of the convention in any future mistmderstanding that may occur. It is sent to Congress as part of the Colombian draft of a convention.

When we wish to know what that convention means we must refer to this letter.

It is attended with a disgusting cajolery and sycophancy that only too well indicates that it is intended to mislead Congress.

Mr. Cromwell's final appearance, in the open, is his letter of indorsement and explanation appended to the report of the minority of the committee. Why was he not called before the committee, as Mr. Pasco was, to swear to his opinions, if they are so important? It is plain enough for common comprehension that Mr. Cromwell could not afford to appear to support his attack upon the Nicaragua route. •

The friends of Nicaragua could not call him as a witness without indorsing him, and could not compel him to disclose professional secrets to the disadvantage of his clients.

The Cromwellian phase of tbe situation is not likely to commend the Panama Cana.l Company or its ditch to the favor of the American people. .

Mr. President, I have now shown the circumstances under which this matter has been brought before the Congress and before the Senate to-day, and I have shown how the discerning eye of the President and of the chairman of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce of the House saw through this pretender, trapped him as he came along with his cajolery and his seductive offers, and how they have disregarded him.

But it seems, Mr. President, that we can not shake him off. I presume he is in the gallery now, listening to me. He has been here all the time during this debate. The word" Panamaist" in Paris to-day is as much a synonym of a scoundrel as any word that was ever invented to define a bad character in our provincialism. I do not foresee what the result may ba if we take up that corporation and do what Colombia says, "Go to them first and deal with them, settle with them, and then come to us."

Sir, I propose that if the Government of the United States has to deal in respect of property with any foreign person it shall find at least some authorized diplomatic agent to stand up in company with our diplomatic agent, to bind a government, to bind somebody beside a private individual or corporation in a contract which relates to the affairs of the whole world.

Why shall we go into a diplomatic correspondence or a dicker with the Panama Canal Company in order to do that which is provided for in the Spooner amendment at the round sum of $4.0,000,000? If we are to take it, why is not our agent permitted to have some judgment about its actual value? Why is the round sum put up, and why is it provided that more or less shall not be given as the price of it?

Mr. President, without reference to its connection with Nicaragua or any other thing or anybody else, it appears to me that the Government of the United States was never put into such a humiliating position as it will be in when our agents go to M. Rutin, or whoever may be the new president, the man put in in order to make the forty-million-dollar bid, and make an arrangement with him to discuss what he proposes to do in selling the property to the United States. The proposed treaty requires that we shall settlewith that company, the company being authorized by Colombia to do it, before we go to Colombia for the purpose of obtaining concessionary rights to go through the State of Colombia with a canal.

The Panama Canal Company can not be a party to a diplomatic agreement with the United States. If it turns out that, by fraud, or through our mistake, we are cheated out of money, that we are deceived, what remedy have we? We have merely to turn our backs and walk off from a transaction with which we had no business to have anything to do.

If, however, the Government of Colombia will come forward and say," W e think the property is worth$40,000,000, and you can

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 6933 have it for $40,000,000, which we will distribute, and another million dollars," (which they have put into the treaty and which is not in the 40,000,000, to be paid at once fo1· its ownership of stock in the P anama Canal Company), "and seven millions advance payment for fourteen years of rent at $500,000 a year for a canal while you are building it, we will guarantee you against France, guarantee you against the creditors of the P anama Canal Company, although some of them are American citizens" (for there are a number of them in the United States); "we will guarantee you against all the speculators and peculators" (who have been running through the market to pick up the bonds since we have been at work about it); "we will guarantee you against the women and the children who have no representation in this matter and whose rights have been cut down by legal technicality or mistake" (they can not guarantee us against the abuse of our own character by accepting a proposition surrounded with such evidences of frightful wrong and injustice), then we might say, "We will accept yoru· proposition, it being extremely beneficial to us and better than any we ever dreamed we could get. We will accept your proposition for the reason that we can hold you to your bargain. If it turns out otherwise, and some court in France, or in Colombia, or in the United States, or elsewhere should hold in favor of one of these little innocent children, that they had a right of lien upon the property, you, Colombia, are bound to make it good to us."

But as we have nobody to deal with but this corporation, the Panama Canal Company, that is now in articulo mortis, it is a very bad outlook for the United States. It is a degrading, a cheapening, and a bad outlook for the United States to engage in any such transaction. We have no business committing the honor of this country to any such transaction. Senators may find in acts of friendship that they think they owe to leading Senators or others in this country some excuse for accepting such a situation, but I have no such responsibilities· and no such inducements to lead me from what I consider to be the path of duty; and I will not consent:" that this GovernmeEt, after an experience that has been disagreeable in the past, shall have any dealings with the Panama Canal Company. Let that company deal with Colombia, with the consent of France, and let Colombia at least offer us a title that is warranted to be free of all incumbrance.

APPENDI X. [House Repcr ~ No. 2615, Fifty-second Congrers, second session.]

INVESTIGATION OF PANAMA CANAL.

March 3, 1S93, laid on the table and ordered to he printed. May 9, 1900, ordered r eprinted by the Senate.

Mr. Fellows, from the Special Committee to Investigate the Panama Canal Company, etc., submitted the following report.

The Committee on Rules, to whom were referred the resolutions heretofore introduced by Mr. Fellows and Mr. Geary, respectively, r eported the same back with the recommendation that the resolutiOn herewith submitted be adopted in lieu thereof, viz:

"Resolved, 'fhat a special committee of five be appointed by the Speaker to investigate and r eport as to what sums of money, If any, were expended by the Panama Canal Company, or its promoters, directly or indirectly, for the purpose of preventing opposition in this country to the plans of said company, or securing acquiescence in America thereto, and what disposition was made of such sums; and generally as to the si t uation of affairs upon the Isthmus so far as American commerce seeking transit across the same may be concerned; and also as to the contracts and r elations between the Pacific Mail Stea.mship Company and the Southern Pacific Railroad Company, the Transcontinental Railroad Association, and other railroads; and as to what contracts or other collusive arrangements have been made by said companies where by the traffic by way of the Isthmus of Panama has been suppressed or diminished; and as to whether said steamship company, by virtue of said conh·acts or otherwise. has been practically absorbed by or subjected to the control of said railroad companies; and as to whether the business which it was the design of this Government to foster by the sums granted to said steamship company, through mail contracts or otherwise, has been thereby diverted from the Isthmus of Panama and the Panama Railroad Company to such transcontinental companies; and as 1lo whether such acts are detrimental to the interests of American maritime commerce and the producers, manufacturers, and merchants of the United States; and if such abuses are found to exist, by what means the same can or should be suppressed, and as to whether the further grant of said sums to said steamship company should be withdrawn. Said committee shall have the power to send for J!ersons and papers and administer oaths, and the expenses incurred in said investigation shall be paid out of the contingent fund of the House, and said committee shall have leave to sit during the sessions of the House in Washington or elsewhere."

Your committee, to which was referred the foregoing resolution, finds itself confronted with the fact that this session will close within a few days and that some report is demanded during the very last week of an expiring Congre£s.

The matters referred to in the r esolution are so varied and distinct in their nature that while the committee finds itself able authoritatively toreport on certain of the subjects contained in it feeling confident that the true facts have been thoroughly disclosed, as to other matters r eferred your committee does not feel that same confidence, and should the House desire further investigation of some of the subjects embraced in this resolution vour committee does not feel justified in saying that no ground for such action exists.

Your committee has not felt itself compelled to go through the great mass of diplomatic papers and correspondence which has accumulated during the present century between various foreign powers and the United States on-. the subject of transit across the Isthmus of Panama. Your committee has examined the matter sufficiently to be able to say that as fa.r as the treaty of 1846 with New Granada is concerned, and so far as the concession granted to and contracts made with the present Panama Railroad corporation, there is no clear gr ound for the assertion that any exclusive ri~ht to cross the

Isthmus was ever in terms granted, or by implication secured, either to an American corporation or to citizens of the United States, to the exclusion of citizens of any other country.

The original concession to Howland and Aspinwall was simply the transfer of the concession theretofore given to a French corporation, which concession had been surrendered back to the Government of New Granada. The Ij$hts of the P anama Railroad Company are simply those conveyed to it by .Howland and Aspinwall, affirmed and modified only by subsequent contracts with the Government of New Granada. There does not seem to be

~l c1~~t<ka~tta:·G~;~:~~ing: N~~u&~~~a~r~r \~: u=t~~t~~~t 6~: lombia has ever guaranteed that the United States shall control the transit, or place any limitation on the legal r ights of shareholders in the railway company or restriction in the nationality of the owners of its stock.

The Panama Railroad is a corporation under the laws of New York, and its directory and the rights of ownership of its shares are governed boy the laws of that State.

Your committee being instructed to ascertain whether any sums of money were expended by the Panama Canal Company or its promoters for the purpose of preventing opposition in this country to the plans of said canal, has done its utmost in the limited time before the end of the present Congress to investigate this matter. It has been unable thus far to trace directly or indirectly the expenditure of any money whatever in a corrupt way to influence the legislative or executive action of the United States Government. It may be that no investi~ation, however prolonged, after this lapse of time could be efficient inmakingsuchdiscovery. even if such corrupt use of money was made; but this is the subject of which your committee does not desire authoritatively to express its opinion that further investigation would be entirely fruitless. .

Certain facts in relation to the ex;I?enditure of money on the part of the canal company, however, are distinctively proven.

In the year 1879 the original subscription to the stock of the Panama Com· pany was opened in France. of which country the canal company, by its technical name of the Universal Inter-Oceanic Canal Company, is a corporation. The original subscription was an entire failure, and great weight must be given to the opinion that it was a failure principally on account of the dis- · trust as to the attitude of the United States toward this canal project which was universally entertained in Europe. ·

It is a fact too well known to have required testimony to be offered that the entire tone of the executive branch of tJUs Government durin~ the Administration of President Hayes, and the entire current of our diplomatic correspondence, was one of intense loyalty to the idea that not merely no foreign government, but no foreign corporation indirectly supported or controlled by any foreign government, should ever obtain any right to construct a canal across the Isthmus. In fact, during the two years preceding the close of the Hayes Administration the correspondence of our Government was kept within ordinary diploma. tic courtesy of protest on this subject only by the belief, which results have proved to be well founded, that the canal constructed on the plans and ideas of De L esseps and his associates was an idle dream, practically hopeless of accomplishment.

It seems clear that the promoters of the canal company saw that no success would attend their efforts to obtain subscriptions in Europe unless the public opinion of America on this subject should either be modified or that the people of Europe should be persuaded that the public opinion of the American people had been m odified. De Lesseps visited this country in the winter of 18i9-80, and a single instance will show how determined the promoters of the canal were, whatever was the popular opinion in this country, that Europe should be pe:rsuaded that it was not hostile to the canal. On the very day of De Lesseps's arrival in Wa.shl~~tonPresident Hayes sent his m essage to Congress affirming in strong terms t.ne position of his Administration as to the Monroe doctrine in its broadest acceptation.

That message as it appeared in the press was translated to De Lesseps, and h.il! answer was characteristic and immediate. To the amazement of his American friends, who had translated him this message, he at once telegraphed to Paris that the President's message had guaranteed the neutrality of the Panama Canal. This seemed to be the beginning of a great change in the tone of the :press of Paris and of France, and from the time of De Les- ... seps's visit to this country there seemed to be an assurance that America was • not hostile, but, on the contrary, very friendly to the enterprise. It was after the return of De Lesseps to France that the decision was made that an American committee of men of prominence whose solid names would be a guaranty of the financial stability of the enterprise should be selected.

The object of this is perfectly clear. It was to give a widespread public impression that American capital, in the persons of some of its most respectable a~encies, with ramifications, correspondents, and connections in every financial center of all localities in the United States, was backing the enterprise, and that Americans intended to become shareholders in the canal. It was intended first by the gentlemen who were selected to compose this committee to choose General Grant to lend his name to this enterprise, to give t o this American committee not merely financial weight, but the patriotic glory of a great name at the heatl of it, so as to impress the American people with its international or binational character. General Grant having declined, it was clear that the next best thing to do was to secure the name, as chairman of this committee, of some gentleman widely known, of political experience and postion, and, if possible, one whose orthodoxy in the past in relation to the Monroe doctrine would make his support of the canal project all the stronger in the eyes of the American people.

The American committee, by mutual agreement, under suggestions from the financial agents of the canalcompanyin Paris, had already been composed of the great banking houses of J. & W. Seligman, Drexel, Morgan & Co., and Winslow, Lanier & Co., of New York. Each of these houses was to designate one of its members to form the American committee, and the then Secretary of the Navy, Hon. R. W. Thompson, was decided upon as chairman, and in the autumn of 1880 the offer was made to him, through J. & W. Seligman, to leave the Cabinet and assume the title of the chairman of the American committee, with a salary to be paid at not less than 125,000 francs.

The house of Seligman & Co., of London, in which the New York banking firm of J. & W. Seligman were interested, had been the financial agents of the Navy Department during the Hayes Admfnistl·ation, and personal acquaintance between the Seligmans and Mr. Thompson had been the consequence.

The only testimony obtainable as to the reasons which induced Mr. ThomJ?son to consent to take this step is his own recollection of what was in his mind at that time. He states that after he decided on this step he notified the President of his intention and that the President acquiesced in it; and his r esignation, under these circumstances, caused no severance of the personal friendly relations between them. This may be true, but it is difficult to see what the President could have done to show any want of acquiescence when one of his Cabinet tendered his resignation and explained that it was to assume a position of great apparent financial responsibility and importance, with a salary three times greater than he received as head of theN a vy Depal.'tment.

Testimony has been taken showing that this action on the part of the Secr etary of the Navy was a great disappointment and surprise to Mr. Hayes, and h e so exp1·essed himself to others than Mr. Thompson.


It is clear that the whole tone of the Administration had been suspicious of and hostile toward the enterprise into which Mr. Thompson was willing to go, and it is perfectly clea-r that had not Mr. Thompson been a member of t hat Administration no controlling r eason existed for his selection as chair-. man of a committee intl'usted, or supposed to be intrusted, with.such great financial and commercial responsibilities.

Mr. Thompson tendered his resignation early in December, 1880, and it was formally accepted by the P resident a few days thereafter. It is significant of the controlling reasons for the haste in which this matter of Mr. Thompson's resignation from the Cabinet was concluded by him, that we find him writin"', on December 16, that arrangements should be made that his salary shoul'a begin on the 20th of December, in order that his friends might" be a.ssured that his p osition was fixed beyond a peradventure," and that a promise to this effect "would satisfy his friends and put the Nicaraguans on their backs."

It was at thiS time that the Forty-sixth Congress appointed a special comm ittee to examine and report on interoceanic routes. At the same time the Committee on Foreioon Affairs was charged with the examination and report upon the so-called" Crapo resolution," as to whether the Panama Canal project was a violation of the Mom·oe doctrine or was detrimental to ,American inter ests.

In the Senate the Bm·nside resolution to a similar effect was under consideration.

Your committee r epeat, that it has not found any evidence to show that any corrupt or improper means were used to stifle the investigation or the discussion of these resolutions. In fact, in spite of the arguments of Mr. Thompson and the counsel employed by him to assist, the Crapo resolution

- was reported back to the House in a somewhat modified form but with arep ort; ringing with true American patriotism, and a manly, yet conservative assertion of the Monroe doctrine as it is generally understood in the United States.

The select committee on Interoceanic routes also made a r epor t strongly supporting the idea that the United States should control all transit over the Isthmus-at least in so far as to prevent any European or non-American nation from having a preponderating influence. But it will be remembered that it was at the short session of the Fortieth Congres , with a change of administration coming on the 4th of March, that these r eports were made, as the present one will be; just at the close of the session, and your committee can see reasonable ground for the belief that these r esolutions andreports were not acted upon simply from the general apathy of the House and the stress of other business a t the close of the session.

Yom· committee find that for the next three or four years Colonel Thompson was exceedingly vigilant in watching the legislation of Congress and most active and able in his efforts and influence to postpone the consideration of any legislation either directly or indirectly tending to work an injury to the causeofthePanamaCanal Company. He appeared b efore committees, House and Senate, personally and by printed arguments and briefs.

These, l:.e t hinks, had great weight in the defeat of the Nicn.ragua Canal plans in whatever shape they came up, but it is not clear that, outside of this, he had anything directly to do with the shaping of public opinion in this country or bringing a bout what seems t o have been an apparent acquiescence, or at least an indifference on the part of the press and the p eople. So far as the t estimony goes, the work of the Amer1can committee was altogether done by Mr. Thompson, and consisted of supervising purchases for a part of the time for the construction of the canal, aud this persistent, watchful, and succe sful supervision of the legislation of the United States.

The members of the American committee other than himself were supposed by Mr. Thompson to have received n o compensation whatever except their commission a-s bankers and brokers in obtaining subscriptions and furthering the sale of the stocks and bonds of the canal company and in the h andling and transmission of the very large amount of money spent in this country for the purchase of supplies of >arious kinds. It was the object of the committee to see ~at to as ~reat an extent as possible the. purchas~ of supplies of raw ma tenal, of machinery and tools should be made 10 the Urn ted States as an aid to make it app~ar tllil.t America had no hostility, but every reason to look with a friendly eye on this enterprise.

The total amount of m oney for purchases of this kind passing through the single house of J . & W. Seligman and distributed to American trade was upward of $40,000,000, and that house is not able to &'ty that no further accounts of money came through other banking h ouses to be spent in America for similar ends. This, however, was all spent by purchasing agents of the canal company, and their vouchers for their purchases were forwarded to Paris for approval. .

There was one thin~, however, which struck the only three salaried officers of the Panama Canal uompa.ny whose testimony we have been able to get as an entire surprise. This fact is that these three banking houses named above received, apparently for the loan of their names and. for notluP:g_else to_ this enterprise, the immense sum of 6,000,000 francs, or $1,200,000; $4W,OOO apiece, or $50,000 a year, was paid these houses without the knowledge of the chairman of that committee, who all the time supposed that he was the important factor in this enterprise and was himself receivmg only half of tha.t sum annually.

In fact, two years before the canal company went into liquidation it is in evidence that Mr. Thompson voluntarily r educed h is salary by one-half-that is to $12,500, remaining in comJ?.lete ignorance that the other members of the c~mmittee, of which he was still chairman, were still each receiving $50,000. These bankin~ houses state they had no specific duties to render in return for these subSldies; that they had no employment or interest to effect the sale of canal stock or bonds, and that, in fact, practically none were sold in the United States.

What influence was exercised upon the financial public opinion of the United States by the names of these three great banking houses, what indirect credit and popularity was given to the enterprise tlu·ough their numerous correspondents and connections throughout the country is perhaps impossible now to estim ate, but to effect this was the object of the formation of this American committee, a committee which testifies that it had nor~ular meetings, and some members of which were never pi·esent at a meetmg or knew whether any minutes were ever kept by the committee, while each of these houses were receiving$-!00.000. This fact, if it is a measure of the s:eneral conduct and management of the Panama Canal Company, may possibly explain why it was compelled to go into liquidation as soon as it did.

The only specific matter-the three banking members of the American committee seem to have had in charge and to have accomplished was the purchase of the stock of the Panama Railroad Company by the canal company at a price more than double what it had been quoted in the market for two or three years previous to the beginning of these negotiations. This stock had been selling from $140 to $150, and the r esult of the negotiations and contract of sale was that the Panama Canal Compa~y_purchased 68,500 shares out of the 70,000 shar es of stock, at a price of 291-~0 a share for the stock, $41 and some cents on each share for certain "assets" of t he railroad company, the nature of which is not very clear.

It may not be out of place to state that in puTsuance of this purchase these "assets" were sold to ba bought by a "syndicate,_:' and that syndicate was composed of Messrs. J. & W. Seligman; Winslow, Lanier & Co., and Drexel, Morgan&; Co., who had been managing the purchase of the Panama Railroad

stock on behalf of the canal company. These negotiations and the price paid for this stock by the canal company, however, may not come within the strict purview of the r esolution of Congress. . As to the. seco~d ~,>art of the r esolution refen·ed to your commit~e, relatmg to the situatiOn 10 the past few years and at present of American commerce upon the Isthmus, your committee feels that it has obtained all the evidence needed to establish certain facts beyond controversy. On the 1st of F ebruary, 1878, the Pacific Mail Company, a corporation organized under the laws of New York, owning and ·running steamers between New York and Aspinwall on the Atlantic, and between Panama and San Francisco on the Pacific, together with certain intermediate Central American· and Mexican ports, made a contract for fifteen years with the Panama Railroad Company, also a corporation under the laws of New York. At that time there was no showing that there were any foreign stockholders in either of these two corporations.

This contract provided that the Pacific Mail should have the exclusive right "to bill freight through" from N ew York to San Francisco and vice versa over the Panama Railroad, and all freight offered by others between these points could not be "billed throu~hl" but would have to pay local rates on the Isthmus railway. The sum paid ror this was to be a lump sum of $75,U00a m onth to the railroad company, which, by modification, was afterwards lowered to $55,000 a month.

A remarkable fact about this contract is that it was the result of a contract made befora tltn.t time between the Pacific Mail Com~,>any and the Transcontinental Railway Pool, as at that date the Association of Transcontinental Railways was called. That was a contract where by the Transcontinental Railway Pool, embracin<>' all of the roads between the Missouri Rive1· and the Pacific seaports, and: covering entil·ely all r ailway traffic b etween the Atlantic and Pacific seaboards, several of which had r eceived large donations of public lands and the bonds of which the United States Government was guaranteeing, paid the Pacific Mail the sum of S90,000 a month, which was afte1·wards reduced to $75,000 a month, for the consideration that the Pacific Mail would carry only 1,200 tons a month of freight each way between N ew York and San Francisco, and on that freight would allow the transcontinental pool to fix the price and rate to b e paid. That was the upshot of the contract, although the form was a reservation of space for 1,.:00 tons a m onth for the exclusive benefit of the Transcontinental Ra.ilway r oads-whether the steamers sailed full or half empty.

After the pa.ssage of the interstate-commerce law had compelled the dissolution of the so-called "pool," a transcontinental railway association was formed, which, under some name or other, is still in existence; and down to the present time the Pacific Mail, subsidized by the Government in a large amount each year, has been allowing the transcontinental railways to fix the rates and limit the tr&ffic over its line. These t wo contracts w ere so far practically parts of one and the same that the amount paid the Panama Railroad m onthly was fix_ej with regard to that paid to the Pacific Mail by the transcontinental r oads, and when the latte r was lQ__"\Yered from $00,000 a month t'J S75,000 the former wa-s lowered from $75,000 to $115,000. The object of this is frankly stated by the officars of both the transcontinental roads and the Pacific Mail; it was to main1ain rates above the level to which they would fall if free competition between these several routes had continued. It seems to be certain that a very large if not an absolutely controlling,

inter est in the stock and the dir ectory of the P acific Mail Company is owned by individuals and estates >ery largely interested in the stock and directory of the transcontinental roads: and 1t is proven that the same individuals composing a majority of the directory of the Pacific Mail composed a majority of the directors present at the meeting of the-Panama Railroad Company's directory at which the contr!lct between the Pacific Mail and the railroad company of February 1, Uii8. was l'atified and executed.

That this system has for fifteen years been diminishing commerce between New York and San Francisco across the Isthmus is not denied. It is stated, as a justification, that the Transcontinental Railway Association, controlling as it did, under these contracts, the prices and traffic of the Pacific Mail, useCl the latter as an active factor to defeat the competition of sailing-vessel traffic around Cape Horn, and thus were able to maintain the rates of the railroad companies as against that of sailing-vessel competition. It is obvious that this did not tend to increase American shipping or tend to the encouragement of the merchant marine or the commer ce of the United States.

I t seems to your committae that this state of things can not be b eneficial to the general interstate trade or commerce of the United States, nor can it see that it is of any particular b enefit to our trade with foreign countries. It is stated that this arrangement between the Pacific :r.Iail and the Transcontinental Railway Association came to an end in December last, which is just about the time that negotiations between the Panama Railroad Company and the Pacific Mail as to a renewal of the former contract seems to have fallen through. And it is likewise in evidence that the final check to the attempts at making a n ew contract between the Panama Railroad Company a.nd the Pacific Mail was given by the following letter t<> the vice-president of the railroad company from the controlling member of the executive committee of the Pacific Mail, who is also universally recognized as one of the controlling influences of the transcontinental railways:

C. P. HUNTINGTON, 23BROAD STREET, New Yo-rk, Dece-mber ~8, 189!.

CHARLES COUDERT, Esq., 68-70 William S tl·eet, New York.

MY DEAR SIR: H erewith I r eturn memorandum that you gave me on Monday. Of course this would not do but it does seem tome as though there could be such a contract made as would be largely bene.ficial to both interests.

Yom·s, truly, C. P. HUNTINGTON.

Whatever be the case in the last sixty days, it is perfectly clear to your committee that the Panama Railroad Company has for fifteen years been prevented by these arrangements from being a competitor with the transcontinental railway lines.

Yom· committee recommends that whenever, under provisions of the act of March 3, 1891, "for ocean mail service and to promote commerce," the Postmaster-General shall enter into contract with any line of vesselsi a clause shall be inserted in said contract to the effect that if said ~teamship ine shall enter into any combination or arrano-ement with competing lines of traffic the result of which is to diminish traffic or raise or mamtain rates of frei~ht on American commerce, foreign or domestic, over what free competition would effect, that said contract m ay be terminated forthwith by the Postmaster-General.

Your committee regrets, so far as the ownership of nearly all the stock (50es, that the control of any American corporation, as the Panruna Railroad IS, should be held in foreign hands, particularly in the hands of the liquidator or receiver of another corporation, also foreign-appointed by fore1gn judicial authority and subject to foreign judicial supervision. It fails to see, however, that. any law, treaty stipulation, or contr act obligation has b een violated by the pm·chase of these railroad shares by the Panama Canal Company, or that as yet any discrimination has been attempted aga1nst American commerce or any injustice practiced thereon on account of such foreigu ownership of this stock. The restrictions and injuries American tr;tde and

1902. · CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 6935 commerce have ·sustained have been laid on them by Amelican citizens controlling various other American corporations, and it is not a pleasing subject to contemplate.

Your committee can not refrain from calling attention to what seems an obvious deduction from the facts shownhthat it is to the interest of the United States that the American peoples ould absolutely control some r • ·-

let across the Isthmus at some point, which shall be used for the bone:t . of American trade in general as an open and continuous competitor, affor<ling no opportunity for entangling subsidies from great competing lines or c,hance of falling into the grasp of any monopoly through stock manipulation.

J OHN R. FELLOWS, Chairman.

T . J.GEARY. JOSIAH PATTERSON. H. HENRY POWERS. BELLAMY STORER.

Mr. QUARLES obtained the floor. Mr. MORGilL Will the Senator from Wisconsin allow me? l\fr. (t!J ARLES. Certainly. Mr. MORGAN. I promised the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr.

SPOO m.:R) that I wm.:tld ask the Senate to agree that the pending bill should be taken up after the routine morning business tomorrow. He was not feeling very well and did not wish to occupy the latter hours of the evening speaking. I also ask permission to take the floor for the Senator from Wisconsin.

The PRESIDING. OFFICER. If there be no objection to the request, it will be so ordered.

Mr. MORGAN. Have Iunanimousconsentfortheotherorder? Mr. SCOTT. I wish to ask the Senator from Alabama if there

are not other Senators who have given notice, and whose notices are on the Calendar, that they wish to speak to-morrow?

Mr. MORGAN. That will be a question between the other Senators. If there is objection, I will not try to secure the order; but it was my suggestion that the Senator from Wisconsin should be relieved in this way. I did not suppose any body would object. At all events, I will ask that the Senate proceed to the consideration of this bill to-morrow at the conclU:~::.ion of the routine morning business.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama asks that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the unfinished business to-morrow at the conclusion of the morning busines . Is there objection to that reque t? The Chair hears none, and it is so ordered.

Mr. HOAR. The request was " at the conclusion of the routine morning business.''

Mr. MORGAN. After the routine morning business. The PRESIDING OFFICER. That was the request of the

Senator from Alabama. J.\IIr. BACON. Mr. President, a few days since_ I presented to

the Senate two-amendments to the pending measure, one intended to be proposed to the amendment offered by the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. SPOONER] and the other an amendment to the original bill. Each of these amendments is identical; in other words, one is the same as the other, t.t.1d is intended to be ingrafted upon whichever meas_ure shall be adopted by the Senate. Since offering those amendments certain amendments have been suggested by various Senators, and I have recast them. I ask that they be reprinted in order that th~y may be available for examination by Senators.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia asks that the amendments he has heretofore offered, and which have beei!- recast by him, be reprinted for the use of the Senate. Is there objection to the request? The Chair hears none, and it is so ordered.

Mr. BACON. I desire that one of the amendments shall be read now, in order that it may be in a position whElre Senators may conveniently see it. The Secretary will begin at the important part, which is the only part I desire read.

Mr. ALDRICH. I suggest that it be printed in the RECORD without being read.

1\fr. SCOTT. It is late; let it be printed. Mr. BACON. That is sufficient.

. The amendment referred to is as follows: Amendments intended to be proposed by Mr. BACON to the bill (H. R. 3110)

to provide for the construction of a canal connecting the waters of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, viz: On page 2, line 3, strike out the words" Secretary of War" and insert in

lieu thereof the words" Isthmian Canal Commission hereinafter authorized." On page 2, lines 10 and 11, strike out the words" Secretary of War" and

insert in lieu thereof the words "Isthmian Canal Commission under the direction of the President."

On page 3, line 6, strike out the words" Secretary of War" and insert in lieu thereof the words "said Isthmian Canal Commission subject to the approval of the President."

On page 3, at the end of line 9, after the word" defenses," insert the words "or any prurt thereof."

Add an additional section to said bill, to be known as section 7, as follows: "SEC. 7. That to enable the President to construct the canal and works

appurtenant thereto as provided in this act, there is hereby created the Isthmian Canal Commission, the same to be composed of seven members, who shall be nominated and appointed by the President, by and with the advice and conEent of the Senate, and who shall serve durmg the pleasure of the President, and one of whom shall be named as the chairman of said Commission. Of the seven members of said Commission at least four of them shall

be persons learned and skilled in the science of engineering, and of the four, at least one shall be an officer of the United States Army and at least one other shall be an officer of the United States Navy, the sa1d officers, respectively, bein~ upon the active or the retired list of the Army or of the Navy. Said commlSsioners shall each receive as their compensation the sum of $10,000 p er annum, and such additional allowances for actual expenses incurred as may be allowed by the President in his discretion.

"In addition tothemembersof a2.id Isthmian Canal Commission, the President is hereby authorized through said Commission to employ in said service any of the engineers of the United States Army, at his discretion, and likewise to employ any engineers in civil life, at his discretion, and any other persons n ecessary fm· the proper !lJld expeditious prosecution of said work. The compensation of all such engineers and other persons employed under this act shall be fixed by said Commission, subject to the approval of the President. T~e official salary of any civil or military officer of the Government appointed or employed under this act shall be deducted from the amount of salary or compensation fixed under the terms of this act. Said Commission shall in all matters be subject to the direction and control of the President and shall make to the President annually and atsuchotherperiods as may be required either by law or by the order of the President full and complete reports of all their actings ancl doings and all moneys received and expended in the construction of srud work and in the J>erformance of their duties in connection therewith, which said reports shall be by the President transmitted to Congress. And the said Commission shall furthermore ~ve to Congress or either House of Congress such information as may be reqwred either by act of Congress or by the order of either House of Congre~."

The President shall eause to be provided and assigned for the use of the said commission such offices as may, with the suitable equipment of the ~~du~~~i~~=-{ and proper, in his discretion, for the proper discharge of

PERMANENT CE..~SUS OFFICE.

Mr. QUARLES. I am directed by the Committee on the Census, to whom was referred the bill (S. 6178) to amend section 4 of an act entitled "An act to provide for a permanent Census Office," approved March 6, 1902, to report it without amendment.

I desire to say that it is intended solely to add one word which was carelessly omitted from the permane:z;tt census act. I ask unanimous consent for the present consideration of the bill.

There being no objection, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, proceeded to consider the bill. It provides that section 4 of an act of Congress entitled ''An act to provide for a permanent Census Office," approved March 6, 1902, shall be amended by inserting, after thrl word '' watchmen '' and before the words '' and chaxwomen," where th~ same occur in section 4, the words" unskilled hborers. ''

The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, ordered to be engroEsed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

REFUNDING OF CERTAIN TAXES.

Mr. ALDRICH. I ask unanimous consent for the present consideration pf the bill (H. R . 13204) to provide for refunding taxes paid upon legacies and bequests for uses of a religious, charitable, or educational character, for the encouragement of art, etc. , under the act of June 13, 1898. The bill has the unanimous approval of the Committee on Finance, and I think it will cause no discussion whatever. ·

There being no objection, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, proceeded to consider the bill, which had been reported from the Committee on Finance with amendments.

The first amendment was to add as a new section the following : SEc 2. That the Secretary of the Treasw·y, under rules and regulations to

be prescribed by hi~.~. and he is hereby, author~ed and directed torefund, out of any money m the Treasury not otherWl!C'e a ppropriated, sums paid for documentary stamps used on export bills of lading, such stamps representing taxes which were illegally ass~ssed and collected.

The amendment was agreed to. The Iiext amendment was to insert as a new section the fol

lowing : SEC. 3. 'l'hat in all cases where an executor, administrator, or trustee shall

have paid, or shall hereafter pay, any tax upon any legacy or distributive share of p ersonal property under the provisions of the act approved June 13, 1898, entitled 'An act to provide ways and means to meet war expenditures, and for other purposes," and amendments thereof, the Soeretary of theTreasw-y be, and h e is hereby, authorized and directed to refund, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated upon proper application bea·n made to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, under such rules and re ations as may be prescribed, so much of said tax as may haYe been collec ed on contingent beneficial interests which shall not have bocome vested prior to July 1, 1902. And no tax shall hereafter be as"3essed or imposed under said act approved Jtme 13, 1898, upon or in r espect of any contingent beneficial interest which sb.all not become absolutely vested in possession or enj oyment prior to said July 1, 1900.

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was to insert as a new section the follow

ing: SEC. 4. That taxes which shall have accrued before the taking effect of the

act of Apri112, 1902, entitled "An act to r epeal war-revenue taxation, and for other pw-poses," and since July 1, 1900, upon seew·ities delivered or transferred to secw·e the future payment of money, are hereby r emitted.

The amendment was agreed to. 1\Ir. SCOTT. I should like to ask the Senator from Rhode

Island a question. He says this is a bill which the House has passed?

Mr. ALDRICH. • It is a House bill, passed by the House of Representatives.

Mr. SCOTT. And is recommended by your committee?

6936 CONGRESSIONAL· RECORD-HOUSE. JUNE 17,

Mr. ALDRICH. Yes; it is recommended h:y the unanimous vote of our committee.

:Mr. SCOTT. It is very sweeping. The bill was reported to the Senate a-s amended, and the amend

ments were concurred in. The amendments were ordered to be engrossed, and the bill to

be read a third time. The bill was read the third time, and passed. The title was amended so as to read: "A bill to provide for re

funding taxes paid upon legacies and bequests for uses of a religious, charitable, or educational character, for the encouragement of art, etc., under the act of June 13, 1898, and for other purposes.''

NATIONAL APPALACHIAN FOREST RESERVE.

Mr. BURTON. I desire to have unanimous consent for the consideration of the bill (S. 5228) for the purchase of a national forest reserve in the Southern Appalachian Mountains, to be known as the" National Appalachian Forest Reserve," after the routine morning business on Saturday. I do not think it will take long to debate it.

Mr. BATE. I should like to hear the Senator's request Mr. BURTON. It is that the bill betaken up for consideration

at that time. Mr. BATE. Simply for consideration? Mr. BURTON. Yes, sir. The agreement I ask for is not to

interfere with conference reports, appropriation bills, or a.ny notices that have heretofore been given.

~Ir. ALDRICH. If this is to be a continuing order, I 'shall be obliged to object to it. As I stated the other day, it seems to me at this time of the session it will not do for us to take up bills for consideration for an indefinite period.

~lr. BURTON. I will not ask that it shall be a continuing order, because I think the Senate will be ready to vote upon the bill after very brief consideration. There have been several speeches made upon the bill; it has had attention called to it, and I think Senators are ready to vote.

Mr. ALDRICH. I shall not object to its being considered in the morning hour of the day named by the Senator from Kansas.

Mr. BURTON. After the routine morning business on Satur-day.

Mr. ALDRICH. Yes; in the morning hour of that day only. Mr. BURTON. Yes. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair understands it to be

a request for unanimous consent that the bill named by the Senator from Kansas be made the order of business at the conclusion of the routine morning business on Saturday morning.

Mr. BATE. Not to affect any other business for which notice has been given.

Mr. ALDRICH. And for consideration during the morning hour of that day only.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. For consideration during the Illorning hour of Saturday only. Is that the understanding?

Mr. ALDRICH. It is. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair so understands it.

Is there objection? · The Chair hears none, and that order i~ made.

EXECUTIVE SESSION,

Mr. ALDRICH. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of executive business.

Mr. BURTON rose. Mr. ALDRICH. I withdraw the motion if the Senator from

Kansas desires to make a request. Mr. BURTON. I shall be glad if the Senate will be so kind as

to pass a bill for .me. It is the bil~ (S. 6g7o~ to authoriz~ the construction of a bndge across the M1ssour1 R1ver, at a pomt to be selected, within 5 miles north of the Kaw River, in Wyandotte County, State of Kansas, and Clay County, State of Missouri, and to make the same a post route. It is a bridge bill, drawn in the usual form, which has been referred to the War Department and reported by the Committee on Commerce.

Mr. SCOTT. It is after 6 o'clock. Mr. KEAN. It is a very long bill. Mr. SCOTT. It is a very long bill. The PRESIDING OFFICER. There seems to be objection. :1\Ir. BURTON. Very well; I will not urge it. Mr. ALDRICH. I move that the Senate proceed to the con-

sideration of executive business. ' The motion was agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to the

consideration of executive business. After twelve minutes spent in executive session the doors were reopened, and (at 6 o'clock and 20 minutes p.m.) the Senate adjourned until to-morrow, Wednesday, June 18, 1902, at 11 o'clock a.m.

NOMINATIONS. Executive norninations received by the Senate June 17, 1902.

REGISTERS OF LAND OFFICES.

Daniel Arms, of Butte, Mont., to be register of the land office at Missoula, Mont., vice Elmer E. Hershey, whose term will expire July 8, 1902.

William R. Dunbar, of Washington, to be register of the land o~ce at Vancouver, Wash., his term having expired. (Reapporntment.)

INDI.A.J.~ AGE..~T.

William R. Logan, of Helena, Mont., to be agent for the Indians of the Fort Belknap Agency, in Montana, vice Morris L. Bridgeman, removed.

CONFIRMATIONS. Executive nominations confirmed by the Senate J une 17, 1902.

CONSUL,

Joseph E. Proffit, of West Virginia, to be consul of the United States at Pretoria, South Africa. .

REGISTER OF LAND OFFICE.

· Charles A. Blake, of South Dakota, to be register of the land office at Hm·on, S. Dak.

POSTMASTER.

• Henry J. Ritchie, to be postmaster at St. Augustine, in the county of St~ John and State of Florida.

HOUSE OF· REPRESENTATIVES.

TUESDAY, J une 17, 1902.

The House met at 12 o'clock m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. HENRY N. CouDEN, D. D. The Journal of yesterday's proceedings was read and approved.

COMPILATION AND INDEX OF REPORTS OF COMMITTEES.

Mr. JOY. Mr. Speaker, I desire to present, by direction of the Committee on Accounts, House resolution No. 302.

The Clerk read as follows: R esolved, That there be prepared, under the direction of the Committee

on Accounts, a continuation of the compil.!Ltion and index of the reports of the committees of the House, for the use of Sl'.id committees, from the Fortyninth to the Fifty-sixth Congresses, inclusive, uniform with the compilation up to the Forty-ninth Congress, the cost of the prep:uation of said compilation and index not to exceed $3,000, to be pg,id out of the contingent fund of the House.

The resolution was agreed to.

JANITOR FOR COMMITTEE ON ELECTIO:NS NO. 2.

Mr. JOY. Mr. Speaker, I also, by direction of the committee, ask consideration of House resolution No. 289.

The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: Resolved, That the chairman of the Committee.on Elections No.2 is hereby

authorized to appoint a janitor to said committee room, to be paid out of the contingent fund of the House at the rate of $60 per month, during the present Congress, until otherwise provided for by law, payment hereunder to date from December 1, 1901.

The following amendment was recommended by the committee: In line 5, after the word "the," insert the words "session of the." The amendment was agreed to. The resolution was agreed to.

MAl3ElJ CRUMP CURTIS.

Mr. JOY. Mr. Speaker, I also present House resolution No. 182, from the same committee.

The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: Resolved, That the Clerk of the House be, and be hereby is, authorized and

directed to pay to Mabel Crump Curtiss, out of the contingent fund of the House, the sum of S750 for services rendered as clerk to her father, the late Ron. Rousseau 0. drump, of Michigan, from April1 to October 15, 1201.

The following substitute resolution was recommended by the committee:

R esolved, That the Clerk of the House b e, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of the contingent fund of the House, to Mabel Crump Curtis tho sum of $100 for serviees r endered as clerk to the late Representative-elect from Michigan from April1 to April 30, 1901, inclusive.

The amendment was agreed to. The substitute resolution was agreed to.

R. E. WALKER AND J. K. DIDTCA.N.

Mr. JOY. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Accounts, I also call up House resolution 275.

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 6937 The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: Re.~olved, That the Committee on Appropriations is hereby authorized to

provide in the general deficiency appropriation bill as followS< · To pay the conductors of the elevator in the House wing of the old Library space of the Capitol the difference between the amounts received by them and the rate of $1,200 per annum, from March 5, 1901, to June 30, 1902, inclusive, as follows: R. E. Walker, :132.49; J. K. Duncan, $132.49; in all, $2(14.98.

The resolution was agreed to. JOHN DOUGLAS.

Mr. JOY. Mr. Speaker, I also present from the Committee on Accounts House resolution No. 303.

The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: Resolved, That the Committee on Appropriations is h ereby authorized to

provide in the general deficiency appropriation bill for the payment of $116 to John Douglas for services as laborer m the.Doorkeepcr's department during the second session of the Fifty-sixth Congress.

The resolution was agreed to. PROTECTIO~ OF THE PRESIDENT.

The SPEAKER laid before the House the bill (S. 3653) for the protection of the President of the United States, and for other purposes, with the disagreement of the Senate to the House amendment and a request for a conference.

Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I ~ove that the House insist on its amendment and agree to the conference asked for by the Senate.

The motion was agreed to. The SPEAKER appointed as conferees on the part of the House

Mr. RAY of New York, Mr. OVERSTREET, and Mr. LANHAM. PERSONAL REQUEST.

By unanimous consent, leave was given to Mr. L ANH.AM to withdraw from the files of the House the papers accompanying bill H. R. 7271, for the relief of Mrs. M, L. Baker, no adverse r eport having been made thereon.

ARTICLE VII, TREATY BETWEE.c~ THE UNITED STATES .ll.""D SPAIN. Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, to-day was set apart to

consider bills reported from the Judiciary Committee. We have several bills which we would like to get through; but before calling up the bankruptcy bill there is one other bill which I desire to take up because it is important. I call up the bill (H. R. 12764) amending the act of March 2, 1901, entitled "An act to carry into effect the stipulations of Article VII of the treaty between the United States and Spain, etc."

The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc.,'That section 13, chapter 800, second session Fifty-sixth

Con!P"ess, is h er eby amended by striking out tho words therein contained and mserting in lien thereof the following:

"SEC. 13. That the Commission is hereby conStituted a court of the United States; and an appeal to the Supreme Court shall be allowed on behalf of the United States from all judgments of the Commission adverse to the United States and on behalf of the plaintiff in any case where the matter in controversy- exceeds $3,000. All such appeals shall be taken within ninety days after the judgment is entered or within ninety days after the passage of this act, and shall be allowed under such r egulations as the Supreme Court may direct."

The following amendment, recommended by the Commission, was read:

Amend by striking out all of section 13 and inserting the following: "SEC. 13. Said Commission being an inferior court of the United States

an api>eal to the Supreme Court of the United States in matters of law shall be allowed on behalf of the United States from all final judgments or awards of the Commission adverso to the United States, and on behalf of the petitioner in any case where the amount in controversy exceeds $3,000. All such appeals shall be taken within ninety days after the final judgment or award is entered or within ninety days after the approval of the act, and shall bs

• allowed and prosecuted under such rules and regulations as the Supreme Court of the United States may prescribe."

The amendments reported by the committee were agreed to. The bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and' read a

third time; and it was accordingly read the third time, and passed. .AME:NDMENT OF BA "KRUPTCY L.A. W .

Mr. RAY of New York. I now call up the bill H. R. 13679, being the bill to amend the bankruptcy law. .

The Clerk proceeded to read the bill (H. R. 13679) to amend an act entitled "An act to establish a uniform system of bankruptcy throughout the United States," approved July 1, 1898.

Mr. CLAYTON (interrupting the reading). Mr. Speaker, I suggest to the gentleman from New York [Mr. RAY] that we dispen e with the first reading of the bill. I should like to have some agreement--

Mr. RAY of New York. I quite agree with the gentleman in his suggestion, and therefore ask unanimous consent that the first reading of the bill be dispensed with.

The SPEAKER. This is practically the second reading of the bill. The regular order of proceeding in the House does not call for any subsequent reaning.

Mr. CLAYTON. I want to have an agreement with the gentleman about the time to be occupied in debate.

Mr. RAY of New York. The Judiciary Committee has other bills that we want to get through, and we shall have no other day at this session for the business of that committee; and to-day we shall have to suspend our proceedings at 5 o'clock. I suggest therefore that we have two hours' debate on this bill--

Mr. CLAYTON. Two hours of general debate? Mr. RAY of New York. That the gentleman from Alabama

[Mr. CLAYTON] control one hour and that I control the other. My understanding is that the gentleman from Alabama desires to bring to a vote in this House a proposition to repeal the bankruptcy law. Now, instead of taking up time in moving the previous question and trying to cut off that proposition, I suggest it be agreed that that amendment be offered now and considered as pending, and that at the expiration of two hours we take a vote on that amendment, and then take a vote on this bill.

Mr. CLAYTON. If I understand the gentleman, his proposition is to have two hours' general debate, he to control one hour and I the other, and that at the expiration of two hours I shall be permitted to offer--

:M.r. RAY of New York. You might offer it now. Mr. CLAYTON. That I be permitted to offer House bil14579,

to repeal the bankruptcy law, and that we have a vote on that proposition.

