EXECUTIVE MANSION, December 6, 1894.
To the Senate of the United States:
In compliance with the resolution of the Senate of the 24th of July, 1894, directing the Secretary of State to furnish copies of all papers, correspondence, diplomatic or otherwise, on file in the State Department in connection with the arrest and imprisonment at Arequipa, Peru, of Victor H. McCord, I transmit herewith the correspondence indicated.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, December 10, 1894.
To the Congress of the United States:
I transmit herewith a communication from the Secretary of State, inclosing the report, with accompanying papers, of the commission of the United States for the Columbian Historical Exposition in Madrid in 1892 and 1893, constituted in virtue of the act of Congress approved May 13, 1892.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, December 10, 1894.
To the Senate and House of Representatives:
I transmit herewith the report on the Chicago strike of June and July, 1894, forwarded to me by the Strike Commission appointed July 26, 1894, under the provisions of section 6 of chapter 1063 of the laws of the United States, passed October 1, 1888.
The testimony taken by the commission and the suggestions and recommendations made to it accompany the report in the form of appendixes.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, December 11, 1894.
To the Senate of the United States:
In response to the resolution of the Senate dated December 6, 1894, requesting that copies of correspondence in regard to the claim of Antonio Maximo Mora against the Government of Spain exchanged since my last message to the Senate on the same subject, dated June 20, 1894,13 be communicated to it, if not incompatible with the public interests, I transmit herewith the report of the Secretary of State on the matter, with accompanying copies of correspondence.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, December 11, 1894.
To the Senate of the United States:
I have received a copy of the following resolution of the Senate, passed on 3d instant:
Resolved, That the President be requested, if in his judgment it be not incompatible with the public interest, to communicate to the Senate any information he may have received in regard to alleged cruelties committed upon Armenians in Turkey, and especially whether any such cruelties have been committed upon citizens who have declared their intention to become naturalized in this country or upon persons because of their being Christians.
And further, to inform the Senate whether any expostulations have been addressed by this Government to the Government of Turkey in regard to such matters or any proposals made by or to this Government to act in concert with other Christian powers regarding the same.
In response to said resolution I beg leave to inform the Senate that I have no information concerning cruelties committed upon Armenians in Turkey or upon persons because of their being Christians, except such information as has been derived from newspapers and statements emanating from the Turkish Government denying such cruelties and two telegraphic reports from our minister at Constantinople.
One of these reports, dated November 28, 1894, is in answer to an inquiry by the State Department touching reports in the press alleging the killing of Armenians, and is as follows:
Reports in American papers of Turkish atrocities at Sassoun are sensational and exaggerated. The killing was in a conflict between armed Armenians and Turkish soldiers. The grand vizier says it was necessary to suppress insurrection, and that about fifty Turks were killed; between three and four hundred Armenian guns were picked up after the fight, and reports that about that number of Armenians were killed. I give credit to his statement.
The other dispatch referred to is dated December 2, 1894, and is as follows:
Information from British ambassador indicates far more loss of lives in Armenia, attended with atrocities, than stated in my telegram of 28th.
I have received absolutely no information concerning any cruelties committed "upon citizens who have declared their intention to become naturalized in this country," or upon any persons who had a right to claim or have claimed for any reason the protection of the United States Government.
In the absence of such authentic detailed knowledge on the subject as would justify our interference no "expostulations have been addressed by this Government to the Government of Turkey in regard to such matters."
The last inquiry contained in the resolution of the Senate touching these alleged cruelties seeks information concerning "any proposals made by or to this Government to act in concert with other Christian powers regarding the same."
The first proposal of the kind referred to was made by the Turkish Government through our minister on the 30th day of November, when the Sultan then expressed a desire that a consul of the United States be sent with a Turkish commission to investigate these alleged atrocities on Armenians. This was construed as an invitation on the part of the Turkish Government to actually take part with a Turkish commission in an investigation of these affairs and any report to be made thereon, and the proposition came before our minister's second dispatch was received and at a time when the best information in the possession of our Government was derived from his first report, indicating that the statements made in the press were sensational and exaggerated and that the atrocities alleged really did not exist. This condition very much weakened any motive for an interference based on considerations of humanity, and permitted us without embarrassment to pursue a course plainly marked out by other controlling incidents.
By a treaty entered into at Berlin in the year 1878 between Turkey and various other governments Turkey undertook to guarantee protection to the Armenians, and agreed that it would "periodically make known the steps taken to this effect to the powers, who will superintend their application."
Our Government was not a party to this treaty, and it is entirely obvious that in the face of the provisions of such treaty above recited our interference in the proposed investigation, especially without the invitation of any of the powers which had assumed by treaty obligations to secure the protection of these Armenians, might have been exceedingly embarrassing, if not entirely beyond the limits of justification or propriety.
The Turkish invitation to join the investigation set on foot by that Government was therefore, on the 2d day of December, declined. On the same day, and after this declination had been sent, our minister at Constantinople forwarded his second dispatch, tending to modify his former report as to the extent and character of Armenian slaughter. At the same time the request of the Sultan for our participation in the investigation was repeated, and Great Britain, one of the powers which joined in the treaty of Berlin, made a like request.
In view of changed conditions and upon reconsideration of the subject it was determined to send Mr. Jewett, our consul at Sivas, to the scene of the alleged outrages, not for the purpose of joining with any other government in an investigation and report, but to the end that he might be able to inform this Government as to the exact truth.
Instructions to this effect were sent to Mr. Jewett, and it is supposed he has already entered upon the duty assigned him.
I submit with this communication copies of all correspondence and dispatches in the State Department on this subject and the report to me of the Secretary of State thereon.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, January 3, 1895.
To the Senate of the United States:
In response to the resolution of the Senate of the 4th ultimo, requesting "any reports or correspondence relating to affairs at Bluefields, in the Mosquito territory," and also information as to "whether any American citizens have been arrested or the rights of any American citizens at Bluefields have been interfered with during the past two years by the Government of Nicaragua," I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State, with accompanying papers.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, January 9, 1895.
