A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents - Volume 8, part 3: Grover Cleveland, First Term

By Author	[ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z \| Other Symbols ]
By Title	[ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z \| Other Symbols ]
By Language

Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ]

Look for this book on Amazon

We have new books nearly every day.
If you would like a news letter once a week or once a month fill out this form and we will give you a summary of the books for that week or month by email.

Title: A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents - Volume 8, part 3: Grover Cleveland, First Term
Author: Cleveland, Grover, 1837-1908
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.

*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents - Volume 8, part 3: Grover Cleveland, First Term" ***

* * * * *

Grover Cleveland

March 4, 1885, to March 4, 1889

* * * * *

Grover Cleveland

Grover Cleveland was born in Caldwell, Essex County, N.J., March 18,
1837. On the paternal side he is of English origin. Moses Cleveland
emigrated from Ipswich, County of Suffolk, England, in 1635, and settled
at Woburn, Mass., where he died in 1701. His descendant William
Cleveland was a silversmith and watchmaker at Norwich, Conn. Richard
Falley Cleveland, son of the latter named, was graduated at Yale in
1824, was ordained to the Presbyterian ministry in 1829, and in the same
year married Ann Neal, daughter of a Baltimore merchant of Irish birth.
These two were the parents of Grover Cleveland. The Presbyterian
parsonage at Caldwell, where he was born, was first occupied by the
Rev. Stephen Grover, in whose honor he was named; but the first name was
early dropped, and he has been since known as Grover Cleveland. When
he was 4 years old his father accepted a call to Fayetteville, near
Syracuse, N.Y., where the son had common and academic schooling, and
afterwards was a clerk in a country store. The removal of the family
to Clinton, Oneida County, gave him additional educational advantages
in the academy there. In his seventeenth year he became a clerk and an
assistant teacher in the New York Institution for the Blind, in New York
City, in which his elder brother, William, a Presbyterian clergyman,
was then a teacher. In 1855 he left Holland Patent, in Oneida County,
where his mother at that time resided, to go to the West in search of
employment. On his way he stopped at Black Rock, now a part of Buffalo,
and called on his uncle, Lewis F. Allen, who induced him to remain and
aid him in the compilation of a volume of the American Herd Book,
receiving for six weeks' service $60. He afterwards, and while studying
law, assisted in the preparation of several other volumes of this work,
and the preface to the fifth volume (1861) acknowledges his services.
In August, 1855, he secured a place as clerk and copyist for the law
firm of Rogers, Bowen & Rogers, in Buffalo, began to read Blackstone,
and in the autumn of that year was receiving $4 per week for his work.
He was admitted to the bar in 1859, but for three years longer remained
with the firm that first employed him, acting as managing clerk at a
salary of $600, a part of which he devoted to the support of his widowed
mother, who died in 1882. Was appointed assistant district attorney of
Erie County January 1, 1863, and held the office for three years. At
this time the Civil War was raging. Two of his brothers were in the
Army, and his mother and sisters were largely dependent upon him for
support. Unable himself to enlist, he borrowed money and sent a
substitute to the war, and it was not till long after the war that
he was able to repay the loan. In 1865, at the age of 28, he was the
Democratic candidate for district attorney, but was defeated by the
Republican candidate, his intimate friend, Lyman K. Bass. He then became
the law partner of Isaac V. Vanderpool, and in 1869 became a member of
the firm of Lanning, Cleveland & Folsom. He continued a successful
practice till 1870, when he was elected sheriff of Erie County. At the
expiration of his three years' term he formed a law partnership with
his personal friend and political antagonist, Lyman K. Bass, the firm
being Bass, Cleveland & Bissell, and, after the forced retirement,
from failing health, of Mr. Bass, Cleveland & Bissell. In 1881 he was
nominated the Democratic candidate for mayor of Buffalo, and was elected
by a majority of 3,530, the largest ever given to a candidate in that
city. In the same election the Republican State ticket was carried in
Buffalo by an average majority of over 1,600. He entered upon the office
January 1, 1882, and soon became known as the "Veto Mayor," using that
prerogative fearlessly in checking unwise, illegal, and extravagant
expenditures. By his vetoes he saved the city nearly $1,000,000 in the
first half year of his administration. He opposed giving $500 of the
taxpayers' money to the Firemen's Benevolent Society on the ground
that such appropriation was not permissible under the terms of the
State constitution and the charter of the city. He vetoed a resolution
diverting $500 from the Fourth of July appropriations to the observance
of Decoration Day for the same reason, and immediately subscribed
one-tenth of the sum wanted for the purpose. His administration of the
office won tributes to his integrity and ability from the press and the
people irrespective of party. On the second day of the Democratic State
convention at Syracuse, September 22, 1882, on the third ballot, was
nominated for governor in opposition to the Republican candidate,
Charles J. Folger, then Secretary of the United States Treasury. He had
the united support of his own party, while the Republicans were not
united on his opponent, and at the election in November he received a
plurality over Mr. Folger of 192,854. His State administration was only
an expansion of the fundamental principles that controlled his official
action while mayor of Buffalo. In a letter written to his brother on
the day of his election he announced a policy he intended to adopt,
and afterwards carried out, "that is, to make the matter a business
engagement between the people of the State and myself, in which the
obligation on my side is to perform the duties assigned me with an
eye single to the interest of my employers." The Democratic national
convention met at Chicago July 8, 1884. On July 11 he was nominated as
their candidate for President. The Republicans made James G. Blaine
their candidate, while Benjamin F. Butler, of Massachusetts, was the
Labor and Greenback candidate, and John P. St. John, of Kansas, was
the Prohibition candidate. At the election, November 4, Mr. Cleveland
received 219 and Mr. Blaine 182 electoral votes. He was unanimously
renominated for the Presidency by the national Democratic convention
in St. Louis on June 6, 1888. At the election in November he received
168 electoral votes, while 233 were cast for Benjamin Harrison, the
Republican candidate. Of the popular vote, however, he received
5,540,329, and Mr. Harrison received 5,439,853. At the close of his
Administration, March 4, 1889, he retired to New York City, where he
reentered upon the practice of his profession. It soon became evident,
however, that he would be prominently urged as a candidate for
renomination in 1892. At the national Democratic convention which met
in Chicago June 21, 1892, he received more than two-thirds of the votes
on the first ballot. At the election in November he received 277 of
the electoral votes, while Mr. Harrison received 145 and Mr. James B.
Weaver, the candidate of the People's Party, 22. Of the popular vote
Mr. Cleveland received 5,553,142, Mr. Harrison 5,186,931, and Mr.
Weaver 1,030,128. He retired from office March 4, 1897, and removed to
Princeton, N.J., where he has since resided. He is the first of our
Presidents who served a second term without being elected as his own
successor. President Cleveland was married in the White House on June 2,
1886, to Miss Frances Folsom, daughter of his deceased friend and
partner, Oscar Folsom, of the Buffalo bar. Mrs. Cleveland was the
youngest (except the wife of Mr. Madison) of the many mistresses of the
White House, having been born in Buffalo, N.Y., in 1864. She is the
first wife of a President married in the White House, and the first to
give birth to a child there, their second daughter (Esther) having been
born in the Executive Mansion in 1893.

INAUGURAL ADDRESS.

FELLOW-CITIZENS: In the presence of this vast assemblage of my
countrymen I am about to supplement and seal by the oath which I shall
take the manifestation of the will of a great and free people. In the
exercise of their power and right of self-government they have committed
to one of their fellow-citizens a supreme and sacred trust, and he here
consecrates himself to their service.

This impressive ceremony adds little to the solemn sense of
responsibility with which I contemplate the duty I owe to all the people
of the land. Nothing can relieve me from anxiety lest by any act of mine
their interests may suffer, and nothing is needed to strengthen my
resolution to engage every faculty and effort in the promotion of their
welfare.

Amid the din of party strife the people's choice was made, but its
attendant circumstances have demonstrated anew the strength and safety
of a government by the people. In each succeeding year it more clearly
appears that our democratic principle needs no apology, and that in its
fearless and faithful application is to be found the surest guaranty of
good government.

But the best results in the operation of a government wherein every
citizen has a share largely depend upon a proper limitation of purely
partisan zeal and effort and a correct appreciation of the time when the
heat of the partisan should be merged in the patriotism of the citizen.

To-day the executive branch of the Government is transferred to new
keeping. But this is still the Government of all the people, and it
should be none the less an object of their affectionate solicitude.
At this hour the animosities of political strife, the bitterness of
partisan defeat, and the exultation of partisan triumph should be
supplanted by an ungrudging acquiescence in the popular will and a
sober, conscientious concern for the general weal. Moreover, if from
this hour we cheerfully and honestly abandon all sectional prejudice and
distrust, and determine, with manly confidence in one another, to work
out harmoniously the achievements of our national destiny, we shall
deserve to realize all the benefits which our happy form of government
can bestow.

On this auspicious occasion we may well renew the pledge of our devotion
to the Constitution, which, launched by the founders of the Republic and
consecrated by their prayers and patriotic devotion, has for almost a
century borne the hopes and the aspirations of a great people through
prosperity and peace and through the shock of foreign conflicts and the
perils of domestic strife and vicissitudes.

By the Father of his Country our Constitution was commended for adoption
as "the result of a spirit of amity and mutual concession." In that same
spirit it should be administered, in order to promote the lasting
welfare of the country and to secure the full measure of its priceless
benefits to us and to those who will succeed to the blessings of our
national life. The large variety of diverse and competing interests
subject to Federal control, persistently seeking the recognition of
their claims, need give us no fear that "the greatest good to the
greatest number" will fail to be accomplished if in the halls of
national legislation that spirit of amity and mutual concession shall
prevail in which the Constitution had its birth. If this involves the
surrender or postponement of private interests and the abandonment of
local advantages, compensation will be found in the assurance that the
common interest is subserved and the general welfare advanced.

In the discharge of my official duty I shall endeavor to be guided
by a just and unstrained construction of the Constitution, a careful
observance of the distinction between the powers granted to the Federal
Government and those reserved to the States or to the people, and by a
cautious appreciation of those functions which by the Constitution and
laws have been especially assigned to the executive branch of the
Government.

But he who takes the oath to-day to preserve, protect, and defend the
Constitution of the United States only assumes the solemn obligation
which every patriotic citizen--on the farm, in the workshop, in the busy
marts of trade, and everywhere--should share with him. The Constitution
which prescribes his oath, my countrymen, is yours; the Government you
have chosen him to administer for a time is yours; the suffrage which
executes the will of freemen is yours; the laws and the entire scheme
of our civil rule, from the town meeting to the State capitals and the
national capital, is yours. Your every voter, as surely as your Chief
Magistrate, under the same high sanction, though in a different sphere,
exercises a public trust. Nor is this all. Every citizen owes to the
country a vigilant watch and close scrutiny of its public servants and
a fair and reasonable estimate of their fidelity and usefulness. Thus
is the people's will impressed upon the whole framework of our civil
polity--municipal, State, and Federal; and this is the price of our
liberty and the inspiration of our faith in the Republic.

It is the duty of those serving the people in public place to closely
limit public expenditures to the actual needs of the Government
economically administered, because this bounds the right of the
Government to exact tribute from the earnings of labor or the property
of the citizen, and because public extravagance begets extravagance
among the people. We should never be ashamed of the simplicity and
prudential economies which are best suited to the operation of a
republican form of government and most compatible with the mission of
the American people. Those who are selected for a limited time to manage
public affairs are still of the people, and may do much by their example
to encourage, consistently with the dignity of their official functions,
that plain way of life which among their fellow-citizens aids integrity
and promotes thrift and prosperity.

The genius of our institutions, the needs of our people in their
home life, and the attention which is demanded for the settlement
and development of the resources of our vast territory dictate the
scrupulous avoidance of any departure from that foreign policy commended
by the history, the traditions, and the prosperity of our Republic. It
is the policy of independence, favored by our position and defended by
our known love of justice and by our power. It is the policy of peace
suitable to our interests. It is the policy of neutrality, rejecting
any share in foreign broils and ambitions upon other continents and
repelling their intrusion here. It is the policy of Monroe and of
Washington and Jefferson--"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with
all nations; entangling alliance with none."

A due regard for the interests and prosperity of all the people demands
that our finances shall be established upon such a sound and sensible
basis as shall secure the safety and confidence of business interests
and make the wage of labor sure and steady, and that our system of
revenue shall be so adjusted as to relieve the people of unnecessary
taxation, having a due regard to the interests of capital invested
and workingmen employed in American industries, and preventing the
accumulation of a surplus in the Treasury to tempt extravagance and
waste.

Care for the property of the nation and for the needs of future settlers
requires that the public domain should be protected from purloining
schemes and unlawful occupation.

The conscience of the people demands that the Indians within our
boundaries shall be fairly and honestly treated as wards of the
Government and their education and civilization promoted with a view
to their ultimate citizenship, and that polygamy in the Territories,
destructive of the family relation and offensive to the moral sense of
the civilized world, shall be repressed.

The laws should be rigidly enforced which prohibit the immigration of
a servile class to compete with American labor, with no intention of
acquiring citizenship, and bringing with them and retaining habits and
customs repugnant to our civilization.

The people demand reform in the administration of the Government and the
application of business principles to public affairs. As a means to this
end, civil-service reform should be in good faith enforced. Our citizens
have the right to protection from the incompetency of public employees
who hold their places solely as the reward of partisan service, and from
the corrupting influence of those who promise and the vicious methods
of those who expect such rewards; and those who worthily seek public
employment have the right to insist that merit and competency shall be
recognized instead of party subserviency or the surrender of honest
political belief.

In the administration of a government pledged to do equal and exact
justice to all men there should be no pretext for anxiety touching the
protection of the freedmen in their rights or their security in the
enjoyment of their privileges under the Constitution and its amendments.
All discussion as to their fitness for the place accorded to them as
American citizens is idle and unprofitable except as it suggests the
necessity for their improvement. The fact that they are citizens
entitles them to all the rights due to that relation and charges them
with all its duties, obligations, and responsibilities.

These topics and the constant and ever-varying wants of an active
and enterprising population may well receive the attention and the
patriotic endeavor of all who make and execute the Federal law.
Our duties are practical and call for industrious application, an
intelligent perception of the claims of public office, and, above all,
a firm determination, by united action, to secure to all the people
of the land the full benefits of the best form of government ever
vouchsafed to man. And let us not trust to human effort alone, but humbly
acknowledging the power and goodness of Almighty God, who presides over
the destiny of nations, and who has at all times been revealed in our
country's history, let us invoke His aid and His blessing upon our
labors.

MARCH 4, 1885.

SPECIAL MESSAGES.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 13, 1885_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

For the purpose of their reexamination I withdraw certain treaties and
conventions now pending in the Senate which were communicated to that
body by my predecessor in office, and I therefore request the return
to me of the commercial convention between the United States and the
Dominican Republic which was transmitted to the Senate December 9, 1884;
of the commercial treaty between the United States and Spain which
was transmitted to the Senate December 10, 1884, together with the
supplementary articles thereto of March 2, 1885; and of the treaty
between the United States and Nicaragua for the construction of an
interoceanic canal which was transmitted to the Senate December 10,
1884.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, April 2, 1885_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

For the purpose of its reconsideration I withdraw the additional
article, now pending in the Senate, signed on the 23d of June last, to
the treaty of friendship, commerce, and navigation which was concluded
between the United States and the Argentine Confederation July 27, 1853,
and communicated to the Senate by my predecessor in office 27th of
January, 1885.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

PROCLAMATIONS.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

A PROCLAMATION.

Whereas it is alleged that certain individuals, associations of persons,
and corporations are in the unauthorized possession of portions of the
territory known as the Oklahoma lands, within the Indian Territory,
which are designated, described, and recognized by the treaties and laws
of the United States and by the executive authority thereof as Indian
lands; and

Whereas it is further alleged that certain other persons or associations
within the territory and jurisdiction of the United States have begun
and set on foot preparations for an organized and forcible entry and
settlement upon the aforesaid lands and are now threatening such entry
and occupation; and

Whereas the laws of the United States provide for the removal of all
persons residing or being found upon such Indian lands and territory
without permission expressly and legally obtained of the Interior
Department:

Now, therefore, for the purpose of protecting the public interests, as
well as the interests of the Indian nations and tribes, and to the end
that no person or persons may be induced to enter upon said territory,
where they will not be allowed to remain without the permission of the
authority aforesaid, I, Grover Cleveland, President of the United
States, do hereby warn and admonish all and every person or persons now
in the occupation of such lands, and all such person or persons as are
intending, preparing, or threatening to enter and settle upon the same,
that they will neither be permitted to enter upon said territory nor, if
already there, to remain thereon, and that in case a due regard for and
voluntary obedience to the laws and treaties of the United States and
if this admonition and warning be not sufficient to effect the purposes
and intentions of the Government as herein declared, the military power
of the United States will be invoked to abate all such unauthorized
possession, to prevent such threatened entry and occupation, and to
remove all such intruders from the said Indian lands.

In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of
the United States to be affixed.

[SEAL.]

Done at the city of Washington, this 13th day of March, 1885, and of the
Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and ninth.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

A PROCLAMATION.

Whereas satisfactory evidence has been received by me that upon vessels
of the United States arriving at the island of Trinidad, British West
Indies, no duty is imposed by the ton as tonnage tax or as light money,
and that no other equivalent tax on vessels of the United States is
imposed at said island by the British Government; and Whereas by the
provisions of section 14 of an act approved June 26, 1884, "to remove
certain burdens on the American merchant marine and encourage the
American foreign carrying trade, and for other purposes," the President
of the United States is authorized to suspend the collection in ports of
the United States from vessels arriving from any port in the island of
Trinidad of so much of the duty at the rate of 3 cents per ton as may be
in excess of the tonnage and light-house dues, or other equivalent of
tax or taxes, imposed on American vessels by the government of the
foreign country in which such port is situated:

Now, therefore, I, Grover Cleveland, President of the United States of
America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the act and section
hereinbefore mentioned, do hereby declare and proclaim that on and after
this 7th day of April, 1885, the collection of said tonnage duty of 3
cents per ton shall be suspended as regards all vessels arriving in any
port of the United States from a port in the island of Trinidad, British
West Indies.

In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of
the United States to be affixed.

[SEAL.]

Done at the city of Washington, this 7th day of April, 1885, and of the
Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and ninth.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

A PROCLAMATION.

Whereas, by an Executive order bearing date the 27th day of February,
1885, it was ordered that "all that tract of country in the Territory
of Dakota known as the Old Winnebago Reservation and the Sioux or Crow
Creek Reservation, and lying on the east bank of the Missouri River, set
apart and reserved by Executive order dated January 11, 1875, and which
is not covered by the Executive order dated August 9, 1879, restoring
certain of the lands reserved by the order of January 11, 1875, except
the following-described tracts: Townships No. 108 north, range 71 west;
108 north, range 72 west; fractional township 108 north, range 73 west;
the west half of section 4, sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,
21, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33 of township 107 north, range 70 west;
fractional townships 107 north, range 71 west; 107 north, range 72 west;
107 north, range 73 west; the west half of township 106 north, range 70
west; and fractional township 106 north, range 71 west; and except also
all tracts within the limits of the aforesaid Old Winnebago Reservation
and the Sioux or Crow Creek Reservation which are outside of the limits
of the above-described tracts, and which may have heretofore been
allotted to the Indians residing upon said reservation, or which may
have heretofore been selected or occupied by the said Indians under and
in accordance with the provisions of article 6 of the treaty with the
Sioux Indians of April 29, 1868, be, and the same is hereby, restored
to the public domain;" and

Whereas upon the claim being made that said order is illegal and in
violation of the plighted faith and obligations of the United States
contained in sundry treaties heretofore entered into with the Indian
tribes or bands occupants of said reservation, and that the further
execution of said order will not only occasion much distress and
suffering to peaceable Indians, but retard the work of their
civilization and engender amongst them a distrust of the National
Government, I have determined, after a careful examination of the
several treaties, acts of Congress, and other official data bearing on
the subject, aided and assisted therein by the advice and opinion of the
Attorney-General of the United States duly rendered in that behalf, that
the lands so proposed to be restored to the public domain by said
Executive order of February 27, 1885, are included as existing Indian
reservations on the east bank of the Missouri River by the terms of the
second article of the treaty with the Sioux Indians concluded April 29,
1868, and that consequently, being treaty reservations, the Executive
was without lawful power to restore them to the public domain by said
Executive order, which is therefore deemed and considered to be wholly
inoperative and void; and

Whereas the laws of the United States provide for the removal of all
persons residing or being found upon Indian lands and territory without
permission expressly and legally obtained of the Interior Department:

Now, therefore, in order to maintain inviolate the solemn pledges and
plighted faith of the Government as given in the treaties in question,
and for the purpose of properly protecting the interests of the Indian
tribes as well as of the United States in the premises, and to the end
that no person or persons may be induced to enter upon said lands,
where they will not be allowed to remain without the permission of
the authority aforesaid, I, Grover Cleveland, President of the United
States, do hereby declare and proclaim the said Executive order of
February 27, 1885, to be in contravention of the treaty obligations of
the United States with the Sioux tribe of Indians, and therefore to
be inoperative and of no effect; and I further declare that the lands
intended to be embraced therein are existing Indian reservations,
and as such available for Indian purposes alone and subject to the
Indian-intercourse acts of the United States. I do further warn and
admonish all and every person or persons now in the occupation of said
lands under color of said Executive order, and all such person or
persons as are intending or preparing to enter and settle upon the same
thereunder, that they will neither be permitted to remain or enter upon
said lands, and such persons as are already there are hereby required to
vacate and remove therefrom with their effects within sixty days from
the date hereof; and in case a due regard for and voluntary obedience
to the laws and treaties of the United States and this admonition and
warning be not sufficient to effect the purpose and intentions as herein
declared, all the power of the Government will be employed to carry into
proper execution the treaties and laws of the United States herein
referred to.

In testimony thereof I hereunto set my hand and cause the seal of the
United States to be affixed.

[SEAL.]

Done at the city of Washington, this 17th day of April, 1885, and of the
Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and ninth.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

A PROCLAMATION.

Whereas certain portions of the Cheyenne and Arapahoe Indian
Reservation, in the Indian Territory, are occupied by persons other
than Indians, who claim the right to keep and graze cattle thereon
by agreement made with the Indians for whose special possession and
occupancy the said lands have been reserved by the Government of the
United States, or under other pretexts and licenses; and

Whereas all such agreements and licenses are deemed void and of no
effect, and the persons so occupying said lands with cattle are
considered unlawfully upon the domain of the United States so reserved
as aforesaid; and

Whereas the claims of such persons under said leases and licenses and
their unauthorized presence upon such reservation have caused complaint
and discontent on the part of the Indians located thereon, and are
likely to cause serious outbreaks and disturbances:

Now, therefore, I, Grover Cleveland, President of the United States, do
hereby order and direct that all persons other than Indians who are now
upon any part of said reservation for the purpose of grazing cattle
thereon, and their servants and agents, and all other unauthorized
persons now upon said reservation, do, within forty days from the date
of this proclamation, depart and entirely remove therefrom with their
cattle, horses, and other property.

In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of
the United States to be affixed.

[SEAL.]

Done at the city of Washington on this 23d day of July, 1885, and the
year of the Independence of the United States the one hundred and tenth.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

A PROCLAMATION.

The President of the United States has just received the sad tidings of
the death of that illustrious citizen and ex-President of the United
States, General Ulysses S. Grant, at Mount McGregor, in the State of
New York, to which place he had lately been removed in the endeavor to
prolong his life.

In making this announcement to the people of the United States the
President is impressed with the magnitude of the public loss of a great
military leader, who was in the hour of victory magnanimous, amid
disaster serene and self-sustained; who in every station, whether
as a soldier or as a Chief Magistrate, twice called to power by his
fellow-countrymen, trod unswervingly the pathway of duty, undeterred
by doubts, single-minded and straightforward.

The entire country has witnessed with deep emotion his prolonged and
patient struggle with painful disease, and has watched by his couch of
suffering with tearful sympathy.

The destined end has come at last, and his spirit has returned to the
Creator who sent it forth.

The great heart of the nation that followed him when living with love
and pride bows now in sorrow above him dead, tenderly mindful of his
virtues, his great patriotic services, and of the loss occasioned by his
death.

In testimony of respect to the memory of General Grant, it is ordered
that the Executive Mansion and the several Departments at Washington
be draped in mourning for a period of thirty days and that all public
business shall on the day of the funeral be suspended; and the
Secretaries of War and of the Navy will cause orders to be issued for
appropriate military and naval honors to be rendered on that day.

In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of
the United States to be affixed.

[SEAL.]

Done at the city of Washington, this 23d day of July, 1885, and of the
Independence of the United States the one hundred and tenth.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

A PROCLAMATION.

Whereas public policy demands that the public domain shall be reserved
for the occupancy of actual settlers in good faith, and that our people
who seek homes upon such domain shall in no wise be prevented by any
wrongful interference from the safe and free entry thereon to which they
may be entitled; and

Whereas, to secure and maintain this beneficent policy, a statute was
passed by the Congress of the United States on the 25th day of February,
in the year 1885, which declared to be unlawful all inclosures of any
public lands in any State or Territory to any of which land included
within said inclosure the person, party, association, or corporation
making or controlling such inclosure had no claim or color of title made
or acquired in good faith, or an asserted right thereto by or under
claim made in good faith with a view to entry thereof at the proper land
office; and which statute also prohibited any person, by force, threats,
intimidation, or by any fencing or inclosure or other unlawful means,
from preventing or obstructing any person from peaceably entering upon
or establishing a settlement or residence on any tract of public land
subject to settlement or entry under the public-land laws of the United
States, and from preventing or obstructing free passage and transit over
or through the public lands; and

Whereas it is by the fifth section of said act provided as follows:

That the President is hereby authorized to take such means as shall
be necessary to remove and destroy any unlawful inclosure of any of
said lands, and to employ civil or military force as may be necessary
for that purpose.

And whereas it has been brought to my knowledge that unlawful
inclosures, and such as are prohibited by the terms of the aforesaid
statute, exist upon the public domain, and that actual legal settlement
thereon is prevented and obstructed by such inclosures and by force,
threats, and intimidation:

Now, therefore, I, Grover Cleveland, President of the United States, do
hereby order and direct that any and every unlawful inclosure of the
public lands maintained by any person, association, or corporation be
immediately removed; and I do hereby forbid any person, association, or
corporation from preventing or obstructing by means of such inclosures,
or by force, threats, or intimidation, any person entitled thereto from
peaceably entering upon and establishing a settlement or residence on
any part of such public land which is subject to entry and settlement
under the laws of the United States.

And I command and require each and every officer of the United States
upon whom the duty is legally devolved to cause this order to be obeyed
and all the provisions of the act of Congress herein mentioned to be
faithfully enforced.

In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of
the United States to be affixed.

[SEAL.]

Done at the city of Washington, this 7th day of August, 1885, and of the
Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and tenth.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

A PROCLAMATION.

Whereas satisfactory evidence has been received by me that upon vessels
of the United States arriving at the port of Boca del Toro, United
States of Colombia, no duty is imposed by the ton as tonnage tax or as
light money, and that no other equivalent tax on vessels of the United
States is imposed at said port by the Colombian Government; and

Whereas by the provisions of section 14 of an act approved June 26,
1884, "to remove certain burdens on the American merchant marine and
encourage the American foreign carrying trade, and for other purposes,"
the President of the United States is authorized to suspend the
collection in ports of the United States from vessels arriving from any
port in "Central America down to and including Aspinwall and Panama" of
so much of the duty at the rate of 3 cents per ton as may be in excess
of the tonnage and light-house dues, or other equivalent tax or taxes,
imposed on American vessels by the government of the foreign country in
which such port is situated:

Now, therefore, I, Grover Cleveland, President of the United States of
America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the act and section
hereinbefore mentioned, do hereby declare and proclaim that on and after
this 9th day of September, 1885, the collection of said tonnage duty of
3 cents per ton shall be suspended as regards all vessels arriving in
any port of the United States from the port of Boca del Toro, United
States of Colombia.

In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of
the United States to be affixed.

[SEAL.]

Done at the city of Washington, this 9th day of September, 1885, and of
the Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and
tenth.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

A PROCLAMATION.

The American people have always abundant cause to be thankful to
Almighty God, whose watchful care and guiding hand have been manifested
in every stage of their national life, guarding and protecting them in
time of peril and safely leading them in the hour of darkness and of
danger.

It is fitting and proper that a nation thus favored should on one day in
every year, for that purpose especially appointed, publicly acknowledge
the goodness of God and return thanks to Him for all His gracious gifts.

Therefore, I, Grover Cleveland, President of the United States of
America, do hereby designate and set apart Thursday, the 26th day of
November instant, as a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, and do
invoke the observance of the same by all the people of the land.

On that day let all secular business be suspended, and let the people
assemble in their usual places of worship and with prayer and songs of
praise devoutly testify their gratitude to the Giver of Every Good and
Perfect Gift for all that He has done for us in the year that has
passed; for our preservation as a united nation and for our deliverance
from the shock and danger of political convulsion; for the blessings of
peace and for our safety and quiet while wars and rumors of wars have
agitated and afflicted other nations of the earth; for our security
against the scourge of pestilence, which in other lands has claimed its
dead by thousands and filled the streets with mourners; for plenteous
crops which reward the labor of the husbandman and increase our nation's
wealth, and for the contentment throughout our borders which follows in
the train of prosperity and abundance.

And let there also be on the day thus set apart a reunion of families,
sanctified and chastened by tender memories and associations; and let
the social intercourse of friends, with pleasant reminiscence, renew the
ties of affection and strengthen the bonds of kindly feeling.

And let us by no means forget while we give thanks and enjoy the
comforts which have crowned our lives that truly grateful hearts are
inclined to deeds of charity, and that a kind and thoughtful remembrance
of the poor will double the pleasures of our condition and render our
praise and thanksgiving more acceptable in the sight of the Lord.

[SEAL.]

Done at the city of Washington, this 2d day of November, 1885, and of
the Independence of the United States the one hundred and tenth.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

A PROCLAMATION.

Whereas it is represented to me by the governor of the Territory of
Washington that domestic violence exists within the said Territory,
and that by reason of unlawful obstructions and combinations and the
assemblage of evil-disposed persons it has become impracticable to
enforce by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings the laws of the
United States at Seattle and at other points and places within said
Territory, whereby life and property are there threatened and
endangered; and

Whereas the legislature of said Territory can not be convened, and in
the judgment of the President an emergency has arisen and a case is now
presented which justifies and requires, under the Constitution and laws
of the United States, the employment of military force to suppress
domestic violence and enforce the faithful execution of the laws of the
United States if the command and warning of this proclamation be
disobeyed or disregarded:

Now, therefore, I, Grover Cleveland, President of the United States of
America, do hereby command and warn all insurgents and all persons who
have assembled at any point within the said Territory of Washington for
the unlawful purposes aforesaid to desist therefrom and to disperse and
retire peaceably to their respective abodes on or before 12 o'clock
meridian on the 8th day of November instant.

And I do admonish all good citizens of the United States and all persons
within the limits and jurisdiction thereof against aiding, abetting,
countenancing, or taking any part in such unlawful acts or assemblages.

In witness whereof I have set my hand and caused the seal of the United
States to be hereunto affixed.

[SEAL.]

Done at the city of Washington, this 7th day of November, A.D. 1885, and
of the Independence of the United States the one hundred and tenth.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

EXECUTIVE ORDERS.

In the exercise of the power vested in the President by the
Constitution, and by virtue of the seventeen hundred and fifty-third
section of the Revised Statutes and of the civil-service act approved
January 16, 1883, the following rule for the regulation and improvement
of the executive civil service is hereby amended and promulgated, as
follows:

RULE XXII.

Any person who has been in the classified departmental service for one
year or more immediately previous may, when the needs of the service
require it, be transferred or appointed to any other place therein upon
producing a certificate from the Civil Service Commission that such
person has passed at the required grade one or more examinations which
are together equal to that necessary for original entrance to the place
which would be secured by the transfer or appointment; and any person
who has for three years last preceding served as a clerk in the office
of the President of the United States may be transferred or appointed
to any place in the classified service without examination.

Approved, March 18, 1885.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

EXECUTIVE ORDER.

Whereas the Government of His Majesty the King of Italy has extended to
the Government of the United States an invitation to participate in a
sanitary conference to be held at Rome on the 15th day of May, 1885, for
the purpose of devising efficient measures to prevent the invasion of
cholera and to mitigate its disastrous consequences; and

Whereas, by a provision of the act of Congress entitled "An act making
appropriations for sundry civil expenses of the Government for the
fiscal year ending June 30, 1886, and for other purposes," approved
March 3, 1885, for the suppression of epidemic diseases, the President
of the United States is authorized, in case of threatened or actual
epidemic of cholera or yellow fever, to use certain appropriated sums,
made immediately available, "in aid of State and local boards or
otherwise, in his discretion, in preventing and suppressing the spread
of the same and for maintaining quarantine and maritime inspections at
points of danger;" and

Whereas there is imminent danger of a recurrence of a cholera epidemic
in Europe, which may be brought to our shores unless adequate measures
of international or local quarantine and maritime inspection are taken
in season, which measures of preventive inspection are proper to be
considered by the aforesaid conference, to the end that their efficiency
in divers countries may be secured:

Now, therefore, in virtue of the discretionary authority conferred upon
me by the aforesaid act of Congress, I hereby designate and appoint
Major George M. Sternberg, surgeon in the United States Army, to attend
said conference at Rome as the delegate thereto on the part of the
Government of the United States, under the directions and instructions
of the Secretary of State; and I hereby direct the Secretary of War to
detail the said George M. Sternberg to perform the special service to
which he is thus assigned, with full pay and allowances as on active
service; and I further direct that the reasonable and necessary expenses
of travel and sojourn of the said George M. Sternberg in proceeding from
Washington to Rome, and during his attendance there upon the sessions
of the said conference, and in returning, upon the conclusion thereof,
from Rome to Washington, be adjusted and paid from the appropriation
available under the aforesaid act of March 3, 1885, upon his statement
of account approved by the Secretary of State.

Done at the city of Washington, this 25th day of April, A.D. 1885, and
of the Independence of the United States the one hundred and ninth.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, May 12, 1885_.

Under a provision of an act of Congress entitled "An act making
appropriations for fortifications and other works of defense, and for
the armament thereof, for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1886, and for
other purposes," approved March 3, 1885, a board, to consist of the
officers and civilians hereinafter named, is appointed to "examine and
report at what ports fortifications or other defenses are most urgently
required, the character and kind of defenses best adapted for each, with
reference to armament," and "the utilization of torpedoes, mines, or
other defensive appliances:" Hon. William C. Endicott, Secretary of War,
president of the board; Brigadier-General Stephen V. Benét, Chief of
Ordnance; Brigadier-General John Newton, Chief of Engineers;
Lieutenant-Colonel Henry L. Abbot, Corps of Engineers; Captain Charles
S. Smith, Ordnance Department; Commander W.T. Sampson, United States
Navy; Commander Caspar F. Goodrich, United States Navy; Mr. Joseph
Morgan, jr., of Pennsylvania; Mr. Erastus Corning, of New York.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 26, 1885_.

Under the provisions of section 4 of the act approved March 3, 1883, it
is hereby ordered that the several Executive Departments, the Department
of Agriculture, and the Government Printing Office be closed on
Saturday, the 30th instant, to enable the employees to participate in
the decoration of the graves of the soldiers who fell during the
rebellion.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

In the exercise of the power vested in the President by the Constitution,
and by virtue of the seventeen hundred and fifty-third section of
the Revised Statutes and of the civil-service act approved January 16,
1883, the following rule for the regulation and improvement of the
executive civil service is hereby amended and promulgated, as follows:

RULE XI.

1. Every application, in order to entitle the applicant to appear for
examination or to be examined, must state under oath the facts on the
following subjects: (1) Full name, residence, and post-office address;
(2) citizenship; (3) age; (4) place of birth; (5) health and physical
capacity for the public service; (6) right of preference by reason of
military or naval service; (7) previous employment in the public
service; (8) business or employment and residence for the previous five
years; (9) education. Such other information shall be furnished as the
Commission may reasonably require touching the applicant's fitness for
the public service. The applicant must also state the number of members
of his family in the public service and where employed, and must also
assert that he is not disqualified under section 8 of the civil-service
act, which is as follows:

"That no person habitually using intoxicating beverages to excess shall
be appointed to or retained in any office, appointment, or employment
to which the provisions of this act are applicable."

No person dismissed from the public service for misconduct and no
person who has not been absolutely appointed or employed after
probation shall be admitted to examination within two years thereafter.

2. No person under enlistment in the Army or Navy of the United States
shall be examined under these rules, except for some place in the
Department under which he is enlisted requiring special qualifications,
and with the consent in writing of the head of such Department.

3. The Commission may by regulations, subject to change at any time by
the President, declare the kind and measure of ill health, physical
incapacity, misrepresentation, and bad faith which may properly exclude
any person from the right of examination, grading, or certification
under these rules. It may also provide for medical certificates of
physical capacity in the proper cases, and for the appropriate
certification of persons so defective in sight, speech, hearing, or
otherwise as to be apparently disqualified for some of the duties of
the part of the service which they seek to enter.

Approved, June 2, 1885.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

In the exercise of the power vested in the President by the
Constitution, and by virtue of the seventeen hundred and fifty-third
section of the Revised Statutes and of the civil-service act approved
January 16, 1883, the eighth clause of Rule XIX for the regulation and
improvement of the executive civil service is hereby amended so as to
read as follows:

8. Chief clerks, deputy collectors, deputy naval officers, deputy
surveyors of customs, and superintendents or chiefs of divisions
or bureaus.

And the same is hereby promulgated.

Approved, June 15, 1885.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

In the exercise of the power vested in the President by the
Constitution, and by virtue of the seventeen hundred and fifty-third
section of the Revised Statutes and of the civil-service act approved
January 16, 1883, the following special rule for the regulation and
improvement of the executive civil service is hereby promulgated:

SPECIAL RULE NO. 4.

Appointments to the 150 places in the Pension Office provided to be
filled by the act of March 3, 1885, except so far as they may be filled
by promotions or transfers, must be separately apportioned by the
appointing power in as near conformity to the second section of the act
of January 16, 1883, as the need of filling them promptly and the
residence and qualifications of the applicants will permit.

Approved, July 16, 1885.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 23, 1885_.

_Heads of all Government Departments_:

Ex-President Ulysses S. Grant died this morning at 8 o'clock.

In respect to his memory it is ordered that all of the offices of the
Executive Departments in the city of Washington be closed to-day at
1 o'clock.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 81.

HEADQUARTERS OF THE ARMY,
ADJUTANT-GENERAL'S OFFICE,
_Washington, July 23, 1885_.

I. The following proclamation has been received from the President:

[For proclamation see p. 308.]

II. In compliance with the instructions of the President, on the day of
the funeral, at each military post, the troops and cadets will be
paraded and this order read to them, after which all labors for the day
will cease.

The national flag will be displayed at half-staff.

At dawn of day thirteen guns will be fired, and afterwards at intervals
of thirty minutes between the rising and setting of the sun a single
gun, and at the close of the day a national salute of thirty-eight guns.

The officers of the Army will wear crape on the left arm and on their
swords, and the colors of the Battalion of Engineers, of the several
regiments, and of the United States Corps of Cadets will be put in
mourning for the period of six months.

The date and hour of the funeral will be communicated to department
commanders by telegraph, and by them to their subordinate commanders.

By command of Lieutenant-General Sheridan:

R.C. DRUM, _Adjutant-General_.

SPECIAL ORDER.

NAVY DEPARTMENT, _Washington, July 23, 1885_.

The President of the United States announces the death of ex-President
Ulysses S. Grant in the following proclamation:

[For proclamation see p. 308.]

In pursuance of the President's instructions, it is hereby directed that
the ensign at each naval station and of each vessel of the United States
Navy in commission be hoisted at half-mast, and that a gun be fired at
intervals of every half hour from sunrise to sunset at each naval
station and on board of flagships and of vessels acting singly on the
day of the funeral, where this order may be received in time, otherwise
on the day after its receipt.

The officers of the Navy and Marine Corps will wear the usual badge of
mourning attached to the sword hilt and on the left arm for a period of
thirty days.

WILLIAM C. WHITNEY,
_Secretary of the Navy_.

In the exercise of the power vested in the President by the
Constitution, and by virtue of the seventeen hundred and fifty-third
section of the Revised Statutes and of the civil-service act approved
January 16, 1883, the seventh clause of Rule XIX for the regulation and
improvement of the executive civil service is hereby amended so as to
read as follows:

7. Persons whose employment is exclusively professional; but medical
examiners are not included among such persons.

And the same is hereby promulgated.

Approved, August 5, 1885.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

EXECUTIVE ORDER.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _August 6, 1885_.

_To Head of each Executive Department_:

_It is hereby ordered_, That the several Executive Departments, the
Department of Agriculture, and the Government Printing Office be closed
to-morrow, Friday, August 7, at 3 o'clock p.m., to enable such employees
as may desire to attend the funeral of the late ex-President, General
Grant, in New York.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, September 23, 1885_.

Under a provision of an act of Congress entitled "An act to authorize
the appointment of a commission by the President of the United States
to run and mark the boundary lines between a portion of the Indian
Territory and the State of Texas, in connection with a similar
commission to be appointed by the State of Texas," the following
officers of the Army are detailed, in obedience to the provisions of
said act of Congress, to act in conjunction with such persons as have
been appointed by the State of Texas to ascertain and mark the point
where the one hundredth meridian of longitude crosses the Red River:
Major W.R. Livermore, Corps of Engineers; First Lieutenant Thomas L.
Casey, jr., Corps of Engineers; First Lieutenant Lansing H. Beach,
Corps of Engineers.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

EXECUTIVE ORDER.

Whereas, by a provision of the act of Congress entitled "An act making
appropriations for sundry civil expenses of the Government for the
fiscal year ending June 30, 1886, and for other purposes," approved
March 3, 1885, for the suppression of epidemic diseases, the President
of the United States is authorized, in case of threatened or actual
epidemic of cholera or yellow fever, to use certain appropriated sums,
made immediate available, "in aid of State and local boards or
otherwise, in his discretion, in preventing and suppressing the spread
of the same and for maintaining quarantine and maritime inspections at
points of danger;" and

Whereas there is imminent danger of a recurrence of a cholera epidemic
in Europe, which may be brought to our shores unless adequate measures
of international or local quarantine inspections are taken in season,
which measures of preventive inspection are proper subjects to be
considered, to the end that their efficiency in divers countries may
be secured:

Now, therefore, in virtue of the discretionary authority conferred upon
me by the aforesaid act of Congress, I hereby designate and appoint
Dr. E.O. Shakespeare, M.D., of Pennsylvania, as a representative of the
Government of the United States, to proceed, under the directions of the
Secretary of State, to Spain and such other countries in Europe where
the cholera exists, and make investigation of the causes, progress, and
proper prevention and cure of the said diseases, in order that a full
report may be made of them to Congress during the next ensuing session;
and I direct that the reasonable and necessary expenses of travel and
sojourn of the said E.O. Shakespeare in proceeding from Washington to
Spain and elsewhere in Europe as he may find it absolutely necessary to
go in pursuit of the desired information, and in returning to Washington
at the conclusion of his labors, be adjusted and paid from the
appropriation available under the aforesaid act of March 3, 1885, upon
his statement of account approved by the Secretary of State.

Done at the city of Washington, this 1st day of October, 1885, and of
the Independence of the United States the one hundred and tenth.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

In the exercise of the power vested in the President by the
Constitution, and by virtue of the seventeen hundred and fifty-third
section of the Revised Statutes and of the civil-service act approved
January 16, 1883, the following special rule for the regulation and
improvement of the executive civil service is hereby made and
promulgated:

SPECIAL RULE NO. 5.

Special Rule No. 2, approved July 18, 1884, is hereby revoked. All
applicants on any register for the postal or customs service who on the
1st day of November next shall have been thereon one year or more shall,
in conformity with Rule XVI, be no longer eligible for appointment from
such register.

Approved, October 1, 1885.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, October 24, 1885_.

Under a provision of an act of Congress entitled "An act to authorize
the appointment of a commission by the President of the United States
to run and mark the boundary lines between a portion of the Indian
Territory and the State of Texas, in connection with a similar commission
to be appointed by the State of Texas," Major S.M. Mansfield,
Corps of Engineers, is detailed, in addition to those officers named in
Executive order dated September 23, 1885, in obedience to the provisions
of said act of Congress, to act in conjunction with such persons as have
been appointed by the State of Texas to ascertain and mark the point
where the one hundredth meridian of longitude crosses the Red River.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _October 29, 1885_.[1]

The death of George B. McClellan, at one time the Major-General
Commanding the Army of the United States, took place at an early hour
this morning. As a mark of public respect to the memory of this
distinguished soldier and citizen, whose military ability and civic
virtues have shed luster upon the history of his country, it is ordered
by the President that the national flag be displayed at half-mast upon
all the buildings of the Executive Departments in the city until after
his funeral shall have taken place.

DANIEL S. LAMONT, _Private Secretary_.

WAR DEPARTMENT,
ADJUTANT-GENERAL'S OFFICE,
_Washington, November 25, 1885_.

I. The following proclamation [order] of the President of the United
States is published for the information and guidance of all concerned:

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, November 25, 1885_.

_To the People of the United States_:

Thomas A. Hendricks, Vice-President of the United States, died to-day
at 5 o'clock p.m. at Indianapolis, and it becomes my mournful duty to
announce the distressing fact to his fellow-countrymen.

In respect to the memory and the eminent and varied services of this
high official and patriotic public servant, whose long career was so
full of usefulness and honor to his State and to the United States, it
is ordered that the national flag be displayed at half-mast upon all the
public buildings of the United States; that the Executive Mansion and
the several Executive Departments in the city of Washington be closed
on the day of the funeral and be draped in mourning for the period of
thirty days; that the usual and appropriate military and naval honors
be rendered, and that on all the legations and consulates of the United
States in foreign countries the national flag shall be displayed at
half-mast on the reception of this order, and the usual emblems of
mourning be adopted for thirty days.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

II. On the day next succeeding the receipt of this order at each
military post the troops will be paraded at 10 o'clock a.m. and this
order read to them.

The national flag will be displayed at half-mast. At dawn of day
thirteen guns will be fired. Commencing at 12 o'clock m., nineteen
minute guns will be fired, and at the close of the day the national
salute of thirty-eight guns.

The usual badge of mourning will be worn by officers of the Army, and
the colors of the several regiments, of the United States Corps of
Cadets, and of the Battalion of Engineers will be put in mourning for
the period of thirty days.

By order of the Secretary of War:

R.C. DRUM, _Adjutant-General_.

[Footnote 1: Sent to the heads of the Executive Departments, etc.]

SPECIAL ORDER.

NAVY DEPARTMENT, _Washington, November 25, 1885_.

The President of the United States announces the death of Vice-President
Thomas A. Hendricks in the following order:

[For order see preceding page.]

In pursuance of the foregoing order, it is hereby directed that upon the
day following the receipt of this the ensign at each United States naval
station and of each United States naval vessel in commission be hoisted
at half-mast from sunrise to sunset, and that thirteen guns be fired at
sunrise, nineteen minute guns at meridian, and a national salute at
sunset at each United States naval station and on board flagships and
vessels acting singly, at home or abroad.

The officers of the Navy and Marine Corps will wear the usual badge of
mourning for three months.

WILLIAM C. WHITNEY, _Secretary of the Navy_.

In the exercise of the power vested in the President by the
Constitution, and by virtue of the seventeen hundred and fifty-third
section of the Revised Statutes and of the civil-service act approved
January 16, 1883, the following rules for the regulation and improvement
of the executive civil service are hereby amended and promulgated so as
to read as follows:

RULE IV.

1. All officials connected with any office where or for which any
examination is to take place will give the Civil Service Commission and
the chief examiner such information as may be reasonably required to
enable the Commission to select competent and trustworthy examiners;
and the examinations by those selected as examiners, and the work
incident thereto, will be regarded as a part of the public business to
be performed at such office, and with due regard to other parts of the
public business said examiners shall be allowed time during office
hours to perform the duties required of them.

2. It shall be the duty of every executive officer promptly to inform
the Commission, in writing, of the removal or discharge from the public
service of any examiner in his office, or of the inability or refusal of
any such examiner to act in that capacity; and, on the request of the
Commission, such officer shall thereupon name not less than two persons
serving under him whom he regards as most competent for a place on an
examining board, stating generally their qualifications; and from all
those who may be named for any such place the Commission shall select
a person to fill the same.

RULE XI.

"That no person habitually using intoxicating beverages to excess shall
be appointed to or retained in any office, appointment, or employment to
which the provisions of this act are applicable."

No person dismissed from the public service for misconduct shall be
admitted to examination within two years thereafter, and no person not
absolutely appointed or employed after probation shall be admitted to
an examination within one year thereafter.

2. No person under enlistment in the Army or Navy of the United States
shall be examined under these rules, except for some place requiring
special qualifications, and with the consent in writing of the head of
the Department under which he is enlisted.

3. The Commission may, by regulations subject to change at any time by
the President, declare the kind and measure of ill health, physical
incapacity, misrepresentation, and bad faith which may properly exclude
any person from the right of examination, grading, or certification
under these rules. It may also provide for medical certificates of
physical capacity in the proper cases, and for the appropriate
certification of persons so defective in sight, speech, hearing, or
otherwise as to be apparently disqualified for some of the duties of
the part of the service which they seek to enter.

RULE XII.

1. Every regular application must be supported by proper certificates of
good moral character, health, and physical and mental capacity for doing
the public work, the certificates to be in such form and number as the
regulations of the Commission shall provide; but no certificate will be
received which is inconsistent with the tenth section of the
civil-service act.

2. No one shall be examined for admission to the classified postal
service if under 16 or over 35 years of age, excepting messengers,
stampers, and other junior assistants, who must not be under 14 years
of age, or to the classified customs service or to the classified
departmental service if under 18 or over 45 years of age; but no one
shall be examined for appointment to any place in the classified customs
service, except that of clerk or messenger, who is under 21 years of
age; but these limitations of age shall not apply to persons honorably
discharged from the military or naval service of the country who are
otherwise duly qualified.

RULE XVI.

1. Whenever any officer having the power of appointment or employment
shall so request, there shall be certified to him by the Commission or
the proper examining board four names for the vacancy specified, to be
taken from those graded highest on the proper register of those in his
branch of the service and remaining eligible, regard being had for any
right of preference and to the apportionments to States and Territories;
and from the said four a selection shall be made for the vacancy. But
if a person is on both a general and a special register he need not be
certified for the former, except at the discretion of the Commission,
until he has remained two months upon the latter.

2. These certifications for the service at Washington shall be made
in such order as to apportion, as nearly as may be practicable, the
original appointments thereto among the States and Territories and the
District of Columbia upon the basis of population as ascertained at the
last preceding census.

3. In case the request for any such certification or any law or
regulation shall call for those of either sex, persons of that sex shall
be certified; otherwise sex shall be disregarded in such certification.

4. Subject to the other provisions of this rule, persons eligible on
any register shall be entitled to three certifications only to the
same officer, but with his request in writing there may be a fourth
certification of such persons to him when reached in order. No one shall
remain eligible for more than one year upon any register, except as may
be provided by regulation; but these restrictions shall not extend to
examinations under clause 5 of Rule VII. No person while remaining
eligible on any register shall be admitted to a new examination, and no
person having failed upon any examination shall within six months be
admitted to another examination without the consent of the Commission.

5. Any person appointed to or employed in any place in the classified
service who shall be dismissed or separated therefrom without fault or
delinquency on his part may be reappointed or reemployed in the same
Department or office, at a grade for which no higher examination is
required than that for the position he last held, within one year next
following such dismissal or separation, without further examination, on
such certification as the Commission may provide.

RULE XVII.

1. Every original appointment or employment in said classified service
shall be for the probationary period of six months, at the end of which
time, if the conduct and capacity of the person appointed have been
found satisfactory to the officer having the duty of selection, the
probationer shall be absolutely appointed or employed, but otherwise be
deemed out of the service.

2. Every officer under whom any probationer shall serve during any part
of the probation provided for by these rules shall carefully observe the
quality and value of the service rendered by such probationer, and shall
report to the proper appointing officer in writing the facts observed by
him, showing the character and qualifications of such probationer and of
the service performed by him; and such reports shall be preserved on
file.

3. Every false statement knowingly made by any person in his application
for examination, and every connivance by him at any false statement
made in any certificate which may accompany his application, and every
deception or fraud practiced by him or by any person in his behalf and
with his knowledge to influence his examination, certification, or
appointment, shall be regarded as good cause for refusing to certify
such person or for the removal or discharge of such person during his
probation or thereafter.

RULE XIX.

There are excepted from examination the following: (1) The confidential
clerk or secretary of any head of a Department or office; (2) cashiers
of collectors; (3) cashiers of postmasters; (4) superintendents of
money-order divisions in post-offices; (5) the direct custodians of
money for whose fidelity another officer is under official bond, and
disbursing officers having the custody of money who give bond; but these
exceptions shall not extend to any official below the grade of assistant
cashier or teller; (6) persons employed exclusively in the secret
service of the Government, or as translators, or interpreters, or
stenographers; (7) persons whose employment is exclusively professional,
but medical examiners are not included among such persons; (8) chief
clerks, deputy collectors, deputy naval officers, deputy surveyors of
customs, and superintendents or chiefs of divisions or bureaus. But no
person so excepted shall be either transferred, appointed, or promoted,
unless to some excepted place, without an examination under the
Commission, which examination shall not take place within six months
after entering the service. Promotions may be made without examination
in offices where examinations are not now held until rules on the
subject shall be promulgated.

RULE XXI.

1. No person, unless excepted under Rule XIX, shall be admitted into the
classified civil service from any place not within said service without
an examination and certification under the rules; with this exception,
that any person who shall have been an officer for one year or more last
preceding in any Department or office, in a grade above the classified
service thereof, may be transferred or appointed to any place in the
service of the same without examination.

2. No person who has passed only a limited examination under clause 4
of Rule VII for the lower classes or grades in the departmental or
customs service shall be appointed, or be promoted within two years
after appointment, to any position giving a salary of $1,000 or upward,
without first passing an examination under clause 1 of said rule; and
such examination shall not be allowed within the first year after
appointment.

3. But a person who has passed the examination under said clause 1, and
has accepted a position giving a salary of $900 or less, shall have the
same right of promotion as if originally appointed to a position giving
a salary of $1,000 or more.

4. The Commission may at any time certify for a $900 or any lower place
in the classified service any person upon the register who has passed
the examination under clause 1 of Rule VII if such person does not
object before such certification is made.

RULE XXII.

Any person who has been in the classified departmental service for six
months or more immediately previous may, when the needs of the service
require it, be transferred or appointed to any other place therein upon
producing a certificate from the Civil Service Commission that such
person has passed at the required grade one or more examinations which
are together equal to that necessary for original entrance to the place
which would be secured by the transfer or appointment; and any person
who has for three years last preceding served as a clerk in the office
of the President of the United States may be transferred or appointed
to any place in the classified service without examination.

Approved, November 27, 1885.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

EXECUTIVE ORDER.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, November 28, 1885_.

_It is hereby ordered_, That the Department of Agriculture, the
Government Printing Office, and all other Government offices in the
District of Columbia be closed on Tuesday, December 1, 1885, the day of
the funeral of the late Thomas A. Hendricks, Vice-President of the
United States.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

FIRST ANNUAL MESSAGE.

WASHINGTON, _December 8, 1885_.

_To the Congress of the United States_:

Your assembling is clouded by a sense of public bereavement, caused by
the recent and sudden death of Thomas A. Hendricks, Vice-President of
the United States. His distinguished public services, his complete
integrity and devotion to every duty, and his personal virtues will find
honorable record in his country's history.

Ample and repeated proofs of the esteem and confidence in which he was
held by his fellow-countrymen were manifested by his election to offices
of the most important trust and highest dignity; and at length, full of
years and honors, he has been laid at rest amid universal sorrow and
benediction.

The Constitution, which requires those chosen to legislate for the
people to annually meet in the discharge of their solemn trust, also
requires the President to give to Congress information of the state of
the Union and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall
deem necessary and expedient. At the threshold of a compliance with
these constitutional directions it is well for us to bear in mind that
our usefulness to the people's interests will be promoted by a constant
appreciation of the scope and character of our respective duties as they
relate to Federal legislation. While the Executive may recommend such
measures as he shall deem expedient, the responsibility for legislative
action must and should rest upon those selected by the people to make
their laws.

Contemplation of the grave and responsible functions assigned to the
respective branches of the Government under the Constitution will
disclose the partitions of power between our respective departments and
their necessary independence, and also the need for the exercise of all
the power intrusted to each in that spirit of comity and cooperation
which is essential to the proper fulfillment of the patriotic
obligations which rest upon us as faithful servants of the people.

The jealous watchfulness of our constituencies, great and small,
supplements their suffrages, and before the tribunal they establish
every public servant should be judged.

It is gratifying to announce that the relations of the United States
with all foreign powers continue to be friendly. Our position after
nearly a century of successful constitutional government, maintenance of
good faith in all our engagements, the avoidance of complications with
other nations, and our consistent and amicable attitude toward the
strong and weak alike furnish proof of a political disposition which
renders professions of good will unnecessary. There are no questions of
difficulty pending with any foreign government.

The Argentine Government has revived the long dormant question of the
Falkland Islands by claiming from the United States indemnity for their
loss, attributed to the action of the commander of the sloop of war
_Lexington_ in breaking up a piratical colony on those islands in
1831, and their subsequent occupation by Great Britain. In view of the
ample justification for the act of the _Lexington_ and the derelict
condition of the islands before and after their alleged occupation by
Argentine colonists, this Government considers the claim as wholly
groundless.

Question has arisen with the Government of Austria-Hungary touching
the representation of the United States at Vienna. Having under my
constitutional prerogative appointed an estimable citizen of unimpeached
probity and competence as minister at that court, the Government of
Austria-Hungary invited this Government to take cognizance of certain
exceptions, based upon allegations against the personal acceptability
of Mr. Keiley, the appointed envoy, asking that in view thereof the
appointment should be withdrawn. The reasons advanced were such as
could not be acquiesced in without violation of my oath of office
and the precepts of the Constitution, since they necessarily involved a
limitation in favor of a foreign government upon the right of selection
by the Executive and required such an application of a religious test
as a qualification for office under the United States as would have
resulted in the practical disfranchisement of a large class of our
citizens and the abandonment of a vital principle in our Government. The
Austro-Hungarian Government finally decided not to receive Mr. Keiley as
the envoy of the United States, and that gentleman has since resigned
his commission, leaving the post vacant. I have made no new nomination,
and the interests of this Government at Vienna are now in the care of
the secretary of legation, acting as chargé d'affaires _ad interim_.

Early in March last war broke out in Central America, caused by the
attempt of Guatemala to consolidate the several States into a single
government. In these contests between our neighboring States the United
States forebore to interfere actively, but lent the aid of their
friendly offices in deprecation of war and to promote peace and concord
among the belligerents, and by such counsel contributed importantly to
the restoration of tranquillity in that locality.

Emergencies growing out of civil war in the United States of Colombia
demanded of the Government at the beginning of this Administration
the employment of armed forces to fulfill its guaranties under the
thirty-fifth article of the treaty of 1846, in order to keep the transit
open across the Isthmus of Panama. Desirous of exercising only the
powers expressly reserved to us by the treaty, and mindful of the rights
of Colombia, the forces sent to the Isthmus were instructed to confine
their action to "positively and efficaciously" preventing the transit
and its accessories from being "interrupted or embarrassed."

The execution of this delicate and responsible task necessarily involved
police control where the local authority was temporarily powerless, but
always in aid of the sovereignty of Colombia.

The prompt and successful fulfillment of its duty by this Government was
highly appreciated by the Government of Colombia, and has been followed
by expressions of its satisfaction.

High praise is due to the officers and men engaged in this service.

The restoration of peace on the Isthmus by the reestablishment of the
constituted Government there being thus accomplished, the forces of the
United States were withdrawn.

Pending these occurrences a question of much importance was presented by
decrees of the Colombian Government proclaiming the closure of certain
ports then in the hands of insurgents and declaring vessels held by
the revolutionists to be piratical and liable to capture by any power.
To neither of these propositions could the United States assent. An
effective closure of ports not in the possession of the Government, but
held by hostile partisans, could not be recognized; neither could the
vessels of insurgents against the legitimate sovereignty be deemed
_hostes humani generis_ within the precepts of international law,
whatever might be the definition and penalty of their acts under the
municipal law of the State against whose authority they were in revolt.
The denial by this Government of the Colombian propositions did not,
however, imply the admission of a belligerent status on the part of the
insurgents.

The Colombian Government has expressed its willingness to negotiate
conventions for the adjustment by arbitration of claims by foreign
citizens arising out of the destruction of the city of Aspinwall by the
insurrectionary forces.

The interest of the United States in a practicable transit for ships
across the strip of land separating the Atlantic from the Pacific has
been repeatedly manifested during the last half century.

My immediate predecessor caused to be negotiated with Nicaragua a treaty
for the construction, by and at the sole cost of the United States,
of a canal through Nicaraguan territory, and laid it before the Senate.
Pending the action of that body thereon, I withdrew the treaty for
reexamination. Attentive consideration of its provisions leads me to
withhold it from resubmission to the Senate.

Maintaining, as I do, the tenets of a line of precedents from
Washington's day, which proscribe entangling alliances with foreign
states, I do not favor a policy of acquisition of new and distant
territory or the incorporation of remote interests with our own.

The laws of progress are vital and organic, and we must be conscious of
that irresistible tide of commercial expansion which, as the concomitant
of our active civilization, day by day is being urged onward by those
increasing facilities of production, transportation, and communication
to which steam and electricity have given birth; but our duty in the
present instructs us to address ourselves mainly to the development of
the vast resources of the great area committed to our charge and to
the cultivation of the arts of peace within our own borders, though
jealously alert in preventing the American hemisphere from being
involved in the political problems and complications of distant
governments. Therefore I am unable to recommend propositions involving
paramount privileges of ownership or right outside of our own territory,
when coupled with absolute and unlimited engagements to defend the
territorial integrity of the state where such interests lie. While the
general project of connecting the two oceans by means of a canal is to
be encouraged, I am of opinion that any scheme to that end to be
considered with favor should be free from the features alluded to.

The Tehuantepec route is declared by engineers of the highest repute and
by competent scientists to afford an entirely practicable transit for
vessels and cargoes, by means of a ship railway, from the Atlantic to
the Pacific. The obvious advantages of such a route, if feasible, over
others more remote from the axial lines of traffic between Europe and
the Pacific, and particularly between the Valley of the Mississippi and
the western coast of North and South America, are deserving of
consideration.

Whatever highway may be constructed across the barrier dividing the two
greatest maritime areas of the world must be for the world's benefit--a
trust for mankind, to be removed from the chance of domination by any
single power, nor become a point of invitation for hostilities or a
prize for warlike ambition. An engagement combining the construction,
ownership, and operation of such a work by this Government, with an
offensive and defensive alliance for its protection, with the foreign
state whose responsibilities and rights we would share is, in my
judgment, inconsistent with such dedication to universal and neutral
use, and would, moreover, entail measures for its realization beyond the
scope of our national polity or present means.

The lapse of years has abundantly confirmed the wisdom and foresight
of those earlier Administrations which, long before the conditions of
maritime intercourse were changed and enlarged by the progress of the
age, proclaimed the vital need of interoceanic transit across the
American Isthmus and consecrated it in advance to the common use of
mankind by their positive declarations and through the formal obligation
of treaties. Toward such realization the efforts of my Administration
will be applied, ever bearing in mind the principles on which it must
rest, and which were declared in no uncertain tones by Mr. Cass, who,
while Secretary of State, in 1858, announced that "what the United
States want in Central America, next to the happiness of its people,
is the security and neutrality of the interoceanic routes which lead
through it."

The construction of three transcontinental lines of railway, all in
successful operation, wholly within our territory, and uniting the
Atlantic and the Pacific oceans, has been accompanied by results of a
most interesting and impressive nature, and has created new conditions,
not in the routes of commerce only, but in political geography, which
powerfully affect our relations toward and necessarily increase our
interests in any transisthmian route which may be opened and employed
for the ends of peace and traffic, or, in other contingencies, for uses
inimical to both.

Transportation is a factor in the cost of commodities scarcely second to
that of their production, and weighs as heavily upon the consumer.

Our experience already has proven the great importance of having the
competition between land carriage and water carriage fully developed,
each acting as a protection to the public against the tendencies to
monopoly which are inherent in the consolidation of wealth and power in
the hands of vast corporations.

These suggestions may serve to emphasize what I have already said on the
score of the necessity of a neutralization of any interoceanic transit;
and this can only be accomplished by making the uses of the route open
to all nations and subject to the ambitions and warlike necessities of
none.

The drawings and report of a recent survey of the Nicaragua Canal route,
made by Chief Engineer Menocal, will be communicated for your
information.

The claims of citizens of the United States for losses by reason of the
late military operations of Chile in Peru and Bolivia are the subject of
negotiation for a claims convention with Chile, providing for their
submission to arbitration.

The harmony of our relations with China is fully sustained.

In the application of the acts lately passed to execute the treaty of
1880, restrictive of the immigration of Chinese laborers into the United
States, individual cases of hardship have occurred beyond the power of
the Executive to remedy, and calling for judicial determination.

The condition of the Chinese question in the Western States and
Territories is, despite this restrictive legislation, far from being
satisfactory. The recent outbreak in Wyoming Territory, where numbers of
unoffending Chinamen, indisputably within the protection of the treaties
and the law, were murdered by a mob, and the still more recent
threatened outbreak of the same character in Washington Territory, are
fresh in the minds of all, and there is apprehension lest the bitterness
of feeling against the Mongolian race on the Pacific Slope may find vent
in similar lawless demonstrations. All the power of this Government
should be exerted to maintain the amplest good faith toward China in the
treatment of these men, and the inflexible sternness of the law in
bringing the wrongdoers to justice should be insisted upon.

Every effort has been made by this Government to prevent these violent
outbreaks and to aid the representatives of China in their investigation
of these outrages; and it is but just to say that they are traceable to
the lawlessness of men not citizens of the United States engaged in
competition with Chinese laborers.

Race prejudice is the chief factor in originating these disturbances,
and it exists in a large part of our domain, jeopardizing our domestic
peace and the good relationship we strive to maintain with China.

The admitted right of a government to prevent the influx of elements
hostile to its internal peace and security may not be questioned, even
where there is no treaty stipulation on the subject. That the exclusion
of Chinese labor is demanded in other countries where like conditions
prevail is strongly evidenced in the Dominion of Canada, where Chinese
immigration is now regulated by laws more exclusive than our own. If
existing laws are inadequate to compass the end in view, I shall be
prepared to give earnest consideration to any further remedial measures,
within the treaty limits, which the wisdom of Congress may devise.

The independent State of the Kongo has been organized as a government
under the sovereignty of His Majesty the King of the Belgians, who
assumes its chief magistracy in his personal character only, without
making the new State a dependency of Belgium. It is fortunate that a
benighted region, owing all it has of quickening civilization to the
beneficence and philanthropic spirit of this monarch, should have the
advantage and security of his benevolent supervision.

The action taken by this Government last year in being the first to
recognize the flag of the International Association of the Kongo has
been followed by formal recognition of the new nationality which
succeeds to its sovereign powers.

A conference of delegates of the principal commercial nations was held
at Berlin last winter to discuss methods whereby the Kongo basin might
be kept open to the world's trade. Delegates attended on behalf of the
United States on the understanding that their part should be merely
deliberative, without imparting to the results any binding character
so far as the United States were concerned. This reserve was due to
the indisposition of this Government to share in any disposal by an
international congress of jurisdictional questions in remote foreign
territories. The results of the conference were embodied in a formal act
of the nature of an international convention, which laid down certain
obligations purporting to be binding on the signatories, subject to
ratification within one year. Notwithstanding the reservation under
which the delegates of the United States attended, their signatures
were attached to the general act in the same manner as those of the
plenipotentiaries of other governments, thus making the United States
appear, without reserve or qualification, as signatories to a joint
international engagement imposing on the signers the conservation of the
territorial integrity of distant regions where we have no established
interests or control.

This Government does not, however, regard its reservation of liberty
of action in the premises as at all impaired; and holding that an
engagement to share in the obligation of enforcing neutrality in the
remote valley of the Kongo would be an alliance whose responsibilities
we are not in a position to assume, I abstain from asking the sanction
of the Senate to that general act.

The correspondence will be laid before you, and the instructive and
interesting report of the agent sent by this Government to the Kongo
country and his recommendations for the establishment of commercial
agencies on the African coast are also submitted for your consideration.

The commission appointed by my predecessor last winter to visit the
Central and South American countries and report on the methods of
enlarging the commercial relations of the United States therewith has
submitted reports, which will be laid before you.

No opportunity has been omitted to testify the friendliness of this
Government toward Korea, whose entrance into the family of treaty powers
the United States were the first to recognize. I regard with favor the
application made by the Korean Government to be allowed to employ
American officers as military instructors, to which the assent of
Congress becomes necessary, and I am happy to say this request has the
concurrent sanction of China and Japan.

The arrest and imprisonment of Julio R. Santos, a citizen of the United
States, by the authorities of Ecuador gave rise to a contention with
that Government, in which his right to be released or to have a speedy
and impartial trial on announced charges and with all guaranties of
defense stipulated by treaty was insisted upon by us. After an elaborate
correspondence and repeated and earnest representations on our part Mr.
Santos was, after an alleged trial and conviction, eventually included
in a general decree of amnesty and pardoned by the Ecuadorian Executive
and released, leaving the question of his American citizenship denied by
the Ecuadorian Government, but insisted upon by our own.

The amount adjudged by the late French and American Claims Commission to
be due from the United States to French claimants on account of injuries
suffered by them during the War of Secession, having been appropriated
by the last Congress, has been duly paid to the French Government.

The act of February 25, 1885, provided for a preliminary search of the
records of French prize courts for evidence bearing on the claims of
American citizens against France for spoliations committed prior to
1801. The duty has been performed, and the report of the agent will be
laid before you.

I regret to say that the restrictions upon the importation of our pork
into France continue, notwithstanding the abundant demonstration of the
absence of sanitary danger in its use; but I entertain strong hopes that
with a better understanding of the matter this vexatious prohibition
will be removed. It would be pleasing to be able to say as much with
respect to Germany, Austria, and other countries, where such food
products are absolutely excluded, without present prospect of reasonable
change.

The interpretation of our existing treaties of naturalization by Germany
during the past year has attracted attention by reason of an apparent
tendency on the part of the Imperial Government to extend the scope of
the residential restrictions to which returning naturalized citizens of
German origin are asserted to be liable under the laws of the Empire.
The temperate and just attitude taken by this Government with regard to
this class of questions will doubtless lead to a satisfactory
understanding.

The dispute of Germany and Spain relative to the domination of the
Caroline Islands has attracted the attention of this Government by
reason of extensive interests of American citizens having grown up in
those parts during the past thirty years, and because the question of
ownership involves jurisdiction of matters affecting the status of our
citizens under civil and criminal law. While standing wholly aloof from
the proprietary issues raised between powers to both of which the United
States are friendly, this Government expects that nothing in the present
contention shall unfavorably affect our citizens carrying on a peaceful
commerce or there domiciled, and has so informed the Governments of
Spain and Germany.

The marked good will between the United States and Great Britain has
been maintained during the past year.

The termination of the fishing clauses of the treaty of Washington, in
pursuance of the joint resolution of March 3, 1883, must have resulted
in the abrupt cessation on the 1st of July of this year, in the midst
of their ventures, of the operations of citizens of the United States
engaged in fishing in British American waters but for a diplomatic
understanding reached with Her Majesty's Government in June last,
whereby assurance was obtained that no interruption of those operations
should take place during the current fishing season.

In the interest of good neighborhood and of the commercial intercourse
of adjacent communities, the question of the North American fisheries is
one of much importance. Following out the intimation given by me when
the extensory arrangement above described was negotiated, I recommend
that the Congress provide for the appointment of a commission in which
the Governments of the United States and Great Britain shall be
respectively represented, charged with the consideration and settlement,
upon a just, equitable, and honorable basis, of the entire question of
the fishing rights of the two Governments and their respective citizens
on the coasts of the United States and British North America. The
fishing interests being intimately related to other general questions
dependent upon contiguity and intercourse, consideration thereof in all
their equities might also properly come within the purview of such a
commission, and the fullest latitude of expression on both sides should
be permitted.

The correspondence in relation to the fishing rights will be submitted.

The arctic exploring steamer _Alert_, which was generously given by
Her Majesty's Government to aid in the relief of the Greely expedition,
was, after the successful attainment of that humane purpose, returned to
Great Britain, in pursuance of the authority conferred by the act of
March 3, 1885.

The inadequacy of the existing engagements for extradition between
the United States and Great Britain has been long apparent. The tenth
article of the treaty of 1842, one of the earliest compacts in this
regard entered into by us, stipulated for surrender in respect of a
limited number of offenses. Other crimes no less inimical to the social
welfare should be embraced and the procedure of extradition brought in
harmony with present international practice. Negotiations with Her
Majesty's Government for an enlarged treaty of extradition have been
pending since 1870, and I entertain strong hopes that a satisfactory
result may be soon attained.

The frontier line between Alaska and British Columbia, as defined by
the treaty of cession with Russia, follows the demarcation assigned
in a prior treaty between Great Britain and Russia. Modern exploration
discloses that this ancient boundary is impracticable as a geographical
fact. In the unsettled condition of that region the question has lacked
importance, but the discovery of mineral wealth in the territory the
line is supposed to traverse admonishes that the time has come when an
accurate knowledge of the boundary is needful to avert jurisdictional
complications. I recommend, therefore, that provision be made for a
preliminary reconnoissance by officers of the United States, to the end
of acquiring more precise information on the subject. I have invited
Her Majesty's Government to consider with us the adoption of a more
convenient line, to be established by meridian observations or by known
geographical features without the necessity of an expensive survey of
the whole.

The late insurrectionary movements in Hayti having been quelled, the
Government of that Republic has made prompt provision for adjudicating
the losses suffered by foreigners because of hostilities there, and the
claims of certain citizens of the United States will be in this manner
determined.

The long-pending claims of two citizens of the United States, Pelletier
and Lazare, have been disposed of by arbitration, and an award in favor
of each claimant has been made, which by the terms of the engagement is
final. It remains for Congress to provide for the payment of the
stipulated moiety of the expenses.

A question arose with Hayti during the past year by reason of the
exceptional treatment of an American citizen, Mr. Van Bokkelen, a
resident of Port-au-Prince, who, on suit by creditors residing in the
United States, was sentenced to imprisonment, and, under the operation
of a Haytian statute, was denied relief secured to a native Haytian.
This Government asserted his treaty right to equal treatment with
natives of Hayti in all suits at law. Our contention was denied by the
Haytian Government, which, however, while still professing to maintain
the ground taken against Mr. Van Bokkelen's right, terminated the
controversy by setting him at liberty without explanation.

An international conference to consider the means of arresting the
spread of cholera and other epidemic diseases was held at Rome in May
last, and adjourned to meet again on further notice. An expert delegate
on behalf of the United States has attended its sessions and will submit
a report.

Our relations with Mexico continue to be most cordial, as befits
those of neighbors between whom the strongest ties of friendship and
commercial intimacy exist, as the natural and growing consequence of our
similarity of institutions and geographical propinquity.

The relocation of the boundary line between the United States and Mexico
westward of the Rio Grande, under the convention of July 29, 1882, has
been unavoidably delayed, but I apprehend no difficulty in securing a
prolongation of the period for its accomplishment.

The lately concluded commercial treaty with Mexico still awaits the
stipulated legislation to carry its provisions into effect, for which
one year's additional time has been secured by a supplementary article
signed in February last and since ratified on both sides.

As this convention, so important to the commercial welfare of the
two adjoining countries, has been constitutionally confirmed by the
treaty-making branch, I express the hope that legislation needed to make
it effective may not be long delayed.

The large influx of capital and enterprise to Mexico from the United
States continues to aid in the development of the resources and in
augmenting the material well-being of our sister Republic. Lines of
railway, penetrating to the heart and capital of the country, bring
the two peoples into mutually beneficial intercourse, and enlarged
facilities of transit add to profitable commerce, create new markets,
and furnish avenues to otherwise isolated communities.

I have already adverted to the suggested construction of a ship railway
across the narrow formation of the territory of Mexico at Tehuantepec.

With the gradual recovery of Peru from the effects of her late
disastrous conflict with Chile, and with the restoration of civil
authority in that distracted country, it is hoped that pending war
claims of our citizens will be adjusted.

In conformity with notification given by the Government of Peru, the
existing treaties of commerce and extradition between the United States
and that country will terminate March 31, 1886.

Our good relationship with Russia continues.

An officer of the Navy, detailed for the purpose, is now on his way to
Siberia bearing the testimonials voted by Congress to those who
generously succored the survivors of the unfortunate _Jeannette_
expedition.

It is gratifying to advert to the cordiality of our intercourse with
Spain.

The long-pending claim of the owners of the ship _Masonic_ for loss
suffered through the admitted dereliction of the Spanish authorities in
the Philippine Islands has been adjusted by arbitration and an indemnity
awarded. The principle of arbitration in such cases, to which the United
States have long and consistently adhered, thus receives a fresh and
gratifying confirmation.

Other questions with Spain have been disposed of or are under diplomatic
consideration with a view to just and honorable settlement.