Mr. LANHAM. I hardly think it would be proper to accede to that suggestion, for the reason that the proposition stated by the gentleman from Alabama may be open to a point of order.

Mr. CLAYTON. I will say to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. LANHAM] that it will be difficult for us to reach an agreement unless on the line suggested by the gentleman from New York.

Mr. GOLDFOGLE. Is it proposed to shut off the right to offer amendments to the pending bill?

Mr. CLAYTON. That will be the effect if we adopt the substitute repealing the existing law.

Mr. GOLDFOGLE. But suppose we do not adopt the substitute, will the suggestion made by the gentleman from New York cut off the right to offer amendments?

Mr. LANHAM. I wish to suggest to the gentleman from New York not to estop himself from the right to raise a point of order upon the proposition to repeal the existing law.

Mr. RAY of New York. That amendment can be offered and considered pending, but subject to the point of order.

Mr. CLAYTON. No, sir; I did not understand the gentleman's proposed agreement to be that at all. The suggestion of the gentleman from Texas--

Mr. RAY of New York. Well, you do not desire to have anybody waive the point of order?

Mr. CLAYTON. I want the gentleman to agree that we shall have a vote upon this amendment. I do not think it subject to a point of order.

Mr. LANHAM. That is a matter to be yet determined. Mr. CLAYTON. But at the same time I want to economize

time. I do not care to go through the process of arguing a point of order upon that proposition. It is in the interest of economy of time that we should have a vote upon the proposition.

Mr. RAY of New York. Well, then, suppose we make this an-angement-I ask gentlemen to listen carefully-that we debate this bill for two hours, the gentleman from Alabama to control one hour and I one hour; that at the expiration of two hours it shall be in order for the gentleman from Alabama to move his amendment; then let the point of order be passed upon, and then take a vote on the bill.

Mr. GOLDFOGLE. When the gentleman speaks of taking a vote on the bill, does he mean that we are to take that vote without giving opportunity to offer amendments?

Mr. RAY of New York. Will the gentleman repeat his inquiry? Mr. GOLDFOGLE. Do youmeantoaffordanopportunity-.Mr. RAY of New York. Later on--Mr. GOLDFOGLE. To offer amendments? Mr. ROBINSON of Indiana. The gentleman from New York

[Mr. RAY] does not mean to waive the reading of the bill? Mr. CLAYTON. I understand the proposition of the gentle

man from New York to be that we shall have two hours of general debate on the bill, he to control half the time and I the other half. I suggest to him that we make the time three hours-an hour and a half on each side. We shall have ample time.

Mr. PAYNE. I suggest to the gentleman that his proposition does not expedite matters. There is really no ' general debate " in the House. The bill is in the House, and must be so considered. Debate on any amendment is in order, subject, however, to the previous question, which may be called at any time. If a majority of the House should support the call for the previous quest ion, that, of course, will cut off all debate. An agreement to restrict " general debate" to two hours or three hours does not amount to anything, unless you cut off all debate.

It does not expedite business at all.

6938 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. JUNE 17,

l\fr. BARTLETT. Mr. Speaker, may I ask the gentleman from New York [Mr. PAYNE] a question? .

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, yes; if my colleague will permitit. Mr. RAY of New York. Certainly. Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Speaker, I desiretoknowinwhatsitua

tion the bill will be with reference to making amendments to the 1·eported bill. For instance, I desire to offer an amendment which I have ready.

Mr. PAYNE. I will say to the gentleman, as I understand it af_ter the bill has been read it is open to amendment with any point of it by any gentleman who gets the floor.

Mr. LANHAM. All amendments, however, subject to the point of order.

1\Ir. PAYNE. Certainly, but it is open to the offering of amendments. Mr. Speaker, I want to suggest a little further. Iunderst~nd this !s 3: sh01:t bill; and if the re~ding of the bill is dispensed With at this tune, 1t means that the bill shall not be read at all in the House, and I hope that will not be insisted upon. I think the bill ought to be read.

Mr. CRUMPACKER. Mr. Speaker, this is a very important bill, I think; and if we have not the time to give it sufficient consideration to-day, we ought not to undertake it. I shall object to anything that will shut off the right to offer amendments to the House bill; and if the time is put in the control of the gentleman from New York and the gentleman on the other side [Mr. CLAYTO~], there will be no opportunity.

Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I call for the regular order.

Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Speaker, I desire to make a parliamentary inquiry.

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. DALZELL). The gentleman will state it.

Mr. BARTLETT. Is it too late to make the point of order that this bill should be considered in the Committee of the Whole? I undertook to get the floor when the reading of it was started, but I was unable to do so.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will state that this bill is now being considered under an order of the House.

l\fr. RAY of New Y o;rk. Mr. Speaker, I call for the reading of the bill.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will read. The Clerk read as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That clause 15 of section 1 of an act entitled "An act to

establish a uniform system of bankruptcy throughout the United States," ~EJ1'~~~ed .July 1,1898, be, and the same is hereby, amended so as to read as

"(15) A person shall be deemed insolvent witltin the provisions of this a<:t whenever the aggregate of his property, exclusive of any property which he may have conveyed, transferred, concealed, or removed, or permitted to be concealed or removed, with intent to d efraud, hinder, or delay his creditors, or which is exempt from being taken on execution under the laws of the United States or of the State or T erritory in which the proceedings in bankruptcy were begun, shall not, at a fair valuation, be sufficient in amount to pay his debts."

Mr. DE ARMOND. Mr. Speaker, at this point I rise to make a parliamentary jnquiry. If an amendment is to be offered to this provision, must it be offered now?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will state to the gentleman that the regular order is to read the bill through. After the bill has been read through, amendments may be offered to any part of it by any gentleman who gets the floor for that purpose. The Clerk will continue the reading.

The Clerk read as follows: SEc. 2. That clause 5 of section 2 of said act be, and the same is hereby,

amended so as to read as follows: "(5) Authorize the business of bankrupts to be conducted for limited pe

riods by r eceivers, the marshals, or trustees, if necessary in the best interests of the estates, and allow such officers additional compensation for such services;"

SEa. 3. That clause 4, subdivision a, of section 3 of said act, be, and the same is hereby, amended so as to read as follows:

"or (4) made a general assi$nment for the benefit of his creditors, or, being insolvent, applied for or oeen put in charge of a receiver or trustee, under the laws of a State or Territory, or of the United States."

SEC. 4. That section 4 of said act be, and the same is hereby, amended so as to read as follows :

"SEC. 4. WHO MAY BECOME B.A.NKRUPTS.-a Any natural person and any unincorporated company owing debts shall be entitled to the benefits of this act as a voluntary bankrupt."

"b Any corporation engaged principally in manufacturing, trading, printing, publishing, mining, or mercantile pursuits shall be entitled to the benefits of this act as a voluntary bankrupt, on petition of an officer or stockholder of such corporation, 'duly authorized at a meeting of stockholders h eld for that :purpose by the vote of a majority in amount of the total stock of the corporation."

"c Any natural J,>erson, except a wage-earner, or a person engaged chiefly in farming or the tillage of the soil, any unincorporated company, and any CO!J?Oration engaged principally in manufacturmg, trading, printing, publishing, mining, or mercantile pursuits, owing debts to the amount of SitOOO or over, may be adjudged an involuntary bankrupt upon default or an liDpartial trial, and shall be subject to the provisions and entitled to the benefits of this act. Private bankers, but not national banks or banks incorporated under State or Territorial laws, may b e adjudged involuntary bankrupts."

" d The bankruptcy of a corporation shall not release its officers, directors, or stockholders, as such, from any liability under the laws of a State or Territory or of the United States."

SEc. 5. That subdivision b of section 14 of said act be, and the same is hereby, amended so as to read as follows:

"b The judge shall hear the application for a discharge and such proofs a;nd pleas .as ~ay be ~a~e ~n opposition thereto by parties i.h interest, at such time. as WJl:l g1ve part1es.m mterest a r~aso~ble opp?rtunity to be fully heard, and mvestigate the mer1ts of the applicatiOn and diScharge the applicant unless ~e has (1) co~mi~ted an off~nse runishable by imprisonment as herein provided; o~ (2) With mtent to concea his financial condition, destroyed, concealed, or failed to keep books of accounts or records from which such condi~on might be ascerta~ned; .o! (3) obtained property on credit upon a matermlly false statementm WTiting made by him to any person for the purpose of obtaining credit, or of being communicated to the trade or to the person from whom he obtained such property on credit; or (4) made a fraudulent tra~sfer o~ any por?.on of his prope~ty.to ~ny person; or (5) been granted or demed ~ discharge m bankruptcy Within SIX years; or (6) m the cour e of his proce~dmgs refused to obey any lawful order of or to answer any material question approved by the court."

SEc. 6. That section 17 of said act be, and the same is hereby n.mended so as to read as follows: • '

"SEa. 17. DEBTS NOT AFFECTED BY .A. DTSCH.A.ROE.-a A discharge in bankruptcy shall release a bankrupt from all of his provable debts except s~ch .as (1) are d.u~ as. a t~x le~ed by t~e United States, the State, 'county, disti:w~, or muniCipality m which he res1des; (2) are liabilities for frauds or obt:nnm.g .PrO~I:tY }:>Y false pretenses or false representations, or for wilifui and malicwus lilJUl'les to the p erson or property of another or for alimony due or to become due, or for maintenance or support of wife or child or for seduction of an unma.rri~d female, or for criminal conversation; (3) have not been. duly scheduled m time for proof and allowance, with the name of the creditor if known to the bankrupt. unless such creditor had notice or actual knowledge of the proce~ngs in ·:ro~kruptcy; or (4) were created by his fraud, embezzlement, IniSappropr:tation, or defalcation while acting as an officer or in any fiduciary capacity."

SEa. 7. That subdivisions a and b of section 18 of said act be, and the same are hereby, amended so as to r ead as follows :

"a Upo~ the ~ling .of a petition for involuntary bankruptcy, service thereof, With~ wnt of subpcena, shall be mad~ upon the person therein named as defendant m the same manner that serviCe of such proce is now had upon the commencement of a suit in equity in the courts of the United States; except that it shall l?e retu~able within ten days, unless the judge shall for cause fix a longer trme: but m case personal service can not be made then notice shall be given by publication in the same manner and for the sam~ time as provided by law for notice by publication in suits to enforce a legal or equitable lien in courts of the United States, except that, unless the judge shall otherwise direct. the order• shall ba published not more than once a week for two consecutive weeks, and the return d.'l.y shall be not more than twenty days after the first publication."

"b The bankrupt or any creditor , may appear and plead to the petition on or before the return day, or within such further time as the court may allow."

SEC. 8. That subdiVIsion a of section 21 of said act b e, and the same is hereby, amend ed so as to read as follows:

"a .A. court of bankruptcy may, upon application of any officer, bankrupt or creditor , by order require any designated person1 including the bankrupt and his wife, to appear in court or before a referee or the judge of any State court, to be examined concerning the acts, conduct, or pro:perty of a bankrupt whose estate is in process of administration under this act: Provided That the wife shall not be so examined except as to business ti·ansactions tO which she is or haB been a party, and she may be examined to determine that fact."

SEC. 9. That subdivision b of section 23 of said act be, and the same is hereby, amended so as to read as follows:

"b Sut'ts by the trustee shall only be brought or prosecuted in the courts where the bankrupt whose estate is being administered by such trustee might have brou(J'ht or prosecuted them if proceedings in bankruptcy had not been instituted, lmless by consent of the proposed defendant, except suits f<?r .tJ:le recovery o~ property ~n?-~r section 60, subdivision b, section 67, subdlVlSlOn e, and section 70, subiliVISwn e."

SEc. 10. That subdivision a of section 40 of said act be, and the same is hereby, amended so as to read as follows:

"a Referees shall receive as full compensation for their services ~;>ayable after they are rendered, a fee of S20 deposited with the clerk at the' time the petition is filed in each case, except when a fee is not required from a voluntary bankrupt and 50 cents for every proof of claim filed for allowance to be paid from th~ estate, if any, as~ :part of the cost of administration, ~nd from estates which have been administered before them 1 per cent commissions on all moneys received ~nd paid ~ut by the trustee, or one-half of 1 per cent on the amount to be pa1d to creditors upon the confirmation of a composition."

SEC. 11. That subdivision a · of section 48 of said act be, and the same is hereby, amended so as to read as follows:

"a Trustees shall receive for their services, payable after they are rendered, a fee of $10 deposited with the clerk at the trme the petition is filed in each case, except when a fee is not required from a voluntary banla·upt and from estates which they have administered such commissions on all moheys • received and paid out by them as may be allowed by the courts, not to exceed 10 per cent on fue first $500 or less, 5 1Jer cent on the next $Ul00 or part thereof, 3 per cent on the next $8,500 or part thereQf, and 1 per cent on such moneys in excess of $10,000, In the event of the confirmation of a compo ition after the qualification of a trustee, the court may allow such trustee not :~·~,than one-half commissions on the moneys or property received by

SEc. 12. That subdivision g of section 57 of said act be, and the same i~ hereby, amended so as to read as follows: · "~The claims of creditors who have received preferences, voidable under section 60, subdivision b, or to whom conve-yances, transfers, assignments, or incumbrances, void or voidable, under sectwn 67, subdivision e, or section 70, subdivision e have b een made or given, shall not be allowed unless such creditors shaii surr ender such preferences, conveyances, transfers, assignments, or incumbrances."

SEc.l3. That subdivisions a and b of section 60 of said act be, and the same are hereby, amended so as to read as follows:

"a A person shall be deemed to have given a preference if, being insolvent, he has, within four months before the filing of the petition, or after the filing of the petition and before the adjudication, procured or suffered a judgment to be entered against himself in favor of any person, or made a transfer of any of his property, and the effect of the enforcement of such judgment or transfer will be to enable any one of his creditors to obtain a greater percentage of hls debt than any other of such creditors of the same class. Where the preference consists in a transfer, such p eriod of fom· months shall not expire until four months after the date of the recordin~ or registering of the transfer, if by law such recording or registering is reqmred or permitted, or, if not, from the date when the beneficiary takes notorious, exclusive, or continuous possession of the property t ransferred. . "b If a. bankrupt shall have given a preference, and the person receiving it, or to be benefited thereby, or his agent acting therein, shall have had

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE. 6939 reasonable cause to believe that it was intended thereby to give a. preference, it shall be voidable by the trustee, and he may recover the property or its value from such person. And, for the purpoEe of such recovery, any court of bankruptcy, as hereinbefore defined, and any State court which would have had jurisdiction if bankruptcy had not intervened, shall have concurreD t jui"isdiction."

SEc. 14. That subdivision a and clause two of subdivision b of section 64 of mid act be, and the same are here by, amended so as to read as follows:

"a The court shall order the trustee to pay all taxes le~ally due and owing by the bankrupt to the United States, State, county, distnct, or municipality, except such taxes as are alien on a homestead claimed by or set off to him as exempt from being taken on execution, in advance of the payment of dividends to creditors, and upon filing the receipts of the proper public officers for such payment he shall be credited with the amount thereof, and in case any question arises as to the amount or legality of any such tax, the same shall be heard and determined by the com·t.

"(2) the filing fees paid by creditors in involuntary cases, and, where property of the bankrupt, transfe.rred or concealed by him either before or after the filing of the petition, shall have been recovered by the efforts and at the expense of one or more creditors, the reasonable expenses of such creditors in so doing."

SEc. 15. That subdivision e of section 6'7 and subdivision e of Eection '71) of said act be, and the same are hereby, amended by adding at the end of each such subdivision the words:

"For the purpose of such recovery any court of bankru:ptcy as hereinbefore defined, and any State court which would have had jUrlSdiction if bankruptcy had not int~rvened , sl:all have concurrent jurisdiction."

SEC. 16. That said act is alEo amended by adding thereto a new section, section 71, to read as follows:

"SEC. 71.. That the clerks of the several district com·m of the United States shall prepare and keep in their respect~ve offices complete and convenient indexes of all petitions and discharges in bankruptcy heretofore or hereafter filed in the said courts, and sha.ll, when requested so to do, issue certificates of sea.rch certifying as to whether or not any such petitions or discharges have been filed; and said clerks shall be entitled to receive for such

. certificates the same fees as now allowed by law for certificates as to judgments in said courts: Pro1:ided, That said bankruptcy indexes and dockets. as well as the indexes of judgments in the several courts of the United States. shall at all times be open to inspection and examination by all persons or corporations for the purpose of transcription or otherwise without any fee or charge therefor."

Mr. R.A.Y of New York and Mr. BARTLETT rose. Mr. BARTL~'~T. Mr. Speaker, I desire to offer an amend

ment. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gen

tleman from New York, in charge of the bill. Mr. BARTLETT. I want to offer an amendment. The SPEAKER pro t empore. The Chair thinks the gentleman

will have an opportunity later. Mr. RAY of New York. The gentleman will be recognized at

the proper time. Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a parlia

mentary inquiry at this point. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it. Mr. BARTLETT. I desire t.o know when will be the proper

time to offer an amendment to this bill under the rules. I understood the Chair, in answer to an inquiry from myself, to state that when the bill was read amendments were in order.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. That is correct. Whenever the gentleman gets the floor he can offer an amendment, but the Chair has recognized the gentleman in charge of the bill, the gentleman from New York [Mr. RAY].

Mr. L.a.cEY rose. Mr. RAY of New York. 1\fr. Epeaker I call for order. 1\fr. LACEY. Mr. Speaker, I aesire to make a parliamenta1·y

inquiry. I would like to know whether by the permission of these amendments, or the waiving of the question as to these amendm ents, that will prevent the calling up of the committee amendments later on. There is one committee amendment that I am very much concerned in, and that is the proposition to repeal the bankruptcy law.

l\1r. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I be~ieve I have the floor. Mr. LACEY. I have the right to make a parliamentary in

quiry and have been recognized to do so. · The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will state to the gen

tleman from Iowa that there are no committee amendments. Mr. LANHAM. Yes; they are all committee amendments. Mr. LACEY. There are a number of committee amendments,

Mr. Speaker, and then there is an amendment proposed by the minority of the committee.

Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I desire to say--The SPEAKER pro tempore. There are no committee amend

ments, so far as the Chair knows, and the minority amench!J.ent will have to be offered in the individual capacity of an amendment. The gentleman from New York is recognize:i.

Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I desire to state that this is a legal proposition, a business proposition and it is not one where those discussing it may indulge in flights of oratory or story telling, but where we must talk as business men on a business matter. I trust I may talk to the House in a business way, and have the attention of the members while I do this, because it is a subject in which the people, the business interests of this co1.mtry, are interested, as they are interested in any other question affecting their business interests. The present bank-1-u.ptcy law was approved and went into operation on the 1st day of .T u1y, 1898, and has been in operation since that time. The

law provides in its terms that returns shall be made to the Attorney-General of the United States, and that lie shall have a man in his office whose business it is to investigate the operations and workings of the bankruptcy law and to make his ).'eport.

In a few moments I will read from that report in order that you may know the opinion of the Attorney-General of the United States and of the Department of Justice. During the last session of the last Congress I, as chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, over which I have the honor to preside in this Congress also, received from all over the country communications recommending cert.ain changes in the bankruptcy law. For the reason that one of the important questions involved was before the Supreme Court of the United States for its adjudication, it was deemed wise to await the decision of that court before Congress should take any action in the matter.

However, in order that I might test the temper of the country, that I might know the opinion of the bu iness interests of the country, I caused to be sent out about 20,00 inquiries to the leading lawyers , judges, and business houses all through the United States asking whether or not they desired to have the bankruptcy law retained or repealed; whether they deemed it best for the interests of the country to have a uniform bankruptcy law or to have none, and to leave these matters to the adjudication of the various States. I also asked these gentlemen to make inquiries of their business friends and to communicate their information, to state their approval or disapproval of a bill which I introduced in the House during that session and a copy of which was sent to them. I also asked them to give suggestions as to other amendments that might be deemed wise or advisable to make.

In reply I received over 16,000 answers from all over the United States-from the Pacific coast, from the South, from the West, from the East.

I have those replies. The letters speak for themselves. They are not printed circulars, but they are letters written by men of the classes I have named. Over 90 per cent insist upon the retention of the banln-uptcy law upon the statute books. About 7 per cent favor a repeal, but all said that if not repealed they wanted the amendments proposed by the bill. About 3 per cent of those who did not favor the retention of the law absolutely said, ''Amend the law and then retain it." So that less than 8 per cent of those who replied to this challenge sent out all over the United States favored a repeal of the law. The same answer comes from all sections of the country and from all business interests, I may say.

Now, what does the Attorney-General say in regard to this law? You will find his views on pages 389, 390, and 391 of his report for the year 1901. I quote from this report as follows: [Excerpt from Exhibit U, Report on Bankruptcy Matters, byE. C. Branden

burg, in charge of bankruptcy matters, contained in report of the Attorney-General for 1901.]

NOVEMBER 15, 1901. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL.

Sm: The present law "establishing a uniform system of bankruptcy throughout the United States," which was enacted July1, 1198, has now been in force a little more than three years, this being longer than the operation of either the act of 1800 or 1841, and but eight years shorter than the act of 1867 which remained in force about eleven years notwithstanding its many inherent defects. The causes attending the repeal of the earlier laws are well known and need here no comment. The present law has materially profited by the experience gained under the earlier laws, and as a consequence contains the good features of all while avoiding many of their weak points. * * ~,

THE PRACTICAL OPERATION OF THE LAW.

The past year discloses the fact, as was anticipated in the earlier reports upon the practical operation of the bankruptcy law, that the number of volunta!y petitions would sho~·tly .decrea~e in view C?f the belief that a good proportion of th ose filed durmg Its earlier operation were those of old insolvents seek in~ to avail themselves of its advantages by securing a discharge coextensive wlt n the limits of the United States. The present report shows that but 1'7.015 >oluntary petitions were filed, which is more than 3,000 less than were filed during either of the two preceding year's operation of the law. It may b e safely said that these report3 are a fair criterion of business conditions, and the fact that more persons have not seen fit to take advantage of the law is clearly .indicative of the continued business prosperity which has prevailed for the past few years. * * ':'

Several important opinions construing the law have been r endered during the past year by the Supreme Court of the United States. The most important and far-reaching is that of Carson, Pirie, Scott & Co. v. The Chicago Title and Trust Company. In this case the question involved was as to whether • or not a creditor who had received a payment on account was obliged to surrender the same before proving his claim for the balance, and the Supreme Court by a vote of 5 to 4 held that this should be done. As this decision reach es the very foundation of our commercial credit system it has received considerable criticism pro and con, and various recommendations have been sug~ested with reference to amending the law in this respect. While the feeling is almost universal that this provision of the law should receive the attention of C<>ngress, yet a difference of opinion exists, even among the comm er cial community, as to what the amendment should be.

A bill was introduced in Congress by Representative RAY suggesting various amendments of the law, all of which have received the most careful and detailed attention on the part of the m erchants of the country as well a various legal associations, and on the whole, if enacted, would materially strengthen the weak points which the practical operation of the law has developed, with the result that the United States would have one of the most equitable b?.nkruptcy laws, so far as all classes, debtor and creditor, are con-cerned that exists in any country on the globe. ·

While it is, perhaps, not in the province of this Department to make recommendations, yet It is suggested that if Congress decides to undertake the extensive amend.ment of the law then the Ray bill would certainly remove

6940 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. J UNE 17,.

most of the weak points which the practical operation of the law has devel-oped. ·

If, however, Congress does not intend to m ake such extensive amendments, but prefers that they should be limited, then it seems to us that, as recommended in our previous reports, section 14, with r eference to the question of discharges, should be amended by making it more difficult to secure a discharge on the part of a dishonest debtor. Secondly, that section 23, which was held by the Supreme Court in the case of Bardes v. Hawarden Bank to restrict the trustee in instituting suit for the recovering fraudulent transfers or preferences to the State court unless by consent of the defendant, be amended by giving the Federal court jurisdiction of such actions without the consent of the defendant. This will result in substituting the much more expeditious machinery of the Federal court, in whJ.ch bankrupt matters are entitled to priority, for that of the State court, in which the action of the trustee is more or less dependent upon the grace of the court, it being recognized that Congress has no authority to impose any jurisdiction upon a State com·t, and that therefore it lies within the power of such com·ts to delay such proceeding!3 or entertain or refuse jurisdiction as they see fit. * * *

It might be suggested in this connection that the fees as now allowed by the law are reduced to a minimum, and that in order to maintain the high standard of the referees, many of whose abilities are unsm·passed and whose attainments might in another line demand a greater return, the fees should be revised so that they shall receive compensation commensurate with the amount of labor and skill required of them. Many of these referees are the pears of the judges of the Federal bench, and to secure a proper administration of the law such men should be retained in office. It would therefore seem wise that Congress should amend the law by fixing their fees at some reasonable amount, and thus avoid the serious conflict now arising whereby one judge construes the law liberally relatin~ to the question of fees and allows a number of miscellaneous charges, realizing that the referee is underp3.id and expecting through this means to some extent compensate him for nis labors while the judge in an adjoining district may be a strict constructionist anc\ allow nothing except such as is specifically provided by the law. This results in great hardship, and Congress should make the fees uniform instead of leaving them to the discretion of the various courts.

That the bankruptcy law is meeting with approval on all hands is best attested by the fact that the American Bar Association in its recent convention in Denver-< and the National Association of Credit .1\Ien at its convention at Buffalo, ana other organizations have by resolution reiterated their belief in the advantages of the law and recommended that it be kept upon our statute books. There are, of course, isolated cases where exception is taken, but when sifted it usually develops that such opposition grows out of its operation in someway working injm·iously to an individual, and not because the law is not advantageous to the community of the United States as a whole.

In other words, here is the deliberate statement and opinion of the Attorney-General of the United States, after examining the law, after watching its operations and workings for nearly three years, and after studying this bill-here is his deliberate opinion that with these amendments we shall have the most just and equitable bankruptcy law of any nation on the face of the earth.

Now, I wish to say in that connection that there is no civilized nation on the face of the earth, doing great business and having great commercial interests, that does not have a bankruptcy law on its statute books. And with the growth and development of this great nation, with our close connections by telegraph, telephone, and railroad, Chicago is the immediate neighbor of New York City; Boston and San Francisco sit side by side in the commercial world. A few moments, and they confer with each other; and it is therefore of importance to manufacturing, mercantile, and business interests of every character that we have some uniformity of law in this regard.

When the bankruptcy bill was introduced by the gentleman now Speaker of the House I was at his right hand, and we coneidered it in the Fifty-fifth Congress and brought it in here and asked its enactment. Some of the great rich business firms of the country opposed it. They said they were able to take care of themselves; that they could and did employ lawyers in all the States, in all the great cities, and that they could take care of themselves; that they understood the divers laws of the various States; but to-day nearly all of those large firms advocate these amendments and the retention of the law upon the statute books. That demand is here in the shape of thousands of telegrams and letters.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I desire to call the attention of the House for a few moments briefly to what this bill does. It has been reported to the House now for some months. I have sent out thousands and thousands of copies of the 'bill-at one time over 10,000 copies-and I asked criticism; I asked suggestions of lawyers, merchants, mercantile firms, business men, North, East, South,

• and West, and no substantial amendment to the bill has been suggested from any source.

Now, I claim no credit for this bill. It is the work of the best judges, the best lawyers, the best practical business men in the United States from all sections of the United States. Before I introduced it, it was submitted in all quarters, to bar associations, to mercantile associations, manufacttuing associations; and laboring men associations were called together and considered the bill, and their amendments and suggestions were agreed to; and it was only when the bill had been made satisfactory to all, when they all agreed to it and said that it was just, equitable, and proper, then only was it introduced by me in the shape in which it is now presented to the country. Now, what does this bill do?

Mr. Speaker, permit me to ask the Chair at the expiration of half an hour to call my attention to the time, so that I may yield the floor.

The first amendment will make the law more ·uniform and equitable by providing ·that where insolvency is the question at issue assets claimed to be exempt shall not be counted in ascer: taining the aggregate of the debtor's property.

The second amendment simply authorizes what is now done by the courts; that is, it authorizes the court to allow additional compensation when the business of a bankrupt is conducted for a limited period by the receiver, marshal, or trustee in the interest of the creditors.

The next amendment makes the equivalent acts of a generai assignment by an insolvent person, a voluntary accounting of an insolvent partnership by action brought by one of the partners and an application for a receivership of an insolvent corporatio~ each acts of bankruptcy. This makes the law more uniform and will reduce many of the inequities now practiced on creditors.

The next amendment simply provides that those corporations which can now be adjudged involuntary bankrupts may become voluntary bankrupts on the petition of an officer or stockholder duly a~th?riz~d at a meeting called for that purpose by a vote of the maJOnty m amount of the total stock of the corporation, and adds mining corporations to those now covered by the law.

As a safeguard and to pTevent injustice it .is provided by a further amendment that the bankruptcy of a corporation shall ~ot !·~lease its officers, directors, or stockho~ders as such from any hability under the laws of a State or Terntory or of the United States. That is, if these officers or any of them by wrongdoing or violating the law of the State have incurred any liability they are not to be discharged from such obligations or liabilities. ..

The next amendment, section 5 of the bill, makes definite and certain the purpose of the law as it was framed, to wit: That the words "in contemplation of bankruptcy" mean a present or future state of insolvency and purpose to take advantage of the law. The amendment is necessary because -the courts have held that the words "in contemplation of bankruptcy" mean with a view to the actual filing of a petition, and therefore many men have been discharged who ought not to have been, because it was impossible to prove that they committed the fraudulent acts mentioned at a time when they had in mind the filing of a petition in bankruptcy, although they did have in mind a present or future state of insolvency and committed the acts for the purpose of defrauding their creditors.

This amendment also provides four additional grotmds for refusing a discharge in bankruptcy: (1) Obtaining property on credit on materially false statements; (2) making a fraudulent transfer of property; (3) having been granted or denied a discharge in bankruptcy within six years, and (4) having refused to obey the lawful orders of the court or having refused to answer material questions approved by the court. No person who has been guilty of any of these fraudulent acts should be discharged, and a person who has refused to obey the order of the court ought not to be discharged, and it is quite clear that no person should have the benefit of the act as a voluntary bankrupt oftener than once in six years. Some men in some of the large cities have made bankruptcy a profession, and it is proposed by the amend-ment to stamp out these practices. ·

Now, as to the amendment that the courts may allow certain officers when they take the property of an estate into their custody additional compensation for that extra work. Under the law as it stands now the court frequently puts a bankrupt's property in the hands of a receiver. In order to have it taken care of, it 1·equires a large expense to the estate, whereas if we have this provision of the law, it will lessen the expense of the Administration of the bankrupt law.

Mr. GILBERT. Will the return of no property found be conclusive of the insolvency under the amendment?

Mr. RAY of New York. Oh, we do not change the law in that regard at all.

The next amendment provides that liabilities for frauds, etc., as described in the act shall not be released by the discharge. As the law now is these liabilities must have been reduced to judgment or else the bankrupt is discharged. This amendment is in , the interest of justice and honest dealing and honest conduct. This amendment further provides that a discharge in banlnuptcy shall not release the bankrupt from liability for alimony due or to become due the wife, or for maintenance or support of wife or child, or for seduction of an unmarried female, or for criminal conversation. It seems to the committee, and this is the universal sentiment, that the bankrupt ought not to be discharged from liabilities of this description.

The next amendment shortens the time for joining issue in involuntary cases. The expeditious disposition of an estate in bankruptcy is what all creditors desire, and this amendment is in the interest of all parties and simply prevents undue delay.

The next amendment permits the wife to be examined as a wit~ ness as to business transactions to which she is or has been a par ty. In some of the States the wife may now be examined the

••

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 6941 same as any other witne s. In other States she can not be, and th1s amendment, carefully guarded by a proviso, simply allows her examination as to business transactions to which she has been a party. To this there can be no reasonable objection.

The next amendment is in the interest of the speedy settlement of bankrupt estates. It has been held that actions to recover property belonging to the estate and fra.udently withheld or disposed of must be brought in the local courts. In great cities this works a practical denial of justice, as the calendars of the State courts are many times years behind, and it is conceded that in the city of New York a case can not be reached for trial in less than from two to three years after the action is brought, unless for some Teason it is preferred.

The next amendment gives a larger fee to the clerk. It is conceded on all hands that the present fee is so small that the clerk can not afford to do the work required of him. The increase given by this amendment is very small, indeed, and can not be reasonably objected to.

The same remarks apply to the next amendment. The next amendment, section 12 of the bill, is the most impor

tant of all. Under the holding of the Supreme Court of the United States in Pirie v . Chicago Title and Trust Company (182 U. S., 438), that section 60, subdivision a, is a definition of a preference, it followed that payments made in good faith and other bona fide transactions after actual insolvency, though in due course of trade and business and without knowledge or reasonable cause to believe that a preference was intended, must be, under section 57 g, sunendered before a creditor who received such a payment could prove the balance of his debt. This was never intended by the framers of the law, and it works obvious injustice and is the source of 99 per cent of"' the objections to the law. The amendments proposed by section 12 of the bill and the other sections remedy all this.

The next amendment puts the four months' c'llmse in subdivision a instead. of subdivision b, and where it ought to be. AB the law now stands, a preferential mortgage may be given and the creditor preferred, by withholding it from record fmu months, be able to dismiss the trustees' suit to recover the same, although it was recorded within the four months' period.

The next amendment simply provides that the trustee shall not be compelled to pay the accrued taxes on the homestead set-off to the bankrupt from the balance of the estate.

The further amendment to section 64 of the act simply provides that the creditor may be allowed the reasonable expense of reclaiming property illegally transferred or concealed.

The next amendment is in line with the others, providing concurrent jurisdiction in the State and United States courts, and is in the interest of a speedy settlement of estates.

The last amendment is one generally demanded, and is in the interest of all persons who deal with property. It requires the clerks to prepare and keep indexes of all petitions and discharges in bankruptcy and to issue certificates in relation thereto when required. It also requir·es that these be kept open to inspection and examination. It is fi·equently desirable to know whether a person has filed a petition in bankruptcy, and also whether he has been discharged, and it is many times impossible within a reasonable time to ascertain these facts in the absence of convenient indexes.

Annexed hereto is a more complete analysis of these proposed amendments, useful and" convenient to the lawyer, and in same attention is called to the decisions of the courts relating to the amended sections.

In proper ca-seA and under proper restrictions those who have been unfortunate in business should be released from their debts on surrendering all their property to their creditors. But the law should be so framed as to prevent injustice and improper and indiscdminate discharges, and should also prevent its being availed of by the professional bankrupt or the dishonest debtor.

The involuntary features are most commendable, for through their instrumentalities fraudulent and unjust preferences are prohibited and there is greater confidence in the business' world. Much of the faultfinding with the bankruptcy law has come from those who, having claims against some insolvent person, have been unable to collect for years (and these persons knew that they vould not collect), but they have seen the debtor discharged under the bankruptcy law and have seen him reenter the business world, and by the exercise of his talent and industry become a valuable factor in the business world. These debtors could never have thus reentered business had it not been for the bankruptcy law, and this fact the creditor overlooks. He seems to think that but for the bankruptcy law he would have been paid under this improved condition of the debtor.

That dishonest men do avail themselves of the law and by fraud and perjury secure discharges can not be denied, but these instances are very rare, and when we contrast the great army of honest and industrious men who have been put upon their feet

through the instrumentalities of the.bankruptcy law with the very few dishonest persons who have been discha1·ged under it, we must all concede that the law is wise and productive of great good and ought to be retained, and amended when experience shows that amendments ar e necessary in the interest of the business world.

Then we have found by experience another thing which I desire to call more particular attention to, because it is important, gentlemen, and that is that we have in some of the g~·eat cities and business centers. of the United States men who make it a business to run in debt and then take advantage of the bankruptcy act. In some cases within two years a man has taken advantage of the law twice, and in another locality, I think, in less than three years a man had taken advantage of it twice and was seeh."'ing an opportunity to take advantage of it a third time. Therefore it is that we amend the law and provide that no man shall take the benefit of this law oftener than once in six years, and that will cut off that class of men that we may characterize as professional banluupts.

Then again, we found that in the construction of the law that has been put upon it the grounds provided for refusing a discharge from bankruptcy are not ample, and therefore we have added several, and you will find in the bill a provision in section 5 amending section 14, giving additional causes for refusing a discharge in bankruptcy.

Mr. SHALLENBERGER. We have State laws providing for the administration of insolvent State banks. I would like to ask t"tte gentleman whether this would make any change in reference to that rna tter?

Mr. RAY of New York. It might in certain cases, but not necessarily so.

~fr. SHALLENBERGER. Would they be under the control of the Federal authority?

Mr. RAY of New York. They might, but not necessarily so. Now, again, Mr. Speaker, coming to subdivision a and b, division 18, that.merely expedites the closing up of an estate. That is all it does. We go along further-and I will not take the time to deal at length with all the little verbal changes which have no partim:uar effect on the law; they are simple and easily understood. One other provision: In the g~·eat cities like New York and Chicago, if you can find and seek to recover property which has been transferred in fi·aud of the bankrupt act in the State court, we find the settlement of the estate, in some cases, may be postponed three or four years because of delays in the State courts by reason of the immense business done in these courts. Therefore, in the interest of both the debtor and the creditor class, in the interest of speedy disposition of these questionsmatters that arise in bankruptcy- we give the United States courts concurrent jurisdiction in these cases. This is recommended by all the lawyers, all the judges, all the business men everywhere. It can do no harm, and it can meet with no objection from any gentleman unless he is absolutely opposed to the F ederal com·t having jurisdiction in any case whatever.

Now I come to the most important amendment of all included in this bill.

Mr. GffiBERT. If the gentleman will pardon me, I understood him to say that this included unincorporated companies. If a company ha-s no existence, no entity, will the discharge in bankruptcy operate to relieve the members of the company in those cases where they have no chartJer, for instance?

Mr. RAY of New York. It would release them from their debts and liabilities, except any liability they had incurred in an official capacity in having represented the company as an officer.

Now, one of the most important amendments, and it is perhaps the most important amendment, and is necessary under this condition of facts. Under the law as it now stands, and under the interpretation put upon it by the Supreme Court, it was held that if A is doing business with B, if A gives credit to B to an extent of $20,000, for instance, and B has paid nothing on account, but has made his purchases at different times of different items fi·om time to time, the debt is all due and past due although the items of credit were given at different times. Now, A says to B: "Before I give you any further credit you must pay on account." So B pays to A $15,000 of the $20,000 on account. It is paid in good faith, it is received in good faith, it is applied in good faith. It was paid on a debt past due, with all the items past due.

Now, gentlemen, ought not that to be retained? Is not that an honest payment whenever made, paid and received in good faith? But the court held, giving const ruction to the act as it stands, that if A on the faith of that payment should give credit for $10,000 more the same day, so that B then owed $15,000 instead of $.20,000, then if B should happen through some unforseen circumstances to go into bankruptcy within the next four months, that before A can prove up his debt for $15,000 he must return the

-6942 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. - J UNE 17,

$15,000 paid to him and received by him in good faith. Now, have I made that plain to the gentleman from illinois?

Mr. HOPKINS. I think you have to me. Mr. RAY of New York. I tried to make it plain so that all

business men can understand it; we have so framed this bill that lawyers, judges, and men everywhere say we have corrected the evil. Justice will be done. ·

So that if A is giving credit to B and the debt is due or past due, and B pays money on account of that debt in good faith and that money is received in good faith-if there is no dishonesty in the transaction-then the creditor may go on in case of bankr uptcy and prove up the balance of his debt. And that is as it ought to be.

Mr. HOPKINS. That is perfectly clear to me. But the question which I wanted to put to the gentleman was in regard to the bankruptcy of a partnership. Suppose that the gentleman from New York and the gentleman from Indiana [Mr~ CRUMP ACKER] form a partnership under the name of RAY & CRUMP A.C:KER. Suppose that the gentleman from New Ymk is worth 100,000 in his own right and the gentleman from Indiana is worth a similar sum in his own right. But suppo!'e the partnership assets amount to only $20,000. Now, can the members of that firm come in and get a discharge in bankn1ptcy as a partnership without affecting the individual interests of either?

Mr. RAY of New York. No; we could not do that unless the partnership were a limited one. We do not propose to permit an association debt to be discharged in that way. We do not propose to allow a discharge until the property of the individual members of the firm has been exhausted, unless it be a case where, under the laws of the State, the partnership liability has been limited. We do not undertake to interfere with the laws of any State in that regard.

Now, Mr. Speaker, will you kindly inform me how much time I have occupied?

The SPEAKER pr o tempore. The gentleman has occupied twenty-six minutes.

Mr. LESSLER. I should like to ask the gentleman this question: In his report it is stated:

It is not thought expedient at this time to attempt to frame a clause speer fying what transactions are protected.

Would it not be wise to insert something of that kind in this bill? .

Mr. RAY of New York. We have done so fully, and the judges and lawyers of the country say that the matter is fully covered; that every business interest is protected.

Mr. LESSLER. Would it not be better covered if you would put in a proviso that bona fide transactions are pr otected?

Mr. RAY of New York. Tbat is covered now in express words. The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. PoWERS] conferred with leading lawyers and judges of his section. I conferred with leading lawyers and judges of New Yo1·k. Gentlemen from Chicago, St. Louis, San Francisco, New Orleans, Charleston, S. C.; Richmond, Va.,and all through the North and South say that the section as now an1ended will do just exactly what we claim it will do, and they approve the bill.

Now, I add a careful analysis of the bill: ANALYSIS OF BILL TO AMEND BANKRUPTCY LAW.

Section 1: Amends clause (15) of section 1 of the law so that where insolvency is the question at issue assets claimed to be exempt shall not be counted in ascert&ining the "aggregate of his (the debtor's) property," thus doing away with an injustice growing out of the n ew definition of insolvency in States that allow large exemptions. (See In re Baumann (Tenn.), 96 Fed., 946.)

Section 2: Designed to permit the allowance of extra compensation to trustees when they do more than merely collect and distribute (as, for instance, when they are ordered to continue a going business for a considerable period of time), their fee~ bein~ now limited by section 48 to commissions on dividends to unsecured creditors. (See In reEpstein (Ark.), 109Fed.,879, and the cases cited.)

Sec non 3: Intended to brlng about the result that the equivalent acts of (1) a general assignment by an insolvent person, (2) a voluntary accounting of an insolvent partnership by action brought by one of the partners, and (3) an application for a receivership of an insolvent corporation shall each be acts of bankruptcy, instead of the first (1) only, as now. Besides making the law more uniform, this change will reduce to a minimum present notorious inequities -practiced on creditors through in-the-family accountings and dh·ector ial r eceiverships under State laws. (See In re Empire Metallic Bedstead Company (New York), 95 Fed., 957; Id., on appeal, 981, and subsequent cases uniformly balding the same doctrine.)

Section 4: Amend section 4 of the law by (1) providing that those corporations which can now be adjudged involuntary bankrnJ?ts may, on a vote of stockholders representing a majority of the stock, petition for voluntary bankruptcy, (2) adding mining corporations to those that are affected by the law , aud (3) affirmatively declaring that the bankruptcy of a corpor ation shall not release its officers, as such, from any liability created by law.

The first (1) restores that portion of the firi:!t paragraph of section 37 of the ~;nkruptcy law of 1t:67 which permitted business corporations to file voluntarr petitions~ with, however, some additional restrictions for the protection or stockholaers-a change the necessity of which is emphasized by the prevailing tendency in important commercial States to supersede partnerships completely by small corporations.

The second (2) IS made necessary by the uniform holdings of the courts that mini ag corporations, which are of p rimary importan ce in some p arts

of th~ country, .are not am on~ those now enumerated in section 4 b. (See I n re Chicago-Joplin Lead and Zmc Co. (Mo.), 1G4 Fed., 67; McNamara v.E:elena. Coal Co. (Ala.), 5 Am. B. R., 48; In re Keystone Coal Co. (Pa.), 6 Am. B R 377.) . .,

The third (3) is merely precautionary-that there may be no doubt about the effect of the discharge of a corporation. (See In re Marshall Paper Co 102 Fed., 872.) .,

Section 5: Modifies one of the present objections to a discharge and adds four new objections.

It has been uniformly held under the present law that "in contemplation o! pankruntcy" (sec. 14 b, 2) means with a view to the actual filing of apetitiOn, and not m erely a present or future state of insolvency. (In re Halmall. (Iowa), 92 Fed., 512; In re Carmichael (Iowa), 96 Fed., 594; In re Morgan (Ark.), 101 Fed., 982.) This has made this objection to a discharge practically valueless. The amendment dl·ops this elem ent of proof out, as well as two or three other words, which are either tautological or unnecessary.

The very g~neral complaiJ?.t ~hat the pre.sent _law lets too many rogues escape fro~ _their de?ts-:-that It IS weak m Its discharge fe9.tm·es-is met by four additiOnal obJections, carefully selected from a multitude of sugges-tions made. ·

The first (3) is almost identical with that proposed by S.1035 Fifty-fifth Congress, first session (section 51 b (3), the Lindsay bill), and adopted by the House substitute. (See CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Fifty-fifth Congr ess, vol. 31, p. 2039, sec. 13 b, 3.)

'l'he second (4) is a rephrasing of an objection to discharge found in section 29 of the law of 1867, and "transfer," now including "conveyance," "mortgage," "payment," etc., means the same thing. In effect it is the same as section 51 b (4) of the Lindsay bill and as section 13 b (4) of the House substitute, above.

The thh·d (5) will put an end to the P?ssib;lity of d~btors going through bankruptcy every ~onth. ~he new perwd, Sl.X years, IS an average arrived at from the suggestiOns received. (Compare Report of National Asssociation of Referees in Bankruptcy, published in March, 1900, for other ways of solving this problem.)

The fourth t6.) is intended to meet a defect which grows out of decisions that, following Counselman v. Hitchcock (142 U.S., 547), declare that the protection afforded a bankrupt by the last clause of section 7 a (1:1) does not amount to the immunity guaranteed by the fifth amendment to the Constitution. (See In re Rosser (Mo.), 96 Fed., 005, and compare In re Marx (Ky.) 102 Fed., 676.) The suggestion that the imm<mi ty clause inserted in the inter: state-commerce law and held constitutional in Brown v . Walker (161 U . S. 591) be also inserted here is met by the objection that such clause would iii. effect grant pardon in advance to bankrupts called to testify1 and might result in a general amnesty to all ban1..'Tupts amenable to purushment un der section 29. A discharge is a boon, not a right. He who asks it should tell what he knows of his assets and his past dealings. If he does not, the discharge should be denied him. It is thought that this new objection to discharge will accomplish much that would be accomplished by the clause in the interstate-commerce law, without amounting to freedom from criminal prosecution, too.