To the Senate and House of Representatives:
I submit herewith certain dispatches from our minister at Hawaii and the documents which accompanied the same.
They disclose the fact that the Hawaiian Government desires to lease to Great Britain one of the uninhabited islands belonging to Hawaii as a station for a submarine telegraph cable to be laid from Canada to Australia, with a connection between the island leased and Honolulu.
Both the Hawaiian Government and the representatives of Great Britain in this negotiation concede that the proposed lease can not be effected without the consent of the United States, for the reason that in our reciprocity treaty with the King of Hawaii he agreed that as long as said treaty remained in force he would not "lease or otherwise dispose of or create any lien upon any port, harbor, or other territory in his dominion, or grant any special privilege or right of use therein, to any other power, state, or government."
At the request of the Hawaiian Government this subject is laid before the Congress for its determination upon the question of so modifying the treaty agreement above recited as to permit the proposed lease.
It will be seen that the correspondence which is submitted between the Hawaiian and British negotiators negatives the existence on the part of Hawaii of any suspicion of British unfriendliness or the fear of British aggression.
The attention of the Congress is directed to the following statement contained in a communication addressed to the Hawaiian Government by the representatives of Great Britain:
We propose to inform the British Government of your inquiry whether they would accept the sovereignty of Nicker Island or some other uninhabited island on condition that no subsidy is required from you. As we explained, we have not felt at liberty to entertain that question ourselves, as we were definitely instructed not to ask for the sovereignty of any island, but only for a lease simply for the purpose of the cable.
Some of the dispatches from our minister, which are submitted, not only refer to the project for leasing an uninhabited island belonging to Hawaii, but contain interesting information concerning recent occurrences in that country and its political and social condition. This information is valuable because it is based upon the observation and knowledge necessarily within the scope of the diplomatic duties which are intrusted solely to the charge of this intelligent diplomatic officer representing the United States Government at Hawaii.
I hope the Congress will see fit to grant the request of the Hawaiian Government, and that our consent to the proposed lease will be promptly accorded. It seems to me we ought not by a refusal of this request to stand in the way of the advantages to be gained by isolated Hawaii through telegraphic communication with the rest of the world, especially in view of the fact that our own communication with that country would thereby be greatly improved without apparent detriment to any legitimate American interest.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, January 11, 1895.
To the Senate of the United States:
In response to the resolution of the Senate of the 19th ultimo, requesting the record of the extradition proceedings in the case of General Ezeta, etc., I transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of State, with accompanying papers.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, January 15, 1895.
To the Senate of the United States:
I transmit a report from the Secretary of State, with accompanying papers, in response to the resolution of the Senate of the 3d instant, requesting "all correspondence or other papers relating to the delivery by the United States consul at Shanghai of two Japanese citizens to the Chinese authorities," and information "whether the said Japanese were put to death after being tortured, and whether there was any understanding with the Chinese Government that officers of the United States should aid, assist, and give comfort to any Japanese citizen desiring to leave China, and whether the United States consul at Hankow was reprimanded by Chinese officials for aiding Japanese citizens to leave the country, and whether all information was refused to the United States consul at Ningpo when he made inquiries as to the charges against certain Japanese citizens arrested there."
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, January 28, 1895.
To the Senate and House of Representatives:
In my last annual message I commended to the serious consideration of the Congress the condition of our national finances, and in connection with the subject indorsed a plan of currency legislation which at that time seemed to furnish protection against impending danger.14 This plan has not been approved by the Congress. In the meantime the situation has so changed and the emergency now appears so threatening that I deem it my duty to ask at the hands of the legislative branch of the Government such prompt and effective action as will restore confidence in our financial soundness and avert business disaster and universal distress among our people.
Whatever may be the merits of the plan outlined in my annual message as a remedy for ills then existing and as a safeguard against the depletion of the gold reserve then in the Treasury, I am now convinced that its reception by the Congress and our present advanced stage of financial perplexity necessitate additional or different legislation.
With natural resources unlimited in variety and productive strength and with a people whose activity and enterprise seek only a fair opportunity to achieve national success and greatness, our progress should not be checked by a false financial policy and a heedless disregard of sound monetary laws, nor should the timidity and fear which they engender stand in the way of our prosperity.
It is hardly disputed that this predicament confronts us to-day. Therefore no one in any degree responsible for the making and execution of our laws should fail to see a patriotic duty in honestly and sincerely attempting to relieve the situation. Manifestly this effort will not succeed unless it is made untrammeled by the prejudice of partisanship and with a steadfast determination to resist the temptation to accomplish party advantage. We may well remember that if we are threatened with financial difficulties all our people in every station of life are concerned; and surely those who suffer will not receive the promotion of party interests as an excuse for permitting our present troubles to advance to a disastrous conclusion. It is also of the utmost importance that we approach the study of the problems presented as free as possible from the tyranny of preconceived opinions, to the end that in a common danger we may be able to seek with unclouded vision a safe and reasonable protection.
The real trouble which confronts us consists in a lack of confidence, widespread and constantly increasing, in the continuing ability or disposition of the Government to pay its obligations in gold. This lack of confidence grows to some extent out of the palpable and apparent embarrassment attending the efforts of the Government under existing laws to procure gold and to a greater extent out of the impossibility of either keeping it in the Treasury or canceling obligations by its expenditure after it is obtained.
The only way left open to the Government for procuring gold is by the issue and sale of its bonds. The only bonds that can be so issued were authorized nearly twenty-five years ago and are not well calculated to meet our present needs. Among other disadvantages, they are made payable in coin instead of specifically in gold, which in existing conditions detracts largely and in an increasing ratio from their desirability as investments. It is by no means certain that bonds of this description can much longer be disposed of at a price creditable to the financial character of our Government.