The operation of the commercial agreement with Spain of January
2-February 13, 1884, has been found inadequate to the commercial needs
of the United States and the Spanish Antilles, and the terms of the
agreement are subjected to conflicting interpretations in those islands.

Negotiations have been instituted at Madrid for a full treaty not open
to these objections and in the line of the general policy touching the
neighborly intercourse of proximate communities, to which I elsewhere
advert, and aiming, moreover, at the removal of existing burdens and
annoying restrictions; and although a satisfactory termination is
promised, I am compelled to delay its announcement.

An international copyright conference was held at Berne in September, on
the invitation of the Swiss Government. The envoy of the United States
attended as a delegate, but refrained from committing this Government to
the results, even by signing the recommendatory protocol adopted. The
interesting and important subject of international copyright has been
before you for several years. Action is certainly desirable to effect
the object in view; and while there may be question as to the relative
advantage of treating it by legislation or by specific treaty, the
matured views of the Berne conference can not fail to aid your
consideration of the subject.

The termination of the commercial treaty of 1862 between the United
States and Turkey has been sought by that Government. While there is
question as to the sufficiency of the notice of termination given, yet
as the commercial rights of our citizens in Turkey come under the
favored-nation guaranties of the prior treaty of 1830, and as equal
treatment is admitted by the Porte, no inconvenience can result from the
assent of this Government to the revision of the Ottoman tariffs, in
which the treaty powers have been invited to join.

Questions concerning our citizens in Turkey may be affected by the
Porte's nonacquiescence in the right of expatriation and by the
imposition of religious tests as a condition of residence, in which
this Government can not concur. The United States must hold in their
intercourse with every power that the status of their citizens is to be
respected and equal civil privileges accorded to them without regard
to creed, and affected by no considerations save those growing out of
domiciliary return to the land of original allegiance or of unfulfilled
personal obligations which may survive, under municipal laws, after such
voluntary return.

The negotiation with Venezuela relative to the rehearing of the awards
of the mixed commission constituted under the treaty of 1866 was resumed
in view of the recent acquiescence of the Venezuelan envoy in the
principal point advanced by this Government, that the effects of the old
treaty could only be set aside by the operation of a new convention. A
result in substantial accord with the advisory suggestions contained in
the joint resolution of March 3, 1883, has been agreed upon and will
shortly be submitted to the Senate for ratification.

Under section 3659 of the Revised Statutes all funds held in trust by
the United States and the annual interest accruing thereon, when not
otherwise required by treaty, are to be invested in stocks of the United
States bearing a rate of interest not less than 5 per cent per annum.
There being now no procurable stocks paying so high a rate of interest,
the letter of the statute is at present inapplicable, but its spirit is
subserved by continuing to make investments of this nature in current
stocks bearing the highest interest now paid. The statute, however,
makes no provision for the disposal of such accretions. It being
contrary to the general rule of this Government to allow interest on
claims, I recommend the repeal of the provision in question and the
disposition, under a uniform rule, of the present accumulations from
investment of trust funds.

The inadequacy of existing legislation touching citizenship and
naturalization demands your consideration.

While recognizing the right of expatriation, no statutory provision
exists providing means for renouncing citizenship by an American
citizen, native born or naturalized, nor for terminating and vacating
an improper acquisition of citizenship. Even a fraudulent decree of
naturalization can not now be canceled. The privilege and franchise of
American citizenship should be granted with care, and extended to those
only who intend in good faith to assume its duties and responsibilities
when attaining its privileges and benefits. It should be withheld from
those who merely go through the forms of naturalization with the intent
of escaping the duties of their original allegiance without taking upon
themselves those of their new status, or who may acquire the rights of
American citizenship for no other than a hostile purpose toward their
original governments. These evils have had many flagrant illustrations.

I regard with favor the suggestion put forth by one of my predecessors
that provision be made for a central bureau of record of the decrees of
naturalization granted by the various courts throughout the United
States now invested with that power.

The rights which spring from domicile in the United States, especially
when coupled with a declaration of intention to become a citizen, are
worthy of definition by statute. The stranger coming hither with intent
to remain, establishing his residence in our midst, contributing to the
general welfare, and by his voluntary act declaring his purpose to
assume the responsibilities of citizenship, thereby gains an inchoate
status which legislation may properly define. The laws of certain
States and Territories admit a domiciled alien to the local franchise,
conferring on him the rights of citizenship to a degree which places him
in the anomalous position of being a citizen of a State and yet not of
the United States within the purview of Federal and international law.

It is important within the scope of national legislation to define this
right of alien domicile as distinguished from Federal naturalization.

The commercial relations of the United States with their immediate
neighbors and with important areas of traffic near our shores suggest
especially liberal intercourse between them and us.

Following the treaty of 1883 with Mexico, which rested on the basis of a
reciprocal exemption from customs duties, other similar treaties were
initiated by my predecessor.

Recognizing the need of less obstructed traffic with Cuba and Puerto
Rico, and met by the desire of Spain to succor languishing interests
in the Antilles, steps were taken to attain those ends by a treaty of
commerce. A similar treaty was afterwards signed by the Dominican
Republic. Subsequently overtures were made by Her Britannic Majesty's
Government for a like mutual extension of commercial intercourse with
the British West Indian and South American dependencies, but without
result.

On taking office I withdrew for reexamination the treaties signed with
Spain and Santo Domingo, then pending before the Senate. The result has
been to satisfy me of the inexpediency of entering into engagements of
this character not covering the entire traffic.

These treaties contemplated the surrender by the United States of large
revenues for inadequate considerations. Upon sugar alone duties were
surrendered to an amount far exceeding all the advantages offered in
exchange. Even were it intended to relieve our consumers, it was evident
that so long as the exemption but partially covered our importation such
relief would be illusory. To relinquish a revenue so essential seemed
highly improvident at a time when new and large drains upon the Treasury
were contemplated. Moreover, embarrassing questions would have arisen
under the favored-nation clauses of treaties with other nations.

As a further objection, it is evident that tariff regulation by treaty
diminishes that independent control over its own revenues which is
essential for the safety and welfare of any government. Emergency
calling for an increase of taxation may at any time arise, and no
engagement with a foreign power should exist to hamper the action of the
Government.

By the fourteenth section of the shipping act approved June 26, 1884,
certain reductions and contingent exemptions from tonnage dues were made
as to vessels entering ports of the United States from any foreign port
in North and Central America, the West India Islands, the Bahamas and
Bermudas, Mexico, and the Isthmus as far as Aspinwall and Panama. The
Governments of Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Portugal, and Sweden and
Norway have asserted, under the favored-nation clause in their treaties
with the United States, a claim to like treatment in respect of vessels
coming to the United States from their home ports. This Government,
however, holds that the privileges granted by the act are purely
geographical, inuring to any vessel of any foreign power that may choose
to engage in traffic between this country and any port within the
defined zone, and no warrant exists under the most-favored-nation clause
for the extension of the privileges in question to vessels sailing to
this country from ports outside the limitation of the act.

Undoubtedly the relations of commerce with our near neighbors, whose
territories form so long a frontier line difficult to be guarded, and
who find in our country, and equally offer to us, natural markets,
demand special and considerate treatment. It rests with Congress to
consider what legislative action may increase facilities of intercourse
which contiguity makes natural and desirable.

I earnestly urge that Congress recast the appropriations for the
maintenance of the diplomatic and consular service on a footing
commensurate with the importance of our national interests. At every
post where a representative is necessary the salary should be so graded
as to permit him to live with comfort. With the assignment of adequate
salaries the so-called notarial extraofficial fees, which our officers
abroad are now permitted to treat as personal perquisites, should be
done away with. Every act requiring the certification and seal of the
officer should be taxable at schedule rates and the fee therefor
returned to the Treasury. By restoring these revenues to the public use
the consular service would be self-supporting, even with a liberal
increase of the present low salaries.

In further prevention of abuses a system of consular inspection should
be instituted.

The appointment of a limited number of secretaries of legation at large,
to be assigned to duty wherever necessary, and in particular for
temporary service at missions which for any cause may be without a head,
should also be authorized.

I favor also authorization for the detail of officers of the regular
service as military or naval attachés at legations.

Some foreign governments do not recognize the union of consular with
diplomatic functions. Italy and Venezuela will only receive the
appointee in one of his two capacities, but this does not prevent the
requirement of a bond and submission to the responsibilities of an
office whose duties he can not discharge. The superadded title of
consul-general should be abandoned at all missions.

I deem it expedient that a well-devised measure for the reorganization
of the extraterritorial courts in Oriental countries should replace the
present system, which labors under the disadvantage of combining
judicial and executive functions in the same office.

In several Oriental countries generous offers have been made of
premises for housing the legations of the United States. A grant of
land for that purpose was made some years since by Japan, and has been
referred to in the annual messages of my predecessor. The Siamese
Government has made a gift to the United States of commodious quarters
in Bangkok. In Korea the late minister was permitted to purchase a
building from the Government for legation use. In China the premises
rented for the legation are favored as to local charges. At Tangier
the house occupied by our representative has been for many years the
property of this Government, having been given for that purpose in 1822
by the Sultan of Morocco. I approve the suggestion heretofore made,
that, in view of the conditions of life and administration in the
Eastern countries, the legation buildings in China, Japan, Korea, Siam,
and perhaps Persia, should be owned and furnished by the Government
with a view to permanency and security. To this end I recommend that
authority be given to accept the gifts adverted to in Japan and Siam,
and to purchase in the other countries named, with provision for
furniture and repairs. A considerable saving in rentals would result.

The World's Industrial Exposition, held at New Orleans last winter, with
the assistance of the Federal Government, attracted a large number of
foreign exhibits, and proved of great value in spreading among the
concourse of visitors from Mexico and Central and South America a wider
knowledge of the varied manufactures and productions of this country and
their availability in exchange for the productions of those regions.

Past Congresses have had under consideration the advisability of
abolishing the discrimination made by the tariff laws in favor of the
works of American artists. The odium of the policy which subjects to
a high rate of duty the paintings of foreign artists and exempts the
productions of American artists residing abroad, and who receive
gratuitously advantages and instruction, is visited upon our citizens
engaged in art culture in Europe, and has caused them with practical
unanimity to favor the abolition of such an ungracious distinction; and
in their interest, and for other obvious reasons, I strongly recommend
it.

The report of the Secretary of the Treasury fully exhibits the condition
of the public finances and of the several branches of the Government
connected with his Department. The suggestions of the Secretary relating
to the practical operations of this important Department, and his
recommendations in the direction of simplification and economy,
particularly in the work of collecting customs duties, are especially
urged upon the attention of Congress.

The ordinary receipts from all sources for the fiscal year ended June
30, 1885, were $322,690,706.38. Of this sum $181,471,939.34 was received
from customs and $112,498,725.54 from internal revenue. The total
receipts, as given above, were $24,829,163.54 less than those for the
year ended June 30, 1884. This diminution embraces a falling off of
$13,595,550.42 in the receipts from customs and $9,687,346.97 in the
receipts from internal revenue.

The total ordinary expenditures of the Government for the fiscal year
were $260,226,935.50, leaving a surplus in the Treasury at the close of
the year of $63,463,771.27. This is $40,929,854.32 less than the surplus
reported at the close of the previous year.

The expenditures are classified as follows:

For civil expenses $23,826,942.11
For foreign intercourse 5,439,609.11
For Indians 6,552,494.63
For pensions 56,102,267.49
For the military, including river and harbor 42,670,578.47
improvements and arsenals
For the Navy, including vessels, machinery, and 16,021,079.69
improvements of navy-yards
For interest on the public debt 51,386,256.47
For the District of Columbia 3,499,650.95
For miscellaneous expenditures, including public 54,728,056.21
buildings, light-houses, and collecting the revenue

The amount paid on the public debt during the fiscal year ended June 30,
1885, was $45,993,235.43, and there has been paid since that date and up
to November 1, 1885, the sum of $369,828, leaving the amount of the debt
at the last-named date $1,514,475,860.47. There was, however, at that
time in the Treasury, applicable to the general purposes of the
Government, the sum of $66,818,292.38.

The total receipts for the current fiscal year ending June 30, 1886,
ascertained to October 1, 1885, and estimated for the remainder of the
year, are $315,000,000. The expenditures ascertained and estimated for
the same time are $245,000,000, leaving a surplus at the close of the
year estimated at $70,000,000.

The value of the exports from the United States to foreign countries
during the last fiscal year was as follows:

Domestic merchandise $726,682,946.00
Foreign merchandise 15,506,809.00
742,189,755.00

Gold 8,477,892.00
Silver 33,753,633.00
784,421,280.00

Some of the principal exports, with their values and the percentage they
respectively bear to the total exportation, are given as follows:

Articles. Value. Percentage.

Cotton and cotton manufactures $213,799,049 29.42
Breadstuffs 160,370,821 22.07
Provisions 107,332,456 14.77
Oils--mineral, vegetable, and animal 54,326,202 7.48
Tobacco and its manufactures 24,767,305 3.41
Wood and its manufactures 21,464,322 2.95

Our imports during the year were as follows:

Merchandise $579,580,053.80
Gold 26,691,696.00
Silver 16,550,627.00
622,822,376.80

The following are given as prominent articles of import during the year,
with their values and the percentage they bear to the total importation:

Articles. Value. Percentage.

Sugar and molasses $76,738,713 13.29
Coffee 46,723,318 8.09
Wool and its manufactures 44,656,482 7.73
Silk and its manufactures 40,393,002 6.99
Chemicals, dyes, drugs, and medicines 35,070,816 6.07
Iron and steel and their manufactures 34,563,689 5.98
Flax, hemp, jute, and their manufactures 32,854,874 5.69
Cotton and its manufactures 28,152,001 4.88
Hides and skins other than fur skins 20,586,443 3.56

Of the entire amount of duties collected 70 per cent was collected from
the following articles of import:

Percentage.
Sugar and molasses 29
Wool and its manufactures 15
Silk and its manufactures 8
Iron and steel and their manufactures 7
Cotton manufactures 6
Flax, hemp, and jute, and their manufactures 5

The fact that our revenues are in excess of the actual needs of an
economical administration of the Government justifies a reduction in the
amount exacted from the people for its support. Our Government is but
the means established by the will of a free people by which certain
principles are applied which they have adopted for their benefit and
protection; and it is never better administered and its true spirit is
never better observed than when the people's taxation for its support is
scrupulously limited to the actual necessity of expenditure and
distributed according to a just and equitable plan.

The proposition with which we have to deal is the reduction of the
revenue received by the Government, and indirectly paid by the people,
from customs duties. The question of free trade is not involved, nor is
there now any occasion for the general discussion of the wisdom or
expediency of a protective system.

Justice and fairness dictate that in any modification of our present
laws relating to revenue the industries and interests which have
been encouraged by such laws, and in which our citizens have large
investments, should not be ruthlessly injured or destroyed. We should
also deal with the subject in such manner as to protect the interests of
American labor, which is the capital of our workingmen. Its stability
and proper remuneration furnish the most justifiable pretext for a
protective policy.

Within these limitations a certain reduction should be made in our
customs revenue. The amount of such reduction having been determined,
the inquiry follows, Where can it best be remitted and what articles can
best be released from duty in the interest of our citizens?

I think the reduction should be made in the revenue derived from a
tax upon the imported necessaries of life. We thus directly lessen the
cost of living in every family of the land and release to the people in
every humble home a larger measure of the rewards of frugal industry.

During the year ended November 1, 1885, 145 national banks were
organized, with an aggregate capital of $16,938,000, and circulating
notes have been issued to them amounting to $4,274,910. The whole number
of these banks in existence on the day above mentioned was 2,727.

The very limited amount of circulating notes issued by our national
banks, compared with the amount the law permits them to issue upon a
deposit of bonds for their redemption, indicates that the volume of our
circulating medium may be largely increased through this
instrumentality.

Nothing more important than the present condition of our currency and
coinage can claim your attention.

Since February, 1878, the Government has, under the compulsory
provisions of law, purchased silver bullion and coined the same at the
rate of more than $2,000,000 every month. By this process up to the
present date 215,759,431 silver dollars have been coined.

A reasonable appreciation of a delegation of power to the General
Government would limit its exercise, without express restrictive words,
to the people's needs and the requirements of the public welfare.

Upon this theory the authority to "coin money" given to Congress by the
Constitution, if it permits the purchase by the Government of bullion
for coinage in any event, does not justify such purchase and coinage to
an extent beyond the amount needed for a sufficient circulating medium.

The desire to utilize the silver product of the country should not lead
to a misuse or the perversion of this power.

The necessity for such an addition to the silver currency of the nation
as is compelled by the silver-coinage act is negatived by the fact that
up to the present time only about 50,000,000 of the silver dollars so
coined have actually found their way into circulation, leaving more than
165,000,000 in the possession of the Government, the custody of which
has entailed a considerable expense for the construction of vaults for
its deposit. Against this latter amount there are outstanding silver
certificates amounting to about $93,000,000.

Every month two millions of gold in the public Treasury are paid out for
two millions or more of silver dollars, to be added to the idle mass
already accumulated.

If continued long enough, this operation will result in the substitution
of silver for all the gold the Government owns applicable to its general
purposes. It will not do to rely upon the customs receipts of the
Government to make good this drain of gold, because the silver thus
coined having been made legal tender for all debts and dues, public and
private, at times during the last six months 58 per cent of the receipts
for duties has been in silver or silver certificates, while the average
within that period has been 20 per cent. The proportion of silver and
its certificates received by the Government will probably increase as
time goes on, for the reason that the nearer the period approaches when
it will be obliged to offer silver in payment of its obligations the
greater inducement there will be to hoard gold against depreciation in
the value of silver or for the purpose of speculating.

This hoarding of gold has already begun.

When the time comes that gold has been withdrawn from circulation, then
will be apparent the difference between the real value of the silver
dollar and a dollar in gold, and the two coins will part company.
Gold, still the standard of value and necessary in our dealings with
other countries, will be at a premium over silver; banks which have
substituted gold for the deposits of their customers may pay them with
silver bought with such gold, thus making a handsome profit; rich
speculators will sell their hoarded gold to their neighbors who need it
to liquidate their foreign debts, at a ruinous premium over silver, and
the laboring men and women of the land, most defenseless of all, will
find that the dollar received for the wage of their toil has sadly
shrunk in its purchasing power. It may be said that the latter result
will be but temporary, and that ultimately the price of labor will be
adjusted to the change; but even if this takes place the wage-worker
can not possibly gain, but must inevitably lose, since the price he is
compelled to pay for his living will not only be measured in a coin
heavily depreciated and fluctuating and uncertain in its value, but
this uncertainty in the value of the purchasing medium will be made
the pretext for an advance in prices beyond that justified by actual
depreciation.

The words uttered in 1834 by Daniel Webster in the Senate of the United
States are true to-day:

The very man of all others who has the deepest interest in a sound
currency, and who suffers most by mischievous legislation in money
matters, is the man who earns his daily bread by his daily toil.

The most distinguished advocate of bimetallism, discussing our silver
coinage, has lately written:

No American citizen's hand has yet felt the sensation of cheapness,
either in receiving or expending the silver-act dollars.

And those who live by labor or legitimate trade never will feel that
sensation of cheapness. However plenty silver dollars may become, they
will not be distributed as gifts among the people; and if the laboring
man should receive four depreciated dollars where he now receives but
two, he will pay in the depreciated coin more than double the price he
now pays for all the necessaries and comforts of life.

Those who do not fear any disastrous consequences arising from the
continued compulsory coinage of silver as now directed by law, and who
suppose that the addition to the currency of the country intended as its
result will be a public benefit, are reminded that history demonstrates
that the point is easily reached in the attempt to float at the same
time two sorts of money of different excellence when the better will
cease to be in general circulation. The hoarding of gold which has
already taken place indicates that we shall not escape the usual
experience in such cases. So if this silver coinage be continued we may
reasonably expect that gold and its equivalent will abandon the field of
circulation to silver alone. This of course must produce a severe
contraction of our circulating medium, instead of adding to it.

It will not be disputed that any attempt on the part of the Government
to cause the circulation of silver dollars worth 80 cents side by
side with gold dollars worth 100 cents, even within the limit that
legislation does not run counter to the laws of trade, to be successful
must be seconded by the confidence of the people that both coins will
retain the same purchasing power and be interchangeable at will.
A special effort has been made by the Secretary of the Treasury to
increase the amount of our silver coin in circulation; but the fact
that a large share of the limited amount thus put out has soon returned
to the public Treasury in payment of duties leads to the belief that the
people do not now desire to keep it in hand, and this, with the evident
disposition to hoard gold, gives rise to the suspicion that there
already exists a lack of confidence among the people touching our
financial processes. There is certainly not enough silver now in
circulation to cause uneasiness, and the whole amount coined and now on
hand might after a time be absorbed by the people without apprehension;
but it is the ceaseless stream that threatens to overflow the land which
causes fear and uncertainty.

What has been thus far submitted upon this subject relates almost
entirely to considerations of a home nature, unconnected with the
bearing which the policies of other nations have upon the question. But
it is perfectly apparent that a line of action in regard to our currency
can not wisely be settled upon or persisted in without considering the
attitude on the subject of other countries with whom we maintain
intercourse through commerce, trade, and travel. An acknowledgment of
this fact is found in the act by virtue of which our silver is
compulsorily coined. It provides that--

The President shall invite the governments of the countries composing
the Latin Union, so called, and of such other European nations as he may
deem advisable, to join the United States in a conference to adopt a
common ratio between gold and silver for the purpose of establishing
internationally the use of bimetallic money and securing fixity of
relative value between those metals.

This conference absolutely failed, and a similar fate has awaited all
subsequent efforts in the same direction. And still we continue our
coinage of silver at a ratio different from that of any other nation.
The most vital part of the silver-coinage act remains inoperative and
unexecuted, and without an ally or friend we battle upon the silver
field in an illogical and losing contest.

To give full effect to the design of Congress on this subject I have
made careful and earnest endeavor since the adjournment of the last
Congress.

To this end I delegated a gentleman well instructed in fiscal science
to proceed to the financial centers of Europe and, in conjunction
with our ministers to England, France, and Germany, to obtain a full
knowledge of the attitude and intent of those governments in respect of
the establishment of such an international ratio as would procure free
coinage of both metals at the mints of those countries and our own. By
my direction our consul-general at Paris has given close attention to
the proceedings of the congress of the Latin Union, in order to indicate
our interest in its objects and report its action.

It may be said in brief, as the result of these efforts, that the
attitude of the leading powers remains substantially unchanged since the
monetary conference of 1881, nor is it to be questioned that the views
of these governments are in each instance supported by the weight of
public opinion.

The steps thus taken have therefore only more fully demonstrated the
uselessness of further attempts at present to arrive at any agreement on
the subject with other nations.

In the meantime we are accumulating silver coin, based upon our own
peculiar ratio, to such an extent, and assuming so heavy a burden to be
provided for in any international negotiations, as will render us an
undesirable party to any future monetary conference of nations.

It is a significant fact that four of the five countries composing the
Latin Union mentioned in our coinage act, embarrassed with their silver
currency, have just completed an agreement among themselves that no more
silver shall be coined by their respective Governments and that such as
has been already coined and in circulation shall be redeemed in gold
by the country of its coinage. The resort to this expedient by these
countries may well arrest the attention of those who suppose that we
can succeed without shock or injury in the attempt to circulate upon
its merits all the silver we may coin under the provisions of our
silver-coinage act.

The condition in which our Treasury may be placed by a persistence in
our present course is a matter of concern to every patriotic citizen who
does not desire his Government to pay in silver such of its obligations
as should be paid in gold. Nor should our condition be such as to oblige
us, in a prudent management of our affairs, to discontinue the calling
in and payment of interest-bearing obligations which we have the right
now to discharge, and thus avoid the payment of further interest
thereon.

The so-called debtor class, for whose benefit the continued compulsory
coinage of silver is insisted upon, are not dishonest because they are
in debt, and they should not be suspected of a desire to jeopardize the
financial safety of the country in order that they may cancel their
present debts by paying the same in depreciated dollars. Nor should it
be forgotten that it is not the rich nor the money lender alone that
must submit to such a readjustment, enforced by the Government and their
debtors. The pittance of the widow and the orphan and the incomes of
helpless beneficiaries of all kinds would be disastrously reduced. The
depositors in savings banks and in other institutions which hold in
trust the savings of the poor, when their little accumulations are
scaled down to meet the new order of things, would in their distress
painfully realize the delusion of the promise made to them that
plentiful money would improve their condition.

We have now on hand all the silver dollars necessary to supply the
present needs of the people and to satisfy those who from sentiment wish
to see them in circulation, and if their coinage is suspended they can
be readily obtained by all who desire them. If the need of more is at
any time apparent, their coinage may be renewed.

That disaster has not already overtaken us furnishes no proof that
danger does not wait upon a continuation of the present silver coinage.
We have been saved by the most careful management and unusual
expedients, by a combination of fortunate conditions, and by a confident
expectation that the course of the Government in regard to silver
coinage would be speedily changed by the action of Congress.

Prosperity hesitates upon our threshold because of the dangers and
uncertainties surrounding this question. Capital timidly shrinks
from trade, and investors are unwilling to take the chance of the
questionable shape in which their money will be returned to them, while
enterprise halts at a risk against which care and sagacious management
do not protect.

As a necessary consequence, labor lacks employment and suffering and
distress are visited upon a portion of our fellow-citizens especially
entitled to the careful consideration of those charged with the duties
of legislation. No interest appeals to us so strongly for a safe and
stable currency as the vast army of the unemployed.

I recommend the suspension of the compulsory coinage of silver dollars,
directed by the law passed in February, 1878.

The Steamboat-Inspection Service on the 30th day of June, 1885, was
composed of 140 persons, including officers, clerks, and messengers. The
expenses of the service over the receipts were $138,822.22 during the
fiscal year. The special inspection of foreign steam vessels, organized
under a law passed in 1882, was maintained during the year at an expense
of $36,641.63. Since the close of the fiscal year reductions have been
made in the force employed which will result in a saving during the
current year of $17,000 without affecting the efficiency of the service.

The Supervising Surgeon-General reports that during the fiscal year
41,714 patients have received relief through the Marine-Hospital
Service, of whom 12,803 were treated in hospitals and 28,911 at the
dispensaries.

Active and effective efforts have been made through the medium of this
service to protect the country against an invasion of cholera, which has
prevailed in Spain and France, and the smallpox, which recently broke
out in Canada.

The most gratifying results have attended the operations of the
Life-Saving Service during the last fiscal year. The observance of the
provision of law requiring the appointment of the force employed in this
service to be made "solely with reference to their fitness, and without
reference to their political or party affiliation," has secured the
result which may confidently be expected in any branch of public
employment where such a rule is applied. As a consequence, this service
is composed of men well qualified for the performance of their dangerous
and exceptionally important duties.

The number of stations in commission at the close of the year was 203.
The number of disasters to vessels and craft of all kinds within their
field of action was 371. The number of persons endangered in such
disasters was 2,439, of whom 2,428 were saved and only 11 lost. Other
lives which were imperiled, though not by disasters to shipping, were
also rescued, and a large amount of property was saved through the aid
of this service. The cost of its maintenance during the year was
$828,474.43.

The work of the Coast and Geodetic Survey was during the last fiscal
year carried on within the boundaries and off the coasts of thirty-two
States, two Territories, and the District of Columbia. In July last
certain irregularities were found to exist in the management of this
Bureau, which led to a prompt investigation of its methods. The abuses
which were brought to light by this examination and the reckless
disregard of duty and the interests of the Government developed on
the part of some of those connected with the service made a change of
superintendency and a few of its other officers necessary. Since the
Bureau has been in new hands an introduction of economies and the
application of business methods have produced an important saving to
the Government and a promise of more useful results.

This service has never been regulated by anything but the most
indefinite legal enactments and the most unsatisfactory rules. It was
many years ago sanctioned apparently for a purpose regarded as temporary
and related to a survey of our coast. Having gained a place in the
appropriations made by Congress, it has gradually taken to itself powers
and objects not contemplated in its creation and extended its operations
until it sadly needs legislative attention.

So far as a further survey of our coast is concerned, there seems
to be a propriety in transferring that work to the Navy Department. The
other duties now in charge of this establishment, if they can not be
profitably attached to some existing Department or other bureau, should
be prosecuted under a law exactly defining their scope and purpose, and
with a careful discrimination between the scientific inquiries which may
properly be assumed by the Government and those which should be
undertaken by State authority or by individual enterprise.

It is hoped that the report of the Congressional committee heretofore
appointed to investigate this and other like matters will aid in the
accomplishment of proper legislation on this subject.

The report of the Secretary of War is herewith submitted. The attention
of Congress is invited to the detailed account which it contains of the
administration of his Department, and his recommendations and
suggestions for the improvement of the service.

The Army consisted, at the date of the last consolidated returns, of
2,154 officers and 24,705 enlisted men.

The expenses of the Departments for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1885,
including $13,164,394.60 for public works and river and harbor
improvements, were $45,850,999.54.

Besides the troops which were dispatched in pursuit of the small band of
Indians who left their reservation in Arizona and committed murders and
outrages, two regiments of cavalry and one of infantry were sent last
July to the Indian Territory to prevent an outbreak which seemed
imminent. They remained to aid, if necessary, in the expulsion of
intruders upon the reservation, who seemed to have caused the discontent
among the Indians, but the Executive proclamation[2] warning them to
remove was complied with without their interference.

Troops were also sent to Rock Springs, in Wyoming Territory, after the
massacre of Chinese there, to prevent further disturbance, and
afterwards to Seattle, in Washington Territory, to avert a threatened
attack upon Chinese laborers and domestic violence there. In both cases
the mere presence of the troops had the desired effect.

It appears that the number of desertions has diminished, but that during
the last fiscal year they numbered 2,927; and one instance is given by
the Lieutenant-General of six desertions by the same recruit. I am
convinced that this number of desertions can be much diminished by
better discipline and treatment; but the punishment should be increased
for repeated offenses.

These desertions might also be reduced by lessening the term of first
enlistments, thus allowing a discontented recruit to contemplate a
nearer discharge and the Army a profitable riddance. After one term of
service a reenlistment would be quite apt to secure a contented recruit
and a good soldier.

The Acting Judge-Advocate-General reports that the number of trials by
general courts-martial during the year was 2,328, and that 11,851 trials
took place before garrison and regimental courts-martial. The suggestion
that probably more than half the Army have been tried for offenses,
great and small, in one year may well arrest attention. Of course many
of these trials before garrison and regimental courts-martial were for
offenses almost frivolous, and there should, I think, be a way devised
to dispose of these in a more summary and less inconvenient manner than
by court-martial.

If some of the proceedings of courts-martial which I have had occasion
to examine present the ideas of justice which generally prevail in these
tribunals, I am satisfied that they should be much reformed if the honor
and the honesty of the Army and Navy are by their instrumentality to be
vindicated and protected.

The Board on Fortifications or other defenses, appointed in pursuance of
the provisions of the act of Congress approved March 3, 1885, will in a
short time present their report, and it is hoped that this may greatly
aid the legislation so necessary to remedy the present defenseless
condition of our seacoasts.

The work of the Signal Service has been prosecuted during the last
year with results of increasing benefit to the country. The field of
instruction has been enlarged with a view of adding to its usefulness.
The number of stations in operation June 30, 1885, was 489. Telegraphic
reports are received daily from 160 stations. Reports are also received
from 25 Canadian stations, 375 volunteer observers, 52 army surgeons at
military posts, and 333 foreign stations. The expense of the service
during the fiscal year, after deducting receipts from military telegraph
lines, was $792,592.97. In view of the fact referred to by the Secretary
of War, that the work of this service ordinarily is of a scientific
nature, and the further fact that it is assuming larger proportions
constantly and becoming more and more unsuited to the fixed rules which
must govern the Army, I am inclined to agree with him in the opinion
that it should be separately established. If this is done, the scope and
extent of its operations should, as nearly as possible, be definitely
prescribed by law and always capable of exact ascertainment.

The Military Academy at West Point is reported as being in a high state
of efficiency and well equipped for the satisfactory accomplishment of
the purposes of its maintenance.

The fact that the class which graduates next year is an unusually
large one has constrained me to decline to make appointments to second
lieutenancies in the Army from civil life, so that such vacancies as
exist in these places may be reserved for such graduates; and yet it is
not probable that there will be enough vacancies to provide positions
for them all when they leave the military school. Under the prevailing
law and usage those not thus assigned to duty never actively enter the
military service. It is suggested that the law on this subject be
changed so that such of these young men as are not at once assigned to
duty after graduation may be retained as second lieutenants in the Army
if they desire it, subject to assignment when opportunity occurs, and
under proper rules as to priority of selection.

The expenditures on account of the Military Academy for the last fiscal
year, exclusive of the sum taken for its purposes from appropriations
for the support of the Army, were $290,712.07.

The act approved March 3, 1885, designed to compensate officers and
enlisted men for loss of private property while in the service of the
United States, is so indefinite in its terms and apparently admits so
many claims the adjustment of which could not have been contemplated
that if it is to remain upon the statute book it needs amendment.

There should be a general law of Congress prohibiting the construction
of bridges over navigable waters in such manner as to obstruct
navigation, with provisions for preventing the same. It seems that under
existing statutes the Government can not intervene to prevent such a
construction when entered upon without its consent, though when such
consent is asked and granted upon condition the authority to insist upon
such condition is clear. Thus it is represented that while the officers
of the Government are with great care guarding against the obstruction
of navigation by a bridge across the Mississippi River at St. Paul a
large pier for a bridge has been built just below this place directly in
the navigable channel of the river. If such things are to be permitted,
a strong argument is presented against the appropriation of large sums
of money to improve the navigation of this and other important highways
of commerce.

The report of the Secretary of the Navy gives a history of the
operations of his Department and the present condition of the work
committed to his charge.

He details in full the course pursued by him to protect the rights of
the Government in respect of certain vessels unfinished at the time
of his accession to office, and also concerning the dispatch boat
_Dolphin_, claimed to be completed and awaiting the acceptance of
the Department. No one can fail to see from recitals contained in this
report that only the application of business principles has been
insisted upon in the treatment of these subjects, and that whatever
controversy has arisen was caused by the exaction on the part of the
Department of contract obligations as they were legally construed. In
the case of the _Dolphin_, with entire justice to the contractor,
an agreement has been entered into providing for the ascertainment by a
judicial inquiry of the complete or partial compliance with the contract
in her construction, and further providing for the assessment of any
damages to which the Government may be entitled on account of a partial
failure to perform such contract, or the payment of the sum still
remaining unpaid upon her price in case a full performance is adjudged.

The contractor, by reason of his failure in business, being unable to
complete the other three vessels, they were taken possession of by the
Government in their unfinished state under a clause in the contract
permitting such a course, and are now in process of completion in the
yard of the contractor, but under the supervision of the Navy
Department.

Congress at its last session authorized the construction of two
additional new cruisers and two gunboats, at a cost not exceeding in the
aggregate $2,995,000. The appropriation for this purpose having become
available on the 1st day of July last, steps were at once taken for the
procurement of such plans for the construction of these vessels as would
be likely to insure their usefulness when completed. These are of the
utmost importance, considering the constant advance in the art of
building vessels of this character, and the time is not lost which is
spent in their careful consideration and selection.

All must admit the importance of an effective navy to a nation like
ours, having such an extended seacoast to protect; and yet we have not
a single vessel of war that could keep the seas against a first-class
vessel of any important power. Such a condition ought not longer to
continue. The nation that can not resist aggression is constantly
exposed to it. Its foreign policy is of necessity weak and its
negotiations are conducted with disadvantage because it is not in
condition to enforce the terms dictated by its sense of right and
justice.

Inspired, as I am, by the hope, shared by all patriotic citizens, that
the day is not very far distant when our Navy will be such as befits our
standing among the nations of the earth, and rejoiced at every step that
leads in the direction of such a consummation, I deem it my duty to
especially direct the attention of Congress to the close of the report
of the Secretary of the Navy, in which the humiliating weakness of the
present organization of his Department is exhibited and the startling
abuses and waste of its present methods are exposed. The conviction is
forced upon us with the certainty of mathematical demonstration that
before we proceed further in the, restoration of a Navy we need a
thoroughly reorganized Navy Department. The fact that within seventeen
years more than $75,000,000 have been spent in the construction, repair,
equipment, and armament of vessels, and the further fact that instead
of an effective and creditable fleet we have only the discontent and
apprehension of a nation undefended by war vessels, added to the
disclosures now made, do not permit us to doubt that every attempt to
revive our Navy has thus far for the most part been misdirected, and
all our efforts in that direction have been little better than blind
gropings and expensive, aimless follies.

Unquestionably if we are content with the maintenance of a Navy
Department simply as a shabby ornament to the Government, a constant
watchfulness may prevent some of the scandal and abuse which have found
their way into our present organization, and its incurable waste may
be reduced to the minimum. But if we desire to build ships for present
usefulness instead of naval reminders of the days that are past, we must
have a Department organized for the work, supplied with all the talent
and ingenuity our country affords, prepared to take advantage of the
experience of other nations, systematized so that all effort shall
unite and lead in one direction, and fully imbued with the conviction
that war vessels, though new, are useless unless they combine all that
the ingenuity of man has up to this day brought forth relating to their
construction.

I earnestly commend the portion of the Secretary's report devoted
to this subject to the attention of Congress, in the hope that his
suggestions touching the reorganization of his Department may be adopted
as the first step toward the reconstruction of our Navy.

The affairs of the postal service are exhibited by the report of the
Postmaster-General, which will be laid before you.

The postal revenue, whose ratio of gain upon the rising prosperity
of 1882 and 1883 outstripped the increasing expenses of our growing
service, was checked by the reduction in the rate of letter postage
which took effect with the beginning of October in the latter year, and
it diminished during the two past fiscal years $2,790,000, in about the
proportion of $2,270,000 in 1884 to $520,000 in 1885. Natural growth
and development have meantime increased expenditure, resulting in a
deficiency in the revenue to meet the expenses of the Department of five
and a quarter million dollars for the year 1884 and eight and a third
million in the last fiscal year. The anticipated and natural revival of
the revenue has been oppressed and retarded by the unfavorable business
condition of the country, of which the postal service is a faithful
indicator. The gratifying fact is shown, however, by the report that our
returning prosperity is marked by a gain of $380,000 in the revenue of
the latter half of the last year over the corresponding period of the
preceding year.

The change in the weight of first-class matter which may be carried
for a single rate of postage from a half ounce to an ounce, and the
reduction by one-half of the rate of newspaper postage, which, under
recent legislation, began with the current year, will operate to
restrain the augmentation of receipts which otherwise might have been
expected to such a degree that the scale of expense may gain upon the
revenue and cause an increased deficiency to be shown at its close.
Yet, after no long period of reawakened prosperity, by proper economy
it is confidently anticipated that even the present low rates, now as
favorable as any country affords, will be adequate to sustain the cost
of the service.

The operation of the Post-Office Department is for the convenience
and benefit of the people, and the method by which they pay the charges
of this useful arm of their public service, so that it be just and
impartial, is of less importance to them than the economical expenditure
of the means they provide for its maintenance and the due improvement of
its agencies, so that they may enjoy its highest usefulness.

A proper attention has been directed to the prevention of waste or
extravagance, and good results appear from the report to have already
been accomplished.

I approve the recommendation of the Postmaster-General to reduce the
charges on domestic money orders of $5 and less from 8 to 5 cents. This
change will materially aid those of our people who most of all avail
themselves of this instrumentality, but to whom the element of cheapness
is of the greatest importance. With this reduction the system would
still remain self-supporting.

The free-delivery system has been extended to 19 additional cities
during the year, and 178 now enjoy its conveniences. Experience has
commended it to those who enjoy its benefits, and further enlargement
of its facilities is due to other communities to which it is adapted.
In the cities where it has been established, taken together, the local
postage exceeds its maintenance by nearly $1,300,000. The limit to which
this system is now confined by law has been nearly reached, and the
reasons given justify its extension, which is proposed.

It was decided, with my approbation, after a sufficient examination, to
be inexpedient for the Post-Office Department to contract for carrying
our foreign mails under the additional authority given by the last
Congress. The amount limited was inadequate to pay all within the
purview of the law the full rate of 50 cents per mile, and it would have
been unjust and unwise to have given it to some and denied it to others.
Nor could contracts have been let under the law to all at a rate to have
brought the aggregate within the appropriation without such practical
prearrangement of terms as would have violated it.

The rate of sea and inland postage which was proffered under another
statute clearly appears to be a fair compensation for the desired
service, being three times the price necessary to secure transportation
by other vessels upon any route, and much beyond the charges made to
private persons for services not less burdensome.

Some of the steamship companies, upon the refusal of the
Postmaster-General to attempt, by the means provided, the distribution
of the sum appropriated as an extra compensation, withdrew the services
of their vessels and thereby occasioned slight inconvenience, though no
considerable injury, the mails having been dispatched by other means.

Whatever may be thought of the policy of subsidizing any line of public
conveyance or travel, I am satisfied that it should not be done under
cover of an expenditure incident to the administration of a Department,
nor should there be any uncertainty as to the recipients of the subsidy
or any discretion left to an executive officer as to its distribution.
If such gifts of the public money are to be made for the purpose of
aiding any enterprise in the supposed interest of the public, I can not
but think that the amount to be paid and the beneficiary might better be
determined by Congress than in any other way.

The international congress of delegates from the Postal Union countries
convened at Lisbon, in Portugal, in February last, and after a session
of some weeks the delegates signed a convention amendatory of the
present postal-union convention in some particulars designed to advance
its purposes. This additional act has had my approval and will be laid
before you with the departmental report.

I approve the recommendation of the Postmaster-General that another
assistant be provided for his Department. I invite your consideration to
the several other recommendations contained in his report.

The report of the Attorney-General contains a history of the conduct of
the Department of Justice during the last year and a number of valuable
suggestions as to needed legislation, and I invite your careful
attention to the same.

The condition of business in the courts of the United States is such
that there seems to be an imperative necessity for remedial legislation
on the subject. Some of these courts are so overburdened with pending
causes that the delays in determining litigation amount often to a
denial of justice. Among the plans suggested for relief is one submitted
by the Attorney-General. Its main features are: The transfer of all the
original jurisdiction of the circuit courts to the district courts and
an increase of judges for the latter where necessary; an addition of
judges to the circuit courts, and constituting them exclusively courts
of appeal, and reasonably limiting appeals thereto; further restrictions
of the right to remove causes from the State to Federal courts;
permitting appeals to the Supreme Court from the courts of the District
of Columbia and the Territories only in the same cases as they are
allowed from State courts, and guarding against an unnecessary number of
appeals from the circuit courts.

I approve the plan thus outlined, and recommend the legislation
necessary for its application to our judicial system.

The present mode of compensating United States marshals and district
attorneys should, in my opinion, be changed. They are allowed to charge
against the Government certain fees for services, their income being
measured by the amount of such fees within a fixed limit as to their
annual aggregate. This is a direct inducement for them to make their
fees in criminal cases as large as possible in an effort to reach the
maximum sum permitted. As an entirely natural consequence, unscrupulous
marshals are found encouraging frivolous prosecutions, arresting people
on petty charges of crime and transporting them to distant places for
examination and trial, for the purpose of earning mileage and other
fees; and district attorneys uselessly attend criminal examinations far
from their places of residence for the express purpose of swelling their
accounts against the Government. The actual expenses incurred in these
transactions are also charged against the Government.

Thus the rights and freedom of our citizens are outraged and public
expenditures increased for the purpose of furnishing public officers
pretexts for increasing the measure of their compensation.

I think marshals and district attorneys should be paid salaries,
adjusted by a rule which will make them commensurate with services
fairly rendered.

In connection with this subject I desire to suggest the advisability,
if it be found not obnoxious to constitutional objection, of investing
United States commissioners with the power to try and determine certain
violations of law within the grade of misdemeanors. Such trials might
be made to depend upon the option of the accused. The multiplication
of small and technical offenses, especially under the provisions of our
internal-revenue law, render some change in our present system very
desirable in the interests of humanity as well as economy. The district
courts are now crowded with petty prosecutions, involving a punishment
in case of conviction, of only a slight fine, while the parties accused
are harassed by an enforced attendance upon courts held hundreds of
miles from their homes. If poor and friendless, they are obliged to
remain in jail during months, perhaps, that elapse before a session
of the court is held, and are finally brought to trial surrounded by
strangers and with but little real opportunity for defense. In the
meantime frequently the marshal has charged against the Government his
fees for an arrest, the transportation of the accused and the expense
of the same, and for summoning witnesses before a commissioner, a grand
jury, and a court; the witnesses have been paid from the public funds
large fees and traveling expenses, and the commissioner and district
attorney have also made their charges against the Government.

This abuse in the administration of our criminal law should be remedied;
and if the plan above suggested is not practicable, some other should be
devised.

The report of the Secretary of the Interior, containing an account of
the operations of this important Department and much interesting
information, will be submitted for your consideration.

The most intricate and difficult subject in charge of this Department is
the treatment and management of the Indians. I am satisfied that some
progress may be noted in their condition as a result of a prudent
administration of the present laws and regulations for their control.

But it is submitted that there is lack of a fixed purpose or policy on
this subject, which should be supplied. It is useless to dilate upon the
wrongs of the Indians, and as useless to indulge in the heartless belief
that because their wrongs are revenged in their own atrocious manner,
therefore they should be exterminated.

They are within the care of our Government, and their rights are, or
should be, protected from invasion by the most solemn obligations. They
are properly enough called the wards of the Government; and it should be
borne in mind that this guardianship involves on our part efforts for
the improvement of their condition and the enforcement of their rights.
There seems to be general concurrence in the proposition that the
ultimate object of their treatment should be their civilization and
citizenship. Fitted by these to keep pace in the march of progress with
the advanced civilization about them, they will readily assimilate with
the mass of our population, assuming the responsibilities and receiving
the protection incident to this condition.

The difficulty appears to be in the selection of the means to be at
present employed toward the attainment of this result.

Our Indian population, exclusive of those in Alaska, is reported as
numbering 260,000, nearly all being located on lands set apart for their
use and occupation, aggregating over 134,000,000 acres. These lands are
included in the boundaries of 171 reservations of different dimensions,
scattered in 21 States and Territories, presenting great variations in
climate and in the kind and quality of their soils. Among the Indians
upon these several reservations there exist the most marked differences
in natural traits and disposition and in their progress toward
civilization. While some are lazy, vicious, and stupid, others are
industrious, peaceful, and intelligent; while a portion of them are
self-supporting and independent, and have so far advanced in
civilization that they make their own laws, administered through
officers of their own choice, and educate their children in schools of
their own establishment and maintenance, others still retain, in squalor
and dependence, almost the savagery of their natural state.

In dealing with this question the desires manifested by the Indians
should not be ignored. Here again we find a great diversity. With some
the tribal relation is cherished with the utmost tenacity, while its
hold upon others is considerably relaxed; the love of home is strong
with all, and yet there are those whose attachment to a particular
locality is by no means unyielding; the ownership of their lands in
severalty is much desired by some, while by others, and sometimes among
the most civilized, such a distribution would be bitterly opposed.

The variation of their wants, growing out of and connected with the
character of their several locations, should be regarded. Some are upon
reservations most fit for grazing, but without flocks or herds; and
some, on arable land, have no agricultural implements. While some of the
reservations are double the size necessary to maintain the number of
Indians now upon them, in a few cases, perhaps, they should be enlarged.

Add to all this the difference in the administration of the agencies.
While the same duties are devolved upon all, the disposition of the
agents and the manner of their contact with the Indians have much to do
with their condition and welfare. The agent who perfunctorily performs
his duty and slothfully neglects all opportunity to advance their moral
and physical improvement and fails to inspire them with a desire for
better things will accomplish nothing in the direction of their
civilization, while he who feels the burden of an important trust and
has an interest in his work will, by consistent example, firm yet
considerate treatment, and well-directed aid and encouragement,
constantly lead those under his charge toward the light of their
enfranchisement.

The history of all the progress which has been made in the civilization
of the Indian I think will disclose the fact that the beginning has been
religious teaching, followed by or accompanying secular education. While
the self-sacrificing and pious men and women who have aided in this good
work by their independent endeavor have for their reward the beneficent
results of their labor and the consciousness of Christian duty well
performed, their valuable services should be fully acknowledged by all
who under the law are charged with the control and management of our
Indian wards.

What has been said indicates that in the present condition of the
Indians no attempt should be made to apply a fixed and unyielding plan
of action to their varied and varying needs and circumstances.

The Indian Bureau, burdened as it is with their general oversight and
with the details of the establishment, can hardly possess itself of the
minute phases of the particular cases needing treatment; and thus the
propriety of creating an instrumentality auxiliary to those already
established for the care of the Indians suggests itself.

I recommend the passage of a law authorizing the appointment of six
commissioners, three of whom shall be detailed from the Army, to be
charged with the duty of a careful inspection from time to time of all
the Indians upon our reservations or subject to the care and control
of the Government, with a view of discovering their exact condition
and needs and determining what steps shall be taken on behalf of the
Government to improve their situation in the direction of their
self-support and complete civilization; that they ascertain from such
inspection what, if any, of the reservations may be reduced in area,
and in such cases what part not needed for Indian occupation may be
purchased by the Government from the Indians and disposed of for their
benefit; what, if any, Indians may, with their consent, be removed to
other reservations, with a view of their concentration and the sale on
their behalf of their abandoned reservations; what Indian lands now
held in common should be allotted in severalty; in what manner and to
what extent the Indians upon the reservations can be placed under the
protection of our laws and subjected to their penalties, and which,
if any, Indians should be invested with the right of citizenship. The
powers and functions of the commissioners in regard to these subjects
should be clearly defined, though they should, in conjunction with the
Secretary of the Interior, be given all the authority to deal definitely
with the questions presented deemed safe and consistent.

They should be also charged with the duty of ascertaining the Indians
who might properly be furnished with implements of agriculture, and
of what kind; in what cases the support of the Government should be
withdrawn; where the present plan of distributing Indian supplies should
be changed; where schools may be established and where discontinued;
the conduct, methods, and fitness of agents in charge of reservations;
the extent to which such reservations are occupied or intruded upon by
unauthorized persons, and generally all matters related to the welfare
and improvement of the Indian.

They should advise with the Secretary of the Interior concerning these
matters of detail in management, and he should be given power to deal
with them fully, if he is not now invested with such power.

This plan contemplates the selection of persons for commissioners who
are interested in the Indian question and who have practical ideas upon
the subject of their treatment.

The expense of the Indian Bureau during the last fiscal year was more
than six and a half million dollars. I believe much of this expenditure
might be saved under the plan proposed; that its economical effects
would be increased with its continuance; that the safety of our frontier
settlers would be subserved under its operation, and that the nation
would be saved through its results from the imputation of inhumanity,
injustice, and mismanagement.

In order to carry out the policy of allotment of Indian lands in
severalty, when deemed expedient, it will be necessary to have surveys
completed of the reservations, and I hope that provision will be made
for the prosecution of this work.

In May of the present year a small portion of the Chiricahua Apaches on
the White Mountain Reservation, in Arizona, left the reservation and
committed a number of murders and depredations upon settlers in that
neighborhood. Though prompt and energetic action was taken by the
military, the renegades eluded capture and escaped into Mexico. The
formation of the country through which these Indians passed, their
thorough acquaintance with the same, the speed of their escape, and
the manner in which they scattered and concealed themselves among the
mountains near the scene of their outrages put our soldiers at a great
disadvantage in their efforts to capture them, though the expectation is
still entertained that they will be ultimately taken and punished for
their crimes.

The threatening and disorderly conduct of the Cheyennes in the Indian
Territory early last summer caused considerable alarm and uneasiness.
Investigation proved that their threatening attitude was due in a great
measure to the occupation of the land of their reservation by immense
herds of cattle, which their owners claimed were rightfully there under
certain leases made by the Indians. Such occupation appearing upon
examination to be unlawful notwithstanding these leases, the intruders
were ordered to remove with their cattle from the lands of the Indians
by Executive proclamation.[3] The enforcement of this proclamation had
the effect of restoring peace and order among the Indians, and they are
now quiet and well behaved.

By an Executive order issued on February 27, 1885, by my predecessor,
a portion of the tract of country in the territory known as the Old
Winnebago and Crow Creek reservations was directed to be restored to
the public domain and opened to settlement under the land laws of the
United States, and a large number of persons entered upon those lands.
This action alarmed the Sioux Indians, who claimed the territory as
belonging to their reservation under the treaty of 1868. This claim
was determined, after careful investigation, to be well founded, and
consequently the Executive order referred to was by proclamation of
April 17, 1885,[4] declared to be inoperative and of no effect, and
all persons upon the land were warned to leave. This warning has been
substantially complied with.

The public domain had its origin in cessions of land by the States to
the General Government. The first cession was made by the State of New
York, and the largest, which in area exceeded all the others, by the
State of Virginia. The territory the proprietorship of which became
thus vested in the General Government extended from the western line of
Pennsylvania to the Mississippi River. These patriotic donations of the
States were encumbered with no condition except that they should be held
and used "for the common benefit of the United States." By purchase with
the common fund of all the people additions were made to this domain
until it extended to the northern line of Mexico, the Pacific Ocean, and
the Polar Sea. The original trust, "for the common benefit of the United
States," attached to all. In the execution of that trust the policy of
many homes, rather than large estates, was adopted by the Government.
That these might be easily obtained, and be the abode of security and
contentment, the laws for their acquisition were few, easily understood,
and general in their character. But the pressure of local interests,
combined with a speculative spirit, have in many instances procured
the passage of laws which marred the harmony of the general plan and
encumbered the system with a multitude of general and special enactments
which render the land laws complicated, subject the titles to
uncertainty, and the purchasers often to oppression and wrong. Laws
which were intended for the "common benefit" have been perverted so
that large quantities of land are vesting in single ownerships. From
the multitude and character of the laws, this consequence seems incapable
of correction by mere administration.

It is not for the "common benefit of the United States" that a large
area of the public lands should be acquired, directly or through fraud,
in the hands of a single individual. The nation's strength is in the
people. The nation's prosperity is in their prosperity. The nation's
glory is in the equality of her justice. The nation's perpetuity is in
the patriotism of all her people. Hence, as far as practicable, the plan
adopted in the disposal of the public lands should have in view the
original policy, which encouraged many purchasers of these lands for
homes and discouraged the massing of large areas. Exclusive of Alaska,
about three-fifths of the national domain has been sold or subjected to
contract or grant. Of the remaining two-fifths a considerable portion is
either mountain or desert. A rapidly increasing population creates a
growing demand for homes, and the accumulation of wealth inspires an
eager competition to obtain the public land for speculative purposes.
In the future this collision of interests will be more marked than in
the past, and the execution of the nation's trust in behalf of our
settlers will be more difficult. I therefore commend to your attention
the recommendations contained in the report of the Secretary of the
Interior with reference to the repeal and modification of certain of our
land laws.

The nation has made princely grants and subsidies to a system of
railroads projected as great national highways to connect the Pacific
States with the East. It has been charged that these donations from the
people have been diverted to private gain and corrupt uses, and thus
public indignation has been aroused and suspicion engendered. Our great
nation does not begrudge its generosity, but it abhors peculation and
fraud; and the favorable regard of our people for the great corporations
to which these grants were made can only be revived by a restoration of
confidence, to be secured by their constant, unequivocal, and clearly
manifested integrity. A faithful application of the undiminished
proceeds of the grants to the construction and perfecting of their
roads, an honest discharge of their obligations, and entire justice to
all the people in the enjoyment of their rights on these highways of
travel are all the public asks, and it will be content with no less. To
secure these things should be the common purpose of the officers of the
Government, as well as of the corporations. With this accomplishment
prosperity would be permanently secured to the roads, and national pride
would take the place of national complaint.

It appears from the report of the Commissioner of Pensions that there
were on the 1st day of July, 1885, 345,125 persons borne upon the
pension rolls, who were classified as follows: Army invalids, 241,456;
widows, minor children, and dependent relatives of deceased soldiers,
78,841; navy invalids, 2,745; navy widows, minor children, and
dependents, 1,926; survivors of the War of 1812, 2,945; and widows of
those who served in that war, 17,212. About one man in ten of all those
who enlisted in the late war are reported as receiving pensions,
exclusive of the dependents of deceased soldiers. On the 1st of July,
1875, the number of pensioners was 234,821, and the increase within the
ten years next thereafter was 110,304.

While there is no expenditure of the public funds which the people more
cheerfully approve than that made in recognition of the services of our
soldiers living and dead, the sentiment underlying the subject should
not be vitiated by the introduction of any fraudulent practices.
Therefore it is fully as important that the rolls should be cleansed of
all those who by fraud have secured a place thereon as that meritorious
claims should be speedily examined and adjusted. The reforms in the
methods of doing the business of this Bureau which have lately been
inaugurated promise better results in both these directions.

The operations of the Patent Office demonstrate the activity of the
inventive genius of the country. For the year ended June 30, 1885, the
applications for patents, including reissues, and for the registration
of trade-marks and labels, numbered 35,688. During the same period there
were 22,928 patents granted and reissued and 1,429 trade-marks and
labels registered. The number of patents issued in the year 1875 was
14,387. The receipts during the last fiscal year were $1,074,974.35, and
the total expenditures, not including contingent expenses, $934,123.11.

There were 9,788 applications for patents pending on the 1st day of
July, 1884, and 5,786 on the same date in the year 1885. There has been
considerable improvement made in the prompt determination of
applications and a consequent relief to expectant inventors.

A number of suggestions and recommendations are contained in the report
of the Commissioner of Patents which are well entitled to the
consideration of Congress.

In the Territory of Utah the law of the United States passed for the
suppression of polygamy has been energetically and faithfully executed
during the past year, with measurably good results. A number of
convictions have been secured for unlawful cohabitation, and in some
cases pleas of guilty have been entered and a slight punishment imposed,
upon a promise by the accused that they would not again offend against
the law, nor advise, counsel, aid, or abet in any way its violation by
others.

The Utah commissioners express the opinion, based upon such information
as they are able to obtain, that but few polygamous marriages have taken
place in the Territory during the last year. They further report that
while there can not be found upon the registration lists of voters the
name of a man actually guilty of polygamy, and while none of that class
are holding office, yet at the last election in the Territory all the
officers elected, except in one county, were men who, though not
actually living in the practice of polygamy, subscribe to the doctrine
of polygamous marriages as a divine revelation and a law unto all
higher and more binding upon the conscience than any human law, local
or national. Thus is the strange spectacle presented of a community
protected by a republican form of government, to which they owe
allegiance, sustaining by their suffrages a principle and a belief which
set at naught that obligation of absolute obedience to the law of the
land which lies at the foundation of republican institutions.

The strength, the perpetuity, and the destiny of the nation rest upon
our homes, established by the law of God, guarded by parental care,
regulated by parental authority, and sanctified by parental love.

These are not the homes of polygamy.

The mothers of our land, who rule the nation as they mold the characters
and guide the actions of their sons, live according to God's holy
ordinances, and each, secure and happy in the exclusive love of the
father of her children, sheds the warm light of true womanhood,
unperverted and unpolluted, upon all within her pure and wholesome
family circle.

These are not the cheerless, crushed, and unwomanly mothers of polygamy.

The fathers of our families are the best citizens of the Republic. Wife
and children are the sources of patriotism, and conjugal and parental
affection beget devotion to the country. The man who, undefiled with
plural marriage, is surrounded in his single home with his wife and
children has a stake in the country which inspires him with respect for
its laws and courage for its defense.

These are not the fathers of polygamous families.

There is no feature of this practice or the system which sanctions it
which is not opposed to all that is of value in our institutions.

There should be no relaxation in the firm but just execution of the law
now in operation, and I should be glad to approve such further discreet
legislation as will rid the country of this blot upon its fair fame.

Since the people upholding polygamy in our Territories are reenforced
by immigration from other lands, I recommend that a law be passed to
prevent the importation of Mormons into the country.

The agricultural interest of the country demands just recognition and
liberal encouragement. It sustains with certainty and unfailing strength
our nation's prosperity by the products of its steady toil, and bears
its full share of the burden of taxation without complaint. Our
agriculturists have but slight personal representation in the councils
of the nation, and are generally content with the humbler duties of
citizenship and willing to trust to the bounty of nature for a reward of
their labor. But the magnitude and value of this industry are
appreciated when the statement is made that of our total annual exports
more than three-fourths are the products of agriculture, and of our
total population nearly one-half are exclusively engaged in that
occupation.

The Department of Agriculture was created for the purpose of
acquiring and diffusing among the people useful information respecting
the subjects it has in charge, and aiding in the cause of intelligent
and progressive farming, by the collection of statistics, by testing
the value and usefulness of new seeds and plants, and distributing
such as are found desirable among agriculturists. This and other
powers and duties with which this Department is invested are of the
utmost importance, and if wisely exercised must be of great benefit to
the country. The aim of our beneficent Government is the improvement of
the people in every station and the amelioration of their condition.
Surely our agriculturists should not be neglected. The instrumentality
established in aid of the farmers of the land should not only be well
equipped for the accomplishment of its purpose, but those for whose
benefit it has been adopted should be encouraged to avail themselves
fully of its advantages.

The prohibition of the importation into several countries of certain of
our animals and their products, based upon the suspicion that health is
endangered in their use and consumption, suggests the importance of such
precautions for the protection of our stock of all kinds against disease
as will disarm suspicion of danger and cause the removal of such an
injurious prohibition.

If the laws now in operation are insufficient to accomplish this
protection, I recommend their amendment to meet the necessities of
the situation; and I commend to the consideration of Congress the
suggestions contained in the report of the Commissioner of Agriculture
calculated to increase the value and efficiency of this Department.

The report of the Civil Service Commission, which will be submitted,
contains an account of the manner in which the civil-service law has
been executed during the last year and much valuable information on this
important subject.

I am inclined to think that there is no sentiment more general in the
minds of the people of our country than a conviction of the correctness
of the principle upon which the law enforcing civil-service reform is
based. In its present condition the law regulates only a part of the
subordinate public positions throughout the country. It applies the test
of fitness to applicants for these places by means of a competitive
examination, and gives large discretion to the Commissioners as to the
character of the examination and many other matters connected with its
execution. Thus the rules and regulations adopted by the Commission have
much to do with the practical usefulness of the statute and with the
results of its application.

The people may well trust the Commission to execute the law with perfect
fairness and with as little irritation as is possible. But of course no
relaxation of the principle which underlies it and no weakening of the
safeguards which surround it can be expected. Experience in its
administration will probably suggest amendment of the methods of its
execution, but I venture to hope that we shall never again be remitted
to the system which distributes public positions purely as rewards for
partisan service. Doubts may well be entertained whether our Government
could survive the strain of a continuance of this system, which upon
every change of Administration inspires an immense army of claimants for
office to lay siege to the patronage of Government, engrossing the time
of public officers with their importunities, spreading abroad the
contagion of their disappointment, and filling the air with the tumult
of their discontent.

The allurements of an immense number of offices and places exhibited to
the voters of the land, and the promise of their bestowal in recognition
of partisan activity, debauch the suffrage and rob political action of
its thoughtful and deliberative character. The evil would increase with
the multiplication of offices consequent upon our extension, and the
mania for office holding, growing from its indulgence, would pervade
our population so generally that patriotic purpose, the support of
principle, the desire for the public good, and solicitude for the
nation's welfare would be nearly banished from the activity of our
party contests and cause them to degenerate into ignoble, selfish, and
disgraceful struggles for the possession of office and public place.

Civil-service reform enforced by law came none too soon to check the
progress of demoralization.

One of its effects, not enough regarded, is the freedom it brings to the
political action of those conservative and sober men who, in fear of the
confusion and risk attending an arbitrary and sudden change in all the
public offices with a change of party rule, cast their ballots against
such a chance.

Parties seem to be necessary, and will long continue to exist; nor can
it be now denied that there are legitimate advantages, not disconnected
with office holding, which follow party supremacy. While partisanship
continues bitter and pronounced and supplies so much of motive to
sentiment and action, it is not fair to hold public officials in charge
of important trusts responsible for the best results in the performance
of their duties, and yet insist that they shall rely in confidential and
important places upon the work of those not only opposed to them in
political affiliation, but so steeped in partisan prejudice and rancor
that they have no loyalty to their chiefs and no desire for their
success. Civil-service reform does not exact this, nor does it require
that those in subordinate positions who fail in yielding their best
service or who are incompetent should be retained simply because they
are in place. The whining of a clerk discharged for indolence or
incompetency, who, though he gained his place by the worst possible
operation of the spoils system, suddenly discovers that he is entitled
to protection under the sanction of civil-service reform, represents an
idea no less absurd than the clamor of the applicant who claims the
vacant position as his compensation for the most questionable party
work.

The civil-service law does not prevent the discharge of the indolent
or incompetent clerk, but it does prevent supplying his place with the
unfit party worker. Thus in both these phases is seen benefit to the
public service. And the people who desire good government, having
secured this statute, will not relinquish its benefits without protest.
Nor are they unmindful of the fact that its full advantages can only be
gained through the complete good faith of those having its execution in
charge. And this they will insist upon.

I recommend that the salaries of the Civil Service Commissioners be
increased to a sum more nearly commensurate to their important duties.

It is a source of considerable and not unnatural discontent that no
adequate provision has yet been made for accommodating the principal
library of the Government. Of the vast collection of books and
pamphlets gathered at the Capitol, numbering some 700,000, exclusive of
manuscripts, maps, and the products of the graphic arts, also of great
volume and value, only about 300,000 volumes, or less than half the
collection, are provided with shelf room. The others, which are
increasing at the rate of from twenty-five to thirty thousand volumes
a year, are not only inaccessible to the public, but are subject to
serious damage and deterioration from other causes in their present
situation.

A consideration of the facts that the library of the Capitol has twice
been destroyed or damaged by fire, its daily increasing value, and its
importance as a place of deposit of books under the law relating to
copyright makes manifest the necessity of prompt action to insure its
proper accommodation and protection.

My attention has been called to a controversy which has arisen from the
condition of the law relating to railroad facilities in the city of
Washington, which has involved the Commissioners of the District in much
annoyance and trouble. I hope this difficulty will be promptly settled
by appropriate legislation.

The Commissioners represent that enough of the revenues of the District
are now on deposit in the Treasury of the United States to repay the sum
advanced by the Government for sewer improvements under the act of June
30, 1884. They desire now an advance of the share which ultimately
should be borne by the District of the cost of extensive improvements
to the streets of the city. The total expense of these contemplated
improvements is estimated at $1,000,000, and they are of the opinion
that a considerable sum could be saved if they had all the money in
hand, so that contracts for the whole work could be made at the same
time. They express confidence that if the advance asked for should be
made the Government would be reimbursed the same within a reasonable
time. I have no doubt that these improvements could be made much cheaper
if undertaken together and prosecuted according to a general plan.

The license law now in force within the District is deficient and
uncertain in some of its provisions and ought to be amended. The
Commissioners urge, with good reason, the necessity of providing a
building for the use of the District government which shall better
secure the safety and preservation of its valuable books and records.

The present condition of the law relating to the succession to the
Presidency in the event of the death, disability, or removal of both the
President and Vice-President is such as to require immediate amendment.
This subject has repeatedly been considered by Congress, but no result
has been reached. The recent lamentable death of the Vice-President, and
vacancies at the same time in all other offices the incumbents of which
might immediately exercise the functions of the Presidential office, has
caused public anxiety and a just demand that a recurrence of such a
condition of affairs should not be permitted.

In conclusion I commend to the wise care and thoughtful attention of
Congress the needs, the welfare, and the aspirations of an intelligent
and generous nation. To subordinate these to the narrow advantages of
partisanship or the accomplishment of selfish aims is to violate the
people's trust and betray the people's interests; but an individual
sense of responsibility on the part of each of us and a stern
determination to perform our duty well must give us place among those
who have added in their day and generation to the glory and prosperity
of our beloved land.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

[Footnote 2: See pp. 303-304.]

[Footnote 3: See pp. 224-225.]

[Footnote 4: See pp. 305-307.]

SPECIAL MESSAGES.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, December 14, 1885_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In response to the resolution of the Senate of the 9th instant, calling
for the correspondence on file in relation to the appointment of Mr.
A.M. Keiley as envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary, first
to the Government of Italy and then to that of Austria-Hungary, I
transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State, with
accompanying papers.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 14, 1885_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of 10th instant from the Secretary
of the Interior, inclosing a report from the Commissioner of Indian
Affairs upon the subject of the condition of the Northern Cheyenne
Indians upon the Rosebud and Tongue rivers, in Montana, the inadequacy
of the appropriation made for their support during the current fiscal
year, and requesting legislative authority for the use of certain funds
indicated for their relief.

The proposed legislation does not involve any additional appropriation,
and the necessity for the authority requested is urgent. I therefore
recommend the matter to the early and favorable consideration and action
of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, December 14, 1885_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit to the Senate, for its consideration with a view to
ratification, a convention between the United States and Venezuela for
the reopening of the claims of citizens of the United States against
that Government under the treaty of April 25, 1866, signed on the 5th
instant.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, December 14, 1885_.

_To the Senate_:

I transmit, for the consideration of the Senate with a view to
ratification, an additional article, signed the 5th instant, extending
for a period of eighteen months from the date of the exchange of
ratifications of the same the provisions of Article VIII of the
convention of July 29, 1882, between the United States and Mexico, in
regard to the resurvey of the boundary line, a copy of which convention
is herewith inclosed.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, December 21, 1885_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I nominate James P. Kimball, of Pennsylvania, to be Director of the
Mint, in place of Horatio C. Burchard, removed; and the reasons for such
removal are herewith communicated to the Senate, pursuant to the statute
in such case made and provided.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 21, 1885_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In the matter of the removal of Horatio C. }
Burchard as Director of the Mint. }

In conformity to section 343 of the Revised Statutes of the United
States, the following is respectfully communicated to the Senate as
reasons of the removal above referred to:

The Director of the Mint is the head of one of the most important of the
bureaus of the Treasury Department, to which are attached duties of a
highly technical and varied nature.

By the express terms of the law creating the office the incumbent is
"under the direction of the Secretary of the Treasury."

This last-named officer, under whose direction Mr. Burchard was thus
placed, reported to me that his mode of conducting the business of the
office was unsatisfactory and inefficient and that the public interest
required a change.

And therefore I removed Mr. Burchard and appointed Mr. Kimball in his
place, believing him to possess especial qualifications for the proper
administration of the important duties involved.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 21, 1885_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 17th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft
of a bill granting a right of way to the Jamestown and Northern Railroad
Company through the Devils Lake Indian Reservation, in the Territory of
Dakota.

The matter is presented for the consideration and action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 21, 1885_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 15th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers upon the
subject, a draft of a bill to amend section 2148 of the Revised Statutes
of the United States, relating to trespasses upon Indian lands.

The subject is one of great importance, and is commended to the early
and favorable action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 21, 1885_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report, together with accompanying documents, made
to me by the board of management of the World's Industrial and Cotton
Centennial Exposition, held at New Orleans from December 16, 1884, to
May 31, 1885.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 21, 1885_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 17th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft
of a bill to accept and ratify an agreement made by the Pi-Ute Indians,
and granting a right of way to the Carson and Colorado Railroad Company
through the Walker River Reservation, in Nevada.

The matter is presented for the consideration and action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 21, 1885_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 17th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a
report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs concerning the failure of
the Utah and Northern Railroad Company to compensate the Indians upon
the Fort Hall Reservation, in Idaho, for lands taken and used in
construction of their line of road crossing the reservation from north
to south.

The subject is recommended to the early attention and action of
Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 21, 1885_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 15th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers upon the
subject, a draft of a bill "to provide for the settlement of the estates
of deceased Kickapoo Indians in the State of Kansas, and for other
purposes."

The matter is presented for the favorable consideration of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 21, 1885_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 15th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers upon the
subject, a draft of a bill for the relief of the Mission Indians in
California.

The subject is presented for the action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 21, 1885_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 17th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft
of a bill to accept and ratify an agreement made by the Sisseton and
Wahpeton Indians, and to grant a right of way for the Chicago, Milwaukee
and St. Paul Railway through the Lake Traverse Reservation, in Dakota.
The subject is presented for the consideration and action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 21, 1885_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 15th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers on the
subject, a draft of a bill to amend section 5388 of the Revised Statutes
of the United States, relating to timber depredations upon lands
reserved or purchased for military, Indian, or other purposes, etc.

This is an important subject, and is commended to the early attention of
Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 21, 1885_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 15th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft
of a bill to accept and ratify an agreement made with the confederated
tribes and bands of Indians occupying the Yakima Reservation, in
Washington Territory, for the right of way of the Northern Pacific
Railroad across said reservation, etc.

The matter is presented for the consideration and action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 5, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 19th ultimo from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers in
relation thereto, a draft of a bill "to provide for allotments of lands
in severalty to the Indians residing upon the Round Valley Reservation,
in the State of California, and granting patents therefor, and for other
purposes."

The matter is presented for the early consideration and action of
Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 7, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I transmit herewith, in response to a resolution of the Senate of the
9th ultimo, a report of the Secretary of State, in answer to the request
for any documents or information received from our consul-general at
Paris or from the special agent sent to the financial centers of Europe
in respect to the establishment of an international ratio of gold and
silver coinage as would procure the free coinage of both metals at the
mints of those countries and our own.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 12, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

In continuation of the message of my predecessor of the 13th of February
last, I now transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of State,
which is accompanied by the final report of the commissioners appointed
under the act of July 7, 1884, to visit the States of Central and South
America.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 12, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 2d instant from the Secretary
of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft of a bill
to amend section 9 of the act of March 3, 1885, relating to the trial
and punishment of Indians committing certain specified crimes.

The subject is presented for the consideration and action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 12, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State, in response to a
resolution of the Senate of the 14th ultimo, requesting a copy of "any
report of an actual instrumental survey of a line for a ship railroad
across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec and any map of the same that has been
made to or placed on file in any of the Executive Departments, and of
any canal or canals designed to connect such ship railway with the Gulf
of Mexico or the Pacific Ocean."

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 12, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith a communication from the Secretary of State,
accompanied by a report of Hon. James O. Broadhead and Somerville P.
Tuck, appointed to carry out certain of the provisions of section 5 of
an act entitled "An act to provide for the ascertainment of claims of
American citizens for spoliations committed by the French prior to the
31st day of July, 1801," approved January 20, 1885.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 12, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I transmit herewith, in response to a resolution of the Senate of the
5th instant, a report of the Secretary of State, containing all the
correspondence and information in the custody of his Department relative
to the extension of certain fishing rights and privileges under the
treaty of Washington from July 1, 1885, to January 1, 1886.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 25, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of State, which is
accompanied by the report of the United States Electrical Commission of
the proceedings of the National Conference of Electricians held at the
city of Philadelphia in the month of September, 1884.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 25, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 16th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft
of proposed legislation providing for negotiations with the various
tribes and bands of Chippewa Indians in the State of Minnesota, with a
view to the improvement of their present condition.

It is requested that the matter may have early attention, consideration,
and action by Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 28, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

In continuing accord with the Senate resolution of December 9, 1885,
I transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of State, accompanied
by information received from the United States minister to Belgium in
relation to the action of the Belgian Government in concluding its
adhesion to the monetary convention of the States comprising the "Latin
Union."

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 28, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of 25th instant from the Secretary
of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, the draft of a
proposed amendment to the first section of the act ratifying an
agreement with the Crow Indians in Montana, approved April 11, 1882,
requested by said Indians, for the purpose of increasing the amount of
the annual payments under said agreement and reducing the number
thereof, in order that sufficient means may be provided for establishing
them on their individual allotments.

The matter is presented for the consideration and action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, February 4, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

By its resolution in executive session of March 18, 1885, the Senate
advised and consented to the ratification of the convention concluded
November 12, 1884, between the United States of America and the United
States of Mexico, touching the boundary line between the two countries
where it follows the bed of the Rio Grande and the Rio Gila.

The ratifications could not, however, be exchanged between the two
contracting parties and the convention proclaimed until after it had
received the constitutional sanction of the Government of Mexico, whose
Congress but recently convened.

In a note to the Secretary of State of December 26, 1885, Mr. Matias
Romero, the minister of Mexico here, advises him of a decree issued by
the Mexican Senate in its session of December 11 last, approving, with
certain modifications, the convention in question:

"The modifications made in the said treaty by the Mexican Senate
are not essential," says Mr. Romero, "since they consist mainly in the
rectification of the mistake made when the Gila River was mentioned as a
part of the boundary line, the Colorado River being omitted, and in the
correction of an error in the Spanish translation."

That the Senate may have the matter fully before it, I herewith transmit
a copy of Mr. Romero's note of December 26, 1885, with its inclosure,
and return the convention in the original for such further consideration
and direction as the Senate in its constitutional prerogative may deem
necessary and proper.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 4, 1886_.

THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE PRO TEMPORE.

SIR: In response to the Senate resolution dated January 5, 1886--

That the Secretary of the Interior be, and hereby is, directed to
communicate to the Senate a copy of each report made by the Government
directors of the Union Pacific Railroad Company from date of first
appointment of such directors to the present time--

I transmit herewith a communication from the Secretary of the Interior,
dated the 2d instant, with the copies required.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 4, 1886_.

THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

SIR: In response to House resolution of January 27, 1886--

That the Secretary of the Interior be, and is hereby, requested to
furnish this House with copies of any and all contracts or leases which
are to be found on file in said Department between the Southern Pacific
Company and any and every railroad or railroads to which land grants
were made, or which received any subsidies from the United States; also
a copy of the charter of incorporation of the Southern Pacific Company;
also all and every contract or contracts on file between the Pacific
Steamship Company and any and every land grant or subsidized railroad
company or companies--

I transmit herewith a communication from the Secretary of the Interior,
dated the 2d instant, inclosing the copies required.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 4, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of 3d instant from the Secretary of
the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft of a bill
authorizing the use of certain funds belonging to the Miami Indians in
Indian Territory, proceeds of sales of their lands, for the purpose of
relieving their present pressing necessities.

The matter is presented for the consideration and action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 8, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of the Interior, dated
5th instant, inclosing the recommendation of the Commissioner of Indian
Affairs for the insertion in the act making appropriations for the
current and contingent expenses of the Indian Department for the year
ending June 30, 1887, of an item providing for an agent for the
Winnebago Indians in Wisconsin, at a salary of $1,500 per annum.

The matter is respectfully submitted for the consideration and action of
Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 8, 1886_.

THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE PRO TEMPORE.

SIR: In response to Senate resolution of January 7, 1886--

That the Secretary of the Interior be, and hereby is, directed to
communicate to the Senate whether any surveys of the public lands have
been made within the last two years in the State of Nebraska; whether
there are any unsurveyed public lands within said State; also what
recommendations have been made within the last three years by the
surveyors-general of said district as to the discontinuance of said
office, and whether it is advisable that the office of surveyor-general
of said district should cease and be discontinued under the provisions
of section 2218 of the Revised Statutes of the United States--

I transmit herewith a communication from the Secretary of the Interior,
dated the 3d instant, inclosing the information desired.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 15, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith, for the consideration of Congress, a communication,
under date of the 9th instant, from the Secretary of the Interior, and
the accompanying last annual report of the Government directors of the
Union Pacific Railway Company.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 15, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 12th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, the
draft of a bill prepared by the Commissioner of Indian Affairs to amend
the third section of the act of March 3, 1885, "to provide for the sale
of the Sac and Fox and Iowa Indian reservations in the States of
Nebraska and Kansas, and for other purposes."

The matter is presented for the consideration and action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 16, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, in response to a resolution of the Senate of
the 9th instant, a statement showing the payments of awards of the
commissioners appointed under the conventions between the United States
and France concluded April 30, 1803, and July 4, 1831, and between the
United States and Spain concluded February 22, 1819, prepared from the
books in the Department of the Treasury, under the direction of the
Secretary of the Treasury, at the request of the Secretary of State.

Also, for the further information of the Senate, a report prepared by
direction of the Secretary of State, from the original records in his
custody, of the awards made by the said commissioners in claims allowed
by them.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, D.C., March 1, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

Ever since the beginning of the present session of the Senate the
different heads of the Departments attached to the executive branch of
the Government have been plied with various requests and demands from
committees of the Senate, from members of such committees, and at last
from the Senate itself, requiring the transmission of reasons for the
suspension of certain officials during the recess of that body, or for
the papers touching the conduct of such officials, or for all papers and
documents relating to such suspensions, or for all documents and papers
filed in such Departments in relation to the management and conduct of
the offices held by such suspended officials.

The different terms from time to time adopted in making these requests
and demands, the order in which they succeeded each other, and the fact
that when made by the Senate the resolution for that purpose was passed
in executive session have led to the presumption, the correctness of
which will, I suppose, be candidly admitted, that from first to last the
information thus sought and the papers thus demanded were desired for
use by the Senate and its committees in considering the propriety of the
suspensions referred to.

Though these suspensions are my executive acts, based upon considerations
addressed to me alone and for which I am wholly responsible, I have had
no invitation from the Senate to state the position which I have felt
constrained to assume in relation to the same or to interpret for myself
my acts and motives in the premises.

In this condition of affairs I have forborne addressing the Senate upon
the subject, lest I might be accused of thrusting myself unbidden upon
the attention of that body.

But the report of the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate lately
presented and published, which censures the Attorney-General of the
United States for his refusal to transmit certain papers relating to a
suspension from office, and which also, if I correctly interpret it,
evinces a misapprehension of the position of the Executive upon the
question of such suspensions, will, I hope, justify this communication.

This report is predicated upon a resolution of the Senate directed to
the Attorney-General and his reply to the same. This resolution was
adopted in executive session devoted entirely to business connected
with the consideration of nominations for office. It required the
Attorney-General "to transmit to the Senate copies of all documents and
papers that have been filed in the Department of Justice since the 1st
day of January, 1885, in relation to the management and conduct of the
office of district attorney of the United States for the southern
district of Alabama."

The incumbent of this office on the 1st day of January, 1885, and until
the 17th day of July ensuing, was George M. Duskin, who on the day last
mentioned was suspended by an Executive order, and John D. Burnett
designated to perform the duties of said office. At the time of the
passage of the resolution above referred to the nomination of Burnett
for said office was pending before the Senate, and all the papers
relating to said nomination were before that body for its inspection and
information.

In reply to this resolution the Attorney-General, after referring to the
fact that the papers relating to the nomination of Burnett had already
been sent to the Senate, stated that he was directed by the President to
say that--

The papers and documents which are mentioned in said resolution and
still remaining in the custody of this Department, having exclusive
reference to the suspension by the President of George M. Duskin, the
late incumbent of the office of district attorney for the southern
district of Alabama, it is not considered that the public interests will
be promoted by a compliance with said resolution and the transmission of
the papers and documents therein mentioned to the Senate in executive
session.

Upon this resolution and the answer thereto the issue is thus stated by
the Committee on the Judiciary at the outset of the report:

The important question, then, is whether it is within the constitutional
competence of either House of Congress to have access to the official
papers and documents in the various public offices of the United States
created by laws enacted by themselves.

I do not suppose that "the public offices of the United States" are
regulated or controlled in their relations to either House of Congress
by the fact that they were "created by laws enacted by themselves."
It must be that these instrumentalities were created for the benefit of
the people and to answer the general purposes of government under the
Constitution and the laws, and that they are unencumbered by any lien in
favor of either branch of Congress growing out of their construction,
and unembarrassed by any obligation to the Senate as the price of their
creation.

The complaint of the committee that access to official papers in the
public offices is denied the Senate is met by the statement that at no
time has it been the disposition or the intention of the President or
any Department of the executive branch of the Government to withhold
from the Senate official documents or papers filed in any of the public
offices. While it is by no means conceded that the Senate has the right
in any case to review the act of the Executive in removing or suspending
a public officer, upon official documents or otherwise, it is considered
that documents and papers of that nature should, because they are
official, be freely transmitted to the Senate upon its demand, trusting
the use of the same for proper and legitimate purposes to the good faith
of that body; and though no such paper or document has been specifically
demanded in any of the numerous requests and demands made upon the
Departments, yet as often as they were found in the public offices they
have been furnished in answer to such applications.

The letter of the Attorney-General in response to the resolution of the
Senate in the particular case mentioned in the committee's report was
written at my suggestion and by my direction. There had been no official
papers or documents filed in his Department relating to the case within
the period specified in the resolution. The letter was intended, by its
description of the papers and documents remaining in the custody of the
Department, to convey the idea that they were not official; and it was
assumed that the resolution called for information, papers, and
documents of the same character as were required by the requests and
demands which preceded it.

Everything that had been written or done on behalf of the Senate
from the beginning pointed to all letters and papers of a private and
unofficial nature as the objects of search, if they were to be found in
the Departments, and provided they had been presented to the Executive
with a view to their consideration upon the question of suspension from
office.

Against the transmission of such papers and documents I have
interposed my advice and direction. This has not been done, as is
suggested in the committee's report, upon the assumption on my part that
the Attorney-General or any other head of a Department "is the servant
of the President, and is to give or withhold copies of documents in his
office according to the will of the Executive and not otherwise," but
because I regard the papers and documents withheld and addressed to me
or intended for my use and action purely unofficial and private, not
infrequently confidential, and having reference to the performance of a
duty exclusively mine. I consider them in no proper sense as upon the
files of the Department, but as deposited there for my convenience,
remaining still completely under my control. I suppose if I desired to
take them into my custody I might do so with entire propriety, and if
I saw fit to destroy them no one could complain.

Even the committee in its report appears to concede that there may be
with the President or in the Departments papers and documents which, on
account of their unofficial character, are not subject to the inspection
of the Congress. A reference in the report to instances where the House
of Representatives ought not to succeed in a call for the production of
papers is immediately followed by this statement:

The committee feels authorized to state, after a somewhat careful
research, that within the foregoing limits there is scarcely in the
history of this Government, until now, any instance of a refusal by a
head of a Department, or even of the President himself, to communicate
official facts and information, as distinguished from private and
unofficial papers, motions, views, reasons, and opinions, to either
House of Congress when unconditionally demanded.

To which of the classes thus recognized do the papers and documents
belong that are now the objects of the Senate's quest?

They consist of letters and representations addressed to the Executive
or intended for his inspection; they are voluntarily written and
presented by private citizens who are not in the least instigated
thereto by any official invitation or at all subject to official
control. While some of them are entitled to Executive consideration,
many of them are so irrelevant, or in the light of other facts so
worthless, that they have not been given the least weight in determining
the question to which they are supposed to relate.

Are all these, simply because they are preserved, to be considered
official documents and subject to the inspection of the Senate? If not,
who is to determine which belong to this class? Are the motives and
purposes of the Senate, as they are day by day developed, such as would
be satisfied with my selection? Am I to submit to theirs at the risk of
being charged with making a suspension from office upon evidence which
was not even considered?

Are these papers to be regarded official because they have not only been
presented but preserved in the public offices?

Their nature and character remain the same whether they are kept
in the Executive Mansion or deposited in the Departments. There is no
mysterious power of transmutation in departmental custody, nor is there
magic in the undefined and sacred solemnity of Department files. If the
presence of these papers in the public offices is a stumbling block in
the way of the performance of Senatorial duty, it can be easily removed.

The papers and documents which have been described derive no official
character from any constitutional, statutory, or other requirement
making them necessary to the performance of the official duty of the
Executive.

It will not be denied, I suppose, that the President may suspend a
public officer in the entire absence of any papers or documents to
aid his official judgment and discretion; and I am quite prepared to
avow that the cases are not few in which suspensions from office have
depended more upon oral representations made to me by citizens of known
good repute and by members of the House of Representatives and Senators
of the United States than upon any letters and documents presented for
my examination. I have not felt justified in suspecting the veracity,
integrity, and patriotism of Senators, or ignoring their
representations, because they were not in party affiliation with the
majority of their associates; and I recall a few suspensions which bear
the approval of individual members identified politically with the
majority in the Senate.

While, therefore, I am constrained to deny the right of the Senate to
the papers and documents described, so far as the right to the same is
based upon the claim that they are in any view of the subject official,
I am also led unequivocally to dispute the right of the Senate by the
aid of any documents whatever, or in any way save through the judicial
process of trial on impeachment, to review or reverse the acts of the
Executive in the suspension, during the recess of the Senate, of Federal
officials.

I believe the power to remove or suspend such officials is vested in the
President alone by the Constitution, which in express terms provides
that "the executive power shall be vested in a President of the United
States of America," and that "he shall take care that the laws be
faithfully executed."

The Senate belongs to the legislative branch of the Government. When the
Constitution by express provision superadded to its legislative duties
the right to advise and consent to appointments to office and to sit as
a court of impeachment, it conferred upon that body all the control and
regulation of Executive action supposed to be necessary for the safety
of the people; and this express and special grant of such extraordinary
powers, not in any way related to or growing out of general Senatorial
duty, and in itself a departure from the general plan of our Government,
should be held, under a familiar maxim of construction, to exclude every
other right of interference with Executive functions.

In the first Congress which assembled after the adoption of the
Constitution, comprising many who aided in its preparation, a
legislative construction was given to that instrument in which the
independence of the Executive in the matter of removals from office was
fully sustained.

I think it will be found that in the subsequent discussions of this
question there was generally, if not at all times, a proposition pending
to in some way curtail this power of the President by legislation, which
furnishes evidence that to limit such power it was supposed to be
necessary to supplement the Constitution by such legislation.

The first enactment of this description was passed under a stress of
partisanship and political bitterness which culminated in the
President's impeachment.

This law provided that the Federal officers to which it applied could
only be suspended during the recess of the Senate when shown by evidence
satisfactory to the President to be guilty of misconduct in office, or
crime, or when incapable or disqualified to perform their duties, and
that within twenty days after the next meeting of the Senate it should
be the duty of the President "to report to the Senate such suspension,
with the evidence and reasons for his action in the case."

This statute, passed in 1867, when Congress was overwhelmingly and
bitterly opposed politically to the President, may be regarded as
an indication that even then it was thought necessary by a Congress
determined upon the subjugation of the Executive to legislative will to
furnish itself a law for that purpose, instead of attempting to reach
the object intended by an invocation of any pretended constitutional
right.

The law which thus found its way to our statute book was plain in its
terms, and its intent needed no avowal. If valid and now in operation,
it would justify the present course of the Senate and command the
obedience of the Executive to its demands. It may, however, be remarked
in passing that under this law the President had the privilege of
presenting to the body which assumed to review his executive acts his
reasons therefor, instead of being excluded from explanation or judged
by papers found in the Departments.

Two years after the law of 1867 was passed, and within less than
five weeks after the inauguration of a President in political accord
with both branches of Congress, the sections of the act regulating
suspensions from office during the recess of the Senate were entirely
repealed, and in their place were substituted provisions which, instead
of limiting the causes of suspension to misconduct, crime, disability,
or disqualification, expressly permitted such suspension by the
President "in his discretion," and completely abandoned the requirement
obliging him to report to the Senate "the evidence and reasons" for his
action.

With these modifications and with all branches of the Government in
political harmony, and in the absence of partisan incentive to captious
obstruction, the law as it was left by the amendment of 1869 was much
less destructive of Executive discretion. And yet the great general and
patriotic citizen who on the 4th day of March, 1869, assumed the duties
of Chief Executive, and for whose freer administration of his high
office the most hateful restraints of the law of 1867 were, on the 5th
day of April, 1869, removed, mindful of his obligation to defend and
protect every prerogative of his great trust, and apprehensive of the
injury threatened the public service in the continued operation of these
statutes even in their modified form, in his first message to Congress
advised their repeal and set forth their unconstitutional character and
hurtful tendency in the following language:

It may be well to mention here the embarrassment possible to arise from
leaving on the statute books the so-called "tenure-of-office acts," and
to earnestly recommend their total repeal. It could not have been the
intention of the framers of the Constitution, when providing that
appointments made by the President should receive the consent of the
Senate, that the latter should have the power to retain in office
persons placed there by Federal appointment against the will of the
President. The law is inconsistent with a faithful and efficient
administration of the Government. What faith can an Executive put in
officials forced upon him, and those, too, whom he has suspended for
reason? How will such officials be likely to serve an Administration
which they know does not trust them?

I am unable to state whether or not this recommendation for a repeal of
these laws has been since repeated. If it has not, the reason can
probably be found in the experience which demonstrated the fact that the
necessities of the political situation but rarely developed their
vicious character.

And so it happens that after an existence of nearly twenty years of
almost innocuous desuetude these laws are brought forth--apparently the
repealed as well as the unrepealed--and put in the way of an Executive
who is willing, if permitted, to attempt an improvement in the methods
of administration.

The constitutionality of these laws is by no means admitted. But why
should the provisions of the repealed law, which required specific cause
for suspension and a report to the Senate of "evidence and reasons,"
be now in effect applied to the present Executive, instead of the law,
afterwards passed and unrepealed, which distinctly permits suspensions
by the President "in his discretion" and carefully omits the requirement
that "evidence and reasons for his action in the case" shall be reported
to the Senate.

The requests and demands which by the score have for nearly three months
been presented to the different Departments of the Government, whatever
may be their form, have but one complexion. They assume the right of the
Senate to sit in judgment upon the exercise of my exclusive discretion
and Executive function, for which I am solely responsible to the people,
from whom I have so lately received the sacred trust of office. My oath
to support and defend the Constitution, my duty to the people who have
chosen me to execute the powers of their great office and not to
relinquish them, and my duty to the Chief Magistracy, which I must
preserve unimpaired in all its dignity and vigor, compel me to refuse
compliance with these demands.

To the end that the service may be improved, the Senate is invited to
the fullest scrutiny of the persons submitted to them for public office,
in recognition of the constitutional power of that body to advise and
consent to their appointment. I shall continue, as I have thus far done,
to furnish, at the request of the confirming body, all the information
I possess touching the fitness of the nominees placed before them for
their action, both when they are proposed to fill vacancies and to take
the place of suspended officials. Upon a refusal to confirm I shall not
assume the right to ask the reasons for the action of the Senate nor
question its determination. I can not think that anything more is
required to secure worthy incumbents in public office than a careful and
independent discharge of our respective duties within their well-defined
limits.

Though the propriety of suspensions might be better assured if the
action of the President was subject to review by the Senate, yet if the
Constitution and the laws have placed this responsibility upon the
executive branch of the Government it should not be divided nor the
discretion which it involves relinquished.

It has been claimed that the present Executive having pledged himself
not to remove officials except for cause, the fact of their suspension
implies such misconduct on the part of a suspended official as injures
his character and reputation, and therefore the Senate should review the
case for his vindication.

I have said that certain officials should not, in my opinion, be removed
during the continuance of the term for which they were appointed solely
for the purpose of putting in their place those in political affiliation
with the appointing power, and this declaration was immediately followed
by a description of official partisanship which ought not to entitle
those in whom it was exhibited to consideration. It is not apparent
how an adherence to the course thus announced carries with it the
consequences described. If in any degree the suggestion is worthy of
consideration, it is to be hoped that there may be a defense against
unjust suspension in the justice of the Executive.

Every pledge which I have made by which I have placed a limitation upon
my exercise of executive power has been faithfully redeemed. Of course
the pretense is not put forth that no mistakes have been committed; but
not a suspension has been made except it appeared to my satisfaction
that the public welfare would be improved thereby. Many applications for
suspension have been denied, and the adherence to the rule laid down to
govern my action as to such suspensions has caused much irritation and
impatience on the part of those who have insisted upon more changes in
the offices.

The pledges I have made were made to the people, and to them I am
responsible for the manner in which they have been redeemed. I am not
responsible to the Senate, and I am unwilling to submit my actions and
official conduct to them for judgment.

There are no grounds for an allegation that the fear of being found
false to my professions influences me in declining to submit to the
demands of the Senate. I have not constantly refused to suspend
officials, and thus incurred the displeasure of political friends, and
yet willfully broken faith with the people for the sake of being false
to them.

Neither the discontent of party friends, nor the allurements constantly
offered of confirmations of appointees conditioned upon the avowal that
suspensions have been made on party grounds alone, nor the threat
proposed in the resolutions now before the Senate that no confirmations
will be made unless the demands of that body be complied with, are
sufficient to discourage or deter me from following in the way which
I am convinced leads to better government for the people.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 1, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

It is made the constitutional duty of the President to recommend to the
consideration of Congress from time to time such measures as he shall
judge necessary and expedient. In no matters can the necessity of this
be more evident than when the good faith of the United States under the
solemn obligation of treaties with foreign powers is concerned.

The question of the treatment of the subjects of China sojourning within
the jurisdiction of the United States presents such a matter for the
urgent and earnest consideration of the Executive and the Congress.

In my first annual message, upon the assembling of the present Congress,
I adverted to this question in the following words:

The harmony of our relations with China is fully sustained.

The condition of the Chinese question in the Western States and
Territories is, despite this restrictive legislation, far from being
satisfactory. The recent outbreak in Wyoming Territory, where numbers
of unoffending Chinamen, indisputably within the protection of the
treaties and the law, were murdered by a mob, and the still more recent
threatened outbreak of the same character in Washington Territory, are
fresh in the minds of all, and there is apprehension lest the bitterness
of feeling against the Mongolian race on the Pacific Slope may find vent
in similar lawless demonstrations. All the power of this Government
should be exerted to maintain the amplest good faith toward China in
the treatment of these men, and the inflexible sternness of the law in
bringing the wrongdoers to justice should be insisted upon.

At the time I wrote this the shocking occurrences at Rock Springs, in
Wyoming Territory, were fresh in the minds of all, and had been recently
presented anew to the attention of this Government by the Chinese
minister in a note which, while not unnaturally exhibiting some
misconception of our Federal system of administration in the Territories
while they as yet are not in the exercise of the full measure of that
sovereign self-government pertaining to the States of the Union,
presents in truthful terms the main features of the cruel outrage there
perpetrated upon inoffensive subjects of China. In the investigation of
the Rock Springs outbreak and the ascertainment of the facts on which
the Chinese minister's statements rest the Chinese representatives were
aided by the agents of the United States, and the reports submitted,
having been thus framed and recounting the facts within the knowledge of
witnesses on both sides, possess an impartial truthfulness which could
not fail to give them great impressiveness.

The facts, which so far are not controverted or affected by any
exculpatory or mitigating testimony, show the murder of a number of
Chinese subjects in September last at Rock Springs, the wounding of many
others, and the spoliation of the property of all when the unhappy
survivors had been driven from their habitations. There is no allegation
that the victims by any lawless or disorderly act on their part
contributed to bring about a collision; on the contrary, it appears that
the law-abiding disposition of these people, who were sojourners in our
midst under the sanction of hospitality and express treaty obligations,
was made the pretext for an attack upon them. This outrage upon law
and treaty engagements was committed by a lawless mob. None of the
aggressors--happily for the national good fame--appear by the reports
to have been citizens of the United States. They were aliens engaged in
that remote district as mining laborers, who became excited against the
Chinese laborers, as it would seem, because of their refusal to join
them in a strike to secure higher wages. The oppression of Chinese
subjects by their rivals in the competition for labor does not differ in
violence and illegality from that applied to other classes of native or
alien labor. All are equally under the protection of law and equally
entitled to enjoy the benefits of assured public order.

Were there no treaty in existence referring to the rights of Chinese
subjects; did they come hither as all other strangers who voluntarily
resort to this land of freedom, of self-government, and of laws, here
peaceably to win their bread and to live their lives, there can be no
question that they would be entitled still to the same measure of
protection from violence and the same free forum for the redress of
their grievances as any other aliens.

So far as the treaties between the United States and China stipulate for
the treatment of the Chinese subjects actually in the United States as
the citizens or subjects of "the most favored nation" are treated, they
create no new status for them; they simply recognize and confirm a
general and existing rule, applicable to all aliens alike, for none are
favored above others by domestic law, and none by foreign treaties
unless it be the Chinese themselves in some respects. For by the third
article of the treaty of November 17, 1880, between the United States
and China it is provided that--

ART. III. If Chinese laborers, or Chinese of any other class, now either
permanently or temporarily residing in the territory of the United
States, meet with ill treatment at the hands of any other persons, the
Government of the United States will exert all its power to devise
measures for their protection and to secure to them the same rights,
privileges, immunities, and exemptions as may be enjoyed by the citizens
or subjects of the most favored nation, and to which they are entitled
by treaty.

This article may be held to constitute a special privilege for Chinese
subjects in the United States, as compared with other aliens; not that
it creates any peculiar rights which others do not share, but because,
in case, of ill treatment of the Chinese in the United States, this
Government is bound to "exert all its power to devise measures for their
protection," by securing to them the rights to which equally with any
and all other foreigners they are entitled.

Whether it is now incumbent upon the United States to amend their
general laws or devise new measures in this regard I do not consider in
the present communication, but confine myself to the particular point
raised by the outrage and massacre at Rock Springs.

The note of the Chinese minister and the documents which accompany
it give, as I believe, an unexaggerated statement of the lamentable
incident, and present impressively the regrettable circumstance that
the proceedings, in the name of justice, for the ascertainment of the
crime and fixing the responsibility therefor were a ghastly mockery
of justice. So long as the Chinese minister, under his instructions,
makes this the basis of an appeal to the principles and convictions
of mankind, no exception can be taken; but when he goes further, and,
taking as his precedent the action of the Chinese Government in past
instances where the lives of American citizens and their property in
China have been endangered, argues a reciprocal obligation on the part
of the United States to indemnify the Chinese subjects who suffered at
Rock Springs, it became necessary to meet his argument and to deny most
emphatically the conclusions he seeks to draw as to the existence of
such a liability and the right of the Chinese Government to insist
upon it.

I draw the attention of the Congress to the latter part of the note of
the Secretary of State of February 18, 1886, in reply to the Chinese
minister's representations, and invite especial consideration of the
cogent reasons by which he reaches the conclusion that whilst the United
States Government is under no obligation, whether by the express terms
of its treaties with China or the principles of international law, to
indemnify these Chinese subjects for losses caused by such means and
under the admitted circumstances, yet that in view of the palpable and
discreditable failure of the authorities of Wyoming Territory to bring
to justice the guilty parties or to assure to the sufferers an impartial
forum in which to seek and obtain compensation for the losses which
those subjects have incurred by lack of police protection, and
considering further the entire absence of provocation or contribution
on the part of the victims, the Executive may be induced to bring the
matter to the benevolent consideration of the Congress, in order that
that body, in its high discretion, may direct the bounty of the
Government in aid of innocent and peaceful strangers whose maltreatment
has brought discredit upon the country, with the distinct understanding
that such action is in no wise to be held as a precedent, is wholly
gratuitous, and is resorted to in a spirit of pure generosity toward
those who are otherwise helpless.

The correspondence exchanged is herewith submitted for the information
of the Congress, and accompanies a like message to the House of
Representatives.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 2, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 27th ultimo from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft
of a bill, prepared in the Office of Indian Affairs, for the purpose of
securing to the Cherokees and others, citizens of the Cherokee Nation by
adoption and incorporation, a sum equal to their proportion of the
$300,000, proceeds of lands west of 96° in the Indian Territory,
appropriated by the act of March 3, 1883.

The matter is presented for the consideration of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 2, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of 25th ultimo from the Secretary of
the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft of a bill
recommended by the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, for the payment of
money claimed under alleged existing treaty stipulations and laws by
such Eastern Cherokee Indians as have removed or shall hereafter remove
themselves to the Indian Territory.

The matter is presented for the consideration of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 2, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of 26th ultimo from the Secretary of
the Interior, with inclosures, requesting legislation to provide for the
reappraisement and sale of a small tract of land in the State of
Nebraska belonging to the Sac and Fox Indian Reservation.

The matter is presented for the action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 3, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith, for the information of Congress, the seventeenth
annual report of the Board of Indian Commissioners, for the year 1885,
submitted to the Secretary of the Interior in pursuance of the act of
May 17, 1882.

The report accompanies the message to the House of Representatives.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 10, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 5th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft
of a bill, prepared in the Office of Indian Affairs, "for the relief of
the Omaha tribe of Indians in the State of Nebraska."

The matter is presented for the consideration of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 10, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith, for the consideration of Congress, the report of
the National Board of Health for the year 1885.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 17, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith a communication from the Secretary of State, being a
revised list of papers on file in the Department of State touching the
unpaid claims of citizens of the United States against France for
spoliation prior to July 31, 1801.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 17, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In response to the resolution of the Senate of the 17th of February,
requesting to be furnished with a copy of the report made by the
consul-general of the United States at Berlin upon the shipping interest
of Germany, I transmit a report of the Secretary of State upon the
subject.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, March 17, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In compliance with the resolution of the Senate in executive session of
the 27th of January, I transmit herewith the report of the Secretary of
State and the papers accompanying it, relating to the emigration of
Chinese to the United States.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 18, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of 16th instant from the Secretary
of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft of a
bill, prepared by the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, providing for the
use of certain funds, proceeds of Indian reservations, covered into the
Treasury under the provisions of the act of March 3, 1883, for the
benefit of the Indians on whose account the same is covered in.

The subject is recommended to the favorable consideration and action of
Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 18, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 16th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft
of a bill, prepared by the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, "to authorize
the purchase of a tract of land near Salem, Oreg., for the use of the
Indian training school."

The subject is presented for the consideration and action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 18, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

In compliance with a resolution of the Senate of February 9, 1886,
I herewith transmit a report from the Secretary of State, with its
accompanying documents, relative to the commerce between the United
States and certain foreign countries in cereals, and the cotton product
during the years 1884 and 1885.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 22, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In answer to the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 15th
of February last, calling upon the Secretary of State for copies of all
the correspondence relating to the claims of certain governments to be
accorded the reductions and exemptions of tonnage dues accorded to
vessels entering ports of the United States from certain ports named
in the shipping act of June 26, 1884, I transmit the report of that
officer, together with the correspondence.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 25, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith the report of the Civil Service Commission for the
year ended on the 16th day of January last.

The exhibit thus made of the operations of the Commission and the
account thus presented of the results following the execution of the
civil-service law can not fail to demonstrate its usefulness and
strengthen the conviction that this scheme for a reform in the methods
of administering the Government is no longer an experiment.

Wherever this reform has gained a foothold it has steadily advanced in
the esteem of those charged with public administrative duties, while the
people who desire good government have constantly been confirmed in
their high estimate of its value and efficiency.

With the benefits it has already secured to the public service plainly
apparent, and with its promise of increased usefulness easily
appreciated, this cause is commended to the liberal care and jealous
protection of the Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 30, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In further answer to the resolution of the House of Representatives
of the 15th of February last, calling upon the Secretary of State for
copies of all correspondence relating to the claims of governments to
be accorded the reductions and exemptions of tonnage dues accorded to
vessels entering the ports of the United States from certain ports named
in the shipping act of June 26, 1884, I transmit herewith a copy of the
reply of the Attorney-General to the letter of the Secretary of State of
December 15, 1885, as found on pages 35 and 36 of Executive Document No.
132, House of Representatives, Forty-ninth Congress, first session,
communicated on the 22d instant.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 1, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In response to a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 24th
of March, relative to the employment of substitutes in the Department of
State, I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State on the
subject.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 1, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of the Interior and the
accompanying report, submitted by the governor of Alaska in compliance
with section 5 of the act of May 17, 1884, entitled "An act providing a
civil government for Alaska."

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 1, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State, in relation
to the claim of the representatives of the late Hon. James Crooks, a
British subject, against this Government for the seizure of the schooner
_Lord Nelson_ in 1812.

The matter is commended to the favorable consideration of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 6, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, for the consideration of Congress with a view to
appropriate legislation in the premises, a report of the Secretary of
State, with certain correspondence touching the treaty right of Chinese
subjects other than laborers "to go and come of their own free will and
accord,"

In my annual message of the 8th of December last I said:

These cases of individual hardship are due to the ambiguous and
defective provisions of the acts of Congress approved respectively on
the 6th May, 1882, and 5th July, 1884. The hardship has in some cases
been remedied by the action of the courts. In other cases, however,
where the phraseology of the statutes has appeared to be conclusive
against any discretion on the part of the officers charged with the
execution of the law, Chinese persons expressly entitled to free
admission under the treaty have been refused a landing and sent back to
the country whence they came without being afforded any opportunity to
show in the courts or otherwise their right to the privilege of free
ingress and egress which it was the purpose of the treaty to secure.

In the language of one of the judicial determinations of the Supreme
Court of the United States to which I have referred--

The supposition should not be indulged that Congress, while professing
to faithfully execute the treaty stipulations and recognizing the fact
that they secure to a certain class the right to go from and come to
the United States, intended to make its protection depend upon the
performance of conditions which it was physically impossible to perform.
(112 U.S. Reports, p. 554, Chew Heong _vs._ United States.)

The act of July 5, 1884, imposes such an impossible condition in not
providing for the admission, under proper certificate, of Chinese
travelers of the exempted classes in the cases most likely to arise in
ordinary commercial intercourse.

The treaty provisions governing the case are as follows:

ART. I. * * * The limitation or suspension shall be reasonable, and
shall apply only to Chinese who may go to the United States as laborers,
other classes not being included in the limitations. * * *

ART. II. Chinese subjects, whether proceeding to the United States as
teachers, students, merchants, or from curiosity, together with their
body and household servants, * * * shall be allowed to go and come of
their own free will and accord, and shall be accorded all the rights,
privileges, immunities, and exemptions which are accorded to the
citizens and subjects of the most favored nation.

Section 6 of the amended Chinese immigration act of 1884 purports to
secure this treaty right to the exempted classes named by means of
prescribed certificates of their status, which certificates shall be the
_prima facie_ and the sole permissible evidence to establish a
right of entry into the United States. But it provides in terms for the
issuance of certificates in two cases only:

(_a_) Chinese subjects departing from a port of China; and

(_b_) Chinese persons (_i.e._, of the Chinese race) who may at
the time be subjects of some foreign government other than China, and
who may depart for the United States from the ports of such other
foreign government.

A statute is certainly most unusual which, purporting to execute the
provisions of a treaty with China in respect of Chinese subjects, enacts
strict formalities as regards the subjects of other governments than
that of China.

It is sufficient that I should call the earnest attention of Congress to
the circumstance that the statute makes no provision whatever for the
somewhat numerous class of Chinese persons who, retaining their Chinese
subjection in some countries other than China, desire to come from such
countries to the United States.

Chinese merchants have trading operations of magnitude throughout the
world. They do not become citizens or subjects of the country where they
may temporarily reside and trade; they continue to be subjects of China,
and to them the explicit exemption of the treaty applies. Yet if such a
Chinese subject, the head of a mercantile house at Hongkong or Yokohama
or Honolulu or Havana or Colon, desires to come from any of these places
to the United States, he is met with the requirement that he must
produce a certificate, in prescribed form and in the English tongue,
issued by the Chinese Government. If there be at the foreign place of
his residence no representative of the Chinese Government competent to
issue a certificate in the prescribed form, he can obtain none, and is
under the provisions of the present law unjustly debarred from entry
into the United States. His usual Chinese passport will not suffice,
for it is not in the form which the act prescribes shall be the sole
permissible evidence of his right to land. And he can obtain no such
certificate from the Government of his place of residence, because he
is not a subject or citizen thereof "at the time," or at any time.

There being, therefore, no statutory provision prescribing the terms
upon which Chinese persons resident in foreign countries but not
subjects or citizens of such countries may prove their status and
rights as members of the exempted classes in the absence of a Chinese
representative in such country, the Secretary of the Treasury, in whom
the execution of the act of July 5, 1884, was vested, undertook to
remedy the omission by directing the revenue officers to recognize
as lawful certificates those issued in favor of Chinese subjects by
the Chinese consular and diplomatic officers at the foreign port of
departure, when viséed by the United States representative thereat.
This appears to be a just application of the spirit of the law, although
enlarging its letter, and in adopting this rule he was controlled by the
authority of high judicial decision as to what evidence is necessary to
establish the fact that an individual Chinaman belongs to the exempted
class.

He, however, went beyond the spirit of the act and the judicial
decisions, by providing, in a circular dated January 14, 1885, for the
original issuance of such a certificate by the United States consular
officer at the port of departure, in the absence of a Chinese diplomatic
or consular representative thereat; for it is clear that the act of
Congress contemplated the intervention of the United States consul only
in a supervisory capacity, his function being to check the proceeding
and see that no abuse of the privilege followed. The power or duty of
original certification is wholly distinct from that supervisory
function. It either dispenses with the foreign certificate altogether,
leaving the consular visé to stand alone and sufficient, or else it
combines in one official act the distinct functions of certification and
verification of the fact certified.

The official character attaching to the consular certification
contemplated by the unamended circular of January 14, 1885, is to be
borne in mind. It is not merely _prima facie_ evidence of the
status of the bearer, such as the courts may admit in their discretion;
it was prescribed as an official attestation, on the strength of which
the customs officers at the port of entry were to admit the bearer
without further adjudication of his status unless question should arise
as to the truth of the certificate itself.

It became, therefore, necessary to amend the circular of January 14,
1885, and this was done on the 13th of June following, by striking out
the clause prescribing original certification of status by the United
States consuls. The effect of this amendment is to deprive any
certificate the United States consuls may issue of the value it
purported to possess as sole permissible evidence under the statute when
its issuance was prescribed by Treasury regulations. There is, however,
nothing to prevent consuls giving certificates of facts within their
knowledge to be received as evidence in the absence of statutory
authentication.

The complaint of the Chinese minister in his note of March 24, 1886,
is that the Chinese merchant Lay Sang, of the house of King Lee & Co.,
of San Francisco, having arrived at San Francisco from Hongkong and
exhibited a certificate of the United States consul at Hongkong as to
his status as a merchant, and consequently exempt under the treaty,
was refused permission to land and was sent back to Hongkong by the
steamer which brought him. While the certificate he bore was doubtless
insufficient under the present law, it is to be remembered that there is
at Hongkong no representative of the Government of China competent or
authorized to issue the certificate required by the statute. The intent
of Congress to legislate in execution of the treaty is thus defeated
by a prohibition directly contrary to the treaty, and conditions are
exacted which, in the words of the Supreme Court hereinbefore quoted,
"it was physically impossible to perform."

This anomalous feature of the act should be reformed as speedily as
possible, in order that the occurrence of such cases may be avoided and
the imputation removed which would otherwise rest upon the good faith of
the United States in the execution of their solemn treaty engagements.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 9, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State, in relation to
the mercantile marines of France, Germany, Great Britain, and Italy.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 14, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In response to a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 17th
ultimo, requesting the Secretary of State "to communicate to the House
of Representatives, if not incompatible with the public interest, copies
of the recent correspondence and dispatches between the Secretary of
State and the minister of the United States at The Hague touching the
subject of taxation of petroleum in Holland and in the Dutch colonies,
and that of the export therefrom of leaf tobacco to the United States,"
I transmit herewith the report of the Secretary of State on the subject.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 14, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In response to a resolution of the House of Representatives of the
6th instant, requesting the Secretary of State "to transmit, if not
incompatible with the public interest, copies of all correspondence
between his Department and the representatives of France, Germany,
Austria, and any other European country which has partially or entirely
restricted the importation of American pork," I transmit herewith the
report of the Secretary of State on the subject.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 20, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State on the
manufacture of milk sugar in Switzerland.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 22, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

The Constitution imposes upon the President the duty of recommending to
the consideration of Congress from time to time such measures as he
shall judge necessary and expedient.

I am so deeply impressed with the importance of immediately and
thoughtfully meeting the problem which recent events and a present
condition have thrust upon us, involving the settlement of disputes
arising between our laboring men and their employers, that I am
constrained to recommend to Congress legislation upon this serious and
pressing subject.

Under our form of government the value of labor as an element of
national prosperity should be distinctly recognized, and the welfare
of the laboring man should be regarded as especially entitled to
legislative care. In a country which offers to all its citizens the
highest attainment of social and political distinction its workingmen
can not justly or safely be considered as irrevocably consigned to the
limits of a class and entitled to no attention and allowed no protest
against neglect.

The laboring man, bearing in his hand an indispensable contribution to
our growth and progress, may well insist, with manly courage and as a
right, upon the same recognition from those who make our laws as is
accorded to any other citizen having a valuable interest in charge; and
his reasonable demands should be met in such a spirit of appreciation
and fairness as to induce a contented and patriotic cooperation in the
achievement of a grand national destiny.

While the real interests of labor are not promoted by a resort to
threats and violent manifestations, and while those who, under the
pretext of an advocacy of the claims of labor, wantonly attack the
rights of capital and for selfish purposes or the love of disorder sow
seeds of violence and discontent should neither be encouraged nor
conciliated, all legislation on the subject should be calmly and
deliberately undertaken, with no purpose of satisfying unreasonable
demands or gaining partisan advantage.

The present condition of the relations between labor and capital is far
from satisfactory. The discontent of the employed is due in a large
degree to the grasping and heedless exactions of employers and the
alleged discrimination in favor of capital as an object of governmental
attention. It must also be conceded that the laboring men are not always
careful to avoid causeless and unjustifiable disturbance.

Though the importance of a better accord between these interests is
apparent, it must be borne in mind that any effort in that direction
by the Federal Government must be greatly limited by constitutional
restrictions. There are many grievances which legislation by Congress
can not redress, and many conditions which can not by such means be
reformed.

I am satisfied, however, that something may be done under Federal
authority to prevent the disturbances which so often arise from disputes
between employers and the employed, and which at times seriously
threaten the business interests of the country; and, in my opinion, the
proper theory upon which to proceed is that of voluntary arbitration as
the means of settling these difficulties.

But I suggest that instead of arbitrators chosen in the heat of
conflicting claims, and after each dispute shall arise, for the purpose
of determining the same, there be created a commission of labor,
consisting of three members, who shall be regular officers of the
Government, charged among other duties with the consideration and
settlement, when possible, of all controversies between labor and
capital.

A commission thus organized would have the advantage of being a stable
body, and its members, as they gained experience, would constantly
improve in their ability to deal intelligently and usefully with the
questions which might be submitted to them. If arbitrators are chosen
for temporary service as each case of dispute arises, experience and
familiarity with much that is involved in the question will be lacking,
extreme partisanship and bias will be the qualifications sought on
either side, and frequent complaints of unfairness and partiality will
be inevitable. The imposition upon a Federal court of a duty so foreign
to the judicial function as the selection of an arbitrator in such cases
is at least of doubtful propriety.

The establishment by Federal authority of such a bureau would be
a just and sensible recognition of the value of labor and of its right
to be represented in the departments of the Government. So far as its
conciliatory offices shall have relation to disturbances which interfere
with transit and commerce between the States, its existence would
be justified under the provision of the Constitution which gives to
Congress the power "to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among
the several States;" and in the frequent disputes between the laboring
men and their employers, of less extent, and the consequences of which
are confined within State limits and threaten domestic violence, the
interposition of such a commission might be tendered, upon the
application of the legislature or executive of a State, under the
constitutional provision which requires the General Government to
"protect" each of the States "against domestic violence."

If such a commission were fairly organized, the risk of a loss of
popular support and sympathy resulting from a refusal to submit to
so peaceful an instrumentality would constrain both parties to such
disputes to invoke its interference and abide by its decisions. There
would also be good reason to hope that the very existence of such an
agency would invite application to it for advice and counsel, frequently
resulting in the avoidance of contention and misunderstanding.

If the usefulness of such a commission is doubted because it might lack
power to enforce its decisions, much encouragement is derived from the
conceded good that has been accomplished by the railroad commissions
which have been organized in many of the States, which, having little
more than advisory power, have exerted a most salutary influence in the
settlement of disputes between conflicting interests.

In July, 1884, by a law of Congress, a Bureau of Labor was established
and placed in charge of a Commissioner of Labor, who is required to
"collect information upon the subject of labor, its relations to
capital, the hours of labor and the earnings of laboring men and women,
and the means of promoting their material, social, intellectual, and
moral prosperity."

The commission which I suggest could easily be ingrafted upon the bureau
thus already organized by the addition of two more commissioners and by
supplementing the duties now imposed upon it by such other powers and
functions as would permit the commissioners to act as arbitrators when
necessary between labor and capital, under such limitations and upon
such occasions as should be deemed proper and useful.

Power should also be distinctly conferred upon this bureau to
investigate the causes of all disputes as they occur, whether submitted
for arbitration or not, so that information may always be at hand to aid
legislation on the subject when necessary and desirable.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 26, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication from the Secretary of State,
accompanied by a report of Mr. Somerville P. Tuck, appointed to carry
out certain provisions of section 5 of an act entitled "An act to
provide for the ascertainment of claims of American citizens for
spoliations committed by the French prior to the 31st day of July,
1801," approved January 20, 1885.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

[The same message was sent to the Senate.]

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 5, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of 1st instant from the Secretary
of the Interior, submitting a draft of a bill recommended by the
Commissioner of Indian Affairs, providing for the payment of
improvements made by settlers on the lands of the Mescalero Indian
Reservation in the Territory of New Mexico.

The subject is presented for the consideration and action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 11, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I herewith transmit a report from the Secretary of State, dated the 6th
instant, touching the claims of Benjamin Weil and La Abra Silver Mining
Company against the Government of Mexico.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 11, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

By a joint resolution of Congress approved March 3, 1877, the President
was authorized and directed to accept the colossal statue of "Liberty
Enlightening the World" when presented by the citizens of the French
Republic, and to designate and set apart for the erection thereof a
suitable site upon either Governors or Bedloes Island, in the harbor of
New York, and upon the completion thereof to cause the statue "to be
inaugurated with such ceremonies as will serve to testify the gratitude
of our people for this expressive and felicitous memorial of the
sympathy of the citizens of our sister Republic."

The President was further thereby "authorized to cause suitable
regulations to be made for its future maintenance as a beacon and for
the permanent care and preservation thereof as a monument of art and the
continued good will of the great nation which aided us in our struggle
for freedom."

Under the authority of this resolution, on the 4th day of July, 1884,
the minister of the United States to the French Republic, by direction
of the President of the United States, accepted the statue and received
a deed of presentation from the Franco-American Union, which is now
preserved in the archives of the Department of State.

I now transmit to Congress a letter to the Secretary of State from
Joseph W. Drexel, esq., chairman of the executive committee of "the
American committee on the pedestal of the great statue of 'Liberty
Enlightening the World,'" dated the 27th of April, 1886, suggesting
the propriety of the further execution by the President of the joint
resolution referred to by prescribing the ceremonies of inauguration
to be observed upon the complete erection of the statue upon its site
on Bedloes Island, in the harbor of New York.

Thursday, the 3d of September, being the anniversary of the signing of
the treaty of peace at Paris by which the independence of these United
States was recognized and secured, has been suggested by this committee
under whose auspices and agency the pedestal for the statue has been
constructed as an appropriate day for the ceremonies of inauguration.

The international character which has been imprinted upon this work by
the joint resolution of 1877 makes it incumbent upon Congress to provide
means to carry their resolution into effect.

Therefore I recommend the appropriation of such sum of money as in the
judgment of Congress shall be deemed adequate and proper to defray the
cost of the inauguration of this statue.

I have been informed by the committee that certain expenses have been
incurred in the care and custody of the statue since it was deposited on
Bedloes Island, and the phraseology of the joint resolution providing
for "the permanent care and preservation thereof as a monument of art"
would seem to include the payment by the United States of the expense so
incurred since the reception of the statue in this country.

The action of the French Government and people in relation to the
presentation of this statue to the United States will, I hope, meet with
hearty and responsive action upon the part of Congress, in which the
Executive will be most happy to cooperate.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 11, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

The last general appropriation bill passed by the legislature of
Utah was vetoed by the then governor of that Territory. It made an
appropriation of money for the support of the district courts of the
Territory, including the pay of reporters, jurors, and witnesses, and
for the completion and maintenance of the Deseret University and the
education of the deaf mutes therein. It also appropriated for the
support of the Territorial insane asylum, as well as the salaries of
Territorial officers, including that of the superintendent of the
district schools, the auditor, the librarian, and the treasurer of the
Territory. It also provided for internal improvements, such as roads and
bridges.

The appropriation for the district courts, for the payment of witnesses
and jurors in criminal cases, was $40,000; that for the Deseret
University and the deaf mutes was $66,000, and for the insane asylum
$25,000.

The board of regents of the Deseret University have borrowed money for
the completion of the university buildings which were authorized by
legislative action, and which is now due and no provision made for the
payment. The act appropriating for the benefit of the Territorial insane
asylum passed by the legislature was also vetoed. This included the sum
of $13,000, which had been borrowed by the board of directors of the
asylum for its completion and furnishing, and which now remains due and
unpaid. It also included the sum of $3,548.85 for the care and
maintenance of the indigent insane.

The legislature of the Territory, under existing law, will not again
convene for nearly two years, there being no authority for a special
session. In the meantime, under present conditions, the good order of
society will be jeopardized, educational and charitable institutions
will be paralyzed, and internal improvements stopped until the
legislature meets and makes provision for their support.

A determination on the part of the General Government to suppress
certain unlawful practices in this Territory demands neither the refusal
of the means to support the local government nor the sacrifice of the
interests of the community.

I therefore recommend the immediate enactment of such legislation as
will authorize the assembling of the legislature of that Territory in
special session at an early day, so that provision can be made to meet
the difficulties herein suggested.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, May 17, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I transmit to the Senate, for its consideration with a view to
ratification, a supplementary article, signed the 14th instant by the
Secretary of State and the minister of Mexico here, extending until
May 20, 1887, the time specified in Article VIII of the commercial
reciprocity treaty of January 20, 1883, between the United States and
Mexico, for the approval of the laws necessary to carry the said treaty
into effect.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, May 17, 1886_

_To the Senate_:

In response to a resolution of the Senate of the 5th instant, inquiring
as to the necessity for the continuance of the present charge for
passports for American citizens desiring to visit foreign countries, I
transmit herewith the report of the Secretary of State on the subject.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, May 17, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

With reference to the paragraph in my annual message to Congress in
which I called attention to the uncertainty that exists as to the
location of the frontier line between Alaska and British Columbia as
defined by the treaty of cession with Russia of March 30, 1867, I now
transmit herewith, for the information and consideration of Congress,
a report of the Secretary of State upon the subject, with accompanying
papers.

In view of the importance of the subject, I recommend that provision be
made by law for a preliminary survey of the boundary line in question by
officers of the United States, in order that the information necessary
for the basis of a treaty between this country and Great Britain for the
establishment of a definite boundary line may be obtained; and I also
recommend that the sum of $100,000, or so much thereof as may be
necessary, be appropriated for the expenses of making such survey.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, May 21, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, for your consideration with a view to their
ratification, the "convention concerning the international exchanges for
official documents and literary publications" and the "convention for
assuring the immediate exchange of the official journal as well as of
the parliamentary annals and documents."

The first was signed at Brussels on the 15th of March, 1886, by the
plenipotentiaries of the United States, Belgium, Brazil, Spain, Italy,
Portugal, Servia, and Switzerland.

The second was signed at the same place and on the same date by the
plenipotentiaries of the above-named powers, with the exception of
Switzerland.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 21, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I herewith transmit a report from the Secretary of State, dated the 19th
instant, touching the necessity of legislation to carry into effect the
provisions of Article II of the treaty between the United States and
China of November 17, 1880, for the repression of the opium traffic, and
recommend that appropriate legislation to fulfill that treaty promise of
this Government be provided without further delay.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 28, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State, accompanying the
report of consuls of the United States on the trade and commerce of
foreign countries.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 1, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In response to a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 17th
of March last, requesting the Secretary of State "to communicate to the
House of Representatives, if not incompatible with the public interest,
copies of recent correspondence and dispatches between the Secretary of
State and the minister of the United States at The Hague touching the
subject of taxation on petroleum in Holland and in the Dutch colonies,
and that of the export therefrom of leaf tobacco to the United States,"
with reference to my message to the House of Representatives of the 14th
ultimo [April], I now transmit a further report of the Secretary of
State on the subject.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 2, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In compliance with the request of the House of Representatives of this
date, I return herewith House bill No. 6391, entitled "An act to
authorize the Kansas City, Fort Scott and Gulf Railway Company to
construct and operate a railway through the Indian Territory, and for
other purposes."

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 9, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I herewith transmit a letter from the Secretary of State, with an
accompanying paper, in relation to the distribution of the fund
appropriated by the act of April 20, 1882, for the relief of the
captain, owners, officers, and crew of the brig _General Armstrong_.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, June 9, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, for your consideration with a view to its
ratification, a convention for the extradition of criminals, signed at
Tokyo on the 29th day of April, 1886, by the plenipotentiaries of the
United States and the Empire of Japan.

The negotiation which led to the conclusion of this convention was
caused immediately by the case of a forger in San Francisco, who, having
fled to Japan, was delivered up to the authorities of the State of
California. It was not possible for this Government to ask his
surrender, but the Japanese Government of its own motion caused his
delivery as a friendly act. It then suggested the conclusion of an
extradition convention between the two countries. The suggestion was
favorably entertained by this Government, not only on account of the
importance of such a treaty to the execution of the criminal laws of the
United States, but also because of the support which its conclusion
would give to Japan in her efforts toward judicial autonomy and complete
sovereignty.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 15, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State, concerning the
claim of Benjamin Weil and La Abra Mining Company, of Mexico, agreeably
to the resolution of the House of Representatives dated May 13, 1886.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 19, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

Upon an examination of a bill originating in the House of
Representatives, No. 4838, entitled "An act to abolish certain fees for
official services to American vessels, and to amend the laws relating to
shipping commissioners, seamen, and owners of vessels, and for other
purposes," I find that there is such a failure to adjust existing laws
to the new departure proposed by the bill as to greatly endanger the
public service if this bill should not be amended or at once
supplemented by additional legislation.

The fees which are at present collected from vessels for services
performed by the Bureau of Inspection, and which made up the fund from
which certain expenses appurtenant to that Bureau were paid, are by the
proposed bill abolished, but no provision has been substituted directing
that such expenses shall be paid from the public Treasury or any other
source.

The objects of the bill are in the main so useful and important that I
have concluded to approve the same upon the assurance of those actively
promoting its passage that another bill shall at once be introduced to
cover the defect above referred to.

The necessity of such supplemental legislation is so obvious that I hope
it will receive the immediate action of the Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 28, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I herewith inclose a report from the Secretary of State, with its
accompanying copies of papers, relative to the case of the American
schooner _Ounalaska_, which was duly condemned by the Government of
Salvador for having been employed in aid of an insurrection against that
Republic, and was subsequently presented to the United States. It seems
that an act of Congress accepting the gift on the part of this
Government is necessary to complete the transfer, and I recommend that
legislation in this sense be adopted. It further appears that one
Isidore Gutte, of San Francisco, has sought to obtain possession of the
condemned vessel, and I therefore suggest that a second provision to the
law accepting her be made giving authority to the Court of Claims to
hear and determine the question of title.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 28, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication, with an accompanying paper, from
the Secretary of State, in relation to the distribution of the award of
the late Mexican Claims Commission in the case of S.A. Belden & Co.
against the Republic of Mexico.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 30, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

In response to the resolution of the Senate of the 28th of April last, I
transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State in relation to the
affairs of the independent State of the Kongo.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 6, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In compliance with a concurrent resolution of this date, I return
herewith House bill No. 3501, entitled "An act granting a pension to
Daniel J. Bingham."

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, July 8, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, for your consideration with a view to its
ratification, a convention signed at London June 25, 1886, between the
United States of America and Great Britain, concerning the extradition
of persons charged with crime.

I also inclose a report from the Secretary of State and a copy of a
dispatch from the United States minister at London dated June 26, 1886,
in reference thereto.

The question of extradition has been discussed between the two countries
by Secretaries Fish, Evarts, and Frelinghuysen, as well as by the
present Secretary of State, and the method adopted by the inclosed
convention, namely, that of amending and extending the provisions of the
tenth article of the treaty of 1842, has seemed the most convenient and
expeditious.

In view of the continued pendency of the question and its great
importance owing to the contiguity of Her Majesty's territories with
those of the United States, I respectfully urge the consideration of the
convention by the Senate during the present session.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 9, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith, for your information, a report from the Secretary
of State, inclosing the correspondence which has been exchanged between
the Department of State and the Governments of Switzerland and Italy on
the subject of international copyright.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 12, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of 3d instant, with inclosures,
from the Secretary of the Interior, recommending legislative authority
for the use of funds from appropriation, Sioux, etc., 1887, for the
subsistence of certain Northern Cheyenne Indians who have gone or who
may go from the Sioux Reservation in Dakota to the Tongue River Indian
Agency or vicinity, in Montana.

The matter is presented for the favorable consideration of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 24, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In response to the resolutions of the Senate dated respectively May 10
and July 10, 1886, touching alleged seizures and detentions of vessels
of the United States in British North American waters, I transmit
herewith a report of the Secretary of State, with accompanying papers.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 27, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith, in response to the House resolution of the 10th
instant, a report from the Secretary of State, and accompanying papers,
relating to the imprisonment in Ecuador and subsequent release of Julio
R. Santos.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 29, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State, in reply to the
resolution of the House of Representatives of the 27th of May last, in
relation to trust funds.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 29, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith reports from the heads of the several Executive
Departments of the Government, in answer to a resolution of the Senate
of June 18, 1886, which requested certain information regarding
appointments in such Departments, and having relation to the
civil-service law.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 30, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In further response to the Senate resolutions of the 10th of May and
10th of July, 1886, touching the seizure and detention of American
vessels in Canadian waters, I transmit herewith a letter from the
Secretary of State dated the 29th instant, accompanied by a report from
the consul-general at Halifax relative to the subject.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 31, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I have approved House bill No. 4335, entitled "An act making an
appropriation to continue the construction of a public building at
Clarksburg, W. Va., and changing the limit of cost thereof."

A law passed by the last Congress authorized the construction of this
building and appropriated $50,000 for that purpose, which was declared
to be the limit of its cost. A site has been purchased for said
building, and, as is too often the case, it is now discovered that the
sum appropriated is insufficient to meet the expense of such a building
as is really needed.

The object of the bill which I have approved is to extend the limit of
the cost to $80,000 and to make the additional appropriation to reach
that sum. The first section fixes the limit above mentioned, but the
second section appropriates $35,000, and thus, with the appropriation of
$50,000 heretofore made, the aggregate appropriations exceed the sum to
which the cost of the building is limited by $5,000.

Inasmuch as this latter sum can not properly be applied to the
construction of the building, attention is called to the existence of
this excess of appropriation and the suggestion made that it be returned
to the Treasury.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _August 2, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In response to the resolution of your honorable body of the 26th ultimo,
I transmit a report of the Secretary of State, with accompanying papers,
communicating the information possessed by the Department of State
"concerning the alleged illegal detention of A.K. Cutting, an American
citizen, by the Mexican authorities at El Paso del Norte;" and as to the
further inquiry contained in said resolution, "whether any additional
United States troops have been recently ordered to Fort Bliss," I answer
in the negative.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _August 2, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In performance of the duty imposed upon me by the Constitution, I
herewith transmit for your information (the same having heretofore been
communicated to the Senate in response to a resolution of inquiry
adopted by that body July 26, 1886) certain correspondence and
accompanying documents in relation to the arrest and imprisonment at
Paso del Norte by Mexican authority of A.K. Cutting, a citizen of the
United States.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _August 2, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I have this day approved a bill originating in the House of
Representatives entitled "An act defining butter, also imposing a tax
upon and regulating the manufacture, sale, importation, and exportation
of oleomargarine."

This legislation has awakened much interest among the people of the
country, and earnest argument has been addressed to the Executive for
the purpose of influencing his action thereupon. Many in opposition have
urged its dangerous character as tending to break down the boundaries
between the proper exercise of legislative power by Federal and State
authority; many in favor of the enactment have represented that it
promised great advantages to a large portion of our population who sadly
need relief; and those on both sides of the question whose advocacy or
opposition is based upon no broader foundation than local or personal
interest have outnumbered all the others.

This upon its face and in its main features is a revenue bill, and
was first introduced in the House of Representatives, wherein the
Constitution declares that all bills for raising revenue shall
originate.

The Constitution has invested Congress with a very wide legislative
discretion both as to the necessity of taxation and the selection of the
objects of its burdens; and though if the question was presented to me
as an original proposition I might doubt the present need of increased
taxation, I deem it my duty in this instance to defer to the judgment of
the legislative branch of the Government, which has been so emphatically
announced in both Houses of Congress upon the passage of this bill.

Moreover, those who desire to see removed the weight of taxation now
pressing upon the people from other directions may well be justified in
the hope and expectation that the selection of an additional subject
of internal taxation so well able to bear it will in consistency be
followed by legislation relieving our citizens from other revenue
burdens, rendered by the passage of this bill even more than heretofore
unnecessary and needlessly oppressive.

It has been urged as an objection to this measure that while purporting
to be legislation for revenue its real purpose is to destroy, by the use
of the taxing power, one industry of our people for the protection and
benefit of another.

If entitled to indulge in such a suspicion as a basis of official action
in this case, and if entirely satisfied that the consequences indicated
would ensue, I should doubtless feel constrained to interpose Executive
dissent.

But I do not feel called upon to interpret the motives of Congress
otherwise than by the apparent character of the bill which has been
presented to me, and I am convinced that the taxes which it creates can
not possibly destroy the open and legitimate manufacture and sale of the
thing upon which it is levied. If this article has the merit which its
friends claim for it, and if the people of the land, with full knowledge
of its real character, desire to purchase and use it, the taxes exacted
by this bill will permit a fair profit to both manufacturer and dealer.
If the existence of the commodity taxed and the profits of its
manufacture and sale depend upon disposing of it to the people for
something else which it deceitfully imitates, the entire enterprise is
a fraud and not an industry; and if it can not endure the exhibition
of its real character which will be effected by the inspection,
supervision, and stamping which this bill directs, the sooner it is
destroyed the better in the interest of fair dealing.

Such a result would not furnish the first instance in the history of
legislation in which a revenue bill produced a benefit which was merely
incidental to its main purpose.

There is certainly no industry better entitled to the incidental
advantages which may follow this legislation than our farming and dairy
interests, and to none of our people should they be less begrudged than
our farmers and dairymen. The present depression of their occupations,
the hard, steady, and often unremunerative toil which such occupations
exact, and the burdens of taxation which our agriculturists necessarily
bear entitle them to every legitimate consideration.

Nor should there be opposition to the incidental effect of this
legislation on the part of those who profess to be engaged honestly and
fairly in the manufacture and sale of a wholesome and valuable article
of food which by its provisions may be subject to taxation. As long as
their business is carried on under cover and by false pretenses such
men have bad companions in those whose manufactures, however vile and
harmful, take their place without challenge with the better sort in a
common crusade of deceit against the public. But if this occupation and
its methods are forced into the light and all these manufactures must
thus either stand upon their merits or fall, the good and bad must soon
part company and the fittest only will survive.

Not the least important incident related to this legislation is the
defense afforded to the consumer against the fraudulent substitution
and sale of an imitation for a genuine article of food of very general
household use. Notwithstanding the immense quantity of the article
described in this bill which is sold to the people for their consumption
as food, and notwithstanding the claim made that its manufacture
supplies a cheap substitute for butter, I venture to say that hardly a
pound ever entered a poor man's house under its real name and in its
true character.

While in its relation to an article of this description there should
be no governmental regulation of what the citizen shall eat, it is
certainly not a cause of regret if by legislation of this character he
is afforded a means by which he may better protect himself against
imposition in meeting the needs and wants of his daily life.

Having entered upon this legislation, it is manifestly a duty to render
it as effective as possible in the accomplishment of all the good which
should legitimately follow in its train.

This leads to the suggestion that the article proposed to be taxed and
the circumstances which subject it thereto should be clearly and with
great distinctness defined in the statute. It seems to me that this
object has not been completely attained in the phraseology of the second
section of the bill, and that question may well arise as to the precise
condition the article to be taxed must assume in order to be regarded as
"made in imitation or semblance of butter, or, when so made, calculated
or intended to be sold as butter or for butter."

The fourteenth and fifteenth sections of the bill, in my opinion, are in
danger of being construed as an interference with the police powers of
the States. Not being entirely satisfied of the unconstitutionality of
these provisions, and regarding them as not being so connected and
interwoven with the other sections as, if found invalid, to vitiate the
entire measure, I have determined to commend them to the attention of
the House with a view to an immediate amendment of the bill if it should
be deemed necessary and if it is practicable at this late day in the
session of Congress.

The fact, too, that the bill does not take effect by its terms until
ninety days have elapsed after its approval, thus leaving it but one
month in operation before the next session of Congress, when, if time
does not now permit, the safety and efficiency of the measure may be
abundantly protected by remedial legislative action, and the desire
to see realized the beneficial results which it is expected will
immediately follow the inauguration of this legislation, have had their
influence in determining my official action.

The considerations which have been referred to will, I hope, justify
this communication and the suggestions which it contains.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _August 4, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of the
3d instant (the Senate concurring), I return herewith Senate bill No.
2056, entitled "An act to amend the pension laws by increasing the
pensions of soldiers and sailors who have lost an arm or leg in the
service."

GROVER CLEVELAND.

VETO MESSAGES.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 10, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I have carefully considered Senate bill No. 193, entitled "An act for
the relief of John Hollins McBlair," and hereby return the same without
approval to the Senate, where it originated, with my objections to the
same.

The object of this bill is to suspend the provisions of law regulating
appointments in the Army by promotion so far as they affect John Hollins
McBlair, and to authorize the President to nominate and, by and with
the advice and consent of the Senate, appoint said McBlair a first
lieutenant in the Army and to place him upon the retired list as of the
date of April 8, 1864, with the pay of his rank from April 30, 1884.

The beneficiary named in this bill was appointed a first lieutenant in
the Army, from civil life, in June, 1861, with rank from May 14, 1861.

It appears from his own testimony, afterwards taken before a retiring
board, that at the time he was commissioned he was but 17 years of age.

In October, 1861, he was in the field for five days with his regiment,
within which time he participated in no battle, skirmish, or engagement
of any kind.

After five days spent in marching and camping he was taken sick, and
after remaining in camp six or seven weeks, his illness still
continuing, he was granted sick leave and came to Washington.

In June, 1862, he was put on duty in the Commissary Department at
Washington and remained there until August, 1863, when he was summoned
before a retiring board convened for the purpose of retiring disabled
officers.

From testimony before this board it appears that the illness which
caused him to leave his regiment was one not uncommon in the Army, and
yielded to treatment, so that in April or May, 1862, he was completely
cured.

About this time, however, he was attacked with convulsions, which were
pronounced by the physicians examined before the board to be a form of
epilepsy, and for this cause he was found to be incapacitated for active
service.

The medical testimony, while it suggested various causes for this
epileptic condition, negatives entirely any claim that these attacks
were at all related to the illness which obliged this officer to abandon
service with his regiment. He testified himself that he had been told
he had one or two convulsions in childhood, but there is no direct
testimony that he was subject to epileptic attacks before he entered the
Army.

The retiring board determined upon the proof that this incapacity
did not result from any incident of military service, and therefore
Lieutenant McBlair was in October, 1863, retired wholly from the service
with one year's pay and allowances, which is the usual action in such
cases, and which was approved by the President.

But in April, 1864, the President, in a review of the case, made an
order that instead of this officer being wholly retired he should be
placed upon the retired list as of the date when the action of the
retiring board was originally approved.

For about twenty years, and up to April 30, 1884, he remained upon the
retired list and received the pay to which this position entitled him.

Quite recently, in consequence of a claim of additional pay which he
made upon the Government, his status was examined by the Court of
Claims, which decided that the action of the President in April, 1864,
by which he sought to change the original disposition of the case upon
the findings of the retiring board, was nugatory, and that ever since
October, 1863, this officer had not been connected with the Army and had
been receiving from the Government money to which he was not entitled.

If the bill herewith returned becomes a law, it makes valid all payments
made, and if its purpose is carried out causes such payments to be
resumed.

The finding of the retiring board seems so satisfactory and the merits
of this case so slight in the light of the large sum already paid to
the applicant, while the claims of thousands of wounded and disabled
soldiers wait for justice at the hands of the Government, that I am
constrained to interpose an objection to a measure which proposes to
suspend general and wholesome laws for the purpose of granting what
appears to me to be an undeserved gratuity.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 11, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I return herewith without approval, and with a statement of my
objections thereto, Senate bill No. 150, entitled "An act to quiet title
of settlers on the Des Moines River lands in the State of Iowa, and for
other purposes."

This proposed legislation grows out of a grant of land made to the
Territory of Iowa in the year 1846 to aid in the improvement of the
navigation of the Des Moines River.

The language of this grant was such that it gave rise to conflicting
decisions on the part of the Government Departments as to its extent,
and it was not until 1860 that this question was authoritatively and
finally settled by the Supreme Court of the United States. Its decision
diminished the extent of the grant to a quantity much less than had been
insisted on by certain interested parties and rendered invalid the
titles of parties who held, under the Territory or State of Iowa, lands
beyond the limit of the grant fixed by the decision of the court.

For the purpose of validating such titles and to settle all disputes so
far as the General Government was concerned, the Congress, in the year
1861, by a joint resolution, transferred to the State of Iowa all the
title then retained by the United States to the lands within the larger
limits which had been claimed, and then held by _bona fide_
purchasers from the State; and in 1862 an act of Congress was passed for
the same general purpose.

Without detailing the exact language of this resolution and statute, it
certainly seems to be such a transfer and relinquishment of all
interests in the land mentioned on the part of the United States as to
relieve the Government from any further concern therein.

The questions unfortunately growing out of this grant and the
legislation relating thereto have been passed upon by the United States
Supreme Court in numerous cases, and as late as 1883 that court,
referring to its many previous decisions, adjudged that "the act of 1862
(12 U.S. Statutes at Large, ch. 161, p. 543) transferred the title from
the United States and vested it in the State of Iowa for the use of its
grantees under the river grant."

Bills similar to this have been before Congress for a number of years
and have failed of passage; and at least on one occasion the Committee
on the Judiciary of the Senate reported adversely upon a measure
covering the same ground.

I have carefully examined the legislation upon the subject of this
grant, and studied the decisions of the court upon the numerous and
complicated questions which have arisen from such legislation, and the
positions of the parties claiming an interest in the land covered by
said grant, and I can not but think that every possible question that
can be raised, or at least that ought to be raised, in any suit relating
to these lands has been determined by the highest judicial authority in
the land; and if any substantial point remains yet unsettled, I believe
there is no difficulty in presenting it to the proper tribunal.

This bill declares that certain lands which nearly twenty-four years ago
the United States entirely relinquished are still public lands, and
directs the Attorney-General to begin suits to assert and protect the
title of the United States in such lands.

If it be true that these are public lands, the declaration that they are
so by enactment is entirely unnecessary; and if they are wrongfully
withheld from the Government, the duty and authority of the
Attorney-General are not aided by the proposed legislation. If they are
not public lands because the United States have conveyed them to others,
the bill is subject to grave objections as an attempt to destroy vested
rights and disturb interests which have long since become fixed.

If a law of Congress could, in the manner contemplated by the bill,
change, under the Constitution, the existing rights of any of the
parties claiming interests in these lands, it hardly seems that any new
questions could be presented to the courts which would do more than
raise false hopes and renew useless and bitter strife and litigation.

It seems to me that all controversies which can hereafter arise between
those claiming these lands have been fairly remitted to the State of
Iowa, and that there they can be properly and safely left; and the
Government, through its Attorney-General, should not be called upon to
litigate the rights of private parties.

It is not pleasant to contemplate loss threatened to any party acting
in good faith, caused by uncertainty in the language of laws or their
conflicting interpretation; and if there are persons occupying these
lands who labor under such disabilities as prevent them from appealing
to the courts for a redress of their wrongs, a plain statute, directed
simply to a remedy for such disabilities, would not be objectionable.

Should there be meritorious cases of hardship and loss, caused by an
invitation on the part of the Government to settle upon lands apparently
public, but to which no right or lawful possession can be secured, it
would be better, rather than to attempt a disturbance of titles already
settled, to ascertain such losses and do equity by compensating the
proper parties through an appropriation for that purpose.

A law to accomplish this very object was passed by Congress in the year
1873.

Valuable proof is thus furnished, by the only law ever passed upon the
subject, of the manner in which it was thought proper by the Congress
at that time to meet the difficulties suggested by the bill now under
consideration.

Notwithstanding the fact that there may be parties in the occupancy
of these lands who suffer hardship by the application of strict legal
principles to their claims, safety lies in noninterference by Congress
with matters which should be left to judicial cognizance; and I am
unwilling to concur in legislation which, if not an encroachment upon
judicial power, trenches so closely thereon as to be of doubtful
expediency, and which at the same time increases the elements of
litigation that have heretofore existed and endangers vested rights.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 26, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I herewith return Senate bill No. 349, entitled "An act for the
promotion of anatomical science and to prevent the desecration of
graves," without my approval.

The purpose of this bill is to permit the delivery of certain dead
bodies to the medical colleges located in the District of Columbia for
dissection.

Such disposition of the bodies of unknown and pauper dead is only
excused by the necessity of acquiring by this means proper and useful
anatomical knowledge, and the laws by which it is permitted should, in
deference to a decent and universal sentiment, carefully guard against
abuse and needless offense.

The measure under consideration does not with sufficient care specify
and limit the officers and the parties who it is proposed to invest
with discretion in the disposition of dead bodies remaining in the
institutions and places mentioned in the bill. The second section
indicates an intention to prevent the use of said bodies for any other
purpose than the promotion of anatomical and surgical knowledge within
the District of Columbia, and to secure after such use the decent burial
of the remains. It declares that a bond shall be given providing for the
performance of these conditions. But instead of exacting the bond from
the medical colleges, to which alone, by the terms of the first section,
the bodies are to be delivered, such bond is required of "every
physician or surgeon before receiving such dead body."

The bill also provides that a relative by blood or marriage, or a
friend, may, within forty-eight hours after death, demand that any body
be buried, upon satisfying "the authorities" of the relationship claimed
to the deceased.

The "authorities" to be thus satisfied should be clearly defined, and
the determination of a question so important should be left with those
only who will perform this duty with proper care and consideration.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, April 30, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I herewith return without my approval Senate bill No. 141, entitled "An
act to extend the provisions of the act of June 10, 1880, entitled 'An
act to amend the statutes in relation to immediate transportation of
dutiable goods, and for other purposes,' to the port of Omaha, in the
State of Nebraska."

The statute, which was passed June 10, 1880, referred to in the title of
this bill permitted certain merchandise imported at specified ports, but
which was consigned to certain other ports which were mentioned by name
in the seventh section of said act, to be shipped immediately after
entry at the port of arrival to such destination.

The seventh section of said act contained the names of more than seventy
ports or places to which imported merchandise might be thus immediately
shipped. One of the places thus named is "Omaha, in Nebraska."

But it was declared in a proviso which was made a part of this section
that the privilege of immediate transportation contemplated by the act
should "not extend to any place at which there are not the necessary
officers for the appraisement of merchandise and the collection of
duties."

Because there were no such officers at Omaha the privilege mentioned was
withheld from that place by the Treasury Department.

The bill submitted to me for approval provides that these privileges
conferred by the act of June 10, 1880, be "extended to the port of
Omaha, in the State of Nebraska, as provided for as to the ports
mentioned in section 7 of said act."

I can not see that anything is gained by this legislation.

If the circumstances should warrant such a course, the authority which
withholds such privileges from any of the places mentioned in the law of
1880 can confer the same without the aid of a new statute. This position
is sustained by an opinion of the Attorney-General, dated in February,
1885.

If the legislation now proposed should become operative, the privileges
extended to the city of Omaha would still be subject to the proviso
attached to the seventh section of the law of 1880, and such newly
granted privileges would be liable to immediate withdrawal by the
Secretary of the Treasury.

Thus, if the design of this bill is to restore to the city named the
privileges permitted by the law of 1880, it seems to be entirely
unnecessary, since the power of such restoration is now fully vested
in the Treasury Department. If the object sought is to bestow such
privileges entirely free from the operation of the proviso above
recited, the language of the bill does not accomplish that result.

I understand that the Government has not now at Omaha "the necessary
officers for the appraisement of merchandise and the collection of
duties," which by such proviso are necessary in order to secure to any
place the advantages of immediate transportation. In the absence of such
officers the proposed legislation would be nugatory and inoperative.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 8, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval a bill numbered 3019, entitled "An
act to increase the pension of Abigail Smith," which bill originated in
the House of Representatives.

This proposed legislation does injustice to a very worthy pensioner who
was on the pension roll at the time of the passage of the law which
took effect on the 19th day of March last, and by virtue of which all
pensions of her class were increased from $8 to $12 per month. Under
this law she became entitled to her increased pension from the date of
its passage. The bill now returned allows her the same amount, but if it
became a law I suppose it would supersede her claim under the previous
statute and postpone the receipt by her of the increase to the date of
the passage of the new law.

She would thus lose for nearly two months the increase of pension
already secured to her.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 8, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without my approval House bill No. 1471, entitled "An act
increasing the pension of Andrew J. Hill."

This bill doubles the pension which the person named therein has been
receiving for a number of years. It appears from the report of the
committee to which the bill was referred that a claim made by him for
increased pension has been lately rejected by the Pension Bureau "on the
ground that the claimant is now receiving a pension commensurate with
the degree of disability found to exist."

The policy of frequently reversing by special enactment the decisions
of the Bureau invested by law with the examination of pension claims,
fully equipped for such examination, and which ought not to be suspected
of any lack of liberality to our veteran soldiers, is exceedingly
questionable. It may well be doubted if a committee of Congress has a
better opportunity than such an agency to judge of the merits of these
claims. If, however, there is any lack of power in the Pension Bureau
for a full investigation, it should be supplied; if the system adopted
is inadequate to do full justice to claimants, it should be corrected,
and if there is a want of sympathy and consideration for the defenders
of our Government the Bureau should be reorganized.

The disposition to concede the most generous treatment to the disabled,
aged, and needy among our veterans ought not to be restrained; and it
must be admitted that in some cases justice and equity can not be done
nor the charitable tendencies of the Government in favor of worthy
objects of its care indulged under fixed rules. These conditions
sometimes justify a resort to special legislation, but I am convinced
that the interposition by special enactment in the granting of pensions
should be rare and exceptional. In the nature of things if this is
lightly done and upon slight occasion, an invitation is offered for the
presentation of claims to Congress which upon their merits could not
survive the test of an examination by the Pension Bureau, and whose
only hope of success depends upon sympathy, often misdirected, instead
of right and justice. The instrumentality organized by law for the
determination of pension claims is thus often overruled and discredited,
and there is danger that in the end popular prejudice will be created
against those who are worthily entitled to the bounty of the Government.

There has lately been presented to me, on the same day, for approval,
nearly 240 special bills granting and increasing pensions and restoring
to the pension list the names of parties which for cause have been
dropped. To aid Executive duty they were referred to the Pension Bureau
for examination and report. After a delay absolutely necessary they have
been returned to me within a few hours of the limit constitutionally
permitted for Executive action. Two hundred and thirty-two of these
bills are thus classified:

Eighty-one cover cases in which favorable action by the Pension Bureau
was denied by reason of the insufficiency of the testimony filed to
prove the facts alleged.