Section 6: The changes in section 17 of th e law are to settle questions arising from antagonistic decisions of the court and to exclude beyond peradventure certain liabilities growing out of offenses against good morals from the effect of a discharge. (Compare a similar amendment to the English act of 1883 by section 10 of the amendatory act of 1890.)

The substitution of "liabilities" for "judgments in actions" makes the clause broader. Now claims created by fraud but not reduced to judgment are discharged. Neither the claim nor the judgment should be. (Compare In re Rhutassel (Iowa), 96 Fed., 567, with In re Leweil.son (N . Y.), 99 Fed., 7ll.)

The reasons for the other changes are too patent to require statement. (As to the dischargeability of alimony, compare In re Houston (Ky.), 94 Fed., 1Ht, wi~ In re Nowell (Mass.), 99 Fed:, 931; of judgments for seduction, In re Sullivan (N. Y.), 2 Am. B. R., 30, with In re Freche (N.J.), 109 Fed.J. 620; of judgments f_or criminal conversation, In re Tinker (N. Y .), 99 Fed. , •t9, with Colwell v . Tinker (N.Y.), 6 Am. B . R., 434.)

Section 7: It is conceded that too much time was given by the law for the joining of issue in involuntary ca es, and that the law was silent as to the method and time of service where the bankrupt had absconded. As changed, section 18 provides for a short service by publication, and not only shortens the time within which a debtor personally served must appear and plead but provides that time to plead shall expire when time to appear does, and not ten days later, as now. All this is in the interest of the rapid-administration of asset cases and the consequent reduction of expenses.

Section 8: Intended to make a wife, who is often the de~ositaryofproperty belonging really to the bankrupt, a compellable witness m every State as to certain transactions to which she is or has been a party. Without her evidence it is sometimes practically impossible to trace property. Neither principle nor policy entitles her to her privilege when the transaction under investigation is a business one between her and ob.er husband. For evils growing out of section 21~, as now phrased, see In re Jefferson (Wash.), 96 Fed., 826; In re Fowler (WIS.), 93Fed., 417.

Section 9: Under the law of 1867, the Federal and State courts had concurrent jurisdiction of suits to recover property fraudulently or preferentially transferred. Bardes v. Bank of Hawarden (Iowa), 17 U . S ., 524, has so con· strued section 23b of the law as to deny such jurisdietion to the district courts, save with the consent of the proposed defendant. In commercial centers this amounts to a denial of justice, the calendars of the State courts being years behindhand; while, growing out 6f Bardes v. Bank, have come decisions which have crippled the administration of the law to a marked degree. (See In re Ward (Mass.), 5 Am. B. R., 215; Mueller v. Nugent (Ky.), 105 Fed., 581; this latter, however,~ recently r eversed by the Supreme Court.) There is a very general demand ror a return to the policy of the law of 1861. Were it not for section 23b, section 2 (7) would probably confer ample .jurisdiction on the district courts. The change in section 23b proposed by the bill simply excepts from the operation of it all suits which can, under the specific words-of the law, be brought to recover property, and this merely by refer ring to the three sections under which alone such suits can be brought. To remove all doubt, also, sections 13 and 16 of the bill confer concurrent jurisdiction of all such suits on the State courts and the Federal district cour ts, by adding appro.Priate words to each of the three sections--section 60b, section 67e, and section 70e.

Sections 10 and 11: These changes in section 40 and section 48 are in response to the very general opinion that the referees and trustees are not now adequately paid. The filing fee of each officer is doubled, making the deposit required at the inception of bankruptcy proceedings $40 instead of 25. It is thought this will prove sufficient in all no-asset cases. Since, under the law, it has been quite uniformly held that the commissions of these officers must be computed on moneys paid out by way of dividends ouly, this species of comp ensation has in the large majority of cases amounted to little. The change suggested rests on the analogy of the State laws, which reckon the commissions of executors, r~ceivers, etc., on moneys received and paid out, and is faii·er. T he other changes are in the line of increasing efficiency and the securing of the best talent for t h e important wor k committed to these officers. Thus, t he large com m issions to t rustees in s:m.all cases, t hat they may have greater

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE. 6943 incentive t:> search for and recover property, and the 50-cent filing fee for 1·eferees, as probably the fairest way properly to compensate them for the great amount of extra work in hearing contests on claims, etc.

The collection of this filing fee in advance seems to be permitted by the rules in many districts, though without apparent sanction of law. The suggested amendment ratifies this practice, which has not proven burdensome, while removing the chief objection to it-the requirement that the fee be paid as a condition of filing a claim at all-by requiring that such fee be paid as a cost of administration. The trustee is also given the same commission in composition cases a-s is the referee. This was an oversight when the law was framed.

Section 12: Pirie v. Chlcago Title and Trust Company (182 U. S ., 438), having h eld that section 60a is a definition of "preference," it necessarily followed that payments and other bona fide transactions after actual insolvE'mcy, though in due course of trade and without knowledge or reasonable cause to believe that a preference was intended, must be, under Section 57g, surrendered b efore a creditor who r eceived such a payment could prove the balance of his debt, This was not what was intended by the framers of tho law. There is a verr urgent and widespread demand for such an amendment as will obviate this menace to trade.

The Ray bill (H. R. 4310) attempts to do this, but leaves a loophole in that only voidable preferences, as defined in section 60 a and b, must be surrendered, whereas some fraudulent transfers (section67e and section 70e) might be retained and the debt still proven. This clause, section 57~, has therefore been modified by adding words referring specifically to creditors who have received an advantage, void or voidable, under section 67c or section 70e. There are no other sections in the la. w which provide for suit to recover back from cr editors or other persons property (which includes money) improperly transferred. The change r esults, therefore, in that only those payments or transfers which could be r ecovered back by suit must be surrendered under section 57 g. This change will also settle the animated and unfortunate controversy over the meaning and effect of section 60c; compare In re Keller (Ia.), 109 Fed .. 118, where a district coru't refuses to follow a coru·tof appeals, in McKey v. Lee (!a.) , 105 Fed., 923; also In re Dickson (M!lss. ), ill Fed., 728, wherein a circuit coru·t of appeals apparently refuses to follow the Supreme Com't in Pirie v. Chicago Title and Trust Co., above.

It is not thought expedient at this time to attempt to frame a clause specifying what transactions are protected (compare section 49 of the Englli<h act of 1883 for such a cumse) or to change the so-called definition of insolvency. The simpler the changes in the present la.w the fewer will be the contl·oversies in the com·ts; and especially in a question which, like this, is at the root of our credit system, the less the disturbance of business.

Section 13: Section 60 a and b is amended in three ways: First, by replacing the four months' clause in a , where it was in the Lind

say bill, instead of in b, as now, and where a casual reading of the law indicates it should have been left. (See In re Jones (Mass.), 4 Am. B. R., 563, for the far-reaching result of this transposition.) .

Second, by adding to a a clause which shall be equivalent to that found in section 3 b (1). It seems that as section 60 a now stands, a preferential mortgage may be given, and the creditor preferred, by withholding it from record four months be able to dismiss the trustee's suit to recover the same, though the _paper was actually recorded within the four months' period. (See In re Wntht (Ga.), 96 Fed., 187; In re Mersman (N.Y.), 7 Am. B. R., 46.) un~ei~s~~tro~9~g the clause as to jm·isdiction of suits previously explained

Section 14: Where homestead exemptions are allowed, it has been held that a bankrupt may insist on the trustee paying the accrued taxes on the homestead set off to him. (See In re Tilden (la.), 91 Fed., 500; contra, In re Veitsch (Conn.), 101 Fed., 251.) This is an injustice to creditors which calls for amendment. That suggested will accomplish the desired result.

It frequently happens that the action of individual creditors in suing, as, for instance, by creditor's bill before the bankruptcy, inures to the benefit of the trustee; and almost as frequently that, through the efforts of certain creditors, property is recovered after the bankruptcy begins. It is only fair that their disbm·sements, by which all creditors have profited, should be accounted for to them. The change in section 64b (2) would accomplish this.

Section 15 adds the clause on jurisdiction of suits to sections 67a and 70e, previously exrlained under section 9.

Section 16 provides for indexes, etc.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the floor to the gentleman n·om Alabama [Mr. CLAYTON].

Mr. RICHARDSON of Alabama. Before the gentleman from New York takes his seat, I should like to ask him what construction the committee has given to the familiar words "in contemplation of bankruptcy?"

Mr. RAY of New York. Let the gentleman read my report. and he will see what the courts have stated about that and what we undertake to say here.

Mr. RICHARDSON of Alabama. I understand what the courts have said. The courts have always contended that the phrase referred to a petition in bankruptcy.

Mr. RAY of New York. I again ask the gentleman to read my report. I must not take any further time now. I have commented on that matter in my report.

Mr. RICHARDSON of Alabama. I am simply asking for information.

Mr. RAY of New York. Well, is it any worse for you to read the report than for me to stand here under pressure and state what it contains?

Mr. RICHARDSON of Alabama. Probably I should understand the matter better from your explanation than by reading the report.

:1\fr. RAY of New York. Well, I will come around and explain it to the gentleman from Alabama while other gentlemen are speaking. I want to be polite, but I must decline to yield fm·ther.

Mr. Speaker, I now reserve the balance of my time, and yield to the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. CLAYTON].

Mr. CLAYTON. I understand that I am to have an hour in my own right.

Mr. RAY of New York. Certainly; I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CLAYTON. I do not want to take any of the gentleman's time, but desire to occupy my own.

Mr. RAY of New York. That is right. Mr. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, I send to the Clerk's desk and

ask to have read the following amendment which I shall offer: The Clerk read as follows: Amend by striking out all after the enacting clause and insert the follow

ing in lieu thereof: " That the act awroved July 1, 1898, entitled 'An act to establli<h a uniform

system of bankruptcy throughout the United States,' be, and the same is herepy, r epealed: _Provided, That ~ot~~ h erei? shall in any ~ay affect proceedirigs under sa1d act begun prwr to m e taking effect of thJs act, and this act shall take effect ninety days after the approval thereof." ·

Mr. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, I endeavored to listen to the gentleman from New York as best I could and to hear some good reason for the retention of the present bankruptcy law. I was unable , however, to gather from his statement or argument any reason for the retention of that law except as he contended that it is a popular measure.

That proposition, Mr. Speaker, is open to very serious doubt. It is true that the gentleman sent his circular letters broadcast through the country for the purpose of getting replies from people who favored the retention of this law and he received to some extent what he sought to get when he started out. Greenleaf in his work on evidence comments on that sort of t estimony. He remarks in substance, if I recollect aright, that when a man starts out with the avowed purpose of proving a given thing, he will generally by hook or crook get what he seeks, and come back and say, ''I have proved it; I have the evidence.'' .

That sort of testimony is worth very little. Mr. Speaker, against those letters that he has gathered I interpose the history of the bankruptcy legislation in this country, the short life of the first bankruptcy law of two years, the short life of the next one, I believe of three years, the short life of the bankruptcy law of 1867 of eleven years, following disasters of the great civil war.

The present bankruptcy law has been in operation about three years, so that while this country has existed under a constitutional government for about one hundred and fourteen years, only about twenty years of that time have we had a bankruptcy law in operation. The people have never favored a permanent bankruptcy system. They do not to-day favor one. I dare say that nearly every letter which the gentleman received had some criticisms or objections to this law.

I venture to say, :Mr. Speaker, that hardly any given number of business men can agree altogether on the defects of the existing bankruptcy law. It is begging the question to say that there • is a popular demand · for the retention of this law. How have the people been canvassed? Do people whom the gentleman wrote to represent the 80,000,000 of American people? We do not know whether they are even a fail· sample

Mr. Speaker, we can judge of the unpopularity of this bankruptcy system by citing the fact that in this Congress some six or seven bills have been introduced for its repeal, by citing the fact that nearly every letter that a member of Cong1.·ess has had from his constituents has said either that this law ought to be amended in certain respects or that it ought to be repeal~d. Many have said that it ought to be repealed entirely. This bill brought here by this committee is a confession of the inadequacy and the unpopularity of the present bankruptcy law.

The Judiciary Committee has had this subject under consideration for months, and what has been the result of their labors? The net result has been to make the !>an1nuptcy law, so far asunfo~ate debtOTs are concerned, more rigid and more stringent and to mcrease the fees of Federal officials. The proposition is embodied in this bill to enlarge the fees of referees, receivers clerks, marshals, and others. The ·bill will show what fees ar~ enlarged and what commissions increased.

Mr. BARTLETT. Ulerks and referees. Mr. CLAYTON. And the clerks and others. This commit

tee's work has been formulated into this bill which seeks to make the present law more oppressive against the unfortunate debtor seeks to make it more a collection agency, seeks to make it mor~ an engine of tyranny against the man who is laboring under a load of debt, and then the next shining virtue written on almost every page of the bill is an increase of the fees of these Federal officeholders.

Now, if I had the time to take up the bill section by section I could point out the harsh features of it and demonstrate how the features increasing the pay for the purpose of adding to the fees of these F ederal officials are everywhere apparent in the bill. From this bill the minority dissent. The minority dissent because they say that if there was ever a demand for this bankiuptcylawthat that demand has been met, that if there was any necessity for it the time for it has passed, and this bill which seeks to amend it is for the avowed purpose of closing the avenues more and more to unfortunate debtors.

The gentlemen who advocate this bill say that it is for the purpose of pr eventing fraud and disbonARtv on the part of debtors.

.

6944 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. J UNE 17,

Our reply to that is that if you seek to prevent fraud and dishonesty under the bankruptcy law on the part of unfortunate debtors the best way to do is to repeal the original law, which is essentially bad, and then you will stop all the frauds and dishonesty which have grown up under the law.

Mr. Speaker, I have offered the amendment which has been r ead by the Clerk, and at the proper time I shall ask its consideration. It seeks to repeal the whole law. If that amendment shall be adopted, repealing the law, then a further examination of the details of this bill will be unnecessary, but if it shall not prevail, then during the progress of this debate the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. DE ARMOND] and the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. BARTLETT] and myself and others will undertake to discuss the details of this bill and demonstrate why it should not be supported.

I call the attention of the House to the expensiveness of the present bankruptcy law, and I invite the attention of the gentleman from New York to this. You will notice from this bill that the fees of referees and others are doubled, and in some cases the allowances are more than doubled. They are increased in some cases from $5 to $10 and in other cases from $10 to $20, and so on; and in passing I might remark that it was the looting of insolvent estates by Federal officials under the act of 1867 that made that law odious, and that finally led to its repeal.

I hazard the prediction here now that if this act is not repealed the fees of these officials will be increased from time to time until this bankruptcy law will become a scandal and a disgrace to the statute books of our counh·y. Now, what is the necessity for this bankruptcy law? I ask my good f1·iend, the next governor of Texas [1\fr. LANHAM] , to answer this.

I ask him to stand up and indict the people of his State, to stand up and indict the people of Alabama, to stand up and indict the people of New York and say that a State government and the people of a State are not just as honest, just as capable of administering the estates of insolvent people as Federal officials are.

It is contended that because the Federal Constitution permits a uniform b::mkruptcy system we must, under that authority, depart from the ideas that the fathers had when they framed that Constitution. They had in contemplation the condition of unfortunate people who had come from the Old World to this country debt ridden, and who had been put into prison and had suffered such hardships as only a Dickens could describe in his fascinating writings. They had in mind the case of Georgia, now a great State, where the grant to Oglethorpe permitted him to take a colony of debt-ridden people and free them from debt and let them start anew in life.

But this is a new idea which has been grafted upon this constitutional provision- the idea that the unfortunate debtor is of secondary consideration; that he amounts to little or nothing, except as a victim. or, at least, that he plays the second fiddle in the bankruptcy court; that the great creditor, or' in the language of the gentleman fTom New York [1\Ir. R .a Y] , the business people, a~ of the first and p:1ramount importance. ·

We have heard that sort of talk all over this country, and gen tlemen c.:onjure with the name of the business man when they want to throw sand in your eyes and deceive you as to a proposition. Those on the debtor side of this question are business men, too. They have some right to be heard and are entitled to some consideration in our legislation.

- Now, l\Ir. Speaker, will anyman here, will any Democrat here, say that his State can not administer justice, can not prevent dishonesty can not make men do right, can not distribute assets as well as the Federal courts can?

If so, let him stand up and confess that the Democratic doctrine of faith in the State, of leaving it in the full exercise of all it;:; r eserved powers, in the full control of regulating the domestic relations, of punishing fraud, of punishing larceny, of punishing all sorts of crime, let him confess that his whole doctrine of State rights is an error and that State government is a failure and turn to the Federal Government and to the Federal courts to help the States where they are unable to execute and perform their duty of the gTeater part of the governing business of the people.

Let the advocates of this bill go further and stand on this floor and advocate an anti-polygamy law. Let him go just a step further and advocate a Federal law firing uniform hours of labor in the private manufactories of the people :!n the States, State regu-lations to the contrary notwithstanding. _

Mr. Speaker, the only difference between this case and the case of the a.ntipolygamy proposition and the uniform Federal labor law for the States is that there is constitutional authority for a uniform bankruptcy system and there is no constitutional authority or grant for the others.

But the majority of the committee say our State laws are inadequate, that our State courts aid" in-the-family receiverships,"

and that under our State chancery courts and equity courts permit estates to be stolen.

I deny that assertion. The State laws are administered just as honestly and just as faithfully as the Federal courts can administer laws, and t he administration of the State courts is more economical. Now, I ask the great business man from New York to listen to a business proposition from a man who does not pretend to be a great business man nor a profound constitut ional lawyer, one so profound that he never made a mistake in his life.

I have examined the reports of the Attorney-General since this law has been enacted, and I call this to the attention of you, my fellow-laborers, representing poor people, r epresenting business people, representing the whole country, not merely the r epresentatives of such men as the Thm·bers, who for a consideration go out and send letters broadcast through the country to influence '' the leaders of thought.'' I am not addressing myself to such '' leaders of thought '' who will pay any attention to such circulars.

The gentleman from Georgia [Mr. BARTLETT] the other day showed me a circular letter that had been sent out, requesting that letters and petitions be sent in here to Congressmen to influence them on this bill; all proper enough, but let u.s understand the source from whence they emanate.

Now, as I said, I have examined the reports of the AttorneyGeneral since this law has been in effect. The act of July 1, 1808, did not permit the operation of the vol:mtary featur.e until the ~st day of August, 1898. It did not permit the operation of the 111-voluntary feature of the law until the 1st day of N ovem be_r, 1898. Hence the report of the Attorney-General for 189~ has little or no infonnation on the subject. But fo1· the followmg three years I have extracted this information fi·om his r eports.

I find that in 1899-1901 the total assets in volunta1·y and involuntary cases were turned over to the bankrupt courts in amount of $105,906,716.63, the total assets turned over to the courts to be administered- these courts that some say are so much more honest and just and fair than ~re the S~a~e com'ts; that O?t ?f this $105.000,000 and upward or assets diVIdends were paid 111 1899 1900 and 1901 to the total amount of $6,513,530.57. Total dividends ~f a little upward of $6,000,000 were paid out of total assets of upward of $105,000,000.

I find further that these total dividends of upward of 86.000,000 were paid at a total cost during these years of $2,800,616. 79. The com·t officials got about 45 cents or 46 cents for every dollar that was paid in dividends. In other words, I go out and collect for you. You. turn me over $105,000,000 of assets. I am a faithful and honest collector; I come back with $G,OOO ,OOO out of _ a total of $105,000,000, and give you that, and I take about $3_.000,000.

I gi-ve you $2 and take $1. What has become of the difference between the sum total of three millions of cost and fees and the six millions of dividends and the item of $105.000,0{)0 of assets? What has become of that, in this honest administration of iusolvent estates, the reports do not show. I here give in det~il the assets, dividends. fees . and costs for the years I have mentiOned.

Mr. STEWART of New Jersey. Will the gentleman yield to me for a minute?

1\'Ir. CLAYTON. Certainly. Mr. STEW ART of New Jersey. The $105,000,000 was the ap

praised value of the assets? Mr. CLAYTON. No. Mr. STEW ART of New Jersey. Has the gentleman got the

selling price? Mr. CLAYTON. I have the report. It does not say t t..at it is

the appraised value, or the selling, or what. It is put down as assets. It is the value of the assets of the estates. so far as the report shows. W~ll! of course if it is the apprai_se.d value, ~aking the case of an adm111Istrator, would not the admm1strator, m case the estate was appraised, have to account for the appraised value of the estate or to show reasons for so great a discrepancy?

Mr. STEWART of New Jersey. That is, the debts are appraised at their face value.

Mr. BELLAMY. In a bankruptcy proceeding, in the schedule of assets returned, do not you have to put the nominal value, and what you are speaking of is the nominal value?

Mr. CLAYTON. The reports do not say, and it is not my 1mderstandin0" that it is that way; but that is not the question. The gentleman is sticking in the bark about assets. What I am after is that no com·t ought to make you pay a man one dollar for collecting two for you.

Mr. BARTLETT. I have a case in point. Mr. CLAYTON. The gentleman from Georgia, when it co.m.es

to details, is prepared to show. ho~. t.hese .estates are n:aladiD.l111stered. He will give you the 111diV1dual 111stances which he has extracted from the reports of .the Attorney-Genera~ .. I now submit a statement showing the total assets, total diVlden?-s, total fees and costs and total liabilities in the volunt..'try and m voluntary bankrupt cases in all the bankrupt com·ts in the Uni~ed

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 6945 States for the years 1899,1900, and 1901. These figures are taken uniform bankruptcy system and make it apply to voluntary from the reports of the Attorney-General for the years named. cases only. It has always been my understanding that you could

AssETs. make a uniform system of bankruptcy and let it be simply a 1899: volunta1·y bankruptcy proceeding. I believe that is the law now.

~&~~~;·~~:~_:::= ~~~~~=~--~~~=:~~==~~===~=====~=======~===~ S§f;~;Y.i3:~ You know that the lack of uniformity in the exemption laws of 1900: . . the different States and various other differences do not r ender a

Involuntary cases--------------------------------------------- 13,433,209.45 bankrupt act nonuniform in the constitutional sense. I refer the 1001-;oluntary cases----------------------------------------------- 33•09 •771·22 gentleman to In re Beckel'ford, 4 N . B. R., 203, and to 1 Dill., 45.

Involuntary cases--------------------------------------------- 2,53!,266.79 Again I cite him to the cases holding that distinction between Voluntary cases----------------------------------------------- 7, 27<>,664. 84 natural and artificial persons does not render a bankruptcy act

Total·---------------------·------- -·-- ------------------------ 10'5,906,716.63 1 nonuniform (1 N. B. R. , 387, and 95 F. R., 637). And, again, thet DIVID:El!\TDS. · lmiformity required by the Constitution is geographical and no

1899: personal in the sense of being alike applicable to all members of Involuntary cases--------------------------------------------- $783,871.41 society. The Constitution requires uniformity in administTation

1900;volnntarycases.------------ ---- ---·: ------------------------- 1•338•660·30 only (In re Jordon, 1 N. B. R., 180). . . . Involuntary cases--------------------------------------------- 513,481.92 Now, Mr. Speaker, there are other features rn this bill that l yoluntary cases_______________________________________________ 703,363.00 would like to take up and discuss and point out, but in the time

1901involuntary cases--------------------------------------------- 1,423,249.25 allowed I will not be ~ble to fully criticis~ the bill in detaillm~ess Voluntary cases----------------------------------------------- 1,750, 894.69 we have an opportumtynnder the five-mrnute rule. I now yield

TotaL---------------------------- ---- ____ ---- ____ ------------FEES AND COSTS.

1899: Involuntary cases--------------------------------------------Voluntary cases.----------------------------------------------

1fl00: Involuntary cases.------------·------------------------------Voluntary cases---------------------- ----------------------·---

1901: Involuntary cases------ __ --------- ____ ---------- -·------------

such time as he may desire to the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. 6•513

•520

·57

DE ARMOND]; but first I will yield to the gentleman from Georgia two minutes to offer an amendment.

$90,429. 81 Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Speaker, I would like to have the Clerk 376,46'2·53 read an amendment which I have to section 3. 82,188.20 The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair deems it his duty to

406,141.24 state to the gentleman from Alabama that if he yields for the purpose of offering an amendment he will lose the floor.

1.~:ffl:gr Mr. CLAYTON. Well, Mr. Speaker, if that is the ruling of the Chair I do not think the gentleman from G-eorgia will insist.

Voluntary cases----------------·----------------------------------

2, 890,616.79 Mr. BARTLETT. Certainly not. Total ______ ----- ____ ___ ----- _____ ______ ___ __ ------ ___________ _ LIABILITIES.

1899:

~J~~t!i;'~~:e_s_~~~=~--~~==~--~~==~--~~==~~===~----=====~ ==== ~==~~ ~: ~:m: ll Mr. CLAYTON. Then I yield to the gentleman f1·om Missomi

such time as he desires and reserve the balance of the time that is not used. But before doing so I submit the views of the minority of the committee: 1900: .

Involuntary cases ____ ---------------- ------------ __ : __ : _______ 27,179,001.20 Voluntary cases----------------------------------------------- 264,979,152.45 I . VIEWS OF THE MINORITY.

1901: · When the existing bankruptcy act was reported by the Committee on the Involuntary cases----·---- -- --- ------ -------------------------- 11,316,~9.03 1 J~diciary to the House on December 16,1897, the minority of the committee Voluntary cases---------------------------.----------------.-- 162,635,658.22 said: ·

"We do not believe the bill, * * * with the extensive powers it confers TotaL---------------------------------------------- ---------- 845,261,019.15 on the Federal courts, is a wise and just measure or one that should be

. pa..<~Sed." How much time have I consumed, Mr. Speaker? .And now we submit that trial and experience have demonstrated themani-The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has consumed fold imperfections of the act, and that many cases of injustice have come

twenty-six minutes. from i~s op~ra~ion, so that we are now asked to make the amendments pro-M CI AYTON Aft . I h ll h d f posed m this bill, H. R. 13679. r. ..J • • ei . s a ave. consume our more It is doubtless true that the financial depression of 1893 and the years im-

minutes I should be pleased if you would rnform me. mediately following furnished many instances where it seemed that the un-N ow. Mr. Speaker briefly as to some features of this bill. fortun~~:te condition of debtors justifted relief to 'fihem through the me!lium

This bill. ks to ' th t . f rtu te d bt h ll b a· of a umform system of bankruptcy. Doubtless m many cases State msol. see say a no un 0 na. . e or S a e . ~- vency laws were inadequate because.of the constitutional inhibition againsi charged rn bankruptcy oftener than once rn SIX years. Now, It IS the State to pass any law impairing the obligation of contracts, as well as the claimed that this provision for the discharge of debtors is abused· limitation u~on :the power of the St-ate precluding it from enacting any law h il th 1 f 't t f · tl If th' b t ' of extraterntonal force. t at men av!l' eJ1!Se ves 0 I 00 Iequen Y· IS e rue, It was argued, in effect, on this floor and in the report of the committee

our answer IS that the law can be repealed, so that he can not be in favor of this act, that "the provisions of this bill (now the bankruptcy discharged · law) carry bankruptcy legislation into the domain of humanity to oUI·debt-

Th · · M S k . 1 · · d th · 1 f ors and creditors," and alSo that the Ehortcomings and imperfections and en_ agarn, r. pea ei, near Y every_ crrme u~ er e aw~ 0 the excessive cost bills of the former bankruptcy laws had been remedied the United States-and there are no cnmes agamst the United in the act which we are now called upon to either amend or repeal. The States except tho e denounced in the Federal Constitution and very able report above referred~. filed~ behalf of the existing Ia:w by Mr. statutes-neru·ly every one of them is barred by statutes of limi- B;ENDERSON (now the S~eak~r) I_n th~ Fifty-fifth Congress, contains a full . . . hiStory of bankruptcy legiSlatwn m this country. tat10ns of less than SIX years; and yet thiS beneficent bankruptcy The first bankruptcy law lived from April 4, 1800, to December 19 1803· law is not only to take into its process a man and brand him with the second lived from August 19, 1841..1 to l\Iarch 3 1843, and the third'lived bankruptcy-almost a criminal appellation-but it tells him after from Marc~ 2• 18~7• to September 1, 18l8. The fourth ba~ruptc~ law, now . under conSideratwn, was approved July 1, 1898. We mention this to show he IS so branded he shall labor under the burden of debt and un- that while our country has grown in wealth and population as no other counder that infamy for six years before he can get anothe1· discharge try every did in the world's history, yet from the adoption of the Constitu-lth h h h b f d . t b k tc a· ' tion to this good hour, a period of about one hundred and fourteen years, a <?Ug ~ may ave een orce In o an _rup Y procee. rngs we have had bankruptcy laws at different times covering altogether about

by hiS creditors and have made a clean showmg and established twenty-five years. Whether all of the reasons that led to the enactment of his honest You sequester his estate and give him no discharge former bankruptcy la~s obtained in th~ case ?f the present one, o! whether if he has had a discharge within six years This is benevolence ~11 the r~asons for then· repeal are :pertment m the present ca.se IS perhaps . · Immaterial With a vengeance. It seems to be a correct statement to say that the American people have

Howeve.;r meritorious your case may be, you must wait until ~ot heretofore favored a p~rmanent bankruptpy system, and we do not bethe expiration of six years to get another discharge Mr Speaker li~ve that they now favor It. We do not beheve that ~uc~ h.ws, howevei·

. . . . . · · ' Wisely framed, and although allowable under the Constitution, are a credit this bill also revives the prOVISIOn of the bankruptcy law of 1867 to any people or age. Such a law is a menace .to the honest conscientious allowing corporations to go into voluntary bankruptcy. I do not painsta~ng m~rchant wherever loca:ted and without regard' to the m~gni~ remember that when this bill was lmder discussion it was even tude of his.busmess. W~ call attention to the fact that the pre~ntact Is the

. . . . . most drastiC and oppre. 1ve law, so far as the unfortunate debtor IS concerned attempted to rnclude a corporation m the proVIsiOns of the law that has ever been enacted, and we shall hereafter invite attention to som~ which allows them to take advantage of voluntary bankruptcy ~f the P~'<?P?sed ame~dments1 which would make this law more harsh, and

d' In our opmwn more mdefens1ble. procee rngs. . . . . . · Under this law, as it is proposed here to amend it, the rights of honest and · If I am no_t mistake~ , It was then refused to giVe such pnvileges unfortunate debtors who are forced .into bankruptcy are minimized, and to corporations. This Congress ought not now to accord that these debtors are a:ssum~d to be gml_ty of a~ts hardly short of criminal. P. rivilege to corporations. That was one of the features that helped They can not obtru~ relief from then· ~reditors, wh,o have forced bank-

. . ruptcy upon them, Without bemg first subJected to possible harsh treatment to condemn the law of 1867. If a corporatiOn has made a failure; as harsh as exacting creditors and shrewd collection lawyers can devise: if it has been exploited by adventurers and it fails it ought to end Even when relieved, they are branded with the almost criminal appellation. and ouo-ht not to have the benefit of a discharge ~bankruptcy ' of "ba:nkrupt," and a large part of their assets have been uselessly dissi-

o . · pated m fees and costs. Mr. STEWART of New Jersey. If the gentleman Will pardon As a virtue, it is said that some of the amendments to the present bank-

me, I want to ask him if he thinks we fulfill the constitutional ruptcy_law seek to make it impossible for t,he_dish~nest debtor to get relief inJ'unction when the voluntary and involuntary features are not from hiS debts thro~gh bankruptcy. I~ this Is as It should be (~nd about . . that we make no dispute), then the dishonest debtor can certamly be de-JOrned? prived of all opportunity of undeserved relief by a repeal of the bankruptcy-

Mr. CLAYTON. Yes; Mr. Webster, if I recollect right, when l~w, thus l~aV?-D.g hilll: liable for his_de~ts, as he _would .be without the :proVl-·the bankruntcy law of 1841 was under discussion. answered that sions of this bill, s~eking to make his discharge rmpo~s1~le. . . -. . . . . · That the retentwn of the present banln·uptcy law ISm accord With a gen-direct quest10n, and gave It as his opnnon that we could create a eral demand is a doubtful question, even in the minds of some of those who-

XXXV-435

6946 CONGRESS! ON .AL REO-ORD-HOUSE. JUNE 17,

here and now advocate the permanent retention of the lawhma.y be inferred from the fact that the chairman of the committee, w o filed the report in behalf of the present .bilb amenda. tory of the act, sent many copies of a circnlar lett-e1· to people in dirrerent parts of the country, as his report states, in which he asked the recipients of the letters to say, among other things, whether-the present bankruptcy law should be amended, left as it is, or repealed.

It may be that nearly all the circular letters were sent to wholesale merchf_mts and jobbers, bankruptcy lawyers, referees in bankruptcy, and other court officials interested in the cost features of the bankruptcy law. In his report the chairman does not tell us how ma.:(ly or how few replies he received to his ciPcub.r letter. He assures us that only 10 per cent of the replies received opposed the retention of the law. In coming to his conclusion as to the popularity of the measure, it may be that the chairman was lar~ely convinced by the silence of the people addressed, as we are led to believe by his statement in the circular letter that-

"In case you (the recipient of the letter) do not return this paper as requested, it will be assumed that you are satisfied with the existing conditions under the present national bankruptcy law."

We have not been told that the unfortunate debtor's side was presented. The man who has gone voluntarily into bankruptcy and made an honest showing has been, in some degree_, ?Onsidered in this legislationj but it does seem to make the unfortunate deowr, who has been put into mvoluntary bankruptcy when he was conducting a going business, and who thereby has had his business, credit, and character ruined, subject to every inquisitorial method and harsh measure that commercial lawyers and hard-hearted cred-itors can suggest. ·

The drastic provisions of this bill show that in the minds of at least some of its promoters every involuntary bankrupt is deemed to be a thief and a scoundrel from the very inception of the proceedings against him. The resort to this unusual remedy is tantamount to an indictment a~ainst the unfortunate debtor. It is no answer to say that he may have a JUl'Y" trial, under certain conditions, and thereby have his innocence established. He has already been ruined and branded, and there is no adequate remedy, no reparation. But what cares the rapacious creditor for the ruin of a hundred honest men, so that he may at some time catch one dishonest xnan and force him to disgorge assets that· should be applied to his just debts?

The debtor class is entitled to some consideration in bankruptcy legislation. We can very well understand why some wholesale dealers and jobbers, bankruptcy lawyers, referees, trustees, marshals, and clerks of courts might desire the retention of the present bankruptcy law, and favor certain amendments. We think it fair to say that some wholesale dealers and jobbei'S favor such retention and some of the amendments proposed~ pecause they would like to use the law more and more as a collection macnine, and we can understand why referees and others who are interested in the fees from the bankrupt estates desire the enactment of these amendments, increasing their compensation.

But we submit that these should not be our controlling 1·easons, however just may be some of these demands or suggestions, when we are called upon to legislate for the whole people. Even the improvement of a system essentially bad is not as good as its abolishment. If we ought to be slow about relievin~ unfortunate debtors and hedge about with many restrictions possible rehef to them,_, as this bill proposes, we ought to be equally slow about conferring new ana harsh remedies upon exacting creditors through the medium of extraoTdinary powers given to the Federal courts and coru-t officials whereby any of the debtor class may be unjustly oppressed or harassed.

We ought to legislate with the idea uppermost in our minds that the creditor class in our country is not as a :rule more honest and just and more to be trusted with power and authority than the debtor class, and that the interests of the one are no more w01'thy of legislativ-e consideration than those of the other.

Let us examme some of the provisions of the pending bill. The first amendment proposed in this bill shows that the committee sympathizes with the tendency manifested cy the friends of the bankruptcy law to make it more and more drastic so far as the debtor is concerned, and to render him more and more at the mercy of h,is creditors through the medium of new and extraordinary remedies.

It is true that this first amendment adverted to, recognizing as it does that the divergence in the exemption laws of the respective States does not render the bankruptcy law nonuniform, as has been settled by 1·epeated adjudications, yet its avowed object is to avoid the effect of the inequalities of the exemption laws of the different States.

The purpose of this amendment is to put every debtor who is allowed exemptions under the State laws, in case his solv-ency is in question, upon the same footing, as would be in the case of a debtor in a State having no exemption law, or in a case where the debtor owns no homestead. In other words, this is an effort in some degree, and for at least one purpose, to nullify the effect of the exemptions which the State has given to her citizens. We are not in favor of a Federal statute minimizing or avoiding in fi.DY degree the effect of State exemption laws.

The creditm· has no right to com~lain that the State, in its wisdom and for the purpose of preventing the poss1bility of one of its citizens or his family becoming a public burden, has exempted certain ;propm·ty from the payment ()f debts. The creditor knew this law of the State and its1)0ssible effect, and he extended credit in the light of such knowledge, and he has no right to complain when business misfortune overtakes hiS debtor. It is a step in advance of any definition heretofore given to insolvency to say that the homestead and personal property exem~ons in a bankruptcy proceeding, which may have been thrust upon an unwilling and honest debtor, shall not be reckoned when the debtor is made the victim of this harsh involuntary process.

Every State in the Union, and all th~'l'erritories, have provided some sort of exemption laws, and the wisdom of the same ought not to be impeached indirectly by a Federal statute declaring in effect that an honest debtor shall not be given credit f<?r common pr~dence in pr9viding a necesl?3.rY J:w!Ue ~or himself and his family. The creditor has noJ.'lght to complam of IDJUStice growing up out of the exemption laws of any State. ·

Sections 2, 10, and 11 of the pending bill increase the fees of the court officials, and are in line with the exorbitant charges that rendered the administration of the bankruptcy law of 1867 scandalous and odious; and we J?redict that the compensation here demanded will be followed f~·om time to time by like demands as long as the bankruptcy law stands. It 18 a well-known fact that the referees in bankruptcy now have a national association, and it may not be too much to say that mcrease of compensation, whether right or wrong-and any man can persuade himself that his pay is inadequate-is with them the "paramount object of patriotic desire."

In regat•d to section B of the bill1 we do not subscribe to the statement made by the committee in respect thereto, that in the States there ~re "present notorious inequities practiced on creditors through in-the-f~ily accountings and directorial receiverships under State laws." We believe that undei· State laws the administration of justice is as wise and as good as can be had under Federal statutes and through Federal coru·ts.

We do .not believe it proper to give to corpm•ations the right to go into voluntary bankruptcy, which this bill proposes to do. If a corporation has

made a failure it ought to go out of business; it ought to end. We think that a provision allowing a corporation the privilege of voluntary bankruptcy will be subject to great abuse.

Section 5 of the bill interposes new obstacles to the discharge of the involuntary bankrupt. The report says a discharge is a. boon, not a right. We dissent from this view. As long as there is a. bankrupt law an unfortunate and honest debtor is entitled, as a matter of right, upon proper showing, to a discharge from his debts. ·

Section 7 interferes with the settled policy of some of the States and makes the wife an involuntary witness in certain transactions. We submit that these States have the right to re~late their domestic affairs, and have a right to refuse to make the wife a w1tness in any case against the husband, if the lawmakers of the State believe thatsuch a course is most conducive to harmonious family relations.

Even if we were to concede, though we do not, that there ought to be a limit to the 1ight of the debtor to discharge, we affirm that one discharge in six years is carrying the restriction too far. esJ?ecially in case a man is made an involuntar~ bankrupt and shows that he IS entitled, under the narror;v provisions of this law, to a discharge. In all cases we belie-ve that the bankrupt, voluntary and involuntary, ougb.t to be discharged as often as he makes the showing required b~ the act.

Most crimes against the United States are barred by statutes of limitation of less than six yeaTs. If debtors are to be forgiven at all, there is no reason for being less generous to them than to criminals.

While we have urged objection-to some of the amendments proposed in the pending bill, we think there are other reasons why the bill should not

pa;:.e believe that the public interests will be subse:rved by the repeal of the present bankruptcy law. Five bills for this purpose have been introduced m the House at the present session of Congress, and two for the same purpose hav-e been introduced in the Senate.

It will be remembered that when the bankruptcy act was under consideration in the Fifty-fifth Congress the amendment to limit its operation to two years was adopted, and that subsequently this limitation was defeated by a very narrow majority vote.

We do not believe that there is any necessity or any general public demand for the longer retention of the law. It has tended to burden the Federal courts with much litigation, which we believe could be just as well conducted by the courts of the different States. We believe that the people of the various States favor and uphold just and honest la-ws, and that the State courts administer justice as honestly, faithfully, and effi.ci'ently as do the Federal courts. Bankruptcy laws and other unnecessa1y Federal legislation, creating new civil remedies and new penal offenses, are unnecessarily burdening the Federal courls, and the administration of public justice is not bettered there by.

We submit House bill457i, as a .substitute, .and recommend its passage, it being in the following words:

"A bill to repeal an act to establish a uniform system of bankruptcy throughout the1JnitedStates, approved July 1, 1.898.

"Be it enacted, etc., That the act approved July 1,1898, entitled 'An act to establish a uniform ·system of bankruptcy throughout the United States,' be. and is hereby, repealed: Provided, That .nothing herein shall in any way affect proceedings under said act begun prior to the time this act takes etfect.''

H. D. CLAYTON. W. H. FLEMING. DAVID A. DE ARMOND. D. H. SMITH.

Mr. DE ARMOND. Mr. Speaker, I am one of those who believ-e that .a banluuptcy law to be fair and useful must have -a limited existence; and that it ought to have no existence whatever except at stated intervals, when the general condition of the country is such that, for tb.e relief of those who are overwhelmed by debt, some means beyond those which ordinarily exist should be supplied.

I do not believe in a bankruptcy law the main object and purpose and office of which are to enable the creditor to bear down more heavily upon the debtor, thus giving him less opportunity of taking care of himself and escaping bankl·uptcy. Hence, I was opposed to the passage of this bankruptcy law when it was adopted some four years ago, and I believ-e the time surely has arrived-no matter how necessary and proper the law may have been thought then-! do not think it was necessary or proper in its present form, but passing that, I believe that surely the time has now arrived when the bankrupt law ought to be repealed.

We are now to consider the question whether this bankrupt law shall be retained upon the statute book as a permanent feature of our jurisprudence, or whether it is better to repeal it and allow the people to get along, as during most of the history of om· country they hav-e got along, without a bankrupt law.

Aside from the question of whether the entire law is' to be repealed, I believe the effect of the passage of this bill will be to make bad worse. This bill, as I think will be evident to anyone who studies it and ought to be evident to anyone who reads it attentively and compares it, even superficially, with the existing law, is designed for the purpose of "perfecting" :the law, as they call it, from the standpoint of the capitalistic class of the country, and not from the standpoint of the insolvent debtors or those who may become insolvent under its operation.

One effect of it will be to transfer more surely the business of the several communities of the country to the centm·s of population, to the great money centers of the country. The legislation is distinctly against the interests of the local business men and the local professional men and is distinctly in the interest of those who are congregated in the large cities and are powerful through accumulated wealth in the metropolitan business and professional life. The banker and the lawyer and the business man in the small countcy place, the comparatively small place, will be sacrificed for the benefit of the mightier banker, the greater lawyer, and the wealthier business classes in the great cities of the

1.902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 6947 ·

country. That is the inevitable tendency, 3tnd, with all due defer- bankrupts, the bankrupts who, as a way to wealth, go. into bankence to those who support the bill (and I am not questioning the ruptcy for what they can make out of it. motives of anybody), it seems to me that if they have studied it How about the other bankrupt-the honest but unfortunate carefully it must be their consdous purpose to accomplish that. debtor, the venturous man, if you please, the misguided manBecause whatever this bill will accomplish must be in the con- who through bankruptcy proceedings is relieved from the obligatemplation of those who are favoring its passage, so that they tion of his debts and engages in business again, and who, pe1·haps mn t be held to de ire to accomplish that which its passage will through bad management, perhaps through misfortune, is again accomplish. overwhelmed with financial disaster and again thrown into a

One provision is to increase the fees of the officers called into bankruptcy court, and when his assets are administered asks for being by the bankruptcy law, as well as the others who are its his discharge -so that he may begin again; is he freed from the official beneficiaries. There is no necessity whatever that the burden of debts which he can not pay? There is an "improveincrease be made. This increase is distinctively for the benefit ment" here providing that if a man has been once discharged or of this office-holding class, created by this law in large part, the denied a discharge in bankruptcy within six years there can be functions of others largely increased by it, and in no sense is it no discharge for him. No matter how honest he may have been, in the interest of the unfortunate debtors of the country. no matter how meritorious his case, the mere fact that he has

Mr. L.A..NHAM. I wish to ask my friend whether he does not been in the bankruptcy court and has been discharged or been believe that the greatest demand for amending the present bank- denied a discharge within six years bars him from being relieved ruptcy law comes from this source which he has just described- again in the same way. from official persons who are interested in the increase of fees and His position may be that of a man who says, "You put me into costs of administering bankrupt assets? the bankruptcy court once; I have gone through and been dis-

M.r. DE ARMOND. I have no doubt that eve1·y one of these charged. I believe I can get along without further relief of this officials who will be ·benefited by this bill dhectly as an office- kind. I do not want to go into your bankruptcy court any more." holder is lending the benefit of his valuable counsel and influence But he is to have nothing to say about it. Additional provisions to persuade the Congress of the United States that it is very es- are added by: this bill under which he can be thrown into.involsential for the public good that he be better taken care of than untary bankruptcy. He is helpless then, his credit gone, his he is under the existing law. business taken away-he is lost, it may be within a year, it may

Ml.·. LANHAM. Does not the gentleman think that the clamor be within five years of his former discharge in bankruptcy-if this for the amendment of the existing law comes from that source? bill passes as it now is the man thrown into bankruptcy involun

M.r. DE ARMO:t{D. I have no doubt that these gentlemen are tarily will be denied a discharge solely upon the ground, if all very influential factors in it. It is perfectly natural that they other reasons for his discharge coexist, that he was or was not should be. discharged before within six years.