The most dangerous and irritating feature of the situation, however, remains to be mentioned. It is found in the means by which the Treasury is despoiled of the gold thus obtained without canceling a single Government obligation and solely for the benefit of those who find profit in shipping it abroad or whose fears induce them to hoard it at home. We have outstanding about five hundred millions of currency notes of the Government for which gold may be demanded, and, curiously enough, the law requires that when presented and, in fact, redeemed and paid in gold they shall be reissued. Thus the same notes may do duty many times in drawing gold from the Treasury; nor can the process be arrested as long as private parties, for profit or otherwise, see an advantage in repeating the operation. More than $300,000,000 in these notes have already been redeemed in gold, and notwithstanding such redemption they are all still outstanding.
Since the 17th day of January, 1894, our bonded interest-bearing debt has been increased $100,000,000 for the purpose of obtaining gold to replenish our coin reserve. Two issues were made amounting to fifty millions each, one in January and the other in November. As a result of the first issue there was realized something more than $58,000,000 in gold. Between that issue and the succeeding one in November, comprising a period of about ten months, nearly $103,000,000 in gold were drawn from the Treasury. This made the second issue necessary, and upon that more than fifty-eight millions in gold was again realized. Between the date of this second issue and the present time, covering a period of only about two months, more than $69,000,000 in gold have been drawn from the Treasury. These large sums of gold were expended without any cancellation of Government obligations or in any permanent way benefiting our people or improving our pecuniary situation.
The financial events of the past year suggest facts and conditions which should certainly arrest attention.
More than $172,000,000 in gold have been drawn out of the Treasury during the year for the purpose of shipment abroad or hoarding at home.
While nearly $103,000,000 of this amount was drawn out during the first ten months of the year, a sum aggregating more than two-thirds of that amount, being about $69,000,000, was drawn out during the following two months, thus indicating a marked acceleration of the depleting process with the lapse of time.
The obligations upon which this gold has been drawn from the Treasury are still outstanding and are available for use in repeating the exhausting operation with shorter intervals as our perplexities accumulate.
Conditions are certainly supervening tending to make the bonds which may be issued to replenish our gold less useful for that purpose.
An adequate gold reserve is in all circumstances absolutely essential to the upholding of our public credit and to the maintenance of our high national character.
Our gold reserve has again reached such a stage of diminution as to require its speedy reenforcement.
The aggravations that must inevitably follow present conditions and methods will certainly lead to misfortune and loss, not only to our national credit and prosperity and to financial enterprise, but to those of our people who seek employment as a means of livelihood and to those whose only capital is their daily labor.
It will hardly do to say that a simple increase of revenue will cure our troubles. The apprehension now existing and constantly increasing as to our financial ability does not rest upon a calculation of our revenue. The time has passed when the eyes of investors abroad and our people at home were fixed upon the revenues of the Government. Changed conditions have attracted their attention to the gold of the Government. There need be no fear that we can not pay our current expenses with such money as we have. There is now in the Treasury a comfortable surplus of more than $63,000,000, but it is not in gold, and therefore does not meet our difficulty.
I can not see that differences of opinion concerning the extent to which silver ought to be coined or used in our currency should interfere with the counsels of those whose duty it is to rectify evils now apparent in our financial situation. They have to consider the question of national credit and the consequences that will follow from its collapse. Whatever ideas may be insisted upon as to silver or bimetallism, a proper solution of the question now pressing upon us only requires a recognition of gold as well as silver and a concession of its importance, rightfully or wrongfully acquired, as a basis of national credit, a necessity in the honorable discharge of our obligations payable in gold, and a badge of solvency. I do not understand that the real friends of silver desire a condition that might follow inaction or neglect to appreciate the meaning of the present exigency if it should result in the entire banishment of gold from our financial and currency arrangements.
Besides the Treasury notes, which certainly should be paid in gold, amounting to nearly $500,000,000, there will fall due in 1904 one hundred millions of bonds issued during the last year, for which we have received gold, and in 1907 nearly six hundred millions of 4 per cent bonds issued in 1877. Shall the payment of these obligations in gold be repudiated? If they are to be paid in such a manner as the preservation of our national honor and national solvency demands, we should not destroy or even imperil our ability to supply ourselves with gold for that purpose.
While I am not unfriendly to silver and while I desire to see it recognized to such an extent as is consistent with financial safety and the preservation of national honor and credit, I am not willing to see gold entirely banished from our currency and finances. To avert such a consequence I believe thorough and radical remedial legislation should be promptly passed. I therefore beg the Congress to give the subject immediate attention.
In my opinion the Secretary of the Treasury should be authorized to issue bonds of the Government for the purpose of procuring and maintaining a sufficient gold reserve and the redemption and cancellation of the United States legal-tender notes and the Treasury notes issued for the purchase of silver under the law of July 14, 1890. We should be relieved from the humiliating process of issuing bonds to procure gold to be immediately and repeatedly drawn out on these obligations for purposes not related to the benefit of our Government or our people. The principal and interest of these bonds should be payable on their face in gold, because they should be sold only for gold or its representative, and because there would now probably be difficulty in favorably disposing of bonds not containing this stipulation. I suggest that the bonds be issued in denominations of twenty and fifty dollars and their multiples and that they bear interest at a rate not exceeding 3 per cent per annum. I do not see why they should not be payable fifty years from their date. We of the present generation have large amounts to pay if we meet our obligations, and long bonds are most salable. The Secretary of the Treasury might well be permitted at his discretion to receive on the sale of bonds the legal-tender and Treasury notes to be retired, and of course when they are thus retired or redeemed in gold they should be canceled.
These bonds under existing laws could be deposited by national banks as security for circulation, and such banks should be allowed to issue circulation up to the face value of these or any other bonds so deposited, except bonds outstanding bearing only 2 per cent interest and which sell in the market at less than par. National banks should not be allowed to take out circulating notes of a less denomination than $10, and when such as are now outstanding reach the Treasury, except for redemption and retirement, they should be canceled and notes of the denomination of $10 and upward issued in their stead. Silver certificates of the denomination of $10 and upward should be replaced by certificates of the denominations under $10.
As a constant means for the maintenance of a reasonable supply of gold in the Treasury, our duties on imports should be paid in gold, allowing all other dues to the Government to be paid in any other form of money.