These bills I have approved on the assumption that the claims were
meritorious and that by the passage of the bills the Government has
waived full proof of the facts.

Twenty-six of the bills cover claims rejected by the Pension Bureau
because the evidence produced tended to prove that the alleged
disability existed before the claimant's enlistment; 21 cover claims
which have been denied by such Bureau because the evidence tended to
show that the disability, though contracted in the service, was not
incurred in the line of duty; 33 cover claims which have been denied
because the evidence tended to establish that the disability originated
after the soldier's discharge from the Army; 47 cover claims which have
been denied because the general pension laws contain no provisions under
which they could be allowed, and 24 of the claims have never been
presented to the Pension Bureau.

I estimate the expenditure involved in these bills at more than $35,000
annually.

Though my conception of public duty leads me to the conclusion, upon the
slight examination which I have been able to give such of these bills as
are not comprised in the first class above mentioned, that many of them
should be disapproved, I am utterly unable to submit within the time
allowed me for that purpose my objections to the same.

They will therefore become operative without my approval.

A sufficient reason for the return of the particular bill now under
consideration is found in the fact that it provides that the name of
Andrew J. Hill be placed upon the pension roll, while the records of the
Pension Bureau, as well as a medical certificate made a part of the
committee's report, disclose that the correct name of the intended
beneficiary is Alfred J. Hill.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 17, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 1397, entitled "An act to
establish a port of delivery at Springfield, in the State of
Massachusetts."

It appears that the best reasons urged for the passage of this bill are
that Springfield has a population of about 40,000, that the imports to
the section of country where the city is located for the last year
amounted in value to nearly $3,000,000, and that the importers at this
point labored under a disadvantage in being obliged to go to New York
and Boston to clear their goods, which are frequently greatly delayed.

The Government is now subjected to great loss of revenue through the
intricacies of the present system relating to the collection of customs
dues, and through the frauds and evasions which that system permits and
invites. It is also the cause of much of the delay and vexation to which
the honest importer is subjected.

I am of the opinion that the reforms of present methods which have been
lately earnestly pressed upon Congress should be inaugurated, instead of
increasing the number of ports where present evils may be further
extended.

The bill now under consideration provides that a surveyor of customs
shall be appointed to reside at said port, who shall receive a salary
not to exceed $1,000 per annum.

It is quite obvious that an experienced force of employees at the ports
where goods for Springfield are entered would be much better qualified
to adjust the duties upon the same than the person thus proposed to be
added to the vast army of Federal officials.

There are many cities in the different States having larger populations
than Springfield, and fully as much entitled, upon every ground
presented, to the advantages sought by this bill; and yet it is clear
that the following of the precedent which the proposed legislation would
establish could not fail to produce confusion and uncertainty in the
adjustment of customs dues, leading to irritating discriminations and
probable loss to the Government.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 24, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I herewith return without approval Senate bill No. 2186, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Louis Melcher."

This claimant enlisted on the 25th day of May, 1861, and was discharged
for disability on the 16th day of August, 1861, having been in the
service less than three months.

The certificate of the surgeon of his regiment, made at the time of his
discharge, stated his disability to be "lameness, caused by previous
repeated and extensive ulcerations of his legs, extending deeply among
the muscles and impairing their powers and action by cicatrices, all
existing before enlistment and not mentioned to the mustering officers
at the time."

Upon this certificate, given at the time of the claimant's discharge and
while he was actually under the surgeon's observation, an application
for a pension was rejected by the Pension Bureau.

In the absence of anything impeaching the ability and integrity of the
surgeon of the regiment, his certificate should, in my opinion, be
regarded as a true statement of the condition of the claimant at the
time of his discharge, though the committee's report suggests that the
surgeon's skill may have been at fault when he declared that the ulcers
existed before enlistment. The cicatrices showing beyond a doubt the
previous existence of this difficulty would be plainly apparent upon an
examination by a surgeon, and their origin could hardly be mistaken.
The term of the claimant's service was not sufficiently long to have
developed and healed, even imperfectly, in a location previously
healthy, ulcers of the kind mentioned in the claimant's application.

My approval of this bill is therefore withheld upon the ground that I
find nothing in my examination of the facts connected with the case
which impeaches the value of the surgeon's certificate upon which the
adverse action of the Pension Bureau was predicated.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 24, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

A bill which originated in the Senate, entitled "An act granting a
pension to Edward Ayers," and numbered 363, is herewith returned without
approval.

The person named in this bill enlisted October 3, 1861, in an Indiana
regiment and was mustered out of the service December 13, 1865. He
represents that he was injured in the hip at the battle of Days Gap,
April 30, 1863, and for this a pension is provided for him by the bill
under consideration. His application for pension has been rejected by
the Pension Bureau on the ground that it was proved on a special
examination of the case that the claimant was injured by a fall when a
boy, and that the injury complained of existed prior to his enlistment.

There is not a particle of proof or a fact stated either in the
committee's report or the records in the Pension Bureau, so far as they
are brought to my notice, tending to show that the claimant was in
hospital or under medical care a single day during the whole term of his
enlistment.

The report of the committee contains the following statement:

The record evidence proves that he was in this engagement, but there is
no proof from this source that he was wounded. By numerous comrades who
were present it is proven that he was hurt by the explosion of a shell
as claimed. It is also shown that he has been disabled ever since; and
the examining surgeon specifically describes the wound, and twice
verifies that he is permanently disabled. From the fact that a man was
exceedingly liable to injury under the circumstances in which he was
placed, and from the evidence of eyewitnesses, the committee are of
opinion that he was wounded as alleged.

A wound from a shell causing the person injured to be "disabled ever
since" usually results in hospital or medical treatment. Not only is
there no such claim made in this case, but, on the contrary, it appears
that the claimant served in his regiment two years and nearly eight
months after the alleged injury, and until he was mustered out.

It is represented to me by a report from the Pension Bureau that after
his alleged wound, and in May or June, 1863, the claimant deserted, and
in July of that year was arrested in the State of Indiana and returned
to duty without trial. If this report is correct, the party now seeking
a pension at the hands of the Government for disability incurred in the
service seems to have been capable of considerable physical exertion,
though not very creditable, within a few weeks after he claims to have
received the injury upon which his application is based.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 24, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 1630, entitled "An act
granting a pension to James C. Chandler."

It appears from the report of the committee to whom this bill was
referred and from an examination of the official records that the
proposed beneficiary first enlisted on the 27th day of August, 1861,
and about nine months thereafter, on the 1st day of June, 1862, was
discharged on account of disability arising from chronic bronchitis.

Notwithstanding the chronic character of his alleged disability, he
enlisted again on the 3d day of January, 1864, seventeen months after
such discharge.

No statement is presented of the bounty received by him upon either
enlistment.

He was finally mustered out on the 19th day of September, 1865.

He first applied for a pension under the general law in May, 1869,
alleging that in April, 1862, he was run over by a wagon and injured
in his ankle. This accident occurred during his first enlistment; but
instead of the injury having been then regarded a disability, he was
discharged from such enlistment less than two months thereafter on
account of chronic bronchitis.

It appears from the committee's report that his application was rejected
and that another was afterwards made, alleging that the claimant had
been afflicted with typhoid fever contracted in May, 1862, resulting in
"rheumatism and disease of the back in region of kidneys."

This application was also rejected, on the ground that any disability
that might have arisen from the cause alleged "had not existed in a
pensionable degree since the date of filing the claim therefor," which
was February 10, 1885.

There still remained an appeal to Congress, and probably there were not
wanting those who found their interests in advising such an appeal and
who had at hand Congressional precedents which promised a favorable
result. That the parties interested did not miscalculate the chances
of success is demonstrated by the bill now before me, which, in direct
opposition to the action of the Pension Bureau, grants a pension to
a man who, though discharged from enlistment for a certain alleged
disability, made two applications for a pension based upon two distinct
causes, both claimed to exist within two months prior to such discharge,
and both different from the one upon which he accepted the same, and
notwithstanding the fact that the proposed beneficiary, after all these
disabilities had occurred, passed an examination as to his physical
fitness for reenlistment, actually did reenlist, and served till finally
mustered out at the close of the war.

If any money is to be given this man from the public Treasury, it should
not be done under the guise of a pension.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 24, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I hereby return without approval Senate bill No. 857, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Dudley B. Branch."

This claim is based upon the allegation, as appears by the committee's
report, that the person named in the bill has a hernia, and that on the
9th day of June, 1862, while in the military service and in the line of
duty, "in getting over a fence he fell heavily, striking a stone or hard
substance, and received the hernia in his left side."

In December, 1875, thirteen and a half years thereafter, he filed an
application for a pension, which was rejected by the Pension Bureau on
the ground that there was no record of the alleged hernia, and the
claimant was unable to furnish satisfactory evidence of its origin in
the service.

The fact is stated in the committee's report that late in the year 1863
this soldier was transferred to the Invalid Corps, and the records show
that he was thus transferred for a disability entirely different from
that upon which he now bases his claim. He was mustered out in
September, 1864, at the end of his term of service.

I am convinced that the rejection of this claim by the Pension Bureau
was correct, and think its action should not be reversed.

I suppose an injury of the description claimed, if caused by violence
directly applied, is quite palpable, its effect usually immediate, and
its existence easily proved. The long time which elapsed between the
injury and the claimant's application for a pension may be fairly
considered as bearing upon the merits of such application, while the
fact that the claimant was transferred to the Invalid Corps more than
a year after he alleges the injury occurred, for an entirely different
disability, can not be overlooked. In the committee's report the
statement is found that the beneficiary named in the bill was in two
different hospitals during the year 1863, and yet it is not claimed that
the history of his hospital treatment furnishes any proof of the injury
upon which his claim is now based.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 25, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 1998, entitled "An act for the
relief of John D. Ham," which grants a pension to the party named.

The claimant alleges that he enrolled in the Army in January, 1862,
and was "sworn in at his own home;" that the next day he started on
horseback to go to the regiment he was to join, and that on the way his
horse fell upon his left ankle, whereby he sustained an injury which
entitles him to a pension.

His name is not borne upon any of the rolls of the regiment he alleges
he was on his way to join.

He filed his application for pension in the Pension Bureau October 17,
1879 (seventeen years after his alleged injury), which was rejected
apparently on the ground that he was not in the military service when
the disability claimed was incurred.

He was drafted in 1863 and served until he was mustered out in 1865.

It is entirely clear that this claimant was not in the military service
at the time he claims to have been injured; and his conduct in remaining
at home until he was drafted, nearly two years afterwards, furnishes
proof that he did not regard himself as in the meantime owing any
military duty. These considerations, and the further facts that upon
being drafted he was accepted as physically qualified for service, that
he actually thereafter served a year and eight months, and that he
waited seventeen years before claiming pension for his injury, in my
mind present a case upon which the claimant is entitled to no relief
even if charity instead of just liberality is invoked.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 25, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I herewith return without approval Senate bill No. 1290, entitled "An
act granting a pension to David W. Hamilton."

A claim for pension filed by him in November, 1879, was rejected by the
Pension Bureau on the ground that his alleged disability existed prior
to his enlistment.

An examination of the records in the Adjutant-General's Office and
a statement from the Pension Bureau derived from the claimant's
application there for pension, with a reference to the report of the
committee to whom this bill was referred, disclose the following facts:

The claimant was mustered in the service as first lieutenant in
September, 1861, and as captain June 12, 1862. He is reported as present
with his company until the 30th of that month. For the six months
immediately following the latter date he is reported as "absent sick,"
and for the ten months next succeeding, and until October 27, 1863, as
"absent on detached service." On the day last mentioned he tendered his
resignation at Camp Morton, in the State of Indiana, to enable him to
accept an appointment as captain in the Invalid Corps. He was thereupon
so appointed upon account of "chronic enlargement of the spermatic cord
of several years' standing, consequent upon hydrocele." He remained in
the Invalid Corps until July 12, 1864, when, upon the tender of his
resignation, he was discharged.

Less than four months afterwards, and on the 6th day of November, 1864,
he was mustered in the service as a captain in another regiment of
volunteers, and on the 17th day of November, 1865, again tendered his
resignation, and was finally discharged.

Upon his application for pension under the general law, fourteen years
thereafter, he admitted that he suffered from hydrocele as early as
1856, but claimed that an operation then performed for the same had
given him permanent relief.

It will be seen that the claimant's term of service was liberally
interspersed with sick leave, detached service, resignations, and
membership in the Invalid Corps. He admits having the trouble which
would naturally result in his alleged disability long before he entered
the service. The surgeon upon whose certificate he was appointed to the
Invalid Corps must have stated to him the character of his difficulty
and that it was chronic. No application for pension was made until
fourteen years after his discharge and just prior to the expiration of
the time within which large arrearages might have been claimed. There is
no hint of any medical testimony at all contradicting the certificate of
the army surgeon made in 1863, but it is stated in the report of the
committee that he can not procure medical testimony as to his soundness
before entering the service because his family physician is dead. If he
had filed his application earlier, it would have appeared in better
faith, and it may be that he could have secured the evidence of his
family physician if it was of the character he desired.

After the Pension Bureau has been in operation for a score of years
since the late civil war, equipped with thousands of employees charged
with no other duty except the ascertainment and adjustment of the claims
of our discharged soldiers and their surviving relatives, it seems
to me that a stronger case than this should be presented to justify
the passage of a special act, twenty-three years after an alleged
disability, granting a pension which has been refused by the Bureau
especially organized for the purpose of allowing the same under just
and liberal laws.

I am by no means insensible to that influence which leads the judgment
toward the allowance of every claim alleged to be founded upon patriotic
service in the nation's cause; and yet I neither believe it to be a duty
nor a kindness to the worthy citizens for whose benefit our scheme of
pensions was provided to permit the diversion of the nation's bounty to
objects not within its scope and purpose.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 28, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I hereby return without approval Senate bill No. 1850, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Mrs. Annie C. Owen."

The husband of the claimant was mustered into the service as second
lieutenant December 14, 1861, and discharged October 16, 1862. It
appears that he died in 1876 from neuralgia of the heart. In 1883 the
present claimant filed her application for pension, alleging that her
husband received two shell wounds, one in the calf of his left leg and
one in his left side, on the 1st day of July, 1862, and claiming that
they were in some way connected with the cause of his death.

On the records of his command there is no mention made of either wound,
but it does appear that on the 8th day of July, seven days after the
date of the alleged wounds, he was granted a leave of absence for thirty
days on account, as stated in a medical certificate, of "remittent fever
and diarrhea." A medical certificate dated August 5, 1862, while absent
on leave, represents him to be at that time suffering from "chronic
bronchitis and acute dysentery."

The application made for pension by the widow was rejected by the
Pension Bureau February 1, 1886.

There is nothing before me showing that the husband of the claimant ever
filed an application for pension, though he lived nearly fourteen years
after his discharge; and his widow's claim was not made until twenty-one
years after the alleged wounds and seven years after her husband's
death.

If the information furnished concerning this soldier's service is
correct, this claim for pension must be based upon a mistake. It is
hardly possible that wounds such as are alleged should be received in
battle by a second lieutenant and no record made of them; that he should
seven days thereafter receive a leave of absence for other sickness,
with no mention of these wounds, and that a medical certificate should
be made (probably with a view of prolonging his leave) stating still
other ailments, but silent as to wounds. The further facts that he made
no claim for pension and that the claim of his widow was long delayed
are worthy of consideration. And if the wounds were received as
described there is certainly no necessary connection between them and
death fourteen years afterwards from neuralgia of the heart.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 28, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval a bill originating in the House of
Representatives, numbered 2145, and entitled "An act for the relief of
Rebecca Eldridge."

This bill provides for the payment of a pension to the claimant as the
widow of Wilber H. Eldridge, who was mustered into the service on the
24th day of July, 1862, and discharged June 21, 1865. He was pensioned
at the rate of $2 per month for a slight wound in the calf of the left
leg, received on the 25th day of March, 1865. There is no pretense that
this wound was at all serious, and a surgeon who examined it in 1880
reported that in his opinion the wounded man "was not incapacitated from
obtaining his subsistence by manual labor;" that the ball passed "rather
superficially through the muscles," and that the party examined said
there was no lameness "unless after long standing or walking a good
deal."

On the 28th of January, 1881, while working about a building, he fell
backward from a ladder and fractured his skull, from which he died the
same day.

Without a particle of proof and with no fact established which connects
the fatal accident in the remotest degree with the wound referred to, it
is proposed to grant a pension to the widow of $12 per month.

It is not a pleasant thing to interfere in such a case; but we are
dealing with pensions, and not with gratuities.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 28, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I hereby return without approval Senate bill No. 1253, entitled "An act
granting a pension to J.D. Haworth."

It is proposed by this bill to grant a pension to the claimant for the
alleged loss of sight in one eye and the impairment of the vision of the
other.

From the information furnished me I am convinced that the difficulty
alleged by this applicant had its origin in causes existing prior to his
enlistment, and that his present condition of disability is not the
result of his service in the Army.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 28, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without approval a bill which originated in the House of
Representatives, numbered 1582, and entitled "An act for the relief of
Eleanor C. Bangham."

The claimant in this case is the widow of John S. Bangham, who was
mustered into the service of the United States as a private on the 26th
day of March, 1864, and was discharged by general order June 23, 1865.

It appears that during his fifteen months of service he was sick a
considerable part of the time, and the records in two of the hospitals
to which he was admitted show that his sickness was epilepsy. There are
no records showing the character of his illness in other hospitals.

His widow, the present claimant, filed an application for pension March
12, 1878, alleging that her husband committed suicide September 10,
1873, from the effects of chronic diarrhea and general debility
contracted in the service. Upon the evidence then produced her claim was
allowed at the rate of $8 a month. She remained upon the rolls until
July, 1885, when a special examination of the case was made, upon which
it was developed and admitted by the pensioner that the deceased soldier
had suffered from epilepsy from early childhood, and that during a
despondent mood following an epileptic fit he committed suicide.

Upon these facts it was determined by the Pension Bureau that the
pension should not have been granted, and it was withdrawn. It was so
satisfactorily proven that the disease which indirectly caused the death
of the claimant's husband was not contracted in the service that, in my
opinion, the conclusion arrived at on such examination should stand.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 28, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without approval bill No. 1406, which originated in the
House of Representatives and is entitled "An act granting a pension to
Simmons W. Harden."

The claimant mentioned in this bill enlisted as a private December 30,
1863, and was discharged May 17, 1865.

He filed an application for pension in 1866, in which he alleged that
he was injured in the left side by a fall from a wagon while in the
service.

In 1880 he filed another application, in which he claimed that he was
afflicted with an enlargement of the lungs and heart from overexertion
at a review. His record in the Army makes no mention of either of these
troubles, but does show that he had at some time during his service
dyspepsia and intermittent fever.

The fact that fourteen years elapsed after he claimed to have been
injured by a fall from a wagon before he discovered that enlargement of
the lungs and heart was his real difficulty is calculated to at least
raise a doubt as to the validity of his claim.

The evidence as to his condition at the time of enlistment, as well as
since, seems quite contradictory and unsatisfactory. The committee to
which the bill was referred report that "the only question in the case
is as to his condition at time of enlistment, and the evidence is so
flatly contradictory on that point that it is impossible to decide that
question."

Notwithstanding this declaration, it is proposed to allow him a pension
of $16 a month, though he has survived all his ailments long enough to
reach the age of 72 years.

I think upon the case presented the action of the Pension Bureau
overruling his claim should not be reversed.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 1, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I return herewith Senate bill No. 1441, entitled "An act granting a
pension to M. Romahn."

The beneficiary named in this bill enlisted September 13, 1862, and was
discharged May 24, 1865.

He filed his claim in the Pension Bureau December 5, 1882, alleging
that in the winter of 1862, from being put on duty--standing guard
excessively--he became afflicted with varicose veins. His army record
shows no disability of any kind, though he served more than two years
after the date at which he alleges his injury was incurred. His
application was rejected on the ground that no record of his disability
appeared and that the evidence of the same filed upon such application
was insufficient.

The claim now made to Congress for relief is the same as that made to
the Pension Bureau, with the allegation added that in May, 1865, his
breast and shoulder were injured by a railroad accident while he was on
detail duty.

If the latter-described injury really existed, it is exceeding strange
that it found no place in his claim before the Pension Bureau, while the
account given of the cause of his alleged varicose veins must surprise
those who are at all familiar with the character of that difficulty and
the routine of army service. His continued performance of military
duty after he incurred this infirmity, the fact that he made no claim
for pension on that account until twenty years had passed, and the
unsatisfactory evidence now produced to support his allegation tend
to induce the suspicion that the decision of the Pension Bureau was
entirely just and that this bill is not based upon substantial merits.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 2, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

Senate bill No. 789, entitled "An act granting a pension to John S.
Williams," is herewith returned without approval.

This claimant enlisted in 1861. He alleges that his shoulder was
dislocated in 1862 while ferrying troops across a river. The records of
the War Department fail to furnish any information as to the alleged
injury. He served afterwards until 1865 and was discharged. His claim
for pension was rejected by the Pension Bureau in 1882, twenty years
after the time he fixes as the date of his injury; and after such long
delay he states as an excuse for the unsatisfactory nature of his proof
that the doctors, surgeons, and officers who knew him are dead.

Considering that the injury complained of is merely a dislocation of the
shoulder, and in view of the other facts developed in the case, I think
the Pension Bureau arrived at a correct conclusion when this claim was
rejected.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 2, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 327, entitled "An act granting
a pension to James E. O'Shea."

From the report of the committee to whom this bill was referred I learn
that the claimant enlisted in April, 1861, and was discharged in
October, 1864.

He filed a claim in the Pension Bureau alleging that he received a saber
wound in the head March 7, 1862, and a gunshot wound in the left leg in
the autumn of the same year.

It appears upon examination of his military record that there is no
mention of either disability, and that he served two years after the
time he claims to have received these injuries. So far from being
disabled, it is reported as an incident of his army life that in the
year 1864 this soldier was found guilty of desertion and sentenced to
forfeit all pay and allowances for the time he was absent.

The report of the committee, in apparent explanation of the lack of any
official mention of the injuries alleged, declares that "the fact that
the records of the War Department are often imperfect works great
hardship to men who apply for pensions;" and his conviction of desertion
and the lack of proof to sustain his allegations as to his injuries are
disposed of as follows in the committee's report:

The Adjutant-General's report shows that the man was under discipline
for some irregularities, but notwithstanding this and the lack of the
required proof that he was wounded in the line of duty the committee are
of the opinion that, situated as he was, he was very liable to and very
probably did receive the wound from which he has suffered and is still
suffering.

I am convinced that there exists serious difficulty on the part of the
claimant instead of in the record of the War Department; that the kind
of irregularity for which he was under discipline is calculated to
produce a lack of confidence in his merits as a pensioner, and that the
fact of his situation being such as to render him liable to receive a
wound is hardly sufficient to establish his right to a soldier's
pension, which is only justified by injuries actually received and
affirmatively proven.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 2, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I return herewith without approval Senate bill No. 1726, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Augustus Field Stevens."

It appears that this claimant enlisted August 21, 1861, and was
discharged on the 3d day of October, 1861, after a service of less than
two months, upon a medical certificate of disability which represented
him as "incapable of performing the duties of a soldier because of
general debility, advanced age, unfit for service before entering."

His claim is not based upon any wound or injury, but he alleges that
he contracted chronic diarrhea or dysentery while in the service. The
committee to whom the bill was referred by the Senate admit that "there
is a quantity of contradictory testimony, biased in about equal
proportion for and against the claimant."

His claim was rejected by the Pension Bureau in 1882 and again in 1885,
after a special examination concerning the facts, on the ground that the
claimant had failed to show any pensionable disability contracted while
he was in the service.

The medical certificate upon which he was discharged makes no mention
of the disorders of which the applicant for pension now complains, but
contains other statements which demonstrate that no allowance should
be made to him by way of pension, unless such pension is to be openly
and confessedly regarded as a mere charity, or unless the medical
certificate made at the time of discharge, with the patient under
observation, is to be, without any allegation to that effect, impeached.

I am not prepared either to gratuitously set at naught two
determinations of the Pension Bureau, one very lately made after a
special examination, and especially when the evidence produced before
the committee to reverse the Bureau's action is admitted to be
"contradictory" and "biased in about equal proportion for and against
the claimant."

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 19, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I return herewith Senate bill No. 226, entitled "An act granting a
pension to Margaret D. Marchand," without approval.

The beneficiary named in this bill is the widow of John B. Marchand, who
entered the United States Navy in 1828, who was promoted to the rank of
commodore in 1866, and who was placed upon the retired list in 1870. He
died in August, 1875, of heart disease.

His widow filed an application for pension in 1883, claiming that his
fatal disease was caused by exposure and exertion in the service during
the War of the Rebellion. The application was rejected because of the
inability to furnish evidence to prove that the death had any relation
to the naval service of the deceased.

I am unable to see how any other conclusion could have been reached. The
information furnished by the report of the committee to whom this bill
was referred and derived from other data before me absolutely fails to
connect the death of Commodore Marchand with any incident of his naval
service.

This officer was undoubtedly brave and efficient, rendering his
country valuable service; but it does not appear to have been of so
distinguished a character, nor are the circumstances of his widow
alleged to be such, as to render a gratuity justifiable.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 19, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I hereby return without my approval Senate bill No. 183, entitled "An
act for the relief of Thomas S. Hopkins, late of Company C, Sixteenth
Maine Volunteers."

This soldier was enrolled in the Army June 2, 1862, and discharged June
30, 1865. He was sent to the Government hospital September 20, 1863, and
thereupon transferred to the Invalid Corps.

He filed his declaration for a pension in November, 1880, alleging that
while in the service he contracted malarial fever and chronic diarrhea,
and was seized with convulsions, suffering from great general debility.

A pension of $50 a month was granted to him in June, 1881, dating from
the time of filing his application, which sum he has been receiving up
to the present time.

This bill proposes to remove the limitation fixed by the law of 1879
prescribing the date prior to which an application for pension must be
filed in order to entitle the claimant to draw the pension allowed from
the time of his discharge from the service.

If this bill should become a law, it would entitle the claimant to about
$9,000 of back pension. This is claimed upon the ground that the soldier
was so sick from the time of the passage of the act creating the
limitation up to the date allowed him to avail himself of the privileges
of the act that he could not file his claim.

I think the limitation thus fixed a very wise one, and that it should
not, in fairness to other claimants, be relaxed for causes not mentioned
in the statute; nor should the door be opened to applications of this
kind.

The beneficiary named in this bill had fifteen years after the accruing
of his claim, and before it is alleged that he was incapacitated, within
which he might have filed his application and entitled himself to the
back pension now applied for.

The facts here presented come so far short of furnishing a satisfactory
excuse for his delay that, in my judgment, the discrimination asked in
his favor should not be granted.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 19, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 763, entitled "An act for the
erection of a public building at Sioux City, Iowa."

The report of the committee of the House of Representatives to whom this
bill was referred states that by the census of 1880 the population of
Sioux City was nearly 8,000, and that by other enumerations since made
its population would seem to exceed 23,000. It is further stated in the
report that for the accommodation of this population the city contains
393 brick and 2,984 frame buildings.

It seems to me that in the consideration of the merits of this bill the
necessities of the Government should control the question, and that it
should be decided as a business proposition, depending upon the needs of
a Government building at the point proposed in order to do the
Government work.

This greatly reduces the value of statistics showing population, extent
of business, prospective growth, and matters of that kind, which, though
exceedingly interesting, do not always demonstrate the necessity of the
expenditure of a large sum of money for a public building.

I find upon examination that United States courts are sometimes held
at Sioux City, but that they have been thus far held in the county
court-house without serious inconvenience and without any expense to the
Government. There are actually no other Federal officers there for whom
the Government in any view should provide accommodations except the
postmaster. The post-office is now located in a building rented by the
Government until the 1st day of January, 1889, at the rate of $2,200 per
annum.

By the last report of the Supervising Architect it appears that on
October 1, 1885, there were 80 new public buildings in course of
construction, and that the amount expended thereon during the preceding
year was nearly $2,500,000, while large appropriations are asked to be
expended on these buildings during the current year.

In my judgment the number of public buildings should not at this time be
increased unless a greater public necessity exists therefor than is
apparent in this case.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 19, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 206, entitled "An act to
provide for the erection of a public building in the city of Zanesville,
Ohio."

No Federal courts are held at Zanesville, and there are no Government
officers located there who should be provided for at the public expense
except the postmaster.

So far as I am informed the patrons of the post-office are fairly well
accommodated in a building which is rented by the Government at the rate
of $800 per annum; and though the postmaster naturally certifies that he
and his fourteen employees require much more spacious surroundings, I
have no doubt he and they can be induced to continue to serve the
Government in its present quarters.

The public buildings now in process of construction, numbering 80,
involving constant supervision, are all the building projects which the
Government ought to have on hand at one time, unless a very palpable
necessity exists for an increase in the number. The multiplication of
these structures involves not only the appropriations made for their
completion, but great expense in their care and preservation thereafter.

While a fine Government building is a desirable ornament to any town
or city, and while the securing of an appropriation therefor is often
considered as an illustration of zeal and activity in the interest of a
constituency, I am of the opinion that the expenditure of public money
for such a purpose should depend upon the necessity of such a building
for public uses.

In the case under consideration I have no doubt the Government can be
well accommodated for some time to come in all its business relations
with the people of Zanesville by renting quarters, at less expense than
the annual cost of maintaining the proposed new building after its
completion.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 19, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without approval House bill No. 1990, entitled "An act
granting a pension to John Hunter."

The claimant was enrolled July 20, 1864, and was discharged by
expiration of his term of service July 13, 1865.

During four months of the twelve while he remained in the service he is
reported as "absent sick." His hospital record shows that he was treated
for intermittent fever and rheumatism. In 1879, fourteen years after his
discharge, he filed his claim for a pension, alleging that in May, 1864,
he received a gunshot wound in the right leg while in a skirmish. The
month of May, 1864, is included in the time during which, by the record,
he appears to have been absent sick and undergoing treatment for fever
and rheumatism. His claim was rejected in December, 1884, on the ground
that there was no record of the alleged wound and the claimant was
unable, though aided by the Bureau, to prove that the injury claimed was
due to the service.

The evidence recited in the report of the Congressional committee to
whom this bill was referred, though it tends to show, if reliable, that
when the soldier returned from his service his leg was affected, fails
to show a continuous disability from that cause. It is stated that about
five years ago, while the claimant was gathering dandelions, in stepping
across a ditch his leg broke. The doctor who attended him states that
the leg was about four weeks longer in uniting than is usual, but he is
not represented as giving an opinion that the fracture had anything to
do with his patient's military service.

I find no reference to his condition since his recovery from the
fracture of his leg, and there seems to be no allegation of present
disability either from army service or the injury sustained while
gathering dandelions.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 19, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without my approval House bill No. 4002, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Carter W. Tiller."

The records of the War Department show that George W. Tiller, the son
of the claimant, enlisted in a Kentucky regiment on the 8th day of
October, 1861, and that he deserted on the 20th day of September, 1863;
that he was captured by the Confederates afterwards, but the time and
circumstances are not given. On the 21st day of July, 1864, he was
admitted to the Andersonville hospital, and died the same day of
scorbutus.

The father filed his claim for a pension in 1877, alleging his
dependence upon the deceased soldier. It is probably true that the son
while in the Army sent money to the claimant, though he appears to have
been employed as a policeman in the city of Louisville ever since his
son's death, at a fair salary.

The claim thus made was rejected by the Pension Bureau on the ground
that the claimant was not dependent upon his son.

I am entirely satisfied of the correctness of this determination, and if
the records presented to me are reliable I think the fact which appears
therefrom, that the death of the soldier occurred ten months after
desertion and had no apparent relation to any service in the Union Army,
is conclusive against the claim now made.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 19, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 3826, entitled "An act for the
relief of John Taylor."

By this bill it is proposed to increase the pension of the beneficiary
named to $16 a month. He has been receiving a pension under the general
law, dating from his discharge in 1865. His pension has been twice
already increased, once by the Pension Bureau and once by a special act
passed in 1882. His wound is not such as to cause his disability to
become aggravated by time. The increase allowed by this bill, when
applied for at the Pension Bureau in 1885, was denied on the ground that
"the rate he was receiving was commensurate with the degree of his
disability, a board of surgeons having reported that he was receiving a
liberal rating."

I can discover no just ground for reversing this determination and
making a further discrimination in favor of this pensioner.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 19, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 5997, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Elizabeth Luce."

The claimant named in this bill is the widow of John W. Luce, who
entered the Army in August, 1861, and who was discharged in January,
1864, for a disability declared at the time in the surgeon's certificate
to arise from "organic stricture of the urethra," which, from his
statement, existed at the time of his enlistment.

Notwithstanding the admission which thus appears to have been made by
him at the time of his discharge, he soon afterwards made an application
for a pension, alleging that his difficulty arose from his being thrown
forward on the pommel of his saddle when in the service.

Upon an examination of this claim by a special examiner, it is stated
that no one could be found who had any knowledge of such an injury, and
the claim was rejected.

In 1883, twenty years after the soldier alleged he was injured in the
manner stated, he died, and the cause of his death was declared to be
"chronic gastritis, complicated with kidney difficulty."

It is alleged that the examinations made by the Pension Bureau developed
the fact that the deceased soldier was a man of quite intemperate
habits.

The theory upon which this widow should be pensioned can only be that
the death of her husband resulted from a disability or injury contracted
or received in the military service. It seems to me that however
satisfactorily the injury which he described may be established, and
though every suspicion as to his habits be dismissed, there can hardly
possibly be any connection between such an injury and the causes to
which his death is attributed.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 19, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 4058, entitled "An act for the
relief of Joel D. Monroe."

The claimant mentioned in this bill enlisted in August, 1864, and was
discharged with his regiment June 4, 1865.

The record of his short military service exhibits no mention of any
injury or disability; but in June, 1880, fifteen years after his
discharge, he filed in the Pension Bureau a claim for a pension based
upon the allegation that in December, 1864, he was injured by the
falling of a tree, which struck him on his head, affecting both of his
eyes. He added to this allegation the further complaint that he
contracted rheumatism while in the service.

The application for a pension was rejected by the Pension Bureau because
there was no record of the disabilities claimed, nor was satisfactory
proof furnished that any such disabilities originated in the service.

I am so entirely satisfied with this determination of the Pension Bureau
that I am constrained to withhold my approval of this bill.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 21, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 3624, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Fred. J. Leese."

This claimant enlisted September 7, 1864, and was discharged June 4,
1865. During his short term of service there does not appear on the
records any evidence of disability.

But in November, 1883, eighteen years after his discharge, he filed his
application for a pension, alleging that in November, 1864, he
contracted chronic diarrhea from exposure and severe work.

His claim has not yet been fully passed upon by the Pension Bureau,
which, in my opinion, is sufficient reason why this bill should not
become a law. I am also thoroughly convinced, from examination of the
case, that the claimant should not be pensioned.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 21, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 6897, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Henry Hipple, jr."

This claimant entered the Army as a drummer August 6, 1862, and was
discharged May 29, 1863.

In 1879, sixteen years after his discharge, he appears to have
discovered that during his short term of military service in the
inhospitable climate of Port Tobacco, within the State of Maryland, he
contracted rheumatism to such an extent as to entitle him to pension,
for which he then applied.

It is conceded that he received no medical treatment while in the Army
for this complaint, nor does he seem to have been attended by a
physician since his discharge.

Without commenting further upon the features of this case which tend to
discredit it, I deem myself obliged to disapprove this bill on the
ground that there is an almost complete failure to state any facts that
should entitle the claimant to a pension.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 21, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without approval a bill originating in the House of
Representatives, entitled "An act granting an increase of pension to
John W. Farris," which bill is numbered 6136.

The claimant mentioned in this bill enlisted in the month of October,
1861, and was mustered out of the service in August, 1865.

In 1881, sixteen years after his discharge, he filed an application
for a pension, alleging that he was afflicted with chronic diarrhea
contracted in the Army, and in 1885 his claim was allowed, and he was
granted a pension for that cause.

In September of the same year, and after this pension was granted, he
filed an application for an increase of his rate, alleging that in 1884
his eyes became affected in consequence of his previous ailments and the
debility consequent thereupon.

The ingenuity developed in the constant and persistent attacks upon
the public Treasury by those claiming pensions, and the increase of those
already granted, is exhibited in bold relief by this attempt to include
sore eyes among the results of diarrhea.

I am entirely satisfied with the opinion of the medical referee, who,
after examining this case in October, 1885, reported that "the disease
of the eyes can not be admitted to be a result of chronic diarrhea."

On all grounds it seems to me that this claimant should be contented
with the pension which has been already allowed him.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 21, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without approval House bill No. 1707, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Elijah P. Hensley."

The records of the War Department show that this claimant was mustered
into the Third North Carolina Regiment, but on the muster-out roll of
his company he is reported to have deserted April 3, 1865, and there is
no record of any discharge or disability.

In September, 1866, an order was issued from his department headquarters
removing the charge of desertion against him. Thirteen days afterwards,
and on the 25th day of September, 1866, he filed an application for
pension, which in 1868 was granted. He drew such pension dating from
1865 until 1877, when, upon evidence that the injury for which he was
pensioned was not received in the line of duty, his name was dropped
from the rolls.

The pensioner appealed from this determination of the Pension Bureau to
the Secretary of the Interior, who, as lately as May, 1885, rendered a
decision sustaining the action of the Bureau.

I find nothing in the facts presented to me which, in my opinion,
justifies the reversal of the judgment of the Bureau and the Secretary
of the Interior.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 21, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 2223, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Elizabeth S. De Krafft."

My objection to this bill is that it is of no possible advantage to the
beneficiary therein mentioned. It directs that her name be placed upon
the pension roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the
pension laws. The effect of such legislation would be to permit Mrs. De
Krafft to draw a pension at the rate of $30 each month from the date of
the approval of the bill.

On the 26th day of February, 1886, under the provisions of the general
pension law, she was allowed a pension of this exact sum, but the
payments were to date from November 10, 1885.

I am so thoroughly tired of disapproving gifts of public money to
individuals who in my view have no right or claim to the same,
notwithstanding apparent Congressional sanction, that I interpose with
a feeling of relief a veto in a case where I find it unnecessary to
determine the merits of the application. In speaking of the promiscuous
and ill-advised grants of pensions which have lately been presented to
me for approval, I have spoken of their "apparent Congressional
sanction" in recognition of the fact that a large proportion of these
bills have never been submitted to a majority of either branch of
Congress, but are the result of nominal sessions held for the express
purpose of their consideration and attended by a small minority of the
members of the respective Houses of the legislative branch of
Government.

Thus in considering these bills I have not felt that I was aided by the
deliberate judgment of the Congress; and when I have deemed it my duty
to disapprove many of the bills presented, I have hardly regarded my
action as a dissent from the conclusions of the people's
representatives.

I have not been insensible to the suggestions which should influence
every citizen, either in private station or official place, to exhibit
not only a just but a generous appreciation of the services of our
country's defenders. In reviewing the pension legislation presented to
me many bills have been approved upon the theory that every doubt should
be resolved in favor of the proposed beneficiary. I have not, however,
been able to entirely divest myself of the idea that the public money
appropriated for pensions is the soldiers' fund, which should be devoted
to the indemnification of those who in the defense of the Union and in
the nation's service have worthily suffered, and who in the day of
their dependence resulting from such suffering are entitled to the
benefactions of their Government. This reflection lends to the bestowal
of pensions a kind of sacredness which invites the adoption of such
principles and regulations as will exclude perversion as well as insure
a liberal and generous application of grateful and benevolent designs.
Heedlessness and a disregard of the principle which underlies the
granting of pensions is unfair to the wounded, crippled soldier who is
honored in the just recognition of his Government. Such a man should
never find himself side by side on the pension roll with those who have
been tempted to attribute the natural ills to which humanity is heir to
service in the Army. Every relaxation of principle in the granting of
pensions invites applications without merit and encourages those who
for gain urge honest men to become dishonest. Thus is the demoralizing
lesson taught the people that as against the public Treasury the most
questionable expedients are allowable.

During the present session of Congress 493 special pension bills have
been submitted to me, and I am advised that 111 more have received the
favorable action of both Houses of Congress and will be presented within
a day or two, making over 600 of these bills which have been passed up
to this time during the present session, nearly three times the number
passed at any entire session since the year 1861. With the Pension
Bureau, fully equipped and regulated by the most liberal rules, in
active operation, supplemented in its work by constant special
legislation, it certainly is not unreasonable to suppose that in all the
years that have elapsed since the close of the war a majority of the
meritorious claims for pensions have been presented and determined.

I have now more than 130 of these bills before me awaiting Executive
action. It will be impossible to bestow upon them the examination they
deserve, and many will probably become operative which should be
rejected.

In the meantime I venture to suggest the significance of the startling
increase in this kind of legislation and the consequences involved in
its continuance.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 21, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I hereby return without approval Senate bill No. 1584, entitled "An act
for the relief of Cornelia R. Schenck."

It is proposed by this bill to grant a pension to Mrs. Schenck as the
widow of Daniel P. Schenck, who entered the military service of the
United States in August, 1861, and was mustered out October 21, 1864.

The record of his service contains no mention of any disability. He died
in December, 1875, of a disease called gastroenteritis, which, being
interpreted, seems to denote "inflammation of the stomach and small
intestines." So far as the facts are made to appear, the soldier,
neither during the term of his service nor during the eleven years he
lived after his discharge, made any claim of any disability.

The claim of his widow was filed in the Pension Bureau in 1885, ten
years after her husband's death, and is still undetermined.

The fact that her application is still pending in that Bureau is
sufficient reason why this bill should not become a law.

A better reason is based upon the entire lack of any facts shown to
exist which entitle the beneficiary named to a pension.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 22, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I return herewith without approval Senate bill No. 1192, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Alfred Denny."

It appears that the claimant entered the United States military service
as captain and assistant quartermaster of volunteers on the 12th day of
June, 1863. After remaining in such position for less than a year he
resigned to accept a civil position.

The short record of his military service discloses no mention of any
accident or disability. But twenty years after his resignation, and on
the 12th day of March, 1884, he reappears as an applicant for a pension,
and alleges in his declaration filed in the Pension Bureau that in
August, 1863, while in the line of duty, he was, by a sudden movement of
the horse he was riding, thrown forward upon the horn of his saddle and
thereby received a rupture in his right side, which at some time and in
a manner wholly unexplained subsequently caused a rupture in his left
side also.

The number of instances in which those of our soldiers who rode horses
during the war were injured by being thrown forward upon their saddles
indicate that those saddles were very dangerous contrivances.

I am satisfied there is not a particle of merit in this claim, and no
facts are presented to me which entitle it to charitable consideration.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 22, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I hereby return without approval Senate bill No. 1400, entitled "An act
granting a pension to William H. Beck."

This claimant enlisted in 1861. He reenlisted as a veteran volunteer
January i, 1864, and was finally mustered out April 20, 1866. In all
this time of service his record shows no medical treatment or claim of
disability. Indeed, an abstract of his reenlistment January 1, 1864,
shows a medical examination and perfect soundness.

Notwithstanding all this, he filed his declaration on the 4th day of
April, 1879, nearly thirteen years after his discharge, alleging that in
June, 1863, he incurred epilepsy, to which he has been subject since,
and that his fits have been from one to ten days apart. To connect this
in some way with his military service he stated that the doctor at a
hospital said his epilepsy was caused "by jar to the head from heavy
firing."

Six months after this alleged "jar" and his consequent epilepsy he
reenlisted upon a medical certificate of perfect soundness and served
more than two years thereafter.

Every conceded fact in the case negatives the allegations of his
declaration, and the rejection of his claim necessarily followed.

If this disease can be caused in the manner here detailed, its
manifestations are such as to leave no doubt of its existence, and it
seems to me simply impossible under the circumstances detailed that
there should be any lack of evidence to support the claim upon which
this bill is predicated.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 22, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I hereby return without approval Senate bill No. 2005, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Mary J. Nottage."

The beneficiary named in this bill is the widow of Thomas Nottage, who
enlisted in August, 1861, and was discharged for disability September
17, 1862. The assistant surgeon of his regiment, upon his discharge,
certified the cause to be "disease of the urinary organs," which had
troubled him several years.

He died of consumption January 8, 1879, nearly seventeen years after his
discharge, without ever having made any application for a pension.

In 1880 his widow made an application for pension, alleging that he
contracted in the service "malarial poisoning, causing remittent fever,
piles, general debility, consumption, and death," and that he left two
children, both born after his discharge, one in 1866 and the other in
1874.

The only medical testimony which has been brought to my attention
touching his condition since his discharge is that of a single physician
to the effect that he attended him from the year 1873 to the time of his
death in 1879. He states that the patient had during that time "repeated
attacks of remittent fever and irritability of the bladder, with organic
deposits;" that "in the spring of 1878 he had sore throat and cough,
which resulted in consumption, of which he died."

The claim of the widow was rejected in July, 1885, on the ground that
"the soldier's death was not the result of his service."

I am satisfied that this conclusion of the Pension Bureau was correct.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 22, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I return herewith without approval Senate bill No. 342, entitled "An Act
granting a pension to Marrilla Parsons, of Detroit, Mich."

No claim has ever been made for a pension in this case to the Pension
Bureau, probably for the reason that there is no pretext that the
beneficiary named is entitled to a pension under any general law.

Daniel P. Parsons was her stepson, who enlisted in 1861 and died of
consumption on the 13th day of August, 1864.

There are no special circumstances to distinguish this case from many
others whose claims might be made by stepparents, and there are no facts
stated in support of the conclusion embodied in the committee's report
that the soldier was taken sick from exposure incident to the service.

To depart from all rules regulating the granting of pensions by such an
enactment as is proposed would establish a precedent which could not
fail to cause embarrassment and perplexity.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 22, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 1383, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Harriet Welch."

The beneficiary named in this bill asks for a pension as the widow of
Syreannous Welch, who was wounded in 1864 while in the service, and was
pensioned therefor in 1867. In 1876 his rate of pension was increased.
In 1877 he appears to have applied to have his pension again increased.
It is alleged that upon such application he was directed to appear
before an examining board or a surgeon at Green Bay, Wis., for
examination, and in returning to his home from that place on the 7th day
of September, 1877, he fell from the cars and was killed, his remains
having been found on the track the next morning.

No one appears to have seen the accident, but it is claimed that he
could not depend upon his wounded leg, and that it "gave way many times
and caused him to fall." From this statement the inference seems to have
been indulged that his death was attributable to the wound he had
received thirteen years before.

The widow's claim based upon this state of facts was rejected by the
Pension Bureau on the ground that the accident resulting in death was
not the result of his military service, and on an appeal taken to the
Secretary of the Interior from that determination the same was
sustained.

Though this widow admits that prior to her marriage with the deceased
soldier she had married another man whom she could only say she believed
to be dead, I believe her case to be a pitiable one and wish that I
could join in her relief; but, unfortunately, official duty can not
always be well done when directed solely by sympathy and charity.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 22, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 1288, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Robert Holsey."

This claimant enlisted in 1862, and though he appears to have been sick
on two occasions during his term of service, he remained with his
company until it was mustered out in 1865.

This soldier was really sick during the time he remained in the Army,
and in this respect his claim for a pension has a better origin than
many that are presented. But the fact must be recognized, I suppose,
that every army ailment does not necessarily result in death or
disability.

In 1882, seventeen years after his discharge, this soldier filed his
declaration for a pension, alleging that in 1863 he contracted
intermittent fever, affecting his lungs, kidneys, and stomach.

A board of surgeons, upon an examination made in 1882, find disease of
kidneys, but no indication of lung and stomach trouble; and a medical
referee reported in 1885 that there had been no disease of the stomach
and lungs since the filing of the claim, and that the difficulty
affecting the kidneys had no relation to the sickness for which the
claimant had been treated while in the Army.

I am of the opinion that a correct conclusion was reached when the
application for pension in this case was denied by the Pension Bureau.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 22, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 7979, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Jackson Steward."

This claimant's application for pension is now pending in the Pension
Bureau, and has been sent to a special examiner for the purpose of
taking additional proof.

This I deem sufficient reason why the proposed bill should not now
become a law.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 22, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I hereby return without approval Senate bill No. 2025, entitled "An act
granting a pension to James Butler."

This claimant was enrolled as a private in a New Hampshire regiment
August 23, 1864, but on the organization of his company, on the 12th day
of September, 1864, he was discharged on account of a fracture of his
leg, which happened on the 11th day of September, 1864.

It appears that before the organization of the company to which he was
attached, and on the 10th day of September, he obtained permission to
leave the place of rendezvous for the purpose of visiting his family,
and was to return the next day. At a very early hour in the morning,
either while preparing to return or actually on his way, he fell into a
new cellar and broke his leg. It is said that the leg fractured is now
shorter than the other.

His claim for pension was rejected in December, 1864, by the Pension
Bureau, and its action was affirmed in 1871 upon the ground that the
injury was received while the claimant was on an individual furlough,
and therefore not in the line of duty.

Considering the fact that neither his regiment nor his company had at
the time of his accident been organized, and that he was in no sense in
the military service of the United States, and that his injury was
received while on a visit, and not in the performance of duty, I can see
no pretext for allowing a pension in this case.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without approval House bill No. 6688, entitled "An act
for the relief of William Bishop."

This claimant was enrolled as a substitute on the 25th day of March,
1865. He was admitted to a post hospital at Indianapolis on the 3d day
of April, 1865, with the measles; was removed to the City General
Hospital, in Indianapolis, on the 5th day of May, 1865; was returned to
duty May 8, 1865, and was mustered out with a detachment of unassigned
men on the 11th day of May, 1865.

This is the military record of this soldier, who remained in the Army
one month and seventeen days, having entered it as a substitute at a
time when high bounties were paid.

Fifteen years after this brilliant service and this terrific encounter
with the measles, and on the 28th day of June, 1880, the claimant
discovered that his attack of the measles had some relation to his army
enrollment and that this disease had "settled in his eyes, also
affecting his spinal column."

This claim was rejected by the Pension Bureau, and I have no doubt of
the correctness of its determination.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 6266, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Philip Arner."

It is conceded in the application for a pension made by this claimant
that he was perfectly well prior to his enlistment, during his service,
and for a year thereafter. He was discharged in July, 1864, and the
proof is that he was taken seriously ill in the fall of 1865, since
which time he has been troubled with lung difficulty.

He filed his application for pension in 1883. This was rejected on the
ground that the sickness which produced his disability having occurred
more than a year after his discharge from the Army, it can not be
accepted as a result of his military service.

There is absolutely no allegation of any incident of his service which
it is claimed is at all related to his sickness and disability.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 6170, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Mary A. Van Etten."

In her declaration for a pension, filed July 28, 1885, this claimant
alleges that her husband was drowned upon attempting to cross Braddocks
Bay, near his residence, in the State of New York, on the 16th day of
July, 1875.

It is claimed that in an effort to drive across that bay in a buggy with
his young son the buggy was overturned and both were drowned. The
application for pension was based upon the theory that during his
military service the deceased soldier contracted rheumatism, which so
interfered with his ability to save himself by swimming that his death
may be fairly traced to a disability incurred in the service.

He does not appear to have been treated while in the Army for
rheumatism, though some evidence is presented of his complaining of
rheumatic symptoms.

He was mustered out in 1863, and though he lived twelve years thereafter
it does not appear that he ever applied for a pension; and though he was
drowned in 1875, his widow apparently did not connect his military
service with his death until ten years thereafter.

It seems to me that there is such an entire absence of direct and
tangible evidence that the death of this soldier resulted from any
incident of his service that the granting of a pension upon such a
theory is not justified.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 6117, entitled "An act
granting a pension to James D. Cotton."

The claim for a pension in this case is on behalf of the father of
Thomas Cotton, who was killed at Pittsburg Landing April 6, 1862.

The application of this claimant still remains in the Pension Bureau
undetermined. The doubt in the case appears to relate to the dependence
of the father upon his son at the time of his death.

This is a question which the Bureau is so well fitted to investigate and
justly determine that it is, in my opinion, best to permit the same to
be there fully examined.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 6753, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Mrs. Alice E. Travers."

The husband of the beneficiary, John T. Travers, enlisted August 25,
1864, and was discharged June 11, 1866.

He died January 6, 1881, from the effects of an overdose of morphine
which he administered himself. He was a druggist, and when suffering
severely was in the habit of taking opiates for relief and sleep.

The disease from which it is said he suffered was lung difficulty,
claimed to have been caused by a severe cold contracted in the service.

It does not appear that he ever applied for a pension, and the widow's
claim seems to have been properly rejected by the Pension Bureau on the
ground that the soldier's death was not due to his military service.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 1816, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Mary Ann Miller."

Hamilton Miller, the husband of the claimant, enlisted April 22, 1861,
and was sent with his regiment to Camp Dennison, in the suburbs of
Cincinnati.

While thus in camp, apparently before he had ever been to the front, and
on the 3d of June, 1861, he obtained permission to go to the city of
Cincinnati, and was there killed by a blow received from some person who
appears to be unknown; but undoubtedly the injury occurred in a fight or
as the result of an altercation.

It is very clear to me that the Pension Bureau properly rejected the
widow's claim for pension, for the reason that the soldier was not in
the line of duty at the date of his death. It is also impossible to
connect the death with any incident of the soldier's military service.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 7436, entitled "An act
to grant a pension to Mary Anderson."

This claimant is the widow of Richard Anderson, who at the time of his
death was receiving a pension on account of chronic diarrhea contracted
in the service.

On the 7th day of February, 1882, the deceased pensioner went to Sparta,
in the State of Wisconsin, to be examined for an increase of his
pension. He called on the surgeon and was examined, and the next morning
was found beheaded on the railroad track under such circumstances as
indicated suicide.

The claim of the widow was rejected by the Pension Bureau on the ground
that the cause of the death of her husband was in no way connected with
his military service.

His wife and family present pitiable objects for sympathy, but I am
unable to see how they have any claim to a pension.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without approval House bill 576, entitled "An act for
the relief of Louisa C. Beezeley."

By this bill it is proposed to grant a pension to the beneficiary named,
as the widow of Nathaniel Beezeley, who was enrolled in an Indiana
regiment as a farrier in September, 1861. He was discharged July 17,
1862, after having been in the hospital considerable of the short time
he was connected with the Army. The surgeon's certificate on his
discharge stated that it was granted by reason of "old age," he then
being 60 years old.

He never made any claim for pension, but in 1877 his widow filed her
declaration, stating that her husband died in 1875 from disease
contracted in the service.

I am convinced that the Pension Bureau acted upon entirely satisfactory
evidence when this claim was rejected upon the ground that the cause of
death originated subsequent to the soldier's discharge.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 6895, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Sarah Harbaugh."

The husband of this claimant enlisted August 1, 1861, and was discharged
September 7, 1864. He received a gunshot wound in the left ankle in May,
1863, and died suddenly of disease of the heart October 4, 1881. He was
insane before his death, but in my opinion any connection between his
injury and his service in the Army is next to impossible.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without approval House bill No. 7167, entitled "An act
for the relief of Mrs. Maria Hunter."

The beneficiary named in this bill, to whom it is therein proposed to
grant a pension at the rate of $50 a month, on the 23d day of March,
1886, filed her application for a pension in the Pension Bureau, where
it is still pending undetermined.

Although the deceased soldier held a high rank, I have no doubt his
widow will receive ample justice through the instrumentality organized
for the purpose of dispensing the nation's grateful acknowledgment of
military service in its defense.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 3205, entitled "An act
granting a pension to George W. Guyse."

The claimant filed his declaration for a pension in 1878, alleging that
about the 25th day of December, 1863, he received a gunshot wound in his
left knee while engaged in a skirmish.

There has been much testimony taken in this case, and a great deal of
it is exceedingly contradictory. Three of the claimant's comrades, who
originally testified to the receipt of the injury by him, afterwards
denied that he was wounded in the service, and a portion of the evidence
taken by the Bureau tends to establish the fact that the claimant cut
his left knee with a knife shortly after his discharge.

An examining surgeon in November, 1884, reports that he finds "no
indication of a gunshot wound, there being no physical or rational signs
to sustain claimant in his application for pension."

He further reports that there "seems to be an imperfect scar near the
knee, so imperfect as to render its origin uncertain, but in no respect
resembling a gunshot wound."

I think upon all the facts presented the Pension Bureau properly
rejected this claim, because there was no record of the injury and no
satisfactory evidence produced showing that it was incurred in service
and in line of duty, "all sources of information having been exhausted."

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 7401, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Samuel Miller."

This man was discharged from one enlistment June 16, 1864, and enlisted
again in August of that year. He was finally discharged July 1, 1865.

In 1880 he filed an application for a pension, alleging that in May,
1862, he contracted in the service "kidney disease and weakness of the
back."

A board of surgeons in 1881 reported that they failed to "discover any
evidence of disease of kidneys."

It will be observed that since the date when it is claimed his
disabilities visited him Mr. Miller not only served out his first term
of enlistment, but reenlisted, and necessarily must have passed a
medical examination.

I am entirely satisfied with the rejection of this claim by the Pension
Bureau.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 424, entitled "An act
to pension Giles C. Hawley."

This claimant enlisted August 5, 1861, and was discharged November 14,
1861, upon a surgeon's certificate, in which he stated: "I deem him
unfit to stay in the service on account of deafness. He can not hear an
ordinary command."

Seventeen years after his discharge from a military service of a little
more than three months' duration, and in the year 1878, the claimant
filed an application for pension, in which he alleged that "from
exposure and excessive duty in the service his hearing was seriously
affected."

There is no doubt that his disability existed to quite an extent at
least before his enlistment, and there was plenty of opportunity for its
increase between the time of discharge and of his application for
pension.

I am entirely satisfied that it should not be altogether charged to the
three months he spent in the service.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 7222, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Callie West."

I base my action upon the opinion, derived from an examination of the
circumstances attending the death of the claimant's husband, that his
fatal disease did not have its origin in his military service and was
entirely disconnected therewith.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 6257, entitled "An act for the
relief of Julia Connelly."

It is proposed by this bill to grant a pension to the beneficiary named
as the widow of Thomas Connelly.

This man was mustered into the service October 26, 1861. He never did a
day's service so far as his name appears, and the muster-out roll of his
company reports him as having deserted at Camp Cameron, Pa., November
14, 1861.

He visited his family about the 1st day of December, 1861, and was found
December 30, 1861, drowned in a canal about 6 miles from his home.

Those who prosecute claims for pensions have grown very bold when cases
of this description are presented for consideration.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 6774, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Bruno Schultz."

The application of this claimant for a pension, which was filed a number
of years ago, though at one time rejected, has been since opened for
reexamination, and is now awaiting additional evidence.

In this condition of this case I think this bill should not be approved.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without approval House bill No. 7298, entitled "An act
for the relief of Charles Schuler."

It is proposed by this bill to grant a pension to the person above
named, who was discharged from the military service in December, 1864.
He filed a declaration for a pension in the Pension Bureau in January,
1883. This application is still pending. Without referring to the merits
of the case, I am of the opinion that the matter should be determined by
the Bureau to which it has properly been presented before special
legislation should be invoked.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 7073, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Mary S. Woodson."

Henry Woodson, the husband of the beneficiary named, enlisted in
September, 1861, and was discharged in October, 1863, on account of
valvular disease of the heart.

The application for pension on behalf of his widow was filed August 5,
1881.

She concedes that she is unable to furnish any evidence of the date or
the cause of her husband's death.

It appears that he left home in March, 1874, for the purpose of finding
work, and neither she nor her friends have ever heard from him since.
His death may naturally be presumed, and the condition of his family is
such that it would be a positive gratification to aid them in the manner
proposed; but the entire and conceded absence of any presumption,
however weak, that he died from any cause connected with his military
service seems to render it improper to place the widow's name upon the
pension rolls.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 7108, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Andrew J. Wilson."

It appears that this man was drafted and entered the service in
February, 1865, and was discharged in September of the same year on
account of "chronic nephritis and deafness."

In 1882 he filed his application for a pension, alleging that in June,
1865, from exposure, he contracted rheumatism. Afterwards he described
his trouble as inflammation of the muscles of the back, with pain in the
kidneys. In another statement, filed in December, 1884, he alleges that
while in the service he contracted diarrhea and was injured in one of
his testicles, producing a rupture.

Whatever else may be said of this claimant's achievements during his
short military career, it must be conceded that he accumulated a great
deal of disability.

There is no doubt in my mind that whatever ailments he may honestly lay
claim to, his title to the same was complete before he entered the Army.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 7703, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Anna A. Probert."

The husband of this beneficiary was pensioned in 1864. He was a druggist
and apothecary at Norwalk, in the State of Ohio. Shortly before his
death, in 1878, he went to Memphis for the purpose of giving his
professional assistance to those suffering from yellow fever at that
place. He was himself attacked by that disease, and died on the 28th day
of October, 1878.

His widow has never herself applied for a pension, but a power of
attorney has been filed, authorizing the prosecution of her claim by
another.

That she has employed an ingenious attorney or agent is demonstrated by
the fact that the bill now before me seems to be based upon the theory
that Mr. Probert might have recovered from his attack of yellow fever
if he had been free from the ailments for which he had been pensioned
fourteen years before.

If such speculations and presumptions as this are to be indulged, we
shall find ourselves surrounded and hedged in by the rule that all men
entering an army were free from disease or the liability to disease
before their enlistment, and every infirmity which is visited upon them
thereafter is the consequence of army service.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 7162, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Martha McIlwain."

R.J. McIlwain, the husband of the claimant, enlisted in 1861, and was
discharged in 1862 because of the loss of his right leg by a gunshot
wound. He was pensioned for this disability. He died May 15, 1883, from
an overdose of morphia. It is claimed by the widow that her husband was
in the habit of taking morphia to alleviate the pain he endured from his
stump, and that he accidentally took too much.

The case was investigated by a special examiner upon the widow's
application for pension, and his report shows that the deceased had been
in the habit of taking morphia and knew how to use it; that he had been
in the habit of buying 6 grains at a time, and that his death was caused
by his taking one entire purchase of 6 grains while under the influence
of liquor.

In any event it is quite clear that the taking of morphia in any
quantity was not the natural result of military service or injury
received therein.

I concur in the judgment of the Pension Bureau, which rejected the
widow's claim for pension on the ground that "the death of the soldier
was not due to his military service."

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without approval House bill No. 7931, entitled "An act
increasing the pension of Clark Boon."

This claimant filed his declaration for pension February 3, 1874, in
which he states that he lost his health while a prisoner at Tyler, Tex.

On the 19th day of October, 1874, he filed an affidavit claiming that
he contracted diseases of the heart and head while in the service.
In a further application, filed January 16, 1878, he abandoned his
allegations as to disease, and asks for a pension on account of a
gunshot wound in the left ankle. Medical testimony was produced on his
behalf tending to show not only a gunshot wound, but a disease of the
eyes.

A small pension was at last granted him upon the theory advanced by a
board of surgeons in 1880 that it was "possible that applicant was
entitled to a small rating for weakness of ankle."

A declaration was filed June 4, 1885, by which this claimant insists
upon an increase of pension on account of the wound and also for disease
of eyes and rheumatism.

I am entirely satisfied that all has been done in this case that the
most liberal treatment demands.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without approval House bill No. 7257, entitled "An act
granting a pension to James H. Darling."

This man enlisted in November, 1861, and was reported as having deserted
March 5, 1862. The charge of desertion was, however, removed, and it is
stated that he went to his home in Ohio at the date stated, by proper
authority, where he remained sick till December, 1862, when he was
discharged for disability caused "by a disease of the kidneys known as
Bright's disease," from which, the physician making the certificate
thought, "there was no reasonable prospect of his recovery."

The claimant filed his application for pension, alleging that in
January, 1862, he contracted rheumatism.

The claim was investigated by a special examiner and rejected on the
ground that the evidence produced failed to show the alleged disability
was contracted in the service and in the line of duty.

A medical examination made in 1877 showed that the claimant was "a
well-nourished man, 65 years old; height, 5 feet 8 inches; weight, 165
pounds." No disability was discovered, "but a general stiffness of
joints, especially of legs, which he says is much aggravated in stormy,
cold weather."

Another examination in 1882 found this victim of war disability with
"the appearance of a hale, hearty old man--no disease that was
discoverable by examination (without chemical test), except some
lameness from rheumatism." His weight upon this examination is stated to
be 186 pounds.

It is evident to me that this man ought not to be pensioned.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without my approval House bill No. 6372, entitled "An
act to pension Charles A. Chase."

This claimant was enrolled September 6, 1864, and mustered out with his
detachment June 1, 1865. His brief service contains no record of
disability.

But in 1880 he filed a declaration for pension, in which he claims that
by reason of exposure suffered in the service about the 20th of October,
1864, he contracted disease of the liver and kidneys.

The application for pension was denied January 9, 1884, because there
was no record of the alleged diseases, and no satisfactory proof of
their contraction in the Army was produced, and because of the meager
and unconvincing evidence of disability found by the surgeon on an
actual examination of the claimant.

I adopt these as the reasons for my action in withholding my approval of
this bill.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 6192, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Mary Norman."

The husband of this claimant was enrolled May 22, 1863, and was mustered
out of the service June 1, 1866.

He was wounded in the head February 20, 1864; was treated for the same,
and returned to duty September 3, 1864.

In her declaration for pension, filed in February, 1880, the claimant
claims a pension because of his wound and deafness consequent therefrom,
and that he died after he left the service.

In a letter, however, dated October 13, 1880, she states that her
husband was drowned while trying to cross Roanoke River in December,
1868.

Her claim was rejected in 1881 on the ground that the cause of the
soldier's death was accidental drowning, and was not due to his military
service.

In an attempt to meet this objection it was claimed as lately as 1885,
on behalf of the widow, that her husband's wound caused deafness to such
an extent that at the time he was drowned he was unable to hear the
ferryman, with whom he was crossing the river, call out that the boat
was sinking.

How he could have saved his life if he had heard the warning is not
stated.

It seems very clear to me that this is not a proper case for the
granting of a pension.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without my approval House bill No. 7614, entitled "An
act granting an increase of pension to Hezekiah Tillman."

This claimant, in his declaration for pension, filed in 1866, alleges
that he received a gunshot wound in his right leg November 25, 1862. He
was mustered out with his company September 22, 1864.

He was pensioned for the wound which he claimed to have received as his
only injury.

In another declaration, filed in 1872, he alleged that in December,
1862, he was struck in his left eye by some hard substance, which
destroyed the vision of that organ.

In a subsequent declaration, filed in 1878, he claimed that he received
a shell wound in his left knee in November, 1863.

This latter claim has not been finally acted upon by the Pension Bureau,
and I am of the opinion that with the diverse claims for injuries which
have been there presented on behalf of the beneficiary named justice
will be done in the case.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 6718, entitled "An act granting
a pension to William H. Starr."

An application made by this claimant to the Pension Bureau is still
pending there, and additional evidence has been called for, which the
claim is awaiting before final decision.

I am of the opinion that the investigation there should be fully
completed before special legislation is resorted to.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 7109, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Joseph Tuttle."

This man claims a pension as the dependent father of Charles Tuttle, who
enlisted in 1861 and was killed in action May 31, 1862.

The claimant, being, as he says, poor, took his son Charles, at the age
of 9 years, and placed him in charge of an uncle living in Ohio. An
arrangement was afterwards made by which the boy should live with a
stranger named Betts. Upon the death of this gentleman the lad was
transferred to one Captain Hill, with whom he remained until his
enlistment in 1861.

It is stated that during the time he remained with Mr. Hill he sent his
father $5; but the fatherly care and interest of the claimant in his son
is exhibited by his statement that though the son was killed in 1862 his
father was not aware of it until the year 1864.

After the exhibition of heartlessness and abandonment on the part of a
father which is a prominent feature in this case, I should be sorry to
be a party to a scheme permitting him to profit by the death of his
patriotic son. The claimant relinquished the care of his son, and should
be held to have relinquished all claim to his assistance and the
benefits so indecently claimed as the result of his death.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 23, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 5995, entitled "An act
granting a pension to David T. Elderkin."

This claimant enlisted August 5, 1862. From his record it appears that
he was dishonorably discharged the service, to date from June 11, 1863,
with a loss of all pay, bounty, and allowances.

He filed a declaration for a pension in 1882, claiming that he was
wounded in the head by a shell January 1, 1863, which cut his cheek
close to his right ear, causing almost total deafness.

There is conflicting evidence as to the claimant's freedom from deafness
prior to enlistment, and on a special examination it was shown that he
was slightly hard of hearing before enlistment. Indeed the claimant
himself stated to the special examiner and also to the board of surgeons
that he had been somewhat deaf from childhood.

In 1882 an examining surgeon reports that he finds no scar or evidence
of wound, but his hearing is very much impaired.

The claim was rejected in 1885 on the ground that deafness existed prior
to enlistment, and also because of no ratable disability by reason of
alleged wound in the cheek.

I think, considering the manner of the soldier's discharge and the facts
developed, that the claimant should not be pensioned.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 29, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I hereby return Senate bill No. 1797, entitled "An act granting a
pension to John S. Kirkpatrick."

This claimant appears to have enlisted December 10, 1861, and to have
been discharged December 20, 1864. He is borne upon the rolls of his
company as present up to June, 1862; in July and August, 1862, as on
detached service as hospital attendant, and so reported February 28,
1863. In March and April, 1863, he is reported as present, and in May
and June, 1863, as on detached service. There is nowhere in his service
any record of disability.

He filed his application for a pension in 1880, in which he alleged that
from hardship and exposure on a long march in New Mexico in the month of
December, 1862, he contracted varicose veins in his legs.

As I understand the record given above, this claimant was on detached
service from July, 1862, to February, 1863.

It will be observed that his claim is that he contracted his disability
within that time, and in December, 1862. He appears also to have served
for two years after the date of his alleged injury, and that he did not
file his application for pension till about sixteen years afterwards.

His claim is still pending, undetermined, in the Pension Bureau, and if
there is merit in it there is no doubt that he will be able to make it
apparent.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 29, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I hereby return without approval Senate bill No. 1077, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Newcomb Parker."

This claimant filed an application for a pension in the year 1880.

Before the passage of the bill herewith returned the Commissioner of
Pensions, in ignorance of the action of Congress, allowed his claim
under the general law. As this decision of the Pension Bureau entitles
the beneficiary named to draw a pension from the date of filing his
application, which, under the provisions of the special bill in his
favor, would only accrue from the time of its passage, I am unwilling
that one found worthy to be placed upon the pension rolls by the Bureau,
to which he properly applied, should be an actual loser by reason of a
special interposition of Congress in his behalf.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 2, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 473, entitled "An act granting
a pension to William Boone."

There is not the slightest room for doubt as to the facts involved in
this case.

No application for pension was ever made to the Pension Bureau by the
beneficiary named in this bill. He enlisted in August, 1862; was in
action November, 1862, and taken prisoner and at once paroled. During
his parole, and at Aurora, in the State of Illinois, he took part in the
celebration of the 4th day of July, 1863, and while so engaged was
terribly injured by the discharge of a cannon. He is poor, and has a
wife and a number of children.

These facts are derived from the report of the committee in Congress to
whom the bill was referred, and from a letter written by the soldier
since favorable action was had upon said bill by both Houses of
Congress, which letter is now before me. In this letter he says:
"I never thought of trying getting a pension until my old comrades urged
me to do so."

This declaration does not in the least, I think, militate against the
present application for pension, but it tends to show the ideas that
have become quite prevalent concerning the facts necessary to be
established in order to procure a pension by special act of Congress.

Let it be conceded that during the three months which elapsed between
the soldier's enlistment and his capture and parole he was constantly
in the field and bravely did his duty. The case presented is that of
a brave soldier, not injured in any engagement with the enemy, but
honorably captured, and by his parole placed in a condition which
prevented for the time being his further active military service. He
proceeded to his home or to his friends and took his place among
noncombatants. Eight months afterwards he joined the citizens of the
place of his sojourn and the citizens of every town and hamlet in the
loyal States in the usual and creditable celebration of our national
holiday. Among the casualties which unfortunately always result from
such celebrations there occurred a premature discharge of a cannon,
which the present claimant for pension was assisting other citizens to
discharge and manage.

Whether any of those thus engaged with him were injured is not
disclosed, but it is certain that the paroled soldier was very badly
hurt.

I am utterly unable to discover any relation between this accident and
the military service, or any reason why, if a pension is granted as
proposed by this bill, there should not also be a pension granted to any
of the companions of the claimant who chanced to be injured at the same
time.

A disabled man and a wife and family in need are objects which appeal to
the sympathy and charitable feelings of any decent man; but it seems to
me that it by no means follows that those intrusted with the people's
business and the expenditure of the people's money are justified in so
executing the pension laws as that they shall furnish a means of relief
in every case of distress or hardship.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 3, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I hereby return without approval Senate bill No. 365, entitled "An act
for the relief of Martin L. Bundy."

By this bill it is proposed to allow in the settlement by the United
States with Mr. Bundy, who was lately a paymaster in the Army, the sum
of $719.47 for the forage of two horses to which he claims he was
entitled while in the service, and which has never been drawn by him.
The time during which it is alleged this forage was due is stated to be
between July 17, 1862, and April 15, 1866.

This claimant was mustered out as paymaster on the last-mentioned date,
and in 1872 a certificate was issued that, his accounts having been
adjusted, they exhibited no indebtedness on his part to the United
States.

Subsequently, however, and in or about the year 1879, it was discovered
that by reason of a duplicate credit, which had been allowed him by
mistake, he was actually indebted to the Government in the sum of
$528.72.

After the fact had been made known to him the claim embodied in this
bill was suggested to or invented by him, which, if allowed, will not
only extinguish his indebtedness to the Government, but leave a balance
due to him.

By the law and the Army Regulations the forage upon which this claim is
based is or should be only allowed to those in the service who actually
have and use horses in the performance of their duties.

And when thus entitled to forage it was necessary to draw it in kind or
in the specific articles permitted every month, and if not thus drawn it
could not afterwards be claimed. There seems to be no such thing as
commutation of forage in such cases.

There is no suggestion that the claimant named in this bill had or
used any horses while in the service. If he did and paid for their
maintenance and at the time of the settlement of his accounts made no
claim for reimbursement, he presents a case of incredible ignorance
of his rights or a wonderful lack of that disposition to gain every
possible advantage which is usually found among those who deal with the
Government.

It is quite apparent that the claim is not valid, and the fact that it
is made long after the discovery of his deficit leads to the suspicion
that it is insisted on merely for the purpose of paying his debt.

Though in this particular case it would do but little more than to
extinguish an indebtedness to the Government, the allowance of this
claim would set a precedent which could hardly be ignored, and which, if
followed, would furnish another means of attack upon the public Treasury
quite as effective as many which are now in active operation.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 5, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 7018, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Aretus F. Loomis."

The Commissioner of Pensions, before he became aware of the passage of
this bill, directed favorable action upon the application of the
claimant pending in the Pension Bureau. A certificate has been issued
for the payment of a pension to him, dating from September 30, 1882.

In the interest of the claimant I therefore withhold my signature from
the bill, as the pension granted by special act would only date from the
time of its passage.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 5, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 1818, entitled "An act
granting a pension to H.L. Kyler."

A pension was granted to the person named in this bill, dating from
September, 1864, for neuralgia and disease of the eyes.

He was mustered into the service, to serve one hundred days, May 14,
1864, and mustered out September 8, 1864.

In 1880 information reached the Pension Bureau that the pensioner was
treated for neuralgia and disease of the eyes at various times between
the years 1859 and 1864, and this fact appearing to the satisfaction of
the Bureau upon the examination which followed, the pensioner's name was
dropped from the roll.

Afterwards another thorough examination of the case was made, when the
pensioner was permitted to confront the witnesses against him and
produce evidence in his own behalf.

It is claimed that a Dr. Saunders, who testified to treating the
pensioner before his enlistment, was exceedingly unfriendly; but he was
corroborated by his son and by entries on his books. Another physician,
apparently disinterested, also testified to his treatment of the
pensioner in 1860 for difficulties with his eyes and ears. The pensioner
himself admitted that he had trouble with one of his eyes in 1860, but
that he entirely recovered. Six other witnesses testified to the
existence of disease of the pensioner's eyes before enlistment.

Though twelve neighbors of the pensioner testified that he was free from
neuralgia and disease of the eyes before enlistment, I am of the opinion
that the evidence against the pension was quite satisfactory, and that
it should not be restored, as the bill before me proposes.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 5, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 3640, entitled "An act
granting a pension to James T. Irwin."

This claimant enlisted in February, 1864, and was mustered out June 10,
1865. He is reported as absent sick from August 20, 1864, until mustered
out. He seems to have been treated for remittent fever, chronic
diarrhea, general debility, and palpitation of the heart.

In 1876 he filed a declaration for pension, alleging that at Petersburg,
July 1, 1864, he contracted fever and inflammation of the eyes.

He filed an affidavit in January, 1877, in which he states that his
diseased eyes resulted from diseased nerves, caused by a wound received
June 18, 1864, at Petersburg, and from a consequent abscess on the back
of the neck.

In an affidavit filed in July, 1878, he states that in June, 1864, in
front of Petersburg, he had his gun smashed in front of his face and his
eyes injured, and afterwards he had an abscess on the back of his neck,
typhoid fever, and disease of the left lung.

His claim founded upon these various allegations of injury was rejected
in February, 1879.

In September, 1884, a declaration was filed for a pension, alleging
disease of the heart contracted at Petersburg June 16, 1864.