Mr. LANHAM. I wish to say tha I thoroughly agree with To my mind that is an abomination. Who suggests it? Where my friend in his opposition to any increase of the costs in admin- does it come from? It comes from the · collecting agency, from istering these bankruptcy assets. the men interested in oppressing instead of relieving the poor; it

1\fr. BARTLETT. Is it not the fact that the agitation for the comes from those who would make worse the condition of the incxea e of these fees of referees was started by a gathering or unfortunate, instead of from any who would relieve from financial association of the referees of the United States bankruptcy courts misfortunes. held last summer, and that they are very largely the class who The general course of the law is to be interfered with in a great have agitated the question and have brought the petitions here in many ways. For instance, among other things, the trustee is 1·efavor of this amendment of the law? quired to-day to pay the taxes upon the bankrupt estate. With

Mr. DE ARMOND. I think, Mr. Speaker, that is true. But care and prudence now-they provide in this bill that the taxes however this bill originated, and whoe-ver is behind it, and who- upon the homestead and other exempt property, whatever it may ever is most influential in the movement, I wish to say, in passing, be, shall not be paid out of the bankruptcy fund. that one object of the proposed legislation is, and one certain In other. words, here is a man crowded into bankruptcy. He effect of it will be, to increase the fees and emoluments of those believes he can swim, he believes he can go through the storm, who administer the law, to the very great gratification, no doubt, can escape what some men regard as the reproach of being adof each and every one of them. judged a bankrupt; every part of his property is taken possession

Another effect Will be to change the law of evidence in some of, except that which is absolutely exempt under the law. It States where the wife is not a competent witness in any affarr of may be that he ha-s been carrying a pretty heavy load and has, in a civil nature in which the husband is interested as a party. Why developing all his available means to the payment of his debts, is this done? It is done because the class of people adverse to the allowed taxes to accumulate to a considerable extent upon that bankrupt fancy they can get some benefit out of it, not because very property which is exempt; namely, the shelter for wife and the unfortunate debtors of the country, seeking relief through a children, the food upon which they are to live, the household bankruptcy law, believe it will be of any benefit to them, or are furnishings which are absolutely essential to their existence. asking that the change be made. Now, if this amendatory bill shall be passed, if this '' reform . The truth is-and it may all be said in one word on this point- measure" be enacted to "perfect the law," if this "reform" there is not a line in this amendatory bill that is suggested by shall be made, then, after there is taken from the involuntary any agency or any interest in the United States that represents bankrupt all but that which is absolutely exempted by the law or i connected in a beneficial way with the debtors of the coun- and which can not be reached, with nothing to pay taxes except try who may avail themselves of a bankruptcy law. by the sacrifice of that which it is the policy of the law to pre-

Now, one of the provisions of this amendatory bill is that in- serve-not particularly for his benefit, but for the benefit of helpsolvents shall be denied relief in bankruptcy proceedings oftener less women and children-his condition will be pitiable indeed. than once in six years. It is said that in many instances persons The shelter for wife and child may be swept away by the tax colhave made an industry of going into bankruptcy-have acquired lector, because not a penny of his estate, be it great or small, is credit, absorbed what they could gather from unsuspecting credit- to go toward the payment of those taxes. ors, and then plunged into bankruptcy, wiped out the old score, The fact is tha~ at every point where an officer in bankruptcy and by aid of a. little perjury (which to them I suppose amounts where the agent of a large collecting establishment, where th~ to little) have gone away with the fruits of their evil doings. powerful who n;take wealth out of the oppression _of the poor,

All agree that as to those people-as to those who go into vol- where these believe that the screws can be put a little tighter untary bankruptcy corruptly and dishonestly, for the purpose of believe that the weight can be made a little heavier, believe that defrauding therr creditors-there ought not to be that relief the burden can be made a little harder to bear, believe 'that the which comes from a discharge in bankruptcy. The very fact slavery of debt can be made a little more complete-everywhere that this rascally use and abuse of. the bankrupt law frequently that any of these" reforms" can be accomplished according to occurs, as no doubt it does, is at once an impeachment and con- the ingenuity of those who have studied them well and apprehend demnation of the law itself. Everybody knows-all experience them fully, this bill provides for the case. has demonstrated-that bankruptcy laws are abused, and that I have not time to go through all these amendments embodied many seek therr aid, not as bonafideunfortunatedebtors seeking in this bill. They can be summed up, in a general way, under 1·elief from debts which they can not pay, but as scoundrels to two or three heads. One is to increase the fees and emolucover up and save property which by scoundrelly acts they have ments of officers. Here is an 4lstance: The trustee is paid now a gathered from unsuspecting creditors, managing under even the percentage on what he distrioutes. Is that harmful to the credbest of bankruptcy acts to e-;cape the liability which otherwise itor or the debtor? He is to be paid under this revised bill-this would rest upon them. That is one of the reasons why bank- ''reform measure," this measure that "perfects" the law-a ruptcy laws should never exist except for a short period of time, percentage upon what he handles; and so it goes clear through. as emergency legislation for an emergency. They will always Ten-dollar fees are to be doubled. be abused; some men, too many men, always will make an indus- There are additional grounds of bankruptcy found and put into try of abusing them. Such is the business of ~ertain fraudulent 1 this bill, lest by chance some unfortunate debtor might escape the


net of the reformer Shylock. The notice necessary to be given when a petition is filed against an involuntary bankrupt under the law as it now exists is too long. It is shortened-hurry them to the gallows. Why stop? Why pause? Swift and complete let your progress be. Shorten the notice; hmJ.·ythe execution! Now, what is the object of that? What man can conceive of an object in it, except that which is beneficial to the powerful agency which forces the bankruptcy, and maybe prejudicial, and probably will be, to the helpless victim of the proceedings?

To enumerate, here are some of the additional obstacles to a discharge in bankruptcy: The great object is first to make it easier and swifter and surer to force into bankruptcy anybody yon choose to put there. Next, to limit still further the victim's prospect for relief. There is no protection for the man wrongfully thrown there. If he is involved in debt, if he is in embarrassed circumstances financially, he is ruined by the filing of the petition. They have made swifter and more secure the course of the man who assails him, and less to hope for is left to the unfortunate.

These are some of the additional things that bar the bankrupt from relief.

(3) Obtained property on credit upon a materially false statement in writin~; made by him to any person for the purpose of obtaining credit, or of bemg communicated to the trade or to the person from whom he obtained such property on credit; or (4) made a fraudulent transfer of any portion of his property to any person; or (5) been granted or denied a discharge in bankruptcy within six years.

Having been denied a discharge within six yeai:s, thrown into bankruptcy again after six years from the day a discharge is granted, after six years from the day a discharge is denied there may be a hope for the hapless bankrupt, but during the six years, whether he rests under the disability of being a bankrupt without a discharge, or whether he was discharged during the six years, though he may be thrown into bankruptcy never so wrongfully, though he may be made to suffer never so cruelly, though the outrage upon him may be unparalleled, there is no discharge for the six years anyhow for the doomed wretch. His doom may be awful, but there is to be no escape from it. Honesty, helplessness, good faith, misfortune, charity, humanity-nothing saves him! The six years' limit absolutely bars him.

Not only that. The phraseology of the law is to be further amended in regard to this matter of discharge. The way of the helpless bankTupt must be made hard indeed. Not only are these conditions imposed, but there is a change of the existing phraseology. Under the existing law a fraudulent intent is to some extent necessary, as witness this provision:

Or with a fraudulent intent to conceal his real financial condition, and in contemplation of bankruptcy, destroyed, concealed, or failed to keep books of account. -

By this bill the word "fraudulent" is taken out of that, the word ; ' true ! ' is taken out of it, and the words " in contemplation . of bankruptcy'' are taken out of it, narrowing it just as much as possible. And that '' reformed '' provision bars from a discharge. And so it goes, from beginning to end of this bill.

I will not dwell upon another feature of the bill before us, though in my judgment hours would hardly suffice for all the words of condemnation which _ it merits. I refer to the provision for enabling corporations to become voluntary bankrupts and to be discharged as such from the obligation of their debts and liabilities.

Let him pretend who will that he yearns for a bankruptcy law for the relief of insolvent debtors, his proposal to give acquittances to corporations must ever raise doubts in my mind as to whether he is entrrely sincere or as to whether his diagnosis of his own motives has been scientific enough to furnish him with a full measure of enlightenment.

Permit corporations to become voluntary bankrupts, and thus to be freed from the burden of their debts, and you open wide the door to fraud. Thus may a corporation be wrecked, to the great injury of its innocent stockholders, and thus may the innocent creditors of a corporation be undone.

Honest corporations, honestly managed, need no bankruptcy law. Dishonest corporations and corporations dishonestly managed deserve none.

When a corporation is swamped the wreck may be deserted and another corporation may be created; but it is quite another thing to desert a man when he is swamped, for your laws can not create another man at will. This provision lacks charity in appearance as it does humanity in fad.

The law which is so framed as to deny relief oftener than every six years , if at all, to poor, suffering men, while it is prodigal in its helpfulness to man's creature, the corporation, no doubt merits corporate benedictions, but I believe it deserves to be accursed for its inhumanity to man.

The whole question, Mr. Speaker, is a very simple one. It is, first, whether four years of this bankrupt law are not enough; whether there ought not to be a repeal of the law and an absolute

prevention, by the repeal, of the fraudulent practices of those who r esort to the bankrupt courts for the purpose of obtaining discharges in order to conceal and keep and preserve safe what they have stolen; whether there ought not to be a repeal in order to protect those who are the victims of those others who would oppress; whether there ought not to be a repeal of the law so that the people may do their business, collect their debts, have their financial and therr personal confidences and security back in therr own communities, where they are known and paEJs for what they are; whether the law should not again be so that friend may help friend in distress without himself being held guiltywithout the friend being guilty of an act of bankruptcy in attempting or accepting with gratitude an act of humanity.

As it is now, a man in straitened crrcumstances applying to his neighbor for aid, and the neighbor lending the aid with the assurance that he will be protected if bad comes to worse, is committing an act of bankruptcy. To go to a friend and r ely upon friendship, to Tender the offices of friendship to a friend in distress, is now to standstampedas a criminal; and they are bythis bill adding to the '' criminality '' of a generous act and increasing the penalties. And so the question next is, Should this bill be passed?

Mr. POWERS of Massa~husetts. I should like to ask the gentleman from Missouri this question: Suppose the bankruptcy act were repealed, what relief, then, would the debtor have? !take it that the only relief he could have must be under the insolvency law of his State, and that would not Telieve him from oppression by creditors residing outside the State, would it?

Mr. DE ARMOND. I have heard of no demand on the part of the debtors anywhere for the relief that a continuance of the bankruptcy law will give. • _

Mr. POWERS of Massachusetts. Do you understand that any State insolvency law can relieve a debtor in a State from a claim that is held outside of the State?

Mr. DE ARMOND. Oh, no. Mr. POWERS of Massachusetts. So that without a national

bankruptcy a~t, the debtor would have no relief except such relief as he can get in the State in which he resides?

Mr. DE ARMOND. And by arrangement with his creditors; of course, I understand that. _

Mr. POWERS of Massachusetts. But if he could not make an aTI'angement with his creditors outside, he could not get the relief.

Mr. DE ARMOND. Of course not. If the very worst that is possible should come to him without the bankruptcy law, he would be no worse off than he would be for six years under this amended bill, provided he had ever been through bankruptcy. You condemn him for six years absolutely, while in the States and under the old law he has some hope from "the mercy or the generosity or the business sense of his creditors; but from this ironbound, ironclad, oppressive, outTageous law he would have absolutely none. The door of hope would be shut.

Mr. POWERS of Massachusetts. Justonemorequestion. Do you know of any State whe1·e an insolvency law ever existed that permitted a debtor to go through insolvency oftener than once in six years?

Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. Why, yes. Mr. DE ARMOND. Oh, yes. Mr. SMITH of Kentucky. A great many of them. Mr. DE ARMOND. All the debtor asks under the insolvency

law of a State is that his estate be distributed, and it is distributed under the law.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I call attention to th_e amendment offered by the gentleman from Alabama, the amen~ent to strike out.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Alabama has offered no amendment.

Mr. DE ARMOND. Do I understand the Chair to say that the gentleman from Alabama has not offered the amendment?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. He has not offered it. Mr. DE ARMOND. Then I offer that amendment, to strike

out all after the enacting clause and insert the matter that is at the Clerk's desk.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows: Amend by striking out all after the enacting clause and insert the follow

ing in lieu thereof: ' That the act approved July 1, 1898, entitled 'An act to establish a uni~

form system of bankruptcy throughout the United States,' be, and the same is hereby, repealed: Prov'ided, That nothing herein shall in any way affect proceedings under said act begun prior to the taking effect of this act, and this act shall take effect ninety days after the approval thereof."

Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I desire to r eserve a. point of order on that.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York reserves the point of order against the amendment.

Mr. DE ARMOND. Had we not just as well dispose of th& point of order?

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 6949 The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will he~r the gentle

man. Mr. DE ARMOND. I did not understand the statement of the

Chair. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The point of order will be re

served, unless the gentleman insists on its being made at once. Mr. DE ARMOND. Ofcotrrseihaveno objection to that. Mr.

Speaker, I do not understand what the point of order is. I understand that one was reserved, but I should like to know what it is.

Mr. RAY of New York. Are you through now? Mr. DE ARMOND. I was just asking for information. I am

now upon the question of the amendment. Mr. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, I want to reserve the unused time. The SPEAKER pro tempo1·e. The gentleman has four min

utes remaining. Mr. CLAYTON. I do not understand the situation. I want

to reserve the unused time that I yielded to the gentleman from Missouri.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. That is four minutes. Mr. DE ARMOND. I offered an amendment, and I desire to

know what is the point of order. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has not used all

the time by four minutes. The gentleman offers an amendment, upon which he is entitled to the floor.

Mr. DE ARMOND. I want to know what the point of order is. Mr. LANHAM. That it is not germane to the bill, which is a

proposition to amend certain sections of the law. If I understand the amendment, it is to repeal the existing law-aU law on the subject of bankruptcy.

Mr. BARTLETT. What is the point of order? The SPEAKER pro tempore. The point of order is that the

amendment offered by the gentleman from Missouri is not ger-mane to the pending bill. .

Mr. STEW ART of New Jersey. Bef01·e the gentleman from Missouri goes into that question I want to ask him-- •

Mr. DE ARMOND. One moment. Mr. Speaker, as this is a very important matter, I think we might just as well have it decided here. I desire to hear what gentlemen have to say upon that question and dispose of it. If the gentleman who raises the point of order, Mr. Speaker, does not desire to be heard, I would like to say a word or two upon the question.

The SPEAKER pro t.empore. Does the gentleman from New York desire to be heard upon the point of order?

Mr. RAY of New York. I reserved the point of order. I supposed that we would dispose of that at a later time.

Mr. DE ARMOND. I think that we had better pass on it now, and then we will know what to do.

Mr. RAY of New York. I have not my copy of the rules before me. The Speaker, the gentleman now in the chair, is a skilled parliamentarian, and for me to talk parliamentary law to him would seem to be a unique performance-a performance I do not care to indulge in, to any great extent at least. But it does seem to me a common-sense idea that the proposition here to amend certain specified sections of the bankruptcy law-a general law containing a great many sections, being a complete law, a complete act in itself-is not amendable by·a proposition to repeal the entire law, wipe it out of existence; that entire repeal should not be in order on the proposed amendment; that it should not be germane to the bill which the committee has presented to the House and which the House is now discussing and is to pass upon. We do not propose by this amendment to change the entire law; we do not propose to modify or enlarge the entire law. R epeal has nothing to do with our propositions, which are presented from the committee, but it is a proposition entirely disconnected therewith and inconsistent. A proposition to wipe out of existence a law which we propose to improve, which we propose in certain respects to amend and make more perfect, is not amended by repealing the law. This question may have been passed upon many times. I have not had time to examine it; but it does seem tome as an original proposition that it can not be germane to the bill now before the House.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. I would like to ask the gentleman a question in that connection. Does not the pending bill repeal certain features of the bankruptcy law?

Mr. RAY of New York. Not at all. It does not expressly repeal a single sentence or word in it. •

Mr. CLAYTON. May I interrupt right on that? Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. In just so far as an amend

ment goes it is a r epeal of some of the features of the present bankruptcy law.

Mr. RAY of New York. It does not repeal anything. It is an addition to some extent, and it is in an addition making more clear and explicit the provisions of the law.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. Permit me to continue the interruption a moment. Your bill now pending does amend fea-tures in the present bankruptcy law1 -

Mr. RAY of New York. Certainly; that is the ptrrpose of it. Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. Now, then, it is not possible

to amend an existing law without repealing or qualifying certain features of the existing law.

Mr. RAY of New York. I do not agree with the gentleman at all in that statement.

Mr. WILLlAMS of Mississippi. Let me finish the question. Mr. RAY of New York. · That might be in thewaythe amend

ment was made, and it would depend upon the amendment in my judgment.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. I s it possible to amend existing law except in one of two ways-either by limiting or by extending the capacity and operation of the existing law? Is there any other way to amend a law?

Mr. RAY of New York. That could be done by addition to, without a repeal of, any part.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. Can you amend a law with-out either adding to it or taking from it? · .

Mr. RAY of New York. Well, I do not know that you could. I do not think you could amend it unless you either add to it or take from it. . ;M;r. WILLIAMS of Mississippi . . And then, unless it was an

idle pretense, any amendment adds to oi· takes from the existing. law. Is it not true that your pending bill in certain features adds to and in certain other features takes from the existing law? And if it be true that the pending bill is pro tanto a repeal either by addition or by subtraction of existing law, is not a further addition or further subtraction always germane to the addition or subtraction sought to be enacted? ·

Mr. RAY of New York. - Mr. Speaker, by simply adding to existing law you do not repeal it at all. Now, by taking one pro-· vision away you might. to a certain extent, r epeal that particular. provision, but you would not r epeal the law.

Mr. CLAYTON. May I interrupt the gentleman one minute? I do not think he remembers one feature of this bill or he would not have answered one question by the gentleman f1·om Mississippi the same as he did. The gentleman from New York said that this bill did not repeal any part of the existing law.

Mr. RAY of New York. It does not in terms, does it? Mr. CLAYTON. This report on page 2 says: The next amendment, section 5 of the bill, make.s definite and certain the

P.urpose of the law as it was framed, to wit, that the words "in contemplation of bankruptcy" mean a present or future state of insolvency and purpose to take advantage of the law.

Now, as I understand it, this bill strikes out from the original law these words: "in contemplation of bankruptcy."

Mr. RAY of New York. Oh, no; the gentleman is mistaken. Mr. CLAYTON. What is the change? Mr. RAY of New York. Look at the bill. Of course in some

respects we do strike out words and add some words, ~aking a broader meaning. In terms we do not repeal any section.

Mr. CLAYTON. You do not have to repeal a whole section· you can repeal provisions by implication. '

Mr. RAY of New York. I understand all that. We will not go into refinement. What I intended to say in reply to the gentleman was that we do not in terms repeal any section or any por.: tion of any section. We do change some language and add some language, and you could not make an amendment without doing that.

Mr. CLAYTON. But you do repeal some provisions in the ex~ isting law. ·

Mr. RAY of New York. I do not concede that; I have denied it. Mr. LANHAM. In every instance where an amendment is

suggested these words were implied: "And the section is hereby amended so as to .read as follows," and there is no purpose to interfere with the general body of existing law.

Mr. RAY of New York. That is it. Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. I find in the gentleman's re

port, on page 5, the following Ianguage-Mr. RAY of New York. I wish the gentleman would not take

up time unnecessarily unless it is for the purpose of instructinothe occl!pant of the chair. I do not want him to ask me question~ on parhamentary law, because I am not competent to answer them; .to ask many ql:le~tions of one knowing no more than I do about 1t would be a ndiculous performance. But I will answer the gentleman's question the best I can. ·

Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. I find on page 5 of the report this language:

Section 5 ~o~es one of the present objections to a discharge and adds four new obJections.

Mr. RAY of New York. I have stated repeatedly, and now if the gentleman has not heard me, let me state it so he can hear. We do add to this bill, but I deny that the addition or provision repeals existing Ia w. · ,

Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. If the gentleman will excuse me, thus far I have read his own language and have not asked a;


question. Now, the question I want to ask is this: If in the pending bill you deny a discharge upon four new grounds, which, under the existing bankrupt law, could be granted, then why is not it germane to extend by amendment the objections which you have in the bill extended to a discharge?

Mr. RAY of New York. So that nobody could be discharged. 1\fr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. Of coursenot. Your present

bill now pending denies to a man, who, the day befoi·e the passage of the bill, could have been discharged, the right to be discharged; and why is it not germane to add to that list men who, prior to the passage of the law, could be discharged, but afterwards could not be discharged, not in a few categories but all categories?

Mr. RAY of New York. If that was the general tenor and purpose of our bill that would be germane, but that is not what you propose. You are proposing to wipe out of existence the entire law. You do not propose to add to causes that are grounds for a refusal to discharge.

l\fr. BELLAMY. I would like to ask the gentleman a question. There are 70 sections in the bankrupt law?

1\fr. RAY of New York. I think so. Mr. BELLAMY. Your bHI simply proposes to amend certain

sections of the bill? Mr. RAY of New York. Seven oreightofthem, I think; possi-

bly more. Mi·. BELLAl\IY. And the rest are left intact? Mr. RAYofNewYork. Yes. Mr. BELLilfY. It does not affect the whole bill? Mr. RAY of New York. The general purpose of the law is

unaffected by the general proposition of our bill. Mr. BARTLETT. I desire to be heard on the point of order

fm· a minute or two. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York

is on the floor. Mr. CLAYTON. Can not anybody be heard in opposition to

the gentleman's pa1·liamentary proposition? Mr. RAY of New York. Sa:,dar as I am concerned, I do not

think I can throw any light upon the question at all. The present occupant of the chair is an experienced parliamentarian, who was studying parliamentary law before I came to Congress, and I have made no study of it at all. I have picked up some things, surely, but bow to the occupant of the chair. I am perfectly willing to leave the question to the present occupant of the chair. Of course, on this question--

Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. The gentleman ought to tell us what his argument is so that we can answer it .

Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, it is almost impossible to speak a sentence in the presence of certain of my respected colleagues-gentlemen for whom I have the highest regardwithout interruption. It does seem to me as if they were trying to fool away the time. Now, as I understand-if I am incol'Tect, the Chair will please correct me-as I understand, without interfering with the general debate we are discussing simply the point of order.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. That is correct. Mr. RAY of New York. If that be so, I will yield the floor.

There is nothing more of interest that I can say on the subject. Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Speaker, I wish to address myself for a

minute or two to the point of order only, and I do so with some reluctance because of the well-known fact that the present occupant of the chair is well versed in parliamentary law; much more so than I am, and therefore I content myself with making a suggestion and citing some precedents, to which I ask the attention of the Chair.

We ought to come back to the question, What is it we have under consideration? This bill proposes to amend the bankruptqy law by providing certain amendments to it which materially change the present law on that subject and which in effect virtually repeal certain pro~ions now existing.

Let me refer to one important particular in which this proposed bill absolutely repeals a certain section of the existing bankruptcy law. We know that in the present law it was provided by an amendment in the House on a vote which changed the bill known as the Bender on bill as reported from the Judiciary Committee, and but for which change I doubt very much if that bill could have become a law at all- a provision requiring that all suits brought by trustees of a bankrupt to recover property which had been conveyed by the bankrupt prior to his bankl·uptcy should be brought in that court alone which would have had jurisdiction if no bankruptcy had taken place. That is an express provision of the existing bankruptcy law-a provision inserted by the House in 1899 by an amendment offered on the floor of the House and advocated most strenuously, as I remember, by the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. L.!.CEY].

Now, because. of the fact that the Supreme Court of the United States since the passage of that bill has decided that a United States court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine cases for

the recovery of property which was conveyed by the bankrupt prior to his adjudication, and therefore where the parties are both citizens of the same States, the State court has the sole jurisdiction and a United States court has no jurisdiction; because of that decision, this bill proposes to repeal absolutely that section of the bankruptcy law by declaring that the United States courts in such cases shall have concurrent jurisdiction with the State courts. Unde1· the present law, as construed by the Supreme Com-t of the United States, the State court has sole jurisdiction unless the United States com·ts acquire jurisdiction by reason of the fact that the parties are citizens of different States.

This bill absolutely provides that a trustee, whether he be a citizen of the same State or a citizen of a different State from the party whom he p1·oceeds against, may bring his suit in the Federal court. In this way that very material and important provi~ sion of the existing bal;l.kruptcy law, which was inserted in this House and without which-it could not have passed the House is proposed by the bill now before us to be repealed. '

Now, the amendment offered by the gentleman from :Mjssomi [Mr. DE .A.IrnoND], which seeks to l'epeal that entire bankl·uptcy act, is offered in the nature of a substitute, and it is a well-known principle of parliamentary law that the opponents of a measure may offer as an amendment in the nature of a substitute a proposition which entirely changes the character of the pending bill to such an extent that even those who advocate the bill in its original form may not vote for it. I ask the attention of the Chair to a sentence which is to be found on page 736 of the Manual:

A new bill may be ingrafted by way of amendment on the words of "Be it enacted," _etc.

And reference is made to Hinds's Manual, 1046, with a refer· ence also to Mr. Jefferson's Manual, which is accepted as authority in this House unless the rules of the House expressly provide otherwise. From Jefferson's Manual, page 187, I read the fol· lowing:

Amendments may be made so as totally to alter the nature of the proposi'tion; and it is a way of getting rid of a proposition by m.a.kin .. g it bear a sense different from what it was intended by the movers, so that they vote against it themselves (2 Hats., 79; 4. 82, M). A new bill may be ingrafted by way of amendment on the words "Be it enacted,".etc. (1 Grey, 190, 192).

So that, Mr. Speaker, when we come to a proposition that substitutes one provision for another we are supported by the wellsettled principle of parliamentary law that the opponents of a measure, if they have the numerical strength, may ingraft upon the enacting clause of the pending measure a substitute which entirely changes the effect of the measure.

Now, I submi.t, Mr. Speaker, that this substitute is germane for the reasons that I have endeavol'ed to convey to the Chan·, because it repeals the ent1re bankl'uptcy law, and the bill before us, while it does not use the words "is hereby repealed," in effect does repeal, and the words are not what make a law, exactly, but the effect that is to be had.

Mr. LANHAM. May I ask the gentleman from Georgia a question?

Mr. BARTLETT. Yes. Mr. LANHAM. What is the object of this bill? Mr. BARTLETT. Which bill? Mr. LANHAM. This bill that we have now before us. Mr. BARTLETT. The object of this bill I think might well

be stated to be an effort to turn the Federal courts into a collection machine for various creditors.

Mr. CLAYTON. And to increase the fees of officers. Mr. LANHAM. That is not an answer from a parliamentary

standpoint. I say, What is the object of this bill-what is the purpose of it?

Mr. BARTLETT. The purpose of this bill is to amend add to, or take away from certain provi ions of the existing bankruptcy law. I think that every one of the amendments adds to it. The gentleman from New York, who made the report---

Mr. WILLiilfS of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman permit a suggestion at this point?

Mr. BARTLETT. Yes. Mr. WILLIAI\IS of Mississippi. An addition to an addition or

a subtraction from a subtraction is always germane. Mr. BARTLETT. Yes; I should think so. I do not desire, Mr. Speake1·, to detain the House any longer.

I desire to say that in my judgment, from the examination I have made of the parliamentary law by which we are guided, from the usage of parliamentary bodies in permitting substitutes to be offered., which, though they may have a different purpo e in view than the authors of the bill intended, though they may destroy the purpose of the bill, yet we have a perfect right to offer, and I submit that this is entirely germane. [Applause.]

Mr. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker the gentleman fl'omNewYork ~fr. RA. Y] advocates, and the committee has offered, the pending bill, entitled "A bill to amend an act entitled 'An act to establish a uniform system of bankruptcy throughout the United States,' approved July 1, 1898." Now, that is the title of the bill-to

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 6951 ·

amend that act. Let us examine the amendments and see if the amendment which I have read in my time and which has been offered at my suggestion by the gentleman from .Missouri [Mr. DE ARMOND] is not entirely germane to this bill.

The bill is to amend the bankruptcy act. It does not say and it is not restricted in substance to amendment by way of addition only. The body of the bill shows that its effect and its object is to amend the bankruptcy law in mOTe than one respect. It amends it, l\1r. Speaker, by adding new provisions to the original bankruptcy law. It amends it by subtracting from the provisions of the original bankruptcy law.

It amends it by adding to it the power of tbe bankruptcy court to make a man's wife a witness in a bankruptcy proceeding. Thatis an addition, pure and simple. It subtracts from the law which gives a man the right to a discharge in bankruptcy as often as he can make a proper showing. Under this bill that right is taken away or not allowed except once in six years. It subtracts from the right of the bankrupt and says he shall not be discharged except once in six years.

Then again, Mr. Speaker, another change in the law. Turn to section 17 of the bankru_ptcy law, and it reads as fo.llows:

SEC. 17. Debts not affected by a. discharge: a. A discharge in ba.n1.."Tuptcy shall release a bankrupt from all of his pro-fable debts, except such as (1) are due as a tax levied by the United States, the State, county, district.. or muIri¢J?ality in which he resides; (2) are judgments in actions for frauds or obtammg property, etc.

By section 6, on page 4 of the bill, this section 17 is amended so as to read as follows:

SEc. 17. Debts not affected by a discharge. -a A discharge in bankruptcy shall1·elease a bankrupt from all of his provable debts, except such as (1) are due as a tax levied by the United States the State, county, district, or municipality in which he resides; (2) are liabilities for frauds, or obtaining property, etc.

In the law the words ''judgments in action '' are used, and the bill amends that .provision by striking out those words and inserting "liabilities." Every lawyer knows what "judgments in action" means. It is a term of well-ascertained legal meaning. It has a :restricted meaning. It is not as large a term in meaning as the word "liabilities." The words "judgments in action " in the original law are stricken out and the word" liabilities !' is substituted. This is one amendment.

So I say, Mr. Speaker, that this bill, both directly and by im~ plication, adds to the original act and subtracts from the original act. Now, every time you make an addition or a subtraction from a law you repeal that law pro tanto. The difference between this bill to repeal a part of the law and this amendment to repeal the whole law is not a difference of principle.

A repeal pro tanto is a repeal different from a repeal in toto in the fact that it is less in extent only. The same principle underlies both. This bill certainly, in the respects that I have named and in others, repeals pro tanto, so far as each one of those amendments is concerned, the original law. This substitute which the gentleman from Missom·i [Mr. DE ARMOND] has offered repeals the law in toto. There is no difference in principle.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. The sections of the original law must be considered as germane to one another.

Mr. CLAYTON. Yes; as said by the gentleman from Mississippi, the sections of the original law must be considered as germane one to the other.

Mr. LANHAM. Will my friend allow a suggestion? Mr. CLAYTON. Certainly. Mr. LANHAM. My friend is a member of the Judiciary Com

mittee. 1\Ir. CLAYTON. Yes; I have the honor to serve on that com

mittee with the distinguished next governor of Texas. Mr. LANHAM. I thank the gentleman. He very thoroughly

understands the objects and purposes of this bill. He was present in the committee, I suppose, when those am"Sndments were considered.

Mr. CLAYTON. Yes. Mr. LANHAM. Now, was it not utterly foreign to the pur

pose of the committee, in presenting these amendments, to suggest any idea of repealing the existing law on the subject?

Mr. CLAYTON. I think not. I think itwas the purpose manifested in almost every line of this bill to repeal very essential parts of the original law, and that is exactly my position, that you intend by this bill to repeal essential and vital parts of the original law. I specify some of them, to wit, the right of a man to avail himself of its operation for a discharge whenever he pleases; to strike out the words "judgments in action" and substitute the word" liabilities," which is a larger word. And in other respects you intend to repeal vital and essential parts of the original law, and to add other provisions.

1\fr. LANHAM. Was it not intended by tbe committee that the original law should stand?

Mr. CLAYTON. As amended, certainly; and yom: amendments go only a part of the way toward repeal. ·My amendment goes the whole way.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. It is not a question of intent. Mr. CLAYTON. You go halfway and I go the whole way.

That is the difference. Now, 1\Ir. Speaker, r believe I have said all I desire to say on this point of order.

Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, it does seem tome that the last argument adduced by the gentleman from Alabama, as applied to his colleague from Texas [Mr. LANHAM], ought to convince the Chair that this proposed amendment is not germane. It ought also to be convincing to the Chair that beTeafter every time it ·is proposed to amend .a law we should not be com_pelled to vote on a proposition to repeal it, but I shall be content to have the decision of the Chair, and I now ask the Chair to decide the point of order o that we may go on with business.

1\Ir. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. Now, Mr. S_peaker, the point that I want to make, and that I want the Chair to listen to, is this: The different sections of the existing bankruptcy law are, parliamentarily speaking, germane to one another. That, I take it, is a proposition which can not be disputed. Sections 2, 3, 21, and 23 of the existing bankruptqy law are germane to one another, in the contemplation of the Chair, vie"Wing questions affecting the existing law, and must neces arily be.

Now, then, if a bill is brought into the House modifying and repealing pro tanto or in toto a single one of the sections of the existing banJn:uptcy law, and if an amendment were offered to the amendment (because the new bill is in the nature of an amendment to the existing law), going a bit further or stopping a bit short, or modifying the amendment of a section of existing law by restricting the meaning of the amendment, or going a bit further and adding to it by still further restricting the operation of existing law by amending or repealing the next section in i;he bankruptcy law, the Chair would undoubtedly :rule that that amendment to the bill would ·.be ·germane. For example, if this bill repeals section 2 of the existing batlkruptcy law, and an amendmentwere offered to it likewise to repeal section 3, I take it there would be no dispute. ·

Now, then, if that be true, why can not -there be added to section 3, section 4, section 5, section 10, or sections 20 or ?5, or all the sections of existing laws clear o-q.t to the· end of the bill? ·Or, in other words, when a bill is offered in the shape of an amendment to existing law, the effect of which bill is to Tepeal in toto a single section of the existing law, or to repeal pro tanto a part of a single section of the existing law, why is not the offering of an amendment to that amendment (regarding this bill as an amendment) a complete repeal pro tanto of a given section or a repeal in toto of a given section germane? And why is not an amendment to that amendment to continue the re_peal of the existing law which has taken the shape of repealing in toto one section of the existing law to another section ge1-mane? And if germane that far, why not germane clear on through to the end of the bill, or, rather, to the end of the repeal of existing law?

Mr. BARTLETT. Let me make a suggestion to my friend. Is it not a fact that this amendment offered by the gentleman from Missomi is virtually a limitation of time as to the existing bankruptcy law as it now exists or as it may be amended to-day?

Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. I think so. .Mr . .BARTLETT. Then, if it were .germane to the bankruptcy

bill, the original limit of time which was to exist as was done in 1800, why is it not germane to amend by limiting the time in this instance?

Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. r think it is; especially as this bill itself changes certain limitations of time.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill befoTe the House is a bill '' to amend an act en ti tied 'An act to establish a uniform system of bankru_ptcy throughout the United States,' approved July 1, 1898." To that bill the gentleman from Missouri offers an amendment which the Chair will ask the Clerk to report again.

The Clerk .read asfollows: .Amend by striking out all after the enacting clause and insert the follow

ing in lieu thereof: "That the act approved July 1, 1 98, entitled 'An act ·to e tablish a uni

form system of bankruptcy throughout the United States,' be, and the same is, hereby repealed: Provided, That nothing h erein shn.ll in any way affect proceedings under said act begun prior to the taking effect of this act, and this act shall take effect ninety da ys after the appro;al thereof."

The SPEAKER pro tempore. To this p1·oposed amendment the point is made that it is not germane.

It is apparent from even a casual examination of the bill that it is a general amendatory bill. Section 1 relates to clause 15 of section 1 of the existing bankruptcy law; section 2 relates to clause 5 of section 2 of the existing bankruptcy law; section 3 relates to clause 4 of subdivision A of section 3 of the bankruptcy law; section 6 relates to section 17, and section 10 relates to section 40, and so on, skipping from section to section tlu:oughout the entire law, without regard to the particular relation of these sections to each other. In other words, 16 sections in all of the 70 sections of the bankruptcy law are here sought to be amended, or more than one-fourth of the entire 1aw.

6952 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-· HOUSE. JUNE 17,

While the Chair has been unable to find any precedents on this question, it has deduced some general principles from former decisions that throw some light upon it. In the Fifty-fu·st Congress it was held that to a bill amending a general law on a specific point an amendment relating to the terms of the law rather than to those of the bill was not germane. The bill in question was an amendment to a general land-forfeiture bill fixing the time when the original act should take effect, and the amendment offered was an amendment providing for the method of classification of the lands described in the original act, so as to determine the character of the land selected by the raih-oad. The decision, which was made by Speaker Reed, was upon the ground that the bill related only to one certain specific poin\ and did not involve the general features of the bill sought to be amended.

Substantially the same principle was recognized by Speaker HENDERSON in a case where amendments were offered of a general character to the Senate joint resolution providing for the administration of civil affairs in Porto Rico pending the appointment and qualification of the civil officers provided for in the act approved April 24, 1900. The same distinction was there drawn between the germaneness of an amendment which was offered to a bill having a single purpose and an amendment to a bill covering several purposes or one general subject. On the other hand, but illustrating the same general principle, recently in the discus ion on the omnibus statehood bill it was held by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HEME!.~.A.Y], the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole, that an amendment offered to include the Indian Territory was germane, because the pending bill related not to one particular Territory but was a general statehood bill, including Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Arizona.

Had the bill been to admit a State the amendment would not have been in order, but it b~ng a bill to admit States the subject of admission generally made the amendment competent. In the light of the principles thus announced, the Chair is inclined to think that any amendment that would be germane to the law sought to be amended would be germane to the pending bill.

It needs no argument to show that it would be competent to amend the pending bill, disposing of it section by section. For example, section 1 may be amended by striking out the words ' ' amended so as to read as follows" and by substituting the word "repealed;" so that the section would read: "That clause 15 of section 1 of an act entitled 'An act to establish a uniform system of bankruptcy throughout the United States," approved July 1,1898, be. and the same is hereby, repealed."

The same method may be followed in the case of each and all of the sections of the bill in their order. And this process, in the opinion of the Chair, may be made to reach to other paragraphs of the bankruptcy law than those specifically refe1Ted to in the pending amendatory bill, because all the sections of the bankruptcy law are germane to each other.

For example, it would be in order to amend the bill by adding additional sections amendatory of sections of the bankruptcy law not refen-ed to in the bill.

If this be so, then it would be equally in order to amend the bill by adding additional sections repealing sections of the bankruptcy law not referred to in this bill. If this process of reasoning be correct, then it is clear that by resort to the method suggested the entire bankruptcy law may be repealed by indirection. As it is one of the purposes of parliamentary rules is to provide for the m'ost direct method of disposing of legislation, and as by the process described the effect intended by this amendment can be reached , the Chair is of the opinion that the amendment must be germane, and therefore overrules the point of order. ~ Mr. CRUl\!PACKER. Mr. Speaker, I desire to offer an amendment and to be recognized in my own right.

Mr. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, I believe I have four minutes remaining of time that was unused, and which I reserved.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is right; but he can not take anoth er gentleman off the floor. The Chair would like t o ask the gentleman from Georgia whether his amendment has been offered or merely was read for information?

Mr. BARTLETT. I had the amendment read at the Clerk's desk.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Indiana offers an amendment , which the Clerk will report.

The Clerk read as follows: Inser t after line 10, pag e 5: . . "Provided, Tha t no per son who has b een adJudged a ban"!n'upt upon hiS

own petition shall b e discha r ged f rom any of his debts until he sha1l have turned over to the proper officer, for the benefit of his cr editors, all :property that may be allowed him under the laws of any State or Territory m excess of $2,000 in value ."

Mr. CRUl\!PACKER. Mr. Speaker, it is exceedingly difficult under our peculiar system of government to have a general bankruptcy law that will operate with perfect equality and fairness throughout the country. There are 45 different systems of collection laws, and a national bankrupt law should fit into the local

colle~tion laws as far as possible. In view of the incongruities among the various collection systems throughout the country, it is exceedingly difficult, if not absolutely impossible, to have a general bankrupt law that will operate with that degree of fairness and uniformity that is necessary to make it a complete and _ permanent success.

In relation to exemptions under the bankrupt law as it exists now the bankrupt can withhold from his creditors of the property he is entitled to under the local exemption laws and still be discharged from his debts. In the State of Pennsylvania the debtor is only entitled to $300 exempt from execution. In Indiana it is $600. In North Dakota it is $6,500. In Iowa, Kansas, and in a number of other States there is absolutely no limitation upon exemptions in point of value. I was talking with my friend from Iowa [Mr. LACEY] not an hour ago, and he stated an instance in the State of Iowa where a man on his own petition went into bankruptcy and obtained a discharge and held a homestead free and safe from his creditors which was worth $250,000 at least.

Now, this disparity of favor ought not to exist, and the amendment I propose simply provides that the debtor who goes into a bankrupt court on his own petition shall not receive a discha1·ge from his debts until he has tJUrrendered all of the property that the State exemption law gives him in excess of $2,000 in value. The philosophy of large and liberal exemptions is that the debtor holds the property given him exempt from sale or execution as a sort of a trust fund; that it constitutes a working capital stock which may be used by the debtor to earn means with which to pay off his debts. It is, in a sense, a trust fund held by the bankrupt for the benefit of the creditors. The present law allows him · to keep this trust fund absolutely and discharges him from his debts.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. Will the gentleman allow me an inter-ruption? · ·

1\'Ir. CRUMPACKER. Certainly. Mr. UNDERWOOD. In some States-for instance, Alabama

the debtor is allowed to waive this exemption. Now, under this amendment of the gentleman from Indiana, if the debtor should waive all his exemption to his creditors, would he not still be allowed to retain a thousand dollars?

1\Ir. CRUMPACKER. This -amendment simply limits the amount that may be claimed under the State law. The bankrupt can not claim more than the State law gives him; but the provision is that he shall not be discharged from his debts if he keeps more than $2,000 worth of property under the terms of any State law. That is the only effect of the amendment.

Mr. TAWNEY. If I understand the gentleman's proposition, it is to repeal the State law in so far as it allows an exemption to a debtor of $2,000.

Mr. CRUMPACKER. No; and it is limited to petitions in voluntary bankruptcy.

Mr. TAWNEY. It would in effect repeal any such provision of the State law.

Mr. CRUMPACKER. Oh, no. Mr. TAWNEY. Do you not dep1'ive the bankrupt of the benefit

of the laws of his State, provided those laws give him as an exemption of more than 2,000 worth of property?

Mr. CRUMPACKER. Theamendmentdoesthat. Butitgives him the option of taking his discharge and giving up everything except $2,000 or of availing himself of the munificent provision of the exemption laws of some of the States and foregoing his discharge. He can not be relieved of his debts and hold a fortune under exemption laws at the same time. He can not have his discharge and keep the fund that has been allowed to remain in his hands on the theory that it is a trust fund to be used for the purpose of accumulating other property with which to pay off his indebtedness.

Mr. TAWNEY. Allow me one more question. Suppose that a little merchant in one of the smaller towns or cities is allowed under State law as an exemption his homestead, valued, we will say, at $3,000. You propose by this amendment to take that homestead away from him, to dispose of it, and turn the $1,000 over for the benefit of his creditors, and allow him to retain the $2,000 in cash?

Mr. CRUMPACKER. We do not. We simply say to him, "If you keep the $3,000 that the State law gives you, you can not have a discharge upon your own voluntary petition. " It does not operate where the proceeding is compulsory. But the bankrupt can not have a discharge upon his own petition if he holds more than $2,000 from his creditors, many of whom may not be worth half that much.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I have occupied more time than I had intended. I think my amendment ought to prevail. It is in the interest of uniformity, justice, and equality. There is no reason in justice why a debtor should be compelled to turn over all but $300 in Pennsylvania in order to secure a discharge from his debts and a debtor in Iowa be allowed a quarter of a million and go free of his obligations.

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 6953 Mr. RAY of New York. I yield ten minutes of my remaining

time to my colleague from Massachusetts-- · Mr. CRUMPACKER. I rise to a parliamentary inquiry.

What becomes . of our amendments? When will they be voted upon?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. They can be voted on at once. Mr. CRUMPACKER. I suggest that the amendments be held

up until we get through with the debate. Mr. RAY of New York. I understood that the amendments

were simply to be offered as we went along, without being voted on: and I had thirty minutes of my time remaining.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. If no gentleman desires to address himself to the pending amendment, the Chair will put the question now.

~Ir. LANHAM. When are we to vote on the proposition of the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. DE .ARMOND]?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will state to the gentleman from Texas that the bill must first be perfected before we can vote on the amendment of the gentleman from Missouri. The Clerk will again report the amendment of the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. CRUMP ACKER] .

The amendment was again read. Mr. DE ARMOND. I would like to be heard for a moment on

that amendment. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will proceed. Mr. DE ARMOND. Mr. Speaker, I think this amendment

should not be adopted. I believe that it is exclusively a matter for the States to determine what the exemption of the citizens should be; and that matter having been determined in each State according to the judgment of the law-making power, and apparently to the satisfaction of the people living there, the same exemption law ought to apply, I think, in the administration of the bankruptcy law. I think the amendment 01;~ght not to be adopted.

Mr. BELLAMY. Mr. Speaker, if I interpret aright the sentiment of the people of our Union on the subject of the bankrupt law, there is no clamor for its repeal, but a strong desire on the part of the people that it should be improved and simplified.

There is no provision in the Constitution that has engendered and fostered commercial and social intercourse among the people of the several States more than that giving to Congress the right to regulate commerce among the several States, and the next provision in the powers of Congress following the regulation of commerce is that giving to Congress the right to pass a uniform system of bankruptcy. This power was essentially a necessary sequence in order to protect equally and equitably the commerce that would follow.

At fu·st the commerce between the orilrinal thirteen States was small and confined to a few towns on ~the seaboard which interchanged as the centers of commerce their products with like towns in other States. But this commerce has grown, and from an inconsiderable beginning the internal commerce of the country has increased to something like 20,000,000 carloa<ls, consisting of country produce, manufactm·ed articles, coal, iron, and other merchandise. The farmer and trucker that sends his produce into another State, the merchant that deals in merchanclise, the manufacturer that makes the products of his mills are alike interested in knowing that when they have sold their property that they will get a return of money at the price at which their articles are sold, and if, perchance, there be a failure that no person will have a preference in the settlement of the debtor's estate over them, but that they will have an equitable, pro rata division of the assets. If the insolvent laws of the various States of the Union were the same, there would be no necessity for a bankrupt law, unless it be for the release of an insolvent debtor.