I believe all the provisions I have suggested should be embodied in our laws if we are to enjoy a complete reinstatement of a sound financial condition. They need not interfere with any currency scheme providing for the increase of the circulating medium through the agency of national or State banks that may commend itself to the Congress, since they can easily be adjusted to such a scheme. Objection has been made to the issuance of interest-bearing obligations for the purpose of retiring the noninterest-bearing legal-tender notes. In point of fact, however, these notes have burdened us with a large load of interest, and it is still accumulating. The aggregate interest on the original issue of bonds, the proceeds of which in gold constituted the reserve for the payment of these notes, amounted to $70,326,250 on January 1, 1895, and the annual charge for interest on these bonds and those issued for the same purpose during the last year will be $9,145,000, dating from January 1, 1895.
While the cancellation of these notes would not relieve us from the obligations already incurred on their account, these figures are given by way of suggesting that their existence has not been free from interest charges and that the longer they are outstanding, judging from the experience of the last year, the more expensive they will become.
In conclusion I desire to frankly confess my reluctance to issuing more bonds in present circumstances and with no better results than have lately followed that course. I can not, however, refrain from adding to an assurance of my anxiety to cooperate with the present Congress in any reasonable measure of relief an expression of my determination to leave nothing undone which furnishes a hope for improving the situation or checking a suspicion of our disinclination or disability to meet with the strictest honor every national obligation.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, January 30, 1895.
To the House of Representatives:
In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 28th instant, the Senate concurring, I herewith return the bill (H.R. 6186) entitled "An act to pension Maria Davis."
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, February 4, 1895.
To the Senate of the United States:
In response to the resolution of the Senate dated December 6, 1894, requesting that copies of correspondence in regard to the claim of Antonio Maximo Mora against the Government of Spain exchanged since my last message to the Senate on the same subject, dated June 20, 1894,15 be communicated to it if not incompatible with the public interests, I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State, inclosing copies of further correspondence exchanged between the Governments of the United States and Spain since the date of my last message to the Senate, December 11, 1894.16
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, February 4, 1895.
To the House of Representatives:
In response to the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 1st instant, calling for certain information touching the recent insurrection in the Hawaiian Islands, I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State, with accompanying papers.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, February 7, 1895.
To the House of Representatives:
In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 2d instant, the Senate concurring, I return herewith the bill (H.R. 5377) entitled "An act granting a pension to Richard R. Knight."
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, February 7, 1895.
To the Senate:
I transmit herewith, in response to a resolution of the Senate of the 16th ultimo, a report from the Secretary of State, accompanied by copies of certain correspondence touching the enforcement of the provisions of the tariff act of 1894.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, February 8, 1895.
To the Congress of the United States:
Since my recent communication to the Congress calling attention to our financial condition and suggesting legislation which I deemed essential to our national welfare and credit17 the anxiety and apprehension then existing in business circles have continued.
As a precaution, therefore, against the failure of timely legislative aid through Congressional action, cautious preparations have been pending to employ to the best possible advantage, in default of better means, such Executive authority as may without additional legislation be exercised for the purpose of reenforcing and maintaining in our Treasury an adequate and safe gold reserve.
In the judgment of those especially charged with this responsibility the business situation is so critical and the legislative situation is so unpromising, with the omission thus far on the part of Congress to beneficially enlarge the powers of the Secretary of the Treasury in the premises, as to enjoin immediate Executive action with the facilities now at hand.
Therefore, in pursuance of section 3700 of the Revised Statutes, the details of an arrangement have this day been concluded with parties abundantly able to fulfill their undertaking whereby bonds of the United States authorized under the act of July 14, 1875, payable in coin thirty years after their date, with interest at the rate of 4 per cent per annum, to the amount of a little less than $62,400,000, are to be issued for the purchase of gold coin, amounting to a sum slightly in excess of $65,000,000, to be delivered to the Treasury of the United States, which sum added to the gold now held in our reserve will so restore such reserve as to make it amount to something more than $100,000,000. Such a premium is to be allowed to the Government upon the bonds as to fix the rate of interest upon the amount of gold realized at 3-3/4 per cent per annum. At least one-half of the gold to be obtained is to be supplied from abroad, which is a very important and favorable feature of the transaction.
The privilege is especially reserved to the Government to substitute at par within ten days from this date, in lieu of the 4 per cent coin bonds, other bonds in terms payable in gold and bearing only 3 per cent interest if the issue of the same should in the meantime be authorized by the Congress.
The arrangement thus completed, which after careful inquiry appears in present circumstances and considering all the objects desired to be the best attainable, develops such a difference in the estimation of investors between bonds made payable in coin and those specifically made payable in gold in favor of the latter as is represented by three-fourths of a cent in annual interest. In the agreement just concluded the annual saving in interest to the Government if 3 per cent gold bonds should be substituted for 4 per cent coin bonds under the privilege reserved would be $539,159 amounting in thirty years, or at the maturity of the coin bonds, to $16,174,770.
Of course there never should be a doubt in any quarter as to the redemption in gold of the bonds of the Government which are made payable in coin. Therefore the discrimination, in the judgment of investors, between our bond obligations payable in coin and those specifically made payable in gold is very significant. It is hardly necessary to suggest that, whatever may be our views on the subject, the sentiments or preferences of those with whom we must negotiate in disposing of our bonds for gold are not subject to our dictation.
I have only to add that in my opinion the transaction herein detailed for the information of the Congress promises better results than the efforts previously made in the direction of effectively adding to our gold reserve through the sale of bonds, and I believe it will tend, as far as such action can in present circumstances, to meet the determination expressed in the law repealing the silver-purchasing clause of the act of July 14, 1890, and that, in the language of such repealing act, the arrangement made will aid our efforts to "insure the maintenance of the parity in value of the coins of the two metals and the equal power of every dollar at all times in the markets and in the payment of debts."
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, February 8, 1895.