The claimant was examined once in 1882 and twice in 1884 by United
States examining surgeons and boards, and it is stated that these
examinations failed to reveal any disease or disability except disease
of the eyes and an irritable heart, the result of indigestion.

An oculist who made an examination in 1884 reported that the unnatural
condition of claimant's eyes was congenital and in no manner the result
of injury or disease.

Upon a consideration of the very short time that the claimant was in
actual service, the different claims he has made touching his alleged
disability, and the positive results of medical examinations, I am
satisfied this pension should not be allowed.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 5, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without my approval House bill No. 5306, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Roxana V. Rowley."

The beneficiary named in this bill is the widow of Franklin Rowley, who
enlisted February 8, 1865, was promoted to first lieutenant March 13,
1865, and was discharged May 22, 1865, having tendered his resignation,
as it is stated, on account of incompetency. His tender of resignation
was indorsed by the commanding officer of his regiment as follows: "This
man is wholly unfit for an officer."

It will be seen that he was in the service a little more than three
months.

In 1880, fifteen years after his discharge, he applied for a pension,
alleging that he contracted disease of the liver while in the service.

Upon an examination of the claim his attending physician before
enlistment stated that as early as 1854 the claimant was afflicted with
dyspepsia and functional disease of the liver; that he regarded him as
incurable, so far as being restored to sound health was concerned, and
that if he had been at home at the time when he enlisted he would have
advised against it.

The testimony of this physician as to the claimant's condition after his
discharge is referred to in the report of the Committee of the House to
whom this bill was referred, and I do not understand that he is at all
impeached. He certainly is better informed than any other person
regarding the condition of the man who was his patient.

The soldier died in 1881, sixteen years after his discharge, and his
widow filed her claim for pension in 1882, alleging that the death of
her husband was caused by a disease of the liver contracted in the
service.

Her claim was rejected in 1883 upon the ground that the disease of which
her husband died existed prior to his enlistment.

I can not avoid the conclusion, upon all the facts presented, that his
death was not chargeable to any incident of his brief military service.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 5, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 5021, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Mrs. Margaret A. Jacoby."

A pension has been allowed on account of the disability of the
claimant's husband, dating from his discharge in 1864.

The beneficiary named in this bill applied for pension in 1885, alleging
that she married the soldier in 1864; that he incurred deafness and
chronic diarrhea while in the service, from the combined effect of which
he partially lost his mind; that on the 7th day of September, 1875, he
disappeared, and that after diligent search and inquiry she is unable to
learn anything of him since that time.

His disability from army service should be conceded and his death at
some time and in some manner may well be presumed; but the fact that he
died from any cause related to his disability or his service in the Army
has no presumption and not a single particle of proof to rest upon.

With proper diligence something should be discovered to throw a little
light upon this subject.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 5, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 3304, entitled "An act to
restore the name of Abner Morehead to the pension roll."

The person mentioned in this bill was pensioned in November, 1867, upon
the claim made by him that in 1863, from hardship and exposure incident
to camp life and field duty, he contracted a fever which settled in his
eyes, almost wholly destroying his sight. Afterwards his pension was
increased to $15 a month, dating from December, 1867, and arrears at the
rate of $8 a month from February, 1864. In 1876 the case was put in the
hands of a special agent of the Pension Bureau for examination, and upon
his report, showing that the claimant's disease of the eyes existed
prior to enlistment, his name was dropped from the rolls.

An application for restoration was made in 1879, and a thorough
examination was made by a special examiner in 1885, who reported that
the testimony taken conclusively established the fact that the claimant
had disease of the eyes prior to the time of enlistment, the result of a
disorder which he specifically mentions, and that he was treated for the
same more than a year subsequently to 1860. He adds:

There is no merit whatever in this case, and it is evident that he
obtained a large sum as pension to which, he must have known he was
not entitled.

The results of these examinations, instituted for the express purpose of
developing the facts, and with nothing apparent to impeach them, should,
I think, control as against the statements of neighbors and comrades
based upon mere general observation, and not necessarily covering the
period which is important to the controversy.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 5, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 4782, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Elizabeth McKay."

The beneficiary named is the widow of Rowley S. McKay, who in 1862 seems
to have been employed as pilot on the ram _Switzerland_. He seems
to have been upon the rolls of two other vessels of the United States,
the _Covington_ and _General Price_, but was discharged by Admiral
Porter in June, 1864, with loss of all pay and emoluments.

He filed an application for pension in 1870, alleging that while on duty
as pilot and in action with the rebel ram _Arkansas_ his hearing
became affected by heavy firing. He also claimed that in February, 1863,
while on the vessel _Queen of the West_, she grounded, and to escape
capture he got off and floated down the river on a cotton bale, and,
being in the water about three hours, the exposure caused a disease of
the urinary organs; and that a few days after, while coming up the river
on a transport, the boat was fired into and several balls passed through
his left thigh. It seems that this claim was not definitely passed upon,
but it is stated that the records failed to show that McKay was in the
service of the United States at the time he alleged the contraction of
disease of the urinary organs and was wounded in the thigh.

The beneficiary named in this bill never made application for pension
to the Pension Bureau, but it appears that she bases her claims to
consideration by Congress upon the allegation that in 1862, while her
husband was acting as pilot of the ram or gunboat _Switzerland_, he
contracted chronic diarrhea, from which he never recovered, and that he
died from the effects of said disease in May, 1874.

It will be observed that among the various causes which the soldier or
sailor himself alleged as the grounds of his application for pension
chronic diarrhea is not mentioned.

There does not appear to be any medical testimony to support the claim
thus made by the widow, and the cause of death is not definitely stated.

Taking all together, it has the appearance of a case, by no means rare,
where chronic diarrhea or rheumatism are appealed to as a basis for a
pension claim in the absence of something more substantial and definite.

The fact that the claim of the beneficiary has never been presented to
the Pension Bureau influences in some degree my action in withholding my
approval of this bill.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 5, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 3623, entitled "An act
granting a pension to William H. Nevil."

This bill directs that the name of the claimant be placed upon the
pension roll "subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension
laws."

This very thing was done on the 22d day of June, 1865, and the claimant
is in the receipt at the present time of the full amount of pension
allowed by our pension laws as administered by the Pension Bureau.

I suppose the intention of the bill was to increase this pension, but it
is not framed in such a way as to accomplish that object or to benefit
the claimant in any way whatever.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 5, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 1505, entitled "An act
granting a pension to William Dermody."

By the records of the War Department which have been furnished me it
appears that this claimant enlisted August 19, 1861; that he deserted
August 29, 1862; in November and December, 1862, he is reported as
present in confinement in regimental guardhouse, to forfeit one month's
pay by sentence of regimental court-martial; he is reported as having
deserted again in December, 1863, but as present for duty in January and
February, 1864; he reenlisted in the latter month, and was mustered out
July 17, 1865, and with his company was paid up to and including July
21, 1865.

He filed a declaration for pension in 1879, alleging that he received a
gunshot wound in the thigh at Trenton, N.J., July 21, 1865, and that the
wound was inflicted by a member of the Invalid Corps, who was whipping a
drummer boy, and the claimant interfered in behalf of the boy.

It is quite certain that the transaction took place July 23.

An examining board, in 1880, found pistol shot in thigh, but refused to
give the claimant a rating, because, as they report, "from the evidence
before the board there is reason to suppose that he was deserting from
the barracks at Trenton July 23, 1865, and was shot by the guard."

This may not be a just suspicion or finding, but he surely was not in
the service nor in the performance of any military duty at the time of
the injury, nor was he engaged in such manner as to entitle him to
indemnification at the hands of the Government.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 5, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 1059, entitled "An act
to grant a pension to Joseph Romiser."

The Pension Bureau reports that the records of the office fail to show
that an application has been filed in favor of this claimant, though it
is stated in the report of the House committee that such a claim was
made and rejected on the ground that the claimant was not at the time of
injury in the service of the United States.

It certainly appears from the report of the committee that the
beneficiary named in this bill was not in the service of the Government
at such a time, and also that he had not been mustered into the service
of any State military organization. It is stated that he belonged to
Captain Frank Mason's company of volunteers, of Prostburg, in the State
of Maryland.

Whether this company was organized for the purpose of cooperating at any
time with the Union or State forces is not alleged, and it may well have
been existing merely for the purpose of neighborhood protection.

Such as it was, the company was ordered in June, 1861, to proceed to
Cumberland to repel a threatened attack of Confederate forces. Upon
arriving at that place the men were ordered to uncap their muskets. In
doing this, and through the negligence of another member of the company,
whose musket was discharged, the claimant was wounded.

It does not seem to me that the facts in this case, so far as they have
been developed, justify the passage of this act.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 5, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 4226, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Fannie E. Evans."

The beneficiary named in this bill is the widow of George S. Evans. He
was a soldier in the Mexican War, and entered the Union Army in the War
of the Rebellion, on the 16th day of October, 1861, as major of a
California regiment. He became a colonel in February, 1863, and resigned
in April of that year, to take effect on the 31st of May ensuing.

His resignation seems to have been tendered on account of private
matters, and no mention was then made of any disability. It is stated in
the committee's report to the House that in 1864 he accepted the office
of adjutant-general of the State of California, which he held for nearly
four years.

He died in 1883 from cerebral apoplexy.

In March, 1884, his widow filed an application for pension, based upon
the allegation that from active and severe service in a battle with the
Indians at Spanish Fort in 1863 her husband incurred a hernia, which
incapacitated him for active service.

There appears to be evidence to justify this statement, notwithstanding
the fact that the deceased during the twenty years that followed before
his death made no claim for such disability.

But it seems to me that the effort to attribute his death by apoplexy to
the existence of hernia ought not to be successful.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 5, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 2971, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Francis Deming."

This claimant entered the service in August, 1861, and was discharged
September 15, 1865.

His hospital record shows that during his service he was treated for
various temporary ailments, among which rheumatism is not included.

He filed an application for pension in September, 1884, alleging that in
August, 1864, he contracted rheumatism, which had resulted in blindness.

On an examination of his case in November, 1884, he stated that his
eyesight began to fail in 1882.

There seems to be no testimony showing his condition from the time of
his discharge to 1880, a period of fifteen years.

The claim that his present condition of blindness is the result of his
army service is not insisted upon as a reason for granting him relief as
strongly as his sad and helpless condition. The committee of the House
to which this bill was referred, after detailing his situation, close
their report with these words: "He served well his country in its dire
need; his necessities now appeal for relief."

We have here presented the case of a soldier who did his duty during
his army service, and who was discharged in 1865 without any record of
having suffered with rheumatism and without any claim of disability
arising from the same. He returned to his place as a citizen, and
in peaceful pursuits, with chances certainly not impaired by the
circumstance that he had served his country, he appears to have held his
place in the race of life for fifteen years or more. Then, like many
another, he was subjected to loss of sight, one of the saddest
afflictions known to human life.

Thereupon, and after nineteen years had elapsed since his discharge from
the Army, a pension is claimed for him upon a very shadowy allegation of
the incurrence of rheumatism while in the service, coupled with the
startling proposition that this rheumatism resulted, just previous to
his application, in blindness. Upon medical examination it appeared that
his blindness was caused by amaurosis, which is generally accepted as an
affection of the optic nerve.

I am satisfied that a fair examination of the facts in this case
justifies the statement that the bill under consideration can rest only
upon the grounds that aid should be furnished to this ex-soldier because
he served in the Army and because he a long time thereafter became
blind, disabled, and dependent.

The question is whether we are prepared to adopt this principle and
establish this precedent.

None of us are entitled to credit for extreme tenderness and
consideration toward those who fought their country's battles. These
are sentiments con|»ion to all good citizens. They lead to the most
benevolent care on the part of the Government and deeds of charity and
mercy in private life. The blatant and noisy self-assertion of those
who, from motives that may well be suspected, declare themselves above
all others friends of the soldier can not discredit nor belittle the
calm, steady, and affectionate regard of a grateful nation.

An appropriation has just been passed setting apart $76,000,000 of
the public money for distribution as pensions, under laws liberally
constructed, with a view of meeting every meritorious case. More than
$1,000,000 was added to maintain the Pension Bureau, which is charged
with the duty of a fair, just, and liberal apportionment of this fund.

Legislation has been at the present session of Congress perfected
considerably increasing the rate of pension in certain cases.
Appropriations have also been made of large sums for the support of
national homes where sick, disabled, or needy soldiers are cared for,
and within a few days a liberal sum has been appropriated for the
enlargement and increased accommodation and convenience of these
institutions.

All this is no more than should be done.

But with all this, and with the hundreds of special acts which have been
passed granting pensions in cases where, for my part, I am willing to
confess that sympathy rather than judgment has often led to the
discovery of a relation between injury or death and military service, I
am constrained by a sense of public duty to interpose against
establishing a principle and setting a precedent which must result in
unregulated, partial, and unjust gifts of public money under the pretext
of indemnifying those who suffered in their means of support as an
incident of military service.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 6, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 4642, entitled "An act
granting a pension to James Carroll."

The claimant alleges that he was wounded while in the service as a
member of Company B, Third Regiment North Carolina Mounted Volunteers,
while securing recruits for the regiment at Watauga, N.C., January 25,
1865.

The records of the War Department develop the fact that the name of this
man is not borne upon any roll of the company to which he claims to
belong.

He stated in his application that he was sworn in by one George W.
Perkins, who, it appears, was a private in said company, and that
Perkins was with him at the time he was shot.

This is undoubtedly true, and that the claimant was injured by a gunshot
is also probably true. He was not, however, at the time regularly in the
United States service, but this objection might in some circumstances
be regarded as technical. The difficulty is that the fact that he was
creditably employed in a service of benefit to the country is not
satisfactorily shown. He gives two accounts of the business in which he
was engaged, and Mr. Perkins's explanation of the manner in which the
two were occupied is somewhat different still.

Carroll's claim, presented to the Pension Bureau, was rejected upon
the ground that there was no record of his service on file; but in his
testimony he stated that Perkins was wounded on the same occasion as
himself, and that he (Perkins) was then a pensioner on account thereof.

The records of the Pension Bureau show that Perkins was pensioned in
1873 on account of three wounds received at the time and place of
Carroll's injury.

It also appears that his name was dropped from the rolls in 1877 on the
ground that his wounds were not received in the line of duty.

After an investigation made at that time by a special examiner, he
reported that Perkins and Carroll had collected a number of men
together, who made their headquarters at the home of Carroll's mother
and were engaged in plundering the neighborhood, and that on account of
their depredations they were hunted down by home guards and shot at the
time they stated.

If this report is accepted as reliable, it should of course lead to the
rejection of the claim for pension on the part of Mr. Carroll.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 6, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 3043, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Lewis W. Scanland."

The claimant filed his declaration for a pension in 1884, alleging that
he contracted chronic diarrhea while serving in a company of mounted
Illinois volunteers in the Black Hawk War.

The records show that he served from April 18, 1832, to May 28, in the
same year.

He was examined by a board of surgeons in 1884, when he was said to be
75 years old. In his examination he did not claim to have diarrhea for a
good many years. On the contrary, he claimed to be affected with
constipation, and said he had never had diarrhea of late years, except
at times when he had taken medicine for constipation.

I am inclined to think it would have been a fortunate thing if in this
case it could have been demonstrated that a man could thrive so well
with the chronic diarrhea for fifty-two years as its existence in the
case of this good old gentleman would prove. We should then, perhaps,
have less of it in claims for pensions.

The fact is, in this case there is no disability which can be traced to
the forty days' military service of fifty-four years ago, and I think
little, if any, more infirmity than is usually found in men of the age
of the claimant.

Entertaining this belief, I am constrained to withhold my signature from
this bill.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 6, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 5414, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Maria Cunningham."

The husband of the beneficiary named in this bill enlisted January 29,
1862, and was discharged January 20, 1865.

He applied for a pension in 1876, alleging a shell wound in the head.
His claim was rejected on the ground that there appeared to be no
disability from that cause. No other injury or disability was ever
claimed by him, but at the time of his examination in 1876 he was found
to be sickly, feeble, and emaciated, and suffering from an advanced
stage of saccharine diabetes.

His widow filed an application for a pension in 1879, alleging that her
husband died in December, 1877, of spinal disease and diabetes,
contracted in the service.

Her claim was rejected because evidence was not furnished that the cause
of the soldier's death had its origin in the military service.

There seems to be an entire absence of proof of this important fact.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 6, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 4797, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Robert H. Stapleton."

This claimant filed an application for pension in the Pension Bureau in
1883, alleging that while acting as lieutenant-colonel of a New Mexico
regiment, on February 21, 1862, the tongue of a caisson struck him,
injuring his left side. A medical examination made in 1882 showed a
fracture of the ninth, tenth, and eleventh ribs of the left side.

If these fractures were the result of the injury alleged, they were
immediately apparent, and the delay of twenty-one years in presenting
the claim for pension certainly needs explanation.

Claims of this description, by a wise provision of law, must, to be
valid, be prosecuted to a successful issue prior to the 4th day of July,
1874.

The rank which this claimant held presupposes such intelligence as
admits of no excuse on the ground of ignorance of the law for his
failure to present his application within the time fixed by law.

The evidence of disability from the cause alleged is weak, to say the
most of it, and I can not think that such a wholesome provision of law
as that above referred to, which limits the time for the adjustment of
such claims, should be modified upon the facts presented in this case.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 6, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 5550, entitled "An act
to provide for the erection of a public building at Duluth, Minn."

After quite a careful examination of the public needs at the point
mentioned I am entirely satisfied that the public building provided for
in this bill is not immediately necessary.

Not a little legislation has lately been perfected, and very likely more
will be necessary, to increase miscalculated appropriations for and
correct blunders in the construction of many of the public buildings now
in process of erection.

While this does not furnish a good reason for disapproving the erection
of other buildings where actually necessary, it induces close scrutiny
and gives rise to the earnest wish that new projects for public
buildings shall for the present be limited to such as are required by
the most pressing necessities of the Government's business.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 6, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 2043, entitled "An act
to place Mary Karstetter on the pension roll."

The husband of this beneficiary, Jacob Karstetter, was enrolled June 30,
1864, as a substitute in a Pennsylvania regiment, and was discharged for
disability June 20, 1865, caused by a gunshot wound in the left hand.

A declaration for pension was filed by him in 1865, based upon this
wound, and the same was granted, dating from June in that year, which he
drew till the time of his death, August 21, 1874.

In 1882 his widow filed her application for pension, alleging that he
died of wounds received in battle. The claim was made that he was
injured while in the Army by a horse running over him.

There is little or no evidence of such an injury having been received;
and if this was presented there would be no necessary connection between
that and the cause of the soldier's death, which was certified by the
attending physician to be gastritis and congestion of the kidneys.

I can hardly see how the Pension Bureau could arrive at any conclusion
except that the death of the soldier was not due to his military
service, and the acceptance of this finding, after an examination of the
facts, leads me to disapprove this bill.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 6, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 5394, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Sallie Ann Bradley."

The husband of this proposed beneficiary was discharged from the
military service in 1865, after a long service, and was afterwards
pensioned for gunshot wound.

He died in 1882. The widow appears to have never filed a claim for
pension in her own right.

No cause is given of the soldier's death, but it is not claimed that it
resulted from his military service, her pension being asked for entirely
because of her needs and the faithful service of her husband and her
sons.

This presents the question whether a gift in such a case is a proper
disposition of money appropriated for the purpose of paying pensions.

The passage of this law would, in my opinion, establish a precedent so
far-reaching and open the door to such a vast multitude of claims not on
principle within our present pension laws that I am constrained to
disapprove the bill under consideration.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 6, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 5603, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Mrs. Catherine McCarty."

The beneficiary is the widow of John McCarty, of the First Missouri
Regiment of State Militia Volunteers, who died at Clinton, Mo., April 8,
1864.

The widow filed her claim in 1866, alleging that her husband died while
in the service from an overdose of colchicum.

The evidence shows without dispute that on the day previous to the death
of the soldier a comrade procured some medicine from the regimental
surgeon and asked McCarty to smell and taste it; that he did so, and
shortly afterwards became very sick and died the next morning.

It is quite evident that the deceased soldier did more than taste this
medicine.

Although it would be pleasant to aid the widow in this case, it is
hardly fair to ask the Government to grant a pension for the freak or
gross heedlessness and recklessness of this soldier.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 6, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without my approval House bill No. 6648, entitled "An
act for the relief of Edward M. Harrington."

It appears that this claimant was enrolled as a recruit December 31,
1863, and mustered in at Dunkirk, N.Y. He remained at the barracks there
until March, 1864, when he was received at the Elmira rendezvous. From
there he was sent to his regiment on the 7th day of April, 1864.

He was discharged June 15, 1864, upon a surgeon's certificate of
disability, declaring the cause of discharge to be epilepsy, produced by
blows of violence over the hypochondrial region while in the service,
producing a deformity of sternum.

The claimant filed an application for pension in June, 1879, and in that
and subsequent affidavits he alleged that while in barracks at Dunkirk,
N.Y., and about the 9th day of January, 1864, and in the line of duty,
he was attacked by one Patrick Burnes, who struck him upon the head and
stamped upon and kicked him, breaking his collar bone and a number of
ribs, causing internal injury and fits, the latter recurring every two
weeks.

It is hardly worth while considering the character of these alleged
injuries or their connection with the fits with which the claimant is
afflicted.

I am entirely unable to see how the injuries are related to the
claimant's army service.

The Government ought not to be called upon to insure against the
quarrelsome propensities of its individual soldiers, nor to compensate
one who is worsted in a fight, or even in an unprovoked attack, when the
cause of injury is in no way connected with or related to any
requirement or incident of military service.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 7, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 2281, entitled "An act
granting to railroads the right of way through the Indian reservation in
northern Montana."

The reservation referred to stretches across the extreme northern
part of Montana Territory, with British America for its northern
boundary. It contains an area of over 30,000 square miles. It is
dedicated to Indian occupancy by treaty of October 17, 1855, and act of
Congress of April 15, 1874. No railroads are within immediate approach
to its boundaries, and only one, as shown on recent maps, is under
construction in the neighborhood leading in its direction. The
surrounding country is sparsely settled, and I have been unable to
ascertain that the necessities of commerce or any public exigencies
demand this legislation, which would affect so seriously the rights and
interests of the Indians occupying the reservation.

The bill is in the nature of a general right of way for railroads
through this Indian reservation. The Indian occupants have not given
their consent to it, neither have they been consulted regarding it, nor
is there any provision in it for securing their consent or agreement to
the location or construction of railroads upon their lands. No routes
are described, and no general directions on which the line of any
railroad will be constructed are given.

No particular organized railway company engaged in constructing a
railroad toward the reservation and ready or desirous to build its road
through the Indian lands to meet the needs and requirements of trade
and commerce is named. The bill gives the right to any railroad in the
country, duly organized under the laws of any Territory, of any State,
or of the United States, except those of the District of Columbia, to
enter this Indian country, prospect for routes of travel, survey them,
and construct routes of travel wherever it may please, with no check
save possible disapproval by the Secretary of the Interior of its maps
of location, and no limitation upon its acts except such rules and
regulations as he may prescribe.

This power vested in the Secretary of the Interior might itself be
improvidently exercised and subject to abuse.

No limit of time is fixed within which the construction of railroads
should begin or be completed. Without such limitations speculating
corporations would be enabled to seek out and secure the right of way
over the natural and most feasible routes, with no present intention of
constructing railroads along such lines, but with the view of holding
their advantageous easements for disposal at some future time to some
other corporation for a valuable consideration. In this way the
construction of needed railroad facilities in that country could be
hereafter greatly obstructed and retarded.

If the United States must exercise its right of eminent domain over the
Indian Territories for the general welfare of the whole country, it
should be done cautiously, with due regard for the interests of the
Indians, and to no greater extent than the exigencies of the public
service require.

Bills tending somewhat in the direction of this general character of
legislation, affecting the rights of the Indians reserved to them by
treaty stipulations, have been presented to me during the present
session of Congress. They have received my reluctant approval, though
I am by no means certain that a mistake has not been made in passing
such laws without providing for the consent to such grants by the
Indian occupants and otherwise more closely guarding their rights and
interests; and I hoped that each of those bills as it received my
approval would be the last of the kind presented. They, however,
designated particular railroad companies, laid down general routes over
which the respective roads should be constructed through the Indian
lands, and specified their direction and termini, so that I was enabled
to reasonably satisfy myself that the exigencies of the public service
and the interests of commerce probably demanded the construction of the
roads, and that by their construction and operation the Indians would
not be too seriously affected.

The bill now before me is much more general in its terms than those
which have preceded it. It is a new and wide departure from the general
tenor of legislation affecting Indian reservations. It ignores the right
of the Indians to be consulted as to the disposition of their lands,
opens wide the door to any railroad corporation to do what, under the
treaty covering the greater portion of the reservation, is reserved to
the United States alone; it gives the right to enter upon Indian lands
to a class of corporations carrying with them many individuals not known
for any scrupulous regard for the interest or welfare of the Indians;
it invites a general invasion of the Indian country, and brings into
contact and intercourse with the Indians a class of whites and others
who are independent of the orders, regulations, and control of the
resident agents.

Corporations operating railroads through Indian lands are strongly
tempted to infringe at will upon the reserved rights and the property of
Indians, and thus are apt to become so arbitrary in their dealings and
domineering in their conduct toward them that the Indians become
disquieted, often threatening outbreaks and periling the lives of
frontier settlers and others.

I am impressed with the belief that the bill under consideration does
not sufficiently guard against an invasion of the rights and a
disturbance of the peace and quiet of the Indians on the reservation
mentioned; nor am I satisfied that the legislation proposed is demanded
by any exigency of the public welfare.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 9, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 524, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Daniel H. Ross."

An application for pension was filed in the Pension Bureau by the
beneficiary named in this bill, and considerable testimony was filed in
support of the same. I do not understand that the claim has been finally
rejected. But however that may be, the claimant died, as I am advised,
on the 1st day of February last. This, of course, renders the proposed
legislation entirely inoperative, if it would not actually prejudice the
claim of his surviving widow. She has already been advised of the
evidence necessary to complete the claim of her husband, and it is not
at all improbable that she will be able to prosecute the same to a
successful issue for her benefit.

At any rate, her rights should not be in the least jeopardized by the
completion of the legislation proposed in this bill.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 9, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I herewith return without approval Senate bill No. 856, entitled "An act
to provide for the erection of a public building in the city of Dayton,
Ohio."

It is not claimed that the Government has any public department or
business which it should quarter at Dayton except its post-office and
internal-revenue office. The former is represented as employing ten
clerks, sixteen regular and two substitute letter carriers, and two
special-delivery employees, who, I suppose, are boys, only occasionally
in actual service. I do not understand that the present post-office
quarters are either insufficient or inconvenient. By a statement
prepared by the present postmaster it appears that they are rented by
the Government for a period of ten years from the 15th day of October,
1883, at an annual rent of $2,950, which includes the cost of heating
the same.

The office of the internal-revenue collector is claimed to be
inadequate, but I am-led to believe that this officer is fairly
accommodated at an annual rental of $900. It is not impossible that a
suggestion to change the area of this revenue district may be adopted,
which would relieve any complaint of inadequacy of office room.

With only these two offices to provide for, I am not satisfied that the
expenditure of $150,000 for their accommodation, as proposed by this
bill, is in accordance with sound business principles or consistent with
that economy in public affairs which has been promised to the people.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 10, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 5546, entitled "An act
for the erection of a public building at Asheville, N.C."

If the needs of the Government are alone considered, the proposed
building is only necessary for the accommodation of two terms of the
United States court in each year and to provide an office for the clerk
of that court and more commodious quarters for the post-office.

The terms of the court are now held in the county court room at
Asheville at an expense to the Government of $50 for each term; the
clerk of the court occupies a room for which an annual rent of $150 is
paid, and the rent paid for the rooms occupied by the post-office is
$180 each year.

The postmaster reports that four employees are regularly engaged in his
office, which is now rated as third class.

I have no doubt that the court could be much more conveniently provided
for in a new building if one should be erected; but it is represented to
me that the regular terms held at Asheville last only two or three weeks
each, though special terms are ordered at times to clear the docket. It
is difficult to see from any facts presented in support of this bill why
the United States court does not find accommodations which fairly answer
its needs in the rooms now occupied by it. The floor space furnished for
the terms of the Federal court is stated to be 75 by 100 feet, which, it
must be admitted, provides a very respectable court room.

It is submitted that the necessity to the Government of a proper place
to hold its courts is the only consideration which should have any
weight in determining upon the propriety of expending the money which
will be necessary to erect the proposed new building.

The limit of its cost is fixed in the bill under consideration at the
sum of $80,000, but the history of such projects justifies the
expectation that this limit will certainly be exceeded.

I am satisfied that the present necessity for this building is not
urgent, and that something may be gained by a delay which will
demonstrate more fully the public needs, and thus better suggest the
style and size of the building to be erected.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 30, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 63, entitled "An act to
authorize the construction of a highway bridge across that part of the
waters of Lake Champlain lying between the towns of North Hero and
Alburg, in the State of Vermont."

On the 20th day of June, 1884, a bill was approved and became a law
having the same title and containing precisely the same provisions and
in the exact words of the bill herewith returned.

The records of the War Department indicate that nothing has been done
toward building the bridge permitted by such prior act. It is hardly
possible that the bill now before me is intended to authorize an
additional bridge between the two towns named, and I have been unable to
discover any excuse or necessity for new legislation on the subject.

I conclude, therefore, that Congress in passing this bill acted in
ignorance of the fact that a law providing for its objects and purposes
was already on the statute book.

My approval of the bill is withheld for this reason and in order to
prevent an unnecessary and confusing multiplicity of laws.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 30, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without my approval House bill No. 1391, entitled "An
act to provide for the erection of a public building at Springfield, Mo."

It appears from the report of the committee of the House of
Representatives to which this bill was referred that the city of
Springfield is in a thriving condition, with stores, banks, and
manufactories, and having, with North Springfield, which is an adjoining
town, about 20,000 inhabitants.

No Federal courts are held at this place, and apparently the only
quarters which the Government should provide are such as are necessary
for the accommodation of the post-office and the land-office located
there.

The postmaster reports that six employees are engaged in his office.

The rooms used as a post-office are now furnished the Government free of
expense, and the rent paid for the quarters occupied as a land-office
amounts to $300 annually.

Upon the facts presented I am satisfied that the business of the
Government at this point can be well transacted for the present without
the construction of the proposed building.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 31, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 2160, entitled "A bill
granting a pension to Mary J. Hagerman."

The husband of this proposed beneficiary enlisted in 1861 and was
wounded by a gunshot, which seriously injured his left forearm. In 1864
he was discharged; was afterwards pensioned for his wound, and died in
August, 1884.

Dr. Hageman, who attended the deceased in his last illness, testifies
that he was called to attend him in August, 1884; that he was sick with
typhomalarial fever, and that upon inquiry he (the physician) found that
it was caused by hard work or overexertion and exposure. He was ill for
about ten days.

The application of his widow for pension was rejected in 1885 on the
ground that the fatal disease was not due to military service.

I am unable to discover how any different determination could have been
reached.

To grant a pension in this case would clearly contravene the present
policy of the Government, and either establish a precedent which, if
followed, would allow a pension to the widow of every soldier wounded
or disabled in the war, without regard to the cause of death, or would
unjustly discriminate in favor of the few thus receiving the bounty of
the Government against many whose cases were equally meritorious.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 31, 1886_.

_To the Senate_:

I herewith return without my approval Senate bill No. 1421, entitled "An
act granting a pension to William H. Weaver."

The claimant named in this bill enlisted August 12, 1862, and was
mustered out of service June 12, 1865. During his service he was treated
in hospital for diarrhea and lumbago, and in the reports for May and
June, as well as July and August, 1864, he is reported as absent sick.

He filed his application for pension in November, 1877, alleging that in
March, 1863, he contracted measles, and in May, 1864, remittent fever,
and that as a result of the two attacks he was afflicted with weakness
in the limbs and eyes. He made statements afterwards in support of his
application that he was also troubled in the service with rheumatism and
diarrhea.

The case was examined by several special examiners, from which, as
reported to me, it appeared from the claimant's admission that he had
sore eyes previous to his enlistment, though he claimed they were sound
when he entered the Army.

A surgeon who made an examination in March, 1881, reported that he could
not find any evidence whatever of disease of the eyes, and nothing to
corroborate the claimant's assertion that he was suffering from
rheumatism, piles, or diarrhea.

Another surgeon, who examined the claimant in 1879, reported that he
found the eyelids slightly granulated, producing some irritation of the
eyeball and rendering the eyes a little weak, and that he found no other
disability.

In 1882 a surgeon who made an examination reported that he discovered
indications that the claimant had suffered at some time with chronic
ophthalmia, but that in his opinion his eyes did not disable him in the
least, and that the claimant was well nourished and in good health.

The report of the committee to whom this bill was referred in the Senate
states that six special examinations have been made in the case and that
two of them were favorable to the claim.

The trouble and expense incurred by the Pension Bureau to ascertain the
truth and to deal fairly by this claimant, and the entire absence of any
suspicion of bias against the claim in that Bureau, ought to give weight
to its determination.

The claim was rejected by the Pension Bureau in July, 1885, upon the
ground that disease of the eyes existed prior to enlistment and that the
evidence failed to show that there had existed a pensionable degree of
disability, since discharge, from diarrhea or rheumatism.

It will be observed that this is not a case where there was a lack of
the technical proof required by the Pension Bureau, but that its
judgment was based upon the merits of the application and affected the
very foundation of the claim.

I think it should be sustained; and its correctness is somewhat
strengthened by the fact that the claimant continued in active service
for more than a year after his alleged sickness, that after filing his
claim he added thereto allegations of additional disabilities, and that
he made no application for pension until more than twelve years after
his discharge.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 31, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 3363, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Jennette Dow."

The husband of the claimant enlisted August 7, 1862; received a gunshot
wound in his left knee in September, 1863, and was mustered out with his
company June 10, 1865. He was pensioned for his wound in 1878 at the
rate of $4 per month, dating from the time of his discharge, which
amount was increased to $8 per month from June 4, 1880. The pensioned
soldier died December 17, 1882, and in 1883 his widow, the claimant,
filed an application for pension, alleging that her husband's death
resulted from his wound. Her claim was rejected in 1885 upon the ground
that death was not caused by the wound.

The physician who was present at the time of the death certifies that
the same resulted from apoplexy in twelve hours after the deceased was
attacked.

It also appears from the statement of this physician that the deceased
was employed for years after his discharge from the Army as a railroad
conductor, and that at the time of his death he had with difficulty
reached his home. He then describes as following the attack the usual
manifestations of apoplexy, and adds that he regards the case as one of
"hemiplegia, the outgrowth primarily of nerve injury, aggravated by the
life's calling, and eventuating in apoplexy as stated."

Evidence is filed in the Pension Bureau showing that after his discharge
he was more or less troubled with his wound, though one witness
testifies that he railroaded with him for fifteen years after his
injury. I find no medical testimony referred to which with any
distinctness charges death to the wound, and it would be hardly credible
if such evidence was found.

I am sure that in no case except in an application for pension would an
attempt be made in the circumstances here developed to attribute death
from apoplexy to a wound in the knee received nineteen years before the
apoplectic attack.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 31, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 9106, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Rachel Barnes."

William Barnes, the husband of the beneficiary named in this bill,
enlisted in the United States infantry in February, 1838, and was
discharged February 24, 1841.

In 1880 he applied for a pension, alleging that while serving in Florida
in 1840 and 1841 he contracted disease of the eyes. He procured
considerable evidence in support of his claim, but in 1882, and while
still endeavoring to furnish further proof, he committed suicide by
hanging.

The inference that his death thus occasioned was the result of
despondency and despair brought on by his failure to procure a pension,
while it adds a sad feature to the case, does not aid in connecting his
death with his military service.

That this was the view of the committee of the House to whom the bill
was referred is evidenced by the conclusion of their report in these
words:

And while your committee do not feel justified under the law as at
present existing in recommending that the name of the widow be placed
upon the pension roll for the purpose of a pension in her own right as
widow of the deceased soldier and by reason of the soldier's death,
they do think that she should be allowed such pension as, had her
husband's claim been favorably determined on the day of his decease,
he would have received.

And yet the bill under consideration directs the Secretary of the
Interior to place this widow's name on the pension roll and to "pay her
a pension as such widow from and after the passage of this act, subject
to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws."

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 31, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 8336, entitled "An act
granting an increase of pension to Duncan Forbes."

The beneficiary named in this bill enlisted, under the name of Alexander
Sheret, January 7, 1862, in the Regular Army, and was discharged January
8, 1865.

He applied for a pension in 1879, alleging that he was wounded in his
right breast December 31, 1862, and in his right ankle September 20,
1863. He was pensioned in 1883, dating from January 9, 1865, for the
ankle wound, but that part of his claim based upon the wound in his
breast was rejected upon the ground that there was no record of the same
and the testimony failed to show that such a wound had its origin in the
service.

Though the lack of such a record is sufficiently accounted for, I am
convinced that, conceding both the wounds alleged were received, this
pensioner has been fairly and justly treated.

It appears from the allegations of his application to the Pension Bureau
that after the wound in his breast, in December, 1862, he continued his
service till September, 1863, when he was wounded again in the ankle,
and that with both wounds he served until his discharge in January,
1865. It also appears from the records that after his discharge from
the. Army, and on the 3d day of February, 1865, he enlisted as landsman
in the United States Navy, and served in that branch of the service for
three years.

A medical examination in May, 1885, disclosed the appearance of a
gunshot wound in the right breast, which is thus described:

The missile struck the seventh rib of right side and glanced off,
leaving a horizontal scar 2-1/4 inches long and one-half inch wide,
deeply depressed and firmly adherent.

I credit this claimant with being a good soldier, and I am willing to
believe that his insistence upon a greater pension than that already
allowed by the Pension Bureau, under liberal general laws, enacted for
the benefit of himself and all his comrades, is the result of the
demoralization produced by ill-advised special legislation on the
subject.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _August 4, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 5389, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Ann Kinney."

This beneficiary applied for a pension in 1877 as the widow of Edward
Kinney, alleging that he died September 5, 1875, from the effects of a
wound received in the Army. He enlisted November 4, 1861, and was
discharged July 28, 1862, on account of a gunshot wound in his left
elbow, for which wound he was pensioned in the year 1865.

A physician testifies that the pensioned soldier's death was, in his
opinion, brought on indirectly by the intemperate use of intoxicating
liquors, and that he died from congestion of the brain.

The marshal of the city where he resided states that on the day of the
soldier's death he was called to remove him from a house in which he was
making a disturbance, and that finding him intoxicated he arrested him
and took him to the lockup and placed him in a cell. In a short time,
not exceeding an hour, thereafter he was found dead. He further states
that he was addicted to periodical sprees.

Another statement is made that the soldier was an intemperate man, and
died very suddenly in the city lockup, where he had been taken by an
officer while on a drunken spree.

This is not a pleasant recital, and as against the widow I should be
glad to avoid its effect. But the most favorable phase of the case does
not aid her, since her claim rests upon the allegation that her husband
was subject to epileptic fits and died from congestion of the brain
while in one of these fits. Even upon this showing the connection
between the fits and the wound in the elbow is not made apparent.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _August 4, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 8556, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Abraham Points."

This soldier enlisted August 11, 1864, and was mustered out June 28,
1865.

He was treated during his short term of service for "catarrhal,"
"constipation," "diarrhea," "jaundice," and "colic."

He filed an application for pension in 1878, alleging that some of his
comrades in a joke twisted his arm in such a manner that the elbow joint
became stiffened and anchylosed, and that his eyes became sore and have
continued to grow worse ever since. There is no record of either of
these disabilities.

The application was denied upon the ground, as stated in the report from
the Pension Bureau, that the claim "was specially examined, and it was
shown conclusively, from the evidence of neighbors and acquaintances of
good repute and standing, that the alleged disabilities existed at and
prior to claimant's enlistment."

I am satisfied from an examination of the facts submitted to me that
this determination was correct.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _August 4, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 3551, entitled "An act
granting a pension to George W. Cutler, late a private in Company B,
Ninth New Hampshire Volunteers."

This claimant enlisted July 12, 1862, and was discharged June 22, 1863,
for disability resulting from "scrofulous ulceration of the tibia and
fibula of right leg; loss of sight of left eye."

He made a claim for pension in 1865, alleging an injury while loading
commissary stores, resulting in spitting of blood, injury to lungs, and
heart disease.

This claim was rejected August 31, 1865.

In 1867 he again enlisted in the United States infantry, and was
discharged from that enlistment March 29, 1869, for disability, the
certificate stating that--

He is unfit for military service by reason of being subject to bleeding
of the lungs. He was wounded, while in the line of his duty in the
United States Army, at Fredericksburg, Va., December 13, 1862. Said
wound is not the cause of his disability.

Afterwards, and in the year 1879, he filed affidavits claiming that he
was wounded by a minie ball at the battle of Fredericksburg, December
13, 1862, and was injured by falling down an embankment.

In 1883 he filed an affidavit in which he stated that the disability for
which he claims a pension arose from injuries received in falling down a
bank at Fredericksburg and being tramped on by troops, causing a
complication of diseases resulting in general debility.

The statement in the certificate of discharge from his second enlistment
as to the wound he received by a minie ball at Fredericksburg was of
course derived from his own statement, as it was related to a prior term
of service.

The records of the Adjutant-General's Office furnish no evidence of
wounds or injury at Fredericksburg.

The injury alleged at first as a consequence of loading commissary
stores seems to have been abandoned by the claimant for the adoption
of a wound at Fredericksburg, which in its turn seems to have been
abandoned and a fall down a bank and trampling upon by troops
substituted.

Whatever injuries he may have suffered during his first enlistment, and
to whatever cause he chooses at last to attribute them, they did not
prevent his reenlistment and passing the physical examination necessary
before acceptance.

The surgeon of the Ninth New Hampshire Volunteers, in which he first
enlisted, states that he remembers the claimant well; that he was
mustered and accepted as a recruit in spite of his (the surgeon's)
protest; that he was physically unfit for duty; that he had the
appearance of impaired health, and that his face and neck were marked by
one or more deep scars, the result, as the claimant himself alleged, of
scrofulous abscesses in early youth. He expresses the opinion that he is
attempting to palm off these old scars as evidence of wounds received,
and that if he had been wounded as he claimed he (the surgeon) would
have known it and remembered it.

It is true that whenever in this case a wound is described it is located
in the jaw, while some of the medical testimony negatives the existence
of any wound.

The contrariety of the claimant's statements and the testimony and
circumstances tend so strongly to impeach his claim that I do not think
the decision of the Pension Bureau should be reversed and the claimant
pensioned.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _August 4, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without my approval House bill No. 7234, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Susan Hawes."

The beneficiary named in this bill is the mother of Jeremiah Hawes, who
enlisted in February, 1861, in the United States artillery, and was
discharged in February, 1864. He filed a claim for pension in 1881,
alleging that in 1862, by the premature discharge of a cannon, he
sustained paralysis of his right arm and side. In 1883, while his claim
was still pending, he died.

He does not appear to have made his home with his mother altogether,
if at all. For some years prior to his death and at the time of its
occurrence he was an inmate, or had been an inmate, of a soldiers' home
in Ohio.

But whatever may be said of the character of any injuries he may have
received in the service or of his relations to his mother, the cause of
his death, it seems to me, can not possibly upon any reasonable theory
be attributable to any incident of his military service.

It appears that in July, 1883, while the deceased was on his way from
Buffalo, where he had been in a hospital, to the soldiers' home in Ohio,
he attempted to step on a slowly moving freight train, and making a
misstep a wheel of the car passed over his foot, injuring it so badly
that it was deemed necessary by two physicians who were called to
amputate the foot. An anaesthetic was administered preparatory to the
operation, but before it was entered upon the injured man died, having
survived the accident but two hours.

The physicians who were present stated that in their opinion death was
due to heart disease.

The above account of the death of the soldier is derived from a report
furnished by the Pension Bureau, and differs somewhat from the statement
contained in the report of the House Committee on Invalid Pensions as
related to the intention of the physicians to amputate the injured foot
and their administration of an anaesthetic. But the accident and the
death two hours thereafter under the treatment of the physicians are
conceded facts.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _August 4, 1886_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 1584, entitled "An act
for the relief of Mrs. Aurelia C. Richardson."

Albert H. Fillmore, the son of the beneficiary mentioned in this bill,
enlisted in August, 1862, and died in the service of smallpox, May 20,
1865.

His father having died some time prior to the soldier's enlistment, his
mother in 1858 married Lorenzo D. Richardson. It is stated in the report
upon this case from the Pension Bureau that the deceased did not live
with his mother after her marriage to Richardson, and that there is no
competent evidence that he contributed to her support after that event.

At the time of the soldier's death his stepfather was a blacksmith,
earning at about that time, as it is represented, not less than $70 a
month, and owning considerable property, a part of which still remains
to him.

While in ordinary cases of this kind I am by no means inclined to
distinguish very closely between dependence at the date of the soldier's
death and the date of proposed aid to a needy mother, I think the
circumstances here presented, especially the fact of nonresidence by the
son with his mother since her second marriage, do not call for a
departure from the law governing claims based upon dependence.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

POCKET VETOES.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, August 17, 1886_.

Hon. Thos. F. Bayard,
_Secretary of State_.

DEAR SIR: The President directs me to transmit to you the accompanying
bills and joint resolutions, which failed to become laws at the close of
the late session of Congress, being unsigned and not having been
presented to him ten days prior to adjournment.

I may add that the printed copy of memorandum (without signature) is by
the President, and is attached to each bill and resolution by his
direction.

Very respectfully,

O.L. PRUDEN,
_Assistant Secretary_.

["An act for the relief of Francis W. Haldeman."--Received July 28,
1886.]

This bill appropriates $200 to the party named therein "as compensation
for services performed and money expended for the benefit of the United
States Army." It appears from a report of the House Committee on War
Claims that in the fall of 1863 Haldeman, a lad 12 years of age,
purchased a uniform and armed himself and attached himself to various
Ohio regiments, and, as is said, performed various duties connected with
the army service until the end of the year 1864, and for this it is
proposed to give him $200.

Of course he never enlisted and never was regularly attached to any
regiment. What kind of arms this boy 12 years of age armed himself with
is not stated, and it is quite evident that his military service could
not have amounted to much more than the indulgence of a boyish freak and
his being made a pet of the soldiers with whom he was associated. There
is a pleasant sentiment connected with this display of patriotism and
childish military ardor, and it is not a matter of surprise that he
should, as stated by the committee, have "received honorable mention by
name in the history of his regiment;" but when it is proposed twenty-two
years after his one year's experience with troops to pay him a sum
nearly if not quite equal to the pay of a soldier who fought and
suffered all the dangers and privations of a soldier's life, I am
constrained to dissent.

["An act for the relief of R.D. Beckley and Leon Howard."--Received July
28, 1886.]

These two men were employed by the Doorkeeper of the Forty-eighth
Congress as laborers at the rate of $720 per annum.

They claim that in both sessions of that Congress they not only
performed the duties appertaining to their positions as laborers, but
also performed the full duties of messengers. Having received their pay
as laborers, this bill proposes to appropriate for them the difference
between their compensation as laborers and $1,200, the pay allowed
messengers.

Congress, in appropriation bills covering the period in which these men
claim to have performed these dual duties, provided for a certain
specified number of messengers and a fixed number of laborers. They both
accepted the latter position. If they actually performed the duties of
both places, their ability to do so is evidence that the labor of either
place was very light. In any case they owed their time and services to
the Government, and while they were performing the duties of messengers
they were not engaged in the harder tasks which might have been required
of them as laborers. They ought not to complain if they have received
the amount for which they agreed to work, and which was allowed for as
the wages of a place which they were glad enough to secure. If they
really did the work of both places, I don't see why they should not be
paid both compensations. This proposition of course would not be
entertained for a moment.

I am of the opinion that claims for extra compensation such as these
should be firmly discountenanced, and I am sure no injustice will be
done by my declining to approve this bill.

["An act for the relief of Thomas P. Morgan, jr."--Received July 31,
1886.--Memorandum.]

Thomas P. Morgan, jr., in the year 1881 entered into a contract with the
Government to do certain excavating in the harbor of Norfolk.

He performed considerable of the work, but though the time limited by
the contract for the completion was extended by the Government, he
failed to complete the work, which necessitated other arrangements, to
the damage of the Government in quite a large sum. His contract was
forfeited by the Government because the progress he made was so slow and
unsatisfactory. It seems that a certain percentage of the money earned
by him in the progress of the work was, under the terms of the contract,
retained by the Government to insure its completion, and when work was
terminated the sum thus retained amounted to $4,898.04, which sum was
justly forfeited to the Government.

The object of this bill is to waive this forfeiture and pay this sum to
the derelict contractor.

Inasmuch as I am unable to see any equities in this case that should
overcome the fact that the amount of loss to the Government through the
contract is greater than the sum thus sought to be released to him, I am
not willing to agree to his release from the consequence of his failure
to perform his contract.

["An act for the relief of Charles F. Bowers."--Received August 2,
1886.]

It appears that Charles P. Bowers, while acting as regimental
quartermaster in 1862, received of John Weeks, assistant quartermaster
of volunteers, the sum of $230, for which he gave a receipt. On the
settlement of his accounts he was unable to account for said sum, for
the reason, as he alleges, that certain of his papers were lost and
destroyed. Thus in the statement of his account he is represented as a
debtor of the Government in that amount.

This bill directs that a credit be allowed to him of the said sum of
$230. But since his account was adjusted as above stated, showing him in
debt to the Government in the amount last stated, he has paid the sum of
$75 and been allowed a credit of $125 for the value of a horse; so that
whatever may be said of the merits of his claim that he should not be
charged with the sum of $230, if he should now be credited with that sum
the Government would owe him upon its books the sum of $30.

The bill is therefore not approved.

["An act to provide for the erection of a public building in the city of
Annapolis, Md."--Received August 3, 1886.--Memorandum.]

The post-office at Annapolis is now accommodated in quarters for which
the Government pays rent at the rate of $500 per annum, and the office
occupied by the collector of customs is rented for $75 per annum.

The Government has no other use for a public building at Annapolis than
is above indicated, and the chief argument urged why a building should
be constructed there is based upon the fact that this city is the
capital of the State of Maryland and should have a Government building
because most if not all the other capitals of the States have such
edifices.

There seems to be so little necessity for the building proposed for the
transaction of Government business, and if there is anything in the
argument last referred to it seems so well answered by the maintenance
of the Naval Academy at Annapolis, this bill is allowed to remain
inoperative.

["An act for the relief of J.A. Henry and others."--Received August 3,
1886.--Memorandum.]

This bill appropriates various sums to the parties named therein, being
claims of rent of quarters occupied during the war by the
Quartermaster's Department of the Army.

Among the appropriations there proposed to be made is one of the sum of
$51 to L.F. Green. This account has been once paid, a special act
directing such payment having been approved February 12, 1885. The fact
of this payment and important information bearing upon the validity of
some of the other claims mentioned in the bill could have been easily
obtained by application to the Third Auditor.

["An act for the relief of William H. Wheeler."--Received August 3,
1886.]

This bill directs the payment of the sum of $633.50 to William H.
Wheeler for quartermaster's stores furnished the Army in the year 1862.

From the data furnished me by the Quartermaster-General I am quite
certain that this claim has been once paid. The circumstances presented
to prove this are so strong that they should be explained before the
relief provided by this bill is afforded the claimant.

["An act granting a pension to Margaret D. Marchand."--Received August
5, 1886.--Memorandum.]

A bill presented to me for approval, granting a pension of $50 per month
to the beneficiary named, was disapproved upon the ground that the death
of her husband did not appear to be in any way related to any incident
of his military service.

This bill differs from the prior one simply in granting a pension
subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws instead of
fixing the rate of pension at a specified sum. I am still unable to see
how the objection to the first bill has been obviated.

["Joint resolution providing for the distribution of the Official
Register of the United States."--Received August 5, 1886.--Memorandum.]

This resolution reached me five minutes after the adjournment of the two
Houses of Congress, and is the only enactment of the session which came
to me too late for official action.

I do not understand this resolution nor the purposes sought to be
accomplished by its passage, and while in that frame of mind should have
been constrained to withhold my approval from the same even if it had
reached me in time for consideration.

["Joint resolution directing payment of the surplus in the Treasury on
the public debt."--Received August 5, 1886.--Memorandum.]

This resolution involves so much and is of such serious import that I do
not deem it best to discuss it at this time. It is not approved because
I believe it to be unnecessary and because I am by no means convinced
that its mere passage and approval at this time may not endanger and
embarrass the successful and useful operations of the Treasury
Department and impair the confidence which the people should have in the
management of the finances of the Government.

PROCLAMATIONS.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

A PROCLAMATION.

Whereas it is represented to me by the governor of the Territory of
Washington that domestic violence exists within the said Territory, and
that by reason of unlawful obstructions and combinations and the
assemblage of evil-disposed persons it has become impracticable to
enforce by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings the laws of the
United States at Seattle and at other points and places within said
Territory, whereby life and property are there threatened and
endangered; and

Whereas, in the judgment of the President, an emergency has arisen and a
case is now presented which justifies and requires, under the
Constitution and laws of the United States, the employment of military
force to suppress domestic violence and enforce the faithful execution
of the laws of the United States if the command and warning of this
proclamation be disobeyed and disregarded:

Now, therefore, I, Grover Cleveland, President of the United States of
America, do hereby command and warn all insurgents and all persons who
have assembled at any point within the said Territory of Washington for
the unlawful purposes aforesaid to desist therefrom and to disperse and
retire peaceably to their respective abodes on or before 6 o'clock in
the afternoon of the 10th day of February instant.

In witness whereof I have set my hand and caused the seal of the United
States to be hereunto affixed.

[SEAL.]

Done at the city of Washington, this 9th day of February, A.D. 1886, and
of the Independence of the United States the one hundred and tenth.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

A PROCLAMATION.

Whereas by a proclamation of the President of the United States dated
the 14th day of February, in the year 1884,[5] upon evidence then
appearing satisfactory to him that the Government of Spain had abolished
the discriminating customs duty theretofore imposed upon the products of
and articles proceeding from the United States of America imported into
the islands of Cuba and Puerto Rico, such abolition to take effect on
and after the 1st day of March of said year 1884, and, by virtue of the
authority vested in him by section 4228 of the Revised Statutes of the
United States, the President did thereby declare and proclaim that on
and after the said 1st day of March, 1884, so long as the products of
and articles proceeding from the United States imported into the islands
of Cuba and Puerto Rico should be exempt from discriminating customs
duties, any such duties on the products of and articles proceeding from
Cuba and Puerto Rico under the Spanish flag should be suspended and
discontinued; and

Whereas by Article I of the commercial agreement signed at Madrid the
13th day of February, 1884, it was stipulated and provided that "the
duties of the third column of the customs tariffs of Cuba and Puerto
Rico, which implies the suppression of the differential flag duty,"
should at once be applied to the products of and articles proceeding
from the United States of America; and

Whereas the complete suppression of the differential flag duty in
respect of all vessels of the United States and their cargoes entering
the ports of Cuba and Puerto Rico is by the terms of the said agreement
expressly made the consideration for the exercise of the authority
conferred upon the President in respect of the suspension of the
collection of foreign discriminating duties of tonnage and imposts upon
merchandise brought within the United States from Cuba and Puerto Rico
in Spanish vessels by said section 4228 of the Revised Statutes, which
section reads as follows:

SEC. 4228. Upon satisfactory proof being given to the President by the
government of any foreign nation that no discriminating duties of
tonnage or imposts are imposed or levied in the ports of such nation
upon vessels wholly belonging to citizens of the United States, or upon
the produce, manufactures, or merchandise imported in the same from the
United States or from any foreign country, the President may issue his
proclamation declaring that the foreign discriminating duties of tonnage
and impost within the United States are suspended and discontinued so
far as respects the vessels of such foreign nation, and the produce,
manufactures, or merchandise imported into the United States from such
foreign nation or from any other foreign country; the suspension to take
effect from the time of such notification being given to the President,
and to continue so long as the reciprocal exemption of vessels belonging
to citizens of the United States, and their cargoes, shall be continued,
and no longer.

And whereas proof is given to me that such complete suppression of the
differential flag duty in respect of vessels of the United States and
their cargoes entering the ports of Cuba and Puerto Rico has not in fact
been secured, but that, notwithstanding the said agreement dated at
Madrid, February 13, 1884, and in contravention thereof, as well as of
the provisions of the said section 4228 of the Revised Statutes, higher
and discriminating duties continue to be imposed and levied in said
ports upon certain produce, manufactures, or merchandise imported into
said ports from the United States or from any foreign country in vessels
of the United States than is imposed and levied on the like produce,
manufactures, or merchandise carried to said ports in Spanish vessels:

Now, therefore, I, Grover Cleveland, President of the United States of
America, in execution of the aforesaid section 4228 of the Revised
Statutes, do hereby revoke the suspension of the discriminating customs
imposed and levied in the ports of the United States on the products of
and articles proceeding under the Spanish flag from Cuba and Puerto
Rico, which is set forth and contained in the aforesaid proclamation
dated the 14th day of February, 1884; this revocation of said
proclamation to take effect on and after the 25th day of October
instant.

In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of
the United States to be affixed.

[SEAL.]

Done at the city of Washington, this 13th day of October, A.D. 1886, and
of the Independence of the United States the one hundred and eleventh.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

[Footnote 5: See pp. 323-224.]

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

A PROCLAMATION.

Whereas satisfactory proof has been given to me by the Government of
Spain that no discriminating duties of tonnage or imposts are imposed
or levied in the islands of Cuba and Puerto Rico upon vessels wholly
belonging to citizens of the United States, or upon the produce,
manufactures, or merchandise imported in the same from the United States
or from any foreign country; and

Whereas notification of such abolition of discriminating duties of
tonnage and imposts as aforesaid has been given to me by a memorandum
of agreement signed this day in the city of Washington between the
Secretary of State of the United States and the envoy extraordinary
and minister plenipotentiary of Her Majesty the Queen Regent of Spain
accredited to the Government of the United States of America:

Now, therefore, I, Grover Cleveland, President of the United States of
America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by section 4228 of the
Revised Statutes of the United States, do hereby declare and proclaim
that from and after the date of this my proclamation, being also the
date of the notification received as aforesaid, the foreign
discriminating duties of tonnage and impost within the United States are
suspended and discontinued so far as respects the vessels of Spain and
the produce, manufactures, or merchandise imported in said vessels into
the United States from the islands of Cuba and Puerto Rico or from any
other foreign country; such suspension to continue so long as the
reciprocal exemption of vessels belonging to citizens of the United
States, and their cargoes, shall be continued in the said islands of
Cuba and Puerto Rico, and no longer. In witness whereof I have hereunto
set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

[SEAL.]

Done at the city of Washington, this 27th day of October, A.D. 1886, and
of the Independence of the United States the one hundred and eleventh.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

A PROCLAMATION

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

It has long been the custom of the people of the United States, on a
day in each year especially set apart for that purpose by their Chief
Executive, to acknowledge the goodness and mercy of God and to invoke
His continued care and protection.

In observance of such custom I, Grover Cleveland, President of the
United States, do hereby designate and set apart Thursday, the 25th day
of November instant, to be observed and kept as a day of thanksgiving
and prayer.

On that day let all our people forego their accustomed employments and
assemble in their usual places of worship to give thanks to the Ruler
of the Universe for our continued enjoyment of the blessings of a free
government, for a renewal of business prosperity throughout our land,
for the return which has rewarded the labor of those who till the soil,
and for our progress as a people in all that makes a nation great.

And while we contemplate the infinite power of God in earthquake, flood,
and storm let the grateful hearts of those who have been shielded from
harm through His mercy be turned in sympathy and kindness toward those
who have suffered through His visitations.

Let us also in the midst of our thanksgiving remember the poor and needy
with cheerful gifts and alms so that our service may by deeds of charity
be made acceptable in the sight of the Lord.

In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of
the United States to be affixed.

[SEAL.]

Done at the city of Washington, this 1st day of November, A.D. 1886, and
of the Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and
eleventh.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

EXECUTIVE ORDERS.

Whereas in an Executive order dated the 21st day of July, 1875,
directing the distribution of the fund of 400,000 pesetas received from
the Spanish Government in satisfaction of the reclamation of the United
States arising from the capture of the _Virginius_, it was provided
"that should any further order or direction be required the same will
hereafter be made in addition hereto;" and

Whereas a further order or direction is deemed necessary:

Now, therefore, I, Grover Cleveland, President of the United States, do
hereby direct that all persons entitled to the benefit of any of the
aforesaid fund of 400,000 pesetas who have not yet presented their
claims thereto shall formulate and present their claims to the Secretary
of State of the United States within six months from the date of this
order, or be held as forever barred from the benefits of said fund.

And I hereby further direct that the balance of the fund which shall
remain unclaimed at the expiration of the aforesaid period of six months
shall be distributed _pro rata_ among the beneficiaries under the
original distribution, provided they or their heirs or representatives
shall within the six months next succeeding the said former period
present to the Secretary of State of the United States petitions for
their shares of said balance.

And to these ends the Secretary of State is requested to cause public
notice to be given of the above direction.

In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand, at the city of
Washington, this 12th day of December, A.D. 1885, and of the
Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and tenth.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, February 9, 1886--4 o'clock p.m._

Tidings of the death of Winfield Scott Hancock, the senior major-general
of the Army of the United States, have just been received.

A patriotic and valiant defender of his country, an able and heroic
soldier, a spotless and accomplished gentleman, crowned alike with the
laurels of military renown and the highest tribute of his
fellow-countrymen to his worth as a citizen, he has gone to his reward.

It is fitting that every mark of public respect should be paid to his
memory.

Therefore it is now ordered by the President that the national flag be
displayed at half-mast upon all the buildings of the Executive
Departments in this city until after his funeral shall have taken place.

By direction of the President:

DANIEL S. LAMONT,
_Private Secretary_.

Rule XXII.

Any person in the classified departmental service may be transferred
and appointed to any other place therein upon the following conditions:

1. That he is not debarred by clause 2 of Rule XXI.

2. That the head of a Department has, in a written statement to be
filed with the Commission, requested such transfer to a place in said
Department, to be designated in the statement.

3. That said person is shown in the statement or by other evidence
satisfactory to the Commission to have been during six consecutive
months in such service since January 16, 1883.

4. That such person has passed at the required grade one or more
examinations under the Commission which are together equal to that
required for the place to which the transfer is to be made.

But any person who has for three years last preceding served as a clerk
in the office of the President of the United States may be transferred
or appointed to any place in the classified service without examination.

Approved, April 12, 1886.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 20, 1886_.

Under the provisions of section 4 of the act approved March 3, 1883, it
is hereby ordered that the several Executive Departments, the Department
of Agriculture, and the Government Printing Office be closed on Monday,
the 31st instant, to enable the employees to participate in the
decoration of the graves of the soldiers who fell during the rebellion.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 3, 1886_.

_To Heads of the Government Departments_:

Inasmuch as the 4th of July of the present year falls upon Sunday and
the celebration of Independence Day is to be generally observed upon
Monday, July 5, it is hereby ordered that the several Executive
Departments, the Department of Agriculture, and the Government Printing
Office be closed on Monday, the 5th instant.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, July 14, 1886_.

_To the Heads of Departments in the Service of the General Government_:

I deem this a proper time to especially warn all subordinates in the
several Departments and all officeholders under the General Government
against the use of their official positions in attempts to control
political movements in their localities.

Officeholders are the agents of the people, not their masters. Not only
is their time and labor due to the Government, but they should
scrupulously avoid in their political action, as well as in the
discharge of their official duty, offending by a display of obtrusive
partisanship their neighbors who have relations with them as public
officials.

They should also constantly remember that their party friends from whom
they have received preferment have not invested them with the power of
arbitrarily managing their political affairs. They have no right as
officeholders to dictate the political action of their party associates
or to throttle freedom of action within party lines by methods and
practices which pervert every useful and justifiable purpose of party
organization.

The influence of Federal officeholders should not be felt in the
manipulation of political primary meetings and nominating conventions.
The use by these officials of their positions to compass their selection
as delegates to political conventions is indecent and unfair; and proper
regard for the proprieties and requirements of official place will also
prevent their assuming the active conduct of political campaigns.

Individual interest and activity in political affairs are by no means
condemned. Officeholders are neither disfranchised nor forbidden the
exercise of political privileges, but their privileges are not enlarged
nor is their duty to party increased to pernicious activity by
officeholding.

A just discrimination in this regard between the things a citizen may
properly do and the purposes for which a public office should not be
used is easy in the light of a correct appreciation of the relation
between the people and those intrusted with official place and a
consideration of the necessity under our form of government of political
action free from official coercion.

You are requested to communicate the substance of these views to those
for whose guidance they are intended.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

RULE IX.

All applications for regular competitive examinations for admission to
the classified civil service must be made on blank forms to be
prescribed by the Commission.

Requests for blank forms of application for competitive examination for
admission to the classified civil service and all regular applications
for such examination shall be made--

1. If for the classified departmental service, to the United States
Civil Service Commission at Washington, D.C.

2. If for the classified customs service, to the civil-service board of
examiners for the customs district in which the person desiring to be
examined wishes to enter the customs service.

3. If for the classified postal service, to the civil-service board of
examiners for the post-office at which the person desiring to be
examined wishes to enter the postal service.

Requests for blank forms of application to customs and postal boards of
examiners must be made in writing by the persons desiring examination,
and such blank forms shall not be furnished to any other persons.

Approved, August 13, 1886.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, November 16, 1886_.

Hon. Daniel Manning,
_Secretary of the Treasury_.

DEAR SIR: In pursuance of a joint resolution of the Congress approved
March 3, 1877, authorizing the President to cause suitable regulations
to be made for the maintenance of the statue of "Liberty Enlightening
the World," now located on Bedloes Island, in the harbor of New York, as
a beacon, I hereby direct that said statue be at once placed under the
care and superintendence of the Light-House Board, and that it be from
henceforth maintained by said board as a beacon, and that it be so
maintained, lighted, and tended in accordance with such rules and
regulations as now exist applicable thereto, or such other and different
rules and regulations as said board may deem necessary to carry out the
design of said joint resolution and this order.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

GENERAL ORDERS, No. 84.

HEADQUARTERS OF THE ARMY,
ADJUTANT-GENERAL'S OFFICE,
_Washington, November 18, 1886_.

I. The following proclamation [order] has been received from the
President:

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, D.C., November 18, 1886_.

_To the People of the United States_:

It is my painful duty to announce the death of Chester Alan Arthur,
lately the President of the United States, which occurred, after an
illness of long duration, at an early hour this morning at his residence
in the city of New York.

Mr. Arthur was called to the chair of the Chief Magistracy of the nation
by a tragedy which cast its shadow over the entire Government.

His assumption of the grave duties was marked by an evident and
conscientious sense of his responsibilities and an earnest desire to
meet them in a patriotic and benevolent spirit.

With dignity and ability he sustained the important duties of his
station, and the reputation of his personal worth, conspicuous
graciousness, and patriotic fidelity will long be cherished by his
fellow-countrymen.

In token of respect to the memory of the deceased it is ordered that the
Executive Mansion and the several departmental buildings be draped in
mourning for a period of thirty days and that on the day of the funeral
all public business in the departments be suspended.

The Secretaries of War and of the Navy will cause orders to be issued
for appropriate military and naval honors to be rendered on that day.

Done at the city of Washington this 18th day of November, A.D. 1886, and
of the Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and
eleventh.

[SEAL.]

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
THOMAS F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

II. In compliance with the instructions of the President, on the day
of the funeral, at each military post, the troops and cadets will be
paraded and this order read to them, after which all labors for the day
will cease.

The national flag will be displayed at half-staff.

The officers of the Army will wear crape on the left arm and on their
swords and the colors of the Battalion of Engineers, of the several
regiments, and of the United States Corps of Cadets will be put in
mourning for the period of six months.

The date and hour of the funeral will be communicated to department
commanders by telegraph, and by them to their subordinate commanders.

By command of Lieutenant-General Sheridan:

R.C. DRUM, _Adjutant-General_.

SPECIAL ORDER.

NAVY DEPARTMENT, _Washington, November 18, 1886_.

The President of the United States announces the death of ex-President
Chester Alan Arthur in the following proclamation [order]:

[For order see preceding page.]

It is hereby directed, in pursuance of the instructions of the
President, that on the day of the funeral, where this order may be
received in time, otherwise on the day after its receipt, the ensign at
each naval station and of each of the vessels of the United States Navy
in commission be hoisted at half-mast from sunrise to sunset, and that
also, at each naval station and on board of flagships and vessels acting
singly, a gun be fired at intervals of every half hour from sunrise to
sunset.

The officers of the Navy and Marine Corps will wear the usual badge of
mourning attached to the sword hilt and on the left arm for a period of
thirty days.

WILLIAM C. WHITNEY,
_Secretary of the Navy_.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, November 20, 1886_.

_It is hereby ordered_, That the Department of Agriculture, the
Government Printing Office, and all other Government offices in the
District of Columbia be closed on Monday, the 22d instant, the day of
the funeral of the late Chester Alan Arthur, ex-President of the United
States.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

SECOND ANNUAL MESSAGE.

WASHINGTON, _December 6, 1886_.

_To the Congress of the United States_:

In discharge of a constitutional duty, and following a well-established
precedent in the Executive office, I herewith transmit to the Congress
at its reassembling certain information concerning the state of the
Union, together with such recommendations for legislative consideration
as appear necessary and expedient.

Our Government has consistently maintained its relations of friendship
toward all other powers and of neighborly interest toward those whose
possessions are contiguous to our own. Few questions have arisen during
the past year with other governments, and none of those are beyond the
reach of settlement in friendly counsel.

We are as yet without provision for the settlement of claims of citizens
of the United States against Chile for injustice during the late war
with Peru and Bolivia. The mixed commissions organized under claims
conventions concluded by the Chilean Government with certain European
States have developed an amount of friction which we trust can be
avoided in the convention which our representative at Santiago is
authorized to negotiate.

The cruel treatment of inoffensive Chinese has, I regret to say, been
repeated in some of the far Western States and Territories, and acts of
violence against those people, beyond the power of the local constituted
authorities to prevent and difficult to punish, are reported even in
distant Alaska. Much of this violence can be traced to race prejudice
and competition of labor, which can not, however, justify the oppression
of strangers whose safety is guaranteed by our treaty with China equally
with the most favored nations.

In opening our vast domain to alien elements the purpose of our
law-givers was to invite assimilation, and not to provide an arena for
endless antagonism. The paramount duty of maintaining public order and
defending the interests of our own people may require the adoption of
measures of restriction, but they should not tolerate the oppression
of individuals of a special race. I am not without assurance that the
Government of China, whose friendly disposition toward us I am most
happy to recognize, will meet us halfway in devising a comprehensive
remedy by which an effective limitation of Chinese emigration, joined to
protection of those Chinese subjects who remain in this country, may be
secured.

Legislation is needed to execute the provisions of our Chinese
convention of 1880 touching the opium traffic.

While the good will of the Colombian Government toward our country is
manifest, the situation of American interests on the Isthmus of Panama
has at times excited concern and invited friendly action looking to the
performance of the engagements of the two nations concerning the
territory embraced in the interoceanic transit. With the subsidence of
the Isthmian disturbances and the erection of the State of Panama into a
federal district under the direct government of the constitutional
administration at Bogota, a new order of things has been inaugurated,
which, although as yet somewhat experimental and affording scope for
arbitrary-exercise of power by the delegates of the national authority,
promises much improvement.

The sympathy between the people of the United States and France, born
during our colonial struggle for independence and continuing to-day, has
received a fresh impulse in the successful completion and dedication of
the colossal statue of "Liberty Enlightening the World" in New York
Harbor--the gift of Frenchmen to Americans.

A convention between the United States and certain other powers for the
protection of submarine cables was signed at Paris on March 14, 1884,
and has been duly ratified and proclaimed by this Government. By
agreement between the high contracting parties this convention is to go
into effect on the 1st of January next, but the legislation required for
its execution in the United States has not yet been adopted. I earnestly
recommend its enactment.

Cases have continued to occur in Germany giving rise to much
correspondence in relation to the privilege of sojourn of our
naturalized citizens of German origin revisiting the land of their
birth, yet I am happy to state that our relations with that country have
lost none of their accustomed cordiality.

The claims for interest upon the amount of tonnage dues illegally
exacted from certain German steamship lines were favorably reported in
both Houses of Congress at the last session, and I trust will receive
final and favorable action at an early day.

The recommendations contained in my last annual message in relation to a
mode of settlement of the fishery rights in the waters of British North
America, so long a subject of anxious difference between the United
States and Great Britain, was met by an adverse vote of the Senate on
April 13 last, and thereupon negotiations were instituted to obtain an
agreement with Her Britannic Majesty's Government for the promulgation
of such joint interpretation and definition of the article of the
convention of 1818 relating to the territorial waters and inshore
fisheries of the British Provinces as should secure the Canadian rights
from encroachment by the United States fishermen and at the same time
insure the enjoyment by the latter of the privileges guaranteed to them
by such convention.

The questions involved are of long standing, of grave consequence, and
from time to time for nearly three-quarters of a century have given rise
to earnest international discussions, not unaccompanied by irritation.

Temporary arrangements by treaties have served to allay friction, which,
however, has revived as each treaty was terminated. The last
arrangement, under the treaty of 1871, was abrogated after due notice by
the United States on June 30, 1885, but I was enabled to obtain for our
fishermen for the remainder of that season enjoyment of the full
privileges accorded by the terminated treaty.

The joint high commission by whom the treaty had been negotiated,
although invested with plenary power to make a permanent settlement,
were content with a temporary arrangement, after the termination of
which the question was relegated to the stipulations of the treaty of
1818, as to the first article of which no construction satisfactory to
both countries has ever been agreed upon.

The progress of civilization and growth of population in the British
Provinces to which the fisheries in question are contiguous and the
expansion of commercial intercourse between them and the United States
present to-day a condition of affairs scarcely realizable at the date of
the negotiations of 1818.

New and vast interests have been brought into existence; modes of
intercourse between the respective countries have been invented and
multiplied; the methods of conducting the fisheries have been wholly
changed; and all this is necessarily entitled to candid and careful
consideration in the adjustment of the terms and conditions of
intercourse and commerce between the United States and their neighbors
along a frontier of over 3,500 miles.

This propinquity, community of language and occupation, and similarity
of political and social institutions indicate the practicability and
obvious wisdom of maintaining mutually beneficial and friendly
relations. Whilst I am unfeignedly desirous that such relations should
exist between us and the inhabitants of Canada, yet the action of their
officials during the past season toward our fishermen has been such as
to seriously threaten their continuance.

Although disappointed in my efforts to secure a satisfactory settlement
of the fishery question, negotiations are still pending, with reasonable
hope that before the close of the present session of Congress
announcement may be made that an acceptable conclusion has been reached.

As at an early day there may be laid before Congress the correspondence
of the Department of State in relation to this important subject, so
that the history of the past fishing season may be fully disclosed and
the action and the attitude of the Administration clearly comprehended,
a more extended reference is not deemed necessary in this communication.
The recommendation submitted last year that provision be made for a
preliminary reconnoissance of the conventional boundary line between
Alaska and British Columbia is renewed.

I express my unhesitating conviction that the intimacy of our relations
with Hawaii should be emphasized. As a result of the reciprocity treaty
of 1875, those islands, on the highway of Oriental and Australasian
traffic, are virtually an outpost of American commerce and a
stepping-stone to the growing trade of the Pacific. The Polynesian
Island groups have been so absorbed by other and more powerful
governments that the Hawaiian Islands are left almost alone in the
enjoyment of their autonomy, which it is important for us should be
preserved. Our treaty is now terminable on one year's notice, but
propositions to abrogate it would be, in my judgment, most ill advised.
The paramount influence we have there acquired, once relinquished, could
only with difficulty be regained, and a valuable ground of vantage for
ourselves might be converted into a stronghold for our commercial
competitors. I earnestly recommend that the existing treaty stipulations
be extended for a further term of seven years. A recently signed treaty
to this end is now before the Senate.

The importance of telegraphic communication between those islands and
the United States should not be overlooked.

The question of a general revision of the treaties of Japan is again
under discussion at Tokyo. As the first to open relations with that
Empire, and as the nation in most direct commercial relations with
Japan, the United States have lost no opportunity to testify their
consistent friendship by supporting the just claims of Japan to autonomy
and independence among nations.

A treaty of extradition between the United States and Japan, the first
concluded by that Empire, has been lately proclaimed.

The weakness of Liberia and the difficulty of maintaining effective
sovereignty over its outlying districts have exposed that Republic to
encroachment. It can not be forgotten that this distant community is
an offshoot of our own system, owing its origin to the associated
benevolence of American citizens, whose praiseworthy efforts to create
a nucleus of civilization in the Dark Continent have commanded respect
and sympathy everywhere, especially in this country. Although a formal
protectorate over Liberia is contrary to our traditional policy, the
moral right and duty of the United States to assist in all proper
ways in the maintenance of its integrity is obvious, and has been
consistently announced during nearly half a century. I recommend that in
the reorganization of our Navy a small vessel, no longer found adequate
to our needs, be presented to Liberia, to be employed by it in the
protection of its coastwise revenues.

The encouraging development of beneficial and intimate relations between
the United States and Mexico, which has been so marked within the past
few years, is at once the occasion of congratulation and of friendly
solicitude. I urgently renew my former representation of the need of
speedy legislation by Congress to carry into effect the reciprocity
commercial convention of January 20, 1883.