In the Union to-day the States of Arkansas, Georgia, illinois, Maryland, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Texas, and Louisiana permit a failing debtor to prefer a creditor, while all the other States prohibit preferences. A farmer in the country, situate remote from a town, frequently, as I know in an experience of a number of years at the bar, has been awakened out of a state of imaginary secm'ity to find that his money, loaned to a person at a dlstance, is in jeopardy. The person has made an as ignment of his prpperty for the benefit of his creditors. Some home creditor is prefen-ed, and his debt, equally as honest, made a general or unpreferred claim. And in 90 per cent of the instances the preferred debt absorbs the assets, and there is nothing left for the unpreferred claim. Now, in equality there is equity, and I fail to see any difference whatever from a moral standpoint between honest debts due to a creditor, whether they be for money bonowed or property purchased.

The retention of the present law therefore makes uniformity in the laws for the distribution of the estates of insolvent debtors, and effect a just and equitable settlement of said estates. It compels fairnes where frequently a debtor has a disposition to be unfair. Another reasm1 that I favor the retention of the bank-

rupt law is that I believe that the existence has a deterrent effect on fraudulent failures. As is well known to those who have been engaged in the practice of the law, litigation resulting over failures has discovered or uncovered a large per cent of fraudulent transactions. When the present banln~upt law was first being discussed, in 1896, the failures in the United States were 1.31 per cent of the number of business concerns. It failed to pass. Again agitated in 1897, the failures became 1.26 per cent; in 1898, 1.10 per cent, and just as soon as the law became effective immediately the failures dropped to 0.81 per cent, where it practically continues up to the present time.

I do not agree with the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. BARTLETT] that the administration of the bankrupt law is more expensive than the administration of the State law of assignments. After a very considerable expe1'ience in observing the comparative operation of both laws, I assert that the administration of an estate of any considerable size is much more economical under the bankrupt law. Under the State laws t4.,e commission allowed a trustee is generally 5 per cent on receipts and disbursements, while under the bankrupt law the trustee is allowed 3 per cent on . amounts up to $5,000, 2t per cent up to $10,000, and 1 per cent on amounts of . 10,000 or over.

So the administration is beneficial not only to the creditor, but to the unfortunate debtor, who is the person primarily to be benefited by it.

I hope, therefore, that the law·will not be repealed until the country can be heard from and it is made clear and unmistakable that its repeal is demanded.

The question being taken, the amendment of Mr. CRUMPACKER was rejected.

Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Speaker, I desire to offer the amendment which I send to the Clerk's desk.

The Clerk read as follows: Amend section 2 by adding after the word "services," in line 10, page 2,

the following: "In all applications for the appointment of receivers to take charge of the

property of a bankrupt, the party applying for such receiver, before such receiver is appointed, shall be r equired to execute a bond, with good and sufficient security, to be approved by the clerk, and file the same with the . clerk of the court, obligating himself to pay to the party proceeded against all costs and damages which may accrue by reason of the appointment of such receiver in the event it shall be finally determined that such receiver should not have been appointed: Provided, That no receiver shall be appointed to take charge of the a-ssets of an alleged bankrupt until notice has been given for at least ten days of the application for such receiver to the alleged bankrupt, and until a hearing shall have been had upon such applica-· tion. .

"And rrrovided ju1·ther; That receivers appointed to take charge of and administer property in ca-ses of bankruptcy shall be paid no greater fees as compensation than the following, exclusive of the necessary expenses that may be allowed by the courts, to-wit: As full compensation for their services, $100, and from the assets which may have been administered by them, where the sums received and paid out by them do not exceed $5,000, 5 per cent of such sums· and where the sums received and paid out by them exceed $5,000, 3 per cent of such sums: and no other or greater fees or allowances shall be paid or allowed such receivers for any service whatever."

Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Speaker, to a permanent system of bankruptcy I am opposed. I do not believe we should have a permanent system that provides for either voluntary or involuntary bankruptcy, or for both. I do not believe we sho"Lud have a permanent system of bankruptcy which permits the debtor to be discharged from his debts or one embracing the features of involuntary bankruptcy which allows the creditors of the country to use the courts of the United States as a collecting machine to oppress unfortunate debtors and to hara.ss them through such machinery. I am opposed to a permanent system of voluntary bankruptcy, b.ecause I believe that contracts should be kept and that the Government should not hold out to the citizen any inducement to engage in business or to undertake obligations which he knows if they are not met by him may be paid by a certificate of discharge in bankruptcy.

Frugality, industry, and honesty should be encouraged by the law, and while I believe that there have occurred periods in our history which fully justify the enactment of bankruptcy laws authorizing unfortunate and honest debtors to surrender their property and be discharged from their debts that they may be put upon their feet again and become good and serviceable citizens, yet when such occasions have passed and opportunities have been gi\Ten for the relief of honest and unfortunate debtors, the reason for the law having ceased, the law should no longer exist.

The State courts are ample for the protection of creditors in the collection of debts. The framers of the Constitution did not intend that the United Stat.es courts should be open to every creditor, regardless of citizenship, to cbllect his debts by harsh and quasi criminal methods. The increased cost and expense of suits and proceedings in the United States courts over those in the State courts are and always have been so great and so expensive that in the history of our country no permanent system of bankruptcy has been permitted to endure. The present system is no excep .. tion to the rule, and therefore I am opposed to the one we have at


present, as I was opposed to the system which was enacted in 1867, and which for seven years was administered.

The result of the investigation of the administration of the two systems will convince any fair-minded man that both were operated not for the purpose of collecting the debts of the creditors and relieving the honest and unfm·tunate debtor from his financial distress, but that the result of the administration of the system has operated to benefit only the officers of the Federal courts, registers, assignees, receivers, etc., and that the effects of the debtor have folmd their way chiefly, not to the creditor to whom they were due, but to the pockets of these officers, and therefore the repeal of the bankruptcy law of 1867 was demanded and had. The pre ent system is following fast in the footsteps of the former, and while the demand for its repeal may not be presently heeded, I have no doubt but the abuses which admittedly exist in its administration will soon lead the people to also demand its removal from the statute book.

I desire briefly to call attention to the history of some bankruptcy legislation. -

The banln·uptcy laws of England, when fu·st enacted~ contained no feature of voluntary bankruptcy. We lind that as early as in the reign of Edward I , in 1805, laws were passed in England offering special remedies to merchants against debtors, and in 1542, during the reign of Henry Vill, the bankruptcy procedure was introduced. Lord Coke speaks about the bankruptcy law as having been of foreign origin, intr-oduced into England for the purpose of aiding in the collection of debts. In the reign of Queen Elizabeth a provision was introduced so that only merchants and traders could become bankrupt.

In 1705, during the reign of Queen Anne, provision was made for the first time for the discharge of bankrupts upon their appearing and answering all questions truthfully. This was the beginning of the feature which relieved the bankrupt from his debts. In 1825, during the reign of George IV, the voluntary feature was introduced, and from that time on bankruptcy was to be equally at the service of the debtor and the creditor. It became a method by which the poor but honest debtor might receive relief from his debts, even against the wishes of his creditor.

In 1861 the distinction between debtors and those who were traders and those who were twt was done away with, and relief was given to any debtor who would deliver up his goods to his creditor in the bankruptcy proceeding, so that to-day the English bankruptcy law is applicable to all persons, and to discharge every debt may be procured in a voluntary as well as an involuntary proceeding.

Mr. JI.Iadison, in the Federalist, declared that a system of national bankruptcy was both proper and expedient, the theory of the bankruptcy law being that whenever an unfortunate debtor· is unable to pay his debts in full it is not just that one or a few of his creditors should be paid in full and others 1·eceive nothing, but that his estate should be divided ratably amongst them, and that if the debtor is unfortunate, and honestly so, and delivers all to his creditors, it is only proper that he should be permitted to begin life anew freed from his old debts.

This is done not with any disregard for contract debts, which are held sacred by the Constitution, but it is justified on the theory that every member of society is needed, and that if the per on who is at the mercy of the creditor, weighed down with debt is freed from his burden he may retrieve his reputation and become a valuable member of society, whereas if his earnings and acquisitions are always to be the prey of the voracious creditor he will not be disposed to work and acquire properly the earnings. .

The various States have passed and have in force laws upon the subject of insolvency and insolvent debtors; but since the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States made in the case of Sturgiss v. Crowninshield ( 4: Wheaton, 14:3), no State can relieve the debtor of his debt, even after he has delivered up all of his property.

The first bankruptcy law which we had in this country was pas ed in 1800. It contained a provision for involuntary bankruptcy only, and continued in force for only two years. The next law was passed on August 12, 184:0, following the panic of 1837. That panic, as is well known, was caused by the contraction of the currency, forced by the action of the United States Bank in calling in its loans to retaliate upon the people for the action of President Jackson, who had throttled and strangled that great money monopoly by refusing to approve the bill torecharter it, and by removing the deposits. This l~w contained both a voluntary and an involuntary feature, but 1t became so unpopular, raised so much opposition and indignation at the hands of the people, that it was repealed on March 3, 184:3, by the arne Congress that enacted it.

It has been suggested by some that a bankruptcy bill which did not contain both the vohmtary and involuntary features would not comply with the provisions of the Constitution which

permit Congre s to pass uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcy. An investigation of this subject will show that when the act of 184:0 was introduced, and afterwards pa ed an effort was made to pass a law which contained only a provision for voluntary bankruptcy, and we find the distingui hed Senator from Massachusetts, Mr. Webster; M.r. Clay, of Kentucky; Mr. .Crittenden, from Kentucky; Mr. Calhoun, from South Carolina, and other great statesmen supporting a proposition which provided only for voluntary bankruptcy.

On the 18th of May, 1840, Mr. Webster addressed the Senate upon the bankruptcy bill, a bill having been introduced establishing a uniform system of bankruptcy; and this bill and other bills upon the subject having been 1·efen-ed to the Judiciary Committee, that committee reported to the Senate a bill which provided for voluntarybankruptcyonly. It contained no provi ions by which creditors on an alleged act of bankruptcy might proceed against their debtors with a view to subject them and their property to the operation of the law. It did not look to the coercion by the creditor of his debtor into involuntarybanki·uptcy.

This was the first time that this characteristic of a bill on the subject of bankruptcy had been introduced which contained only a voluntary feature, and in that respect it differed from the former bankrupt laws of the United States and from the English bankrupt laws. The bill as it came from the committee provided for voluntary bankruptcy only. It was supported by Mr. Webster, and he, in his speech on the 18th of May, discussed distinctly the proposition: Can Congress pa s a law providing for voluntary cases only; that is, cases in which the proceedings originate only with the debtor himself? On this subject he declared:

The bill which has been reported by the committee provides for voluntary bankruptcies only. It contains no provisions by which creditors on an alle~ed act of bankruptcy may proceed against their debtors with a view to subJect them and thro.r property to the operation of the law. It looks to no coe1.·cion by a creditor to make his debtor a subject of the law against his will. This is the first .characteristic of the bill, and in this respect it certainly differs from the former bankrupt laws of the United States and from the English bankrupt laws.

The bill, too, extends its provisions not only to those who, either in fact or in contemplation of law, are traders, bnt to all p ersons who declare themselves insolvent or m~able to p y their debts and meet their engagements, and who desire to assign their property for the benefit of their creditors. In this respect, also, it differs from the former law and from the law of England.

The questions, then, are two: First. Can Congress constitutionally pass a bankrupt law which shall

include other persons than traders? Second. Can it pass a. law providing for v oluntary cases only-that is,

cases in which the proceedings ori~inate only with the debtor himself? But now, sir, I come to a very Important inquiry. The Constitution re-

9.uires us to establish uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcy, if we esta blish any. What is this uniformity, or in what is it to consist? The honorable gentleman says that the meaning IS that the law mu t give a coercive power to creditors, as well as a voluntary power to debtors; that this is the constitutional uniformity. I deny this altogether. No idea of uniformity arises from any such consideration. The uniformity which the Constitution require is merely a uniformity throughout all the States. It is a local uni~"it~t \!nd~~~hj_~g more. The words are perfectly plain, and the sense

The authority is to establish uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States. Can anything be clearer? To be uniform is to have one shape, one fashion, one form; and our bankrupt laws, if we pass them a1·e to have one shape, one fashion, and one form in every State. If this be not so, what is the sense of the concluding words of the clause, "throughout the United States?" My honorable friend from Kentucky, Mr. Crittenden, has disposed of this whole question, if there ever could be a question about it, by asking the honorable gentleman from New Jer y what "uniform" means in the very same clause of the Constitution where the word is applied to rules of naturafi.za tion; and what it means in a previous clause where it declares that "all duties of imwst shall be uniform throughout the United States."

Agah1, on the 5th of June, 1840 (Congressional Globe, vol. 8, p. 444:), Mr. Clay, of Kentucky, made a motion to strike out the involuntary part of the bankruptcy pill. This motion was supported by Mr. W ebster, both in argument upon the floor of the Senate and by his vote upon the subject of the constitutionality as well as the justice and propriety of a bill which provided only for voluntary bankruptcy. In advocating the amendment offered by Mr. Clay, Mr. Webster said:

It seems to be agreed by all the friends of any bankrupt bill that there shall be a provision for voluntary bankruptcy. The question now is whether there ought to be also a compulsory power or a power on the part of creditors to subject their debtors in certain ca es to the operation of the law.

It is w ell known that the bill introdu~ed by me contained such a power, and I should still prefer to •retain it. But I do not think this of so much importance as some other gentlemen aud I should cheerfully support a bill which did not contain it if by o doing- I could contribute to the success of the general measure. In truth, on this question and on many others my -vote will be go>erned by a desire to make the billl'.cceptn.ble to others.

Now, sir, the argument for the compulsory clause is that without this power the creditors ha>e no security; that the bill is a one-sided measure, a measu1.·e for the benefit and relief of debtors only quite r egardless of the just right.'< of creditors. All this I deny. I maintain, on the contrary, not only that there is just security for the rights of creditors under the volun· tary part of the bill, but that. that part of itself and by itself is of the highest value and imp01·tance to creditors. This proposition takes for !P'anted what I have no doubt will be found true, that persons in insol~ent circumstances will generally become voluntary bankrupts; and, in the econd place, I maintain that very little >alue is added to the security of creditors by the compulsoJ.-y part of the biTI. The e are points on which I propose now particularly to address the Senate, and, with its patience, I hope to make them clear.

The immediate motion before the Senate, Mr. President, does not justify

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 6955 a. further extension of my observations on thls part of the case. My object has been to prove that this bill is not one-sided, IS not a bill for debtors only, but is what it ought to be, a bill making just, honest, and reasonable provis· ions for the distribution of the effects of insolvents among their creditors; and that the voluntary part of the bill alone secures all these principal object because, in the great and overruling motive of obtaining a discharge, 1t holds out an inducement to debtors who know themselves to be insolvent to stop to stop seasonably, to assign honestly, and to conform in good faith to all the provisions intended for the security of their creditors.

From 1843 until1867 we had no law upon the subject of bankruptcy. In 1867 a bankruptcy law was passed to meet the conditions that followed the destruction of property occasioned by the war of 1861 and to relieve distressed debtors who had been financially overwhelmed by the results of the war. I know something of the administration of that law. I know the records of the bankruptcy courts show that under this law as it was administered the estates of bankrupts were wasted; that both creditor and debtor were robbed by means of exorbitant fees of registers in bankruptcy and court costs and by the wasting the estate in expenses.

I know that men in my own State grew rich upon the fat fees and plunder that they filched out of the estates of bankrupts under that law. I can not, therefore, in the face of the history of the administration of these former laws and the manner in which they have been enforced and the demand of the people which has always followed for their repeal, vote to longer continue a measure having for its main purpose, not the relief of unfortunate debtors, but the enforcement of the claims of the creditors against the debtors, and that, too, by new and harsh methods, which absolutely places the small retail merchant at the mercy of his wholesale merchant creditor; nor can I give rfty consent to the various amendments proposed in this bill which :Q.ave for their purpose the giving to the creditor additional remedies to oppress the unfortunate debtor and to defeat the pm-pose of the bankruptcy law to r elieve the unfortunate class of our citizens who may become overwhelmed by debt.

I have not the time to discuss in detail the amendments proposed. If the law is to remain permanently on the statute book, then I think it wise that we should amend it, but not on the line on which most of the amendments contained in this bill proceed.

The gentleman from Missouri [Mr. DE ARMOND] has forcibly called the attention of the House to the harshness and severity of some of the amendments. I desire to call attention to some of them.

I agree with the committee and the chairman in his report that the amendment contained in section 12 of the bill is very important and should be adopted. I can not conceive how it should be either the law or that it is just that where a debtor makes payments in good faith, in due course of trade and business. to his creditor, without any knowledge on the part of the creditOr that such debtor is insolvent, that such bona fide transactions should, after the insolvency, if it occurs within four months after such bona fide payment, be held to be a preference and that the creditor should sunender such payment before he can prove his debt in bankruptcy for the balance of his claim. . I do not believe that such was intended by the framers of the law, and I am convinced that it is an injustice to the creditor and to the debtor and that this defect in the law should be remedied. I am aware that the Supreme Court of the United States, in the case ofPiere v. Chicago Title and Trust Company (182 U.S., 438) .decided that such payments made in good faith by a debtor' insolvent at the time, to a creditor who was not aware of such insolvency, was a preference. In view of that decision, I am willing to remedy it by a change of the law, as proposed by the committee, if the bankruptcy law is to continue in force.

I am earnestly opposed to the change in the general policy of the law, as proposed in section 8 of this bill, which is as follows:

A .court of bankruptcy may, upon application of any officer, bankrupt or creditor, by order reqmre any designated person, including the ba~pt and his wife, to appear in court or before a r eferee of the judge of any State court to be examined concerning the acts, conduct, or property of a bankrupt whose estate is in process of administration under this act.

I oppose this amendment because it proposes to drag the wife of the bankrupt before the court and subject her to an examination, not as a witness, but as a party. Such examination of the wife and the compelling her to appear as a witness against her husband in proceedings that may subject him to puni hment by the court, which may result in denying him his discharge, which proposes to break down a:nd destroy that confidential relationship which should always eXIst between the husband and the wife and which has been recognized by the law always as sacred: would contravene all the principles of law upon this subject and ove.rride that public policy uniformly adopted and upheld by the courts which forbids confidential communications between husband and wife to be divulged in court.

So particular have the courts been about this that these communications between husband and wife have been held so sacred and inviolable that neither death nor divorce can destroy it. The rapacity of the creditor goes far indeed when it demands such changes in the universal law. Some of the law writers have

said that this rule has been so universal and uniform that no one would ever propose to abolish it. The uniform rule is that such evidence is excluded because it contravenes sound public policy.

On this subject see 1 Greenleaf, sections 333, 346, and 354. While courts have sometimes differed, the better opinion is as

I have stated. (1 Greenleaf, sec. 345; 2 Taylor on Evidence, sec. S09, 909a, p. 590; id., p. 621, and American notes.)

i abstract from Greenleaf and Taylor the following well-settled and accepted principles of law on this subject:

Commurucatwns between husband and wife belong to this privileged class of commnnic.o'l.tions, and are therefore protected independently of the ground of i?-terest and identity, whlch precludes the parties from testifying for or aga.mst each other. ~h~ ha_ppiness of the married state require~ that there should be the most

nnlinnted confidence between husband and wife; and this confidence the law secures by providing that it shall be kept forever inviolable; that nothlng shall. be extl-acted from the bosom of the wife which was confided there by the husband. (1 Greenleaf, sec. 254.)

The law excludes or dispenses with some kinds of evidence, on the ground of J?Ublic poli~Y.· because it :fst_hought.that~efs would more probably result from reqmrmg or pernntting theu admisswn than from wholly excluding them.

The first class of subjects protected from disclosm·e consists of communications between husband and wife. * * * This rests on the obvious ground U?-at the admission of such testimony would have a powerfnl tendency to disturb the peace of families, to promote domestic broils and_ to weaken if not to destroy, that feeling of mutual confidence whlchis the most endear~g solace of married life. (2 Taylor on Evidence, sec. 908, p. 589.)

This proposed amendment to the banln·uptcy law utterly contravenes thif? well-settled doctrine of public policy, and will have the effect that it will visit upon the head of the Wife of the unfortunate debtor the shame and mortification of being dragged before the United States bankruptcy courts and made to disclose these confidential communications between her and her husband which, under the wise policy of the law, have heretofore bee~ held sacred and inviolable. Not only does this bill and the system proposed to be perpetuated under it seek to bring shame and contumely upon the unfortunate husband, but also to disgrace the wife. Against such a monstrous proposition I enter my most earnest protest.

For the enunciation of the American doctrine on this subject see 2 'Fay lor on Evidence, p. 622 et seq.; Castello v. Castello, 41 Georgia, 187.

I now offer the following amendment, which I send to the Clerk's desk.

The Clerk read as follows: Amend section 2 by adding after the word "services," in line 10 page 2

the following: ' ' "In all applications for the appointment of receivers to take charge of the

pro~erty .of a b~nkrupt the party ~pplying for such receiver, before such receryer IS app~mted, snail be reqll.lred to execute a. bond, with good and suffiClent secm·Ity, to be approved by the clerk, and file the same with the clerk of the court, obligating himself to pay to the party proceeded against all costs ~nd 4amages whlc:h may accrue by reason of the appointment of such rece1ver m the event 1t shall be finally determined that such receiver sh<;mld not have been appointed: Provided, That no receiver shall be appomte9- to take charge of the assets of an a}feg~d bankrupt until notice has been given for at least ten days of the ap:fJlication for such receiver to the ~~t1~~~ bankrupt, and until a hearing sha have been had upon such appli-

. "-4nd provided f.urtheT, That receivers appointed to take charge of and admmiSterpropertym cases of bankruptcy shall be paid nogreaterfeesascompensation than the following, exclusive of the necessary expenses that may be allowed by the courts, to wit: .As full compensation for their services $100. and from the assets whlch may have been administered by them, wher'e the sums r eceived and paid out by them do not exceed 5,000, 5 per cent of such sums; and where the sums received and paid out by them exceed $5,000, 3per cent of such sums; and no other or greater fees or allowances shall be paid or allowed such receivers for any service whatever."

The gentleman from Alabama [Mr. CLAYTON] has called attention to the fact that the expenses and commissions paid under this system, as shown by the report of the Attorney-General, have amounted to fr·om 45 to 46 per cent of the amount of the estates distributed in dividends. He compiled and submitted the following statement in support of his assertion, which, with his permission I insert:

1899. 1900. 1001. Total.

ASSETS.

Involunt..·:u·y cases __ $11, '701, 713. 43 $13, 483,209. 45 $2, 534, 266. '79 }S105,006,716.63 Voluntary cases ____ 3'i, 863, 090. 90 33, 098, 771. 22 7, 275,664.84-

DIVIDENDS,

Involuntary cases __ 7'83,871.41 513,481.92 1, 4-23,2-19. 2:)1} 6, 513, 5:;0. 57 Voluntary cases ____ 1, 338, 6C-{). 30 703,363.00 1, 7'50, &}4. 69 FEES AND COSTS.

Involuntary cases __ 90,429.81 82,188.20 366,923. 39 } 2, sro, 616. 79 Voluntary cases ____ 316, 462. 53 406, 141.24 1, 588, 471. 61 LIABILITIES.

Involuntary cases __ 23,207,181. 7'i 27,179.001.20 11, 31~. 689. 03} 84.5 267 01915 Voluntary cases ____ 355,949, 331). 48 264,979,152.45 162, 635, €5 . 2"21 , , •

I desn·e to call attentron to the fact that in different States of the Union and in different districts of the same State there is a

6956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE.

great variance in •the expenses, commissions, etc., paid out by the court for the same kind, amount, and class of services. An examination of the report of the Attorney-General for 1901, to be found on pages 394 to 401, inclusive, will demonstrate this.

I submit the following statement, in parallel columns, showing the expense of administering the present system of bankruptcy in the States of Kentucky and Massachusetts. I place them in parallel columns that the vast difference in the expenditures in the courts of the two States may attra~t the attention of the public and that they may realize the vice of a system which permits in one court such a large amount to be paid out for expenses and in another so reasonable an amount to be paid:

Voluntary ca~es. KENTUCKY. MASSACHUSETTS.

Number of cases----------- 394 Number of cases___________ 1,250 Dividends __________ --------- $57,785.99 Dividends ______ ------------ $002,278. 20 SetaJ?art ------------------- 62,555.00 Exemptions ________ ; ______ 135,182.00 Prionties ------------ _ ------ 88,663.00 Priorities_----------------- 376,605.00 Expenses -------- _ -------- __ 67,355.51 Expenses __________ ------ __ 51,827.48

Involuntmy cases. Number of cases---------- 22 Number of cases__________ 40 Assets ______ ---------------- $009,633.84 Assets ____ ------------------ 119,895.01 Dividends ____________ ------ 10,432.97 Dividends _____ ------------- 57,224.41 Exemptions--------------- 8,075.03 Exemptions--------------- 1, 915.00 Priorities------------- ·- --- 11,300.00 Priorities---------------- -- 50,074.00 Expenses------------------ 83,179.98 Expenses------------------ 3,060.01

In the case of Kentucky there were paid out in dividends and priorities in voluntary cases the sum of $146,448.99, and the expenses were $67,355.51.

In the case of Massachusetts there were paid out in dividends and priorities $678,883.20, and the expenses were $51,827.48.

So that it required nearly 16,000 more to pay out to creditors ·in Kentucky $146,448.99 than it required to pay out $678,883.20 in Massachusetts.

In the cases of involuntary bankruptcy it will be noted that for paying out in dividends and priorities the sum of $21,732.97 it required $83,179.88 in expenses.

In Massachusetts, for paying out in involuntary cases the sum of $107,298.41 it required only $3,060.01 in expenses.

Such disparity in the costs and expenses paid out by the courts in these two States is enough to alarm the public and to require either that the law should be abolished or that it should be so amended as to con·ect such glaring evils.

And so an examination of the report of the Attorney-General will show that this law is used in many States mainly to pay the assets of the bankrupt's estate not to the creditors, but to court costs, expenses, etc.

I call attention now to the administration of this law in the State of Georgia and to the following statement taken from that report: Report of bankruptcy ca~es in the State of Georgia for the year ending Sep

tember 30, 1901. VOLUNTARY CASES.

N o:rthern distlict (194 cases) : Assets _ _____ ______ ____ $85,706.53

Liabilities------ ______ 1,085,573. 45 Dividends--- --- -- ---- 12,162.50 Priorities_------ __ ____ 44,528.00

Southern district (125 cases) :

Assets ----------------- $76,937.91 Liabilities_____________ 972,938. 3l Dividends ---- --- "----- 658.85 Priorities _______ :______ 8, ';20.00 Fees, commissions,ex-Fees, commissions, ex-

penses, etc. ______ --- 11, 160.71 penses, etc.__________ 6,497.25 J VOLUNTARY CASES.

Northern district (15 cases): Southern district (17 cases): Assets .. _________________ $44,395.57 Assets.--------------_--- $37,001. 67 Dividends-------------- 35,254.60 Dividends-------------- 2,556.55 Priorities -----------____ 4,383. 00 Priorities ______ --------- 194.00 Fees, commissions, etc _ 1, 752.10 Fees, commissions, etc _ 2, 384. 55

In one case: Paid out----------- --- -- 39,637.60 Expenses--------------- 1, 752.10

In one case: Paid out---------------Expenses---------------

2,750.55 2,384.55

Leaving __ .. _ ___ _ _ _ ___ 37,885.50 Leaving _____ ---------- 366.00

It will be observed from this statement that in the northern distlict, for paying out in dividends and priorities in voluntary cases the sum of $56,690.50, the expenses were $11,160.71; while in the southern district, for paying out the sum of $9,378.86, the expenses were $6,497.25. . •

It wm be further noted that for paymg out the sum of $39,637.60 in involuntary cases in the northern district of Georgia the expenses were $1,752.10, while in the southern district of Georgia for paying out the sum of $2,750.55 in involuntary cases the expenses were 2 384.55.

The following is a statement of bankruptcy cases in the southern district of Georgia since the last report of the Attorney-General: Voluntary cases (85) : I Involuntary cases (13): Assets. ______ __ ______ ____ $25, 3m. 06 Assets. ___ _____ __________ $18,224.85

Di~. ·d~J?.ds______________ _ 724.10 Diyid.e:J?-ds·---------- --- - 658.86 Prwrities _ ______ ____ __ __ 3,631.00 Pr10r1ties _ -------------- 10,201.00 Expenses---------- --- -- 4,888.00 Expenses--------------- 1,826.39

Mr. Speaker. in order to show the enormous expense to which the people of this country have been put in the administration of the bankruptcy law under the present system in some of the bankruptcy courts I have directed the attention of the House to the report of the Attorney-General and to a statement of my own compiled from that report for 1901. The difference in the

reports of the administration of this law in the States of Massachusetts and Kentucky, in the matter of the payment of fees, commissions, etc. lis so wide and glaring that it is startling. The cold figures demonstrate that in the one State (Massachusetts) the administration has been economical and cheap and in the other (Kentucky) it has been extravagant and expensive.

Mr. GAINES of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I would ask the gentleman how he accounts for that?

Mr .BARTLETT. I can not on any other ground account for it except that there are judges who do not regard the law and who divide up the estates of debtors and creditors to receivers and officials.

Mr. GAINES of Tennessee. Who are the judges? Mr. BARTLETT. I have here an illustration from the State

of Georgia, taking the two distlicts, one the northern and the other the southern. The last report of the Attorney-General shows that the administration of one is economical, in the other that the fees, commissions, etc., are extravagant. In the southern district, in which I live-I beg to read from the report of the Attorney-General for 1901-that there, in cases of voluntary bankruptcy, they have paid out to creditors in dividends and to pay priorities 9,370; and in order to pay out that to the creditors the officials of the courts and the receivers and others were paid $6,497.25 for fees, commissions, and expenses.

In the very same State, amongst the same people, the same character of cases, the same character of claims, and the same kind of people to a-dminister them, in one part of the State-in the northern district-the expenses amounted to 4! per cent in involuntary cases .:116!- per cent in voluntary cases, and in the other~ the southern -district-they amounted to 47 per cent in cases of involuntary and 41 per cent in volulltary bankruptcy.

It is because of these abuses, it is because of the fad that very little at most is realized for creditors, and the officers of the courts, the receivers, and others who are appointed to administer the estates under this law receive for services, costs, etc., the money that should be paid to the creditor, and would be paid under the State laws and Stat~ court administration, that I have offered this amendment, with the purpose of correcting in some measure these evils and abuses.

In fact, such abuses, such extravagance in cost of administration, have been the result; such has been the experience of the people under the administration of every bankruptcy law which has remained upon the statute books for any length of time.

Mr. Speaker, I wish I had time to go into the details of this bill and the proposed amendments; but I must content myself with what I have said. This bill and the existing bankruptcy law might well be termed a law neither to aid the creditor to collect his debt nor to relieve the honest debtor from his burdens, but to aid those who make fortunes out of both. Mr. Speaker, Diekens, in his celebrated work Bleak House, called the attention of the English people to the abuses that existed in the chancery court, and I beg in conclusion to quote what he said:

This is the court of chancery; which has its decaying houses and its blighted lands in every shire; which has its worn-out lunatic in every mad house, and its dead in every churchyard; which has its ruined suitor, with his slipshod heels and threadbare dress, borrowing and begging through the round of every man's acquaintance; which gives to moneyed might the means abundantly of wearying out the right; which so exhaustsfinancesJ patience, courage, hope; so overthrows the brain and breaks the heart tnat there is not an honorable man among its practitioners who would not give-who does not often give-the warning: "Suffer any wrong that can be done you rather than come here."

So I say to this House, so I say to the American debtor and the American creditor, under this system of bankruptcy which we have on our statute books and under these proposed amendments that it would be better for them to suffer any wrong rather than to go into these bankruptcy courts. [Applause on the Demo-. cratic side.]

Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I understand that the gentleman from Alabama claims four minutes, and I understood the Chair to say that he still has the 1-ight to occupy that time.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. That is correct. Mr. RAY of New York. I desire to say now in view of the

lateness of the hour that I hope the gentleman will occupy his time, so that I can complete my remarks.

:Mr. BARTLETT. :Mr. Speaker, in order to be perfectly frank with the House and the gentleman from New York, I understood when I took the floor that I occupied the four minutes that were credited to the gentleman from Alabama, and so governed myself.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under that statement the gentleman from New York [Mr. RAY] is r ecognized.

Mr. RAY of New York. Now, :Mr. Speaker, I desire to yield five minutes to my colleague from Massachusetts [Mr. PoWERs].

[Mr. POWERS of Massachusetts addressed the House. See Appendix.]

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Massachusetts has expired.

Mr. POWERS of Massachusetts. I ask unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the RECORD.

1902 . . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE. 6957 Mr. BARTLETT. I desire to present a like request. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachu

setts and .the gentleman from Georgia as~ unanimous consent to extend their remarks in the RECORD. Is there objection?

There was no objection. Mr. RAY of New York. I offer an amendment suggested by

my friend from Alabama. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question first is on the amend

ment offered by the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. BARTLETT]. The question being taken, the Speaker pro tempore announced

that the noes appear to have it. Mr. BARTLETT demanded a division. The Committee divided; and there were-ayes 38, noes 80. So the amendment was rejected. Mr. RAY of New York. 1\Ir. Speaker, I move the previous

question-·-The SPEAKER pro tempore. The amendment offered by the

gentleman from New York will now be reported by the Clerk. The Clerk read as follows: SEc. 72. Provided, That when the bankrupt in any State has waived his

right to claim his exempt property to his creditors, the bankruptcy court shall not set apart to him this exemption as against ~aid creditors.

Mr. RAY of New York. That is not the amendment I offered. I begpardon; I could not hear.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the 'amendment. ·

Mr. UNDERWOOD. I would like to explainthisamendment. Mr. PAYNE. Has the amendment been fully·reported, Mr.

Speaker? Mr. RAY of New York. May I ask to have it read again? The SPEAKER pro tempore. Where does the gentleman want

this amendment to come in the bill? Mr. RAY of New York. The seventh section, I think. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman want the

amendment to come in section 72 of the bankruptcy law? Mr. UNDERWOOD. Seventy-two. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Seventy-two of the bankruptcy

law. Then it will be section 17, an additional section of this bill. Mr. UNDERWOOD. Yes, sir. Mr. RAY of New York. Has that amendment been read? The SPEAKER pro tempore. The amendment has been read. Mr. RAY of New York. Now, Mr. Speaker,! desiretosaythat

I hope that amendment will be agreed to. It is just and proper. Now, I move the previous question on the bill and all the pending amendments to its final passage.

Mr. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it. Mr. CLAYTON. I wish to know the status of the amendment

which I offered and had read in my time, and which was offered subsequently by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. DEARMOND].

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The amendment will be disposed of after the text of the bill has been perfected. The Clerk will again report the pending amendment,

The Clerk read as follows: Insert as a new section: "SEc . 17. That said act is also amended by adding thereto a new section,

as follows: · "' SEc . 72. Provided , That where the bankrupt in any State has waived his

right to claim his exempt property to his creditors the bankruptcy court shall not set apart to him this exemption as against said creditors.' "

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York.

Mr. RAY of New York. Have I not the right to demand the previous question on the bill and amendments? I have done so.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York asks for the previous question. .

Mr. BARTLETT. Is the amendment offered subject to debate? I am opposed to the amendment.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York has the floor and has demanded the previous question on the bill and amendments to its final passage.

The question was taken on ordering the previous question; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.

Mr. DE ARMOND. Division. . The House divided; and there were-ayes 88, noes 57. · So the previous question was ordered. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question now is on the

amendment offered by the gentleman from New York. The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore an-

nounced that the noes appeared to have it. Mr. UNDERWOOD. I call for a division. The House divided; and there were-a7es 76, noes 55. So the amendment was agreed to. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Thequestionnowison the amend

ment of the gentleman from Missouri, in the nature of a substitute. Mr. RAY of New York. May I have that amendment re

ported again?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the amendment will be again reported.

The Clerk read as follows : Amend by striking all out after the enacting clause and insert the follow

ing in lieu thereof: "That the act approved July 1,1898, entitled 'An act to establish a uniform

system of bankruptcy throughout the United States' be, and the same is hereby, repealed: Provided, That nothing herein shall in any way affect proceedin.gs under said act begun prior to the taking effect of this act, and this act shall take effect ninety days after the approval thereof."

Mr. CLAYTON. I demand the yeas and nays on that ques-tion. .

The yeas and nays were ordered. The question was taken: and there were-yeas 66, nays 137, an

swering" present" 9, not voting 139; as follows: YEAS-66.

Adamson, Allen, Ky. Ball, Tex. Benton, Bowie, Brantley, Breazeale, Brundidge, Burkett, Burleson, Burnett, Candler, Cannon Cassingham, Clayton, Cousins, Davis, Fla.

De Armond, Livingston, Sims, Dinsmore, McCulloch, Small, Dougherty, Maddox, Smith, Ky. Ed wards, Miers, Ind. Snodgrass, Fleming, NortoJ?--1 Spight, Gaines, Tenn. Padge~, Stark, Gilbert, Randell,\ Tex. Stephens, Tex. Griffith, Ransdeu, La. Taylor, Ala. Griggs, Reid, Thomas, N. C. Hay, Richardson, Ala. Thompson, Jones, Va. Richardson, Tenn. Underwood. Kern, Rixey, Wheeler .. Kitchin, Claude Robb, Wiley, Kitchin, Wm. W. Robinson, Ind. Williams, Miss. Kleberg, Rucker, Zenor. Lester, Selby,

Acheson, Adams, Alexander, Allen, Me. Bartholdt, Bates, Beidler, Bellamy, Bingham, Bishop, Boutell, Brick, Bristow, Bromwell, Brown. Bru·k,Pa. Bw·ke, S. Dak. Burleigh, Bw-ton, Capron, Cassel, Cochran, Cowherd, Cromer, Crumpacker, Currier, Cmtisil Dalze , Deemer, Dick, Douglas, Dovener, Draper, Eddy, Emerson,

Bartlett, Bell, Burgess,

Little, Shackleford, NAYS-137.

Esch, Long, Evans, Loud, Fitzgerald, Loudenslager, Fletcher, Lovering, Foerderer, McCleary, Foss, McClellan, Gaines, W . Va. McLachlan, Gardner, Mich. Mahon, Gibson, . Mann, Gillet, N.Y. Metcalf, Goldfogle, Meyer, La. Graff, Mickey, Green, Pa. Minor, Grosvenor, Moody, N.C. Grow, Moody, Oreg. Hamilton, Moon, Hanbury, Morgan, Hildebrant, Morris, Hill Moss, Hitt, Needham, Holliday, Nevin, Hopkins, Olmsted, Irwin, Otjen, Jenkins, Overstreet, Jones, Wash. Palmer, Joy, Parker,

,Kahn, Patterson, Pa. Ketcham, Payne, Knapp, Perkins, Kyle, Power s, Me. Lamb, Powers, Mass. Lanham, Ray,_N. Y. Lessler, Reeaer, Lewis, Pa. Reeves, Lindsay, Roberts,

ANSWERED "PRESENT "-9. Haugen, Mercer, Johnson, Pierce,

NOT VOTING-139. Aplin, Driscoll, Jett, Babcock, · Elliott, Kehoe, Ball, Del. Feely, Klut tz, Bankhead, Finley, Knox, Barney, Flood, Lacey, Belmont, Fordney, Landis, Blackburn, Foster, ill. Lassiter, Blakeney, Foster, Vt. Latimer, Boreing, Fowler, Lawrence, Bowersock, Fox, Lever, Broussard, Gardner, N.J. Lewis, Ga. Brownlow, Gill, Littauer, Bull, Gillett, Mass. Littlefield, Butler, Mo. Glenn, Lloyd, Butler , Pa.. Gooch , McAndrews, Calderhead, Gordon, McCall, Caldwell, Graham, McDermott, Clark, Greene, Mass. McLain, Connell, Hall, McRae, Conner, Haskins, Mahoney, Conry, Heatwole, Marshall, Coombs, Hedge, Martin, Cooney, Hemenway, Maynard, Cooper, Tex. Henry, Conn. Miller, Cooper, Wis. Henry, Miss. Mondell, Corliss, Henry, Tex. Morrell, Creamer, H epburn, Mudd. Crowley, Hooker Mutchler, Cushman, Howard, Naphen, Dahle, Howell, Neville, Darragh, Hughes, Newlands,

g:~dso~~· Ya~~·, ~:!~~~on, Tenn. Dayton, Jackson, Kans. Prince, DeGraffenreid, Jackson, Md. Pugsley,

So the amendment was rejected.

Ruppert, Ryan, Schirm, Scott, Shattuc, Sherman, Showalter, Sibley, Sla-yden, Smith, ill. Smith, S. W. Snook, Southar d, Sperry, Stevens, Minn. Stewart, N.J. Stewart, N.Y. Storm, Sulloway, Sutherland, Tawney, Thayer, Tirrell, Van Voorhis, Vreeland, Wachter, Wadsworth, Wanger, Warnock, Watson, Wilson, Woods.

Pou. Tate,

Rhea, Va. Robertson, La. Robinson, Nebr_ Rumple, Russell, Scarborough, Shafroth, Shallenberger,. Shelden, Sheppard, Skiles, Smith, Iowa Smith, H . C. Smith, Wm.Aldell'! Southwick, Sparkman, Steele, Sulzer, Swanson, Talbert, Tayler, Ohio Thomas, Iowa Tompkins, N.Y. Tompkins, Ohio. Tongue, Trimble, Vandiver, Warner, Weeks. White, Williams, ID- _ Wooten Wright, Young.

6958 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. J UNE 17,

The following pairs were announced: For the session: Mr. WANGER with Mr. ADAMSON. Mr. CooMBs with Mr. DAVEY of Louisiana. 1\fr. BOREING with Mr. TRil\ffiLE. Mr. HEATWOLE with Mr. TATE. Mr. WRIGHT with Mr. HALL. Mr. BULL with Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. YOUNG with Mr. BENTON. Mr. DAYTON with Mr. MEYER of Louisiana. Until further notice: Mr. LANDIS with Mr. CLARK. Ml·. JACK with Mr. FINLEY. Mr. TAYLER of Ohio with Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. HASKINS with Mr. JoHNSON. Mr. Co~ELL with Mr. KLuTTz. Mr. BROWNLOW with Mr. PIERCE, Mr. GILL with Mr. SULZER. Mr. DAVIDSON with Mr. SPARKMAN. Mr. McCALL with Mr. RoBERTSON of Louisiana. Mr. FORDNEY with Mr. BURGESS. Mr. TIRRELL with Mr. Co~TRY. Mr. WARNER with Mr. CALDWELL. Mr. SKILES with Mr. TALBERT. Mr. FosTER of Vermont with Mr. Pou. Mr. MILLER with Mr. LEVER, For this day: Mr. BOWERSOCK with Mr. SCARBOROUGH, Mr. SOUTHWICK with Mr. LLOYD. Mr. GRAHAM with Mr. MAYNARD. Mr. HENRY C. SMITH with Mr. DE GRA.FFIDo.TREID, Mr. HEMENWAY with Mr. COOPER of Texas. Mr. HAUGEN with Mr. GoocH. Mr. MoRRELL with Mr. JACKSON of Kansas, Mr. LITTLEFIELD with Mr. WOOTEN. Mr. MONDELL with Mr. SHA.FROTH. Mr. RussELL with Mr. JETT. Mr. 'TOMPKINS with Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr . BABCOCK with Mr. McANDREWS. Mr. TONGUE with Mr. WILLIAMS of illinois, Mr. THOMAS of Iowa with Mr. V .ANDIVER, Mr. WM. ALDEN SMITH with Mr. WHITE. Mr. SlllTH of Iowa with Mr. SWANSON. Mr. SHELDEN with Mr. SHALLENBERGER. Mr. PRINCE with Mr. PUGSLEY. Mr. PEARRE with Mr. PATTERSON of Tennessee. Mr. RUMPLE with Mr. NEWLANDS. Mr. MUDD with :Mr. NEVILLE. Mr. MARTIN with Mr. MUTCHLER. Mr. LITTAUER with Mr. MAHONEY. Mr. HuLL with Mr. KEHoE. Mr. LACEY with Mr. LATIMER. Mr. l\IARSHALL with Mr. McLAIN. Mr. LAWRENCE with Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. TOMPKINS with Mr. CREAMER. Mr. KNOX with Mr. L ASSITER. Mr . H UGHES with Mr. HOWARD. Mr. HOWELL with Mr. HOOKER. Mr. HEPBURN with Mr. HENRY of Texas. Mr. HEDGE with Mr. GoRDON. Mr. GREENE of Massachusetts with Mr. GLENN. Mr. GARDNER of New Jersey with Mr. Fox, Mr. DRISCOLL with Mr. FOSTER of illinois. Mr. DARRAGH with Mr. FLOOD. Mr. CusHMAN with Mr. ELLIOTT. Mr. CORLISS with Mr. FEELY. Mr. CooPER of Wisconsin with Mr. CoONEY. Mr. CALDERHEAD with Mr. BuTLER of Missouri. Mr. BLACKBURN with Mr. BROUSSARD. Mr. BALL of Delaware with Mr. BANKHEAD. On this vote: Mr. HENRY of Connecticut with Mr. HENRY of Mississippi. Mr. CoNNER with Mr. BELMONT. Mr. FoWLER with Mr. BELL. Mr. MERCER with Mr. ROBINSON of Nebra.ska. Mr. GILLETT of Massachusetts with Mr. NAPHEN, until the 12th. Mr. BUTLER of Pen:psylvania with Mr. RHEA of Virginia, until

Thursday. . Mr. WEEKS with Mr. SHEPPARD, for two weeks. Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Speaker, I voted" aye" on this question.

I observe I am paired with the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. TAYLER. I therefore desire to withdraw my vote and be recorded "present."

The result of the vote was announced as above stated. The bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and read a

third time; and it was accordingly read the third time, and passed. On motion of Mr. RAY of New York, a motion to reconsider the

last -vote was laid on the table.

Mr. CLAYTON . I ask that there be general leave to print for five days on the amendment to the bankruptcy law.

Mr. RAY of New York. I have no objection. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request

of the gentleman from Alabama? Mr. SHERMAN. It is understood that the speeches shall re

late to the subject? The SPEAKER pro tempore. The request was for leave to

print speeches on the bankruptcy law. . There was no objection and leave was granted.

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. PARKINSON, its reading

clerk, announced that the Senate had passed with amendments bills of the following titles, in which the concunence of the House of Representatives was requested:

H . R. 10299. An act authorizing the Santa Fe Pacific Railroad Company to sell or lease its railroad property and franchises, and for other purposes; and ·

H . R . 11725. An act to amend section 4139 and section 4314 of the Revised Statutes.