To the Senate and House of Representatives:
I transmit herewith, for the information of the Congress, a copy of a telegraphic dispatch just received from Mr. Willis, our minister to Hawaii, with a copy of the reply thereto which was immediately sent by the Secretary of State.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, February 11, 1895.
To the Senate::
On the 8th day of January I received a copy of the following Senate resolution:
Resolved, That the President be requested, if not incompatible with the public interests, to communicate to the Senate all reports, documents, and other papers, including logs of vessels, relating to the enforcement of the regulations respecting fur seals adopted by the Governments of the United States and Great Britain in accordance with the decision of the Tribunal of Arbitration convened at Paris and the resolutions under which said reports are required to be made, as well as relating to the number of seals taken during the season of 1894 by pelagic hunters and by the lessees of the Pribilof and Commander islands; also relating to the steps which may have been taken to extend the said regulations to the Asiatic waters of the North Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea and to secure the concurrence of other nations in said regulations, and, further, all papers not heretofore published, including communications of the agent of the United States before said tribunal at Paris, relating to the claims of the British Government on account of the seizure of the sealing vessels in Bering Sea.
In compliance with said request I herewith transmit sundry papers, documents, and reports which have been returned to me by the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Secretary of the Navy, to whom said resolution was referred. I am not in possession of any further information touching the various subjects embodied in such resolution.
It will be seen from a letter of the Secretary of the Navy accompanying the papers and documents sent from his Department that it is impossible to furnish at this time the complete log books of some of the naval vessels referred to in the resolution, but I venture to express the hope that the reports of the commanders of such vessels herewith submitted will be found to contain in substance so much of the matters recorded in said log books as are important in answering the inquiries addressed to me by the Senate.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, February 12, 1895.
To the Senate and House of Representatives:
I transmit herewith, for the information of the Congress, a communication from the Secretary of State, covering the report of the Director of the Bureau of the American Republics for the year 1894.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, February 14, 1895.
To the Senate and House of Representatives:
I transmit herewith the eighth special report of the Commissioner of Labor, which relates to "the housing of the working people" in different countries.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, February 26, 1895.
To the Senate:
I transmit herewith, in response to a resolution of the Senate of the 29th ultimo, a report from the Secretary of State, accompanied by copies of correspondence touching Samoan affairs.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, January 14, 1895.
To the House of Representatives:
I herewith return without my approval House bill No. 7451, entitled "An act to authorize the entry of land for gravel pits and reservoir purposes and authorizing the grant of right of way for pipe lines."
The first section of this bill permits the sale to railroad companies, in the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior, under certain restrictions and at an appraised value, certain public lands to be used by said companies for gravel pits or the construction of reservoirs. It also permits grants of the right of way for pipe lines connecting such reservoirs with the railways of said companies.
The second, third, and fourth sections of the bill relate to the purchase by any citizen of the United States, or any association of citizens, or any ditch or water company, of public lands suitable for reservoir purposes at such a price as the Secretary of the Interior shall prescribe, not less than $2 per acre.
The right to purchase these lands is given by the sections last referred to "under rules and regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior."
I think the expediency and propriety of disposing of these lands for the purposes specified should in each case be determined by the Secretary of the Interior, as well as the rules and regulations governing such disposition.
The objections to the bill, however, which appear to be the most serious are found in its fifth and last section, which provides:
That any State or any county or district organization duly organized under the laws of any State or Territory may apply for any of the storage-reservoir sites not reserved by the United States, situated on unentered public lands, for the storage of water for irrigating, mining, or other useful purposes, whereupon the Secretary of the Interior shall set aside and withdraw from public sale or other disposition such site or sites and permit the use thereof for either or all of such purposes.
These provisions do not seem to be in harmony with prior laws by which, under certain conditions, arid lands may be conveyed to States for the purpose of irrigation, and it is not clear what is intended by the words "any of the storage-reservoir sites not reserved by the United States."
The apparent purpose and effect of the section is to give to the organizations mentioned the right to select such land as may present eligible reservoir sites not reserved and upon unentered lands, and demand of the Secretary of the Interior a grant of the same, leaving no discretion on the subject to him or to any other officer of the Government; and these grants are to be made without any compensation to the Government and without any specific requirement of the amount or kind of work to be done or improvements to be made upon such sites.
The grants may be demanded not only for the storage of water for irrigating purposes, but for "mining and other useful purposes." Inasmuch as no officer of the Government is vested with any discretion in the premises, the pretext that the "purpose" to be accomplished is "useful" might result in the use of these sites in a manner prejudicial to the surrounding public domain and destructive of the utilization of such sites for irrigating purposes.
The wise and prudent safeguards which have been incorporated in other legislation relating to the disposition of arid public lands and their irrigation seem to have been to such an extent overlooked in the construction of the bill under consideration that, in my judgment, if it should become the law a beneficent policy which the Government has entered upon in the interest of agriculture would be seriously endangered.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, February 1, 1895.
To the Senate:
I herewith return without my approval Senate bill No. 2338, entitled "An act granting to the Gila Valley, Globe and Northern Railway Company a right of way through the San Carlos Indian Reservation, in the Territory of Arizona."
The reservation through which it is proposed to construct a railroad under the provisions of this bill is inhabited by tribes of Indians which in the past have been most troublesome and whose depredations on more than one occasion have caused loss of life, destruction of property, and serious alarm to the people of the surrounding country; and their condition as to civilization is not now so far improved as to give assurance that in the future they may not upon occasion make trouble.
The discontent among the Indians which has given rise to disturbances in the past has been largely caused by trespass upon their lands and interference with their rights by the neighboring whites. I am in very great doubt whether in any circumstances a road through their reservation should at this time be permitted, and especially since the route, which is rather indefinitely described in the bill, appears to pass through the richest and most desirable part of their lands. In any event, I am thoroughly convinced that the construction of the road should not be permitted without first obtaining the consent of these Indians. This is a provision which has been insisted upon, so far as I am aware, in all the like bills which have been approved for a long time, and I think it should especially be inserted in this bill if, even upon any conditions, it is thought expedient to permit a railroad to traverse this reservation.