Our commercial treaty of 1831 with Mexico was terminated, according to
its provisions, in 1881, upon notification given by Mexico in pursuance
of her announced policy of recasting all her commercial treaties. Mexico
has since concluded with several foreign governments new treaties of
commerce and navigation, defining alien rights of trade, property, and
residence, treatment of shipping, consular privileges, and the like.
Our yet unexecuted reciprocity convention of 1883 covers none of these
points, the settlement of which is so necessary to good relationship.
I propose to initiate with Mexico negotiations for a new and enlarged
treaty of commerce and navigation.

In compliance with a resolution of the Senate, I communicated to that
body on August 2 last, and also to the House of Representatives,[6] the
correspondence in the case of A.K. Cutting, an American citizen, then
imprisoned in Mexico, charged with the commission of a penal offense in
Texas, of which a Mexican citizen was the object.

After demand had been made for his release the charge against him was
amended so as to include a violation of Mexican law within Mexican
territory.

This joinder of alleged offenses, one within and the other exterior to
Mexico, induced me to order a special investigation of the case, pending
which Mr. Cutting was released.

The incident has, however, disclosed a claim of jurisdiction by Mexico
novel in our history, whereby any offense committed anywhere by a
foreigner, penal in the place of its commission, and of which a Mexican
is the object, may, if the offender be found in Mexico, be there tried
and punished in conformity with Mexican laws.

This jurisdiction was sustained by the courts of Mexico in the Cutting
case, and approved by the executive branch of that Government, upon the
authority of a Mexican statute. The appellate court in releasing Mr.
Cutting decided that the abandonment of the complaint by the Mexican
citizen aggrieved by the alleged crime (a libelous publication) removed
the basis of further prosecution, and also declared justice to have been
satisfied by the enforcement of a small part of the original sentence.

The admission of such a pretension would be attended with serious
results, invasive of the jurisdiction of this Government and highly
dangerous to our citizens in foreign lands. Therefore I have denied it
and protested against its attempted exercise as unwarranted by the
principles of law and international usages.

A sovereign has jurisdiction of offenses which take effect within his
territory, although concocted or commenced outside of it; but the right
is denied of any foreign sovereign to punish a citizen of the United
States for an offense consummated on our soil in violation of our laws,
even though the offense be against a subject or citizen of such
sovereign. The Mexican statute in question makes the claim broadly, and
the principle, if conceded, would create a dual responsibility in the
citizen and lead to inextricable confusion, destructive of that
certainty in the law which is an essential of liberty.

When citizens of the United States voluntarily go into a foreign
country, they must abide by the laws there in force, and will not be
protected by their own Government from the consequences of an offense
against those laws committed in such foreign country; but watchful care
and interest of this Government over its citizens are not relinquished
because they have gone abroad, and if charged with crime committed in
the foreign land a fair and open trial, conducted with decent regard for
justice and humanity, will be demanded for them. With less than that
this Government will not be content when the life or liberty of its
citizens is at stake.

Whatever the degree to which extraterritorial criminal jurisdiction may
have been formerly allowed by consent and reciprocal agreement among
certain of the European States, no such doctrine or practice was ever
known to the laws of this country or of that from which our institutions
have mainly been derived.

In the case of Mexico there are reasons especially strong for perfect
harmony in the mutual exercise of jurisdiction. Nature has made us
irrevocably neighbors, and wisdom and kind feeling should make us
friends.

The overflow of capital and enterprise from the United States is a
potent factor in assisting the development of the resources of Mexico
and in building up the prosperity of both countries.

To assist this good work all grounds of apprehension for the security of
person and property should be removed; and I trust that in the interests
of good neighborhood the statute referred to will be so modified as to
eliminate the present possibilities of danger to the peace of the two
countries.

The Government of the Netherlands has exhibited concern in relation to
certain features of our tariff laws, which are supposed by them to be
aimed at a class of tobacco produced in the Dutch East Indies. Comment
would seem unnecessary upon the unwisdom of legislation appearing to
have a special national discrimination for its object, which, although
unintentional, may give rise to injurious retaliation.

The establishment, less than four years ago, of a legation at Teheran is
bearing fruit in the interest exhibited by the Shah's Government in the
industrial activity of the United States and the opportunities of
beneficial interchanges.

Stable government is now happily restored in Peru by the election of a
constitutional President, and a period of rehabilitation is entered
upon; but the recovery is necessarily slow from the exhaustion caused by
the late war and civil disturbances. A convention to adjust by
arbitration claims of our citizens has been proposed and is under
consideration.

The naval officer who bore to Siberia the testimonials bestowed by
Congress in recognition of the aid given to the _Jeannette_
survivors has successfully accomplished his mission. His interesting
report will be submitted. It is pleasant to know that this mark of
appreciation has been welcomed by the Russian Government and people as
befits the traditional friendship of the two countries.

Civil perturbations in the Samoan Islands have during the past
few years been a source of considerable embarrassment to the three
Governments--Germany, Great Britain, and the United States--whose
relations and extraterritorial rights in that important group are
guaranteed by treaties. The weakness of the native administration and
the conflict of opposing interests in the islands have led King Malietoa
to seek alliance or protection in some one quarter, regardless of the
distinct engagements whereby no one of the three treaty powers may
acquire any paramount or exclusive interest. In May last Malietoa
offered to place Samoa under the protection of the United States, and
the late consul, without authority, assumed to grant it. The proceeding
was promptly disavowed and the overzealous official recalled. Special
agents of the three Governments have been deputed to examine the
situation in the islands. With a change in the representation of all
three powers and a harmonious understanding between them, the peace,
prosperity, autonomous administration, and neutrality of Samoa can
hardly fail to be secured.

It appearing that the Government of Spain did not extend to the flag of
the United States in the Antilles the full measure of reciprocity
requisite under our statute for the continuance of the suspension of
discriminations against the Spanish flag in our ports, I was constrained
in October last[7] to rescind my predecessor's proclamation of February
14, 1884,[8] permitting such suspension. An arrangement was, however,
speedily reached, and upon notification from the Government of Spain
that all differential treatment of our vessels and their cargoes, from
the United States or from any foreign country, had been completely and
absolutely relinquished, I availed myself of the discretion conferred by
law and issued on the 27th of October my proclamation[9] declaring
reciprocal suspension in the United States. It is most gratifying to
bear testimony to the earnest spirit in which the Government of the
Queen Regent has met our efforts to avert the initiation of commercial
discriminations and reprisals, which are ever disastrous to the material
interests and the political good will of the countries they may affect.

The profitable development of the large commercial exchanges between
the United States and the Spanish Antilles is naturally an object of
solicitude. Lying close at our doors, and finding here their main
markets of supply and demand, the welfare of Cuba and Puerto Rico and
their production and trade are scarcely less important to us than to
Spain. Their commercial and financial movements are so naturally a part
of our system that no obstacle to fuller and freer intercourse should be
permitted to exist. The standing instructions of our representatives at
Madrid and Havana have for years been to leave no effort unessayed to
further these ends, and at no time has the equal good desire of Spain
been more hopefully manifested than now.

The Government of Spain, by removing the consular tonnage fees on
cargoes shipped to the Antilles and by reducing passport fees, has shown
its recognition of the needs of less trammeled intercourse.

An effort has been made during the past year to remove the hindrances to
the proclamation of the treaty of naturalization with the Sublime Porte,
signed in 1874, which has remained inoperative owing to a disagreement
of interpretation of the clauses relative to the effects of the return
to and sojourn of a naturalized citizen in the land of origin. I trust
soon to be able to announce a favorable settlement of the differences as
to this interpretation.

It has been highly satisfactory to note the improved treatment of
American missionaries in Turkey, as has been attested by their
acknowledgments to our late minister to that Government of his
successful exertions in their behalf.

The exchange of ratifications of the convention of December 5, 1885,
with Venezuela, for the reopening of the awards of the Caracas
Commission under the claims convention of 1866, has not yet been
effected, owing to the delay of the Executive of that Republic in
ratifying the measure. I trust that this postponement will be brief; but
should it much longer continue, the delay may well be regarded as a
rescission of the compact and a failure on the part of Venezuela to
complete an arrangement so persistently sought by her during many years
and assented to by this Government in a spirit of international
fairness, although to the detriment of holders of _bona fide_
awards of the impugned commission.

I renew the recommendation of my last annual message that existing
legislation concerning citizenship and naturalization be revised. We
have treaties with many states providing for the renunciation of
citizenship by naturalized aliens, but no statute is found to give
effect to such engagements, nor any which provides a needed central
bureau for the registration of naturalized citizens.

Experience suggests that our statutes regulating extradition might
be advantageously amended by a provision for the transit across our
territory, now a convenient thoroughfare of travel from one foreign
country to another, of fugitives surrendered by a foreign government to
a third state. Such provisions are not unusual in the legislation of
other countries, and tend to prevent the miscarriage of justice. It is
also desirable, in order to remove present uncertainties, that authority
should be conferred on the Secretary of State to issue a certificate, in
case of an arrest for the purpose of extradition, to the officer before
whom the proceeding is pending, showing that a requisition for the
surrender of the person charged has been duly made. Such a certificate,
if required to be received before the prisoner's examination, would
prevent a long and expensive judicial inquiry into a charge which the
foreign government might not desire to press. I also recommend that
express provision be made for the immediate discharge from custody of
persons committed for extradition where the President is of opinion that
surrender should not be made.

The drift of sentiment in civilized communities toward full recognition
of the rights of property in the creations of the human intellect has
brought about the adoption by many important nations of an international
copyright convention, which was signed at Berne on the 18th of
September, 1885.

Inasmuch as the Constitution gives to the Congress the power "to promote
the progress of science and useful arts by securing for limited times to
authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings
and discoveries," this Government did not feel warranted in becoming a
signatory pending the action of Congress upon measures of international
copyright now before it; but the right of adhesion to the Berne
convention hereafter has been reserved. I trust the subject will receive
at your hands the attention it deserves, and that the just claims of
authors, so urgently pressed, will be duly heeded.

Representations continue to be made to me of the injurious effect upon
American artists studying abroad and having free access to the art
collections of foreign countries of maintaining a discriminating duty
against the introduction of the works of their brother artists of other
countries, and I am induced to repeat my recommendation for the
abolition of that tax.

Pursuant to a provision of the diplomatic and consular appropriation act
approved July 1, 1886, the estimates submitted by the Secretary of State
for the maintenance of the consular service have been recast on the
basis of salaries for all officers to whom such allowance is deemed
advisable. Advantage has been taken of this to redistribute the salaries
of the offices now appropriated for, in accordance with the work
performed, the importance of the representative duties of the incumbent,
and the cost of living at each post. The last consideration has been too
often lost sight of in the allowances heretofore made. The compensation
which may suffice for the decent maintenance of a worthy and capable
officer in a position of onerous and representative trust at a post
readily accessible, and where the necessaries of life are abundant and
cheap, may prove an inadequate pittance in distant lands, where the
better part of a year's pay is consumed in reaching the post of duty,
and where the comforts of ordinary civilized existence can only be
obtained with difficulty and at exorbitant cost. I trust that in
considering the submitted schedules no mistaken theory of economy will
perpetuate a system which in the past has virtually closed to deserving
talent many offices where capacity and attainments of a high order are
indispensable, and in not a few instances has brought discredit on our
national character and entailed embarrassment and even suffering on
those deputed to uphold our dignity and interests abroad.

In connection with this subject I earnestly reiterate the practical
necessity of supplying some mode of trustworthy inspection and report of
the manner in which the consulates are conducted. In the absence of such
reliable information efficiency can scarcely be rewarded or its opposite
corrected.

Increasing competition in trade has directed attention to the value of
the consular reports printed by the Department of State, and the efforts
of the Government to extend the practical usefulness of these reports
have created a wider demand for them at home and a spirit of emulation
abroad. Constituting a record of the changes occurring in trade and of
the progress of the arts and invention in foreign countries, they are
much sought for by all interested in the subjects which they embrace.

The report of the Secretary of the Treasury exhibits in detail the
condition of the public finances and of the several branches of the
Government related to his Department. I especially direct the attention
of the Congress to the recommendations contained in this and the last
preceding report of the Secretary touching the simplification and
amendment of the laws relating to the collection of our revenues, and in
the interest of economy and justice to the Government I hope they may be
adopted by appropriate legislation.

The ordinary receipts of the Government for the fiscal year ended June
30, 1886, were $336,439,727.06. Of this amount $192,905,023.41 was
received from customs and $116,805,936.48 from internal revenue. The
total receipts, as here stated, were $13,749,020.68 greater than for the
previous year, but the increase from customs was $11,434,084.10 and from
internal revenue $4,407,210.94, making a gain in these items for the
last year of $15,841,295.04, a falling off in other resources reducing
the total increase to the smaller amount mentioned.

The expense at the different custom-houses of collecting this increased
customs revenue was less than the expense attending the collection of
such revenue for the preceding year by $490,608, and the increased
receipts of internal revenue were collected at a cost to the
Internal-Revenue Bureau $155,944.99 less than the expense of such
collection for the previous year.

The total ordinary expenses of the Government for the fiscal year ended
June 30, 1886, were $242,483,138.50, being less by $17,788,797 than such
expenditures for the year preceding, and leaving a surplus in the
Treasury at the close of the last fiscal year of $93,956,588.56, as
against $63,463,771.27 at the close of the previous year, being an
increase in such surplus of $30,492,817.29.

The expenditures are compared with those of the preceding fiscal year
and classified as follows:

========================================================================
Year ending Year ending
June 30, 1886. June 30, 1885.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For civil expenses $21,955,604.04 $23,526,942.11
For foreign intercourse 1,332,320.88 5,439,609.11
For Indians 6,099,158.17 6,552,494.63
For pensions 63,404,864.03 56,102,267.49
For the military, including river and
harbor improvements and arsenals 34,324,152.74 42,670,578.47
For the Navy, including vessels,
machinery, and improvement of
navy-yards 13,907,887.74 16,021,079.69
For interest on public debt 50,580,145.97 51,386,256.47
For the District of Columbia 2,892,321.89 3,499,650.95
Miscellaneous expenditures, including
public buildings, light-houses, and
collecting the revenue 47,986,683.04 54,728,056.21
========================================================================

For the current year to end June 30, 1887, the ascertained receipts up
to October 1, 1886, with such receipts estimated for the remainder of
the year, amount to $356,000,000.

The expenditures ascertained and estimated for the same period are
$266,000,000, indicating an anticipated surplus at the close of the year
of $90,000,000.

The total value of the exports from the United States to foreign
countries during the fiscal year is stated and compared with the
preceding year as follows:

========================================================================
For the year For the year
ending ending
June 30, 1886. June 30, 1885.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Domestic merchandise $665,964,529 $726,682,946
Foreign merchandise 13,560,301 15,506,809
Gold 42,952,191 8,477,892
Silver 29,511,219 33,753,633
========================================================================

The value of some of our leading exports during the last fiscal year, as
compared with the value of the same for the year immediately preceding,
is here given, and furnishes information both interesting and suggestive:

========================================================================
For the year For the year
ending ending
June 30, 1886. June 30, 1885.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cotton and cotton manufactures $219,045,576 $213,799,049
Tobacco and its manufactures 30,424,908 24,767,305
Breadstuffs 125,846,558 160,370,821
Provisions 90,625,216 107,332,456
========================================================================

Our imports during the last fiscal year, as compared with the previous
year, were as follows:

========================================================================
For the year For the year
ending ending
June 30, 1886. June 30, 1885.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Merchandise $635,436,136 $579,580,053.80
Gold 20,743,349 26,691,696
Silver 17,850,307 16,550,627
========================================================================

In my last annual message to the Congress attention was directed to the
fact that the revenues of the Government exceeded its actual needs, and
it was suggested that legislative action should be taken to relieve the
people from the unnecessary burden of taxation thus made apparent.

In view of the pressing importance of the subject I deem it my duty to
again urge its consideration.

The income of the Government, by its increased volume and through
economies in its collection, is now more than ever in excess of public
necessities. The application of the surplus to the payment of such
portion of the public debt as is now at our option subject to
extinguishment, if continued at the rate which has lately prevailed,
would retire that class of indebtedness within less than one year from
this date. Thus a continuation of our present revenue system would soon
result in the receipt of an annual income much greater than necessary to
meet Government expenses, with no indebtedness upon which it could be
applied. We should then be confronted with a vast quantity of money, the
circulating medium of the people, hoarded in the Treasury when it should
be in their hands, or we should be drawn into wasteful public
extravagance, with all the corrupting national demoralization which
follows in its train.

But it is not the simple existence of this surplus and its threatened
attendant evils which furnish the strongest argument against our present
scale of Federal taxation. Its worst phase is the exaction of such a
surplus through a perversion of the relations between the people and
their Government and a dangerous departure from the rules which limit
the right of Federal taxation.

Good government, and especially the government of which every American
citizen boasts, has for its objects the protection of every person
within its care in the greatest liberty consistent with the good order
of society and his perfect security in the enjoyment of his earnings
with the least possible diminution for public needs. When more of the
people's substance is exacted through the form of taxation than is
necessary to meet the just obligations of the Government and the expense
of its economical administration, such exaction becomes ruthless
extortion and a violation of the fundamental principles of a free
government.

The indirect manner in which these exactions are made has a tendency to
conceal their true character and their extent. But we have arrived at a
stage of superfluous revenue which has aroused the people to a
realization of the fact that the amount raised professedly for the
support of the Government is paid by them as absolutely if added to the
price of the things which supply their daily wants as if it was paid at
fixed periods into the hand of the taxgatherer.

Those who toil for daily wages are beginning to understand that capital,
though sometimes vaunting its importance and clamoring for the
protection and favor of the Government, is dull and sluggish till,
touched by the magical hand of labor, it springs into activity,
furnishing an occasion for Federal taxation and gaining the value which
enables it to bear its burden. And the laboring man is thoughtfully
inquiring whether in these circumstances, and considering the tribute he
constantly pays into the public Treasury as he supplies his daily wants,
he receives his fair share of advantages.

There is also a suspicion abroad that the surplus of our revenues
indicates abnormal and exceptional business profits, which, under the
system which produces such surplus, increase without corresponding
benefit to the people at large the vast accumulations of a few among our
citizens, whose fortunes, rivaling the wealth of the most favored in
antidemocratic nations, are not the natural growth of a steady, plain,
and industrious republic.

Our farmers, too, and those engaged directly and indirectly in supplying
the products of agriculture, see that day by day, and as often as the
daily wants of their households recur, they are forced to pay excessive
and needless taxation, while their products struggle in foreign markets
with the competition of nations, which, by allowing a freer exchange of
productions than we permit, enable their people to sell for prices which
distress the American farmer.

As every patriotic citizen rejoices in the constantly increasing pride
of our people in American citizenship and in the glory of our national
achievements and progress, a sentiment prevails that the leading strings
useful to a nation in its infancy may well be to a great extent
discarded in the present stage of American ingenuity, courage, and
fearless self-reliance; and for the privilege of indulging this
sentiment with true American enthusiasm our citizens are quite willing
to forego an idle surplus in the public Treasury.

And all the people know that the average rate of Federal taxation upon
imports is to-day, in time of peace, but little less, while upon some
articles of necessary consumption it is actually more, than was imposed
by the grievous burden willingly borne at a time when the Government
needed millions to maintain by war the safety and integrity of the
Union.

It has been the policy of the Government to collect the principal part
of its revenues by a tax upon imports, and no change in this policy is
desirable. But the present condition of affairs constrains our people to
demand that by a revision of our revenue laws the receipts of the
Government shall be reduced to the necessary expense of its economical
administration; and this demand should be recognized and obeyed by the
people's representatives in the legislative branch of the Government.

In readjusting the burdens of Federal taxation a sound public policy
requires that such of our citizens as have built up large and important
industries under present conditions should not be suddenly and to their
injury deprived of advantages to which they have adapted their business;
but if the public good requires it they should be content with such
consideration as shall deal fairly and cautiously with their interests,
while the just demand of the people for relief from needless taxation is
honestly answered.

A reasonable and timely submission to such a demand should certainly be
possible without disastrous shock to any interest; and a cheerful
concession sometimes averts abrupt and heedless action, often the
outgrowth of impatience and delayed justice.

Due regard should be also accorded in any proposed readjustment to the
interests of American labor so far as they are involved. We congratulate
ourselves that there is among us no laboring class fixed within
unyielding bounds and doomed under all conditions to the inexorable fate
of daily toil. We recognize in labor a chief factor in the wealth of the
Republic, and we treat those who have it in their keeping as citizens
entitled to the most careful regard and thoughtful attention. This
regard and attention should be awarded them, not only because labor is
the capital of our workingmen, justly entitled to its share of
Government favor, but for the further and not less important reason that
the laboring man, surrounded by his family in his humble home, as a
consumer is vitally interested in all that cheapens the cost of living
and enables him to bring within his domestic circle additional comforts
and advantages.

This relation of the workingman to the revenue laws of the country and
the manner in which it palpably influences the question of wages should
not be forgotten in the justifiable prominence given to the proper
maintenance of the supply and protection of well-paid labor. And these
considerations suggest such an arrangement of Government revenues as
shall reduce the expense of living, while it does not curtail the
opportunity for work nor reduce the compensation of American labor and
injuriously affect its condition and the dignified place it holds in the
estimation of our people.

But our farmers and agriculturists--those who from the soil produce the
things consumed by all--are perhaps more directly and plainly concerned
than any other of our citizens in a just and careful system of Federal
taxation. Those actually engaged in and more remotely connected with
this kind of work number nearly one-half of our population. None labor
harder or more continuously than they. No enactments limit their hours
of toil and no interposition of the Government enhances to any great
extent the value of their products. And yet for many of the necessaries
and comforts of life, which the most scrupulous economy enables them to
bring into their homes, and for their implements of husbandry, they are
obliged to pay a price largely increased by an unnatural profit, which
by the action of the Government is given to the more favored
manufacturer.

I recommend that, keeping in view all these considerations, the
increasing and unnecessary surplus of national income annually
accumulating be released to the people by an amendment to our revenue
laws which shall cheapen the price of the necessaries of life and give
freer entrance to such imported materials as by American labor may be
manufactured into marketable commodities.

Nothing can be accomplished, however, in the direction of this
much-needed reform unless the subject is approached in a patriotic
spirit of devotion to the interests of the entire country and with a
willingness to yield something for the public good.

The sum paid upon the public debt during the fiscal year ended June 30,
1886, was $44,551,043.36.

During the twelve months ended October 31, 1886, 3 per cent bonds were
called for redemption amounting to $127,283,100, of which $80,643,200
was so called to answer the requirements of the law relating to the
sinking fund and $46,639,900 for the purpose of reducing the public debt
by application of a part of the surplus in the Treasury to that object.
Of the bonds thus called $102,269,450 became subject under such calls to
redemption prior to November 1, 1886. The remainder, amounting to
$25,013,650, matured under the calls after that date.

In addition to the amount subject to payment and cancellation prior
to November 1, there were also paid before that day certain of these
bonds, with the interest thereon, amounting to $5,072,350, which were
anticipated as to their maturity, of which $2,664,850 had not been
called. Thus $107,341,800 had been actually applied prior to the 1st of
November, 1886, to the extinguishment of our bonded and interest-bearing
debt, leaving on that day still outstanding the sum of $1,153,443,112.
Of this amount $86,848,700 were still represented by 3 per cent bonds.
They, however, have been since November 1, or will at once be, further
reduced by $22,606,150, being bonds which have been called, as already
stated, but not redeemed and canceled before the latter date.

During the fiscal year ended June 30, 1886, there were coined, under the
compulsory silver-coinage act of 1878, 29,838,905 silver dollars, and
the cost of the silver used in such coinage was $23,448,960.01. There
had been coined up to the close of the previous fiscal year under the
provisions of the law 203,882,554 silver dollars, and on the 1st day of
December, 1886, the total amount of such coinage was $247,131,549.

The Director of the Mint reports that at the time of the passage of the
law of 1878 directing this coinage the intrinsic value of the dollars
thus coined was 94-1/4 cents each, and that on the 31st day of July,
1886, the price of silver reached the lowest stage ever known, so that
the intrinsic or bullion price of our standard silver dollar at that
date was less than 72 cents. The price of silver on the 30th day of
November last was such as to make these dollars intrinsically worth 78
cents each.

These differences in value of the coins represent the fluctuations in
the price of silver, and they certainly do not indicate that compulsory
coinage by the Government enhances the price of that commodity or
secures uniformity in its value.

Every fair and legal effort has been made by the Treasury Department
to distribute this currency among the people. The withdrawal of
United States Treasury notes of small denominations and the issuing
of small silver certificates have been resorted to in the endeavor to
accomplish this result, in obedience to the will and sentiments of
the representatives of the people in the Congress. On the 27th day
of November, 1886, the people held of these coins, or certificates
representing them, the nominal sum of $166,873,041, and we still had
$79,464,345 in the Treasury, as against about $142,894,055 so in the
hands of the people and $72,865,376 remaining in the Treasury one year
ago. The Director of the Mint again urges the necessity of more vault
room for the purpose of storing these silver dollars which are not
needed for circulation by the people.

I have seen no reason to change the views expressed in my last annual
message on the subject of this compulsory coinage, and I again urge its
suspension on all the grounds contained in my former recommendation,
reenforced by the significant increase of our gold exportations during
the last year, as appears by the comparative statement herewith
presented, and for the further reasons that the more this currency is
distributed among the people the greater becomes our duty to protect it
from disaster, that we now have abundance for all our needs, and that
there seems but little propriety in building vaults to store such
currency when the only pretense for its coinage is the necessity of its
use by the people as a circulating medium.

The great number of suits now pending in the United States courts for
the southern district of New York growing out of the collection of
customs revenue at the port of New York and the number of such suits
that are almost daily instituted are certainly worthy the attention of
the Congress. These legal controversies, based upon conflicting views by
importers and the collector as to the interpretation of our present
complex and indefinite revenue laws, might be largely obviated by an
amendment of those laws.

But pending such amendment the present condition of this litigation
should be relieved. There are now pending about 2,500 of these suits.
More than 1,100 have been commenced within the past eighteen months, and
many of the others have been at issue for more than twenty-five years.
These delays subject the Government to loss of evidence and prevent the
preparation necessary to defeat unjust and fictitious claims, while
constantly accruing interest threatens to double the demands involved.

In the present condition of the dockets of the courts, well filled with
private suits, and of the force allowed the district attorney, no
greater than is necessary for the ordinary and current business of his
office, these revenue litigations can not be considered.

In default of the adoption by the Congress of a plan for the general
reorganization of the Federal courts, as has been heretofore
recommended, I urge the propriety of passing a law permitting the
appointment of an additional Federal judge in the district where these
Government suits have accumulated, so that by continuous sessions of the
courts devoted to the trial of these cases they may be determined.

It is entirely plain that a great saving to the Government would be
accomplished by such a remedy, and the suitors who have honest claims
would not be denied justice through delay.

The report of the Secretary of War gives a detailed account of the
administration of his Department and contains sundry recommendations for
the improvement of the service, which I fully approve.

The Army consisted at the date of the last consolidated return of 2,103
officers and 24,946 enlisted men.

The expenses of the Department for the last fiscal year were
$36,990,903.38, including $6,294,305.43 for public works and river and
harbor improvements.

I especially direct the attention of the Congress to the recommendation
that officers be required to submit to an examination as a preliminary
to their promotion. I see no objection, but many advantages, in adopting
this feature, which has operated so beneficially in our Navy Department,
as well as in some branches of the Army.

The subject of coast defenses and fortifications has been fully and
carefully treated by the Board on Fortifications, whose report was
submitted at the last session of Congress; but no construction work of
the kind recommended by the board has been possible during the last year
from the lack of appropriations for such purpose.

The defenseless condition of our seacoast and lake frontier is perfectly
palpable. The examinations made must convince us all that certain of our
cities named in the report of the board should be fortified and that
work on the most important of these fortifications should be commenced
at once. The work has been thoroughly considered and laid out, the
Secretary of War reports, but all is delayed in default of Congressional
action.

The absolute necessity, judged by all standards of prudence and
foresight, of our preparation for an effectual resistance against the
armored ships and steel guns and mortars of modern construction which
may threaten the cities on our coasts is so apparent that I hope
effective steps will be taken in that direction immediately.

The valuable and suggestive treatment of this question by the Secretary
of War is earnestly commended to the consideration of the Congress.

In September and October last the hostile Apaches who, under the
leadership of Geronimo, had for eighteen months been on the war path,
and during that time had committed many murders and been the cause of
constant terror to the settlers of Arizona, surrendered to General
Miles, the military commander who succeeded General Crook in the
management and direction of their pursuit.

Under the terms of their surrender as then reported, and in view of the
understanding which these murderous savages seemed to entertain of the
assurances given them, it was considered best to imprison them in such
manner as to prevent their ever engaging in such outrages again, instead
of trying them for murder. Fort Pickens having been selected as a safe
place of confinement, all the adult males were sent thither and will be
closely guarded as prisoners. In the meantime the residue of the band,
who, though still remaining upon the reservation, were regarded as
unsafe and suspected of furnishing aid to those on the war path, had
been removed to Fort Marion. The women and larger children of the
hostiles were also taken there, and arrangements have been made for
putting the children of proper age in Indian schools.

The report of the Secretary of the Navy contains a detailed exhibit of
the condition of his Department, with such a statement of the action
needed to improve the same as should challenge the earnest attention of
the Congress.

The present Navy of the United States, aside from the ships in course of
construction, consists of--

First. Fourteen single-turreted monitors, none of which are in
commission nor at the present time serviceable. The batteries of these
ships are obsolete, and they can only be relied upon as auxiliary ships
in harbor defense, and then after such an expenditure upon them as might
not be deemed justifiable.

Second. Five fourth-rate vessels of small tonnage, only one of which was
designed as a war vessel, and all of which are auxiliary merely.

Third. Twenty-seven cruising ships, three of which are built of iron, of
small tonnage, and twenty-four of wood. Of these wooden vessels it is
estimated by the Chief Constructor of the Navy that only three will be
serviceable beyond a period of six years, at which time it may be said
that of the present naval force nothing worthy the name will remain.

All the vessels heretofore authorized are under contract or in course
of construction except the armored ships, the torpedo and dynamite
boats, and one cruiser. As to the last of these, the bids were in excess
of the limit fixed by Congress. The production in the United States of
armor and gun steel is a question which it seems necessary to settle
at an early day if the armored war vessels are to be completed with
those materials of home manufacture. This has been the subject of
investigation by two boards and by two special committees of Congress
within the last three years. The report of the Gun Foundry Board in
1884, of the Board on Fortifications made in January last, and the
reports of the select committees of the two Houses made at the last
session of Congress have entirely exhausted the subject, so far as
preliminary investigation is involved, and in their recommendations they
are substantially agreed.

In the event that the present invitation of the Department for bids to
furnish such of this material as is now authorized shall fail to induce
domestic manufacturers to undertake the large expenditures required to
prepare for this new manufacture, and no other steps are taken by
Congress at its coming session, the Secretary contemplates with
dissatisfaction the necessity of obtaining abroad the armor and the gun
steel for the authorized ships. It would seem desirable that the wants
of the Army and the Navy in this regard should be reasonably met, and
that by uniting their contracts such inducement might be offered as
would result in securing the domestication of these important interests.

The affairs of the postal service show marked and gratifying improvement
during the past year. A particular account of its transactions and
condition is given in the report of the Postmaster-General, which will
be laid before you.

The reduction of the rate of letter postage in 1883, rendering the
postal revenues inadequate to sustain the expenditures, and business
depression also contributing, resulted in an excess of cost for the
fiscal year ended June 30, 1885, of eight and one-third millions of
dollars. An additional check upon receipts by doubling the measure of
weight in rating sealed correspondence and diminishing one-half the
charge for newspaper carriage was imposed by legislation which took
effect with the beginning of the past fiscal year, while the constant
demand of our territorial development and growing population for the
extension and increase of mail facilities and machinery necessitates
steady annual advance in outlay, and the careful estimate of a year ago
upon the rates of expenditure then existing contemplated the unavoidable
augmentation of the deficiency in the last fiscal year by nearly
$2,000,000. The anticipated revenue for the last year failed of
realization by about $64,000, but proper measures of economy have so
satisfactorily limited the growth of expenditure that the total
deficiency in fact fell below that of 1885, and at this time the
increase of revenue is in a gaining ratio over the increase of cost,
demonstrating the sufficiency of the present rates of postage ultimately
to sustain the service. This is the more pleasing because our people
enjoy now both cheaper postage proportionably to distances and a vaster
and more costly service than any other upon the globe.

Retrenchment has been effected in the cost of supplies, some
expenditures unwarranted by law have ceased, and the outlays for mail
carriage have been subjected to beneficial scrutiny. At the close of the
last fiscal year the expense of transportation on star routes stood at
an annual rate of cost less by over $560,000 than at the close of the
previous year and steamboat and mail-messenger service at nearly
$200,000 less.

The service has been in the meantime enlarged and extended by the
establishment of new offices, increase of routes of carriage, expansion
of carrier-delivery conveniences, and additions to the railway mail
facilities, in accordance with the growing exigencies of the country and
the long-established policy of the Government.

The Postmaster-General calls attention to the existing law for
compensating railroads and expresses the opinion that a method may be
devised which will prove more just to the carriers and beneficial to the
Government; and the subject appears worthy of your early consideration.

The differences which arose during the year with certain of the ocean
steamship companies have terminated by the acquiescence of all in the
policy of the Government approved by the Congress in the postal
appropriation at its last session, and the Department now enjoys the
utmost service afforded by all vessels which sail from our ports upon
either ocean--a service generally adequate to the needs of our
intercourse. Petitions have, however, been presented to the Department
by numerous merchants and manufacturers for the establishment of a
direct service to the Argentine Republic and for semimonthly dispatches
to the Empire of Brazil, and the subject is commended to your
consideration. It is an obvious duty to provide the means of postal
communication which our commerce requires, and with prudent forecast of
results the wise extension of it may lead to stimulating intercourse and
become the harbinger of a profitable traffic which will open new avenues
for the disposition of the products of our industry. The circumstances
of the countries at the far south of our continent are such as to invite
our enterprise and afford the promise of sufficient advantages to
justify an unusual effort to bring about the closer relations which
greater freedom of communication would tend to establish.

I suggest that, as distinguished from a grant or subsidy for the mere
benefit of any line of trade or travel, whatever outlay may be required
to secure additional postal service, necessary and proper and not
otherwise attainable, should be regarded as within the limit of
legitimate compensation for such service.

The extension of the free-delivery service as suggested by the
Post-master-General has heretofore received my sanction, and it is to be
hoped a suitable enactment may soon be agreed upon.

The request for an appropriation sufficient to enable the general
inspection of fourth-class offices has my approbation.

I renew my approval of the recommendation of the Postmaster-General that
another assistant be provided for the Post-Office Department, and I
invite your attention to the several other recommendations in his
report.

The conduct of the Department of Justice for the last fiscal year is
fully detailed in the report of the Attorney-General, and I invite the
earnest attention of the Congress to the same and due consideration of
the recommendations therein contained.

In the report submitted by this officer to the last session of the
Congress he strongly recommended the erection of a penitentiary for the
confinement of prisoners convicted and sentenced in the United States
courts, and he repeats the recommendation in his report for the last
year.

This is a matter of very great importance and should at once receive
Congressional action. United States prisoners are now confined in more
than thirty different State prisons and penitentiaries scattered in
every part of the country. They are subjected to nearly as many
different modes of treatment and discipline and are far too much removed
from the control and regulation of the Government. So far as they are
entitled to humane treatment and an opportunity for improvement and
reformation, the Government is responsible to them and society that
these things are forthcoming. But this duty can scarcely be discharged
without more absolute control and direction than is possible under the
present system.

Many of our good citizens have interested themselves, with the most
beneficial results, in the question of prison reform. The General
Government should be in a situation, since there must be United States
prisoners, to furnish important aid in this movement, and should be able
to illustrate what may be practically done in the direction of this
reform and to present an example in the treatment and improvement of its
prisoners worthy of imitation.

With prisons under its own control the Government could deal with the
somewhat vexed question of convict labor, so far as its convicts were
concerned, according to a plan of its own adoption, and with due regard
to the rights and interests of our laboring citizens, instead of
sometimes aiding in the operation of a system which causes among them
irritation and discontent.

Upon consideration of this subject it might be thought wise to erect
more than one of these institutions, located in such places as would
best subserve the purposes of convenience and economy in transportation.
The considerable cost of maintaining these convicts as at present, in
State institutions, would be saved by the adoption of the plan proposed,
and by employing them in the manufacture of such articles as were needed
for use by the Government quite a large pecuniary benefit would be
realized in partial return for our outlay.

I again urge a change in the Federal judicial system to meet the wants
of the people and obviate the delays necessarily attending the present
condition of affairs in our courts. All are agreed that something should
be done, and much favor is shown by those well able to advise to the
plan suggested by the Attorney-General at the last session of the
Congress and recommended in my last annual message. This recommendation
is here renewed, together with another made at the same time, touching a
change in the manner of compensating district attorneys and marshals;
and the latter subject is commended to the Congress for its action in
the interest of economy to the Government, and humanity, fairness, and
justice to our people.

The report of the Secretary of the Interior presents a comprehensive
summary of the work of the various branches of the public service
connected with his Department, and the suggestions and recommendations
which it contains for the improvement of the service should receive your
careful consideration.

The exhibit made of the condition of our Indian population and the
progress of the work for their enlightenment, notwithstanding the many
embarrassments which hinder the better administration of this important
branch of the service, is a gratifying and hopeful one.

The funds appropriated for the Indian service for the fiscal year just
passed, with the available income from Indian land and trust moneys,
amounting in all to $7,850,775.12, were ample for the service under the
conditions and restrictions of laws regulating their expenditure. There
remained a balance on hand on June 30, 1886, of $1,660,023.30, of which
$1,337,768.21 are permanent funds for fulfillment of treaties and other
like purposes, and the remainder, $322,255.09, is subject to be carried
to the surplus fund as required by law.

The estimates presented for appropriations for the ensuing fiscal year
amount to $5,608,873.64, or $442,386.20 less than those laid before the
Congress last year.

The present system of agencies, while absolutely necessary and well
adapted for the management of our Indian affairs and for the ends in
view when it was adopted, is in the present stage of Indian management
inadequate, standing alone, for the accomplishment of an object which
has become pressing in its importance--the more rapid transition from
tribal organizations to citizenship of such portions of the Indians as
are capable of civilized life.

When the existing system was adopted, the Indian race was outside of the
limits of organized States and Territories and beyond the immediate
reach and operation of civilization, and all efforts were mainly
directed to the maintenance of friendly relations and the preservation
of peace and quiet on the frontier. All this is now changed. There is no
such thing as the Indian frontier. Civilization, with the busy hum of
industry and the influences of Christianity, surrounds these people at
every point. None of the tribes are outside of the bounds of organized
government and society, except that the Territorial system has not been
extended over that portion of the country known as the Indian Territory.
As a race the Indians are no longer hostile, but may be considered as
submissive to the control of the Government. Few of them only are
troublesome. Except the fragments of several bands, all are now gathered
upon reservations.

It is no longer possible for them to subsist by the chase and the
spontaneous productions of the earth.

With an abundance of land, if furnished with the means and implements
for profitable husbandry, their life of entire dependence upon
Government rations from day to day is no longer defensible. Their
inclination, long fostered by a defective system of control, is to cling
to the habits and customs of their ancestors and struggle with
persistence against the change of life which their altered circumstances
press upon them. But barbarism and civilization can not live together.
It is impossible that such incongruous conditions should coexist on the
same soil.

They are a portion of our people, are under the authority of our
Government, and have a peculiar claim upon and are entitled to the
fostering care and protection of the nation. The Government can not
relieve itself of this responsibility until they are so far trained and
civilized as to be able wholly to manage and care for themselves. The
paths in which they should walk must be clearly marked out for them, and
they must be led or guided until they are familiar with the way and
competent to assume the duties and responsibilities of our citizenship.

Progress in this great work will continue only at the present slow pace
and at great expense unless the system and methods of management are
improved to meet the changed conditions and urgent demands of the
service.

The agents, having general charge and supervision in many cases of more
than 5,000 Indians, scattered over large reservations, and burdened with
the details of accountability for funds and supplies, have time to look
after the industrial training and improvement of a few Indians only. The
many are neglected and remain idle and dependent, conditions not
favorable for progress and civilization.

The compensation allowed these agents and the conditions of the service
are not calculated to secure for the work men who are fitted by ability
and skill to properly plan and intelligently direct the methods best
adapted to produce the most speedy results and permanent benefits.

Hence the necessity for a supplemental agency or system directed to the
end of promoting the general and more rapid transition of the tribes
from habits and customs of barbarism to the ways of civilization.

With an anxious desire to devise some plan of operation by which to
secure the welfare of the Indians and to relieve the Treasury as far as
possible from the support of an idle and dependent population, I
recommended in my previous annual message the passage of a law
authorizing the appointment of a commission as an instrumentality
auxiliary to those already established for the care of the Indians. It
was designed that this commission should be composed of six intelligent
and capable persons--three to be detailed from the Army--having
practical ideas upon the subject of the treatment of Indians and
interested in their welfare, and that it should be charged, under the
direction of the Secretary of the Interior, with the management of such
matters of detail as can not with the present organization be properly
and successfully conducted, and which present different phases, as the
Indians themselves differ in their progress, needs, disposition, and
capacity for improvement or immediate self-support.

By the aid of such a commission much unwise and useless expenditure of
money, waste of materials, and unavailing efforts might be avoided; and
it is hoped that this or some measure which the wisdom of Congress may
better devise to supply the deficiency of the present system may receive
your consideration and the appropriate legislation be provided.

The time is ripe for the work of such an agency.

There is less opposition to the education and training of the Indian
youth, as shown by the increased attendance upon the schools, and there
is a yielding tendency for the individual holding of lands. Development
and advancement in these directions are essential, and should have every
encouragement. As the rising generation are taught the language of
civilization and trained in habits of industry they should assume the
duties, privileges, and responsibilities of citizenship.

No obstacle should hinder the location and settlement of any Indian
willing to take land in severalty; on the contrary, the inclination to
do so should be stimulated at all times when proper and expedient. But
there is no authority of law for making allotments on some of the
reservations, and on others the allotments provided for are so small
that the Indians, though ready and desiring to settle down, are not
willing to accept such small areas when their reservations contain ample
lands to afford them homesteads of sufficient size to meet their present
and future needs.

These inequalities of existing special laws and treaties should be
corrected and some general legislation on the subject should be
provided, so that the more progressive members of the different tribes
may be settled upon homesteads, and by their example lead others to
follow, breaking away from tribal customs and substituting therefor the
love of home, the interest of the family, and the rule of the state.

The Indian character and nature are such that they are not easily led
while brooding over unadjusted wrongs. This is especially so regarding
their lands. Matters arising from the construction and operation of
railroads across some of the reservations, and claims of title and right
of occupancy set up by white persons to some of the best land within
other reservations require legislation for their final adjustment.

The settlement of these matters will remove many embarrassments to
progress in the work of leading the Indians to the adoption of our
institutions and bringing them under the operation, the influence, and
the protection of the universal laws of our country.

The recommendations of the Secretary of the Interior and the
Commissioner of the General Land Office looking to the better protection
of public lands and of the public surveys, the preservation of national
forests, the adjudication of grants to States and corporations and of
private land claims, and the increased efficiency of the public-land
service are commended to the attention of Congress. To secure the widest
distribution of public lands in limited quantities among settlers for
residence and cultivation, and thus make the greatest number of
individual homes, was the primary object of the public-land legislation
in the early days of the Republic. This system was a simple one. It
commenced with an admirable scheme of public surveys, by which the
humblest citizen could identify the tract upon which he wished to
establish his home. The price of lands was placed within the reach of
all the enterprising, industrious, and honest pioneer citizens of the
country. It was soon, however, found that the object of the laws was
perverted, under the system of cash sales, from a distribution of land
among the people to an accumulation of land capital by wealthy and
speculative persons. To check this tendency a preference right of
purchase was given to settlers on the land, a plan which culminated in
the general preemption act of 1841. The foundation of this system was
actual residence and cultivation. Twenty years later the homestead law
was devised to more surely place actual homes in the possession of
actual cultivators of the soil. The land was given without price, the
sole conditions being residence, improvement, and cultivation. Other
laws have followed, each designed to encourage the acquirement and use
of land in limited individual quantities. But in later years these laws,
through vicious administrative methods and under changed conditions of
communication and transportation, have been so evaded and violated that
their beneficent purpose is threatened with entire defeat. The methods
of such evasions and violations are set forth in detail in the reports
of the Secretary of the Interior and Commissioner of the General Land
Office. The rapid appropriation of our public lands without _bona
fide_ settlements or cultivation, and not only without intention of
residence, but for the purpose of their aggregation in large holdings,
in many cases in the hands of foreigners, invites the serious and
immediate attention of the Congress.

The energies of the Land Department have been devoted during the present
Administration to remedy defects and correct abuses in the public-land
service. The results of these efforts are so largely in the nature of
reforms in the processes and methods of our land system as to prevent
adequate estimate; but it appears by a compilation from the reports of
the Commissioner of the General Land Office that the immediate effect in
leading cases which have come to a final termination has been the
restoration to the mass of public lands of 2,750,000 acres; that
2,370,000 acres are embraced in investigations now pending before the
Department or the courts, and that the action of Congress has been asked
to effect the restoration of 2,790,000 acres additional; besides which
4,000,000 acres have been withheld from reservation and the rights of
entry thereon maintained.

I recommend the repeal of the preemption and timber-culture acts, and
that the homestead laws be so amended as to better secure compliance
with their requirements of residence, improvement, and cultivation for
the period of five years from date of entry, without commutation or
provision for speculative relinquishment. I also recommend the repeal of
the desert-land laws unless it shall be the pleasure of the Congress to
so amend these laws as to render them less liable to abuses. As the
chief motive for an evasion of the laws and the principal cause of their
result in land accumulation instead of land distribution is the facility
with which transfers are made of the right intended to be secured to
settlers, it may be deemed advisable to provide by legislation some
guards and checks upon the alienation of homestead rights and lands
covered thereby Until patents issue.

Last year an Executive proclamation[10] was issued directing the removal
of fences which inclosed the public domain. Many of these have been
removed in obedience to such order, but much of the public land still
remains within the lines of these unlawful fences. The ingenious methods
resorted to in order to continue these trespasses and the hardihood of
the pretenses by which in some cases such inclosures are justified are
fully detailed in the report of the Secretary of the Interior.

The removal of the fences still remaining which inclose public lands
will be enforced with all the authority and means with which the
executive branch of the Government is or shall be invested by the
Congress for that purpose.

The report of the Commissioner of Pensions contains a detailed and most
satisfactory exhibit of the operations of the Pension Bureau during the
last fiscal year. The amount of work done was the largest in any year
since the organization of the Bureau, and it has been done at less cost
than during the previous year in every division.

On the 30th day of June, 1886, there were 365,783 pensioners on the
rolls of the Bureau.

Since 1861 there have been 1,018,735 applications for pensions filed, of
which 78,834 were based upon service in the War of 1812. There were
621,754 of these applications allowed, including 60,178 to the soldiers
of 1812 and their widows.

The total amount paid for pensions since 1861 is $808,624,811.57.

The number of new pensions allowed during the year ended June 30, 1886,
is 40,857, a larger number than has been allowed in any year save one
since 1861. The names of 2,229 pensioners which had been previously
dropped from the rolls were restored during the year, and after
deducting those dropped within the same time for various causes a net
increase remains for the year of 20,658 names.

From January 1, 1861, to December 1, 1885, 1,967 private pension acts
had been passed. Since the last-mentioned date, and during the last
session of the Congress, 644 such acts became laws.

It seems to me that no one can examine our pension establishment and its
operations without being convinced that through its instrumentality
justice can be very nearly done to all who are entitled under present
laws to the pension bounty of the Government.

But it is undeniable that cases exist, well entitled to relief, in which
the Pension Bureau is powerless to aid. The really worthy cases of this
class are such as only lack by misfortune the kind or quantity of proof
which the law and regulations of the Bureau require, or which, though
their merit is apparent, for some other reason can not be justly dealt
with through general laws. These conditions fully justify application to
the Congress and special enactments. But resort to the Congress for a
special pension act to overrule the deliberate and careful determination
of the Pension Bureau on the merits or to secure favorable action when
it could not be expected under the most liberal execution of general
laws, it must be admitted opens the door to the allowance of
questionable claims and presents to the legislative and executive
branches of the Government applications concededly not within the law
and plainly devoid of merit, but so surrounded by sentiment and
patriotic feeling that they are hard to resist. I suppose it will not be
denied that many claims for pension are made without merit and that many
have been allowed upon fraudulent representations. This has been
declared from the Pension Bureau, not only in this but in prior
Administrations.

The usefulness and the justice of any system for the distribution of
pensions depend upon the equality and uniformity of its operation.

It will be seen from the report of the Commissioner that there are now
paid by the Government 131 different rates of pension.

He estimates from the best information he can obtain that 9,000 of those
who have served in the Army and Navy of the United States are now
supported, in whole or in part, from public funds or by organized
charities, exclusive of those in soldiers' homes under the direction and
control of the Government. Only 13 per cent of these are pensioners,
while of the entire number of men furnished for the late war something
like 20 per cent, including their widows and relatives, have been or now
are in receipt of pensions.

The American people, with a patriotic and grateful regard for our
ex-soldiers, too broad and too sacred to be monopolized by any special
advocates, are not only willing but anxious that equal and exact justice
should be done to all honest claimants for pensions. In their sight the
friendless and destitute soldier, dependent on public charity, if
otherwise entitled, has precisely the same right to share in the
provision made for those who fought their country's battles as those
better able, through friends and influence, to push their claims. Every
pension that is granted under our present plan upon any other grounds
than actual service and injury or disease incurred in such service, and
every instance of the many in which pensions are increased on other
grounds than the merits of the claim, work an injustice to the brave and
crippled, but poor and friendless, soldier, who is entirely neglected or
who must be content with the smallest sum allowed under general laws.

There are far too many neighborhoods in which are found glaring cases of
inequality of treatment in the matter of pensions, and they are largely
due to a yielding in the Pension Bureau to importunity on the part of
those, other than the pensioner, who are especially interested, or they
arise from special acts passed for the benefit of individuals.

The men who fought side by side should stand side by side when they
participate in a grateful nation's kind remembrance.

Every consideration of fairness and justice to our ex-soldiers and the
protection of the patriotic instinct of our citizens from perversion and
violation point to the adoption of a pension system broad and
comprehensive enough to cover every contingency, and which shall make
unnecessary an objectionable volume of special legislation.

As long as we adhere to the principle of granting pensions for service,
and disability as the result of the service, the allowance of pensions
should be restricted to cases presenting these features.

Every patriotic heart responds to a tender consideration for those who,
having served their country long and well, are reduced to destitution
and dependence, not as an incident of their service, but with advancing
age or through sickness or misfortune. We are all tempted by the
contemplation of such a condition to supply relief, and are often
impatient of the limitations of public duty. Yielding to no one in the
desire to indulge this feeling of consideration, I can not rid myself of
the conviction that if these ex-soldiers are to be relieved they and
their cause are entitled to the benefit of an enactment under which
relief may be claimed as a right, and that such relief should be granted
under the sanction of law, not in evasion of it; nor should such worthy
objects of care, all equally entitled, be remitted to the unequal
operation of sympathy or the tender mercies of social and political
influence, with their unjust discriminations.

The discharged soldiers and sailors of the country are our
fellow-citizens, and interested with us in the passage and faithful
execution of wholesome laws. They can not be swerved from their duty of
citizenship by artful appeals to their spirit of brotherhood born of
common peril and suffering, nor will they exact as a test of devotion to
their welfare a willingness to neglect public duty in their behalf.

On the 4th of March, 1885, the current business of the Patent Office
was, on an average, five and a half months in arrears, and in several
divisions more than twelve months behind. At the close of the last
fiscal year such current work was but three months in arrears, and it is
asserted and believed that in the next few months the delay in obtaining
an examination of an application for a patent will be but nominal.

The number of applications for patents during the last fiscal year,
including reissues, designs, trade-marks, and labels, equals 40,678,
which is considerably in excess of the number received during any
preceding year.

The receipts of the Patent Office during the year aggregate
$1,205,167.80, enabling the office to turn into the Treasury a surplus
revenue, over and above all expenditures, of about $163,710.30.

The number of patents granted during the last fiscal year, including
reissues, trade-marks, designs, and labels, was 25,619, a number also
quite largely in excess of that of any preceding year.

The report of the Commissioner shows the office to be in a prosperous
condition and constantly increasing in its business. No increase of
force is asked for.

The amount estimated for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1886, was
$890,760. The amount estimated for the year ending June 30, 1887, was
$853,960. The amount estimated for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1888,
is $778,770.

The Secretary of the Interior suggests a change in the plan for the
payment of the indebtedness of the Pacific subsidized roads to the
Government. His suggestion has the unanimous indorsement of the persons
selected by the Government to act as directors of these roads and
protect the interests of the United States in the board of direction.
In considering the plan proposed the sole matters which should be taken
into account, in my opinion, are the situation of the Government as a
creditor and the surest way to secure the payment of the principal and
interest of its debt.

By a recent decision of the Supreme Court of the United States it has
been adjudged that the laws of the several States are inoperative to
regulate rates of transportation upon railroads if such regulation
interferes with the rate of carriage from one State into another. This
important field of control and regulation having been thus left entirely
unoccupied, the expediency of Federal action upon the subject is worthy
of consideration.

The relations of labor to capital and of laboring men to their employers
are of the utmost concern to every patriotic citizen. When these are
strained and distorted, unjustifiable claims are apt to be insisted upon
by both interests, and in the controversy which results the welfare of
all and the prosperity of the country are jeopardized. Any intervention
of the General Government, within the limits of its constitutional
authority, to avert such a condition should be willingly accorded.

In a special message[11] transmitted to the Congress at its last session
I suggested the enlargement of our present Labor Bureau and adding to
its present functions the power of arbitration in cases where
differences arise between employer and employed. When these differences
reach such a stage as to result in the interruption of commerce between
the States, the application of this remedy by the General Government
might be regarded as entirely within its constitutional powers. And I
think we might reasonably hope that such arbitrators, if carefully
selected and if entitled to the confidence of the parties to be
affected, would be voluntarily called to the settlement of controversies
of less extent and not necessarily within the domain of Federal
regulation.

I am of the opinion that this suggestion is worthy the attention of the
Congress.

But after all has been done by the passage of laws, either Federal or
State, to relieve a situation full of solicitude, much more remains to
be accomplished by the reinstatement and cultivation of a true American
sentiment which recognizes the equality of American citizenship. This,
in the light of our traditions and in loyalty to the spirit of our
institutions, would teach that a hearty cooperation on the part of all
interests is the surest path to national greatness and the happiness of
all our people; that capital should, in recognition of the brotherhood
of our citizenship and in a spirit of American fairness, generously
accord to labor its just compensation and consideration, and that
contented labor is capital's best protection and faithful ally. It would
teach, too, that the diverse situations of our people are inseparable
from our civilization; that every citizen should in his sphere be a
contributor to the general good; that capital does not necessarily tend
to the oppression of labor, and that violent disturbances and disorders
alienate from their promoters true American sympathy and kindly feeling.

The Department of Agriculture, representing the oldest and largest of
our national industries, is subserving well the purposes of its
organization. By the introduction of new subjects of farming enterprise
and by opening new sources of agricultural wealth and the dissemination
of early information concerning production and prices it has contributed
largely to the country's prosperity. Through this agency advanced
thought and investigation touching the subjects it has in charge should,
among other things, be practically applied to the home production at a
low cost of articles of food which are now imported from abroad. Such an
innovation will necessarily, of course, in the beginning be within the
domain of intelligent experiment, and the subject in every stage should
receive all possible encouragement from the Government.

The interests of millions of our citizens engaged in agriculture are
involved in an enlargement and improvement of the results of their
labor, and a zealous regard for their welfare should be a willing
tribute to those whose productive returns are a main source of our
progress and power.

The existence of pleuro-pneumonia among the cattle of various States has
led to burdensome and in some cases disastrous restrictions in an
important branch of our commerce, threatening to affect the quantity and
quality of our food supply. This is a matter of such importance and of
such far-reaching consequences that I hope it will engage the serious
attention of the Congress, to the end that such a remedy may be applied
as the limits of a constitutional delegation of power to the General
Government will permit.

I commend to the consideration of the Congress the report of the
Commissioner and his suggestions concerning the interest intrusted to
his care.

The continued operation of the law relating to our civil service has
added the most convincing proofs of its necessity and usefulness. It is
a fact worthy of note that every public officer who has a just idea of
his duty to the people testifies to the value of this reform. Its
staunchest friends are found among those who understand it best, and its
warmest supporters are those who are restrained and protected by its
requirements.

The meaning of such restraint and protection is not appreciated by those
who want places under the Government regardless of merit and efficiency,
nor by those who insist that the selection of such places should rest
upon a proper credential showing active partisan work. They mean to
public officers, if not their lives, the only opportunity afforded them
to attend to public business, and they mean to the good people of the
country the better performance of the work of their Government.

It is exceedingly strange that the scope and nature of this reform are
so little understood and that so many things not included within its
plan are called by its name. When cavil yields more fully to
examination, the system will have large additions to the number of its
friends.

Our civil-service reform may be imperfect in some of its details; it may
be misunderstood and opposed; it may not always be faithfully applied;
its designs may sometimes miscarry through mistake or willful intent; it
may sometimes tremble under the assaults of its enemies or languish
under the misguided zeal of impracticable friends; but if the people of
this country ever submit to the banishment of its underlying principle
from the operation of their Government they will abandon the surest
guaranty of the safety and success of American institutions.

I invoke for this reform the cheerful and ungrudging support of the
Congress. I renew my recommendation made last year that the salaries of
the Commissioners be made equal to other officers of the Government
having like duties and responsibilities, and I hope that such reasonable
appropriations may be made as will enable them to increase the
usefulness of the cause they have in charge.

I desire to call the attention of the Congress to a plain duty which the
Government owes to the depositors in the Freedman's Savings and Trust
Company.

This company was chartered by the Congress for the benefit of the most
illiterate and humble of our people, and with the intention of
encouraging in them industry and thrift. Most of its branches were
presided over by officers holding the commissions and clothed in the
uniform of the United States. These and other circumstances reasonably,
I think, led these simple people to suppose that the invitation to
deposit their hard-earned savings in this institution implied an
undertaking on the part of their Government that their money should be
safely kept for them.

When this company failed, it was liable in the sum of $2,939,925.22 to
61,131 depositors. Dividends amounting in the aggregate to 62 per cent
have been declared, and the sum called for and paid of such dividends
seems to be $1,648,181.72. This sum deducted from the entire amount of
deposits leaves $1,291,744.50 still unpaid. Past experience has shown
that quite a large part of this sum will not be called for. There are
assets still on hand amounting to the estimated sum of $16,000.

I think the remaining 38 per cent of such of these deposits as have
claimants should be paid by the Government, upon principles of equity
and fairness.

The report of the commissioner, soon to be laid before Congress, will
give more satisfactory details on this subject.

The control of the affairs of the District of Columbia having been
placed in the hands of purely executive officers, while the Congress
still retains all legislative authority relating to its government, it
becomes my duty to make known the most pressing needs of the District
and recommend their consideration.

The laws of the District appear to be in an uncertain and unsatisfactory
condition, and their codification or revision is much needed.

During the past year one of the bridges leading from the District to the
State of Virginia became unfit for use, and travel upon it was
forbidden. This leads me to suggest that the improvement of all the
bridges crossing the Potomac and its branches from the city of
Washington is worthy the attention of Congress.

The Commissioners of the District represent that the laws regulating the
sale of liquor and granting licenses therefor should be at once amended,
and that legislation is needed to consolidate, define, and enlarge the
scope and powers of charitable and penal institutions within the
District.

I suggest that the Commissioners be clothed with the power to make,
within fixed limitations, police regulations. I believe this power
granted and carefully guarded would tend to subserve the good order of
the municipality.

It seems that trouble still exists growing out of the occupation of the
streets and avenues by certain railroads having their termini in the
city. It is very important that such laws should be enacted upon this
subject as will secure to the railroads all the facilities they require
for the transaction of their business and at the same time protect
citizens from injury to their persons or property.

The Commissioners again complain that the accommodations afforded them
for the necessary offices for District business and for the safe-keeping
of valuable books and papers are entirely insufficient. I recommend that
this condition of affairs be remedied by the Congress, and that suitable
quarters be furnished for the needs of the District government.

In conclusion I earnestly invoke such wise action on the part of the
people's legislators as will subserve the public good and demonstrate
during the remaining days of the Congress as at present organized its
ability and inclination to so meet the people's needs that it shall be
gratefully remembered by an expectant constituency.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

[Footnote 6: See p. 406.]

[Footnote 7: See pp. 489-490.]

[Footnote 8: See pp. 223-224.]

[Footnote 9: See pp. 490-491.]

[Footnote 10: See pp. 308-309.]

[Footnote 11: See pp. 394-397.]

SPECIAL MESSAGES.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 8, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States_:

I transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of State, which is
accompanied by the correspondence in relation to the rights of American
fishermen in the British North American waters, and commend to your
favorable consideration the suggestion that a commission be authorized
by law to take perpetuating proofs of the losses sustained during the
past year by American fishermen owing to their unfriendly and
unwarranted treatment by the local authorities of the maritime provinces
of the Dominion of Canada.

I may have occasion hereafter to make further recommendations during the
present session for such remedial legislation as may become necessary
for the protection of the rights of our citizens engaged in the open-sea
fisheries in the North Atlantic waters.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 13, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 8th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, an
estimate of appropriation in the sum of $22,000, prepared in the Office
of Indian Affairs, to provide for the payment to the Eel River band of
Miami Indians of a principal sum in lieu of all annuities now received
by them under existing treaty stipulations.

The matter is presented for the consideration of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, December 13, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, with a view to their ratification, an additional
article, signed June 23, 1884, to the treaty of friendship, commerce,
and navigation of July 27, 1853, between the United States and the
Argentine Confederation; also an additional clause to the said
additional article, signed June 25, 1885.

The report of the Secretary of State of even date and the papers
inclosed therewith set forth the reasons which have, in my opinion,
rendered it advisable to again transmit for ratification the additional
article above mentioned, which was withdrawn from the Senate at my
request on April 2, 1885.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 15, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith, for your information, a report from the Secretary
of State, inclosing the correspondence which has passed between the
Department of State and the Governments of Switzerland and France on the
subject of international copyright since the date of my message of July
9, 1886, on this question.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 20, 1886_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State, in relation
to the invitation from Her Britannic Majesty to this Government to
participate in an international exhibition which is to be held at
Adelaide, South Australia, in 1887.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 21, 1886_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I nominate James C. Matthews, of New York, to be recorder of deeds in
the District of Columbia, in the place of Frederick Douglass, resigned.

This nomination was submitted to the Senate at its last session, upon
the retirement of the previous incumbent, who for a number of years had
held the office to which it refers. In the last days of the session the
Senate declined to confirm the nomination.

Opposition to the appointment of Mr. Matthews to the office for which he
was named was developed among the citizens of the District of Columbia,
ostensibly upon the ground that the nominee was not a resident of the
District; and it is supposed that such opposition, to some extent at
least, influenced the determination of the question of his confirmation.

Mr. Matthews has now been in occupancy of the office to which he was
nominated for more than four months, and he has in the performance of
the duties thereof won the approval of all those having business to
transact with such office, and has rendered important service in
rescuing the records of the District from loss and illegibility.

I am informed that his management of this office has removed much of the
opposition to his appointment which heretofore existed.

I have ventured, therefore, in view of the demonstrated fitness of this
nominee, and with the understanding that the objections heretofore urged
against his selection have to a great extent subsided, and confessing a
desire to cooperate in tendering to our colored fellow-citizens just
recognition and the utmost good faith, to again submit this nomination
to the Senate for confirmation, at the same time disclaiming any
intention to question its previous action in the premises.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 5, 1887_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

Referring to my message of the 12th of January last,[12] transmitting
the final report of the commissioners appointed under the act of July 7,
1884, to visit the States of Central and South America, I have now to
submit a special report by Commissioner Thomas C. Reynolds on the
condition and commerce of Nicaragua, Honduras, and Salvador.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

[Footnote 12: See p. 370.]

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 5, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of State, inclosing
statement of customs duties levied by foreign nations upon the produce
and manufactures of the United States.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 10, 1887_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of 22d ultimo from the Secretary of
the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft of proposed
legislation, prepared in the Office of Indian Affairs, providing for
the per capita payment to the Delaware Indians resident in the Cherokee
Nation, in Indian Territory, of the amount of their trust fund,
principal and interest, held by the Government of the United States by
virtue of the several treaties with the said Delaware Indians.

The matter is presented for the consideration and action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 11, 1887_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State, in relation to
an invitation which has been extended to this Government to appoint a
delegate or delegates to the Fourth International Prison Congress, to
meet at St. Petersburg in the year 1890, and commend its suggestions to
the favorable attention of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, January 13, 1887_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit to the Senate, for its consideration with a view to
ratification, a declaration of the late international conference at
Paris, explanatory of the convention of March 14, 1884, for the
protection of submarine cables, made between the United States of
America and Germany, Argentine Confederation, Austria-Hungary, Belgium,
Brazil, Costa Rica, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Spain, United States of
Colombia, France, Great Britain, Guatemala, Greece, Italy, Turkey,
Netherlands, Persia, Portugal, Roumania, Russia, Salvador, Servia,
Sweden and Norway, and Uruguay.

The declaration has been generally accepted by the signatory powers, and
Mr. McLane, the representative of the United States at the conference,
has been instructed to sign it, subject to the approval of the Senate.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 17, 1887_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 11th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a copy
of an agreement duly made under the provisions of the act of May 15,
1886 (24 U.S. Statutes at Large, p. 44), with the Indians residing upon
the Fort Berthold Reservation, in Dakota, for the cession of a portion
of their reservation in said Territory, and for other purposes.

The agreement, together with the recommendations of the Department, is
presented for the action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, January 18, 1887_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

Referring to the message of the President of the United States dated
February 2, 1885,[13] I transmit herewith, for your consideration, a
report from the Secretary of State, inclosing a translation of the
convention for the protection of industrial property, of the
_protocole de clôture_ of said convention, and of a protocol
proposed by the conference of 1886 for ratification by the Governments
which have adhered to the convention.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

[Footnote 13: See p. 270.]

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 18, 1887_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

As a matter of national interest, and one solely within the discretion
and control of Congress, I transmit the accompanying memorial of the
executive committee of the subconstitutional centennial commission,
proposing to celebrate on the 17th of September, in the city of
Philadelphia, as the day upon which and the place where the convention
that framed the Federal Constitution concluded their labors and
submitted the results for ratification to the thirteen States then
composing the United States.

The epoch was one of the deepest interest and the events well worthy of
commemoration.

I am aware that as each State acted independently in giving its adhesion
to the new Constitution the dates and anniversaries of their several
ratifications are not coincident. Some action looking to a national
expression in relation to the celebration of the close of the first
century of popular government under a written constitution has already
been suggested, and whilst stating the great interest I share in the
renewed examination by the American people of the historical foundations
of their Government, I do not feel warranted in discriminating in favor
or against the propositions to select one day or place in preference to
all others, and therefore content myself with conveying to Congress
these expressions of popular feeling and interest upon the subject,
hoping that in a spirit of patriotic cooperation, rather than of local
competition, fitting measures may be enacted by Congress which will give
the amplest opportunity all over these United States for the
manifestation of the affection and confidence of a free and mighty
nation in the institutions of a Government of which they are the
fortunate inheritors and under which unexampled prosperity has been
enjoyed by all classes and conditions in our social system.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 18, 1887_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 7th ultimo from the Secretary
of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft of a bill
"for the relief of Hiatt & Co., late traders for the Osage tribe of
Indians, and for other purposes."

The matter is presented for the consideration of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, January 20, 1887_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, with a view to its ratification, a draft of
declaration explanatory of Articles II and IV of the convention for the
protection of submarine cables, which has been proposed by the
conference of 1886 for ratification by the Governments adhering to the
said convention.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 20, 1887_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I herewith transmit a communication addressed to me by Mr. Samuel C.
Reid, who offers to the United States the battle sword (now in my
custody) of his father, Captain Samuel Chester Reid, who commanded the
United States private armed brig _General Armstrong_ at the battle
of Fayal, in September, 1814.

I respectfully recommend that appropriate action be taken by Congress
for the acceptance of this gift.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 20, 1887_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I have the honor to transmit to the Senate herewith a report of the
Secretary of State, in answer to the resolution of the Senate of the
11th instant, requesting "estimates for the contingent fund of each
bureau" in the Department of State.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 20, 1887_.

_To the Senate_:

I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State, in answer to the
resolution of the Senate of December 8, 1886, relative to the claims of
Antonio Pelletier and A.H. Lazare against the Republic of Hayti.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 23, 1887_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In response to the resolution of the Senate of the 21st ultimo, calling
for certain correspondence touching the construction of a ship canal
through Nicaragua, I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of
State on the subject, with accompanying papers.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 1, 1887_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of State, together
with a copy of the report, which it incloses, of Lieutenant William H.
Schuetze, United States Navy, who was designated by the Secretary of
the Navy, in pursuance of the act of Congress of March 3, 1885, making
appropriations for the sundry civil expenses of the Government for
the year ending June 30, 1886, to distribute the testimonials of the
Government to subjects of Russia who extended aid to the survivors of
the _Jeannette_ exploring expedition and to the parties dispatched
by this Government to aid the said survivors.

The report is interesting alike to the people of the United States and
to the subjects of Russia, and will be gratifying to all who appreciate
the generous and humane action of Congress in providing for the
testimonials.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 1, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

In response to the resolution of the House of Representatives adopted on
the 22d ultimo, calling upon me for a "copy of the treaty or convention
proposed to the Senate and ratified by that body between the United
States and the Government of the Hawaiian Islands," I transmit herewith
a report of the Secretary of State, with accompanying papers.

It is proper to remark in this relation that no convention whatever has
been "agreed to and ratified" by "the President and Senate," as is
recited in the preamble to the said resolution of the House of
Representatives, but that the documents referred to, exhibiting the
action of the Executive and the Senate, respectively, are communicated
in compliance with the request of the resolution.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 8, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, in response to a resolution of the House of the
24th ultimo, a report of the Secretary of State, with accompanying
copies of correspondence between the Governments of the United States
and Great Britain concerning the rights of American fishermen in the
waters of British North America, supplemental to the correspondence
already communicated to Congress with my message of December 8,
1886.[14]

GROVER CLEVELAND.

[Footnote 14: See pp. 529-530.]

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 10, 1887_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of State, accompanying
reports by consular officers of the United States on the extent and
character of the emigration from and immigration into their respective
districts.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, February 14, 1887_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, with a view to its ratification, a treaty of amity,
commerce, and navigation, concluded October 2, 1886, in the harbor of
Nukualofa, Tongatabu, between the United States of America and the King
of Tonga.

I also transmit, for your information, a report from the Secretary of
State, inclosing copies of the treaties of friendship concluded between
the Kingdom of Tonga and Germany and Great Britain.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 14, 1887_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith a report furnished by the Secretary of State in
response to a resolution of the Senate of January 31 ultimo, calling for
particulars of the investment and distribution of the indemnity received
in 1875 from Spain, and known as the "_Virginius_ fund."

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 15, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In compliance with the resolution of the Senate of the 12th instant
(the House of Representatives concurring), I return herewith the bill
(H.R. 5652) for the relief of James W. Goodrich.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 16, 1887_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of State, accompanying
the annual reports of the consuls of the United States on the trade and
industries of foreign countries.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 19, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

I transmit herewith to the House of Representatives a report from the
Secretary of State, in response to a resolution of that body of the 16th
instant, inquiring as to the action of this Department to protect the
interests of American citizens whose property was destroyed by fire
caused by insurgents at Aspinwall in 1885.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 23, 1887_.

_To the Senate_:

In answer to the resolution of the Senate of the 14th instant, relating
to the arrest, trial, and discharge of A.K. Cutting, a citizen of the
United States, by the authorities of Mexico, I transmit herewith a
letter from the Secretary of State of this date, with its accompaniment.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 25, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In compliance with the resolution of the House of Representatives (the
Senate concurring), I return herewith the bill (H.R. 367) to amend
section 536 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, relating to
the division of the State of Illinois into judicial districts, and to
provide for holding terms of court of the northern district at the city
of Peoria.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, February 25, 1887_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, with a view to its ratification, an additional
article to the treaty of extradition concluded October 11, 1870, between
the United States of America and the Republic of Guatemala.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 26, 1887_.

_To the Senate_:

I transmit herewith, in reply to a resolution of the Senate of the 21st
ultimo, a report from the Secretary of State, relative to the seizure
and sale of the American schooner _Rebecca_ at Tampico and the
resignation of Henry R. Jackson, esq., as minister of the United States
to Mexico. It is not thought compatible with the public interests to
publish the correspondence in either case at the present time.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 28, 1887_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of 17th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, two
agreements made with Chippewa Indians in the State of Minnesota under
the provisions of the act of May 15, 1886 (24 U.S. Statutes at Large,
p. 44).

The papers are presented for the consideration and action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, March 1, 1887_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In answer to the resolution of the Senate of the 22d ultimo, requesting
copies of certain letters, dated June 8, 1886, and September 20, 1886,
addressed by the counsel of A.H. Lazare to the Secretary of State, in
regard to the award against the Republic of Hayti in favor of A.H.
Lazare under the protocol signed by the Secretary of State and the
minister of Hayti on May 24, 1884, I transmit a report from the
Secretary of State upon the subject.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, March 1, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:.

In compliance with the resolution of the House of Representatives of the
28th ultimo (the Senate concurring), I return herewith the bill of the
House (H.R. 7310) granting a pension to Mrs. Arlanta T. Taylor.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 2, 1887_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In response to the resolution of the Senate of the 14th ultimo,
requesting information concerning the service rendered by Count
Casimir Pulaski, a brigadier-general of the Army of the United States
in the years 1777, 1778, and 1779, and also respecting his pay and
compensation, I transmit herewith reports upon the subject from the
Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Secretary
of War.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, March 2, 1887_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State, with
accompanying papers, furnished in response to the resolution of the
Senate of the 26th ultimo, calling for information touching the
conditions under which certain transatlantic telegraph companies have
been permitted to land their cables in the United States, and touching
contracts of such companies with each other or with other cable or
telegraph companies.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

VETO MESSAGES.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 19, 1887_.

_To the Senate_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 2269, entitled "An act
granting a pension to William Dickens."

The beneficiary named in this bill filed his application for pension in
the Pension Bureau in 1880, and in December, 1886, the same was granted,
taking effect from the 15th day of October, 1864.

If the bill herewith returned should become a law, it would permit the
payment of a pension only from the date of its approval. Thus, if it did
not result in loss to the claimant by superseding the action of the
Pension Bureau, it is plain that it would be a useless enactment.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 27, 1887_.

_To the Senate_:

I hereby return without approval Senate bill No. 2173, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Benjamin Obekiah."

This bill directs that the beneficiary named therein be placed upon the
pension roll, "subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension
laws."

In July, 1886, the person named in this bill was placed upon the pension
roll at a rate determined upon by the Pension Bureau, pursuant to the
provisions and limitations of the pension laws; and it is entirely
certain that the special act now presented to me would give the claimant
no new rights or additional benefits.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 27, 1887_.

_To the Senate_:

I herewith return without approval Senate bill No. 127, entitled "An act
for the relief of H.K. Belding."

This bill directs the sum of $1,566 to be paid to the said H.K. Belding
"for carrying the mails of the United States between the years 1858 and
1862."

In April, 1858, a contract was awarded to the said Belding for carrying
the mails from Brownsville, Minn., to Carimona, in the same State, a
distance of 63 miles, and return, three times a week, for the sum of
$1,800 per annum, said service to begin on the 1st day of July, 1858,
and to terminate on the 30th day of June, 1862. This contract contained
a provision that the Post-Office Department might discontinue the
service in whole or in part, allowing to the contractor one month's
extra pay therefor.

On May 9, 1859, in consequence of a failure on the part of the Congress
to make the necessary appropriation, a general reduction of mail service
was ordered, and the service under the contract with the claimant was
reduced to two trips per week from May 10, 1859, instead of three, as
stipulated in the contract, and a deduction of one-third of the annual
sum to be paid by the contract was made for such reduced service; and
thereupon one month's extra pay was allowed and paid the contractor on
account of said reduction.

It is conceded that payment was made in full according to the terms of
the contract up to the 10th day of May, 1859, but it is claimed that
notwithstanding the reduction of the service to two trips per week and
the receipt by the contractor of one month's extra pay by reason
thereof, he continued to perform the full service of three trips per
week from the 10th day of May, 1859, to the 30th day of September, 1860,
being seventeen months.

Of the sum directed to be paid to him in the bill under consideration,
$850 is allowed him on account of this service, he having been paid
for the period stated at the rate of $1,200 per annum. The contractor
claims that this full service was performed after the reduction by the
Post-Office Department because he had received an intimation from the
Postmaster-General that if the full service was continued after such
reduction there was no doubt that the Congress would at its next session
make provision for the payment of the sum deducted.

Of course no legal claim in favor of the contractor can be predicated
upon the facts which he alleges; and if he did continue full service
under the circumstances stated, it must be conceded that his conduct was
hardly in accordance with the rules which regulate transactions of this
kind.