The message also announced that the Senate had agreed to the amendments of the House of Representatives to the bill (S. 2769) to fix the fees of United States marshals in the Indian Territory, and for other purposes.

The message also announced that the Senate had passed with-out amendment bill of the following title: ·

H . R . 14411. An act to regulate commutation for good conduct for United States prisoners.

The message also announced that the Senate had passed joint resolution of the following title; in which the concm·rence of the H ouse of Representatives was requested:

S. R. 113. Joint resolution authorizing the Secretary of War to furnish condemned cannon for a monument to the soldiers of Worcester County, Mass., who served in the war for the Union, to be surmounted by an equestrian statue of the late Maj. Gen. Charles Devens, United States Volunteers.

UNITED STATES COURTS IN GE<)RGIA., Mr. R AY of New York. I call up the bill which I send to the desk. The bill (H. R. 12205) to provide for circuit and district courts

of the United States at Valdosta, Ga., and to transfer certain counties from the northern to the southern district in said State, was read, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc. 1 That the southwestern division of the southern judicial district of Georgia.1s hereby established, to be composed of the counties of Baker, Berrien, Brooks, Calhoun, Charlton, Clinch, Coffee, Colquitt, Decatur, Dougherty, Echols, h"Win, Lowndes, Mitchell, Thomas, Ware, and Worth, of the southern district of Georgia, and of the counties of Early and Miller, of the northern district of Georgia, which are hereby attached to said southern district and made a part of said southwestern division of said southern district.

SEC. 2. That a tel'lll of the circuit court and of the district court for the southern district of Georgia shall be held at Valdosta, in said State, on the second Mondays in J une and December in each year; and it shall be the duty of the clerk, marshal, and other offic.ers of the southern judicial district to attend said terms of said court and perform all the duties pertaining to their positions, and no additional clel\k or marshal shall be appointed in said district. If, in the o:pinion of the court, it shall become necessary, a deputy clerk may be appomted.

SEC. 3. That all suits not of a local nature in the circuit and district courts a~ainst a single defendant, inhabitant of said State, must be brought in the division of the district where he resides; but if there are two or more defendants residing in different divisions of the district such suits may be brought in either division. All issues of fact in said suits shall be tried at a term of the court held in the division where the suit is so brought.

SEC. 4. T hat prosecutions for crime or offenses hereafter committed in any of the counties of the southwestern division shall be cognizable within such division; and all prosecutions for crime or offenses heretofore committed within either of said counties, taken as aforesaid from the northern district, or committed in the southern district as hitherto constituted, shall be commenced and proceeded with a~ if this act had not been passed.

dis~~~t 5co~~t ~ll e1~r'dfs~rfc~do¥rdfv1~~~r~!ww~~~e i~o~~c;:~-~~!~f tuting this division have been taken, and which would, if instituted after the passa~e of this act, be required to be brought in the southwestern division of said district, may be transferred by consent of all parties to said southwestern division of said district and there disposed of in the same manner and with like effect as if the same had been instituted therein; and all processes writs and recognizances relating tosuchsuit.sand proceedings so transferred shall be considered as belonging to the term of the court in the southwestern division of said district in the same manner and with like effect as if they had been issued or taken in reference thereto originally.

SEC. 6. That in all cases of removal of suits from the courts of the State of Georgia to the courts of the United States in the southern district of Georgia such removal shall be to the United States courtsin the division in which the county is situated from which the removal is made, and the time within which the removal shall be perfected, in so far as it refers to or is regulated by the terms of the United States courts, shall be deemed to refer to the terms of the United States courts in such division.

SEc. 7. That all grand and petit jurors summoned for service in each division shall be residents of such division. All mesne and final proce , sub. ject to the provision herein before contained, issued in either of said divisions, may be served or executed in either or all of said divisions.

SEc. 8. That this act shall be in force from and after the 1st day of January, A . D. 1903.

SEC. 9. All acts and parts ot acts inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed. The amendments reported by the Committee on the Judiciary

were read and agreed to, as follows : Add at the close of section 2, on page 2, the following proviso, to wit: "P-rovided, however, Thatsuitableroomsandaccommodationsarefurnished

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 6959 for the holding of said courts free of expense to the Government of the United States." .

. Add after the word "parties," in line 5, page 3, section 5, the folloWing words, to wit, "or by order of the court."

Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, if it be in order, I desire to offer the amendment which I send to the desk.

The Clerk read as follows: · ·Amend H . R.12205 by striking out all of section 1 afi!er the enacting clause,

ending with line 2, and substitute therefor the followmg: "That the southwestern division of the southern judicial district of Geor

gia is hereby established, to be composed of the counties of Berrien, Brooks, Charlton, Church, Coffee, Colquitt, Decatur, Echols, Irwin, Lowndes, Mitchell, Thomas, Ware, and Worth of the southern district of Georgia."

Amend caption by striking out the w~r~ " !!-nd 0 transfer certain counties from the northern to the southern distr1ct 1n sa1d State."

The amendment was agreed to. The bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and read a

third time; and it was accordingly read the third time, and passed. On motion of Mr. RAY of New York, a motion to reconsider

the last vote wa-s laid on the table. CO~TROL .A..l\'D MANAGEMENT OF PENITENTIARIES.

Mr. RAY of of New York. I call up the bill (H. R.,14410) to provide for the control and management of United States penitentiaries, and for other purposes.

The bill was read, as follows: Be it enacted., etc., That the control and management of all United States

penitentiaries be, and hereby are, vested in the Attorney-General, who shall b!l.ve J!Ower.to appo_int all officers and employees necessary f~r the conqu~t of smd p emtentiar1es;. and for t_he safe-keepmg, care, protec~on, and dlScipli.De of prisoners connned therem. He shall also have authonty to promulgate .mch rules for the government of the officers and employees of said penitentiaries, and prisoners therein confined, as he may deem proper and

ne~~~~ That persons convicted of crimes against the laws of the United States and sentenced to imprisonment in a penitentiary may be confined in any one of said United States penitentiaries on the designation thereof by the Attorney-General. Nothing in this act is intended to int-erfere with existing legislation relative to the confii!.eme~t of pers<?ns conVI~ted _by courtsmartial and sentenced to terms of rmprisonment m a pemtentiary. The Attorney-Gene~l.may in~ discretion,_ tral¢'~r t<? any one of said U~ted States penitentiaries from priSons or pemtentiaries many State or Temtory persons undergoing sentence of imprisonment imposed by the United States courts.

SEC. 3. That the transportation of persons convicted of crimes against the laws of the p-nited States iJI any S_tate, District, <?r T~rritory, and .sent~nced to terms of Imprisonment m a Umted Statespemtentiary, and therrdelivery to the warden or keeper thereof, shall ·be by the marshal of the State, District, or Territory where such convictions may occur: Provided, That such transportation and deliver[ from the District of Columbia, if any.shall be by the warden of the jail o that District; that the actual expenses of such marshal or warden of the jail in the District of Columbia, including transportation and subsistence, hii·e, transportation and subsistence of guards, and the transportation and subsistence of the convict or convicts, be paid, on the approval of the Attorney-General, out of the proper funds.

SEc. 4. That convicts in said United States penitentiaries maybe employed in the manufacture of articles and the production of supplie-S for said penitentiaries, and in the manufacture of supplies for the Government, and in the care and cultivation of the prison grounds and farms, the construction and completion of prison buildings, and on stone, brick, and wood work connected therewith, and for this purpose may be employed anywhere on the prison ·grounds or reservations, and at adjacent ~one quarries, when necessary, under proper guard.

SEc. 5. That ~very prisoner when discharged from said United States penitential·ies shall be furnished by the warden or keeper with transportation to the place of his conviction or place of his bona fide residence in the United States, and if the term of his imprisonment shall have been for six months or more he shall also be furni'Shed by the warden or keeper with suitable cloth-

int~~~6~ ~~~~cts in said United States penitentiaries who have or may become insane may be transfened to the Government Hosp~tal for the _Insane at Washington, J?. C., under th~ same rules and.regulations gov~rm~g the case of wane Umted States prlSOners confined 1n State or Terr1tonal prisons. . . . .

S.&c. 7. That all acts or parts of acts inconsiStent With the proviSIOns of this act are hereby repealed.

The following amendments reported by the committee were read and agreed to:

Before the words "bona fide residence" in section 5, page 3, line 12, insert the word "his."

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

On motion of Mr. RAY of New York, a motion to reconsider the last vote was aid on the table.

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE. A message from the Senate, by Mr. PARKINSON, its reading

clerk, announced that the Senate had agreed to the amendments of the House of Representatives to the bill (S. 640) to extend the provisions, limitations, and benefits of arl act entitled "An act granting pensions to the survivors of the Indian wars of 1832 to 1842, inclusive, known as the Black Hawk war, Creek war, Chm·okee disturbances, and the Seminole war,'' approved July 27, 1892.

The message also announced that the Senate had disagreed to the amendments of the House of Representatives to the bill (S. 5269) to provide a commission to secure plans and designs for a monument or memorial to the memory of Abraham Lincoln, late President of the United States, had asked a conference with the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon, and had appointed Mr. WETMORE, Mr. HANSBROUGH, and Mr. VEST as the conferees on the part of the Senate.

The message also announced that t he Senate had d isagreed to the amendment of the House of Representatives t o the bill (S. .5856) granting an increase of pension to Elizabeth A . Turner, had asked a conference with the House on the disagreeing votes of the two H ouses thereon, and had appointed Mr. GALLINGER, Mr. PRITCHARD, and Mr. T.ALIA.FERRO as the conferees on the part of the Senate.

PUNISHMENT OF UNITED STATES PRISONERS.

Mr. R AY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I call up the bill (H. R . 7206) p!:_oviding for the punishment of United States prisoners for crimes committed while confined in State penal institutions.

The bill was read, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That hereafter when any prisoner confined in any State

prison or reformatory, under or by virtue of a sentence of any United States court, shall commit, or be charged with the commission of, any crime against the laws of the State in which said prison or r eformatory is situated, said prisoner shall be turned over to the proper State authorities for trial, and if the sentence of the State court is either death or imprisonment for life, said ~risoner shall at once be sentenced and said judgment executed. If the Judgment of said State court shall be for imprisonment for a te1·~ of years said prisoner shall be remanded by the State court back to the pnson or reformatory whence said prisoner was obtained, there to serve out the sentence of the United States court, after which time he shall be turned over to the State authorities in Qrder that he may serve out the judgment of the State court.

SEc. 2. That all laws in conflict with the provisions of this act are hereby repealed, and this act shall take effect from and after its passage.

The amendment reported by the committee was read, as follows: Sti·ike out all after the enacting clause and insert the following : That whenever any prisoner confined in any State prison or reformatory

within a State, under and by virtue of a sentence of any court of the United States to imprisonment for a term less than life, has committed or shall commit any crime against the laws of any State of the United States the punishment for which by the laws of such State is death or imprisonment in the State prison, and such prisoner has been or shall be indicted therefor, he may be turned over -to the proper State authorit ies for trial on the requisition of the governor of such State, accompanied by satisfactery proof of the facts and designating the officer or officers to whom such surrender is desired, in case such requisition is approved and such surrender is directed by the Attorney-General of the United States; and if such prisoner is convicted in the State court, and the penalty imposed thereby is either death or imprisonment for life, he may be sentenced and the judgment executed by the State authorities. If sueh prisoner is acquitted, or if convicted and the penalty imposed by said State court is less than death or imprisonment for life, he shall be immediately remanded by the State court to the prison or reformatory whence obtained, there to serve out the sentence of the United States court less the diminution of time hereinafter provided, after which he shall be surrendered to the State authorities to answer the judgment of the State court.

The officers of the State having the custody of such prisoner shall deliver and surrender him at the place of his confinemQllt-to the authorities of the prison or reformatory from which he was obtained: Pmvided, That in no case shall a prisoner so surrendered for trial be admitted to bail by any State official State court, or any judge or justice thereof: Provided further, That nothing in this act contained shall be construed as an absolute surrender of the custody of such prisoner by the .authorities of the United States, but the actual custody of the United States may be immediately resumed and asserted whenever the purpooos of this act are accomplished : Provided jw-thm·, That in case a pardon shall be gi'anted such prisoner by the authorities of either the State or of the United States in the exercise of their power and jurisdiction, then such prisoner shall be immediately subject and surrendered to the authority and proper officials of the other, as the case may be: Providedfurtlter, That no such prisoner shall be surrendered to the authorities of a State under the provisions of this act until such State has provided by law for the detention and surrender of such prisoner to the authorities of the United States in case of his acquittal, pardon, or sentence on conviction to any punishment less than death or imprisonment for life, and has also provided by law that no such prisoner so surrendered shall be admitted to bail by any l"ourt of the State or any judge or justice thereof or any other official of the State. ·

SEC. 2. That whenever a prisoner heretofore or hereafter convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for a crime heretofore committed is surrendered to the authorities of a State under the provisions of this act for trial under the State laws the time during which he is held in custody 'by the State authorities shall be deemed and shall count as part of the term of imprisonment imposed by the UJ!ited States court, and the term of his aetna impl:is<?n~ent in such State prlSOn or reformatory, as the case may be, shall be dlmllliShed according-ly, but any person hereafter convicted and imprisoned for the commissiOn of any crime hereafter committed shall be held and imp1'isoned for the full term Imposed by the court of the United States, without deduction or dilninution of time on account of being surrendered to and held in custody by a. State court under and pursuant to the provisions of this act.

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. GROSVENOR. I assume that this bill is all right, but I

should like to hear some explanation of it. · l'lfr. RAY of New York . Mr. Speaker, I will gladly explain

the matter, and I can do so in two minutes. While the substitute just read is quite long, it was made nec

essary by t he ~onditions. A prisoner convicted under United States law is generally confined in a State prison. At present there is no method by which such a prisoner can be taken from the authorities of the United States while so confined and tried for an offense committed against the State. Now, it happened down in Kentucky that a United States plisoner serving an im· prisonment for a few years in a State institution murdered his keeper.

There is no way by which he can be triecl and convicted of that murder. We would ha-ve to wait eight or ten years, and then the witnesses might be dead: Now, it is proposed to have some special legislation covering such cases. I went to work and drew a bill, and submitted it to some of the best lawyers in the House,

, "6960 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE. JuNE 17,

to cover such cases, which would permit the taking from these State institutions, convicted and confined under jurisdiction of the United States, a prisoner and his trial where he commits a greater offense. Such a bill needs careful provisions, you see, to prevent escape; it needs careful provisions as to confinement and return and custody and what shall be done with him after he is tried by the State and convicted or acquitted. Of course, we provide that if the punishment prescribed by the State is death, then the State takes his life. If the punishment is imprisonment for life , the State may keep him; but if it is for any less time, then we provide he shaH be returned to the United States to serve out his sentence, and then the United States shall turn him over to the State. It is a ·very carefully prepared bill.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.

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

On motion of Mr. RAY of New York, a motion to reconsider the last vote was laid on the table.

SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE A.T EVENING SESSION,

The SPEAKER. At this stage the Chair takes occasion to state that he appoints Mr. OLMSTED, of Pennsylvania, to preside during the evening session.

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA..

Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I call up the bill (H. R. 14892) relating to jurisdiction on appeals in the court of appeals of the District of Columbia, and transcripts on appeals in said court, and to quiet title to public lands, which I ask to have read.

The Clerk read as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That jurisdiction on appeal from the final decision or

order of the Secretary of the Interior in all cases rejecting an application for a patent to land claimed under any of the land laws of the United States is hereby given to and vested in the court of appeals of the District of Columbia. Appeal to such court shall lie whether the rejected a_Pplication for patent be ex parte or whether such rejection be the final decisiOn or order of and in the Interior Department made in a contest for a patent to land between opposing parties claiming the same land: Provided, That nothing in this act shall be construed to give the right of appeal when a patent to the land in question has in fact issued to any party.

SEc. 2. That the transeript on appeal shall consist of the application for the patent, if ex parte, and the proof made in support of the application in the Interior Department, which transcript shall be certified to by the said Secretary of the Interior Department with the official seal thereof attached. If said appeal be taken from a final decision or order of the Interior Department reJecting an application for patent by either party in a case of contest therefor between two or more opposing parties, then the transcript shall be prepared by appellant and shall contain the appellant's application for patent, and the proof in the Interior Department in support thereof deemed necessary by appellant, which said transcript shall be printed and a copy thereof served on appellee, who, if not satisfied with said transcript so served on him by aJ?pellant, shall have the right to print and file in the appellate court, withinthirtydaysaftersuchserviceofappellant'stranscriptonhim,orwithin the time fixed by the com·t, a supplemental transcript deemed by appellee to be neceseary to fully present the case on appeal and his rights therein. No appeal shall be taken from a final decision or order of the Interior Department rejecting an application for a patent made and entered of record and promulgated more than one year prior to such appeal. When an appeal is taken in a contested case, the parties to said contest may stipulate what the record on appeal shall contain, and such stipulation shall be filed with and be a part of the r ecord on appeal. Appeals shall not be allowed under this act from any decision made prior to January 1, 1002.

SEc. 3. That when an appeal is taken to the court of appeals of the District of Columbia as hereinbefore nrovided, the appellant shall give notice thereof to the Secretary of the Interfor, and shall also file in the office of the clerk of said court of appeals, within thirty days, his reasons of appeal sufficiently set forth in writing. . . .

SEC. 4. That the court shall, before hearing such appeal, give notice to the Secretary of the Interior of the time and place of the hearing, and on receiving such nonce the Secretary of the futerior shall give notice of such time and place to such parties as are interested therein, and the Secretary of the Interim· may, if h e so elects, furnish t he court with the grounds of his decision fully set forth in writing and touching all the points involved by the reasons of appeal.

SEc. 5. That the court shall hear and determine such appeal and revise the decision appealed from at such early and convenient time as the com-t may appoint, and the r evision shall be confined to the points set forth in the r easons for appeal; and the court shall also have junsdiction on such appeal to adjudge the rights of the parties to a patent, and to apportion the costs of appeal b atween the parties as to the said com·t seems just; and after hearing and deciding the case the court shall r eturn to the Secretary of the Interior a certificate of its proceedings and decision, which shall be entered of record in the office of the Secretary of the Interior, and shall govern the further proceedings in the case. If the court, on such appeal, shall adjudge that the appellant upon the record as presented is entitled to a patent, the Secretary of the Interior shall issue such patent on the appellant filing in the office of the Secretary of the Interior a copy of the adjudication and otherwise complying with the requirements of law: Provided always, That an appeal shall lie from the court of appeals of the District of Columbia to the Supreme Com·t of the United States.

SEC. 6. That any person claiming title. either legal or equitable, by compliance with any law of the United States for disposal of the public domain, to any public lands the r ecord title of which is in the United States. which the Land Department refuses to recognize, may institute a&-ainst the United States in the Com·t of Claims, and prosecute ,to final decision, any suit that may be necessary to settle the same: Provided, That no such smt shall be brought for cause now existing, where the final decision of the Land Department was made prior to January 1, 1002, at any time after the expiration of six months after the passage of this act, nor t.. for causes h ereafter arising, aft~r six months from the final deci"'ion of the Land Department upon such cl1dm, and suits hereunder not brought within such time shall be forever ba1-red.

SEc. 7. Tb.at all such suits shall be by petition in the nature of a bill in equity, and shall be conducted and determined in all respects, except as

herein otherwise provided, according to the rules and principles of equity, practice, and jurisprudence in the courts of the United States; and for the purpose of this act the Court of Claims is h ereby invested with the jurisdiction and m:wei'S exercised by courts of equitr so far as it may be n ecessary ~i~\!<~{e "ef in any suit which may be Instituted under the provisions of

SEc. 8. That notice of every suit authorized by this act shall be executed by the delivery of a true copy thereof, with a copy of the petition..,..~ the Attorney-General, whose duty it shall be for and in behalf of the united States to demur to or answer the I_>etition therein within thirty days after the service of such process upon him, unless the court shall for good cause · shown grant further time for filing the sam e.

SEc. 9. That if two or more parties claiming the same lands under different r ights shall institute separate suits under the provisions of this act such suits shall be consolidated and tried together, and the court shall determine the question of title, and grant all proper relief as between the prospective claimants as well as between each of them and the United States. If the court decide in favor of any claimant, both a-s against the United States and other claimants, it shall so decree, and proceed by proper process to put such successful claimant in such p ossession of such portion thereof as he may be thus found to be entitled to and upon the filing of a certified copy of such decree with the Secretary of the Interior he shall cause a patent to be issued to the party in whose fa. vor such decree shall be rendered for the lands therein adjud&-ed to him: Provided, That either pa1-ty may, within ninety days after rendition of any final judgment or decree in any suit authorized by this act, carry such suit by appeal to the Supreme Com-t of the United States, which court is hereby vested with full jurisdiction to hear and determine the same on such a:ppeal,.in the same manner and with the same effect as in cases of appeal in eqmty causes from the circuit com·ts of the United States: .And provided further, That in case the judgment or decree of the Court of Claims in any such suit shall be adverse to the United States, the Attorney-General shall prosecute such appeal within the time above described; and the taking of an appeal from any such judgment or decree shall operate as a supersedeas thereof until the final hearing and judgment of the Supreme Com't thereon.

The committee amendments were read, as follows: Strike out sections s; 7, 8, and 9. The SPEAKER. The question is on agreeing to the amend

ments. The amendments were agreed to. The SPEAKER. The question now is on the engrossment and

third reading of the bill. The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, read

the third time, and passed. On motion of Mr. RAY of New York, a motion to reconsider

the last vote was laid on the table. FEES OF JURORS IN UNITED STATES COURTS.

Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I now call up the bill (S. 4769) to fix the fees of jurors in the United States courts, which I will ask the Clerk to read.

The Clerk read as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That on and after the passage of this act the per diem

pay of each jm·or, grand or petit, in any court of the United States shall be $3 a day instead of $2 a day, as now provided by law.

The SPEAKER. The question is on the third reading of the Senate bill.

The bill was ordered to be read a third time, read the third time, and passed.


SOCIETY OF THE ARMY OF SANTIAGO DE CUBA..

Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I now call up the bill . (H. R. 11656) to incorporate the Society of the Army of Santiago de Cuba, which I will ask to have read.

The Clerk read as follows: Be it etwcted, etc., That William R. Shafter, J . Ford Kent, and John C.

Bat~s, of the United States Army; G. Creighton Webb, of New Yorki in the State of New YorJ.s Lyman W. V. Kennon, Charles Morts Samue B. M. Young, SamuelS. ~:;umner, Wallace F . Randolph, Jos(lph w neeler, Adna R. Chaffee, Alfred C. Sharpe, Philip Reade, and James T. Kerr, of the United States Army; John Jacob Astor~ of New York, in the State of New York; Hamilton S. Hawkins, of the Umted States Army; Adelbert Ames, of Lowell, in the State of Massachusetts; Chambers McKibbin and Eugene D. Dimmick, of the United States Army; and Charles D ick, of Akron, in the State of Ohio, officers and members of the council of The Society of the Army of Santiago de Cuba, and their associates and successors, be, and they are hereby, incorporated and made a bodfpoliticand incorporate in the District of Columbia by the name of " The SoClety of the Army of Santiago de Cuba," for patriotic, historical, and educational purposes, to record the history and conserve the memory of events of the campaign which resulted in the surrender on the 17th day of July, 1898, of the Spanish army, the city of Ssntiago de Cuba and the militaryprovince to which it pertained; and oy that name it may sue and b e sued, plead and be impleaded in a y com·t of law or equity, and may have and use a common seal and change the same at pleasure.

SEc. 2. That the said corporation shall have the power to take and hold personal estate and such real estate, to the amount of $50,000, as shall be necessary and proper for the promotion of the purposes of said corporation, which shall not be divided among the m embers of said corporation, but shall descend to their successor§ for the promotion of the objeots aforesaid.

SEc. 3. That said corpora ton shall have a constitution and regulations or by-laws, and shall have the power to amend the sam at pleasm·e: Provided~ That such constitution and r egulations or by-laws do not conflict with the laws of the United States or of any State.

SEC. 4. That said corporation may hold its meetings in such places as said incorporators or their succeEsors shall determine, and shall report to the Congress, through the Secretary of War, such por tions of its meetings and transactions as its officers shall deem to be of general public interest.

The committee amendments were read, as follows: On page 2, line 8, after the word "campaign," inse1-t the words "of the.

Army and Navy of the United States." an~. page 3, after the word 'determine," in line 5, strike out all of li.ne 5, 6,.

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 6961 The SPEAKER. The question is on agreeing to the amend

ments. The amendments were agreed to. The SPEAKER. The question now is on the engrossment and

third reading of the bill. . . The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a thll'd time, read

the third time, and passed. On motion of Mr. RAY of New York, a motion to reconsider

the last vote was laid on the table. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONERS AND CONSTABLES IN THE INDIAN

TERRITORY. Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I call up the bill (H. R.

14923) for the appointment of five additi<?nal Uni~d States. commissioners and five additional constables m the Indian Tern tory, which I send o the desk and ask to have rea-d.

The Clerk read as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Judge. of the United St,ates court of the west

ern district in the Indian Territory IS hereby !1-u~horiZed and. emyo~ered to appoint three additional United States coiDIDlSsiOners for said district, who shall ha. ve their headquarters established and~ located at Sapulpa, Wa~on~r, and Okmulgee, in the Creek Nation; and. the JUdge of the northern ~hstrlCt of the Indian Territory is hereby authoriZed and empowere4 to appomt two additional United States commissioners, who shall have their headquarters e tablished and be located at Pryor Creek and Nowata, in the Cherokee NILtion. Said commissioners shall hold office for four yea:rs from the da.te of their appointment and until their successors .are ~ppomte?- and qualified. Said commissioners shall have the same qualifications, duties, powers, and jurisdiction, and shall receive the sa1p.e .compe_nsation a~ are no:w provided by law for other United States COIDIDlSSioners m the Indian Territory. The judge of said district shall, b.Y o~der of co~rt\ fi~ ~he ~ete~ and bounds of each of the commissioner's districts for said JUdiCial di.stnct, aJ?.d .he sha;ll also fix the times when and the places where each of said commissiOners m said district shall hold his regular terms of court.

SEC. 2. That all cases pending in commissioners' COl?-rts at the ti:n~ of the passage and approval of an act entitled "An act making appropnations for the current and contingent expenses of the Indian Department and for fulfilling treaty stipulations with various Indian tribes for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1903, and for other purposes,'' shall be. transferred to the commissioner's court herein proVIded for nearest the residence of the defendant, which shall have the same jurisdiction and shall try the same as if originally b1·ought in that court. . . . . . . .

SEc. 3. That the judge of the western district m the Indian Territory lS hereby authorized and e1p.powe~ed to appoint a constab~e f<;n' each .of the three commissioners herem provided for ~n t]?.e western dlS~nct of ~Id Te~r:itory· and the judge of the northern district of the Indian Territory IS hereby authorized and emP.owered .to appoint a cons~b~e for ea~h of th.e two commissioners herein proVIded form the northern distnct of said Territory, each of which C<?nstables shall h<?ld <?ffice for a term of f.our years fro:n;t the time of his ap~omtment and until his successor lS appomted and qualified. The qualificatwns, duties, and powers, and the compensation of said constables shall be the same as that now provided by law for other constables in the Indian Territory.

SEC 4. That all persons now residing in the western judicial district who have heretofore been appointed and commissioned notaries public in the Indian Territory, and whose terms of office have not yet expired, are here hr. empowered and authorized to continue to act as such notaries public until the expiration of the term for which each was appointed. .

SEc. 5. That this act shall take effect from and after its passage and approval.

Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker~ I am inclined to think that we ought to have unanimous consent to consider that bill in the House as in Committee of the Whole. While I do not think there will be any objection to this, still it does make in a way a charge on the TTeasury, because it c1·eates these new officers in the Indian Territory.

The SPEAKER. The Chair thinks that the special order allows the gentleman to bring it up in the House.

Mr. RAY of New York. Very well. All I desire to say to the House is that this matter was submitted to a subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee, of. whi~h Mr. W ~RNER, of illinois! was chairman. Careful consideration was given to the necessity of these officers. The subcommittee made investigations and were satisfied that these new additional officers should be given. Every member of the committee was of that opinion. The report was unanimous.

:Mr. ROBINSON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker--The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from New York yield to

the gentleman from Indiana? Mr. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, may I interrupt the gentleman? Mr. RAY of New York. I yield. The SPEAKER. To whom does the gentleman from New York

yield? Mr. RAY of New York. I yield to my colleague [Mr. CLAY

TONl. Mr. CLAYTON. I simply want to add to the statement made

by the gentleman from New York the further statement that I have had several letters from different people-business men, merchants, and lawyers in the Indian Territory-saying that the passage of this measure is essential and in the interest of public justice. I indorse the statement of the gentleman that this measure has received the unanimous approval of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. LACEY].

The SPEAKER. How much time does the gentleman yield?

XXXV-436

Mr. RAY of New York. Whatever time the gentleman needs. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Iowa [Mr. LACEY] is

recognized. Mr. LACEY. Mr. Speaker, I simply want to say that frequent

requests for the passage of a bill of this kind have come to various members of the Committee on Indian Affairs; but as that committee has no jurisdiction of the question, of course it could not take any action. The necessity for the bill, however, is very evident.

1\Ir. RAY of New Yoi·k. You do not question the necessity? Mr. LACEY. Oh, no; I have no doubt of it. Mr. ROBINSON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker--The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from New York yield to

the gentleman from Indiana? Mr. RAY of New York. Certainly; five minutes, or such time

as the gentleman desires. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Indiana is recognized

for five minutes. Mr. ROBINSON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I shall not inter

pose any objection to the passage of this bill, because any legislation for these benighted people of the Indian Territory is like a breath of fresh air in a charnel house. I ask this opportunity to present to the House again the state of anarchy that prevails in the Indian Territory. One hundred thousand school children there are neglected by Cong~·ess in our failure to pass some law providing for their education. At present there is an absence of all law on the subject outside of towns.

The insane of the Indian Territory are transported to the asylum across the Potomac River here because there is no law providing for their care or for the security of the people who might be injured by reason of their violence.

Only three days ago a representative of the Indian Tenitory in the city of Washington was asked by the authorities there to consult the various departments of the United States Government to see if some means could be provided for the ca.re of a violent insane man. The result of the inquiry and effort was that no law could be found to cover the case, and he was advised by the very authorities who should provide or recommend Jegislation that the insane man had better be shipped to some sister State and there be cared for. Twenty-five of those insane from the Indian Territory are to-day at St. Elizabeth's, the only place where they can be cared for and protected.

Three hundred thousand people of the Indian Territory have no law for their government to-day. No law for schools, for institutions, for highways and bridges. Congress has denied to these people the legislation necessary for their proper government. I only desire to emphasize this fact, thinking that perhaps at some time we may secure the remedy which has been so long desired by these people and legislation that American c.itizens surely deserve.

Mr. LITTLE. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman from New York will yield for a moment, I desire to ask him a question. If Iremember couectly, constables in the Indian Territory have no power to appoint deputies. That being true, I would suggest whether it would not be wise to give them the power to appoint at least one deputy with the approval of the judge.

Mr. RAY of New York. It would not be wise to do that here without consideration. If that is a matter of wisdom and the gentleman will present it to the Judiciary Committee, we will consider it carefully, but to do such a thing here in the haste of legislation would be unwise.

Mr. LANHAM. It can be considered in the Senate on an amendment.

Mr. RAY of New York. Yes; as my colleague suggests, it can be offered a-s an amendment to the bill in the Senate.

Mr. LITTLE. I have no objection to the pending bill. I have no doubt it ought to be passed, but there ought to be some other provisions. ·

Mr. RAY of New York. Such matters ought not to be acted on hastily without consideration in the committee.

The bill wa-s ordered to a third reading; and was accordingly rea-d the third time, and passed.


SUPPRESSION OF TRA.IN ROBBERIES. Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I call up House bill

11412, for the suppression of train robberies in the Territories of the United States and other places, and for other purposes.

The bill was read, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That any person who within any State or Territory of

the United States, or other place subject to the jurisdiction thereof, obstructs or derails or makes an assault u~on any railroad train railroad cars, or railroad locomotive operating within such State Territory, or place, and upon which the United States mail is carried or which is en~aged in interstate commerce, Jor the purpose and with the intent to commit murder, robbery, or any other felony, upon said train, cars, or locomotive, or upon or against

6962 · CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. JUNE 17,

any person or persons lawfully on said train, or cars, or locomotive, shall be punished as follows: If the death of an:y such person is effected or thereby caused, s uch offender shall suffer death; if death is not caused, he shall be imprisoned not less than five nor more than twenty years.

SEc. 2. That any person who attempts to comnnt the offense mentioned in section 1 of this act shall be imprisoned not less than one nor more than ten

Ysi'c. 3. That any person who aids, abets, or incites- another to commit either of the offenses mentioned in sections 1 or 2 of this act shall be deemed a principal offender.

SEc. 4. That upon the trial of a person charged' with the violation o! this net it shall not be necessary to prove, nor shall it be deemed material to a conviction, that the defendant or defendants intellded to effect the death of or to rob or commit a felony UJ;>On or against :my particular person, but it shall be deemed sufficient if it lS proved to the satisfaction o! the jury that as a result of such unlawful act some person or persons had been killed, rob bed, or injm·ed, as the case may be, or that such act was committed with the design to commit any crime . .

The amendments recommended by the committee were read, as follows:

On page 1 line 5 after "an," insert "unlawful." On page 1:lines fand 8, st1·ike out "and upon which the United states mail

is carried or." On page 1, line 9, strike out ''for the purpose and" and insert in lieu

thereof the following: "or which is operating within a Territory of the United States."

On page 1, from lines 10, n, and 12, strike out the following: "upon said train

1 cars, or locomotive or upon or against any J.>erson or persons lawfully

on sa.1d train, or cars, or iocomotive," and insert mlieu thereof the following: "or who with such intent makes an unlawful assault upon any person lawfully on such train, cars, or locomotive."

On page 1, line 13, strike out the word "such." The section will then read as follows: "That any person who within any State or Territory of the United States-;

or other place subject to the jurisdiction thereof, obstructs or derails· or makes an Unlawful assault upon any railroad train, railroad cars, or railroad locomotive operating within such State, Territory, or place, which is engaged in interstate commerce, or which is operating: withih a district or Territory of the United States, with the intent to comiDit murder, robbery, Ol.' any other felonv, or who with such intent makes an unlawful assault upon any person la wfUUy on such tra.in, cars, m· locomotive, shall be punished as follows: If the death of any person is effected or thereby caused, such offender shall suffer death; if death is not caused, he shall be imprisoned. not less than five nor more than twenty years." ·

Mr. SMITH of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker--Mr. RAY of New York. How much time does- the gentleman

want? Mr. SMITH of Kentucky. I would like to have considerable

time on this bill. This is a very important bill. Mr. RAY of New York. We have only a few minutes remain-

ink. SMITH of Kentucky. · This bill iB too important to be rushed thl:ough in that time, and I hope it will not be insisted upon.

Mr. RAY of New York. I will take but two minutes to explain the bill, and then! will yield to the gentleman from Kentucky five minutes,. and then I shall be inclined to call for a vote.

Now, this bill involves just this, nothing more and nothing less: This country of ours, in some sections, has been infested for years with train robbers, who have carried on their operations somewhat in the Tenitories and to a very large extent in the sparsely populated States, or in those parts sparsely populated on the frontier. The States have so little real interest in this class of criminals where the crime has been committed away fi·om civilization that if they have acted at all it has been after a reward has been offered by the United States or by the suffering railroad or express company for the capture of these robbers. In the meantime the criminals have disappeared, and if no reward has been offered then the State has done nothing; and as the United States has been powerless to do anything, no effort has been made to capture these train robbers.

Now, if we can add to the power of the States the power of the General Government the two will a-ct together in the suppression of these train robberies, and where the offense is committed so far :D:om real civilization that the State does not feel like taking hold of it the United States Government will take hold of it, and we will be sure to wipe out this business of ,robbing and holding up trains. Now, what is the objection to it, gentlemen? The sole and only objection comes from our friends on the other side, who

• are sticklers for State rights. They contend we are invading a power that belongs to the State and conferring it on the Federal Government. In other words, that the Federal Government has no right and should not exercise the right to enact a law against murder and robbery upon an interstate train or a train carrying the mails.

The SPEAKER. The two minutes of the gentleman have ex-pire~ ·

Mr. RAY of New York. There is the objection. Now I yield five minutes to the gentleman n:om Kentucky.

Mr. SMITH of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I desire to be recognized in my own right.

The SPEAKER. That can not be done while the gentleman from New York has the floor. He is entitled to one hour.

Mr. SMITH of Kentucky. Then I will let the gentleman get through, an<l then I will ask to be recognized. ·

Mr. RAY of New York. I move the previous question on the bill and amendments to its final passage. .

The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the noes appeared to have it.

Mr. RAY of-New York. Division, Mr. Speaker. The House divided; and there were-ayes 65; noes 55. Mr. SMITH of Kentucky. Tellers, Mr. Speaker. Tellers were ordered. . The SPEAKER. The Chair will appoint as tellers the gentle

man from New. York [Mr. RAY] and the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. SMITH].

The House again divided; and the tellers reported-ayes 72, noes 52.

Mr. SMITH of Kentucky. I make the :[?Oint that no quorum has-voted.

Mr. BARTLETT. I make the point that there iB no quorum present.

Mr. LANHAM. Mr. Speaker, pending that, I move that the House do now adjourn..

The SPEAKER. That i& in order, of course. Mr~ RAY of New York. I demand the yeas and nays. Mr: PAYNE. A parliamentary inquiry~ The SPEAKER. The Chair understands that the gentleman

from Texas moves that the House do now adjourn. Mr. PAYNE. A parliamentary inquiry. Under the rule that

was adopted last night if this motion to adjourn is adopted, still we can have an evening session, the rule providing that the evening session shall oe had at 8 o'clock this evening.

Mr. LANHAM. Then I change my-motion and move that the House take a recess.

The SPEAKER. The Chair thinks that is the better form, although the rule provides for an evening session to commence at 8 o'clock. If the gentleman from Kentucky would withdraw his point of no quorum there can be no objection made to that.

Mr. SMITH of Kentucky. I withdraw the point for that purpose simply.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Texas moves that the House take a recess until 8 o'clock.

Mr. RAY of New York. Mr. Speaker, what becomes of my demand for the yeas and nays?

The SPEAKER. That will take care of itself. [Laughter.] ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED.

Mr. WACHTER, from the Committee on Enrolled Bills, reported that they had examined and found truly enrolled bills of' the following titles; when the Speaker signed the same:

H. R. 2470. An act granting an increase of pension to Charles P. Maxwell;

H. R. 6402. An act granting a. pension to Mary J. Adams; H. R. 292. An act granting a pension to Hemietta Gottweis; H. R. 8781. An act granting ~pension to .Mary E. Holbrook; H. R. 798n. An act granting a pension to Clara C. Hawks; H. R. 618n. An act granting ar.pension to Carrie B. Farnham; H. R. 7353. An act granting a. pension to Nancy M. Williams; H. R. 5328. An act granting an increase of pension to Samuel

Bortle; . H. R. 2192. An act granting an increase of pension to Benja

min F. Shearer; H. R. 9366. An act granting an increase of pension to Peter T.

Nonis; H. R. 514.5. An act granting an increase of pension to Thomas

Swan; H. R. 6414. An act granting an increase of pension to William

W. H. Davis; H. R. 7922. An_act granting an increase of pension to Richard

G. Watkins; H. R. 6890. An act- granting an increase of pension to Robert

G. Scroggs; H. R. 5146. An act granting an increase of pension to Florian

V. Sims; H. R. 3677. An act granting an increase of pension to James F.

Gray; H. R. 3263. An act granting an increase of pension to John

Rev ley; H. R. 6991. An act granti.ng an increase of pension to Esek B.

Chandler; H. R. 3770. An act granting a pension to James E. Dickey; H. R. 5018. An act granting an increase of pension to Johann

Conrad Haas; H. R. 5877. An act granting a pension to Robert Watts; H. R. 3986. An act- granting a pension to Martha A. Cornish; H. R. 5866. An act granting an increase of pension to William

P. Schott, alias Jacob Schott; H. R. 5550. An act for the relief of_ W. C. Taylor; H. R. 7882. An act granting an increase of pension to John H.

Smith:;

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 6963 H. R. 8698. An act granting an increase of pension to Nelson

Churchill; H. R. 3262. An act granting an increase of pension to David

T. Bruck; and . H. R. 7906. An act granting a pension to Martha G. Young.

ENROLLED BILLS PRESENTED TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

Mr. WACHTER also, from the Committee on Enrolled Bills, reported that they had presented this day to the President of the United States for his approval bills of the following titles:

H. R. 7679. An act granting an increase of pension to Franklin Snyder;

H. R. 8794. An act granting an increase of pension to Henry I. Smith; •

H. R. 12828. An act granting a pension to Mary E. Culver; H. R. 12420. An act granting a pension to Wesley Brummett; H. R. 12865. An act regulating the use of telephone wires in

the District of Columbia; H. R. 13278. An act granting an increase of pension to Levi H.

Collins; H. R. 4103 . .An act granting a pension to William C. Hickox;

1 H. R. 1054:5. An act granting an increase of pension to Solomon P. Brockway; and

H. R. 9334. An act to amend an act to prohibit the passage of special or local laws in the Ten-itories., to limit the Ten-itorial indebtednes.s. and for other purposes.

SENATE BILLS REFERRED. Under clause 2 of Rule XXIV, Senate bills of the following titles

were taken from the Speaker's table and referred to their appro: priate committees as indicated below:

S. 6008. An act granting an increase of pension to David Vickers-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

S. 5001. An act granting an increase of pension to Orange Sells-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

S. 5758. An act granting an increase of pension to David Hamto the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

S. 5747. An act granting an increase of pension to James E. Bader-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. _

S. 5660. An act granting an increase of pension to George W. Berry-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

S. 5659. An act granting an increase of pension to Melinda Heard-to the Committee on Pensions.

S. 5431. An act granting a pension to Daniel Dougherty-to'the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

S. 5076. An act granting an increase of pension to Katharine W. Clarke-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

S. 4~57. An act granting an increase of pension to Stiles L. Acee-to the Committee on Pensions.

S. 4827. An act granting an increase of pension to George W. Stott-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

S. 4811. An act granting an increase of pension to John W. Dick-to the Committee on Invalid Pe sions.

S. 4454. An act granting an increase of pension to John D. Sullivan-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

S. 4251. An act granting an increase of pension to William C. Banta-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

S. 4211. An actgrantinganincrease of pension toAsa Wordento the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

S. 4121. An act granting a pension to Elizabeth Jacobs-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

S. 3715. An act granting an increase of pension to Henry Weaver-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

S. 3644. An act granting an increase of pension to James :Mealey-to the Committee on Invalid·Pensions.

S. 3~65. An act granting an increase of pensio~ to Eliza M. Miller-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions;

S. 3315. An act granting an increase of pension to George W. Bradshaw- to the Committee on Invalid Pensions;

S. 3238. An act granting a pension to Martha Elizabeth Henchto the Committee on Invalid Pensions;

S. 2345. An act granting a pension to William Johnston-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions;

S. 2306. An act granting an increase of pension to William H. Lessig-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions;

S. 2283. An act granting an increase of pension to William F. Angevine-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions; and

S. 1666. An act granting an inc1·ease of pension to Rufus V. Lee-to the Committee on Invalid Pension3.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE.

By unanimous consent, Mr. HEATWOLE obtained an extension of his leave of absence for one week, on account of sickness.

The motion to take a recess was then agreed to. And accordingly (at 5 o'clock p.m.) the House was declared

to be in recess nntil8 o'clock this evening.

AFTER THE RECESS. The recess having expired, the House resumed its session, with

Mr. OLMSTED, Speaker pro tempore, in the chair. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the special order this

evening's session is devoted exclusively to the consideration of bills reported by the Committee on Indian Affairs.

SALE OF SITES FOR MANUFACTURING PLANTS, ETC., IN INDIAN TERRITORY.

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I first call up the bill (S. 5718) providing for the sale of sites for manufacturing or industrial plants in the Indian Tenitory.

The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the chief executive officer of any one of the Five •

Civilized Tribes in the Indian Territory may, with the approval of the Seol'etary of the Interior, and upon such terms and conditions as said Secretary may prescribe, sell and convey, in tracts not exceedin~ 40 acres, or a quarter of a quarter section, at any one place, such lands adjoining or in the vicinity of a town site in that nation, as may be desired for the establishment and operation of a manufacturing or industrial plant which will tend to encourage the cultivation of the la-nds held by the tribe or its members, or which will promote the general welfa1·e of the community.

The proceeds of any such sale shall be paid to the Secretary of the Interior and be by him covered into the Treasury of the United States to the credit of the tribe and shall be disbursed as other funds of the tribe upon the dissolution of the tribal government. Where the lands so sold and conveyed are occupied and improved by any member of the tribe he shall be compen.sa.red for his right of occupancy or improvements out of the proceeds of the sale in such manner as the Secretary of the Interior may direct. As to lands in the Choctaw or Chickasaw Nation, such sale and conveyance must be made by the chief executive officers of the two tribes acting together, and the proceeds of the sale shall be-credited in the Treasury to the two tribes according to their respective intere ts. After allotment has been made of the lands of any tribe desired for the .establishment or operation of such plant, the sale and conveyance thereof may, during the period when alienation is otherwise prohibited or restricted, be made by the allottee in the manner and subject to the restrictions herein prescribed, instead of being made by the chief executive officer of the tribe.

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I suggest that the report be read, as it states what the bill is in as few words as I can state it myself.

The Clerk read as follows: The Committee on Indian Affairs, to whom was r efet'l'ed the bill (S. 5nB)

providing for the sale of sites for manufacturing or industrial plants in the Indian Territory, beg leave to submit the following report and recommend that said bill do pass without amendment:

The title of tlie act correctly describes its object, which is to p1·omote the sale and purchase of additional tribal properties adjoining or near town sites for the usa of manufacturing or industrial plants. The object of the bill is to encourage the entrance of such industries into the Territory, and thus promote its material interests.

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I have an amendment which I wish to offer.

The Clerk read as follows: On page 2, after the word "tribe," in line 18, insert the following: "The clerk of the United States court for the southern district shall ap

point deputy clerks for the courts at Tishomingo and Ada; that in addition to the places now provided bylaw for holding court in said district court shall be held at Duncan, and alllawsregulating the holding of court shall be applicable to Duncan."

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas.