The importance of this consent does not rest solely upon the extent to which the Indians have the right of ownership over this land. The fact that the procurement of this consent is the most effective means of allaying the discontent which might arise and perhaps develop into a train of lamentable and destructive outbreaks of violence particularly emphasizes its importance.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, February 5, 1895.
To the House of Representatives:
I return herewith without approval House bill No. 5368, entitled "An act for the relief of H.W. McConnell."
The reports of both the Senate and House committees, which favorably reported this bill, disclose an intention to partially relieve the former postmaster at Jacksboro, in the State of Texas, from liability on account of two remittances of postal funds which he dispatched at different times during the year 1883 to be deposited at Dallas, in the same State, and which were lost by robberies of the stage conveying the same. In dealing with the first remittance the committees report that the postmaster should be relieved of liability to the amount of only $94, the loss of the remainder of the money being chargeable to his neglect and violation of postal regulations. As to the second remittance, the committees report that by reason of like neglect and violation of regulations the postmaster should be held responsible for the loss of all the money transmitted except the sum of $42.
For these two sums, amounting to $136, an appropriation is made for the benefit of H.W. McConnell.
The name of the postmaster intended to be relieved is H.H. McConnell, as appears by the records of the Post-Office Department. The person to whom the money appropriated should be paid is therefore not correctly named in the bill.
An examination of this postmaster's accounts discloses the further fact that the amount proposed to be appropriated for his relief is too large by $42, that being the sum allowed him by reason of the second stage robbery. This item has already been credited to him in the adjustment of his accounts at the Post-Office Department, and the claim for its reimbursement has been thereby extinguished.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, February 12, 1895.
To the Senate:
I return herewith without approval Senate bill No. 143, entitled "An act for the relief of the heirs of D. Fulford."
This bill directs the Secretary of the Treasury "to redeem, in favor of the heirs at law of D. Fulford, four bonds of the United States, consols of 1867, of the denomination of $500, $100, $50, and $50, and known as five-twenties, said bonds having been destroyed by fire the 9th day of July, 1872, and to pay to the heirs at law of said D. Fulford the amount of said bonds, together with accrued interest from July 1, 1872, to the date of the maturity of said bonds."
The bill further provides that the heirs to whom the payment is to be made shall execute and file with the Secretary of the Treasury a bond "conditioned to save harmless the United States from loss or liability on account of said bonds or the interest accrued thereon, and to contain such words as to cover any liability resulting from any mistake in the designation or description of the bonds, so that in no event shall the United States be called upon by a rightful claimant for a second payment thereof."
The proposition is that the Government shall pay bonds alleged to have been destroyed by fire nearly twenty-three years ago.
The Secretary of the Treasury states that an application for the payment of these bonds, made by Mr. Fulford himself, was rejected by the Department because he was unable to describe the bonds in such a way as to permit their identification and because the evidence of their destruction by fire was inconclusive.
The Senate Committee on Claims, however, in their report on the bill under consideration, state that they are entirely satisfied that Mr. Fulford was the owner of four Government bonds, one for $500, one for $100, and two for $50, and that they were burned with his residence, which was destroyed by fire on the 9th day of July, 1872, and that while he could not furnish the numbers or descriptions of said bonds he understood all these bonds were of the class known as consols of 1867, and that he had collected the coupons thereon for the interest due July 1, 1872.
The particular class of bonds mentioned were dated July 1, 1867, and were payable or redeemable not less than five nor more than twenty years from their date. The short period expired, therefore, on the 1st day of July, 1872. That was the date when the last coupons on Mr. Fulford's bonds, which it is alleged were detached and collected, became due, and only nine days before the supposed destruction of the bonds by fire.
A letter from the Secretary of the Treasury dated July 20, 1892, attached to the report of the Senate committee made upon a bill similar to this which was pending at that time, discloses the fact that among the consols of 1867 then outstanding there were 107 of the denomination of $500, 167 of the denomination of $100, and 85 of the denomination of $50. This statement merely shows that there were numerous bonds precisely similar to those described as belonging to Mr. Fulford which had not in July, 1892, been redeemed, though the extreme limit of their maturity expired on the 1st day of July, 1887. The letter of the Secretary further discloses, however, that there were two of these outstanding bonds of the denomination of $500 and two of the denomination of $100 upon which coupons of interest had not been paid since July 1, 1872. Of course this lends plausibility to the suggestion that two of these four bonds, one of each denomination, were those destroyed when Mr. Fulford's house was burned in July, 1872; but this suggestion loses its force under the additional statement in the letter of the Secretary of the Treasury that in July, 1892, there were no consols of 1867 of the denomination of $50 whose last coupon was paid July 1, 1872. This shows conclusively that no fifty-dollar bonds of this class were destroyed by fire in Mr. Fulford's house and casts great uncertainty upon the description of the other bonds, inasmuch as the theory of the claimants seems to be that all the bonds destroyed belonged to the same class.
In 1893, upon an examination of the records of the Treasury Department, it was found that the two unpaid bonds for $500 reported in 1892 as outstanding, from which no coupons had been paid since July 1, 1872, still remained unredeemed, but that one of the two one-hundred-dollar bonds which were in that condition in 1892 had been since that time paid and canceled. I think it must be conceded that this late redemption of this bond greatly weakens any presumption that the other three will not be presented for payment.
It is perfectly clear that so far as this bill directs the payment to the persons therein named of two consols of 1867 of the denomination of $50 each on the ground that such bonds were destroyed by fire in July, 1872, it requires the payment of money to those not entitled to it, since it is shown that these consols could not have been destroyed at the time stated, because coupons due on all consols of that denomination unredeemed have been paid since that date.
While the objections to the payment of the amount of the other two bonds mentioned in the bill are less conclusive, there seem to be so much doubt and uncertainty concerning their description and character, and their identification as unredeemed consols of 1867 is so unsatisfactory, that, in my opinion, it is not safe to assume, as is done in this bill, that they are represented among those bonds of that class recorded as still outstanding whose coupons for some reason have not been presented for payment since July 1, 1872.