But a thorough search of the correspondence and records in the
Post-Office Department fails to disclose any letter, document, or record
giving the least support to the allegation that any such intimation or
assurance as is claimed was given; nor is there the least evidence in
the Department that the full service was actually performed. There is,
however, on the files of the Department a letter from the claimant,
dated August 25, 1860, containing the following statement:

When I received official information of the curtailing service, the
reasons why, I wrote to the Department that I would, if allowed,
continue service three times a week and take certificates, if I could
be allowed to connect with La Crosse at _pro rata_ rates. That letter
was never answered and I continued service three times a week till
3d of September following, then run twice a week.

Thus it appears that this contractor, who in August, 1860, claimed that
he continued full service upon the invitation of his own unanswered
letter for less than four months, insists twenty-seven years after the
date of the alleged service that he performed such service for seventeen
months, and up to October, 1860. Not only has he himself in this manner
almost conclusively shown that the claim now made and allowed is
exorbitant, but the evidence gives rise to a strong presumption that it
is entirely fictitious.

The remainder of the amount allowed to the claimant in this bill is
based upon an alleged performance by the contractor of the same mail
service which has been referred to from October 1, 1860, to February 14,
1861, a period of four months and fourteen days.

Prior to October 1, 1860, the claimant's contract was annulled and a new
or more extended route established, entirely covering that upon which he
had carried the mails. Thereupon a month's extra pay was allowed to him,
and new contractors undertook the service and were paid therefor by the
Government for the period covered by the claimant's alleged service.
From the 14th day of February, 1861, Mr. Belding's contract with the
Government was reinstated; but if he performed the service alleged
during the period of four months and fourteen days immediately prior to
that date, it is quite clear that he did so under an arrangement with
the new contractors, and not under circumstances creating any legal or
equitable claim against the Government.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 31, 1887_.

_To the Senate_:

I hereby return without approval Senate bill No. 2167, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Mrs. Margaret Dunlap."

By this bill it is proposed to grant a pension to the beneficiary
therein named as the mother of James F. Dunlap, who enlisted in the
Seventh Missouri State Militia Cavalry in 1862 and died in July, 1864,
of wounds received at the hand of a comrade.

The favorable action of the Senate upon this bill appears to be based,
so far as the cause of death is concerned, upon an affidavit contained
in the report of the committee to which the bill was referred, made
by one G. Will Houts, second lieutenant in the company to which the
deceased soldier belonged, in which the affiant deposes that some of
the comrades of the deceased being engaged in an affray he attempted
to separate the combatants, whereupon one of them, without cause or
provocation, stabbed the deceased in the breast, from which, in a few
days thereafter, he died; to which affidavit is added the finding of a
court-martial that the party inflicting the wound was found guilty of
manslaughter and sentenced to five years' imprisonment.

Upon this showing it might be difficult to spell out the facts that the
injury to the soldier was received in the line of duty or that any
theory of granting pensions covered the case.

But the weak features of this application are not alluded to in the
committee's report.

The record of the soldier's death states that he was "killed by one of
his comrades in a difficulty."

The same Lieutenant Houts who in 1872 made oath that the soldier
was wounded while attempting to separate comrades who were fighting
testified in 1864 before the court-martial upon the trial of the man
who did the wounding, and whose name was Capehart, that Dunlap, the
deceased, stated to him "that he was more to blame than Capehart, and
that they had been scuffling, at first good-naturedly, and then both got
angry; that he was rougher with Capehart than he ought to have been."

Another witness testified that the affray took place between Dunlap and
Capehart; that Dunlap handled Capehart very roughly, kicking him, etc.,
and that finally Capehart stabbed Dunlap, upon which the latter
attempted to get his gun, but was prevented from doing so by the
witness.

Of course there can be no pretense of any kind of claim against the
Government arising from these facts.

It is quite evident that the affidavit presented to the Senate committee
was contrived to deceive, and it is to be feared that it is but a sample
of many that are made in support of claims for pensions.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 3, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 6443, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Alexander Falconer."

This claimant filed his application for pension in 1879, alleging that
in 1837, being then an enlisted man in the United States Army, he
received a gunshot wound in his right leg below the knee at the battle
of Okeechobee Lake, Florida.

The records disclose the fact that this soldier enlisted in 1834, and
was almost continuously in the service and attached to the same company
until 1846.

It further appears that he is reported sick during the month in which
the battle was fought. The list of casualties does not contain his name
among the wounded.

He reenlisted in 1846 and again in 1847, and was finally discharged in
1848. These latter enlistments were for service in the Mexican War.

His claim for pension was denied in 1885 on the ground that no
disability existed in a pensionable degree from the alleged gunshot
wound in his leg.

It is perfectly clear that the only pretexts for giving this claimant a
pension are military service, old age, and poverty.

Inasmuch as he was a soldier in the Mexican War, his case is undoubtedly
provided for by a general law approved within the last few days.

Under this bill the amount to be paid him is fixed, while if the bill
herewith returned were approved the sum to be paid him would depend
upon the determination of the Pension Bureau as to the extent of his
disability as the result of his wound. As that Bureau has quite lately
determined that there was no disability, it is evident that this old
soldier can better rely upon the general law referred to.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 3, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 6132, entitled "An act
granting a pension to William Lynch."

The claimant mentioned in this bill enlisted in the Fifth Regiment
United States Infantry in 1849, and was discharged, after a
reenlistment, September 8, 1859.

He filed a claim for pension more than twenty-four years afterwards, in
April, 1884, claiming that he contracted rheumatism of the right hip and
leg in the winter of 1857-58, while serving in Utah. He admitted that he
was not under treatment while in the service and that he never consulted
a physician in regard to his disability until he commenced proceedings
for a pension.

The evidence disclosed to me falls far short of establishing this claim
for pension upon its merits.

The application made to the Pension Bureau is still pending and awaiting
answer to inquiries made by the Bureau in January, 1886.

I do not understand that the Congress intends to pass special acts in
cases thus situated.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 4, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without approval House bill No. 7698, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Robert K. Bennett."

The beneficiary named in this bill enlisted in September, 1862, and it
appears that very soon after that he was detailed to the cook shop. This
seems to be the only military service he rendered, and on February 7,
1863, five months after enlistment, he was received into the marine
hospital at New Orleans for varicocele. He was discharged from the
service February 22, 1863, and the cause of discharge is stated to be
"varicocele, to which he was subject four years before enlistment."

Seventeen years thereafter, and in June, 1880, this claimant filed an
application for pension in the Pension Bureau, alleging that about the
10th day of February, 1863, in unloading a barrel it fell upon him,
producing a hernia, shortly after which he was affected by piles.

It will be seen that he fixes this injury as occurring three days after
his admission to the hospital, but he might well be honestly mistaken as
to this date. If the injury, however, was such as he stated, it is
difficult to see why no mention was made of it in the hospital records.

He persisted at all times, as I understand the case, until the rejection
of his claim in 1883, that his disability arose from hernia and piles.
The reason of this rejection is stated to be that varicocele existed
prior to enlistment and that there was no evidence of the existence of
piles in the service or at discharge. From a medical examination made in
December, 1882, it appears that there was "no evidence or symptoms of
disability resulting from piles or hernia."

Subsequent to the rejection of this claim some proof was filed tending
to show that the disability was in the right leg, but it is of such a
nature, in the light of the claimant's own previous allegations, that I
think the Pension Bureau did entirely right in informing his attorney
that the additional evidence did not change the status of the case.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 4, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without approval House bill No. 7540, entitled "An act
to increase the pension of Franklin Sweet."

This soldier was pensioned in 1863 as sergeant, though before that time
he had been acting as captain, and was in command of his company when he
was wounded. He is entitled in equity, and, I think, upon the theory of
an act very recently approved, in law, to be treated in regard to his
pension as a captain; and the Pension Bureau has within the last few
days ordered a certificate for pension to issue to him as captain as of
the date of his discharge.

I fully approve this action of the Bureau, and as this is much more
favorable to a deserving soldier than his remedy under this bill, I am
not willing that the action, so lately and so justly taken in his behalf
under the general law should be superseded by the approval of this act.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 4, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 8834, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Abraham P. Griggs."

The claimant mentioned in this bill enlisted in a New Jersey regiment
August 14, 1861, and was discharged for disability November 17, 1863.

He entered hospital January 2, 1863, and was transferred to general
hospital at Newark, N.J., March 28, 1863, with "debility." He was
discharged from that hospital and from the service in November, 1863,
as above stated, and the following statement from his certificate of
discharge, if trustworthy, sheds some light upon the kind of debility
with which he was afflicted:

This man has been in this hospital for the past eight months. We do not
believe him sick, or that he has been sick, but completely worthless.
He is obese and a malingerer to such an extent that he is almost an
imbecile--worthlessness, obesity, and imbecility and laziness. He is
totally unfit for the Invalid Corps or for any other military duty.

I do not regard it at all strange that this claimant, encouraged by the
ease with which special acts are passed, seeks relief through such
means, after his application, filed in the Pension Bureau nearly twenty
years after his discharge, had been rejected.

Of the four comrades who make affidavit in support of his claim, two of
them are recorded as deserters.

His claim is predicated upon rheumatism. He alleges that after his
discharge from his enlistment he was drafted and served in the Third New
York Cavalry, but the Adjutant-General reports that his name does not
appear on the rolls of the company to which he says he was attached.

The board of United States examining surgeons at Trenton, N.J., report
as the result of an examination as late as May 27, 1885, that they found
"no disease of heart or lungs, no thickening or wasting of any of the
joints of the body, no evidence of any rheumatic diathesis, no rupture
or hemorrhoids, no disease of his spleen or kidney; hands are hard and
indicate an ability to work."

I can not think that the official statements referred to, and which
militate so strongly against the merits of the claimant, should be
impeached or set aside by any of the other testimony which has been
brought to my attention.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 4, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without approval House bill No. 927, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Cudbert Stone."

The report of the committee of the House of Representatives to whom this
bill was referred states that the claimant enlisted October 3, 1861, in
Company H, Fourteenth Kentucky Volunteers, and was honorably discharged
on the 31st day of January, 1865; that he filed his claim for pension
July 20, 1881, more than sixteen years thereafter, alleging that he
contracted piles while in the service, from exposure while in the line
of duty, and that his claim was rejected in October, 1884, on the ground
that the allegation of the claimant shows that his disability originated
while undergoing the sentence of a court-martial, and therefore not in
the line of duty.

The report of the committee closes with the statement that--

In view of the long and faithful service and high character of the
claimant and the well-established facts that claimant was a stout and
able-bodied man, free from any and all disease when he enlisted, and
that by reason of his faithful service to his country and the great
suffering and hardship through which he passed while in said service
his health was permanently destroyed, the committee earnestly recommend
the passage of the bill.

The records of the War Department show that the claimant enlisted
October 25, 1861, and that on the muster-in roll of his company dated
December 10, 1861, he is reported as present; that on the roll dated
December 31, 1861, he is reported as absent without leave; that on the
roll for January and February, 1862, he is reported as deserted; that he
is not borne on subsequent rolls until that for November, 1864, when he
is reported as gained from desertion; he was mustered out with his
company January 31, 1865, and the records offered no evidence of
disability; that in his claim for pension, filed in 1881, he alleges
that he contracted piles in the winter of 1863.

In a subsequent statement he alleges that this date is erroneous,
and that his disability was contracted in October, 1864, and that he
believes it was the result of his having diarrhea for about twelve
months prior to that date, contracted while he was being carried from
place to place as a prisoner, he having been tried by a court-martial
in May, 1862, for desertion and sentenced to imprisonment until the
expiration of his term of enlistment.

Thus it quite plainly appears that this claimant spent the most of his
term of enlistment in desertion or in imprisonment as a punishment of
that offense; and thus is exhibited the "long and faithful service and
the high character of the claimant" mentioned as entitling him to
consideration by the committee who reported favorably upon this bill.

I withhold my assent from this bill because, if the facts before me,
derived from the army records and the statements of the claimant are
true, the allowance of this claim would, in my opinion, be a travesty
upon our whole scheme of pensions and an insult to every decent veteran
soldier.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 4, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 8150, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Jesse Campbell."

The claim for a pension made by the beneficiary named in this bill to
the Pension Bureau, and rejected in 1881, was reopened upon further
proof in January, 1887, and the claimant was ordered before a board of
examining surgeons, upon which a report has not yet been made.

Inasmuch as the only ground for the rejection of his claim was the
nonexistence of pensionable disability from the cause he alleged, and in
view of the fact that he now alleges a different disability, which the
new evidence seems to support, there is no doubt that justice will be
done the claimant under the general law.

This bill if passed would only place the name of the beneficiary upon
the pension roll, "subject to the restrictions and limitations of the
pension laws." Whether any sum was allowed him or not would still depend
upon the existence of a disability; and if this is found upon the
examination lately ordered, he will undoubtedly be put upon the pension
roll, under existing law, in accordance with his supplementary claim.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 4, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I hereby return without approval House bill No. 6832, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Mrs. Catharine Sattler."

The beneficiary named in this bill claims a pension as the surviving
widow of Julius Sattler, who enlisted in Company A, Seventh New York
Volunteers, and was in the service from March 10, 1864, to March 22,
1865, when he was discharged because of the amputation of his left
forearm in consequence of a wound received in the battle of Deep Bottom,
Virginia, on the 14th day of August, 1864. He was pensioned in 1865 at
the rate of $8 per month, which was afterwards increased to $15 per
month, dating from June 6, 1866.

In October, 1867, he was employed as a watchman in the United States
bonded warehouse in the city of New York, and on the 31st day of that
month he received his monthly pay of $50. He disappeared on that day,
and on the 13th day of November, 1867, his body was found in the North
River, at the foot of West Thirteenth street, in the city of New York
without his hat, coat, watch, or money.

These facts, with the further statement that he was a strong and healthy
man at the time of his death, constitute the case on the part of the
widow, who filed her application for a pension July 8, 1884, nearly
seventeen years after her husband's death, alleging that she was married
to the deceased in 1865, after the amputation of his arm.

Her claim was rejected in November, 1884, upon the ground that the
soldier's death was not due to his military service.

This rejection was clearly right, unless the Government is to be held as
an insurer against every fatal casualty incurred by those who have
served in the Army, without regard to the manner of its occurrence.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 4, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 6825, entitled "An act
granting a pension to James R. Baylor."

The claim of the beneficiary named in this bill is based upon an injury
to his left ankle in 1862.

A medical examination in 1877 showed no appearance of there ever having
been a fracture of the left ankle, as alleged by the claimant, and
it was determined that there was no disability. A later examination
in the same year was had with the same result. Still another medical
examination was had in June, 1884, which, although nearly agreeing with
the previous ones, and giving rise to some suspicion that the claimant
was inclined to exaggerate and prevent a free and fair examination,
still does not absolutely exclude a very slight disability.

Upon the report of this last examination the case has been reopened for
further proof of disability since discharge, which if found will entitle
the claimant to a pension under general laws. On the question to be
determined he would have no advantage under a special act, inasmuch as
there must be a ratable disability to entitle him to any payment in
pursuance of its provisions.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 11, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without my approval House bill No. 10457, entitled
"An act for the relief of dependent parents and honorably discharged
soldiers and sailors who are now disabled and dependent upon their own
labor for support."

This is the first general bill that has been sanctioned by the Congress
since the close of the late civil war permitting a pension to the
soldiers and sailors who served in that war upon the ground of service
and present disability alone, and in the entire absence of any injuries
received by the casualties or incidents of such service.

While by almost constant legislation since the close of this war there
has been compensation awarded for every possible injury received as a
result of military service in the Union Army, and while a great number
of laws passed for that purpose have been administered with great
liberality and have been supplemented by numerous private acts to reach
special cases, there has not until now been an avowed departure from the
principle thus far adhered to respecting Union soldiers, that the bounty
of the Government in the way of pensions is generously bestowed when
granted to those who, in this military service and in the line of
military duty, have to a greater or less extent been disabled.

But it is a mistake to suppose that service pensions, such as are
permitted by the second section of the bill under consideration, are new
to our legislation. In 1818, thirty-five years after the close of the
Revolutionary War, they were granted to the soldiers engaged in that
struggle, conditional upon service until the end of the war or for a
term not less than nine months, and requiring every beneficiary under
the act to be one "who is, or hereafter by reason of his reduced
circumstances in life shall be, in need of assistance from his country
for support." Another law of a like character was passed in 1828,
requiring service until the close of the Revolutionary War; and still
another, passed in 1832, provided for those persons not included in the
previous statute, but who served two years at some time during the war,
and giving a proportionate sum to those who had served not less than six
months.

A service-pension law was passed for the benefit of the soldiers of 1812
in the year 1871, fifty-six years after the close of that war, which
required only sixty days' service; and another was passed in 1878,
sixty-three years after the war, requiring only fourteen days' service.

The service-pension bill passed at this session of Congress, thirty-nine
years after the close of the Mexican War, for the benefit of the
soldiers of that war, requires either some degree of disability or
dependency or that the claimant under its provisions should be 62 years
of age, and in either case that he should have served sixty days or been
actually engaged in a battle.

It will be seen that the bill of 1818 and the Mexican pension bill,
being thus passed nearer the close of the wars in which its
beneficiaries were engaged than the others--one thirty-five years and
the other thirty-nine years after the termination of such wars--embraced
persons who were quite advanced in age, assumed to be comparatively few
in number, and whose circumstances, dependence, and disabilities were
clearly defined and could be quite easily fixed.

The other laws referred to appear to have been passed at a time so
remote from the military service of the persons which they embraced that
their extreme age alone was deemed to supply a presumption of dependency
and need.

The number of enlistments in the Revolutionary War is stated to be
309,791, and in the War of 1812 576,622; but it is estimated that on
account of repeated reenlistments the number of individuals engaged in
these wars did not exceed one-half of the number represented by these
figures. In the war with Mexico the number of enlistments is reported to
be 112,230, which represents a greater proportion of individuals engaged
than the reported enlistments in the two previous wars.

The number of pensions granted under all laws to soldiers of the
Revolution is given at 62,069; to soldiers of the War of 1812 and their
widows, 60,178; and to soldiers of the Mexican War and their widows,
up to June 30, 1885, 7,619. The latter pensions were granted to the
soldiers of a war involving much hardship for disabilities incurred as a
result of such service; and it was not till within the last month that
the few remaining survivors were awarded a service pension.

The War of the Rebellion terminated nearly twenty-two years ago; the
number of men furnished for its prosecution is stated to be 2,772,408.
No corresponding number of statutes have ever been passed to cover every
kind of injury or disability incurred in the military service of any
war. Under these statutes 561,576 pensions have been granted from the
year 1861 to June 30, 1886, and more than 2,600 pensioners have been
added to the rolls by private acts passed to meet cases, many of them of
questionable merit, which the general laws did not cover.

On the 1st day of July, 1886, 365,763 pensioners of all classes were
upon the pension rolls, of whom 305,605 were survivors of the War of the
Rebellion and their widows and dependents. For the year ending June 30,
1887, $75,000,000 have been appropriated for the payment of pensions,
and the amount expended for that purpose from 1861 to July 1, 1886, is
$808,624,811.51.

While annually paying out such a vast sum for pensions already granted,
it is now proposed by the bill under consideration to award a service
pension to the soldiers of all wars in which the United States has been
engaged, including of course the War of the Rebellion, and to pay those
entitled to the benefits of the act the sum of $12 per month.

So far as it relates to the soldiers of the late civil war, the bounty
it affords them is given thirteen years earlier than it has been
furnished the soldiers of any other war, and before a large majority of
its beneficiaries have advanced in age beyond the strength and vigor of
the prime of life.

It exacts only a military or naval service of three months, without any
requirement of actual engagement with an enemy in battle, and without a
subjection to any of the actual dangers of war.

The pension it awards is allowed to enlisted men who have not suffered
the least injury, disability, loss, or damage of any kind, incurred in
or in any degree referable to their military service, including those
who never reached the front at all and those discharged from rendezvous
at the close of the war, if discharged three months after enlistment.
Under the last call of the President for troops, in December, 1864,
11,303 men were furnished who were thus discharged.

The section allowing this pension does, however, require, besides a
service of three months and an honorable discharge, that those seeking
the benefit of the act shall be such as "are now or may hereafter be
suffering from mental or physical disability, not the result of their
own vicious habits or gross carelessness, which incapacitates them for
the performance of labor in such a degree as to render them unable to
earn a support, and who are dependent upon their daily labor for
support."

It provides further that such persons shall, upon making proof of the
fact, "be placed on the list of invalid pensioners of the United States,
and be entitled to receive for such total inability to procure their
subsistence by daily labor $12 per month; and such pension shall
commence from the date of the filing of the application in the Pension
Office, upon proof that the disability then existed, and continue during
the existence of the same in the degree herein provided: _Provided_,
That persons who are now receiving pensions under existing laws, or
whose claims are pending in the Pension Office, may, by application to
the Commissioner of Pensions, in such form as he may prescribe, receive
the benefit of this act."

It is manifestly of the utmost importance that statutes which, like
pension laws, should be liberally administered as measures of
benevolence in behalf of worthy beneficiaries should admit of no
uncertainty as to their general objects and consequences.

Upon a careful consideration of the language of the section of this bill
above given it seems to me to be so uncertain and liable to such
conflicting constructions and to be subject to such unjust and
mischievous application as to alone furnish sufficient ground for
disapproving the proposed legislation.

Persons seeking to obtain the pension provided by this section must be
now or hereafter--

1. "Suffering from mental or physical disability."

2. Such disability must not be "the result of their own vicious habits
or gross carelessness."

3. Such disability must be such as "incapacitates them for the
performance of labor in such a degree as to render them unable to earn
a support."

4. They must be "dependent upon their daily labor for support."

5. Upon proof of these conditions they shall "be placed on the lists of
invalid pensioners of the United States, and be entitled to receive for
such total inability to procure their subsistence by daily labor $12 per
month."

It is not probable that the words last quoted, "such total inability to
procure their subsistence by daily labor," at all qualify the conditions
prescribed in the preceding language of the section. The "total
inability" spoken of must be "such" inability--that is, the inability
already described and constituted by the conditions already detailed in
the previous parts of the section.

It thus becomes important to consider the meaning and the scope of these
last-mentioned conditions.

The mental and physical disability spoken of has a distinct meaning in
the practice of the Pension Bureau and includes every impairment of
bodily or mental strength and vigor. For such disabilities there are now
paid 131 different rates of pension, ranging from $1 to $100 per month.

This disability must not be the result of the applicant's "vicious
habits or gross carelessness." Practically this provision is not
important. The attempt of the Government to escape the payment of a
pension on such a plea would of course in a very large majority of
instances, and regardless of the merits of the case, prove a failure.
There would be that strange but nearly universal willingness to help the
individual as between him and the public Treasury which goes very far to
insure a state of proof in favor of the claimant.

The disability of applicants must be such as to "incapacitate them for
the performance of labor in such a degree as to render them unable to
earn a support."

It will be observed that there is no limitation or definition of the
incapacitating injury or ailment itself. It need only be such a degree
of disability from any cause as renders the claimant unable to earn a
support by labor. It seems to me that the "support" here mentioned as
one which can not be earned is a complete and entire support, with no
diminution on account of the least impairment of physical or mental
condition. If it had been intended to embrace only those who by disease
or injury were totally unable to labor, it would have been very easy to
express that idea, instead of recognizing, as is done, a "degree" of
such inability.

What is a support? Who is to determine whether a man earns it, or has
it, or has it not? Is the Government to enter the homes of claimants for
pension and after an examination of their surroundings and circumstances
settle those questions? Shall the Government say to one man that his
manner of subsistence by his earnings is a support and to another that
the things his earnings furnish are not a support? Any attempt, however
honest, to administer this law in such a manner would necessarily
produce more unfairness and unjust discrimination and give more scope
for partisan partiality, and would result in more perversion of the
Government's benevolent intentions, than the execution of any statute
ought to permit.

If in the effort to carry out the proposed law the degree of disability
as related to earnings be considered for the purpose of discovering if
in any way it curtails the support which the applicant, if entirely
sound, would earn, and to which he is entitled, we enter the broad field
long occupied by the Pension Bureau, and we recognize as the only
difference between the proposed legislation and previous laws passed for
the benefit of the surviving soldiers of the Civil War the incurrence in
one case of disabilities in military service and in the other
disabilities existing, but in no way connected with or resulting from
such service.

It must be borne in mind that in no case is there any grading of this
proposed pension. Under the operation of the rule first suggested, if
there is a lack in any degree, great or small, of the ability to earn
such a support as the Government determines the claimant should have,
and, by the application of the rule secondly suggested, if there is a
reduction in any degree of the support which he might earn if sound, he
is entitled to a pension of $12.

In the latter case, and under the proviso of the proposed bill
permitting persons now receiving pensions to be admitted to the benefits
of the act, I do not see how those now on the pension roll for
disabilities incurred in the service, and which diminish their earning
capacity, can be denied the pension provided in this bill.

Of course none will apply who are now receiving $12 or more per month.
But on the 30th day of June, 1886, there were on the pension rolls
202,621 persons who were receiving fifty-eight different rates of
pension from $1 to $11.75 per month. Of these, 28,142 were receiving $2
per month; 63,116, $4 per month; 37,254, $6 per month, and 50,274, whose
disabilities were rated as total, $8 per month.

As to the meaning of the section of the bill under consideration there
appears to have been quite a difference of opinion among its advocates
in the Congress. The chairman of the Committee on Pensions in the House
of Representatives, who reported the bill, declared that there was in it
no provision for pensioning anyone who has a less disability than a
total inability to labor, and that it was a charity measure. The
chairman of the Committee on Pensions in the Senate, having charge of
the bill in that body, dissented from the construction of the bill
announced in the House of Representatives, and declared that it not only
embraced all soldiers totally disabled, but, in his judgment, all who
are disabled to any considerable extent; and such a construction was
substantially given to the bill by another distinguished Senator, who,
as a former Secretary of the Interior, had imposed upon him the duty of
executing pension laws and determining their intent and meaning.

Another condition required of claimants under this act is that they
shall be "dependent upon their daily labor for support."

This language, which may be said to assume that there exists within the
reach of the persons mentioned "labor," or the ability in some degree to
work, is more aptly used in a statute describing those not wholly
deprived of this ability than in one which deals with those utterly
unable to work.

I am of the opinion that it may fairly be contended that under the
provisions of this section any soldier whose faculties of mind or body
have become impaired by accident, disease, or age, irrespective of his
service in the Army as a cause, and who by his labor only is left
incapable of gaining the fair support he might with unimpaired powers
have provided for himself, and who is not so well endowed with this
world's goods as to live without work, may claim to participate in its
bounty; that it is not required that he should be without property, but
only that labor should be necessary to his support in some degree; nor
is it required that he should be now receiving support from others.

Believing this to be the proper interpretation of the bill, I can not
but remember that the soldiers of our Civil War in their pay and bounty
received such compensation for military service as has never been
received by soldiers before since mankind first went to war; that never
before on behalf of any soldiery have so many and such generous laws
been passed to relieve against the incidents of war; that statutes have
been passed giving them a preference in all public employments; that the
really needy and homeless Union soldiers of the rebellion have been to a
large extent provided for at soldiers' homes, instituted and supported
by the Government, where they are maintained together, free from the
sense of degradation which attaches to the usual support of charity; and
that never before in the history of the country has it been proposed to
render Government aid toward the support of any of its soldiers based
alone upon a military service so recent, and where age and circumstances
appeared so little to demand such aid.

Hitherto such relief has been granted to surviving soldiers few in
number, venerable in age, after a long lapse of time since their
military service, and as a parting benefaction tendered by a grateful
people.

I can not believe that the vast peaceful army of Union soldiers, who,
having contentedly resumed their places in the ordinary avocations of
life, cherish as sacred the memory of patriotic service, or who, having
been disabled by the casualties of war, justly regard the present
pension roll on which appear their names as a roll of honor, desire at
this time and in the present exigency to be confounded with those who
through such a bill as this are willing to be objects of simple charity
and to gain a place upon the pension roll through alleged dependence.

Recent personal observation and experience constrain me to refer to
another result which will inevitably follow the passage of this bill. It
is sad, but nevertheless true, that already in the matter of procuring
pensions there exists a widespread disregard of truth and good faith,
stimulated by those who as agents undertake to establish claims for
pensions heedlessly entered upon by the expectant beneficiary, and
encouraged, or at least not condemned, by those unwilling to obstruct
a neighbor's plans.

In the execution of this proposed law under any interpretation a wide
field of inquiry would be opened for the establishment of facts largely
within the knowledge of the claimants alone, and there can be no doubt
that the race after the pensions offered by this bill would not only
stimulate weakness and pretended incapacity for labor, but put a further
premium on dishonesty and mendacity.

The effect of new invitations to apply for pensions or of new advantages
added to causes for pensions already existing is sometimes startling.

Thus in March, 1879, large arrearages of pensions were allowed to be
added to all claims filed prior to July 1, 1880. For the year from July
1, 1879, to July 1, 1880, there were filed 110,673 claims, though in the
year immediately previous there were but 36,832 filed, and in the year
following but 18,455.

While cost should not be set against a patriotic duty or the recognition
of a right, still when a measure proposed is based upon generosity or
motives of charity it is not amiss to meditate somewhat upon the expense
which it involves. Experience has demonstrated, I believe, that all
estimates concerning the probable future cost of a pension list are
uncertain and unreliable and always fall far below actual realization.

The chairman of the House Committee on Pensions calculates that the
number of pensioners under this bill would be 33,105 and the increased
cost $4,767,120. This is upon the theory that only those who are
entirely unable to work would be its beneficiaries. Such was the
principle of the Revolutionary pension law of 1818, much more clearly
stated, it seems to me, than in this bill. When the law of 1818 was upon
its passage in Congress, the number of pensioners to be benefited
thereby was thought to be 374; but the number of applicants under the
act was 22,297, and the number of pensions actually allowed 20,485,
costing, it is reported, for the first year, $1,847,900, instead of
$40,000, the estimated expense for that period.

A law was passed in 1853 for the benefit of the surviving widows of
Revolutionary soldiers who were married after January 1, 1800. It was
estimated that they numbered 300 at the time of the passage of the act;
but the number of pensions allowed was 3,742, and the amount paid for
such pensions during the first year of the operation of the act was
$180,000, instead of $24,000, as had been estimated.

I have made no search for other illustrations, and the above, being at
hand, are given as tending to show that estimates can not be relied upon
in such cases.

If none should be pensioned under this bill except those utterly unable
to work, I am satisfied that the cost stated in the estimate referred to
would be many times multiplied, and with a constant increase from year
to year; and if those partially unable to earn their support should be
admitted to the privileges of this bill, the probable increase of
expense would be almost appalling.

I think it may be said that at the close of the War of the Rebellion
every Northern State and a great majority of Northern counties and
cities were burdened with taxation on account of the large bounties paid
our soldiers; and the bonded debt thereby created still constitutes
a large item in the account of the tax gatherer against the people.
Federal taxation, no less borne by the people than that directly levied
upon their property, is still maintained at the rate made necessary by
the exigencies of war. If this bill should become a law, with its
tremendous addition to our pension obligation, I am thoroughly convinced
that further efforts to reduce the Federal revenue and restore some part
of it to our people will, and perhaps should, be seriously questioned.

It has constantly been a cause of pride and congratulation to the
American citizen that his country is not put to the charge of
maintaining a large standing army in time of peace. Yet we are now
living under a war tax which has been tolerated in peaceful times to
meet the obligations incurred in war. But for years past, in all parts
of the country, the demand for the reduction of the burdens of taxation
upon our labor and production has increased in volume and urgency.

I am not willing to approve a measure presenting the objections to which
this bill is subject, and which, moreover, will have the effect of
disappointing the expectation of the people and their desire and hope
for relief from war taxation in time of peace.

In my last annual message the following language was used:

Every patriotic heart responds to a tender consideration for those who,
having served their country long and well, are reduced to destitution
and dependence, not as an incident of their service, but with advancing
age or through sickness or misfortune. We are all tempted by the
contemplation of such a condition to supply relief, and are often
impatient of the limitations of public duty. Yielding to no one in the
desire to indulge this feeling of consideration, I can not rid myself
of the conviction that if these ex-soldiers are to be relieved they
and their cause are entitled to the benefit of an enactment under
which relief may be claimed as a right, and that such relief should be
granted under the sanction of law, not in evasion of it; nor should
such worthy objects of care, all equally entitled, be remitted to the
unequal operation of sympathy or the tender mercies of social and
political influence, with their unjust discriminations.

I do not think that the objects, the conditions, and the limitations
thus suggested are contained in the bill under consideration.

I adhere to the sentiments thus heretofore expressed. But the evil
threatened by this bill is, in my opinion, such that, charged with a
great responsibility in behalf of the people, I can not do otherwise
than to bring to the consideration of this measure my best efforts of
thought and judgment and perform my constitutional duty in relation
thereto, regardless of all consequences except such as appear to me
to be related to the best and highest interests of the country.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 16, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without my approval House bill No. 10203, entitled "An act to
enable the Commissioner of Agriculture to make a special distribution of
seeds in the drought-stricken counties of Texas, and making an
appropriation therefor."

It is represented that a long-continued and extensive drought has
existed in certain portions of the State of Texas, resulting in a
failure of crops and consequent distress and destitution.

Though there has been some difference in statements concerning the
extent of the people's needs in the localities thus affected, there
seems to be no doubt that there has existed a condition calling for
relief; and I am willing to believe that, notwithstanding the aid
already furnished, a donation of seed grain to the farmers located in
this region, to enable them to put in new crops, would serve to avert
a continuance or return of an unfortunate blight.

And yet I feel obliged to withhold my approval of the plan, as proposed
by this bill, to indulge a benevolent and charitable sentiment through
the appropriation of public funds for that purpose.

I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and
I do not believe that the power and duty of the General Government ought
to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no
manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent
tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should,
I think, be steadfastly resisted, to the end that the lesson should be
constantly enforced that though the people support the Government the
Government should not support the people.

The friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied upon
to relieve their fellow-citizens in misfortune. This has been repeatedly
and quite lately demonstrated. Federal aid in such cases encourages the
expectation of paternal care on the part of the Government and weakens
the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the
indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which
strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood.

It is within my personal knowledge that individual aid has to some
extent already been extended to the sufferers mentioned in this bill.
The failure of the proposed appropriation of $10,000 additional to meet
their remaining wants will not necessarily result in continued distress
if the emergency is fully made known to the people of the country.

It is here suggested that the Commissioner of Agriculture is annually
directed to expend a large sum of money for the purchase, propagation,
and distribution of seeds and other things of this description,
two-thirds of which are, upon the request of Senators, Representatives,
and Delegates in Congress, supplied to them for distribution among their
constituents.

The appropriation of the current year for this purpose is $100,000, and
it will probably be no less in the appropriation for the ensuing year.
I understand that a large quantity of grain is furnished for such
distribution, and it is supposed that this free apportionment among
their neighbors is a privilege which may be waived by our Senators and
Representatives.

If sufficient of them should request the Commissioner of Agriculture
to send their shares of the grain thus allowed them to the suffering
farmers of Texas, they might be enabled to sow their crops, the
constituents for whom in theory this grain is intended could well bear
the temporary deprivation, and the donors would experience the
satisfaction attending deeds of charity.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 19, 1887_.

_To the Senate_:

I herewith return without approval Senate bill No. 859, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Charlotte O'Neal."

This bill proposes to grant a pension to the beneficiary therein named
as the widow of Richard O'Neal, late colonel of the Twenty-sixth
Regiment Indiana Volunteers.

In the report of the committee in the Senate to whom this bill was
referred it is stated that the deceased soldier was the first colonel of
the regiment named; that he resigned from the Army, and was by order of
the governor of Indiana put in charge of the United States camps at
Indianapolis. A military order is made part of the report, announcing
that the funeral of Lieutenant-Colonel Richard O'Neal will take place
January 6, 1863, and reciting the fact that the deceased had charge of
the camps near Indianapolis for the preceding four months.

It is distinctly alleged in the report that the beneficiary did not
apply to the Pension Bureau for relief because the disease of which her
husband died was incurred after his resignation.

The records of the War Department fail to show that there was a colonel
of the Twenty-sixth Indiana Regiment named Richard O'Neal, but it does
appear that Richard Neal was lieutenant-colonel of said regiment; that
he was mustered in August 31, 1861, and resigned June 30, 1862.

If this is the officer whose widow is named in the bill, the proposition
is to pension a widow of a soldier who, after ten months' service,
resigned, and who seven months after his resignation died of disease
which was in no manner related to his military service.

There is besides such a discrepancy between the name given in the bill
and the name of the officer who served as lieutenant-colonel in the
regiment mentioned that if the merits were with the widow the bill would
need further Congressional consideration.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 19, 1887_.

_To the Senate_:

I herewith return without approval Senate bill No. 1626, entitled "An
act granting a pension to John Reed, Sr."

The report of the Senate Committee on Pensions merely states that the
mother of John Reed was granted a pension, commencing the 5th day of
December, 1862; that she has since died, and that the proposed bill is
to secure a pension to John Reed, Sr., the aged and dependent father of
the deceased soldier.

The records show that the beneficiary named in this bill filed an
application for a pension in 1877, alleging that he was the father of
John Reed, who died in the service, and that his wife, the mother of the
deceased soldier, died May 10, 1872, and that he, the father, was mainly
dependent upon his son for support. He filed evidence of the mother's
death, and one witness alleged that he was present at her death and
attended her funeral.

In 1864 Martha Reed, the mother of the soldier, filed her application
for pension, in which she at first claimed to be the widow of John Reed.
She afterwards, however, alleged that her husband, John Reed, abandoned
his family in 1859 and had not thereafter contributed to their support,
and that the soldier was her main support after such abandonment. She
was allowed a pension as dependent mother, which commenced in 1862, the
date of her son's death, and seems to have terminated July 22, 1884,
when she died.

The claim of the father was rejected in 1883 for the reason that the
mother, who had a prior right, was still living, and when his claim was
again pressed in 1886 he was informed that his abandonment of his family
in 1859 precluded the idea that he was entitled to a pension as being
dependent upon the soldier for support.

Of course these decisions were correct in law, in equity, and in morals.

This case demonstrates the means employed in attempts to cheat the
Government in applications for pensions--too often successful.

The allegation in 1877 of the man who now poses as the aged and
dependent father of a dead soldier that the mother died in 1872, when
at that time her claim was pending for pension largely based upon his
abandonment; the affidavit of the man who testified that he saw her die
in 1872; the effrontery of this unworthy father renewing his claim after
the detection of his fraud and the actual death of the mother, and the
allegation of the mother that she was a widow when in fact she was an
abandoned wife, show the processes which enter into these claims for
pensions and the boldness with which plans are sometimes concocted to
rob the Government by actually trafficking in death and imposing upon
the sacred sentiments of patriotism and national gratitude.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 21, 1887_.

_To the Senate_:

I herewith return without approval Senate bill No. 2452, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Rachel Ann Pierpont."

At the time this bill was introduced and passed an application for
pension on behalf of the beneficiary named was pending in the Pension
Bureau. This application was filed in December, 1879. Within the last
few days, and on the 17th day of February, 1887, a pension was granted
upon said application and a certificate issued at precisely the same
rate which the bill herewith returned authorizes.

But the pension under the general laws dates from the time of filing the
application in 1879, while under a special act it would date only from
the time of its passage.

In the interest of the beneficiary and for her advantage the special
bill is therefore disapproved.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, February 21, 1887_.

_To the Senate_:

I return herewith without approval Senate bill No. 2111, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Jacob Smith."

The beneficiary named in this bill filed his claim for a pension
November 11, 1882. He seems upon the facts presented to be justly
entitled to it, and since this bill has been in my hands the
Commissioner of Pensions has reported to me that a certificate therefor
would at once be issued.

Under such a certificate this disabled soldier's pension will commence
November 11, 1882. Under this bill, if approved, it would date only from
the time of its approval. I suppose his certificate has already been
issued, and I am unwilling to jeopardize the advantages he has gained
thereunder, as might be done if the bill herewith returned became a law.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 21, 1887_.

_To the Senate_:

I herewith return without approval Senate bill No. 1768, entitled "An
act granting a pension to John D. Fincher."

The beneficiary named in this bill enlisted August 6, 1862, and was
discharged for disability February 24, 1863.

The surgeon's certificate of disability given at the time of the
soldier's discharge recites "general debility, which will disable him
from performing the duties of a soldier for a good period of time. The
disease was contracted by exposure and fatigue while performing the
duties of a soldier."

The claimant filed his application for pension in September, 1882,
nearly twenty years after his discharge, alleging that in November,
1862, he was attacked with bilious fever, followed by chronic diarrhea
and lung trouble.

In support of his application an affidavit of a comrade was filed,
setting forth the fact that the claimant was taken sick, as he alleged,
in the fall of 1862, and that he was sent to the hospital on that
account. The affidavit further expresses the belief that the claimant
still suffers from the effects of his sickness and exposure.

So far as I am informed, and so far as the committee's report discloses,
this is the only proof furnished of any continuance of disability at the
time of filing the application for pension, and this proof, if it may
be so regarded, is the mere expression of an opinion or belief, not
necessarily based upon any personal knowledge, and which might have been
honestly expressed if derived from representations of the claimant
himself.

In this condition of the case the claimant was examined by a surgeon in
1882, whose report seems to negative all ailments except as one may be
found in the fact alleged therein that he had pneumonia in 1868, and
that there might be some pleuritic adhesions, plainly inferring that if
such adhesions existed they were the result of the sickness to which he
refers.

In February, 1885, the claimant was again examined by a board of
surgeons. This examination seems to have been very carefully and
thoroughly made, and as a result of the same the board reported that
there was no disability. On this ground the claim was rejected.

There is no doubt as to the sickness of the claimant during his service
and his disability at the time of his discharge, but unless the report
of the board of surgeons is to be impeached without apparent reason
there is as little doubt of the claimant's complete recovery.

No case has been presented to me in which the evidence afforded of a
continuance of disability seems so inconclusive. In these circumstances
the report of the board of surgeons appears to be upon the evidence
before me almost uncontradicted.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 23, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No 7327, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Anthony McRobertson."

The beneficiary named in this bill was badly wounded in a battle which
occurred about the 17th day of November, 1863.

He applied for pension in 1874, and the same was granted in November,
1886, to date from the time of his disability, November 17, 1863.

He is now receiving the highest rate allowed under the general law for
cases such as his, and he would be entitled to no more under the special
act.

It could not, therefore, by any possibility be of the least benefit to
him, but, on the other hand, might jeopardize his advantages already
gained.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 23, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 8002, entitled "An act
to increase the pension of Loren Burritt."

The beneficiary named in this bill enlisted in October, 1863, and in
December of that year was mustered in as major of the Eighth Regiment
United States Colored Troops; was promoted to lieutenant-colonel and
very badly wounded in February, 1864, and was mustered out with his
regiment November 10, 1865.

His condition at the present time is most pitiable, and his helplessness
is such that he needs the constant care and assistance of others. He was
obliged to give up business about the year 1873.

In 1866 he was pensioned for his wound, which was in the right leg; and
such pension has been increased from time to time until he is now in the
receipt of $72 per month, the highest pension allowed under general
laws. This rate was awarded him under a law passed in 1880, increasing
from $50 to $72 per month the pensions of those who were rendered
permanently and totally helpless, so that they required the regular and
personal attendance of another.

On the 30th day of June, 1886, there were 1,009 persons on the rolls
receiving this rate of pension.

This bill was reported upon adversely by the House Committee on
Pensions, and they, while fully acknowledging the distressing
circumstances surrounding the case, felt constrained to adverse action
on the ground, as stated in the language of their report, that "there
are many cases just as helpless and requiring as much attention as this
one, and were the relief asked for granted in this instance it might
reasonably be looked for in all."

No man can check, if he would, the feeling of sympathy and pity aroused
by the contemplation of utter helplessness as the result of patriotic
and faithful military service; but in the midst of all this I can not
put out of mind the soldiers in this condition who were privates in the
ranks, who sustained the utmost hardships of war, but who, because they
were privates and in the humble walks of life, are not so apt to share
in special favors of Congressional action. I find no reason why this
beneficiary should be singled out from his class, except it be that he
was a lieutenant-colonel instead of a private.

I am aware of a precedent for the legislation proposed, which is
furnished by an enactment of the last session of Congress, to which I
assented, as I think improvidently; but I am certain that exact equality
and fairness in the treatment of our veterans is, after all, more just,
beneficent, and useful than unfair discrimination in favor of officers
or the special benefit born of sympathy in individual cases.

I am constrained, therefore, to agree with the House Committee on
Pensions in their views of this bill.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 23, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 10082, entitled "An
act to increase the pension of Margaret R. Jones."

The beneficiary mentioned in this bill is now receiving the highest rate
of pension allowed in cases such as hers under the general law.

All the information which is available to me fails to furnish any reason
why this pension should be specially increased, except the general
statement in the claimant's petition that she is in necessitous
circumstances and that the rate now allowed her is insufficient for her
support.

The further statement in the petition that her husband's death "was
caused prematurely by his endeavor to comply with unusual,
disrespectful, and indefinite orders" to go to League Island Navy-Yard
certainly does not in all its bearings furnish conclusive proof that his
widow's pension should be increased beyond that furnished others in her
situation.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 23, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 5877, entitled "An act for the
relief of William H. Morhiser."

This beneficiary, though apparently not regularly enlisted in the
military service of the country during the time covered by this bill for
his relief, performed military duty, was captured and imprisoned. No
technicality should be interposed in considering this bill to prevent
the receipt by him of the same pay and allowances awarded under like
circumstances to soldiers regularly enlisted.

But this bill proposes to appropriate for the benefit of this claimant
such sum as pay and allowances as would be allowed a private of cavalry
from November 30, 1863, to January 1, 1865. It appears from the records
of the War Department that he has already been paid for at least two
months of that time.

The bill also provides that there shall also be allowed to the claimant
such additional pay and allowances, as commutation of rations and so
forth, as were allowed prisoners of war, from July 30, 1864, to January
1, 1865. The records disclose the fact that he has been allowed
commutation of rations from July 30, 1864, to December 11, 1864.

As the purpose of this bill, as gathered from the report of the
committee to whom it was referred, appears to be to secure for the
claimant therein named compensation "at the rate at which other soldiers
in the same situation were paid," and as he seems already to have
received a considerable part of the compensation provided for in the
bill, I am led to suppose that a mistake has been made in framing the
same.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 24, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 7648, entitled "An act
for the relief of the estate of the late John How, Indian agent, and his
sureties."

John How was appointed Indian agent in July, 1878, and upon such
appointment gave a bond to the Government in the penal sum of $10,000
conditioned for the faithful performance of his duties as such agent and
to protect the Government from loss by mismanagement or malfeasance in
his official conduct. The parties named in the bill were his sureties on
said bond.

On the 23d day of December, 1881, upon a report of inspectors connected
with the Indian Bureau suggesting frauds and mismanagement in the
conduct of this agency, Mr. How was suspended from his office, which
suspension was approved by the President in January, 1882.

After such suspension the accounts of the agent were examined and
various explanations offered by him in relation thereto. It is stated,
however, in a report from the Indian Office now before me, that such
explanations were deemed by that office sufficient to remove only a
small part of the items in the accounts which were questioned. The
matter was thereupon referred to the Treasury Department for further
examination and adjustment.

The Second Comptroller reports that the final settlement of this agent's
accounts was pending before the accounting officers for upward of
eighteen months, affording ample opportunity for any explanation which
might be deemed necessary and proper, and that on the 21st day of July,
1885, a final adjustment was made of the said accounts, by which a sum
very much in excess of the penalty of his bond was found due from said
agent to the Government.

A suit was afterwards instituted against the agent and his sureties to
recover the amount thus found due, so far as the bond covered the same.

This suit is still pending.

The object of the bill now under consideration is to wholly release and
discharge these sureties from any liability upon said bond.

It seems to be the opinion of all the officers of the Government who
have examined the matter at all that a debt exists in favor of the
Government upon this bond. It is reported that a large amount of
evidence has been taken, and that in the opinion of these officers the
amount due the Government can not be reduced to a less amount than the
penalty of the bond.

The Second Comptroller states, as results of examinations made in his
office and by the Second Auditor, that it appears that many of the
vouchers presented by the agent were fictitious, the persons in whose
names they were given testifying that services and supplies therein
mentioned were never rendered or furnished; that in other cases parties
denied the genuineness of vouchers purporting to be made by them; that a
large voucher apparently given for cattle was actually given for money
loaned, and that supplies bought with Government funds were appropriated
for the agent's personal benefit.

I do not suppose that it was intended by the Congress to entirely
relieve these sureties if a condition exists such as is above set out,
which results in an indebtedness to the Government. The proposed
legislation, judging from the report of the House Committee on Claims,
seems rather to proceed upon the theory that no sum is due the
Government in the premises.

I think it will hardly be claimed that the patient investigation of the
accounting officers should be lightly discredited in this case; and it
seems to me that justness to the Government and fairness to the sureties
seeking relief will presumably be secured by the further prosecution of
the suit already instituted, in which the truth of all matters involved
can be thoroughly tested.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 25, 1887_.

_To the Senate_:

I herewith return without approval Senate bill No. 1162, entitled "An
act for the erection of a post-office building at Lynn, Mass."

The title of this bill sufficiently indicates its purpose.

Congressional action in its favor appears to be based, as usual in such
cases, upon representations concerning the population of the town in
which it is proposed to erect the building, and the increase in such
population, the number of railroad trains arriving and departing daily,
and various other items calculated to demonstrate the importance of the
city selected for Federal decoration.

These statements are supplemented by a report from the postmaster,
setting forth that his postal receipts are increasing, giving the number
of square feet now occupied by his office, the amount of rent paid, and
the number of his employees.

This bill, unlike others of its class which seek to provide a place for
a number of Federal offices, simply authorizes the construction of a
building for the accommodation of the post-office alone.

The report of the postmaster differs also in this case from those which
are usually furnished, inasmuch as it is therein distinctly stated that
the space now furnished for his office is sufficient for its present
operations. He adds, however, that from present indications there will
be a large increase in the business of the office during the next ten
years.

It is quite apparent that there is no necessity for the expenditure of
$100,000, the amount limited in this bill, or any other sum, for the
construction of the proposed building to meet the wants of the
Government, and for this reason I am constrained to disapprove the
proposed legislation.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 26, 1887_.

_To the Senate_:

I herewith return without approval Senate bill No. 2045, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Mrs. Sarah Hamilton."

Thomas Hamilton, the husband of the beneficiary named in this bill,
enlisted September 2, 1862. Upon the records he is reported present
to April 30, 1863; deserted May 27, 1863. His name is dropped from
subsequent rolls to February 29, 1864, when he is reported as a deserter
in arrest. He is not borne upon the rolls for March and April, 1864;
for May and June, 1864, he is reported absent in arrest; for July and
August, present under arrest; and for September and October, present for
duty. He was mustered out with his company May 24, 1865.

He applied for a pension in 1872, alleging that he received an injury to
his left leg about February 15, 1863, at St. Louis, by falling from a
ladder, causing varicose veins and stiffening of the leg.

He was granted a pension January 29, 1881, to commence May 25, 1865.

He subsequently applied for an increase of pension, claiming that
his eyes had become affected as a result of his varicose veins. This
application was rejected upon the ground that the disability for which
he was pensioned had not increased and that the disease of his eyes was
not a result of such disability.

The pensioner died April 22, 1883, twenty years after his alleged
injury, of cerebral apoplexy; and a physician states it as his judgment
that the varicosed condition of the venous system was primarily the
cause of his disabilities and death.

His widow filed an application for pension October 31, 1883, which was
rejected upon the ground that the soldier's death was not the result of
his military service.

Notwithstanding the record of the deceased soldier, stained as it is
with the charge of desertion, and the entire absence of any record proof
of sickness and injury, I should consider myself, in favor of his widow,
bound by the act of the Pension Bureau in allowing him a pension, and
should cheerfully aid her attempt to procure a pension for herself in
her needy condition, if I was not thoroughly convinced that her
husband's death had no relation to his military service or any injury
for which he was pensioned.

To the ordinary mind it seems impossible that apoplexy could result
from such a varicosed condition as is described in this case. I do not
understand that the physician who gives a contrary opinion bases his
judgment upon actual observation at the time the soldier died. The last
medical examination by the Pension Bureau before the soldier's death was
in October, 1882, and resulted in the following report of the examining
surgeon:

Weight, 180 pounds; age, 69 years; has varicose veins of left leg, but
not to such an extent as to increase the size of the leg or result in
marked disability; he is entirely blind in both eyes from glaucoma,
which does not in any degree, in my opinion, depend upon the pensioned
disability--varicose veins.

It appears that the benefit proposed by this bill can neither be
properly regarded as a gratuity, based upon the honorable service and
record of the soldier, nor predicated on his death resulting from a
disability incurred in such service.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 26, 1887_.

_To the Senate_:

I herewith return without approval Senate bill No. 2210, entitled "An
act granting a pension to Anna Wright."

The beneficiary named in this bill was granted a pension on the 17th day
of November, 1886, dating from May 25, 1863, and is now under the
general law receiving precisely the pension which she would receive
under the bill herewith returned if the same should be approved.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, February 26, 1887_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 6976, entitled "An act
to erect a public building at Portsmouth, Ohio."

It is represented in support of this bill that Portsmouth by its last
census had a population of 11,321, and that, it contains at present
not less than 15,000 inhabitants; that it is a place of considerable
manufacturing and commercial importance, and that there is no public
building for the transaction of the business of the General Government
nearer than Columbus or Cincinnati, both about 100 miles distant.

It is further stated in a communication from the promoter of this bill
that--

There is not a Federal public building in the State of Ohio east of the
line drawn on the accompanying map from Cleveland through Columbus to
Cincinnati; and when wealth and population and the needs of the public
service are considered, the distribution of public buildings in the
State is an unfair one.

Here is disclosed a theory of expenditure for public buildings which I
can hardly think should be adopted. If an application for the erection
of such a building is to be determined by the distance between its
proposed location and another public building, or upon the allegation
that a certain division of a State is without a Government building,
or that the distribution of these buildings in a particular State
is unfair, we shall rapidly be led to an entire disregard of the
considerations of necessity and public need which it seems to me should
alone justify the expenditure of public funds for such a purpose.

The care and protection which the Government owes to the people do
not embrace the grant of public buildings to decorate thriving and
prosperous cities and villages, nor should such buildings be erected
upon any principle of fair distribution among localities.

The Government is not an almoner of gifts among the people, but an
instrumentality by which the people's affairs should be conducted upon
business principles, regulated by the public needs.

Applying these principles to the case embraced in the bill under
consideration, we find that at Portsmouth there is a post-office and
an internal revenue collector's office for which the Government should
provide.

It is represented that the quarters now furnished for these offices
are inadequate and that more spacious rooms are desirable. In the
post-office there are six employees, and the collector of internal
revenue has five assistants. The annual rent paid for both these offices
is $600.

Upon these facts the proposition is to expend $60,000 for a building to
accommodate these offices, entailing after its completion quite a large
sum annually for its care and superintendence.

Though the sum of $60,000 is the limit fixed for the cost of this
building, if it should be completed for this sum it would be an
exception to the rule in such cases; and if it is absolutely impossible
to do the public business in the quarters now occupied by these offices,
which does not appear to be claimed, there can be no difficulty in
securing in this enterprising city adequate accommodations at a rent not
largely in excess of that at present paid.

Upon the whole it does not appear, as a business proposition, that the
building proposed should be undertaken.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, February 28, 1887_.

_To the Senate_:

I herewith return without approval Senate bill No. 531, entitled "An act
to provide for the erection of a public building at Lafayette, Ind."

This bill appropriates $50,000 for the purpose indicated in its title.

It is represented that a deputy internal-revenue collector is located at
Lafayette, but no information is furnished that he has an office there
which is or ought to be furnished by the Government. It is not claimed
that the Federal business at this point requires other accommodation
except for the post-office located there.

As usual in such cases, the postmaster reports, in reply to inquiries,
that his present quarters are inadequate, and, as usual, it appears that
the postal business is increasing. The rent paid for the rooms or
building in which the post-office is kept is $1, 100 per annum.

I have been informed since this bill has been in my hands that last
spring a building was erected at Lafayette with special reference to
its use for the post-office, and that a part of it was leased by the
Government for that purpose for the term of five years. Upon the faith
of such lease the premises thus rented were fitted up and furnished by
the owner of the building in a manner especially adapted to postal uses,
and an account of such fitting up and furnishing is before me, showing
the expense of the same to have been more than $2,500.

In view of such new and recent arrangements made by the Government for
the transaction of its postal business at this place, it seems that the
proposed expenditure for the erection of a building for that purpose is
hardly necessary or justifiable.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

PROCLAMATIONS.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

A PROCLAMATION.

Whereas satisfactory proof has been given to me by the Government
of the Netherlands that no light-house and light dues, tonnage dues,
or beacon and buoy dues are imposed in the ports of the Kingdom of the
Netherlands; that no other equivalent tax of any kind is imposed upon
vessels in said ports, under whatever flag they may sail; that vessels
belonging to the United States of America and their cargoes are not
required in the Netherlands to pay any fee or due of any kind or nature,
or any import due higher or other than is payable by vessels of the
Netherlands or their cargoes; that no export duties are imposed in the
Netherlands; and that in the free ports of the Dutch East Indies, to
wit, Riouw (in the island of Riouw), Pabean, Sangrit, Loloan, and
Tamboekoes (in the island of Bali), Koepang (in the island of Timor),
Makassar, Menado, Kema, and Gorontalo (in the island of Celebes),
Amboina, Saparoa, Banda, Ternate, and Kajeli (in the Moluccas), Olehleh
and Bengkalis (in the island of Sumatra), vessels are subjected to no
fiscal tax, and no import or export duties are there levied:

Now, therefore, I, Grover Cleveland, President of the United States of
America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by section 11 of the
act of Congress entitled "An act to abolish certain fees for official
services to American vessels, and to amend the laws relating to shipping
commissioners, seamen, and owners of vessels, and for other purposes,"
approved June 19, 1886, do hereby declare and proclaim that from and
after the date of this my proclamation shall be suspended the collection
of the whole of the duty of 6 cents per ton, not to exceed 30 cents per
ton per annum (which is imposed by said section of said act), upon
vessels entered in the ports of the United States from any of the ports
of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in Europe, or from any of the above
named free ports of the Dutch East Indies.

_Provided_, That there shall be excluded from the benefits of the
suspension hereby declared and proclaimed the vessels of any foreign
country in whose ports the fees or dues of any kind or nature imposed on
vessels of the United States, or the import or export duties on their
cargoes, are in excess of the fees, dues, or duties imposed on the
vessels of such foreign country or their cargoes, or of the fees, dues,
or duties imposed on the vessels of the country in which are the ports
mentioned in this proclamation, or the cargoes of such vessels.

And the suspension hereby declared and proclaimed shall continue so long
as the reciprocal exemption of vessels belonging to citizens of the
United States and their cargoes shall be continued in the said ports of
the Kingdom of the Netherlands in Europe and the said free ports of the
Dutch East Indies, and no longer.

In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of
the United States to be affixed.

[SEAL.]

Done at the city of Washington, this 22d day of April, A.D. 1887, and of
the Independence of the United States the one hundred and eleventh.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

A PROCLAMATION.

Whereas satisfactory proof has been given to me by the Government of
Spain that no discriminating duties of tonnage or imposts are imposed
or levied in the islands of Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines, and
all belonging to the Crown of Spain, upon vessels wholly belonging to
citizens of the United States, or upon the produce, manufactures, or
merchandise imported in the same from the United States or from any
foreign country; and

Whereas notification of such abolition of discriminating duties of
tonnage and imposts as aforesaid has been given to me by a memorandum
of agreement signed this day at the city of Washington between the
Secretary of State of the United States and the envoy extraordinary
and minister plenipotentiary of Her Majesty the Queen Regent of Spain
accredited to the Government of the United States of America:

Now, therefore, I, Grover Cleveland, President of the United States
of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by section 4228
of the Revised Statutes of the United States, do hereby declare and
proclaim that from and after the date of this my proclamation, being
also the date of the notification received as aforesaid, the foreign
discriminating duties of tonnage and imposts within the United States
are suspended and discontinued so far as respects the vessels of Spain
and the produce, manufactures, or merchandise imported in said vessels
into the United States from the islands of Cuba and Puerto Rico, the
Philippines, and all other countries belonging to the Crown of Spain, or
from any other foreign country; such suspension to continue so long as
the reciprocal exemption of Vessels belonging to citizens of the United
States and their cargoes shall be continued in the said islands of Cuba
and Puerto Rico, and the Philippines, and all other Spanish possessions,
and no longer.

In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of
the United States to be affixed.

[SEAL.]

Done at the city of Washington this 21st day of September, A.D. 1887,
and of the Independence of the United States the one hundred and
twelfth.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

A PROCLAMATION

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

The goodness and the mercy of God, which have followed the American
people during all the days of the past year, claim their grateful
recognition and humble acknowledgment. By His omnipotent power He has
protected us from war and pestilence and from every national calamity;
by His gracious favor the earth has yielded a generous return to the
labor of the husbandman, and every path of holiest toil has led to
comfort and contentment; by His loving kindness the hearts of our people
have been replenished with fraternal sentiment and patriotic endeavor,
and by His unerring guidance we have been directed in the way of
national prosperity.

To the end that we may with one accord testify our gratitude for all
these blessings, I, Grover Cleveland, President of the United States, do
hereby designate and set apart Thursday, the 24th day of November next,
as a day of thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by all the people of
the land.

On that day let all secular work and employment be suspended, and let
our people assemble in their accustomed places of worship and with
prayer and songs of praise give thanks to our Heavenly Father for all
that He has done for us, while we humbly implore the forgiveness of our
sins and a continuance of His mercy.

Let families and kindred be reunited on that day, and let their hearts,
filled with kindly cheer and affectionate reminiscence, be turned in
thankfulness to the source of all their pleasures and the giver of all
that makes the day glad and joyous.

And in the midst of our worship and our happiness let us remember the
poor, the needy, and the unfortunate, and by our gifts of charity and
ready benevolence let us increase the number of those who with grateful
hearts shall join in our thanksgiving.

In witness whereof I have set my hand and caused the seal of the United
States to be hereunto affixed.

[SEAL.]

Done at the city of Washington, this 25th day of October, A.D. 1887, and
of the Independence of the United States the one hundred and twelfth.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

By the President:
T.F. BAYARD,
_Secretary of State_.

EXECUTIVE ORDERS.

JANUARY 4, 1887.

In the exercise of the power vested in the President by the
Constitution, and by virtue of the seventeen hundred and fifty-third
section of the Revised Statutes and of the civil-service act approved
January 16, 1883, the following regulations governing promotions in the
customs service at the city of New York are hereby approved and
promulgated:

REGULATION 1.

The board of examiners at the New York customs district may at any time,
with the approval of the Civil Service Commission, order an examination
for promotion, and at least five days before the examination is to take
place shall cause a notice to be posted conspicuously in the office for
which such examination is to be held, and shall state in said notice the
class or classes to test fitness for promotion to which the examination
is to be held and the time and place of examination. Promotions shall
be from class to class, and the examination of persons in one class
shall be to test their fitness for promotion to the next higher class:
_Provided, however_, That if in any examination for promotion the
competitors in the next lower class shall not exceed three in number,
the board may, at its discretion, open the competition to one or more
of the classes below the class in which there are not more than three
competitors. All persons in the class immediately below the class for
which promotions are to be made, and who have been in said class at
least six months, must be examined for promotion.

REGULATION 2.

The examination must be held upon such subjects as in the opinion
of the board of examiners, with the approval of the Commission, the
general nature of the business of the office and the special nature
of the positions to be filled may require. In grading the competitors
due weight must be given to the efficiency with which the several
competitors shall have performed their duties in the office; but none
who shall fail to attain a minimum standard of 75 per cent in the
written examination shall be certified for promotion.

REGULATION 3.

The whole list of eligibles from which the promotion is to be made shall
be certified to the nominating officer.

REGULATION 4.

Any person employed in any of the offices to which these regulations
apply may be transferred without examination, after service of six
months consecutively since January 16, 1883, from one office to a
class no higher in another office, upon certification by the board of
examiners that he has passed an examination for the class in which he
is doing duty, and with the consent of the heads of the respective
offices and the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury.

REGULATION 5.

The Civil Service Commission may at any time amend these regulations
or substitute other regulations therefor.

The foregoing regulations are adopted and approved.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

RULE IV.

1. The Civil Service Commission shall have authority to appoint the
following-named boards of civil-service examiners:

_The central board_.--This board shall be composed of seven
members, who shall be detailed from the Departments in which they may
be serving at the time of appointment for continuous service at the
office of the Civil Service Commission. Under the supervision of the
Commission, the central board shall examine and mark the papers of all
examinations for entrance to the departmental service, and also such
of the papers of examinations for entrance to either the customs or
the postal service as shall be submitted to it by the Commission. The
Commission shall have authority to require any customs or postal board
to send the papers of any examination conducted by said board to be
examined and marked by the central board. The persons composing this
board shall be in the departmental service.

_Special boards_.--These boards shall mark the papers of special
examinations for the classified departmental service, and shall be
composed of persons in the public service.

_Supplementary boards_.--These boards shall mark the papers of
supplementary examinations for the classified departmental service, and
shall be composed of persons in the public service.

_Local departmental boards_.--These boards shall be organized at
one or more places in each State and Territory where examinations for
the departmental service are to be held, and shall each be composed of
persons in the public service residing in the State or Territory in
which the board is to act.

_Customs boards_.--One for each classified customs district, to be
composed of persons in the customs service in the district for which
the board is to act. These boards shall conduct examinations for
entrance to and promotion in the classified customs service.

_Postal boards_.--One for each classified post-office, to be
composed of persons in the postal service at the post-office for which
said board is to act. These boards shall conduct examinations for
entrance to and promotions in the postal service.

2. No person shall be appointed a member of any board of examiners named
herein until after consultation by the Civil Service Commission with the
head of the Department or office in which the person whom it desires to
appoint is serving.

3. It shall be the duty of the head of any classified customs office or
classified post-office to promptly inform the Civil Service Commission,
in writing, of the removal or resignation from the public service, or
of the death, of any member of a board of examiners appointed from his
office; and upon request of the Commission such officer shall state to
the Commission which of the persons employed in his office he regards as
most competent to fill the vacancy thus occasioned, or any vacancy which
may otherwise occur; and in making this statement the officer shall
mention generally the qualifications of each of the persons named
therein by him.

4. The duties of a member of a special, supplementary, local,
departmental, customs, or postal board of examiners shall be regarded as
a part of the public duties of such examiner, and each examiner shall be
allowed time during office hours to perform the duties required of him.

5. The Civil Service Commission shall have authority to adopt
regulations which shall (1) prescribe the manner of organizing the
several boards of civil-service examiners herein named, (2) more
particularly state the powers of each of said boards, and (3)
specifically define the duties of the members thereof.

6. The Civil Service Commission shall have authority to change at any
time the membership of any of the above-named boards of civil-service
examiners.

Approved, January 15, 1887.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

REGULATIONS FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF ARMS, ORDNANCE STORES,
QUARTERMASTER'S STORES, AND CAMP EQUIPAGE TO THE TERRITORIES AND THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, PRESCRIBED BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
IN CONFORMITY WITH THE SECOND SECTION OF THE ACT ENTITLED "AN ACT TO
AMEND SECTION 1661, REVISED STATUTES, MAKING AN ANNUAL APPROPRIATION TO
PROVIDE ARMS AND EQUIPMENTS FOR THE MILITIA."

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 22, 1887_.

1. Each Territory shall, if included within the provisions of said act,
annually receive arms, ordnance stores, quartermaster's stores, and camp
equipage equivalent to the quota of a State having the least
representation in Congress, and the District of Columbia shall annually
receive arms, ordnance stores, quartermaster's stores, and camp equipage
not exceeding double the quota of a State having the least
representation in Congress.

2. Arms, ordnance stores, quartermaster's stores, and camp equipage
shall be issued to the Territories on requisitions of the governors
thereof and to the District of Columbia on requisitions approved by the
senior general of the District Militia present for duty. Returns shall
be made annually by the senior general of the District Militia in the
manner as required by sections 3 and 4 of the act above referred to in
the case of States and Territories.

3. It is forbidden to make issues to States and Territories in excess of
the amount to their credit under the provisions of section 1161, Revised
Statutes, as amended by the above act.

4. The regulations established by President Pierce April 30, 1855, under
the act approved March 30, 1855, are hereby revoked.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

In the exercise of the power vested in the President by the
Constitution, and by virtue of the seventeen hundred and fifty-third
section of the Revised Statutes and of the civil-service act approved
January 16, 1883, Rules IV, VI, XIX, XXI of the rules for the regulation
and improvement of the executive civil service are hereby amended and
promulgated as follows:

RULE IV.

I. The Commission may appoint boards of examiners as follows:

_The central board_.--A board composed of seven members, who shall
be detailed from the Departments in which they are serving when
appointed for continuous service at the office of the Commission. This
board shall mark such papers of examinations for admission to the
departmental, customs, and postal services as the Commission may direct.

_Departmental special boards_.--These boards shall mark such papers
of special examinations for the departmental service as the Commission
may direct, and shall be composed of persons in the public service.

_Departmental supplementary boards_.--These boards shall mark the
papers of such supplementary examinations for the departmental service
as the Commission may direct, and shall be composed of persons in the
public service.

_Departmental promotion boards_.--One for each of the Executive
Departments, of three members, and one auxiliary member for each bureau
of the Department for which the board is to act.

_Departmental local boards_.--These boards shall be organized at
one or more places in each State and Territory where examinations for
the departmental service are to be held, and shall each be composed of
persons in the public service residing in the State or Territory in
which the board is to act.

_Customs boards_.--One for each classified customs district, to be
composed of persons in the customs service in the district for which
said board is to act. These boards shall conduct examinations for
entrance to and promotions in the classified customs service, and shall
mark such of the examination papers for that service as the Commission
shall direct. They shall also conduct such departmental examinations as
the Commission may direct.

_Postal boards_.--One for each classified post-office, to be
composed of persons in the postal service at the post-office in which
said board is to act. These boards shall conduct examinations for
entrance to and promotions in the postal service, and shall mark such of
the examination papers for that service as the Commission may direct.
They shall also conduct such departmental examinations as the Commission
may direct.

2. No person shall be appointed an examiner until after consultation by
the Commission with the head of the Department or office in which the
person whom it desires to appoint is serving.

3. It shall be the duty of the head of any classified customs office or
post-office to promptly give written information to the Commission of
the removal or resignation from the public service, or of the inability
or refusal to act, of any examiner in his office; and on request of the
Commission such officer shall state which of the persons in his office
he regards as most competent to fill the vacancy, and shall mention
generally the qualifications of each person named by him.

4. The duties of an examiner shall be regarded as a part of his public
duties, and each examiner shall be allowed time during office hours to
perform the duties required of him.

5. The Commission may adopt regulations which shall prescribe (1) the
manner of organizing the boards of examiners, (2) the powers of each
board, and (3) the duties of the members thereof.

6. The Commission may create additional boards of examiners and may
change the membership of any board; and boards of examiners shall
perform such other appropriate duties as the Commission may impose
upon them.

RULE VI.

1. There shall be open competitive examinations for testing the fitness
of applicants for admission to the service. Such examinations shall be
practical in their character, and so far as may be shall relate to those
matters which will fairly test the relative capacity and fitness of the
persons examined to discharge the duties of the branch of the service
which they seek to enter.

2. And for the purpose of establishing in the classified service the
principle of compulsory competitive examination for promotion there
shall be, so far as practicable and useful, such examinations of a
suitable character to test the fitness of persons for promotion in the
service, and the Commission may make regulations applying them to any
classified Department, customs office, or post-office, under which
regulations examinations for promotion shall be conducted and all
promotions made; but until regulations made by the Commission in
accordance herewith have been applied to a classified Department,
customs office, or post-office, promotions therein may be made upon any
test of fitness determined upon by the promoting officer. And in any
classified Department, customs office, or post-office in which
promotions are made under examinations as herein provided the Commission
may, in special session, if the exigencies of the service require such
action, provide noncompetitive examinations for promotion.

RULE XIX.

There are excepted from examination the following: (1) The confidential
clerk or secretary of any head of a Department or office; (2) cashiers
of collectors; (3) cashiers of postmasters; (4) superintendents of
money-order divisions in post-offices; (5) the direct custodians of
money for whose fidelity another officer is under official bond, and
disbursing officers having the custody of money, who give bonds; but
these exceptions shall not extend to any official below the grade of
assistant cashier or teller; (6) persons employed exclusively in the
secret service of the Government, or as translators or interpreters or
stenographers; (7) persons whose employment is exclusively professional,
but medical examiners are not included among such persons; (8) chief
clerks, deputy collectors, deputy naval officers, deputy surveyors of
customs, and superintendents or chiefs of divisions or bureaus. But no
person so excepted shall be either transferred, appointed, or promoted,
unless to some excepted place, without an examination under the
Commission, which examination shall not take place within six months
after entering the service.

RULE XXI.

1. No person, unless excepted under Rule XIX, shall be admitted into the
classified civil service from any place not within said service without
an examination and certification under the rules, with this exception,
that any person who shall have been an officer for one year or more last
preceding in any Department or office in a grade above the classified
service thereof may be transferred or appointed to any place in the
service of the same without examination.

2. No person who has passed only a limited examination under clause 4 of
Rule VII for the lower classes or grades in the departmental or customs
service shall be appointed or be promoted within two years after
appointment to any position giving a salary of $1,000 or upward without
first passing an examination under clause 1 of said rule; and such
examination shall not be allowed within the first year after
appointment.

3. But a person who has passed the examination under said clause 1 and
has accepted a position giving a salary of $900 or less shall have the
same right of promotion as if originally appointed to a position giving
a salary of $1,000 or more.

4. The Commission may at any time certify for a $900 or any lower place
in the classified service any person upon the register who has passed
the examination under clause 1 of Rule VII, if such person does not
object before such certification is made.

5. The provisions of this rule relating to promotions shall cease to be
operative in any classified Department, customs office, or post-office
when regulations for promotions have been applied thereto by the
Commission under the authority conferred by clause 2 of Rule VI.

Approved, May 5, 1887.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, May 9, 1887_.

The executive offices and Departments at the seat of Government,
including the public printing establishment, will be closed at noon on
Thursday, the 12th instant, to enable persons employed therein to attend
the exercises at the unveiling of the statue of the late President
Garfield.

And employees in such offices and Departments who desire to accompany
any organization to which they belong in the parade or other exercises
preceding on that day the unveiling ceremonies may, by permission of the
heads of their respective offices or Departments, also be granted such
leave of absence as may be necessary for that purpose.

Members of the Society of the Army of the Cumberland desiring to attend
any meeting of such society on Wednesday, the 11th instant, may, by
special permission of the respective heads of Departments and offices,
be excused from duty during the hours on that day as said meetings may
be held.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

WAR DEPARTMENT, ADJUTANT-GENERAL'S OFFICE,
_Washington, April 30, 1887_.

HON. WILLIAM C. ENDICOTT,
_Secretary of War_.

SIR: I have the honor to state that there are now in this office, stored
in one of the attic rooms of the building, a number of Union flags
captured in action, but recovered on the fall of the Confederacy and
forwarded to the War Department for safe-keeping, together with a number
of Confederate flags which the fortunes of war placed in our hands
during the late Civil War.

While in the past favorable action has been taken on applications
properly supported for the return of Union flags to organizations
representing survivors of the military regiments in the service of the
Government, I beg to submit that it would be a graceful act to
anticipate future requests of this nature, and venture to suggest the
propriety of returning all the flags (Union and Confederate) to the
authorities of the respective States in which the regiments which bore
these colors were organized, for such final disposition as they may
determine.

While in all the civilized nations of the world trophies taken in war
against foreign enemies have been carefully preserved and exhibited as
proud mementos of the nation's military glories, wise and obvious
reasons have always excepted from the rule evidences of past internecine
troubles which by appeals to the arbitrament of the sword have disturbed
the peaceful march of a people to its destiny.

Over twenty years have elapsed since the termination of the late Civil
War. Many of the prominent leaders, civil and military, of the late
Confederate States are now honored representatives of the people in the
national councils, or in other eminent positions lend the aid of their
talents to the wise administration of affairs of the whole country; and
the people of the several States composing the Union are now united,
treading the broader road to a glorious future.

Impressed with these views, I have the honor to submit the suggestion
made in this letter for the careful consideration it will receive at
your hands.

Very truly, yours,

R.C. DRUM,
_Adjutant-General_.

[Indorsement.]

WAR DEPARTMENT, _May 26, 1887_.

The within recommendation approved by the President, and the
Adjutant-General will prepare letters to governors of those States whose
troops carried the colors and flags now in this Department, with the
offer to return them as herein proposed. The history of each flag and
the circumstances of its capture or recapture should be given.

HON. WILLIAM C. ENDICOTT,
_Secretary of War_.

WAR DEPARTMENT, ADJUTANT-GENERAL'S OFFICE,
_Washington, June 7, 1887_.

Honorable GOVERNOR OF ----.

SIR: The President of the United States having approved the
recommendation that all the flags in the custody of the War Department
be returned to the authorities of the respective States in which the
regiments which bore them were organized, for such final disposition as
they may determine, I am instructed by the honorable Secretary of War to
make you, in the name of the War Department, a tender of the flags now
in this office belonging to the late volunteer organizations of the
State of ----.