The amendment was agreed to. The bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the third

time, and passed. On motion of Mr. SHERMAN, a motion to reconsider the last

vote was laid on the table. RATIFICATION OF AGREEMENT WITH KANSAS OR KA W INDIANS OF

OKLAHOMA. Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I now call up the bill (B. R.

12597) to ratify and confu-m an agreement submitted by the Kansas or Kaw Indians of Oklahoma , and for other purposes.

The Clerk read the bill, as follows: · Whereas the Kansa.s or Kaw tribe of Indians of Oklahoma Territory has

submitted the following proposed agreement to Congress, with the r equest that the same be accepted, ratified, and coniirmed, to mt: AGREEMENT OF THE KANSAS OR K.A. W INDIA 'S OF OKLAHOMA TERRITORY

AMO G THEMSEL YES RELATIVE TO THEIR TRIBAL LANDS AND FUNDS, AND MEMORIAL TO CONGRE S.

This agreement and memorial of the Kansas or Kaw Indians, entered into on behalf of said Indians by Wah-shungah, Wah-moh-o-e-ke, Forrest Chou· t.ean, Mitchel Fronkier, William Hardy, Akan Pappan, and Gen. W. E. Hardy, duly authorized to r epresent said tribe by a vote of a majority of the adult members thereof, at a general council held for the purpose of selecting representatives to enter into this agreement and memorial, witnesseth:

SECTIO:N 1. The roll of the Kansas or Ks.wtribe of Indians, as shown by the records of the United States in the office of the United States Indian agent at the Osage Indian Angency, Oklahoma Territory, now in charge of said tribe, as it existed on thefirstda.yof December,1901, and all decendants born between December first, 1901, and Deeember fir t,1902, to persons whose names were on said roll on December first, 1901, is hereby declared to be the roll of said tribe, and to constitute the legal membership of said tribe, and the lands and money of said tribe shall be divided among the members of said tribe, as shown by the roll made UJ>, as directed herein, and the lands and moneys of said tribe shall be divided among said members a.s hereinafter provided.

SEC. 2. All lands belonging to said Kansas or Kaw tribe of Indians located in the Territory of Oklahoma, except as herein provided, shall be divided among the members of said tribe, giving to each hiS or her fair share thereof, in acres, as follows:

First. There shall beset aside to each member of said tribe, as shown by

6964 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. J UNE 17 ' , the roll of membership December fu-st, 1901; and their descendants born between that date and December first, 1902, one hundred and sixty (160) acres of land for an homestead, which shall be nontaxable and inalienable for the period of twenty-five yea1-s from the first day of J anuary, 1903, exce_pt as hereinafter provided. Where the members of said tribe have already selected their homesteads of one hundred and sixty acres, the same are here by confirmed, and the members who have not selected their homesteads shall do so within thirty days after the ratification of this agreement; and if any member fails to make .such selection within said time, then it shall be the duty of the United States Indian agent in charge of said tribe to make the selection for such member or members: Provided, That selections of homesteads for minors shall be made by his or her parents, and the selections of homesteads for othern than minors, who are unable for any reason to make their selections, shall be made by the United States Indian agent in charge of said tribes: P1·ovidedfurther, That in case there are any children born to members of said tribe between the ratification of this agreement and the first day of December, 1902, selection shall be made for them within thirty

· days after their birth, and all selections must be made on or before January

flr~~J-~ . .After each member has selected his or her homestead the remaining lands in Oklahoma Territory belonging to said tribe, except as herein provided, shall be divided equally, in acres, among said members, giving to each, as nearly as practicable, the same number of acres of farming and grazing lands, and the share or each member shall be given to him or her as near as possible to his or her homestead selections. The lands, other than

. the homestead, set aside to each member shall be free from taxation as long as the title remains in said member but in no event to exceed twenty-five years, and the same shall not be sold or encumbered in any way before the expiration of ten years from the date of the deed to said member, except as herein provided and with the a:pproval of the Secretary of the Interior, and it shall be his duty to carefully mvestigate each sale or transaction before he approves the same: Provided, That the lands of minors shall be inalienable during their minority: ProvidedfU?·the1·, That all selections and allotments made under this agreement shall conform to existing surveys of said reservation in tracts of not less than eigh1;y (80) acres.

SEC. 3. It shall be the duty of the Urn ted States Indian agent, the clerk in charge of the Kaw subagency, together with a committee of three members of the tribe, to be selected jointly by the agent, clerk in charge, and the council of the tribe, to divide the surplus lands among the membe1-s of the tribe, in accordance with this agreement.

SEc. 4. In selecting his or her homestead a member shall not be permit-red to select lands already selected by another member of said tribe, unless such other member is in possession of more lands than he and his family are entitled to under this agreement; in such case, the member in possession shall have the right to make the fu-st selection.

SEC. 5. The Secretary of the Interior shall furnish the head chief of said tribe deedsJ properly filled out, for the conveyances herein provided for, and said head cruef shall thereupon, and in the presence of the agent in charge of said tribe, proceed to execute said deeds, and when the same are executed they shall be delivered to the United States Indian agent in charge of said tribe and it shall be his duty to see that said deeds are properly delivered to the n:'tembers entitled to the same: Provided, That a separate deed shall be given to each member for the lands conveyed as a homestead: Provided further That if, for any cause, any member of said tribe is unable to receive his or her deed, then it shall be the duty of such United States Indian agent to see that such deed is properly recor~ed with the register o~ de~ds for the county in Oklahoma Terr1tory to which the Kansas Reservatwn IS attached.