I do not believe that an indemnity bond could be drawn which, as against the strict rights of sureties, would protect the Government against double liability in case all the payments directed by this bill were made. Even if the payments were confined to the two larger consols described, there would be great difficulty in framing a bond which would surely indemnify the Government.
There should always be a willingness to save the holders of Government securities from damage through their loss or destruction, but, in my judgment, a bad precedent would be established by paying obligations whose destruction and identification are not more satisfactorily established than in this case.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, February 19, 1895.
To the House of Representatives:
I return herewith without approval House bill No. 6244, entitled "An act to remove the charge of desertion from the military record of Jacob Eckert."
This bill directs the Secretary of War "to cause the records of the War Department to be so amended as to remove the charge of desertion from the service record of Jacob Eckert, of New Philadelphia, Ohio, late a private in Company B, Sixty-first Ohio Volunteer Infantry, and to grant an honorable discharge to said Jacob Eckert from the service of the United States Army as of date when said company was mustered out of service."
The regiment and company to which this soldier belonged, except such members as reenlisted as veterans, were mustered out of the service October 17, 1864.
Jacob Eckert did not reenlist and was not mustered out with his comrades for the reason that he was then under arrest on a charge of desertion. In November, 1864, he was tried by a general court-martial and convicted of having deserted on the 1st of September, 1864, and again on the 2d day of September, 1864, and upon such conviction he was sentenced to forfeit all pay due him from September 1, the date of his first desertion, until the expiration of his term of service, to be dishonorably discharged and confined at hard labor for twelve months.
This sentence was approved by the reviewing authority, and I assume the convicted soldier served his term of imprisonment, since the statement contained in the report of the House committee to whom this bill was referred that he was dishonorably discharged in 1865 can be accounted for in no other way.
It seems to me that the provisions of this bill amount to a legislative reversal of the judgment of a regularly constituted court and a legislative pardon of the offense of which this soldier was convicted. If this doubtful authority is to be exercised by Congress, it should be done in such a manner as not to restore a man properly convicted and sentenced as a deserter, without even the allegation of injustice, to the rights of pay, allowance, and pension belonging to those who faithfully and honorably served in the military service of their country according to the terms of their enlistment.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, February 20, 1895.
To the Senate:
I return herewith without approval Senate bill No. 1526, entitled "An act for the relief of Henry Halteman."
This bill directs the Secretary of War "to grant an honorable discharge from the United States service to Henry Halteman, late of Company F, Second United States Artillery."
It is conceded that this soldier enlisted in the Regular Army on the 18th day of December, 1860, for the term of five years and that he deserted on the 18th day of August, 1865. The only excuse or palliation offered for his offense is found in the statement that his desertion was provoked by his company's being ordered to California so near the termination of his enlistment that his term would have expired before or soon after his company could have reached California, and "that his return would have been both tedious and somewhat perilous, if not expensive."
The fact must not be overlooked that this soldier enlisted in the Regular Army and that his term had no relation to the duration of the war or the immediate need of the Government for troops at the time of his desertion. The morale and discipline of the Regular Army are therefore directly involved in the proposed legislation.
The soldier's name remained on the records of the War Department as a deserter at large for twenty-three years, and until the year 1888. In August of that year application was made to the Department for the removal of the charge of desertion against him, which was refused on the ground that it was not shown that such charge was founded in error. Thereupon he applied for a discharge without character, as it is called, as of the date of his desertion. This was granted on the 21st day of September, 1888. Such discharges, which were not uncommon at that time, omitted the certificate of character which entitled the soldier to reenlistment.
In 1892 a bill similar to that now under consideration was referred to the Adjutant-General of the Army and was returned with an adverse report.
The record of the War Department on the subject of this soldier's separation from the Army is absolutely correct as it stands, and no sufficient reason is apparent why another record should be substituted. If this deserter is to be allowed an honorable discharge, I do not see why every deserter should not be absolved from the consequences of his unfaithfulness.
The effect of this bill if it should become a law would be to allow the beneficiary not only a pensionable status, but arrears of pay and clothing allowances up to the date of his desertion and travel allowance from the place of his desertion to the place of his enlistment.
It is not denied that all these things have been justly forfeited by deliberate and inexcusable desertion. In the case presented it seems to me that the laws and regulations adopted for the purpose of maintaining the discipline and efficiency of the Army ought not to be set aside.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, February 23, 1895.
To the House of Representatives:
I return herewith without approval House bill No. 8165, entitled "An act authorizing the Kansas City, Oklahoma and Pacific Railway Company to construct and operate a railway through Indian reservations in the Indian Territory and the Territories of Oklahoma and New Mexico, and for other purposes."
This bill contains concessions more comprehensive and sweeping than any ever presented for my approval, and it seems to me the rights and interests of the Indians and the Government are the least protected.
The route apparently desired, though passing through or into one State and three Territories, is described as indefinitely as possible, and does not seem to be subject to the approval in its entirety of the Secretary of the Interior or any other governmental agency having relation to the interest involved.
There is no provision for obtaining the consent of the Indians through whose territory and reservations the railroad may be located.
Though it is proposed to build the railroad through territories having local courts convenient to their inhabitants, all controversies that may arise out of the location and building of the road are by the provisions of the bill to be passed upon by the United States circuit and district courts for the district of Kansas "and such other courts as may be authorized by Congress."
The bill provides that "the civil jurisdiction of said courts is hereby extended within the limits of said Indian reservations, without distinction as to citizenship of the parties, so far as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this act." This provision permits the subordination of the jurisdiction of Indian courts, which we are bound by treaty to protect, to the "provisions of this act" and to the interests and preferences of the railroad company for whose benefit the bill under consideration is intended.
A plan of appraisal is provided for in the bill in case an agreement can not be reached as to the amount of compensation to be paid for the taking of lands held by individual occupants according to the laws, customs, and usages of any of the Indian nations or tribes or by allotment or agreement with the Indians. It is, however, further provided that in case either party is dissatisfied with the award of the referees to be appointed an appeal may be taken to the district court held at Wichita, Kans., no matter where on the proposed route of the road the controversy may originate. If upon the hearing of said appeal the judgment of the court shall be for the same sum as the award of the referees, the costs shall be adjudged against the appellant, and if said judgment shall be for a smaller sum the costs shall be adjudged against the party claiming damages. It does not seem to me that the interests of an Indian occupant or allottee are properly regarded when he is obliged, if dissatisfied with an award for the taking of his land, to go to the district court of Kansas for redress, at the risk of incurring costs and expenses that may not only exceed the award originally made to him, but leave him in debt.
It is probable that there are other valid objections to this bill. I have only attempted to suggest enough to justify my action in disapproving it.
In constructing legislation of this description it should not be forgotten that the rights and interests of the Indians are important in every view and should be scrupulously protected.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, February 23, 1895.
To the House of Representatives:
I return herewith without approval House bill No. 5740, entitled "An act incorporating the Society of American Florists."
No sufficient reason is apparent for the incorporation of this organization under Federal laws. There is not the least difficulty in the way of the accomplishment under State laws by the incorporators named in the bill of every purpose which can legitimately belong to their corporate existence. The creation of such a corporation by a special act of Congress establishes a vexatious and troublesome precedent.
There appears to be no limit in the bill to the value of the real and personal property which the proposed corporation may hold if acquired by donation or bequest. The limit of $50,000 applies only to property acquired by purchase.
A conclusive objection to the bill is found in the fact that it fails to carry out the purposes and objects of those interested in its passage. The promoters of the bill are florists, who undoubtedly seek to advance floriculture. The declared object of the proposed incorporation is, however, stated in the bill to be "the elevation and advancement of horticulture in all its branches, to increase and diffuse the knowledge thereof, and for kindred purposes in the interest of horticulture."
It is entirely clear that the interests of florists would be badly served by a corporation confined to the furtherance of garden culture.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, February 23, 1895.
To the House of Representatives:
I return herewith without approval House bill No. 4658, entitled "An act granting a pension to Hiram R. Rhea and repealing an act approved March 3, 1871."
The person named in the title of this bill was pensioned under the provisions of a private act passed March 3, 1871. In 1892 a letter from the Commissioner of Pensions was presented to Congress exhibiting facts which established in a most satisfactory manner that the claim for pension allowed by said special act was a barefaced and impudent fraud, supported by deliberate perjury. This letter appears to be the moving cause of the passage of the bill now before me. Payment of pension under the fraudulent act has been suspended since January 28, 1893, and since that time no information has been received from the fraudulent pensioner.
The circumstances developed called for the repeal of the law of 1871 lacing him upon the pension roll. This is accomplished in the second section of the bill under consideration, which section I would be glad to approve. This repeal, however, is accompanied by a provision in the first section of the bill directing the Secretary of the Interior to place upon the pension roll this identical fraudulent pensioner, under a certificate numbered precisely the same as that heretofore issued to him, "at a rate proportionate to the degree of disability from such gunshot wounds as may be shown to the satisfaction of said Secretary to have been received at the hands of Confederate soldiers or sympathizers while said Rhea was attempting to cooperate with the Union forces," etc.
Inasmuch as the letter of the Commissioner of Pensions to which reference has been made, and which forms part of the committee's report on this bill, is the basis of this repealing provision, and inasmuch as this letter furnishes evidence that the pensioner was when injured a very disreputable member of a band of armed rebels and was wounded by Union soldiers, I can not understand why the same bill which for this reason purges the pension rolls of his name should in the same breath undo this work and direct his name to be rewritten on the rolls.
If the facts before Congress justify the repeal of the law under which this man fraudulently received a pension for nearly twenty-two years, they certainly do not justify the provision directing his name to be put on the rolls again with a view to further examination of his case or for any other purpose.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, February 27, 1895.
To the House of Representatives:
I return herewith without approval House bill No. 2051, entitled "An act to grant a pension to Eunice Putman."
This bill provides for a pension to the beneficiary therein named as the helpless daughter of John Putman, who served as a private in the War of the Rebellion from August 27, 1864, to June 2, 1865. In 1870, when the beneficiary was not 2 years old, her mother died, and her father married again in 1872. He applied for a pension in 1884, but died the same year. His claim was allowed, however, in 1891, and his pension which had accrued between the date of his application and his death was paid to his widow, Jeanette S. Putman. Immediately thereafter a pension was allowed the widow in her own right, dating from the soldier's death, in 1884, with $2 additional per month for each of the two minor children. The beneficiary was not included because she had reached the age of 16 years prior to her father's death.
The report of the committee to whom this bill was referred states that no claim for pension on account of the soldier's death has ever been filed in the Pension Bureau, and it seems that upon this theory it was proposed to pension the daughter. I do not suppose it was intended that a double pension should be allowed. In point of fact, the widow has already been pensioned, and no such pension allowance has been made for the minor children. There is no suggestion that the widow has died or remarried.
If this bill should become a law, two full pensions would be in force at the same time, one to the widow and another to the daughter, each predicated upon the services and death of the same soldier.
GROVER CLEVELAND.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, February 27, 1895.
To the House of Representatives:
I herewith return without approval House bill No. 6868, entitled "An act for the relief of Catherine Ott, widow of Joseph Ott."
An application by the beneficiary named in this bill, under the law of 1890, was rejected on the ground that her husband died in the service, and therefore had not been honorably discharged, as required by that law.
It appears that after he had served a number of years in a cavalry regiment, and having been once discharged for reenlistment, he was transferred to the Veteran Reserve Corps and was in that service at the time of his death.
In these circumstances the rejection of the beneficiary's claim on the ground stated is held, under present rulings of the Pension Bureau, to have been erroneous, and such claim can now be favorably adjudicated upon proof of continued widowhood of the applicant and the lack of other means of support than her daily labor.