SEc. 6. All deeds shall be approved by the Secretary of the Interior, which approv~l, and the sig~ng.o~ the same by the head c?lef, s~all ope1:ate as a relinq]tlshment to the mdividual member of all th~ r1ght, ti~le, and mte-rest of the 'United States and of the Kansas or Kaw tr1be of Indrnns (as a tnbe) in and to the lands embraced in his or her deed. All disputes between the members of said tribe as to the right of possession in the selection of homesteads sball b e adjudicat-ed and settled by the United States Indian agent in char15e of said tribe, subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Indian

~~~7. There shall be set aside and reserved from selection or allotment one hundred and sixty (160) acres of land, including the school and agency buildings, to conform to the public survey, which said one hundred and sixty (160) acres of land said tribe cedes to the United States, including the improvements; and the United States agrees to maintain a school for the education of children of Indian blood at said place for the period of ten (10) years, and as much longer as it deems necessary, the land and improvements to be subject to final disposition by Congress. Said land shall be exempt from taxation. There shall be reserved from allotment twenty (20) acres of land, including the present cemetery, to be used as a cemetry, and the same shaU be exempt fr?m taxation.. There shall be reserved from allotment eig~ty. (80) acres, includmg the dwellings now used by agency trader and other b~din~ at said agency not used by the employees of the Govermnent, which sa1d ei~hty (80) acres shall be set aside as a town site, which shall be surveyed and laid off mto town lots.

The lots in said town site are to be sold at public auction to the highest bidder under such rules and regulations as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the iiiterior, and the proceeds of said sale, after deducting the cost of the sm-vey and sale, shall be placed in the Treasury to the credit of said Indians: Provided, That the Secretary of the Interior may reject any and all bids for such town lots: Provided further, That if any member of said tribe is in possession of any town lot or lots, and has any building and other improvements thereon he shall have the right to purchase one lot seventy-five (75) feet wide bl one hundred and sixty (160) feet deep, including his or her improvements, a such price as the council of said tribe may fix on the lots, exclusive of ~mprovements: Pmvided, That the lots unsold shall be exempt from taxation as long as the title remains in the tribe.

SEc. 8. The funds of said tribe, including the one hundred and thirty-five thousand dollars ($135,000) due said tribe under the treaty of June 14, 1846 (see Ninth U. S. S., page 842); the Kansas school fund., amounting to twentyseven thousand one hundred seventy-four dollars and forty-one cents ( .7,-174.41) (see 21st U. S. S., page 70), and the Kansas general fund., amounting to twen~y-six thousand nine hundred seventy-eight dolla1-s and eighty-nine cents ($25,978.89), derived from the sale of lands in Kansas and all other moneys now due, or that may be fOlmd to be due said Indians; all money that may be received from the sale of their lands in Kansas, the money received from the sale of town Iota in Oklahoma Territory, as hereinbefo~·e provide<L and all money found to be due to said tribe on claims against the United States shall be segregated and placed to the credit of the individlrnl members of said Kansas or Kaw tribe of Indians on a basis of a pro rata division among the members of said tribe, as shown by the roll of membership of said tribe, as provided, on the first day of December, 1902, said credits to draw interest. as now authorized by law, at the rate of five (5) per centum per annum; and the interest that may accrue thereon shall be paid annually to thft members entitled thereto, except in cases of minors, in which cases the interest shall be paid annually to the parent until the child for whom the interest is so paid arrives at the age of twenty-one (21) yeai-s: Provided, That if the Commissioner of Indian Affairs becomes satisfied that the inter-

est and payment of any minor is being misused or squandered, he may withhold the va:yment of such interest. In case of minors whose parents have died the mterest shall be paid to the legal guardian, as above provided: Provided, That the amount placed to the credit (together with the accrued interest) of each member of the tribe of the age of tw "nty-one (21) yearn may be paid to such member in ten (10) equal payments, one payment each year: Provided further, That if the Secretary of the Interior deems it advisable, he may pay to any member of said tribe, over the age of twenty-one years, the full amount of the principal and interest that may be credit,1d to such member: Provided fu,·ther, That the sum ascertained to be due l:iaid tribe shall be segregated as soon as possible after December 1,1902: Provided further, That when the children whose shares have been placed to their credit shall arrive at the age of twenty-one (21) years, before the expiration of ten (10) years from the date of the ratification of this agreement, then the share due such member or members may be paid to them at the annual payments after they arrive at the age of twenty-one (21) years in equal amounts, so that such share will be fully paid at the expiration of said ten years; and where such children arrive at the age of twenty-one (21) years at or after the expi· ration of said ten years, then the full amount due such member may be paid to them at the next annual payment after they arrive at the a&'e of twentyone (21) years: Pmvi ded fuTthm·, That the Secret{try of the Interwr may with· hold any of the payments provided for in this section if, in his judgment, it woulq be to the best interest of the member entitled to said payment to do so: P1·ovided, furthe1·, That the Secretary of the Interior shall offer at public sale all tracts or parcels of the Kansas trust and diminished reserve lands, within the State of Kansas, belonging to said Kansas or Kaw tribe of Indians, fo1· which no application has been filed under the provisions of existing laws in relation thereto. Such la.nds shall be offered for sale by advertisement for not less than thirty (30) days, in two newspapers in the proper land district, one of which shall be published in Morris County, Kansas, and by posting in the local land office notice for the same period, and, upon the day named in such notice, such lands shall be sold for cash to the highest bidder at not less than the price fixed by law.

SEc. 9. That all funds remaining to the credit of or found to be due from the United States to any member of said tribe, at his or her death, shall be paid to his or her heirs under the laws of the Territory or State in which such member resides at the date of his or her death.

SEc. 10. The Secretary of the Interior may, in his discretion, at the request of any adult member of said tribe, issue a certificate to such member authorizing him to sell and convey any or all lands deeded him by reason of this agreement, and may pay such member at the next annual payment his or her pro rata share of the funds of said tribe, if, upon consideration and examination of the request, the said Secretary shall find said member to be fully compet-ent and capable of managing and caring for his or her individual affairs: Provided, That upon the issuance of said certificate, the lands of such member, both homestead and surplus, shall become subject to taxation, and such member shall have the right to manage and dispose of such propertY' the same as any other citizen of the United States, and upon the issuance of :~~1c~~t~~atee~~~;!tet~~~~i~~F~al~et1!%!~ due him or her such member

SEC. 11. ~Eat the adult heirs of any deceased Kansas or Kaw Indian, whose selection has been made or to whom a deed has been issued for his or her share of the lands of said tribe in Oklahoma '1'erritory, may sell and convey the lands inherited from such descent; and, if there be both adult and minor heirs of such inherited lands then such minors may join in a sale thereof by a &"uardian duly appointed by the proper court of the county in which said mmor or minors may reside, upon an order of such court made upon petition filed by such guardian; all conveyances made under this proVISion to be subject to the approval of the Secretary of the Interior, under such rules and re~ulations as he may prescribe.

SEC. 12. All claims, of whatever nature, which said Kansas or Kaw tribe of Indians may have or claim to have against the United State~; shttll be submitted to a commission to be appointed by the Secretary of the Interior from the 'Officers or employees of his Department for investigation, consideration, and settlement; and the United States shall, without delay, rendel' to said tribe of Indians a complete accounting of all moneys agreed to be paid to said tribe to which said tribe may be entitled under any treaty or act of Congress. If the settlement of the claims •1f said tribe submitted to said commission (and the accounting) is satisfactory to said tribs, the amount found due shall be placed to the credit of the members of said tribe, according to the terms of this agreement, within one year after the r eport of said commission is made. But if the settlement of the clairnsof said tribe or the accounting is not satisfactory to said tribe, or if they are satisfactory and Congress fails to appropriate the money to pay the same within one year after the report of said commission and the accounting, then the said tribe of Indians shall have two years from the date of the report and accounting in which to enter a suit in the Court of Claims, with the right of appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, by either party, for the amount due or claimed to be due said tribe from the United States under any treaties or laws of Cone,:I·ess, or for the misappropriation of any of the funds of said tribe or the failure of the United States to pay the money due the tribe. And juri diction is hereby conferred upon sa1d United States Court of Claims to hear and determine all claims of said tribe against the United States and to enter judgment thereon.

If the question is submitted to said court, it shall settle all the l"ights, both legal and equitable, of both the said Kansas or Kaw tribe of Indians a.nd of the United States. The claims submitted to the commission may b e submit. t ed by one or more petitions, to be filed by s.."\id tribe with said commission. If an action is brought in the Court of Claims, it shall be presented by a single petition, making the United States party defendant, and shall set forth all the facts on which the said Kansas or Kaw tribe of Indians bases its claim or claims against the United States, and the said petition may be verified by the agent or attorney of said tribe, upon informatiOn or belief as to the existence of such facts, and no other statements or veri.fl.ca ... ion shall be necessary. Official letters, papers, reports, and public records, or certified copies thereof, may be used as evidence.

SEc. 13. The said Kansas or Kaw Indians hereby memorialize Congress to ratify and confirm this agreement and to make provision for carrying it into effect: P1·ovided, r.rhat if any material amendments are made in this agreement by Congress the same shall not become effective until such amendments are approved by a majority of the adult members of the Kansas or Kaw tribe of Indians.

Be it enacted, etc., That the said agreement be, and the same hereby is, accepted, ratified, and confirmed with the following amendments: Strike out section 13 and change section 14 so as to read section 13.

Amend the title so as to read: "A bill to accept, ratify, and confirm a proposed agreement submitted by the Kansas or Kaw Indians of Oklahoma, and for other purposes."

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, while this is descTibed as a treaty, it is in fact a memorial presented to Congress by the Kaw Indians. It imposes ri.o burdens whatever, directly or indirectly, upon the Treasury. It provides for the distribution amongst

1902. co·NGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 6965 themselves of all their funds and all their lands. That is substantially all that it does. The Commissioner of Indian Affairs, in an elaborate report, which I will print in the RECORD, says:

DEPARTMENT OF THE lNTEruOR, OFFICE OF lNDIAl .AFFAIRS,

Washington, March 1, 1902. Srn: The office is in receipt of a letter from 0. A. Mit.scher, esq., Unit~d

States Indian agent, Osage Ag~ncy, Okla., dated !february ?I, 1902, transmitting an agreement and memorial of the Kansas tr1b~ of Indians of Oklahoma T erritory relative to their triballan~s and funds, .signeq ~y Wah shun gab, Wah moo eke Forrest Chouteau, Mitchel Fronkier, Wilham Hardy, Akan Pappan, and G(m. W. E. Hardy, who were elected at a tribal meeting hel~on February 1, 1902, as r eprel?entatives.of the Kaw tribe of In:dia~, ~ enterill1!<! an agreement for a divisiOn of therr lands and for the distribution of then funds and to make arrangements for the sale _of all.tr~cts and parcels of trust and diminished reserve lands of the Kaw tr1be withill the State of Kansas, said r epresentatives being fully authorized to represent the tribe in all mat-ters mentioned in the agreement. .

In submitting the agreement, Agent Mitscher ~:?tates that the Kaw tnbe of Indians at present number s 217 persons, of which .number 76 are ad~ts, 65 of whom signed the credentials of the above-me~twned r~presentat1-yes; that the agreement they present represents the unalllllious W1Sh of the tribe, and he feels convinced that their action is well advised and that they .are prepared to assume the responsibilities contemplated; that under tnbal conditions individual effort is at a discount; that tribal inheritance leaves no incentive for accumulation of property by an individual member, a~d the result is directly opposite to the end desired to be reached; that illstead of making the Indians independent and self-supporting, tribal l;"elations and a community of interest tend to dependence, carelessness, m-9ifference, shif~lessness, and downrig_ht laziness; th~t the tr~becontains only about five fa1111lies of full-blood Indians, the remaillder beillg more or less mixed bloods and fully competent to manage their own affairs; that the full bloods are fairly intelligent, and with the restrictions and safeguards P!Ovided in the agreement, he thinks they will get along very well. He heartily concurs in the action the tribe has taken for a settlement of their relations with the Government, and states that in his judgment it will redound greatly to their advantage. . .

Briefly the agreement fixes the roll of Kaw Indians and determilles who shalliJarticipate in the division of the lands and a distribution of the fu.J?.ds; proviries for the selection of a homestead by each member of the trib.e, which shall be inalienable and nontaxable for twenty-five years, except as ill the agreement provided; for an equitable division of the remaining lands a-mong the membersofthe trib~, the lands to be alie.nable o~y astp.ereinprovided and to be free from taxatiOn as long as the title remains with the Indians, which in no event shall exceed twenty-five years; for the execution of deeds to the individual members of the tribe by the head chief, the deeds to be properly prepared forhissigna~ure by~he Secretary of the Intet?-or; ~hat the execution of the deeds as therem proVIded shall operate as a relinqUishment to the individual members of all the right, title, and interest of the United States and the Kaw tribe in and to the lands; fov the reservation of 160 acres for school purposes, the school to be :u::.aintained by the United States for at least ten years, the lands to be subject to final disposition by Congress; for the reservation of 20 acres as a cemetery and 80 acres as a town site, the lots to be disposed of as therein provided; for the segregation of the tribal funds and for a pro rata division of the same among the members of the tribe, the i)ayment to be made a:S ?-n the agreement provided; for the ~ispo_sition at public sale of the rema1mng UllSold tracts of Kaw tr11St and dillnrushed reserve lands in the State of Kansas; for the issuance by the Secretary of the Interior, in his discretion, of certificates of "competency" to adult members of the tribe authorizin~ them to sell and convey their lands, the lands to be-come taxable after the 1ssuance of such certificates; for the sale of inherited lands; for the settlement and determination by a commission to be appointed by the Secretary of the Interior of all claims which the tribe has against the United States, with the right of appeal to the Court of Claims in case the aecounting and settlement is not satisfactory, with the further right of appeal to the Supreme Court; for the placing of the members of th.e tribe under the supervision and control of the supe1·intendent of the Kaw school after the delivery of the deeds. The Indians memorialize Congress to ratify and confirm the agreement and to make provision for carrying the same into effect.

The a~reement is in entire harmony with the VIews of this office as expressed ill its last two annual reports. The Indian must ultimately be thrown upon his own resom·ces, and this agreement proposes to do tllis for the Kaw .tribe. As a whole this tribe is probably as nearly ready for this step as any tribe in the country. It will be noticed, however, that the agreement does not propose to throw them upon their own resources immediately, but in such manner as to protect the rights and interests of the less competent Indians. The most important object to be attained in the elevatiO'n of the In·dian race is to remove them from a state of dependence-dependence upon the Government and dependence upon tribal association. They must be individualized and treated with individually. Tribal organization and tribal association must be broken up, and each member of the tribe must learn to act for himself. The common ownership of property is not an incentive to individual effortt especially among noncivilized races. This community of interest leads to Idleness and shiftlessness, with their accompanying evils.

The agreement proposes the abolishment of tribal organization and an equal division of the lands and an equal distribution of the tribal funds. This is in line with the new _policy which must be adopted in dealing with the Indian if he is to be made sell-supporting and to become a useful memb er of the community in which he lives. This step is the more important from the fact that the Indians of the Kaw tribe have reached this conclusion themselves without the intervention of this Departm ent and with no m·ging from it. The office most heartily recommends the acceptance and ratification of the agreement.

There are 100,137 acres in the Kaw Reservation. On the basis of 220 members, this would give to each member of the tribe approximately 455 acres. The tribal funds approximately amount to $189,151.00. This would give each member of the tribe about $860.

The agreement and accompanying tribal authority are transmitted herewith, with the recommendation that they be submitted to Congress for action by that body.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

The SECRETARY OF THE lNTXRTOR.

W.A.JONES, Commissioner.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the gentleman a question. I see that this treaty or bill provides for the selling of a portion of these lands.

Mr. CURTIS. There are 500 to 1,000· acres belonging to the Ka·1.· tribe of Indians remaining in Morris County, Kans., which have not been disposed of under the treaty of 1859, and the Gov-

ernment is authorized to dispose of that land for the Indians. It is really a small amotmt of land, and this bill authorizes its sale at public auction, and that is all.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. Does it provide that the title shall not pass until the land is paid for? ·

Mr. CURTIS. The title does not pass until the lands are paid for. They will be sold at auction in small tracts and they will no doubt be paid for at once.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. But suppose that after this legislation, while the land is occupied by homestead settlers, after they get on to it, they say that the Government must pay the Indians for the property and the people who are on· the land will get it for nothing.

Mr. CURTIS. No; this land will be sold outright, and the free-homestead law will not apply. ·

Mr. SHERMAN. They are not buying anything of the Indians. We are simply authorizing them to distribute their property and offer for sale this small portion of land, which is not contiguous to their reservation.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. The proceeds of the sale go directly to the Indians-and do not come into the Government Treasury.

Mr. MADDOX. I should like to hear the gentleman from New York explain the twelfth section of this bill. It seems to be a one-sided affair. I do not know why there should be a commission at all if the report of the commission is to be accepted provided it is satisfactory and repudiated if not satisfa-ctory. Under such conditions why have a commission at all?

Mr. SHERMAN. I will ask the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. CuRTIS] to explain that matter.

Mr. CUR TIS. This section is in regard to a small claim which the Kaw Indians have against the Government and which the tribe is perfectly willing to leave to a commission; but as the commission is to be composed of Government officers alone it was thought by the Department that the Indians should have the right to appeal to the Court of Claims if the finding of the commission should not be satisfa-ctory. As will be seen by the reading of the twelfth section, the whole matter is left to a board of officers of the Government, to be selected by the Secretary of the Interior. I doubt if the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. MAnn ox] ever before heard of a case of this kind. The section meets the-hearty approval of the Interior Department and the section was carefully gone ·over by the officers of that Department.

Mr. MADDOX. The section reads thus: All claims, of whatever nature, which said Kansas or Kaw tribe of Indians

may have or claim to have against the United States shall be submitted to a commission to be appointed by the Secretary of the Interior from the officers or employees -of his Department for investigation, consideration, and settlem ent; and the United States ~hall, without delay, render to said tribe of Indians a complete accounting of all moneys agreed to be paid to said tribe to which said tribe may be entitled under any treaty or act of Congress.

If the settlement of the claims of said tribe submitted to said commission (and the acc:mnting) is satisfactory to said tribe, the amount found due shall be placed to the credit of the members of said tribe, according to the terms of this agreement, witllin one year after the report of said comn1ission is made. But if the settlement of the claims of said tribe or the accounting is not satisfactory to said tribe, or if they are. sa~sfactory and Congress fails to appropriate the money to pay the same w1thill one year after the report of said commission· and the accounting, then the said tribe of Indians shall have two years from the date of the report and accounting in which to enter a suit in the Com·t of Claims, with the right of appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States by either party, etc.

Now, why not provide that the claim shall be paid by the Government, and if the Government does not pay it there shall be the right to sue?

Mr. CURTIS. The gentleman understands that Cong1·ess sometimes refuses to pay claims after they have been allowed, and if provision is not made for the bringing of a suit, the parties may never get the money.

Mr. MADDOX. I am aware of that; I do not base any objection on that ground; but I can not understand why we should provide for a commission with the proviso that if the finding of the commission be satisfactory to these Indians it shall be accepted, but otherwise they shall have the right to appeal.

Mr. CURTIS. The chances are that the finding will be satisfactory. The Indians would not have agreed to the appointment of a commission of Government officers if they had not had confidence that their findings will be acceptable.

Mr. MADDOX. I am not going to object, but it seems to me this provision of the bill is not a proper one and ought not to be here.

The question being taken, the amendments reported by the committee were agreed to.

The bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time; and it was accordi.J:lgly read the third time, and passed.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection the proposed amendment to the title will be considered as agreed to.

There was no objection. On motion of Mr. SHERJ.\>IAN, a motion to reconsider the vote

by which the bill was passed was laid on the table.


HEIRS OF MARY CLARK AND FRANCIS CLARK.

Mr. SHERMAN. I now call up the bill (H. R. 8238) for the relief of the heirs of Mary Clark and Francis or Jenny Clark, deceased, ancl for other purposes.

The bill was read, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., .T.hat the Secretary of the Interior is he1·eby authorized

and directed to issue a patent in fee simple to Benjamin Clark, the father and sole heir of Mary Clark and Francis or J enny Clark, deceased, late of Oklahoma Territory, for the northwest quarter of section 17 in township 13 north, of range 8 west, of the Indian m eridian, in said Territory, and the northwest quarter of section 26 in township 11 north, of range 8 west, of the Indian mendian, in said Territory, said patent to issue in lieu of a patent issued to said Francis or Jenny Clark May 20, 1892, for said first-described tract, and a patent issued to said Mary Cl&rk on the 6th day of May, 1892, for the last-described tract; each of SaJ.d patents being trust in their chara cter and issued under the provisions of the act of COngress approved February 8, 1887, as amended by the act of March 3, 1891, said allottees being members of the Cheyenne or Arapahoe tribe of Indians, child1·en of said .Benjamin Clark, and each of them being unmarried and without issue and dying intestate.

SEc. 2. That said lands when so patented shall besubjectto taxation under the laws of the Territory of Oklahoma.

The amendments reported by the committee were read, as follows:

In line 5, page 1, strike out "Benjamin Clark, the father and sole heir," and insert "heirs."

In line 9, same page, strike out "northwest-" and insert "northeast." On page 2, strike out, in lines 10, 11, and 12, the words "children of said

Benjamin Clark, and each of them being unmarried and without issue and dying intestate.

Mr. SHERMAN. I will ask the gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. FLYNN] to state what this bill is.

Mr. FLYNN. Mr. Speaker, Ben Clark is a white man who married a Cheyenne woman. They had one child. When the Cheyenne and Arapahoe reservation in Oklahoma was allotted the wife and child of Clark received allotments. Since that time both have died, and under the law Clark is their legal heir. There is a trust, however, on the land. When the land was allotted to the Indians, it was provided that no patent should issue for twentyfive years. I introduced a bill authorizing the Secretary of the Interior to issue a patent to the father, Mr. Clark, but the suggestion was made at the Department that the patent should issue to the heir or heirs of these two Indians who had died, which was acceptable to me. All that this bill does is to remove the twentyfive-year r estriction and to provide for the issue of the patent to this white man if he is the heir, who had married the woman and was the father of the child.

The question ·being taken, the amendments reported by the committee were agreed to.

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

On motion of Mr. SHERMAN, a motion to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed was laid on the table.

KIOWA, COMANCHE, AND APACHE L.'WIA...~ RESERVATIONS.

Mr. SHERMAN. I now call up the bill (H. R.103) to open for settlement 480,000 acres of land in the Kiowa, Comanche, and Apache Indian Reservation, Oklahoma Territory.

The bill was read. Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from

Texas [Mr. STEPHENS], who reported the bill, to make a statement with reference thereto.

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on June 6,1900, Congress passed an act opening for settlement about 4,000,000 acres of land in the Comanche, Kiowa, and Apache reservations, in Oklahoma. The bill passed the House, and in the Senate was amended so a-s to reserve480,000 acres out of their reservation for pasturage purposes for the Indian. This land ha-s been set apart in portions of that reservation where it should not, in my judgment, have been set apart, as it includes agricultural lands, and not the grazing lands of the reservation. The treaty made between the United States and the Indians, made, I believe, in 189'.>., provided that when the lands were opened for settlement allotments should be made to the Indians. This bill now opens this 480,000 acres of pasture land under the act of June 6, 1900.

Jlt!r. UNDER WOOD. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the gen-tleman from Texas a question.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman yield? Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. Cert.ainly. Mr. UNDERWOOD. Iunderstandfrom thegentleman'sstate

ment that when this land was originally open for settlement there was a certain portion reserved for the Indians?

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. Four hundred and eighty thousand acres for pasture.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. That was in conformity to the treaty made with the Indians?

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. No; that was in addition to the tTeaty. The Indians had agreed by treaty to take 160 acres and throw open the rest. These additional 480,000 acres give them

160 acres of pasture land in addition to 160 acres of the treatyallotted land, and this was done at the instance of the Senate. The Senate insisted that it was necessary that the Indians should have a large amount of land to pastm·e their stock upon, and this bill now simply carries into effect the original treaty with the Indians.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. Have the Indians petitioned? Are they petitioning here for the sale of this land?

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. There has been no protest whatever filed, and this bill carries out the original agreement entered into in 1892 between the Indians and the United States Government.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. Who is in possession of that land now? Mr. STEPHENS of; Texas. It is in the possession of and leased

to cattlemen. Mr. UNDERWOOD. There is nothing here to show that the

Indians are satisfied to have this done or that any communication has been had with the tribes as to this legislation at all.

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. No; I think not. I do not think they have been consulted about it. I will state that it is very necessary that this land should be opened up for settlement, because it is in the possession of cattlemen and it should be in the pos ession of the farmers. It is a drawback to that entire country.

.Mr. UNDERWOOD. It belongs to these Indians, and it was set apart for them.

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. Only for grazing purposes, temporarily. It was a temporary arrangement.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. And they have not been consulted, or there is nothing here to show that they have been consulted.

Mr. STEPHENS of. Texas. The gentleman is wrong in that. Mr. UNDERWOOD. I mean since that law was enacted and

Congress set it apart and it became their land. Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. That reservation was merely a

temporary agreement with the Indians to allow these pasture lands to remain unallotted. Now, by this bill, we want to throw it open to settlement.

MT. UNDERWOOD. Who is going to get the benefit of this land?

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. The Indians get the benefit of it. One dollar and twenty-five cents an acre will be paid by the settlers, which is covered into the T1·easury, and the Indians will get the benefit of that.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. Who is getting the benefit of the pasturage now?

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. The Indians do. The cattlemen are getting the use of it, but of course they pay lease money.

· Mr. UNDERWOOD. The gentleman says there is nothing here to show that the Indians want this done. -

1\Ir. STEPHENS of Texas. In the original treaty they agreed that they would take 160 acres of land and sell the remainder of their reservation. _

Mr. UNDERWOOD. Since Congress amended their treaty and :fixed a different status there is nothing here to show that the Indians are satisfied.

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. They were not called upon to make any treaty at all. It was a mere gratuity, I presume, a mere donation of grass lands to the Indians on the part of Congress for grazing purposes.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. As I understand it, Congress proposed to sell the balance of this land. All this land belonged to the Indians. The whole 4,000,000 acres belonged to the Indians until Congress legislated in 1900.

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas . . The treaty of 1892, as I have stated several times, constituted that agreement. They were to take an allotment of 160 acres of land. That has been set apart and allotted to them. The bill further set apart 480,000 acres of land for pasturage purposes. Now it is desired by this bill to open that pasture land to settlement and let the Indians have their money for it-$1.25 per acre.

Mr. FITZGERALD. If the gentleman will permit me, the intention was that these Indians should use this land for pasturage. Instead of that the Secretary of the Interior has construed the act to give him the right to lease these lands to cattlemen, and he has done that, and the Indians are not getting the advantage from the lands which it was intended they should get.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. How much an acre did they lease it for? Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. I do not know what the price is now.

I think the original leases were for 10 cents an acre. They are getting more for the land now. I do not know how much.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. Under this bill does this money go to the Indians or go into the Treasury?

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. It goes into the United States Treas· ury and is then paid to the Indians.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. Under this law of 1900, the law under which the land was sold, will the Goverp.ment of the United

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 6967 States have to pay the Indians and then the settlers get the land free?

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. No; the settler pays a dollar and a quarter an acre for the land, and then the money goes to the Indians.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. What I want to find out is if there is any provision here that will make this money, if the land is sold, go directly to the Indians withoutthe United States Government being an intervening party?

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. No; ~has to be paid through the regular channel. It goes into the Treasury and through the Treasury to the Indians, under the act of June 6, 1900.

Mr. MADDOX. It is just the same law that has prevailed all the time with r ef erence to other reservations?

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. Certainly. Mr. MADDOX. But have we not since then, by the passage of

the free-homes bill, made this land free to the settlers, so that the Government has to paythe Indians while receiving nothing from the settlers?

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. That has not been done in this case in these reservations. It has been done heretofore in Oklahoma, but not with reference to the Comanche and Kiowa reservations.

1\Ir. MADDOX. When this t1·eatyis ratified, that is, when this act is passed, does it not throw these lands open, and put them in exactly the same position that the others were which-we did grant free?

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. I think not. .Mr. MADDOX. Say, for in8tance, this land isopen now to set

tlement. Will it not be in exactlythe same position and the same situation as the othe1·land in Oklahoma? We pm·chased this land and promised to pay for-it, and the Government has paid for it, but the Government has thrown the land open to settlers and the settlers get it free.

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. Congress could do that. It could give the Indians a dollar and a quarter an acre and not require the settlers to pay for the land; but that has not been done on any part of these reservations. It has not been done for several years. The Arapahoes and Cheyennes, I think, were the last Indians whose reservations were so thrown open, and the people who went onto their lands got it for nothing; but it is not proposed to do anything of that kind here. It is proposed that the settlers on this land shall pay a dollar and a quarter an acre for it, and that the Indians shall get the money.

Mr. MADDOX. In the case of these other reservations they did not suppose anything of that sort, but afterwards the land was thrown open to settlers free. The question is now, Are you not putting this in exactly the same situation, to make the Government responsible for this?

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. I think not. :Mr. MADDOX. That is the question I should like to hear ·you

upon. Mr. UNDERWOOD. I would like to ask the gentleman from

Texas if they are willing to accept an amendment providing that the moneys arising from the sale of this land shall be set apart in the Treasury as a separate fund belonging to these Indians, and that ·no title shall pass to any portion of that land until that portion which is sold is paid for.

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. I do not see at what point in the bill such an amendment could be placed.

1\fr. UNDERWOOD. It certainlyis a germane amendment to the bill. I think an amendment of that kind could be prepared if the gentleman was willing to accept it. It could come in as a new section. It could be added as section 3. "Provided that the money received from the sale of this land shall be set apart as a separate fund to go to these Indians, and no title shall be passed to any portion of the land or to that portion which is sold until the purchasers have completed all their payments." Now, if that is all the gentleman wants, if he wants the sale of the land for the benefit of the Indians, I think that amendment would accomplish that purpose.

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. There is a provision in the law of J une 6, 1900, beginning in line 20 , on page 4:

And p r ovided further, That the m oney arising from the sale of said lands shall b e paid to said Indians in the same manner as >.as provided in the said act of June 6, 1900.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. Ihavenotgotthatact,soicannotreadit. Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. You will find this provision on

page 4 of the act of June 6, 1900: A n d p1·ovided ju1·ther, That should any of said lands allotted to said In

dians or opened to settlement under this act. Mr. UNDERWOOD. Right there is where I understand is

what I wanted to remedy if I could. That is a general provision of law now, and that money under the old law, and under this agreement or contract made with the Government agents, whatever has been paid has gone to the general fund in the Treasury, and then if the land was opened to free homestead entry, why

then the Government of the United States had topaytheindians, if it was ever paid for at all, instead of the settler.

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. I find a provision in this bill covering the objection you have made-on line 11 , page 4:

Provided, That in addition to the land-office fees prescribed by statute for such entries the en~an shall pay 1.25 per acre for the land entered at the time of submitt ing his final proof.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. What I ask the gentleman to accept is an amendment to keep this money as a separate fund for these Indians. I think the time has come when, if we are going to open up these rich Indian reservations for settlement, that we ought to set apart this money as belonging to the Indians, and to be held in a separate fund by the Government for the Indians.

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. This does that. If the gentleman will read lines 23 and 24 he will see this language:

And p~·ovided further, That the money arising from the sale of said lands shall be paid to said Indians in the same manner as was provided in the said act of June 6, 1000.

That act provided 'that it should be covered into the Treasury and paid out to the Indians. You certainly would have the Government supervise the sale ofthe lands and pay-the money out to the Indians, as we do under this bill.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. As I understand it, this act merely provides that this land shall be sold as allland has been sold before.

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. No; it is to be sold under the act of June 6, 1900, and this act provides:

That the money arising from the sale of this land shall be paid to said Indians in the same manner as was provided in the said act of June 6, moo .

Mr. UNDERWOOD. I will ask my friend from Texas what objection can there be to providing in this bill that this money, the proceeds of the sale of this land, shall be set apart as a separate fund belonging to the Indians?

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. Because it is already provided for here in this bill in direct language, as follows:

Provided, That in addition to the land-office fees prescribed by statute for such entries the entryman shall pay $1.25 p er acre for the land entered at the time of submitting his final proof.

Then, also, in lines 23 and 24: That the money arising from the sale of said lands shall be-paid to said In-

dians in the same manner as was provided in the said act of June 6, 1900.

It is thus set apart as a separate fund. Mr. UNDERWOOD. Under the act and kept separate? Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. Certainly. Mr. UNDERWOOD. Well, if that is so, I have nothing fur

ther to say. Mr. CANNON. I want a minute about this to see if I under

stand, and if I do understand it I am against it. I recollect when this legislation was had in 1900 for us to open these reservations for settlement. There was pending a treaty that was tried to be ratified. A great railroad company had surveyed these lands and there were multiplied thousands of people who wanted to g~ in there and make homes, and between the railroad people and the desire of people to make homes and the pending treaty Congress went to work to throw open the reservation-legislate.

And it was a mighty hard time for legislation with us. I was not on this committee, nor either of them, nor on the conference committees, but I 1·ecollect that as a member of the House I had more or less knowledge about it, and it was through great tribulation that this legislation was finally had; and the f1iends of the red men in the Senate put upon us-and when I say upon ·us I m.ean the United States-some pretty severe restr ictions.

They ratified the treaty, paid the Indians for the land, and then after they paid the Indians for thi3 480,000 acres of land they turned around and gave it to him to be held in common. I see the gentleman from Oklahoma is present. He is more familiar with these matters than I am, but that is the way I recollect it and the gentleman from Oklahoma will correct me if I am wrong:

Now, two years have not passed away, the reservation is open the people have gone in there, the Indian lands have been allotted' and these 480,000 acres are held in common .for the benefit of th~ Indians after the United States has bought the Indians off and given it back to them to be held in common. Now, what is the proposition, if I understand it, in this bill? It is to authorize the homesteading of this land, and it must .be paid for at the rate of $1.25 an acre, and that $1.25 an acre is to go to the Indians.

I asked somebody what the land was worth, and he said, "Oh, five to seven dollars an acre." It is good land. Mind you, the Indians got the land in common; 480,000 acres. True, it was a hard bargain, as I noted heretofore, but he holds it in common by the a-ction of the Congress of the United States. N ow, how are you going to get it out of the Indian? Why, this bill jll2t • takes it out of him. Not a Cresarian operation, but a drastic operation, without asking the Indian a word about it . It takes the Indian's land-480,000 acres- that he owns under an act of Congress, withou~ his consent, throws it open to settlement, makes the bargam for two, when the merest tyro in the law

I


understands that it takes two to make a bargain. Here ·one man makes the bargain, namely, the United States, and sells it at $1.25 an acre.

Now, then, I undertake to say, if I am correct about this-and the gentleman from New York [Mr. SHERMAN], who is the chairman of this committee, and the gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. FLYNN] and the gentleman from Texas [Mr. STEPHE s] will correct me if I am incorrect-! undertake to say if we enact this legislation and the title of this land, which is worth $5 an acre, is so conferred, in God's chancery and in man's chancery the United States is r esponsible for the difference between $1.25 an acre and five or six or seven dollars an acre.

Now, with all due respect, if I am right about this it is time to call a halt. I am getting pretty tired of the United States dealing in homestead lands and Indian lands and arid lands down in that section of the country. In my short time I have seen the United States Government mulcted twenty-five or thirty million dollars-extinguishing the title and then giving them, by Executive order, anoth~r Teservation, and extinguishing the title and paying for it, and then throwing it open to homestead settlement to be paid for at $1.25 per acre, and then giving it for free homes. Let us call a halt, and I know of no better place to call it than upon this bill for the reasons I have indicated.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engTossment and third reading of the bill.

The question was taken, and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the noes had it.

So the House refused to order the bill to be engrossed. AGREEMENT WITH CREEK TRIBE OF INDIANS.

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I now call up bill H. R. 13171, and I ask unanimous consent to substitute for that the Senate bill 4923, to ratify and confirm a supplemental agreement with the Creek tribe of Indians, and for other purposes. It is a similar bill , with very few minor changes.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York asks unanimous consent to substitute for the House bill the Senate bill4923. Is there objection? [After a pause.] The Chair hears none,

The Clerk, proceeding to read the bill, read as follows: 9. If the rolls of citizenship provided for by the act of Congress approved

March 1, 1901 (31 Stat. L., 861), shall have been completed by said commission prior to the ratification of this agreement, the names of children entitled to enrollment under the provisions of sections 7 and 8 hereof shall be placed upon a supplemental roll of citizens of the Creek Nation, and said supplemental roll when approved by the Secretary of the Interior shall in all respects be held to be a part of the final rolls of citizenship of said tribe.

Mr. CURTIS. I · offer the amendment, which I send to the desk.

The Clerk read as follows: On page 6, after line 15, add the following: "Prov-ided, That the Dawes Commission be, aJld is hereby, authorized to

add the following persons to the Creek roll: N ar walle pe se, Mary Washington, Walter Washington, and Willie Washington, who are Creek Indians, but whose names were left off the roll through neglect on their part."

Mr. LITTLE. I would like some explanation of this amendment.

Mr. CURTIS. I will ask to have read a letter explaining why the adoption of this amendment is asked. It is a letter from the Dawes Commission, approved by the principal chief of the nation.

The Clerk read as follows: DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

COMMISSION TO THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES, Muscogee, Ind. T., June 4, 1902.

Hon. CHARLES CURTIS, Washi-ngton, D. 0. DEAR Srn: I desire to call attention to some needed legislation in the mat

ter of the applicatio~ of certain India~s now resi~g in the Cree~ Nati~n who claim citizenship as Creeks by vrrtue of their blood and residence ill

sai~~~~dians, for whom it seems no provision is made, are part (!reek and part Shawnee; they do not appear on any of the Creek rolls\ neither have they been given allotments ill the Shawnee country. They nave resided in the Creek Nation for several years, but it seems that they have never made any effort to be placed on the rolls of the Creek Nation prior to this time. .

I would suggest, in the event that you deem such actiOn. proper, that an amendment be made on the floor of the House to the pending Cre~k agreem ent which shall provide by name ~or the enrollment of ~he followmg: ~~r walle pe se (female), Mary Washmgton, Walter Washillgton, and Willie Washington, who are the Creek citizens h erein referred to.

Yours, truly, TAMS BIXBY, .Acti-ng Ohairma-n.

Approved. P. PORTER, Pri-ncipal Ohief.

Mr. CURTIS. That is approved by the chief of the tribe as well as bv the Dawes Commission.

• Mr. UNDERWOOD. As I understand, this proposition is to thrust these people into the ownership of land in that country by naming them in this bill.

l\Ir. CURTIS. These Indians were entitled to enrollment had they applied at the proper time, before the rolls were closed, but they neglected to do so. The principal ch~ef_of the natio~ representing the nation, and the Dawes Comnnsswn representmg the

Government say that these three or four people are entitled to enrollment. I have offered this amendment at the suggestion of the representative of the Government of the United States and the representative of the Creek Nation. ·

Mr. UNDERWOOD. As I understand the proposition, a roll was made up in a sort of judicial way to determine who were the ·heirs of this proporty. The parties claiming interest therein had their day in court in which to apply for enrollment. Now, the gentleman proposes to l~slate into this enrollment some people who were not placed tlrere under the original law. I do not mean to say that this may not be a just proceeding, but I ask the gentleman from Kansas this question: If Congress undertakes to legislate people into property rights by this class of legislation, where are we to stop?

Mr. CURTIS. Congress would not generally do that; but in a case where the proceeding is recommended by the Commission representing the Government, and by the principal of the nation, it seems to me no harm can be done. If the gentleman objects, however, I will withdraw the amendment.

Mr. LITTLE. I should like to know whether there is any dispute about the citizenship of these Indians?

Mr. CURTIS. None in the world. They belong to the two tribes-the Shawnees and the Creeks. As the gentleman knows, it has been the practice in our legislation to allow these people to select which tribe they would join. They have not selected the other tribe, and now they come in and ask to be admitted to this tribe.

As I have already said, this proposition has met the approval of the chief of the nation and of the Dawes Commission.

Mr. McRAE. WhydidnottheDawesCommissionadmitthem? Mr. CUR TIS. The time for closing the roll had already passed

before these Indians made their application. If any gentleman says that he objects to this proposition I will withdraw it.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. I will only ask the gentleman this· question: Does he know these people?

Mr. CURTIS. I do not; [ have no infotmation about the matter, except what comes from the officers of the Government and the chief of the tribe.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. Does the gentleman know whether these are full-blooded Indians or whether they are white people-

Mr. CURTIS. I do not know anything on earth about the matter, except what is stated in the letter which has been read.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. Then I ask the gentleman to let this proposition go over. I think it is a dangerous amendment.

Mr. CURTIS. I withdraw the amendment. The Clerk, continuing the reading, read the following: 11. In all instances of the establishment of town sites in accordance with

the provisions of the act of Congress approved May 31, 1900 (31 Stat. L., 231)_, or those of section 10 of the agreement ratified by act of Congress approvea March 1, 1901 (31 Stat. L., 861), authorizing the Secretary of the Interior, upon the recommendation of the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes, at any time before allotment, to set aside and reserve from allotment any lands in the Creek Nation not exceeding 160 acres in any one tract, at such stations as are or shall be established in conformity with law on the line of any railroad which shall be constructed, or be in process of construction, in or through said nation prior to the allotment of lands therein, any citizen who shall have previously selected such town site, or any portion thereof, for his allotment, or who shall have been by reason of improvements therein entitled to select the same for his allotment, shall b e paid by the Creek Nation the full value of his improvements thereon at the time of the establishment of the town site, and 10 per cent of the net proceeds arising from the sale of that portion of the land within the town site so selected by him, or which he was so entitled to select; and this shall be in addition to his right to receive from other lands an allotment of 160 acres.

M1·. CURTIS. I offer an amendment to make this bill correspond with the bill reported by the House committee. It is an amendment suggested by the Interior Department and was inserted in the House bill by the committee.

The Clerk read the amendment, as follows: On page 7, after the word "site," in line 251 insel't : • Under rules and regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary of the In

terior: Provided, however, That such citizens may purchase any of said lands in accordance with the provisions of the act of March 1, 1901 (31 Stat. L., 61): .And p1"ovided ju1·ther, 'I' hat the lands which may hereafter be set aside and reserved for town sit es upon recommendation of the Dawes Commission as herein provided shall embrace such acreage as may be necessary for the present needs and reasonable prospective growth of such town sites, and not to exceed 640 acres for each town site."

The amendment was agreed to. The Clerk read as follows: 16. Lands allotted to citizens hereunder shall not in any manner whatever

or at any time be encumbered, taken, or sold to secure or satisfy any debt or obligation nor be alienated by the allottee or his heirs before the expiration of five years from the date of the deed therefor, except with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior. Each citizen shall select from his allotment 40 acres of land, or a quarter of a quarter section, as a homest ead, which shall be and remain nontaxable, inalienable, and f ree from any incumbrance whatever for twenty-one years from the date of the deed therefor, and a separate deed shall be issued to each allottee for his homeste&.d, in which this condition shall appear.

Selections of homesteads for minors, prisoners. convicts, incompetents~ and aged and "infirm persons, who can not select for themselves. m ay b e maae in the manner herein provided for the selection of their allotments, and if for any reason such selection be not made for any citizen it shall be the duty of said Commission to make selection for him. The homesteao of each citizen

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 6969 . shall remain, after the death of the allottee, for the use and support of children born to him after May 25, 1901, but if he have no such issue then he may dispose of his homestead by will, free from the limitation herein imposed, and if this be not done, the land embraced in his homestead shall descend to his heirs, free from such limitation, according to the laws of descent herein otherwise prescribed. Any agreement or conveyance of any kind or character violative of any of the provisions of this paragraph shall be absolutely void and not f'usceptible of ratification in any manner, and no rule of estoppel shall ever prevent the assertion of its invalidity.

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, I move the following amendment: On page 9, line 18, strike ont the word "hereunder." I would state that allotments are not made under this treaty,

but under the treaty of 1901, and that word should be stricken out.

The Clerk reported the amendment. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the adoption

of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kansas. The question was taken and the amendment agreed to. Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, I have another amendment: On page 10, line 8, strike out the word "herein." The Clerk reported the amendmen~. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the adoption

of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kansas. The question was taken and the amendment agreed to. The Clerk read as follows: 17. Section 37 of the agreement ratified by said act of March 1, 1901, is

amended, and as so amended is reenacted to read as follows: "During the continuance of the tribal government Creek citizens may

rent their allotments, when selected for strictly nonmineral purposes, for a term not to exceed three year, but without any stipulation or obligation to renew the same. Such leases for a. period longer than threelea.rsa.ndleases for mineral purposes may also be made with the approval o the Secretary of the Interior, and not otherwise.

"Any agreement or lease of any kind or character violative of this paragraph shall be absolutely void and not susceptible of ratification in any manner, and no rule of estoppel shall ever prevent the assertion of its invalidity. Cattle grazed upon leased allotments shall not be liable to any tribal tax. but when cattle are introduced into the -Creek Nation and grazed on landS not selected for allotment by citizens, the Secretary of the Interior shall collect from the owners thereof a reasonable grazing tax for the benefit of the tribe, and section 2117 of the Revised Statutes of the United States shall not hereafter apply to Creek lands."

MI·. STEPHENS of Texas and Mr. CURTIS rose. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas is

recognized. Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I have an amend

ment which. I wish to offer; but I suppose the committee amendment, if the gentleman from Kansas has another, takes precedence:

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, I offer the following amendment: Strike out, on page 11, line 4, the words "when selected." The Clerk reported the amendment. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the adoption

of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kansas. The question was taken; and the amendment was agreed to. Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. Speaker, I would ask the gentleman

from Kansas if he has not another committee amendment as to the length of the leases that may be made. I think we changed it from three to five years, with a provision that grazing leases should not exceed one year.

Mr. LITTLE. Mr. Speaker, I would suggest to the gentleman from Kansas that the amendment agreed to by the committee in in the House bill limits the grazing leases to one year, the agricultural leases to five years, and the mineral and other leases for a longer time, only subject to the approval of the Secretary of the Interior.

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to go back to section 16.

Mr. LITTLE. Had we not better finish section 17 while we are at it?

Mr. CURTIS. I would suggest to the gentleman that I will take care of that later.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will state that this is a proceeding in the House, and not in the Committee of the Whole. It will be in order to offer an amendment at any time after the entire bill has been read.

Mr. CURTIS. Then I will go back at that time. Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. Speaker, I call the gentleman's at

tention to the fact that there is another committee amendment to the section that we are now considering.

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, I understand that, but I would like to explain that this is the Senate bill which has been just called up, and the members of the committee have had but three or four minutes in which to compare it. I have not had time to go through it all, and I will suggest that I will go back after the bill has been read.

Mr. FITZGERALD. It is page 15 of the House bill. Mr. LITTLE. Mr. Speaker, I would suggest to the gentleman

from Ka~as that he simply offer section 17 of the House bill as a substitute for the pending section. I think it would be difficult to arrange the several other amendments.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will state that it is not regular to read the bill by sections in the House in this way. The proper way is to read the bill entirely through.

Mr. LITTLE. Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that this is a better plan, the way we are doing now, and I ask unanimous consent that we proceed as we have been doing.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. If there is no objection, we will proceed to read the bill by paragraphs or sections for amendment. [After a pause.] The Chair hears no objection.

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I will now call for the reading of the amendment which I offer.

The Clerk read as follows: After the word "same," in line 'i, page 11, insert the words "and agricul

turalleases heretofore made in good faith for a fair consideration to the allottees are hereby validated for a period not exceeding five years from the date of the ratification of this agreement."

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will state to the gentleman from Texas that the part of the bill to which that amendment applies has not yet been rea-ched.

:M:r. STEPHENS of Texas. I thought it had. Then let it be considered as pending.

Mr. FLYNN. Mr. Speaker, I notice these leases are ratified, but there is no provision here with reference to the approval of any ofthem by the Department. I do not knowwhetherthematter came up in the committee or not. I have no objection whatever to the ratification, but I think there should be supervision of this matter by the Secretary of the Interior. I want to add, after the word "years," in line 5, the section now reading-

During the continuance of the tribal government Creek citizens may rent their allotments when selected, for strictly nonminera.l purposes, for a term not exceeding-

The amendment saidfive years for agricultural lands.

I want to add-subject to the approval of the Secretary of the Interior.

Mr. LITTLE. If the gentleman from Oklahoma will permit, I think if he will read the provision as amended by the committee, it covers that point, and I would like to offer as a substitute for this section the section as amended by the House committee.

Mr. FL_YNN. Let us have that read. I will withdraw my amendment for the present.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will read the proposed amendment. .

The Clerk read as follows: Substitute for section 17 of the Senate bill the following: "17. Section 37 of the agreement ratified by said act of March 1, 1901, is

amended, and as so amended is reenacted to read as follows: "'Creek citizens mayrenttheira.llotments, when selected for strictly non

mineral purposes, for a term not to exceed one year for grazing purposes only and for a period not to exceed five years for agricultural purposes, but without any stipulation or obligation to renew the same. Such leases for a period longer than one year for grazing purposes and for a period longer than five years for agncultural purpose~~ and leases for mineral purposes may also be made with the approval of me Secretary of the Interior, and not otherwise. •

"'Any agreement or lease of any kind or character violative of this paragraph shall be absolutely void and not susceptible of ratification in any manner, and no rule of estoppel shall ever prevent the assertion of its invalidity. Cattle grazed upon leased allotments shall not be liable to any tribal tax, but when cattle are introduced into the Creek Nation and grazed on lands not selected for allotment by citizens, the Secretary of the Interior shall collect from the owners thereof a reasonable grazing tax for the benefit of the tribe, and section 2117 of the Revised Statutes of the United States shall not hereafter apply to Creek lands.' "

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, I move to amend the amendment by striking out the words" when selected," in lines 4 and 5.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. One moment. The gentleman from Texas [Mr. STEPHENS] offered an amendment to this section. The gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. LITTLE] offers a substitute for the section. The amendment of the gentleman from Texas is first in order. Does the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. CURTIS] desire to offer an amendment to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas?

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. !withdraw the amendment for the present. After the substitute is read, then I will offer my amendment, if the substitution is made.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas [Mr. STEPHENS] withdraws his amendment.

:Mr. CURTIS. Now I move to amend the substitute by striking out the words "when selected." in lines 4 and 5.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. ·The gentleman from Kansas moves to amend the substitute offered by the gentleman from Ar- -kansas by striking out the words he has indicated?

Mr. CURTIS. The words "when selected." The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is upon the amend

ment offered by the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. CURTIS] to the substitute.

The amendment to the substitute was agreed to. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is upon•the substi

tute offered by the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. LITTLE]. Mr. FLYNN. One moment, Mr. Speaker.


!'t!r. ZENOR. I desire toofferanamendmenttothesubstitute. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Indiana.

offers an amendment to the substitute, which the Clerk will report.

Mr. ZENOR. After the word ''otherwise,'' in line 13, on page 15 of the House bill.

The Clerk read as follows: Insert after the word "otherwise," in line 13 of the substitute, the fol

lowing: ''But agricultural leases heretofore made inlood faith, and for a fair con

sideration to the allottee, are hereby validate for the period of five years from the ratification of this a~Ueement."

Mr. ZENOR. I will say, Mr. Speaker, that this amendment is substantially, if it is not verbatim, a copy of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas [Mr. STEPHENS].

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. It is the same amendment. I intended to reoffer that, but I will accept the amendment.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is upon the adoption of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. ZENOR].

Mr. LITTLE. Mr. Speaker, I do not think that amendment ought to be adopted. The committee considered that question quite thoroughly. It was considered not only by the committee of the House, but by the joint committee of the two Houses, and it was on due consideration by them rejected.

It is a matter of common knowledge in that country, and known at least to some members of the House, that there are leases and indirect sales of various kinds which have been made in that country upon these lands, when the treaty under which they were made declared that they should not be made for exceeding one year. That was the written law, and I do not believe CongJ.'ess ought blindly, simply by a blanket ratificatU:m, to approve leases that it does not know anything about, and does not provide any way at all to determine. When the leases were made, they were made in the face of the law, and by those who knew the law. I hope the House will not adopt the amendment.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. I would like to ask my friend from Arkansas wh!l,t is section 2117 that they propose to strike out?

Mr. LITTLE. That refers simply to the cattle tax on cattle imported into the Territory, and has nothing to do with the question under discussion at all. This is just simply a proposition to come here and ask Congress to say that all bona fide agricultural leases shall be ratified for a term of five years.

I have understood that there are three or four hundred thousandacres of land leased by various companies, probably some of them bona fide, some entirely speculative, with a provision in many of them for a release of them from year to year, making it equivalent to a title; some with an agreement to sell, and the Lord knows what else; so far as I am concerned, I do not think Congress in this way ought to ratify and agree to any such agreement.

I do not believe a man in the House has seen any of these leases. I have not seen one of them, and to say that all bona. fide agricultuml leases shall be approved for a term of five years when they were made under a law authorizing a lease of one year, I think this is simply a blind leap in the dark, calculated to do irreparable injury, because we do not know what we are doing. It has been so thoroughly considered by the committees of the Senate and the House, acting separately and jointly, and also the bill having passed the Senate, without amendment in the Senate, I do not think it ought to be pressed on this occasion.

Mr. ZENOR. 1\ir. Speaker, I differ with my distinguished friend from Arkansas in his view of the subject of this amendment. In the first place, I think it is perfectly apparent, or at least sufficient evidence appeared before the committee reporting this bill, that the Creek Indians are intelligent, civilized, and amply able to take care of themselves, and it seems to me that any such restriction placed upon them in the management of their lands should not be made.

When we began the allotment of these lands of the Chickasaws and the Choctaws, a provision was made in the treaty with the Chickasaw and the Choctaw nations that those tribes should be permitted to lease their lands for a term of five years, and I can not see any reason why the same rule should not prevail when you come to apply the law and establish rules and regulations in regard to the allotments made to the Creek Indians.

Again, Mr. Speaker-and I think that the members of the committee will bear me out in this statement-a large number of leases have been made and entered into between the allottees and certain white people who have gone into that country since the ratification of the treaty of 1\fa.y, 1901. Now, these leases are not, I insist, made, as the gentleman from Arkansas insists they were, in defiance of law. They were made in pursuance of an agreement ratified in the original treaty, and these leases are to-day binding leases.

Now, then, the business interests of the Creek Nation is ham-

pered by reason of the fact that you impose limitations upon the . allottees, the Indians, when you make allotments to him and then when the segregations have been made of their land that they shall have no right to lease them for more than one year. That is the provision here so far as grazing purposes are concerned.

Now, it can be well understood, gentlemen, how it retards the development of that country and how it prevents business men giving credit to the allottees, the owners of this land, where they can not execute a lease to a white man, the man who has gone into that Territory to take a farm and lease lands to develop the Territory, with a view of putting imp1·ovements upon it. He can not afford to take a lease for one year.

Going to live on the land, he is bound to improve it to such an extent as to make it profitable to him; and with a one-year lease he can not afford to do it. There are a great many white men who have gone into this country and improved these lands, and yet there is a provision made in respect to the leasing of grazing lands that it shall be simply for one year. What is the purpose of allotting these lands to the Indians? One hundred and sixty acres aTe allotted to each one of these Creek Indians, and as a. general rule there are about five to a family, which makes about 800 acres of land allotted to each head of a family in the Creek Nation.

Now, it is perfectly apparent that the Indian can not cultivate 800 acres of land and make it profitable, and it is absolutely an impediment to the people down there and prevents the development of that country. There ought to be some provision giving to the allottees the right to lease the land in such a way as would permit it to be profitable to the person leasing the land and enable them to put improvements upon it and enable them to get credit with their merchants and business men with whom they do business; and these men ought not to be prejudiced by unreasonable restrictions imposed upon the right of allottees to make and enter into leases of their landS for a reasonable term.

Under the original agreement, Mr. Speaker, there was no restTiction placed upon the owners of these allotments with reference to their power to renew or enter into an obligation to renew a lease, and under the provisions of this amendment there are such restrictions, and they can not agree in the lease to renew the lease. Under the original agreement ratified by Congress there was no such restriction placed upon the owners of the e allotments, and therefore a man that entered into a lease should be protected; and it seems to me no prejudice· could result to the Indians, no prejudice to the allottees, but an absolute benefit will be derived all along if they want to ratify the lease.

Mr. BURKE of South Dakota. May I ask the gentleman a question?

Mr. ZENOR. Oertainly. Mr. BURKE of South Dakota. What would be the effect of

this amendment proposed. by you upon leases now in existence that will terminate in six or twelve or even three months?

Mr. ZENOR. I do not think it would result in any increase or lengthen the term of the lease that was in existence at that time.

Mr. BURKE of South Dakota. But your amendment ratifies them for five years.

Mr. ZENOR. ]~or five years. Mr. BURKE of South Dakota. Even if they had only three

months to run? Mr. ZENOR. Yes. I am not advised on the subject of the

different leases made by these allottees, but if you adopt my amendment, and the supplemental agreement now proposed to Congress for ratification shall be ratified by the cotmcil of the Creek Nation, and they consent to the agreement as ratified by Congress, then it would be a binding contract and would have the effect of extending the leases for five years.

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, I hope the amendment will be voted down. The question was thoroughly discussed before the joint committee of the Senate and the House, and the amendment was voted down by the joint committee. It was considered by the House committee and voted down, and, as the gentleman from Arkansas well says, we know nothing about these leases. It seems to me it would be very unwise for Congress to approve, for a period of five years, leases that it knows nothing about.

:Mr. LITTLE. Let me ask the genileman this question: Can the gentleman give any idea as to about how much of that country is covered by these wild-cat leases?

Mr. CURTIS. I am informed by the people living down there that there are from five to seven hundred thousand aeres of land covered by these leases. Of course I have no personal knowledge of the matter, and know nothing about it except the information from the people down there. ·

Mr. LACEY. How many leases, if the gentleman knows, are there on one lot?

:l!tfr. CURTIS. I understand there are as many as three leases on one piece of property.

1902. 1 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE. 6971·

Mr. LACEY. And whi9h would we validate by this amendment?

Mr. LITTLE. It would be difficult to tell whichonewewould ratify.

Mr. MORRELL. Mr. Speaker, I might say in regard to the lea es that were lately entered into between the Secretary of the Interior and the Indians at Standing Rock Reservation, that a great deal of opposition was developed by the Indians and those in authority at that reservation. All these leases of grazing lands bring at once the Indian into opposition with the herder and the grazer. It creates opposition between the two, and it brings the source of contamination close to the home of the Indian.

As in the case of the Standing-Rock Reservation, the lands that were selected to be leased under the lease were not those that were approved of by the Indians, but, on the contl·ro·y, they gave to the lessors or those who entered into the leases the very best lands, and took them away from the Indians, so that they could not make their livelihood by entering into the business of grazing and raising of cattle. On that particular reservation there are to-day, standing on the books of the agency, 250 self-supporting Indians simply through the result of their own efforts in raising cattle and grazing on that reservation.

Those Indians. were willing to come before the Secl'etary of the Interior and were willing to have their lands allotted in severalty, provided they were paid what was owing to them by the Government; they would not wait until the time which was stipulated, provided their land was not leased. They had their personal representatives here, and I went with them to see the Secretary of the Interior and to see the President of the United States, who listened carefully to what they had to say. But it seems that the leases were practically settled and signed before they had an opportunity to speak.

Therefore, from my knowledge of it, which includes some personallmowledge of the reservation, because I have visited it on several occa.sions, I think any indiscriminate leasing of the Indian lands ought not to be authorized unless we have the names of those who desire to lease the lands, the terms of the lease, and the fact as to whether or not the lessors are responsible for the obligations that they are about to enter into. Unless we have those facts placed before the House we should not authorize the leasing of any of these lands on any of the resel·vations.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the adoption of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. ZENOR].

The amendment was rejected. . Mr. FLYNN. On line 7 of the bill there is this provision, to

which I wish to offer an amendment: For grazing purposes only, and for a period not exceeding five years for

agricultural purposes.

I move to amend by adding to this clause the words" subject to the approval of the Secretary of the Interior.'' This is customary in all leases made by Indians.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is this amendment presented as a. substitute for the amendment of the gentleman from Arkansas?

Mr. FLYNN. It is. Mr. LITTLE. Does the gentleman think it necessary to insert

that provision? I hardly think so, in view of the terms of the lease.

Mr. FLYNN. The gentleman will see that further on it is provided that leases for mineral purposes may also be made with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior, and not otherwise. In no Indian reservation in the United States, so far as I lmow, where the land has been allotted or where it is under the control of the Government, can a lease be made for any period of time without the approval of the Secretary of the Interior.

Mr. LITTLE. My recollection is that in the Choctaw and Chickasaw country, under the treaty with those Indians leases can be made for five years without such approval .

Mr. FLYNN. I do not think so. Mr. LITTLE. That is my recollection, though I do not make

the statement positively. Mr. CURTIS. That is correct a.s to the Choctaws and Chick

a.sa.-ws. Mr. LITTLE. The provision here iS framed partly in analogy

with that arrangement. Mr. FLYNN. All right. If the committee are satisfied it

will suit me. I withdraw the amendment. ' The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is upon the sub-

stitute offered by the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. LITTLE] . The substitute was ·agreed to. The Clerk, continuing the reading, read the following: 16. Lands allotted to citizens hereunder shall not in any manner whatever

or at any time be encumbered, taken, or sold to secure or satisfy any debt or obligation nor be alienated by the allottee or his heirs before the expiration

of five years from the date of the deed therefor, except with the approval of the Secretary of the 1nterior. Each citizen shall select from his allotment 40 acres of land, or a quarter of a quarter section, as a homestead which shall be and remain nontaxable, inalienable~, and free from any incu.nlbrance whatever for twenty-one years from the a.ate of the deed therefor and a separate deed shall be issued to each allottee for his homestead, in w hlch this condition shall appear.

Mr. CURTIS. I move to amend by striking out, in 1ine 22 page 9, the words '' deed therefor '' and inserting in lieu thereof th~ words " approval of this supplemental agreement."

Mr. ZENOR. I move to amend the amendment by substituting in lieu of the words" approval of this supplemental agreement" the words "ratification of the original agreement in May, 1901."

I will state the purpose of this amendment. In the original treaty there was a provision that the deed could be made to the allottees after five years from the date of the ratification of that treaty. That was the original agreement between the Indian tri~e. and the Government of the United States. Now, the propoSition of the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. CURTIS] is to change the date on which the deeds are to be made. This change of date was not suggested by the Indian council or by the Indian tl·ibe. It is a suggestion evidently coming from the Interior Department itself.

Now, it can well be understood that deeds issuing from the Government issue at irregular and different times and under the provision proposed~ there will be no fixed date from which deeds made to these allotments shall run. There ought to be a fixed time. If the ratification or the approval of the agreement be fixed upon as the date, it is a postponement of the date for one year after the time agreed upon between the Creek tribe and the Government ·of the United States. The date at which these Indians were to receive title to these lands was at the expiration of five years from the ratification of the original treaty made in May, 1901.

I thin~ it but fair to the parties ~hat the date fixed upon for the making of these deeds should be m accordance with the agreement between the Indian tribe and the Government and that there should be no postponement of this date; that' the titles sh<?uld take e~ect five years afte~· the date originally agreed upon. It 1s for the mterest of the busmess people down in that Territory that the date originally agreed npon shall be adhered to.

According to all the information that I have a proposition such as that embraced in the amendment of the ge~tleman from Kansas is regarded by the people in that Territory as de trim en tal to business interests and to the development of the particular tribe in that Territory. I therefore offer my amendment to the amendment of the gentleman from Kansas.

M;r. CURTIS. The . statement made by the gentleman from Indiana [Ml'. ZENoR] m regard to the first treaty is correct· but I hope the amendment which the gentleman has offered t~ my amendment will be voted down and my amendment adopted· because the amendment I have submitted is the amendment whlch was agreed upon by the full Committee on Indian Affairs at its last meeting.

It was .not suggested, a.s the gentleman says, by the Indians. nor was 1t suggested by the Department; but some member of the committee-! lmow not whom, or if I did know I have forgotten whom-suggested that some date ought to be fixed. If it be P"?-t from the date of the deeds, the deeds naturally being made on different dates, thus there would be no uniformity.

Therefore the date was agreed to by the committee and as I understand it, the vote was unanimous in fixing it from' the ;atification of the tl·eaty. I therefore hope the amendment to the amendment will be voted down and that the amendment as offered by myself will be agreed to. . Mr. z.ENOR. Mr .. Speaker, .I will ask my colleague whether it 1s not his understanding that smce the ratification of the original treaty of May, 1901, some of these deeds have been issued to the allottees?

Mr. CURTIS. Not a single deed has been delivered. Mr. ZENOR. They have been issued by the Interior Depa1·t

ment? Mr. CURT~. You migh! say no. They have been prepared,

but they are m the hands O.L the Government officers ancl not n. deed has been delivered.

Mr. ZENOR. To any of the allottees? Mr. CURTIS. Not a single deed, is my information. Mr. ZENOR. I have had some information to the effect that

perhaps some of these deeds have been delivered by the Depart-ment. ·

Mr. CURTIS. Not one. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The amendment offered by the

gentleman from Indiana [Mr. ZEl"\fOR] is rather a substitute than an amendment. The question is upon the substitute offered by the gentleman from Indiana for the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kansas.

The question was taken, and the substitute wa,~ rejected.

6972 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. JuNE 17,

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question· now is upon the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kansas.

The question was taken, and the amendment was agreed to. Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, I offered an amendment, which

is in the hands of the Clerk, on page 6, at the end of line 15, and I desire now to call the attention of the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. UNDERWOOD] to the following note which I have received from the chairman of the Dawes Commission. He says:

These people are desperately poor, full-blooded Indians, who do not speak a word of English.

Mr. UNDERWOOD. Mr. Speaker, all I asked the gentleman in regard to the matter when it was up before, was as to whether they were full-blooded Indians. I do not know·these other people. I think it is a dangerous proposition to open up these lists in the Dawes case. I know the gentleman from Kansas, and I am entirely willing in such a matter to rely on his opinion, and if he thinks, as I stated before, or if h is willing to state to the House that these are full-blooded Indians and an injustice will be done them if they are not put in the bill, I will withdraw all objection.

Mr. CURTIS. I make the statement upon the authority of the chairman of the Dawes Commission. He says they are fullblooded Indians.

Mr. LITTLE. Mr. Speaker, I would say that that is satisfactory tome.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the adoption of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kansas. ·

The question was taken, and the amendment agreed to. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question now is upon the

third reading of the Senate bill. . The bill was ordered to be read a third time, read the third

time, and passed. On motion of Mr. CURTIS, a motion to reconsider the last

vote was laid on the table. Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I now call up the bill (H. R.

13172) to ratify and confirm an agreement with the Choctaw and Chickasaw tribes of Indians, and for other purposes, which I will ask the Clerk to read.

The Clerk read as follows: MISSISSIPPI CHOCTA. WS.

41. All persons duly identified by the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes under the provisions of section 21 of the act of Congress approved June 28, 1898 (30 Stats., 495) as MissiS,!)ippi Choctaws entitled to benefits under article 14 of the treaty between the United. States and the Choctaw Nation, concluded September 27,1830, may, at any time within six months after the date of the final ratification of this agreement, make bona fide settlement within the Choctaw-Chickasaw country, and uponproofof suchsettlementto such Commission within one year after the date of the final ratification of this agreement may be enrolled by such Commission as Mississippi Choctaws entitled to allotment as herein provided for citizens of the tribes, subject to the special provisions herein provided as to Mississippi Choctaws and said enrollment shall be final when approved by the Secretary of the futerior. The application of no person for identification as a Mississippi Choctaw shall be received by said Commission after the date of the fina ratification of this agreement.

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I offer the following as a substitute for section 32 of the bill.

l\!r. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, I would ask the gentleman if he would not just as soon wait until the bill is read, and then let us commence at the first of the bill and start with that. ··

Mr. LITTLE. I would suggest to the gentleman that outside of the controverted point, when we get through with these we can agree on the ordinary amendments in bulk.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas offers the following substitute, which the Clerk will read.

The Clerk·read as follows: SEC. 32. Said citizenship court shall also have appellate jurisdiction over

all judgments of the courts in Indian Territory rendered under said act of Congress of June 10,1896, admitting persons to citizenship or to enrollment as citizens in either of said nations. The right of appea may be exercised by the said nations jointly or by either of them actin~ separately at any time Within six months after this agreement is finally ratified. In the exercise of such appellate jurisdiction said citizenship court shall be authorized to consider r eview, and r evise all such judgments, both as to findings of fact and conclusions of law and may, wherever in its judgment substantial justice will thereby be subserved :permit either party to any such appeal to take and present such further eVIdence a-s may be necessary to enable said court to determine the very right of the controversy. And said court shall have power to make all needful rules and regulations prescribing the manner of taking and conducting said appeals and of taking additional evidence therein.

Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I believe this has been substantially agreed to.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the substitute offered by the gentleman from Texas. ·

The question was taken; and the substitute was agreed to. :Mr. :McRAE. Mr. Speaker, I propose the following amendment,

which I will ask the Clerk to read. The Clerk read as follows: Strike out the following words, in lines 6 and 7, on page 3'2-: "The final rati

fication of this agreement" and insert the folowing: "Their identification as Mississippi Choctaws by the said;" so that it will read as follows: "May at any time within six months after the date of their identification as Mississippi Choctaw. by the said Commission make bona fide settlement."

Mr. McRAE. Mr. Speaker, it is perfectly apparent to those

who will think for a moment that this amendment ought to be adopted. It is hard indeed to understand why sensible men should negotiate a treaty that might be construed to defeat the very objects of it. If these words remain as they are in the treaty now, we might have this kind of a case: A Mississippi Choctaw applies for identification.

His application is continued, as these applications have been continued practically up to date. There are thousands of them pending to-day before the Secretary of the Interior. If this treaty remains as now proposed, the Mississippi Choctaw is required within six months after the date of final ratification to become a bona fide settler; and yet if he dares go into the Territory before he is identified, he is an intruder.

I have in mind people in my district whose ancestors took land under the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830, and these people are as much entitled to participate in the lands owned by the Choctaws as anybody. But under the right guaranteed to them by Article XIV of the treaty of 1830 they have seen fit to remain in the States. They have, however, a right at any time to go there.

This provision seeks to preserve that right. Yet, while their application for identification is pending, and while they can not get a decision upon it, you tell them by this new treaty that they must get in within six months after the ratification, although the ratification may come long before the identification paper is issued. Now, if the purpose is to give these people six months after they know that they have a right to be there, then why not say so?

Mr. CURTIS. May I ask the gentleman a question? The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Ar

kansas yield to the gentleman from Kansas? Mr. McRAE. Yes. Mr. CURTIS. I did not catch the wording of your amend

ment. How much time is given by your amendment to these Mississippi Choctaws in which to file their applications?

Mr. McRAE. I was not dealing with the question of applications, because those I have named have already filed theirs, but

·this provision requires them to get into the Territory within six months after ratification. I say it should be within six months after they know that thay have a right to be there. · Mr. CURTIS. You give them six months after identification? Mr. McRAE. Yes; instead of after the ratification. Then the

second amendment would give them the same time you propose, one year after identification, to make bona fide improvement. It seems to me that unless the purpose is to get the advantage of the people whose rights you seek to protect, that there should be no objection to this amendment; because, I take it, that is the intent of this provision.

Yet the words adopted may be construed to defeat a pending application, or the applicant must take the risk of going in there without authority; and I want to say that in the case of these people whom I have in mind, they have applied to the Secretary of the Interior to know whether after the application has been filed they have a right to go and select land, and the answer has been," You must determine that question yourselves, " and they are referred to the Dawes Commission. These applications have been pending for years-

Mr. CUR TIS. Mr. Speaker, I should like to suggest to the gentleman that I do not believe there is any objection on this side to his amendment, if he will allow it to come to a vote.

Mr. McRAE. Certainly. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the adoption

of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. McRAE].

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. McRAE. I also propose the following amendment. The Clerk read as follow!: Strike out the following words, in lines 9 and 10, on page 32: "The final

ratification of this agreement may" and insert the following: "Their said identification as Mississippi Choctaws shall. '

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is upon the adoption of the amendment.

The amendment was agreed to. . Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, upon this section I desire to offer

the following amendment--Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. Before that is offered-Mr. CURTIS. I will withdraw the amendment for a minute. Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. I understand that is in addi-

tion to the section as it stands. Mr. CURTIS. That is right. Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. Now, on line 17 of the section

as it stands I move to insert the words "twelve months subsequent to;" so that it shall read:

The application of no person for identifi cation as a Mississippi Choctaw shall be received by said Commission after twelve months subs~qnent to the date of final ratification.

Mr. CURTIS. I should like to ask the gentleman to make that six months. We want to close this matter up.

1902. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE. 6973 Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. Very well; I will make it six

months. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the Chair understand the

gentleman from Kansas to withdraw his amendment temporarily?

Mr. CURTIS. Yes; temporarily. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amend

ment offered by the gentleman from Mississippi. The question was taken, and the amendment was agreed to. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Now, the gentleman from Kan

sas offers the following amendment, which the Clerk will report. The Clerk read as follows: Amend section 41 by adding thereto, as a part of the last sentence, the fol

lowing: "and in the disposition of such applications all full-blood Choctaw Indians who had not moved to and made bona fide settlement in the ChoctawChickasaw country prior to June 28, 1898, shall be deemed to be Mississippi Choctaws, entitled to benefits under article 14 of the said treaty of September 27, lHOO, and to identification as such by said Commission, but this direction or provision shall be deemed to be only a rule of evidence and shall not be invoked by or operate to the advantage of any applicant who is not of the full blood."

1\Ir. WILLIA1t1S of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I want to offer an amendment to the amendment.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Mississippi offers the following amendment to the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows: And the sum of $15,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, is hereby

appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to pay the expenses of removal to the Indian Territory of full-blood Mississippi Choctaws and other Mississippi Choctaws duly identified under the provisions of this agreement.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is upon the adoption of the amendment to the amendment.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. Now, I want to say a few words upon the amendment to the amendment.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will have to ask the gentleman to suspend. The special order under which we are proeeeding this evening expressly directs that this session shall not extend beyond 10.30 p. m. - That hour having arrived, the House stands adjourned until12 o'clock noon to-morrow.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS.

Under clause 2 of Rule XIII, bills and resolutions of the following titles were severally reported from committees, delivered to the Clerk, and refeued to the several Calendars therein named, as follows:

Mr. HULL, from the Committee on Military Affairs, to which was referred the joint resolution of the Senate (S. R. 100) authorizing the Secretary of War to furnish condemned cannon for an equestrian statue of the late Maj. Gen. William J. Sewell, United States Volunteers, reported the same without amendment, accompanied by a report (No. 2556); which said joint resolution and report were referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

Mr. WANGER, from the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, reported the bill of the House (H. R. 15144) to amend an act entitled "An act to promote the safety of employees and travelers upon railroads by compelling common carriers engaged in interstate commerce to equip their cars with automatic couplers and continuous brakes and their locomotives with driving-wheel brakes, and .for other purposes," approved March 2, 1893, and amended April1, 1896, accompanied by a report (No. 2563); which said bill and report were referred to the House Calendar.

Mr. FLEMING, from the Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the bill of the Senate (S. 5383) providing that the circuit court of appeals of the fifth judicial circuit of the United States shall hold at least one term of said court annually in the city of Atlanta, in the State of Georgia, on the first Monday in October in each year, reported the same with amendments, accompanied by a report (No. 2566); which said bill and report were referred to the House Calendar.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS.

Under clause 2 of Rule XIII, private bills and resolutions of the following titles were severally reported from committees, delivered to the Clerk, and referred to the Committee of the Whole House, as follows:

Mr. ESCH, from the Committee on Military Affairs, to which was referred the bill of the Senate (S. 3371) removing the charge of desertion from the name of Jacob Bowman, reported the same without amendment, accompanied by a report (No. 2562); which said bill and report were referred to the Private Calendar.

Mr. CAPRON, from the Committee on Military Affairs, to which was referred the bill of the Senate (S. 4572) to grant an

honorable discharge from the military service to Charles H. Hawley, reported the same without amendment, accompanied by a report (No. 2564); which said bill and report were referred to the Private Calendar.

Mr. DAYTON, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, to which was referred the bill of the Senate (S. 4222) authorizing the appointment of John Russell Bartlett, a captain on the retired list of the Navy, as a rear-admiral on the retired list of the Navy, reported the same with amendment, accompanied by a reporb (No. 2565); which said bill and report were referred to the Private Calendar.

Mr. GOLDFOGLE, from the Committee on Claims, to which was referred the bill of the House (H. R. 4224) to reimburse John Waller, postmaster at Monticello, N. Y., for moneys expended in can·ying the mails, reported the same without amendment, accompanied by a report (No. 2567); which said bill and report were referred to the Private Calendar.

Mr. LACEY, from the Committee on Indian Affairs·, to which was referred the bill of the House (H. R. 8130) for the relief of the Miami Indians of Indiana, reported the same without amendment, accompanied by a report (No. 2568); which said bill and report were referred to the Private Calendar.

CHANGE OF REFERENCE. Under clause 2 of Rule XXII, the Committee on Pensions was

discharged from the consideration of the bill (H. R. 15071) granting a pension to Louisa M. Sippell, and the same was referred to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

PUBLIC BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, AND MEMORIALS. Under clause 3 of Rule XXII, bills, resolutions, and memorials

of the following titles were introduced and severally referred as follows:

By Mr. LANHAM: A bill (H. R. 15140) p1·oviding that the circuit court of appeals of the fifth judicial circuit of the United States shall hold at least one term of said court annually in the city of Fort Worth, in the State of Texas, on the first Monday inN ovember in each year-to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. COWHERD: A bill (H. R. 14141) fixing the rates for telephones in the District of Columbia, and providing for the enforcement of the same-to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

By Mr. BELL: A bill (H. R. 15142) requiring corporations doing interstate business to file reports with the Secretary of State, and for other purposes-to the Committee on the Judicary.

By Mr. MANN (by request): A bill (H. R. 15143) concerning the rights, privileges, and immunities of passengers traveling on or by any mode of conveyance engaged in interstate communication or commerce-to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

By Mr. WANGER, from the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce: A bill (H. R.15144) to amend an act entitled "An act to promote the safety of employees and travelers upon railroads by compelling common carriers engaged in interstate commerce to equip their cars with automatic couplers and continuous brakes and their locomotives with driving-wheel brakes, and for other purposes, 'approved Marc_h 2,1893, and amended Aprll 1, 1896-to the House Calendar.

By Mr. WILEY: A bill (H. R. 15145) to fix the fees of jurors and witnesses in attendari~e upon the United States courts in Alabama-to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. OLMSTED: A resolution (H. Res. 309) providing for the employment during the last ten days of the session of four bicycle messengers-to the Committee on Accounts.

PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS. Under clause 1 of Rule XXII, private bills and resolutions of

the following titles were introduced and severally referred as follows:

By Mr. BINGHA1tf: A bill (H. R. 15146) for the 'relief of Priscilla R. Burns-to the Committee on Claims.

By Mr. BRICK: A bill (H. R. 15147) granting an increase of pension to Abraham E. Clark-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. CANDLER: A bill (H. R. 15148) for the relief of heirs of Sylvia Cannon-to the Committee on War Claims.

By Mr. MAHON: A bill (H. R. 15149) to revoke sentence and establish the military record of Capt. George G. Lovett, Company K, One hundred and eighty-seventh Regiment Pennsylvania Volunteers, war of rebellion of 1861 to 1865-to the Committee on Military Affairs.

By Mr. ROBINSON of Nebraska: A bill (H. R . 15150) granting an incrense of pension to Ellen Sheehan-to the Committee on In valid Pensions.

6974 ' CONGR.ESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. . JUNE 18,

By Mr. SGIDRM: .A. bill (H. R. 15151) granting an increase of pension to Chancy Baker-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. STEPHENS of Texas: A bill (H. R. 15152) granting a pension to William T. Edgeman-to the Committee on Pensioru;.

By Mr. THOMPSON: A bill (H. R.15153) granting an increase of pension to Susan De Lamar-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

PETITIONS, ETC. Under clause 1 of Rule XXTI, the following petitions and papers

were laid on the Clerk's desk and referred as follows: By Mr. ALEXANDER: Resolutions of the East Buffalo Live

Stock Association, of Buffalo, N.Y., favoring a bill to authorize the :!\lather Power Company to construct experimental span in Niagara River at Buffalo, N. Y.-to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

By Mr. CANDLER: Papers to accompany House bill for the relief of the heirs of Sylvi.aCannon, of Tupelo, Miss.-tothe Committee on War Claims.

By Mr. CASSINGHAM: Petition of the Westminster Presbyterian Church, of Wooster, Ohio, for an amendment to the Constitution preventing polygamous marriages-to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. ESCH: Petition of citizens of La Crosse County, Wis., for the passage of a service pension bill-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By 1\Ir. FITZGERALD: Resolution of the Jewelers' Association and Board of Trade, m·ging the passage of House bill13679, amending the bankruptcy law-to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Also, protest of the Pure Oil Company, of Pittsburg, Pa., against the passage of the shi-p-subsidy bill-to the Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries.

By Mr. GOLDFOGLE: PetitionsofB.Fischer&Co.,Einstein, Wolff & Co., Schefer, Schramm & Vogel, Yale & Towne Manufacturing Company, Schiefllin & Co., New York Board of Trade and Transportation, the Crockery Board of Trade, and the Jewelers' Association and Board of Trade, all of New York City, favoring the Ray bankruptcy bill-to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Also, resolutions of Atlantic Coast Marine Firemen's Union and Cooper's Union No. 2,of New York City, for increase of pay of letter carriers-to the Committee on the Post-Office and Post. Roads.

By Mr. MAHON: Papers relating to charges and specifications prefeiTed against Capt. George G. Lovett, of Company K, One hundred and eighty-seventh Regiment Pennsylvania Volunteersto the Committee on Military Affairs.

By Mr. NEVILLE: Paper to accompany House bill granting a pension to Franklin Peale-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. ROBINSON of Nebraska: Papers to accompany House bill granting a pension to Andrew Anderson-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. WACHTER: Petition of Polish Society, No. 487, of Baltimore, Md., favoring the erection of a statue to the late Brigadier-General Count Pulaski at Washington-to the Com· mittee on the Library.

SENATE. WEDNESDAY, June 18, 1902.

The Senate met at 11 o'clock a. m. Prayer by Rev. F. J. PRETTYMAN, of the city of Washington. The Secretary proceeded to read the Journal of yesterday's pro-

ceedings, when, on request of Mr. ALLISON, and by unanimous consent, the further reading was dispensed with.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Journal, without objection, will stand approved.

The concurrent resolution was considered by unanimous con· sent, and agreed to.

EXECUTIVE SESSION. Mr. HALE. I ask the Senate, upon an important report to go

into executive session for three or four minutes. I make that motion. . The ~otion was a~eed to! and the Senate proceeded to the con

sideration of executive busmess. After three minutes spent in executive session the doors were reopened.

MISSOURI VOLUNTEERS. The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate a com

mnnicaiioD: from the Sec~etary of War, transmitting, in response to a resolution of the 14th mstant, a statement showing the various cl.asse~ of th~ ~souri v_ol:unteers, militia, and home guards that were m ~emce m the c1V1l war and the laws under which they were rrused; also what classes of such were recognized by the War Department as being in the military service of the United States; which, with the accompanying papers, was ordered to lie on the table, and to be printed.

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. A message .from the House of Representatives, by Mr. C. R.

McKENNEY, Its enrolling clerk, announced that the House haa. passed the bill (S. 4769) to fix the fees of jurors in the United States courts.

The message also .announced that the House had passed with amendments the following bills; in which it requested the con· currence of the Senate:

A bill (S. 4923) to ratify .and confum a supplemental agreement with ~he Creek tribe ~f :rndians, and for other purposes; and

A bill (S. 5718) proVIding for the sale of sites for manufacturing or industrial plants in the Indi.an Territory.

The message further announced that the House had agreed to ~h:e amendments of th~ Sena~e to the bill (H. R. 10299) author· 1ZI?g the Santa Fe Pacific R~lroad Company to sell or lease its raih·oad property and franchises, .and for other purposes.

The message also announced that the House insists upon its amendments to the bill (S. 3653) for the protection of the Presi· dent of the United States, and for other purposes, disagreed to by the Senate; .agrees to the conference asked for by the Senate on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon and had appointed Mr. RAY of New York, Mr. OVERSTREET, ~nd Mr. LAN· HA.M managers at the conference on the part of the House.

The message further announced that the House had disagreed to the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 14019) making appropr~tions to pro~de for the expenses of the government of the DIBtnct of Columb1a for the fiscal year ending J nne 30 1903 and for other purposes, asks a conference with the Senate bn th~ di....~greeing votes of the two Houses thereon, and had appointed Mr. McCLEARY, Mr. CANNON, and Mr. BENTON managers at the conference on the part of the House.

The message also announced that the House had passed the fol· lowing bills; in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate:

A bill (H. R. 7206) providing for the punishment of United States prisoners for crimes committed while confined in State penal institutions;

A bill (H. R. 8238) for the relief of the heirs of Mary Clark and Francis or Jenny Clark, deceased, and for other purposes·

A bill (H. R. 11656) to incorporate the Society of the Army of Santiago de Cuba;

A bill (H. R. 12205) to provide for circuit and district courts of. the United Stat-es at Valdosta, Ga.;

A bill (H. R. 12597) to accept, ratify, and confirm a proposed agreement submitted by the Kansas or Kaw Indians of Oklahoma and for other purposes; '

A bill (H. R. 12764) amending an act of March 2, 1901 entitled ''An act to carry into effect the stipulations of article '7 of the treaty between the United States and Spain, etc.;"

A bill (H. R. 13679) to amend an act entitled "An act to estab· PUBLIC BUILDINGS. lish a uniform system of bankruptcy throughout the United

Mr. ALLISON. I ask that the Chair maylaybeforethe Senate States," approved July 1, 1898; the concurrent resolution passed some days ago by the House of A bill (H. R. 14410) to provide for the control and management Representatives respecting the sundry civil appropriation bill. of United States penitentiaries, and for other purposes;

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate the con- A bill (H. R. 14898) relating to jurisdiction on appeals in the current resolution; which was read, as follows: court of appeals of the District of Columbia, and transcripts on

· IN THE HousE oF REPRESENTATIVEs, June 7, 1:1re. appeals in said court, and to quiet title to public lands; and Resolt:ed by the House of Rep1·esentatives (the Senate c01tC'Urring), That the A bill (H. R. 14923) for the appointment of five additional

committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the United States commissioners and five additional constables in the :~e:~~~~ft!,h~o:ld~~ ~d~:c~ntJ~ea&~1~f~~~~~fil· ~-~~~ Indian Territory. sary appropriations to carry out the several objects authorized in the "Act El.'IROLLED BILLS SIGNED. to increase the limit of cost of certain public buildings, to authorize the pur-chase of sites for public buildings, to authorize the erection and completion The message further announced that the Speaker of the House of public buildings, and for other purposes," approved June 6, 1902. had signed the following enrolled bills; and they were thereupon

MJ;. ALLISON. I ask that the concurrent resolution may be signe~ by the President pro tempore: considered now. I A bill (H. R. 292) granting a pension to Henrietta Gottweis•

Date post:	25-Mar-2023
Category:	Documents
Upload:	khangminh22
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

-CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE.

Documents