In discharging this pleasant duty I beg you will please advise me of
your wishes in this matter. It is the intention in returning each flag
to give its history as far as it is possible to do so, stating the
circumstances of its capture and recovery.

I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

R.C. DRUM, _Adjutant-General._

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, June 16, 1887_.

The SECRETARY OF WAR:

I have to-day considered with more care than when the subject was orally
presented me the action of your Department directing letters to be
addressed to the governors of all the States offering to return, if
desired, to the loyal States the Union flags captured in the War of the
Rebellion by the Confederate forces and afterwards recovered by
Government troops, and to the Confederate States the flags captured by
the Union forces, all of which for many years have been packed in boxes
and stored in the cellar and attic of the War Department.

I am of the opinion that the return of these flags in the manner thus
contemplated is not authorized by existing law nor justified as an
executive act.

I request, therefore, that no further steps be taken in the matter
except to examine and inventory these flags and adopt proper measures
for their preservation. Any direction as to the final disposition of
them should originate with Congress.

Yours, truly,

GROVER CLEVELAND.

WAR DEPARTMENT, ADJUTANT-GENERAL'S OFFICE,
_Washington, June --, 1887_.

Hon. ---- ----,
_Governor of ----_.

SIR: Referring to the letter from this office dated June --, 1887, on
the subject of the return to the respective States of the flags now in
the custody of the War Department, I am instructed by the Secretary of
War to inform you of the withdrawal of the offer made therein, as on a
more careful consideration of the legal points involved in the proposed
action the President of the United States is of the opinion that the
return of these flags is not authorized by existing law nor justified as
an executive act, and that any direction as to their final disposition
should originate with Congress.

I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

---- ----, _Adjutant-General_.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, August 25, 1887_.

It appearing to me that the promoters of the International Military
Encampment to be held in Chicago in October proximo, in commemoration of
the fiftieth anniversary of the settlement of that city, have extended
to the militia organizations of foreign countries, in behalf of the
citizen soldiers of the State of Illinois, an invitation to take part
in said encampment as the guests of the city of Chicago, and that
representatives of the soldiery of certain foreign countries have
accepted such invitation and are about to arrive in the United States:

I hereby direct the Secretary of the Treasury to instruct the collectors
of customs at the several ports of entry that upon being satisfied that
such visitors come as guests, in pursuance of the aforesaid invitation,
they shall permit the entrance of such foreign soldiers into the United
States, with their personal baggage, uniforms, arms, and equipments,
without payment of customs duties thereon, and without other formality
than such as may be necessary to insure the reexportation of said
uniforms, baggage, arms, and equipments.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, _Washington, October 24, 1887_.

By direction of the President the undersigned is charged with the sad
duty of announcing the death, on the 22d instant, at 4 o'clock p.m., at
his residence, Chicago, Ill., of Elihu B. Washburne, an illustrious
citizen, formerly Secretary of State of the United States.

Mr. Washburne rendered great service to the people of the United States
in many and important capacities. As a Representative from the State
of Illinois in the National Legislature, and subsequently as envoy
extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States to
France, his career was marked by eminent usefulness, in which abilities
of a high order were applied with unsparing devotion and fidelity in the
performance of the trusts of public power.

His private life was unstained, his public service unquestionably great,
and his memory will be cherished with affection and respect by his
grateful countrymen.

On the day of his funeral this Department will be closed for all public
business, and be draped in mourning for ten days thereafter.

The diplomatic and consular officers of the United States in foreign
countries will be directed to make proper expression of the public
sorrow experienced by the death of Mr. Washburne.

T.F. BAYARD, _Secretary of State_.

THIRD ANNUAL MESSAGE.

WASHINGTON, _December 6, 1887_.

_To the Congress of the United States_:

You are confronted at the threshold of your legislative duties with a
condition of the national finances which imperatively demands immediate
and careful consideration.

The amount of money annually exacted, through the operation of present
laws, from the industries and necessities of the people largely exceeds
the sum necessary to meet the expenses of the Government.

When we consider that the theory of our institutions guarantees to every
citizen the full enjoyment of all the fruits of his industry and
enterprise, with only such deduction as may be his share toward the
careful and economical maintenance of the Government which protects him,
it is plain that the exaction of more than this is indefensible
extortion and a culpable betrayal of American fairness and justice. This
wrong inflicted upon those who bear the burden of national taxation,
like other wrongs, multiplies a brood of evil consequences. The public
Treasury, which should only exist as a conduit conveying the people's
tribute to its legitimate objects of expenditure, becomes a hoarding
place for money needlessly withdrawn from trade and the people's use,
thus crippling our national energies, suspending our country's
development, preventing investment in productive enterprise, threatening
financial disturbance, and inviting schemes of public plunder.

This condition of our Treasury is not altogether new, and it has more
than once of late been submitted to the people's representatives in the
Congress, who alone can apply a remedy. And yet the situation still
continues, with aggravated incidents, more than ever presaging financial
convulsion and widespread disaster.

It will not do to neglect this situation because its dangers are not now
palpably imminent and apparent. They exist none the less certainly, and
await the unforeseen and unexpected occasion when suddenly they will be
precipitated upon us.

On the 30th day of June, 1885, the excess of revenues over public
expenditures, after complying with the annual requirement of the
sinking-fund act, was $17,859,735.84; during the year ended June 30,
1886, such excess amounted to $49,405,545.20, and during the year ended
June 30, 1887, it reached the sum of $55,567,849.54.

The annual contributions to the sinking fund during the three years
above specified, amounting in the aggregate to $138,058,320.94, and
deducted from the surplus as stated, were made by calling in for that
purpose outstanding 3 per cent bonds of the Government. During the six
months prior to June 30, 1887, the surplus revenue had grown so large by
repeated accumulations, and it was feared the withdrawal of this great
sum of money needed by the people would so affect the business of the
country, that the sum of $79,864,100 of such surplus was applied to
the payment of the principal and interest of the 3 per cent bonds
still outstanding, and which were then payable at the option of the
Government. The precarious condition of financial affairs among the
people still needing relief, immediately after the 30th day of June,
1887, the remainder of the 3 per cent bonds then outstanding, amounting
with principal and interest to the sum of $18,877,500, were called in
and applied to the sinking-fund contribution for the current fiscal
year. Notwithstanding these operations of the Treasury Department,
representations of distress in business circles not only continued, but
increased, and absolute peril seemed at hand. In these circumstances
the contribution to the sinking fund for the current fiscal year was at
once completed by the expenditure of $27,684,283.55 in the purchase of
Government bonds not yet due bearing 4 and 4-1/2 per cent interest,
the premium paid thereon averaging about 24 per cent for the former and
8 per cent for the latter. In addition to this, the interest accruing
during the current year upon the outstanding bonded indebtedness of
the Government was to some extent anticipated, and banks selected as
depositories of public money were permitted to somewhat increase their
deposits.

While the expedients thus employed to release to the people the money
lying idle in the Treasury served to avert immediate danger, our surplus
revenues have continued to accumulate, the excess for the present year
amounting on the 1st day of December to $55,258,701.19, and estimated to
reach the sum of $113,000,000 on the 30th of June next, at which date it
is expected that this sum, added to prior accumulations, will swell the
surplus in the Treasury to $140,000,000.

There seems to be no assurance that, with such a withdrawal from use of
the people's circulating medium, our business community may not in the
near future be subjected to the same distress which was quite lately
produced from the same cause. And while the functions of our National
Treasury should be few and simple, and while its best condition would be
reached, I believe, by its entire disconnection with private business
interests, yet when, by a perversion of its purposes, it idly holds
money uselessly subtracted from the channels of trade, there seems to be
reason for the claim that some legitimate means should be devised by the
Government to restore in an emergency, without waste or extravagance,
such money to its place among the people.

If such an emergency arises, there now exists no clear and undoubted
executive power of relief. Heretofore the redemption of 3 per cent
bonds, which were payable at the option of the Government, has afforded
a means for the disbursement of the excess of our revenues; but these
bonds have all been retired, and there are no bonds outstanding the
payment of which we have a right to insist upon. The contribution to
the sinking fund which furnishes the occasion for expenditure in the
purchase of bonds has been already made for the current year, so that
there is no outlet in that direction.

In the present state of legislation the only pretense of any existing
executive power to restore at this time any part of our surplus revenues
to the people by its expenditure consists in the supposition that the
Secretary of the Treasury may enter the market and purchase the bonds
of the Government not yet due, at a rate of premium to be agreed upon.
The only provision of law from which such a power could be derived is
found in an appropriation bill passed a number of years ago, and it is
subject to the suspicion that it was intended as temporary and limited
in its application, instead of conferring a continuing discretion and
authority. No condition ought to exist which would justify the grant
of power to a single official, upon his judgment of its necessity, to
withhold from or release to the business of the people, in an unusual
manner, money held in the Treasury, and thus affect at his will the
financial situation of the country; and if it is deemed wise to lodge
in the Secretary of the Treasury the authority in the present juncture
to purchase bonds, it should be plainly vested, and provided, as far
as possible, with such checks and limitations as will define this
official's right and discretion and at the same time relieve him from
undue responsibility.

In considering the question of purchasing bonds as a means of restoring
to circulation the surplus money accumulating in the Treasury, it
should be borne in mind that premiums must of course be paid upon
such purchase, that there may be a large part of these bonds held
as investments which can not be purchased at any price, and that
combinations among holders who are willing to sell may unreasonably
enhance the cost of such bonds to the Government.

It has been suggested that the present bonded debt might be refunded
at a less rate of interest and the difference between the old and new
security paid in cash, thus finding use for the surplus in the Treasury.
The success of this plan, it is apparent, must depend upon the volition
of the holders of the present bonds; and it is not entirely certain that
the inducement which must be offered them would result in more financial
benefit to the Government than the purchase of bonds, while the latter
proposition would reduce the principal of the debt by actual payment
instead of extending it.

The proposition to deposit the money held by the Government in banks
throughout the country for use by the people is, it seems to me,
exceedingly objectionable in principle, as establishing too close a
relationship between the operations of the Government Treasury and the
business of the country and too extensive a commingling of their money,
thus fostering an unnatural reliance in private business upon public
funds. If this scheme should be adopted, it should only be done as a
temporary expedient to meet an urgent necessity. Legislative and
executive effort should generally be in the opposite direction, and
should have a tendency to divorce, as much and as fast as can be safely
done, the Treasury Department from private enterprise.

Of course it is not expected that unnecessary and extravagant
appropriations will be made for the purpose of avoiding the accumulation
of an excess of revenue. Such expenditure, besides the demoralization of
all just conceptions of public duty which it entails, stimulates a habit
of reckless improvidence not in the least consistent with the mission of
our people or the high and beneficent purposes of our Government.

I have deemed it my duty to thus bring to the knowledge of my
countrymen, as well as to the attention of their representatives charged
with the responsibility of legislative relief, the gravity of our
financial situation. The failure of the Congress heretofore to provide
against the dangers which it was quite evident the very nature of the
difficulty must necessarily produce caused a condition of financial
distress and apprehension since your last adjournment which taxed to the
utmost all the authority and expedients within executive control; and
these appear now to be exhausted. If disaster results from the continued
inaction of Congress, the responsibility must rest where it belongs.

Though the situation thus far considered is fraught with danger which
should be fully realized, and though it presents features of wrong to
the people as well as peril to the country, it is but a result growing
out of a perfectly palpable and apparent cause, constantly reproducing
the same alarming circumstances--a congested National Treasury and a
depleted monetary condition in the business of the country. It need
hardly be stated that while the present situation demands a remedy, we
can only be saved from a like predicament in the future by the removal
of its cause.

Our scheme of taxation, by means of which this needless surplus is
taken from the people and put into the public Treasury, consists of a
tariff or duty levied upon importations from abroad and internal-revenue
taxes levied upon the consumption of tobacco and spirituous and malt
liquors. It must be conceded that none of the things subjected to
internal-revenue taxation are, strictly speaking, necessaries. There
appears to be no just complaint of this taxation by the consumers of
these articles, and there seems to be nothing so well able to bear the
burden without hardship to any portion of the people.

But our present tariff laws, the vicious, inequitable, and illogical
source of unnecessary taxation, ought to be at once revised and amended.
These laws, as their primary and plain effect, raise the price to
consumers of all articles imported and subject to duty by precisely the
sum paid for such duties. Thus the amount of the duty measures the tax
paid by those who purchase for use these imported articles. Many of
these things, however, are raised or manufactured in our own country,
and the duties now levied upon foreign goods and products are called
protection to these home manufactures, because they render it possible
for those of our people who are manufacturers to make these taxed
articles and sell them for a price equal to that demanded for the
imported goods that have paid customs duty. So it happens that while
comparatively a few use the imported articles, millions of our people,
who never used and never saw any of the foreign products, purchase and
use things of the same kind made in this country, and pay therefor
nearly or quite the same enhanced price which the duty adds to the
imported articles. Those who buy imports pay the duty charged thereon
into the public Treasury, but the great majority of our citizens,
who buy domestic articles of the same class, pay a sum at least
approximately equal to this duty to the home manufacturer. This
reference to the operation of our tariff laws is not made by way of
instruction, but in order that we may be constantly reminded of the
manner in which they impose a burden upon those who consume domestic
products as well as those who consume imported articles, and thus create
a tax upon all our people.

It is not proposed to entirely relieve the country of this taxation.
It must be extensively continued as the source of the Government's
income; and in a readjustment of our tariff the interests of American
labor engaged in manufacture should be carefully considered, as well
as the preservation of our manufacturers. It may be called protection
or by any other name, but relief from the hardships and dangers of
our present tariff laws should be devised with especial precaution
against imperiling the existence of our manufacturing interests. But
this existence should not mean a condition which, without regard
to the public welfare or a national exigency, must always insure the
realization of immense profits instead of moderately profitable returns.
As the volume and diversity of our national activities increase, new
recruits are added to those who desire a continuation of the advantages
which they conceive the present system of tariff taxation directly
affords them. So stubbornly have all efforts to reform the present
condition been resisted by those of our fellow-citizens thus engaged
that they can hardly complain of the suspicion, entertained to a certain
extent, that there exists an organized combination all along the line to
maintain their advantage.

We are in the midst of centennial celebrations, and with becoming pride
we rejoice in American skill and ingenuity, in American energy and
enterprise, and in the wonderful natural advantages and resources
developed by a century's national growth. Yet when an attempt is made to
justify a scheme which permits a tax to be laid upon every consumer in
the land for the benefit of our manufacturers, quite beyond a reasonable
demand for governmental regard, it suits the purposes of advocacy to
call our manufactures infant industries still needing the highest and
greatest degree of favor and fostering care that can be wrung from
Federal legislation.

It is also said that the increase in the price of domestic manufactures
resulting from the present tariff is necessary in order that higher
wages may be paid to our workingmen employed in manufactories than are
paid for what is called the pauper labor of Europe. All will acknowledge
the force of an argument which involves the welfare and liberal
compensation of our laboring people. Our labor is honorable in the eyes
of every American citizen; and as it lies at the foundation of our
development and progress, it is entitled, without affectation or
hypocrisy, to the utmost regard. The standard of our laborers' life
should not be measured by that of any other country less favored, and
they are entitled to their full share of all our advantages.

By the last census it is made to appear that of the 17,392,099 of our
population engaged in all kinds of industries 7,670,493 are employed in
agriculture, 4,074,238 in professional and personal service (2,934,876
of whom are domestic servants and laborers), while 1,810,256 are
employed in trade and transportation and 3,837,112 are classed as
employed in manufacturing and mining.

For present purposes, however, the last number given should be
considerably reduced. Without attempting to enumerate all, it will be
conceded that there should be deducted from those which it includes
375,143 carpenters and joiners, 285,401 milliners, dressmakers, and
seamstresses, 172,726 blacksmiths, 133,756 tailors and tailoresses,
102,473 masons, 76,241 butchers, 41,309 bakers, 22,083 plasterers, and
4,891 engaged in manufacturing agricultural implements, amounting in the
aggregate to 1,214,023, leaving 2,623,089 persons employed in such
manufacturing industries as are claimed to be benefited by a high
tariff.

To these the appeal is made to save their employment and maintain their
wages by resisting a change. There should be no disposition to answer
such suggestions by the allegation that they are in a minority among
those who labor, and therefore should forego an advantage in the
interest of low prices for the majority. Their compensation, as it may
be affected by the operation of tariff laws, should at all times be
scrupulously kept in view; and yet with slight reflection they will not
overlook the fact that they are consumers with the rest; that they too
have their own wants and those of their families to supply from their
earnings, and that the price of the necessaries of life, as well as the
amount of their wages, will regulate the measure of their welfare and
comfort.

But the reduction of taxation demanded should be so measured as not to
necessitate or justify either the loss of employment by the working-man
or the lessening of his wages; and the profits still remaining to the
manufacturer after a necessary readjustment should furnish no excuse
for the sacrifice of the interests of his employees, either in their
opportunity to work or in the diminution of their compensation. Nor can
the worker in manufactures fail to understand that while a high tariff
is claimed to be necessary to allow the payment of remunerative wages,
it certainly results in a very large increase in the price of nearly all
sorts of manufactures, which, in almost countless forms, he needs for
the use of himself and his family. He receives at the desk of his
employer his wages, and perhaps before he reaches his home is obliged,
in a purchase for family use of an article which embraces his own labor,
to return in the payment of the increase in price which the tariff
permits the hard-earned compensation of many days of toil.

The farmer and the agriculturist, who manufacture nothing, but who pay
the increased price which the tariff imposes upon every agricultural
implement, upon all he wears, and upon all he uses and owns, except
the increase of his flocks and herds and such things as his husbandry
produces from the soil, is invited to aid in maintaining the present
situation; and he is told that a high duty on imported wool is necessary
for the benefit of those who have sheep to shear, in order that the
price of their wool may be increased. They, of course, are not reminded
that the farmer who has no sheep is by this scheme obliged, in his
purchases of clothing and woolen goods, to pay a tribute to his
fellow-farmer as well as to the manufacturer and merchant, nor is any
mention made of the fact that the sheep owners themselves and their
households must wear clothing and use other articles manufactured from
the wool they sell at tariff prices, and thus as consumers must return
their share of this increased price to the tradesman.

I think it may be fairly assumed that a large proportion of the sheep
owned by the farmers throughout the country are found in small flocks,
numbering from twenty-five to fifty. The duty on the grade of imported
wool which these sheep yield is 10 cents each pound if of the value of
30 cents or less and 12 cents if of the value of more than 30 cents. If
the liberal estimate of 6 pounds be allowed for each fleece, the duty
thereon would be 60 or 72 cents; and this may be taken as the utmost
enhancement of its price to the farmer by reason of this duty. Eighteen
dollars would thus represent the increased price of the wool from
twenty-five sheep and $36 that from the wool of fifty sheep; and at
present values this addition would amount to about one-third of its
price. If upon its sale the farmer receives this or a less tariff
profit, the wool leaves his hands charged with precisely that sum, which
in all its changes will adhere to it until it reaches the consumer. When
manufactured into cloth and other goods and material for use, its cost
is not only increased to the extent of the farmer's tariff profit, but a
further sum has been added for the benefit of the manufacturer under the
operation of other tariff laws. In the meantime the day arrives when the
farmer finds it necessary to purchase woolen goods and material to
clothe himself and family for the winter. When he faces the tradesman
for that purpose, he discovers that he is obliged not only to return in
the way of increased prices his tariff profit on the wool he sold, and
which then perhaps lies before him in manufactured form, but that he
must add a considerable sum thereto to meet a further increase in cost
caused by a tariff duty on the manufacture. Thus in the end he is
aroused to the fact that he has paid upon a moderate purchase, as a
result of the tariff scheme, which when he sold his wool seemed so
profitable, an increase in price more than sufficient to sweep away all
the tariff profit he received upon the wool he produced and sold.

When the number of farmers engaged in wool raising is compared with all
the farmers in the country and the small proportion they bear to our
population is considered; when it is made apparent that in the case of
a large part of those who own sheep the benefit of the present tariff
on wool is illusory; and, above all, when it must be conceded that
the increase of the cost of living caused by such tariff becomes a
burden upon those with moderate means and the poor, the employed and
unemployed, the sick and well, and the young and old, and that it
constitutes a tax which with relentless grasp is fastened upon the
clothing of every man, woman, and child in the land, reasons are
suggested why the removal or reduction of this duty should be included
in a revision of our tariff laws.

In speaking of the increased cost to the consumer of our home
manufactures resulting from a duty laid upon imported articles of the
same description, the fact is not overlooked that competition among our
domestic producers sometimes has the effect of keeping the price of
their products below the highest limit allowed by such duty. But it is
notorious that this competition is too often strangled by combinations
quite prevalent at this time, and frequently called trusts, which have
for their object the regulation of the supply and price of commodities
made and sold by members of the combination. The people can hardly hope
for any consideration in the operation of these selfish schemes.

If, however, in the absence of such combination, a healthy and free
competition reduces the price of any particular dutiable article of home
production below the limit which it might otherwise reach under our
tariff laws, and if with such reduced price its manufacture continues to
thrive, it is entirely evident that one thing has been discovered which
should be carefully scrutinized in an effort to reduce taxation.

The necessity of combination to maintain the price of any commodity to
the tariff point furnishes proof that someone is willing to accept lower
prices for such commodity and that such prices are remunerative; and
lower prices produced by competition prove the same thing. Thus where
either of these conditions exists a case would seem to be presented for
an easy reduction of taxation.

The considerations which have been presented touching our tariff laws
are intended only to enforce an earnest recommendation that the surplus
revenues of the Government be prevented by the reduction of our customs
duties, and at the same time to emphasize a suggestion that in
accomplishing this purpose we may discharge a double duty to our people
by granting to them a measure of relief from tariff taxation in quarters
where it is most needed and from sources where it can be most fairly and
justly accorded.

Nor can the presentation made of such considerations be with any
degree of fairness regarded as evidence of unfriendliness toward our
manufacturing interests or of any lack of appreciation of their value
and importance.

These interests constitute a leading and most substantial element of
our national greatness and furnish the proud proof of our country's
progress. But if in the emergency that presses upon us our manufacturers
are asked to surrender something for the public good and to avert
disaster, their patriotism, as well as a grateful recognition of
advantages already afforded, should lead them to willing cooperation. No
demand is made that they shall forego all the benefits of governmental
regard; but they can not fail to be admonished of their duty, as well
as their enlightened self-interest and safety, when they are reminded
of the fact that financial panic and collapse, to which the present
condition tends, afford no greater shelter or protection to our
manufactures than to other important enterprises. Opportunity for safe,
careful, and deliberate reform is now offered; and none of us should
be unmindful of a time when an abused and irritated people, heedless of
those who have resisted timely and reasonable relief, may insist upon
a radical and sweeping rectification of their wrongs.

The difficulty attending a wise and fair revision of our tariff laws is
not underestimated. It will require on the part of the Congress great
labor and care, and especially a broad and national contemplation of the
subject and a patriotic disregard of such local and selfish claims as
are unreasonable and reckless of the welfare of the entire country.

Under our present laws more than 4,000 articles are subject to duty.
Many of these do not in any way compete with our own manufactures, and
many are hardly worth attention as subjects of revenue. A considerable
reduction can be made in the aggregate by adding them to the free list.
The taxation of luxuries presents no features of hardship; but the
necessaries of life used and consumed by all the people, the duty upon
which adds to the cost of living in every home, should be greatly
cheapened.

The radical reduction of the duties imposed upon raw material used in
manufactures, or its free importation, is of course an important factor
in any effort to reduce the price of these necessaries. It would not
only relieve them from the increased cost caused by the tariff on
such material, but the manufactured product being thus cheapened that
part of the tariff now laid upon such product, as a compensation to
our manufacturers for the present price of raw material, could be
accordingly modified. Such reduction or free importation would serve
besides to largely reduce the revenue. It is not apparent how such a
change can have any injurious effect upon our manufacturers. On the
contrary, it would appear to give them a better chance in foreign
markets with the manufacturers of other countries, who cheapen their
wares by free material. Thus our people might have the opportunity of
extending their sales beyond the limits of home consumption, saving them
from the depression, interruption in business, and loss caused by a
glutted domestic market and affording their employees more certain and
steady labor, with its resulting quiet and contentment.

The question thus imperatively presented for solution should be
approached in a spirit higher than partisanship and considered in the
light of that regard for patriotic duty which should characterize the
action of those intrusted with the weal of a confiding people. But the
obligation to declared party policy and principle is not wanting to
urge prompt and effective action. Both of the great political parties
now represented in the Government have by repeated and authoritative
declarations condemned the condition of our laws which permit the
collection from the people of unnecessary revenue, and have in the most
solemn manner promised its correction; and neither as citizens nor
partisans are our countrymen in a mood to condone the deliberate
violation of these pledges.

Our progress toward a wise conclusion will not be improved by dwelling
upon the theories of protection and free trade. This savors too much of
bandying epithets. It is a _condition_ which confronts us, not a
theory. Relief from this condition may involve a slight reduction
of the advantages which we award our home productions, but the entire
withdrawal of such advantages should not be contemplated. The question
of free trade is absolutely irrelevant, and the persistent claim made in
certain quarters that all the efforts to relieve the people from unjust
and unnecessary taxation are schemes of so-called free traders is
mischievous and far removed from any consideration for the public good.

The simple and plain duty which we owe the people is to reduce taxation
to the necessary expenses of an economical operation of the Government
and to restore to the business of the country the money which we hold in
the Treasury through the perversion of governmental powers. These things
can and should be done with safety to all our industries, without danger
to the opportunity for remunerative labor which our workingmen need, and
with benefit to them and all our people by cheapening their means of
subsistence and increasing the measure of their comforts.

The Constitution provides that the President "shall from time to time
give to the Congress information of the state of the Union." It has been
the custom of the Executive, in compliance with this provision, to
annually exhibit to the Congress, at the opening of its session, the
general condition of the country, and to detail with some particularity
the operations of the different Executive Departments. It would be
especially agreeable to follow this course at the present time and to
call attention to the valuable accomplishments of these Departments
during the last fiscal year; but I am so much impressed with the
paramount importance of the subject to which this communication has thus
far been devoted that I shall forego the addition of any other topic,
and only urge upon your immediate consideration the "state of the Union"
as shown in the present condition of our Treasury and our general fiscal
situation, upon which every element of our safety and prosperity
depends.

The reports of the heads of Departments, which will be submitted,
contain full and explicit information touching the transaction, of
the business intrusted to them and such recommendations relating to
legislation in the public interest as they deem advisable. I ask for
these reports and recommendations the deliberate examination and action
of the legislative branch of the Government.

There are other subjects not embraced in the departmental reports
demanding legislative consideration, and which I should be glad to
submit. Some of them, however, have been earnestly presented in previous
messages, and as to them I beg leave to repeat prior recommendations.

As the law makes no provision for any report from the Department of
State, a brief history of the transactions of that important Department,
together with other matters which it may hereafter be deemed essential
to commend to the attention of the Congress, may furnish the occasion
for a future communication.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

SPECIAL MESSAGES.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, December 14, 1887_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, with a view to its ratification, a final protocol,
signed at Paris on the 7th day of July, 1887, by the plenipotentiaries
of the United States and of the other powers parties to the convention
of March 14, 1884, for the protection of submarine cables, fixing the
1st day of May, 1888, as the date on which the said convention of March
14, 1884, shall take effect, provided that those of the contracting
Governments that have not adopted the measures provided for by article
12 of the said convention shall have conformed to that stipulation.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, December 14, 1887_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, with a view to its ratification, a convention
between the United States and the Kingdom of the Netherlands for the
extradition of criminals, signed at Washington on the 2d day of June,
1887.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 19, 1887_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State, in relation
to the invitation from Her Britannic Majesty to this Government to
participate in the international exhibition which is to be held at
Melbourne in 1888 to celebrate the centenary of the founding of New
South Wales, the first Australian colony.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 19, 1887_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State, in relation to
an invitation which has been extended to this Government to appoint a
delegate or delegates to the International Exposition of Labor to be
held in April, 1888, at Barcelona, Spain, and commend its suggestions to
the favorable attention of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, December 20, 1887_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication from the Secretary of State,
accompanied by the report of Mr. Edward Atkinson, of Massachusetts, who
was specially designated by me, under the provisions of successive acts
of Congress in that behalf, to visit the financial centers of Europe in
order to ascertain the feasibility of establishing by international
arrangement a fixity of rates between the two precious metals in free
coinage of both.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 4, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of 23d ultimo from the Secretary of
the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft of a bill to
amend section 2148 of the Revised Statutes of the United States,
relating to trespasses upon Indian lands.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 4, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of 23d ultimo from the Secretary of
the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft of a bill
granting a right of way to the Jamestown and Northern Railroad Company
through the Devils Lake Indian Reservation, in the Territory of Dakota.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 4, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 22d ultimo from the Secretary
of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft of a bill
to amend section 5388 of the Revised Statutes of the United States,
relating to timber trespasses upon the public lands, so as to include
Indian lands.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 4, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of 27th December, 1887, from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, draft
of a bill "to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to fix the amount
of compensation to be paid for the right of way for railroads through
Indian reservations in certain contingencies."

The matter is commended to the consideration of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 4, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of 22d ultimo from the Secretary of
the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft of a bill
to accept and ratify an agreement made with the Indians of the Yakima
Reservation, in Washington Territory, for the right of way of the
Northern Pacific Railroad across said reservation, etc.

The matter is presented for the consideration and action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 4, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of 24th ultimo from the Secretary of
the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft of a bill to
accept and ratify an agreement made by the Pi-Ute Indians, and granting
a right of way to the Carson and Colorado Railroad Company through the
Walker River Reservation, in Nevada.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 4, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 24th ultimo from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft
of a bill to accept and ratify an agreement made with the Sisseton and
Wahpeton Indians, and to grant a right of way for the Chicago, Milwaukee
and St. Paul Railway through the Lake Traverse Indian Reservation, in
Dakota.

The matter is presented for the consideration and action of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 5, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 23d ultimo from the Secretary
of the Interior, submitting a draft of a bill "to provide for the
reduction of the Round Valley Indian Reservation, in the State of
California, and for other purposes," with accompanying papers relating
thereto. The documents thus submitted exhibit extensive and entirely
unjustifiable encroachments upon lands set apart for Indian occupancy
and disclose a disregard of Indian rights so long continued that the
Government can not further temporize without positive dishonor. Efforts
to dislodge trespassers upon these lands have in some cases been
resisted upon the ground that certain moneys due from the Government for
improvements have not been paid. So far as this claim is well founded
the sum necessary to extinguish the same should be at once appropriated
and paid. In other cases the position of these intruders is one of
simple and barefaced wrongdoing, plainly questioning the inclination of
the Government to protect its dependent Indian wards and its ability to
maintain itself in the guaranty of such protection.

These intruders should forthwith feel the weight of the Government's
power. I earnestly commend the situation and the wrongs of the Indians
occupying the reservation named to the early attention of the Congress,
and ask for the bill herewith transmitted careful and prompt attention.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 5, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

In answer to the resolution of the Senate of the 28th of February last,
requesting the President of the United States to obtain certain
information from the Government of Great Britain relative to the
proceedings of the authorities of New Zealand concerning the titles to
lands in that colony claimed by American citizens, I transmit a report
of the Secretary of State, together with the accompanying documents.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, January 5, 1888_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, with a view to its ratification, a treaty of
friendship, commerce, and navigation between the United States and the
Republic of Peru, signed at Lima on the 31st day of August, 1887.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, January 5, 1888_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit, with a view to its ratification, an additional article,
signed October 22, 1887, to the treaty for the extradition of criminals
concluded October 11, 1870, between the United States and the Republic
of Guatemala, and, for the reasons suggested by the Secretary of State
in his report, request the return of the additional article to the
above-mentioned treaty signed February 4, 1887, and transmitted to the
Senate on February 24[*25] of the same year.[15]

GROVER CLEVELAND.

[Footnote 15: See p. 538.]

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 9, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of 30th of December, 1887, from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, two
additional reports from the commission appointed to conduct negotiations
with certain tribes and bands of Indians for reduction of reservations,
etc., under the provisions of the act of May 15, 1886 (24 U.S. Statutes
at Large, p. 44), providing therefor.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 9, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication from the Secretary of State,
relative to the requests which have been received from various maritime
associations and chambers of commerce of this country asking that
measures be taken to convoke an international conference at Washington
of representatives of all maritime nations to devise measures for the
greater security of life and property at sea.

I commend this important subject to the favorable consideration of
Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 9, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State, recommending
that this Government take action to approve the resolutions of the
Washington International Meridian Conference, held in October, 1884, in
favor of fixing a prime meridian and a universal day, and to invite the
powers with whom this country has diplomatic relations to accede to the
same.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 9, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State, relative to the
legislation required to carry into effect the international convention
of March 14, 1884, for the protection of submarine cables, to which this
country is a party.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 12, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State, in relation to
the invitation from the Government of France to this Government to
participate in the international exhibition which is to be held at Paris
in 1889.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, January 16, 1888_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, in response to a resolution of the Senate of the
21st ultimo, a report of the Secretary of State touching correspondence
of this Government with that of Hawaii, or of any foreign country,
concerning any change or proposed change in the Government of the
Hawaiian Islands.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 17, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

On the 3d day of March last an act was passed authorizing the
appointment of three commissioners who should investigate the affairs of
such railroads as have received aid from the United States Government.
Among other things, the contemplated investigation included a history of
the construction of these roads, their relations and indebtedness to the
Government, and the question whether in the interest of the United
States any extension of the time for the performance of the obligations
of said roads to the Government should be granted; and if so, the said
commissioners were directed to submit a scheme for such extension.

The commissioners were further directed by said act to report in full to
the President upon all the matters submitted to them, and he was by said
act required to forward said report to Congress with such
recommendations or comments as he should see fit to make in the
premises.

The commissioners immediately after their selection entered upon the
discharge of their duties, and have prosecuted their inquiries with
commendable industry, intelligence, and thoroughness. A large amount of
testimony has been taken, and all the facts have been developed which
appear to be necessary for the consideration of the questions arising
from the condition of these aided railroads and their relations to the
Government.

The commissioners have, however, been unable to agree upon the manner in
which these railroads should be treated respecting their indebtedness to
the United States, or to unite upon the plan best calculated to secure
the payment of such indebtedness.

This disagreement has resulted in the preparation of two reports, both
of which are herewith submitted to the Congress.

These reports exhibit such transactions and schemes connected with the
construction of the aided roads and their management, and suggest the
invention of such devices on the part of those having them in charge,
for the apparent purpose of defeating any chance for the Government's
reimbursement, that any adjustment or plan of settlement should be
predicated upon the substantial interests of the Government rather than
any forbearance or generosity deserved by the companies.

The wide publication which has already been given to the substance of
the commissioners' reports obviates the necessity of detailing in this
communication the facts found upon the investigation.

The majority report, while condemning the methods adopted by those who
formerly had charge of the Union Pacific Railroad, declares that since
its present management was inaugurated, in 1884, its affairs have been
fairly and prudently conducted, and that the present administration "has
devoted itself honestly and intelligently to the herculean task of
rescuing the Union Pacific Railway from the insolvency which seriously
threatened it at the inception of its work;" that it "has devoted
itself, by rigid economy, by intelligent management, and by an
application of every dollar of the earning capacity of the system to its
improvement and betterment, to place that company on a sound and
enduring financial foundation."

The condition of the present management of the Union Pacific Company has
an important bearing upon its ability to comply with the terms of any
settlement of its indebtedness which may be offered by the Government.

The majority of the commission are in favor of an extension of the time
for the payment of the Government indebtedness of these companies, upon
certain conditions; but the chairman of the commission, presenting the
minority report, recommends, both upon principle and policy, the
institution of proceedings for the forfeiture of the charters of the
corporations and the winding up of their affairs.

I have been furnished with a statement or argument in defense of the
transactions connected with the construction of the Central Pacific road
and its branch lines, from which it may not be amiss to quote for the
purpose of showing how some of the operations of the directors of such
road, strongly condemned by the commissioners, are defended by the
directors themselves. After speaking of a contract for the construction
of one of these branch lines by a corporation called the Contract and
Finance Company, owned by certain directors of the Central Pacific
Railroad, this language is used:

It may be said of this contract, as of many others that were let to the
different construction companies in which the directors of the Central
Pacific have been stockholders, that they built the road with the moneys
furnished by themselves and had the road for their outlay. In other
words, they paid to the construction company the bonds and stock of the
railroad so constructed, and waited until such time as they could
develop sufficient business on the road built to induce the public to
buy the bonds or the stock. If the country through which the railroad
ran developed sufficient business, then the project was a success; if it
did not, then the operation was a loss. These gentlemen took all the
responsibility; any loss occurring was necessarily theirs, and of right
the profit belonged to them.

But it is said that they violated a well-known rule of equity in dealing
with themselves; that they were trustees, and that they were
representing both sides of the contract.

The answer is that they did not find anybody else to deal with. They
could not find anyone who would take the chances of building a road
through what was then an almost uninhabited country and accept the bonds
and stock of the road, in payment. And when it is said that they were
trustees, if they did occupy such relation it was merely technical, for
they represented only their own interests on both sides, there being no
one else concerned in the transaction. They became the incorporators of
the company that was to build the road, subscribed for its stock, and
were the only subscribers; therefore it is difficult to see how anyone
was wronged by their action. The rule of equity invoked, which has its
origin in the injunction "No man can serve two masters," certainly did
not apply to them, because they were acting in their own interests and
were not charged with the duty of caring for others' rights, there being
no other persons interested in the subject-matter.

In view of this statement and the facts developed in the commissioners'
reports, it seems proper to recall the grants and benefits derived from
the General Government by both the Union and Central Pacific companies
for the purpose of aiding the construction of their roads.

By an act passed in 1862 it was provided that there should be advanced
to said companies by the United States, to aid in such construction, the
bonds of the Government amounting to $16,000 for every mile constructed,
as often as a section of 40 miles of said roads should be built; that
there should also be granted to said companies, upon the completion of
every said section of 40 miles of road, five entire sections of public
land for each mile so built; that the entire charges earned by said
roads on account of transportation and service for the Government should
be applied to the reimbursement of the bonds advanced by the United
States and the interest thereon, and that to secure the repayment of
the bonds so advanced, and interest, the issue and delivery to said
companies of said bonds should constitute a first mortgage on the whole
line of their roads and on their rolling stock, fixtures, and property
of every kind and description.

The liberal donations, advances, and privileges provided for in this law
were granted by the General Government for the purpose of securing the
construction of these roads, which would complete the connection between
our eastern and western coasts; and they were based upon a consideration
of the public benefits which would accrue to the entire country from
such consideration.

But the projectors of these roads were not content, and the sentiment
which then seemed to pervade the Congress had not reached the limit
of its generosity. Two years after the passage of this law it was
supplemented and amended in various important particulars in favor of
these companies by an act which provided, among other things, that the
bonds, at the rate already specified, should be delivered upon the
completion of sections of 20 miles in length instead of 40; that the
lands to be conveyed to said companies on the completion of each section
of said road should be ten sections per mile instead of five; that only
half of the charges for transportation and service due from time to time
from the United States should be retained and applied to the advances
made to said companies by the Government, thus obliging immediate
payment to its debtor of the other half of said charges, and that the
lien of the United States to secure the reimbursement of the amount
advanced to said companies in bonds, which lien was declared by the law
of 1862 to constitute a first mortgage upon all the property of said
companies, should become a junior lien and be subordinated to a mortgage
which the companies were by the amendatory act authorized to execute
to secure bonds which they might from time to time issue in sums not
exceeding the amount of the United States bonds which should be advanced
to them.

The immense advantages to the companies of this amendatory act are
apparent; and in these days we may well wonder that even the anticipated
public importance of the construction of these roads induced what must
now appear to be a rather reckless and unguarded appropriation of the
public funds and the public domain.

Under the operation of these laws the principal of the bonds which
have been advanced is $64,023,512, as given in the reports of the
commissioners; the interest to November 1, 1887, is calculated
to be $76,024,206.58, making an aggregate at the date named of
$140,047,718.58. The interest calculated to the maturity of the bonds
added to the principal produces an aggregate of $178,884,759.50.
Against these amounts there has been repaid by the companies the sum
of $30,955,039.61.

It is almost needless to state that the companies have availed
themselves to the utmost extent of the permission given them to issue
their bonds and to mortgage their property to secure the payment of the
same, by an incumbrance having preference to the Government's lien and
precisely equal to it in amount.

It will be seen that there was available for the building of each mile
of these roads $16,000 of United States bonds, due in thirty years, with
6 per cent interest; $16,000 in bonds of the companies, secured by a
first mortgage on all their property, and ten sections of Government
land, to say nothing of the stock of the companies.

When the relations created between the Government and these companies by
the legislation referred to is considered, it is astonishing that the
claim should be made that the directors of these roads owed no duty
except to themselves in their construction; that they need regard no
interests but their own, and that they were justified in contracting
with themselves and making such bargains as resulted in conveying
to their pockets all the assets of the companies. As a lienor the
Government was vitally interested in the amount of the mortgage to which
its security had been subordinated, and it had the right to insist that
none of the bonds secured by this prior mortgage should be issued
fraudulently or for the purpose of division among these stockholders
without consideration.

The doctrine of complete independence on the part of the directors of
these companies and their freedom from any obligation to care for other
interests than their own in the construction of these roads seems to
have developed the natural consequences of its application, portrayed as
follows in the majority report of the commissioners:

The result is that those who have controlled and directed the
construction and development of these companies have become possessed
of their surplus assets through issues of bonds, stocks, and payment
of dividends voted by themselves, while the great creditor, the United
States, finds itself substantially without adequate security for the
repayment of its loans.

The laws enacted in aid of these roads, while they illustrated a profuse
liberality and a generous surrender of the Government's advantages,
which it is hoped experience has corrected, were nevertheless passed
upon the theory that the roads should be constructed according to the
common rules of business, fairness, and duty, and that their value and
their ability to pay their debts should not be impaired by unfair
manipulations; and when the Government subordinated its lien to another
it was in the expectation that the prior lien would represent in its
amount only such bonds as should be necessarily issued by the companies
for the construction of their roads at fair prices, agreed upon in an
honest way between real and substantial parties. For the purpose of
saving or improving the security afforded by its junior lien the
Government should have the right now to purge this paramount lien of all
that is fraudulent, fictitious, or unconscionable. If the transfer to
innocent hands of bonds of this character secured by such first mortgage
prevents their cancellation, it might be well to seek a remedy against
those who issued and transferred them. If legislation is needed to
secure such a remedy, the Congress can readily supply it.

I desire to call attention also to the fact that if all that was to be
done on the part of the Government to fully vest in these companies the
grants and advantages contemplated by the acts passed in their interest
has not yet been perfected, and if the failure of such companies to
perform in good faith their part of the contract justifies such a
course, the power rests with the Congress to withhold further
performance on the part of the Government. If donated lands are not yet
granted to these companies, and if their violation of contract and of
duty are such as in justice and morals forfeit their rights to such
lands, Congressional action should intervene to prevent further
consummation. Executive power must be exercised according to existing
laws, and Executive discretion is probably not broad enough to reach
such difficulties.

The California and Oregon Railroad is now a part of the Central Pacific
system, and is a land-grant road. Its construction has been carried on
with the same features and incidents which have characterized the other
constructions of this system, as is made apparent on pages 78, 79, and
80 of the report of the majority of the commissioners. I have in my
hands for approval the report of the commissioners appointed to examine
two completed sections of this road. Upon such approval the company or
the Central Pacific Company will be entitled to patents for a large
quantity of public lands. I especially commend to the attention of
Congress this condition of affairs, in order that it may determine
whether or not it should intervene to save these lands for settlers,
if such a course is justifiable.

It is quite time that the troublesome complications surrounding this
entire subject, which has been transmitted to us as a legacy from former
days, should be adjusted and settled.

No one, I think, expects that these railroad companies will be able to
pay their immense indebtedness to the Government at its maturity.

Any proceeding or arrangement that would result now, or at any other
time, in putting these roads, or any portion of them, in the possession
and control of the Government is, in my opinion, to be rejected,
certainly as long as there is the least chance for indemnification
through any other means.

I suppose we are hardly justified in indulging the irritation and
indignation naturally arising from a contemplation of malfeasance to
such an extent as to lead to the useless destruction of these roads or
loss of the advances made by the Government. I believe that our efforts
should be in a more practical direction, and should tend, with no
condonation of wrongdoing, to the collection by the Government, on
behalf of the people, of the public money now in jeopardy.

While the plan presented by a majority of the commission appears to be
well devised and gives at least partial promise of the results sought,
the fact will not escape attention that its success depends upon its
acceptance by the companies and their ability to perform its conditions
after acceptance. It is exceedingly important that any adjustment now
made should be final and effective. These considerations suggest the
possibility that the remedy proposed in the majority report might well
be applied to a part only of these aided railroad companies.

The settlement and determination of the questions involved are
peculiarly within the province of the Congress. The subject has been
made quite a familiar one by Congressional discussion. This is now
supplemented in a valuable manner by the facts presented in the reports
herewith submitted.

The public interest urges prompt and efficient action.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 23, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith the first report of the board of control created by
the act of Congress approved August 4, 1886 (24 U.S. Statutes at Large,
p. 252), for the management of an industrial home in the Territory of
Utah, containing a statement of the action of the board in establishing
the home and an account of expenditures from the appropriation made for
that purpose in the act above mentioned.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, January 30, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

I transmit herewith, in response to the resolution of the Senate of the
21st of December last, a report from the Secretary of State, in relation
to Midway Island.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, February 7, 1888_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit, with a view to its ratification, a declaration, signed
December 1, 1886, and March 23, 1887, for Germany, by the delegates of
the powers signatories of the convention of March 14, 1884, for the
protection of submarine cables, defining the sense of articles 2 and 4
of the said convention.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 7, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of 4th instant from the Secretary of
the Interior, submitting, with other papers, a draft of a bill to accept
and ratify an agreement made with the Shoshone and Bannock Indians for
the surrender and relinquishment to the United States of a portion of
the Fort Hall Reservation, in the Territory of Idaho, for the purposes
of a town site, and for the grant of a right of way through said
reservation to the Utah and Northern Railway Company, and for other
purposes.

The matter is presented for the consideration of the Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 20, 1888_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith a report furnished by the Secretary of State in
response to a resolution of the Senate of the 2d instant, making inquiry
respecting the present condition of the _Virginius_ indemnity fund.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 20, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith and commend to your favorable consideration a report
from the Secretary of State, in relation to an invitation which this
Government has received from the Belgian Government to participate in an
international exhibition of sciences and industry which will open at
Brussels in the month of May next.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 20, 1888_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In my annual message transmitted to the Congress in December, 1886, it
was stated that negotiations were then pending for the settlement of the
questions growing out of the rights claimed by American fishermen in
British North American waters.

As a result of such negotiations a treaty has been agreed upon between
Her Britannic Majesty and the United States, concluded and signed in
this capital, under my direction and authority, on the 15th of February
instant, and which I now have the honor to submit to the Senate with the
recommendation that it shall receive the consent of that body, as
provided in the Constitution, in order that the ratifications thereof
may be duly exchanged and the treaty be carried into effect.

Shortly after Congress had adjourned in March last, and in continuation
of my efforts to arrive at such an agreement between the Governments of
Great Britain and the United States as would secure to the citizens of
the respective countries the unmolested enjoyment of their just rights
under existing treaties and international comity in the territorial
waters of Canada and of Newfoundland, I availed myself of opportune
occurrences indicative of a desire to make without delay an amicable and
final settlement of a long-standing controversy, productive of much
irritation and misunderstanding between the two nations, to send through
our minister in London proposals that a conference should take place on
the subject at this capital.

The experience of the past two years had demonstrated the dilatory and
unsatisfactory consequences of our indirect transaction of business
through the foreign office in London, in which the views and wishes of
the government of the Dominion of Canada were practically predominant,
but were only to find expression at second hand.

To obviate this inconvenience and obstruction to prompt and well-defined
settlement, it was considered advisable that the negotiations should be
conducted in this city and that the interests of Canada and Newfoundland
should be directly represented therein.

The terms of reference having been duly agreed upon between the two
Governments and the conference arranged to be held here, by virtue of
the power in me vested by the Constitution I duly authorized Thomas F.
Bayard, the Secretary of State of the United States, William L. Putnam,
a citizen of the State of Maine, and James B. Angell, a citizen of the
State of Michigan, for and in the name of the United States, to meet and
confer with the plenipotentiaries representing the Government of Her
Britannic Majesty, for the purpose of considering and adjusting in a
friendly spirit all or any questions relating to rights of fishery in
the seas adjacent to British North America and Newfoundland which were
in dispute between the Government of the United States and that of Her
Britannic Majesty, and jointly and severally to conclude and sign any
treaty or treaties touching the premises; and I herewith transmit for
your information full copies of the power so given by me.

In execution of the powers so conveyed the said Thomas F. Bayard,
William L. Putnam, and James B. Angell, in the month of November last,
met in this city the plenipotentiaries of Her Britannic Majesty and
proceeded in the negotiation of a treaty as above authorized. After many
conferences and protracted efforts an agreement has at length been
arrived at, which is embodied in the treaty which I now lay before you.

The treaty meets my approval, because I believe that it supplies a
satisfactory, practical, and final adjustment, upon a basis honorable
and just to both parties, of the difficult and vexed question to which
it relates.

A review of the history of this question will show that all former
attempts to arrive at a common interpretation, satisfactory to both
parties, of the first article of the treaty of October 20, 1818, have
been unsuccessful, and with the lapse of time the difficulty and
obscurity have only increased.

The negotiations in 1854 and again in 1871 ended in both cases in
temporary reciprocal arrangements of the tariffs of Canada and
Newfoundland and of the United States, and the payment of a money award
by the United States, under which the real questions in difference
remained unsettled, in abeyance, and ready to present themselves anew
just so soon as the conventional arrangements were abrogated.

The situation, therefore, remained unimproved by the results of the
treaty of 1871, and a grave condition of affairs, presenting almost
identically the same features and causes of complaint by the United
States against Canadian action and British default in its correction,
confronted us in May, 1886, and has continued until the present time.

The greater part of the correspondence which has taken place between the
two Governments has heretofore been communicated to Congress, and at as
early a day as possible I shall transmit the remaining portion to this
date, accompanying it with the joint protocols of the conferences which
resulted in the conclusion of the treaty now submitted to you.

You will thus be fully possessed of the record and history of the case
since the termination on June 30, 1885, of the fishery articles of the
treaty of Washington of 1871, whereby we were relegated to the
provisions of the treaty of October 20, 1818.

As the documents and papers referred to will supply full information of
the positions taken under my Administration by the representatives of
the United States, as well as those occupied by the representatives of
the Government of Great Britain, it is not considered necessary or
expedient to repeat them in this message. But I believe the treaty will
be found to contain a just, honorable, and therefore satisfactory
solution of the difficulties which have clouded our relations with our
neighbors on our northern border.

Especially satisfactory do I believe the proposed arrangement will be
found by those of our citizens who are engaged in the open-sea fisheries
adjacent to the Canadian coast, and resorting to those ports and harbors
under treaty provisions and rules of international law.

The proposed delimitation of the lines of the exclusive fisheries from
the common fisheries will give certainty and security as to the area
of their legitimate field. The headland theory of imaginary lines is
abandoned by Great Britain, and the specification in the treaty of
certain named bays especially provided for gives satisfaction to the
inhabitants of the shores, without subtracting materially from the value
or convenience of the fishery rights of Americans.

The uninterrupted navigation of the Strait of Canso is expressly and for
the first time affirmed, and the four purposes for which our fishermen
under the treaty of 1818 were allowed to enter the bays and harbors of
Canada and Newfoundland within the belt of 3 marine miles are placed
under a fair and liberal construction, and their enjoyment secured
without such conditions and restrictions as in the past have embarrassed
and obstructed them so seriously.

The enforcement of penalties for unlawfully fishing or preparing to fish
within the inshore and exclusive waters of Canada and Newfoundland is to
be accomplished under safeguards against oppressive or arbitrary action,
thus protecting the defendant fishermen from punishment in advance of
trial, delays, and inconvenience and unnecessary expense.

The history of events in the last two years shows that no feature of
Canadian administration was more harassing and injurious than the
compulsion upon our fishing vessels to make formal entry and clearance
on every occasion of temporarily seeking shelter in Canadian ports and
harbors.

Such inconvenience is provided against in the proposed treaty, and this
most frequent and just cause of complaint is removed.

The articles permitting our fishermen to obtain provisions and the
ordinary supplies of trading vessels on their homeward voyages, and
under which they are accorded the further and even more important
privilege on all occasions of purchasing such casual or needful
provisions and supplies as are ordinarily granted to trading vessels,
are of great importance and value.

The licenses, which are to be granted without charge and on application,
in order to enable our fishermen to enjoy these privileges, are
reasonable and proper checks in the hands of the local authorities to
identify the recipients and prevent abuse, and can form no impediment to
those who intend to use them fairly.

The hospitality secured for our vessels in all cases of actual distress,
with liberty to unload and sell and transship their cargoes, is full and
liberal.

These provisions will secure the substantial enjoyment of the treaty
rights for our fishermen under the treaty of 1818, for which contention
has been steadily made in the correspondence of the Department of State
and our minister at London and by the American negotiators of the
present treaty.

The right of our fishermen under the treaty of 1818 did not extend to
the procurement of distinctive fishery supplies in Canadian ports and
harbors, and one item supposed to be essential--to wit, bait--was
plainly denied them by the explicit and definite words of the treaty of
1818, emphasized by the course of the negotiation and express decisions
which preceded the conclusion of that treaty.

The treaty now submitted contains no provision affecting tariff duties,
and, independently of the position assumed upon the part of the United
States that no alteration in our tariff or other domestic legislation
could be made as the price or consideration of obtaining the rights of
our citizens secured by treaty, it was considered more expedient to
allow any change in the revenue laws of the United States to be made by
the ordinary exercise of legislative will and in the promotion of the
public interests. Therefore the addition to the free list of fish, fish
oil, whale and seal oil, etc., recited in the last article of the
treaty, is wholly left to the action of Congress; and in connection
therewith the Canadian and Newfoundland right to regulate sales of bait
and other fishing supplies within their own jurisdiction is recognized,
and the right of our fishermen to freely purchase these things is made
contingent by this treaty upon the action of Congress in the
modification of our tariff laws.

Our social and commercial intercourse with those populations who have
been placed upon our borders and made forever our neighbors is made
apparent by a list of United States common carriers, marine and inland,
connecting their lines with Canada, which was returned by the Secretary
of the Treasury to the Senate on the 7th day of February, 1888, in
answer to a resolution of that body; and this is instructive as to the
great volume of mutually profitable interchanges which has come into
existence during the last half century.

This intercourse is still but partially developed, and if the amicable
enterprise and wholesome rivalry between the two populations be not
obstructed the promise of the future is full of the fruits of an
unbounded prosperity on both sides of the border.

The treaty now submitted to you has been framed in a spirit of liberal
equity and reciprocal benefits, in the conviction that mutual advantage
and convenience are the only permanent foundation of peace and
friendship between States, and that with the adoption of the agreement
now placed before the Senate a beneficial and satisfactory intercourse
between the two countries will be established so as to secure perpetual
peace and harmony.

In connection with the treaty herewith submitted I deem it also my duty
to transmit to the Senate a written offer or arrangement, in the nature
of a _modus vivendi_, tendered after the conclusion of the treaty
on the part of the British plenipotentiaries, to secure kindly and
peaceful relations during the period that may be required for the
consideration of the treaty by the respective Governments and for the
enactment of the necessary legislation to carry its provisions into
effect if approved.

This paper, freely and on their own motion signed by the British
conferees, not only extends advantages to our fishermen pending the
ratification of the treaty, but appears to have been dictated by a
friendly and amicable spirit.

I am given to understand that the other Governments concerned in this
treaty will within a few days, in accordance with their methods of
conducting public business, submit said treaty to their respective
legislatures, when it will be at once published to the world. In view of
such action it appears to be advisable that by publication here early
and full knowledge of all that has been done in the premises should be
afforded to our people.

It would also seem to be useful to inform the popular mind concerning
the history of the long-continued disputes growing out of the subject
embraced in the treaty and to satisfy the public interests touching the
same, as well as to acquaint our people with the present status of the
questions involved, and to give them the exact terms of the proposed
adjustment, in place of the exaggerated and imaginative statements which
will otherwise reach them.

I therefore beg leave respectfully to suggest that said treaty and all
such correspondence, messages, and documents relating to the same as may
be deemed important to accomplish those purposes be at once made public
by the order of your honorable body.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 20, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State, relative to an
invitation from the Imperial German Government to the Government of the
United States to become a party to the International Geodetic
Association.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 27, 1888_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith a report furnished by the Secretary of State in
response to a resolution of the Senate of January 12, 1888, making
various inquiries respecting the awards of the late Spanish and American
Claims Commission and the disposition of moneys received in satisfaction
thereof.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 5, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of
America_:

I transmit herewith, for the information and consideration of Congress,
a report of the Secretary of State, with accompanying correspondence,
touching the action of the Government of Venezuela in conveying to that
country for interment the remains of the distinguished Venezuelan
soldier and statesman, General Jose Antonio Paez, and take pleasure in
expressing my concurrence in the suggestion therein referred to, that
the employment of a national vessel of war for the transportation of
General Paez's remains from New York to La Guayra be authorized and
provided for by Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 5, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State, relative to an
invitation which the Royal Bavarian Government has extended to this
Government to participate in the Third International Exhibition of the
Fine Arts, which is to be held at Munich, Bavaria, during the present
year.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 5, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I herewith transmit a letter from the Secretary of State, accompanied by
documents and correspondence, in relation to the recent negotiations
with Great Britain concerning American fishing interests in British
North American waters.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 5, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State, with its
inclosures, in response to the resolution of the Senate of the 21st of
December, 1887, and the 16th of January, 1888, touching the awards of
the late Mexican Claims Commission, and especially those in favor of
Benjamin Weil and La Abra Silver Mining Company.

It will be seen that the report concludes with a suggestion that these
claims be referred to the Court of Claims, or such other court as may be
deemed proper, in order that the charges of fraud made in relation to
said claims may be fully investigated.

If for any reason this proceeding be considered inadvisable, I
respectfully ask that some final and definite action be taken directing
the executive department of the Government what course to pursue in the
premises.

In view of the long delay that has already occurred in these cases, it
would seem but just to all parties concerned that the Congress should
speedily signify its final judgment upon the awards referred to and make
the direction contemplated by the act of 1878, in default of which the
money now on hand applicable to such awards now remains undistributed.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 7, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

In compliance with the resolution of the Senate of the 24th of February,
1888, calling for information as to whether the Government of France has
prohibited the importation into the country of any American products,
and, if so, what products of the United States are affected thereby, and
also as to whether any correspondence upon said subject has passed
between the Governments of the United States and France, I transmit
herewith a report from the Secretary of State on the subject, with the
accompanying correspondence.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 8, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

A copy of the following resolution, passed by the Senate on the 1st day
of the present month, was delivered to me on the 3d instant:

_Resolved_, That in view of the difficulties and embarrassments
that have attended the regulation of the immigration of Chinese laborers
to the United States under the limitations of our treaties with China,
the President of the United States be requested to negotiate a treaty
with the Emperor of China containing a provision that no Chinese laborer
shall enter the United States.

The importance of the subject referred to in this resolution has by no
means been overlooked by the executive branch of the Government, charged
under the Constitution with the formulation of treaties with foreign
countries.

Negotiation with the Emperor of China for a treaty such as is mentioned
in said resolution was commenced many months ago and has been since
continued. The progress of the negotiation thus inaugurated has
heretofore been freely communicated to such members of the Senate and of
its Committee on Foreign Relations as sought information concerning the
same. It is, however, with much gratification that I deem myself now
justified in expressing to the Senate, in response to its resolution,
the hope and expectation that a treaty will soon be concluded concerning
the immigration of Chinese laborers which will meet the wants of our
people and the approbation of the body to which it will be submitted for
confirmation.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, March 12, 1888_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, with a view to its ratification, a treaty between
the United States of America and Zanzibar, concluded July 3, 1886,
enlarging and defining the stipulations of the treaty of September 21,
1833, between the United States of America and His Majesty Seyed Syed
bin Sultan of Muscat and Sovereign of Zanzibar, which treaty has
continued in force as to Zanzibar and its dependencies after the
separation of Zanzibar from Muscat, and has been accepted, ratified,
and confirmed by the Sultan of Zanzibar on October 20, 1879.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, March 16, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

I have the honor to transmit herewith and recommend for your
constitutional approval a convention signed and concluded in this city
on the 12th instant, under my direction, between the United States and
China, for the exclusion hereafter of Chinese laborers from coming into
this country.

This treaty is accompanied by a letter from the Secretary of State in
recital of its provisions and explanatory of the reasons for its
negotiation, and with it are transmitted sundry documents giving the
history of events connected with the presence and treatment of Chinese
subjects in the United States.

In view of the public interest which has for a long time been manifested
in relation to the question of Chinese immigration, it would seem
advisable that the full text of this treaty should be made public, and I
respectfully recommend that an order to that effect be made by your
honorable body.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 16, 1888_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I herewith transmit, in compliance with the resolution of the Senate of
the 16th ultimo, a report from the Secretary of State, accompanied by
certain correspondence in regard to the Mexican _zona libre_.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 20, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 13th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, with accompanying papers, and submitting the
draft of a proposed bill to forfeit lands granted to the State of Oregon
for the construction of certain wagon roads, and for other purposes.

The presentation of facts by the Secretary of the Interior herewith
transmitted is the result of an examination made under his direction,
which has developed, as it seems to me, the most unblushing frauds upon
the Government, which, if remaining unchallenged, will divert several
hundred thousand acres of land from the public domain and from the reach
of honest settlers to those who have attempted to prevent and prostitute
the beneficent designs of the Government. The Government sought by the
promise of generous donations of land to promote the building of wagon
roads for public convenience and for the purpose of encouraging
settlement upon the public lands. The roads have not been built, and yet
an attempt is made to claim the lands under a title which depends for
its validity entirely upon the construction of these roads.

The evidence which has been collected by the Secretary of the Interior,
plainly establishing this attempt to defraud the Government and exclude
the settlers who are willing to avail themselves of the liberal policy
adopted for the settlement of the public lands, is herewith submitted
to the Congress, with the recommendation that the bill which has been
prepared, and which is herewith transmitted, may become a law, and with
the earnest hope that the opportunity thus presented to demonstrate a
sincere desire to preserve the public domain for settlers and to
frustrate unlawful attempts to appropriate the same may not be
neglected.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, March 22, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

I transmit herewith, for your advice and consent to the ratification
thereof, a convention between the United States and Venezuela, signed
the 15th instant, supplementary to the convention between the same
powers for the settlement of claims signed December 5, 1885.

I transmit also a report of the Secretary of State thereon and copies of
correspondence had with the diplomatic representative of Venezuela at
this capital in relation thereto.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 22, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

In response to the resolution adopted by your honorable body on the 16th
instant, as follows--

_Resolved_, That the President of the United States be requested,
if in his judgment not incompatible with the public interest, to
transmit to the Senate copies of the minutes and daily protocols of
the meetings of the commissioners who negotiated the treaty with Great
Britain submitted by the President to the Senate on the 20th of
February, 1888--

I submit herewith a report of the Secretary of State, which I hope will
satisfactorily meet the request for information embraced in said
resolution.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _March 27, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report from Hon. George H. Pendleton, our minister
to Germany, dated January 30, 1888, from which it appears that
trichinosis prevails to a considerable extent in certain parts of
Germany and that a number of persons have already died from the effects
of eating the meat of diseased hogs which were grown in that country.

I also transmit a report from our consul at Marseilles, dated February
4, 1888, representing that for a number of months a highly contagious
and fatal disease has prevailed among the swine of a large section of
France, which disease is thought to be very similar to hog cholera by
the Commissioner of Agriculture, whose statement is herewith submitted.

It is extremely doubtful if the law passed April 29, 1878, entitled "An
act to prevent the introduction of contagious or infectious diseases
into the United States," meets cases of this description.

In view of the danger to the health and lives of our people and the
contagion that may be spread to the live stock of the country by the
importation of swine or hog products from either of the countries named,
I recommend the passage of a law prohibiting such importation, with
proper regulations as to the continuance of such prohibition, and
permitting such further prohibitions in other future cases of a like
character as safety and prudence may require.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, April 2, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State, with its
inclosures, in response to the resolution of the House of
Representatives of the 8th ultimo, in relation to affairs in Samoa.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

[A similar message was sent to the Senate in answer to a resolution of
that body of December 21, 1887.]

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 5, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 3d instant from the Secretary
of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft of a bill
to provide for the revocation of the withdrawal of lands made for the
benefit of certain railroads, and for other purposes.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 9, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication of the 6th instant from the
Secretary of the Interior, submitting, with accompanying papers, a draft
of proposed legislation, prepared in the Office of Indian Affairs, to
authorize the use of certain funds therein specified in the purchase of
lands in the State of Florida upon which to locate the Seminole Indians
in that State.

The matter is presented for the favorable consideration of Congress.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 12, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith and commend to your favorable consideration a letter
from the Secretary of State, outlining a plan for publishing the
important collections of historical manuscripts now deposited in the
Department of State.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 12, 1888_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In response to the resolution of the Senate dated March 8, calling for
the correspondence respecting the seizure of the American steamships
_Hero_, _San Fernando_, and _Nutrias_, the property of the Venezuela
Steam Transportation Company of New York, and the imprisonment of their
officers by the authorities in Venezuela, I transmit herewith the report
of the Secretary of State on the subject, together with the accompanying
documents.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 18, 1888_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In answer to the resolution of the Senate of the 5th of March last,
calling upon the Secretary of State for copies of the correspondence
relating to the claim of William H. Frear against the Government of
France for money due him for provisions furnished in March, 1871, for
revictualing Paris, I transmit a report from that officer, together with
the correspondence called for by the resolution.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, April 23, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State and
accompanying papers, in response to the resolution of the Senate of the
25th of January last, requesting correspondence and other information in
relation to the claims convention of December 5, 1885, between the
United States and Venezuela.

This resolution was adopted in open session; but in view of the change
of circumstances since its adoption, by the signature on the 15th ultimo
of the convention which I transmitted to the Senate with my message of
the 22d ultimo,[16] and which is now under consideration there in
executive session, I transmit the accompanying report as a confidential
document also.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

[Footnote 16: See p. 611.]

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, May 8, 1888_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I retransmit herewith a convention for the surrender of criminals
between the United States and the Republic of Guatemala, concluded
October 11, 1870, and ratified by the President of the United States,
as amended by the Senate, on April 11, 1871, calling attention to the
accompanying report of the Secretary of State as explanatory of my
action.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 8, 1888_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In answer to the resolution of the Senate of April 12, directing
the Secretary of State to transmit to the Senate a copy of the
correspondence in his Department in regard to the case of John Fruchier,
an American citizen who has been impressed into the military service of
France, I transmit herewith a report in relation thereto from the
Secretary of State, together with the accompanying papers, not
considering their communication to be incompatible with the public
interests.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, May 14, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State, relative to
the claim of Mr. Rudolph Lobsiger, a Swiss citizen, against the United
States, and recommend that provision be made by law for referring the
matter to the Court of Claims for examination on its merits.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, May 14, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 15, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In compliance with a resolution originating in the House of
Representatives and concurred in by the Senate, I return herewith the
bill (H.R. 2699) entitled "An act for the relief of the heirs of the
late Solomon Spitzer."

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, June 14, 1888_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, in response to a resolution of the Senate of
the 11th instant, a report of the Secretary of State, to whom said
resolution was addressed, together with a copy of the letter addressed
by William H. Seward, Secretary of State, to the governors of certain
States of the Union, under date of October 14, 1861, as described in
said resolution.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _June 26, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State, accompanied
with selected correspondence relating to foreign affairs for the year
1887.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, July 5, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

I transmit herewith, with a view to its ratification, a convention for
the extradition of criminals between the United States of America and
the Republic of Colombia, signed at Bogota on the 7th of May, 1888, and
I at the same time call attention to the accompanying report of the
Secretary of State, suggesting certain amendments to the convention.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, July 18, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

I transmit, with a view to its ratification, a convention between the
United States and Mexico, signed July 11, 1888, regulating the crossing
and recrossing of the frontier between the two countries by pasturing
estray or stolen cattle, and I at the same time call attention to the
report of the Secretary of State and accompanying papers, relating to
the convention in question.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 18, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication from the Secretary of State,
submitting a series of reports on taxation, prepared by the consular
officers of the United States.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 18, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of State, accompanying
the annual reports of the consuls of the United States on the trade and
industries of foreign countries.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 18, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a letter from the Acting Secretary of State and
accompanying documents, being reports from the consuls of the United
States on the production of and trade in coffee among the Central and
South American States.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 23, 1888_.

_To the Congress of the United States_:

Pursuant to the second section of chapter 27 of the laws of 1883,
entitled "An act to regulate and improve the civil service of the United
States," I herewith transmit the fourth report of the United States
Civil Service Commission, covering the period between the 16th day of
January, 1886, and the 1st day of July, 1887.

While this report has especial reference to the operations of the
Commission during the period above mentioned, it contains, with its
accompanying appendixes, much valuable information concerning the
inception of civil-service reform and its growth and progress which can
not fail to be interesting and instructive to all who desire improvement
in administrative methods.

During the time covered by the report 15,852 persons were examined for
admission in the classified civil service of the Government in all its
branches, of whom 10,746 passed the examination and 5,106 failed. Of
those who passed the examination 2,977 were applicants for admission
to the departmental service at Washington, 2,547 were examined for
admission to the customs service, and 5,222 for admission to the postal
service. During the same period 547 appointments were made from the
eligible lists to the departmental service, 641 to the customs service,
and 3,254 to the postal service.

Concerning separations from the classified service, the report only
informs us of such as have occurred among employees in the public
service who had been appointed from eligible lists under civil-service
rules. When these rules took effect, they did not apply to the persons
then in the service, comprising a full complement of employees, who
obtained their positions independently of the new law. The Commission
has no record of the separations in this numerous class. And the
discrepancy apparent in the report between the number of appointments
made in the respective branches of the service from the lists of the
Commission and the small number of separations mentioned is to a great
extent accounted for by vacancies, of which no report was made to the
Commission, occurring among those who held their places without
examination and certification, which vacancies were filled by
appointment from the eligible lists.

In the departmental service there occurred between the 16th day of
January, 1886, and the 30th day of June, 1887, among the employees
appointed from the eligible lists under civil-service rules, 17
removals, 36 resignations, and 5 deaths. This does not include 14
separations in the grade of special pension examiners--4 by removal,
5 by resignation, and 5 by death.

In the classified customs and postal services the number of separations
among those who received absolute appointments under civil-service rules
is given for the period between the 1st day of January, 1886, and the
30th day of June, 1887. It appears that such separations in the customs
service for the time mentioned embraced 21 removals, 5 deaths, and 18
resignations, and in the postal service 256 removals, 23 deaths, and 469
resignations.

More than a year has passed since the expiration of the period covered
by the report of the Commission. Within the time which has thus elapsed
many important changes have taken place in furtherance of a reform in
our civil service. The rules and regulations governing the execution of
the law upon the subject have been completely remodeled in such manner
as to render the enforcement of the statute more effective and greatly
increase its usefulness.

Among other things, the scope of the examinations prescribed for those
who seek to enter the classified service has been better defined and
made more practical, the number of names to be certified from the
eligible lists to the appointing officers from which a selection is made
has been reduced from four to three, the maximum limitation of the age
of persons seeking entrance to the classified service to 45 years has
been changed, and reasonable provision has been made for the transfer
of employees from one Department to another in proper cases. A plan
has also been devised providing for the examination of applicants for
promotion in the service, which, when in full operation, will eliminate
all chance of favoritism in the advancement of employees, by making
promotion a reward of merit and faithful discharge of duty.

Until within a few weeks there was no uniform classification of
employees in the different Executive Departments of the Government. As a
result of this condition, in some of the Departments positions could be
obtained without civil-service examination, because they were not within
the classification of such Department, while in other Departments an
examination and certification were necessary to obtain positions of the
same grade, because such positions were embraced in the classifications
applicable to those Departments.

The exception of laborers, watchmen, and messengers from examination and
classification gave opportunity, in the absence of any rule guarding
against it, for the employment, free from civil-service restrictions, of
persons under these designations, who were immediately detailed to do
clerical work.

All this has been obviated by the application to all the Departments of
an extended and uniform classification embracing grades of employees not
theretofore included, and by the adoption of a rule prohibiting the
detail of laborers, watchmen, or messengers to clerical duty.

The path of civil-service reform has not at all times been pleasant nor
easy. The scope and purpose of the reform have been much misapprehended;
and this has not only given rise to strong opposition, but has led to
its invocation by its friends to compass objects not in the least
related to it. Thus partisans of the patronage system have naturally
condemned it. Those who do not understand its meaning either mistrust it
or, when disappointed because in its present stage it is not applied to
every real or imaginary ill, accuse those charged with its enforcement
with faithlessness to civil-service reform. Its importance has
frequently been underestimated, and the support of good men has thus
been lost by their lack of interest in its success. Besides all these
difficulties, those responsible for the administration of the Government
in its executive branches have been and still are often annoyed and
irritated by the disloyalty to the service and the insolence of
employees who remain in place as the beneficiaries and the relics and
reminders of the vicious system of appointment which civil-service
reform was intended to displace.

And yet these are but the incidents of an advance movement which is
radical and far-reaching. The people are, notwithstanding, to be
congratulated upon the progress which has been made and upon the firm,
practical, and sensible foundation upon which this reform now rests.

With a continuation of the intelligent fidelity which has hitherto
characterized the work of the Commission; with a continuation and
increase of the favor and liberality which have lately been evinced by
the Congress in the proper equipment of the Commission for its work;
with a firm but conservative and reasonable support of the reform by
all its friends, and with the disappearance of opposition which must
inevitably follow its better understanding, the execution of the
civil-service law can not fail to ultimately answer the hopes in which
it had its origin.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _July 26, 1888_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, in response to a resolution of the Senate of 11th
April last, a report of the Secretary of State, with accompanying
correspondence, relating to the pending dispute between the Government
of Venezuela and the Government of Great Britain concerning the
boundaries between British Guiana and Venezuela.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _August 6, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

It becomes my painful duty to announce to the Congress and to the people
of the United States the death of Philip H. Sheridan, General of the
Army, which occurred at a late hour last night at his summer home in the
State of Massachusetts.

The death of this valiant soldier and patriotic son of the Republic,
though his long illness has been regarded with anxiety, has nevertheless
shocked the country and caused universal grief.

He had established for himself a stronghold in the hearts of his
fellow-countrymen, who soon caught the true meaning and purpose of his
soldierly devotion and heroic temper.

His intrepid courage, his steadfast patriotism, and the generosity of
his nature inspired with peculiar warmth the admiration of all the
people.

Above his grave affection for the man and pride in his achievements will
struggle for mastery, and too much honor can not be accorded to one who
was so richly endowed with all the qualities which make his death a
national loss.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _August 7, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

In compliance with a resolution of the Senate of the 3d instant (the
House of Representatives concurring), I return herewith the enrolled
bill (S. 3303) amendatory of "An act relating to postal crimes and
amendatory of the statutes therein mentioned," approved June 18, 1888.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _August 10, 1888_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication from the Secretary of State,
accompanied by a report of the delegate on the part of the United States
to the Fourth International Conference of the Red Cross Association,
held at Carlsruhe, in the Grand Duchy of Baden, in September last.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _August 23, 1888_.

_To the Congress_:

The rejection by the Senate of the treaty lately negotiated for the
settlement and adjustment of the differences existing between the United
States and Great Britain concerning the rights and privileges of
American fishermen in the ports and waters of British North America
seems to justify a survey of the condition to which the pending question
is thus remitted.

The treaty upon this subject concluded in 1818, through disagreements as
to the meaning of its terms, has been a fruitful source of irritation
and trouble. Our citizens engaged in fishing enterprises in waters
adjacent to Canada have been subjected to numerous vexatious
interferences and annoyances; their vessels have been seized upon
pretexts which appeared to be entirely inadmissible, and they have been
otherwise treated by the Canadian authorities and officials in a manner
inexcusably harsh and oppressive.

This conduct has been justified by Great Britain and Canada by the claim
that the treaty of 1818 permitted it and upon the ground that it was
necessary to the proper protection of Canadian interests. We deny that
treaty agreements justify these acts, and we further maintain that aside
from any treaty restraints of disputed interpretation the relative
positions of the United States and Canada as near neighbors, the growth
of our joint commerce, the development and prosperity of both countries,
which amicable relations surely guarantee, and, above all, the
liberality always extended by the United States to the people of Canada
furnished motives for kindness and consideration higher and better than
treaty covenants.

While keenly sensitive to all that was exasperating in the condition and
by no means indisposed to support the just complaints of our injured
citizens, I still deemed it my duty, for the preservation of important
American interests which were directly involved, and in view of all the
details of the situation, to attempt by negotiation to remedy existing
wrongs and to finally terminate by a fair and just treaty these
ever-recurring causes of difficulty.

I fully believe that the treaty just rejected by the Senate was well
suited to the exigency, and that its provisions were adequate for our
security in the future from vexatious incidents and for the promotion of
friendly neighborhood and intimacy, without sacrificing in the least our
national pride or dignity.

I am quite conscious that neither my opinion of the value of the
rejected treaty nor the motives which prompted its negotiation are of
importance in the light of the judgment of the Senate thereupon. But it
is of importance to note that this treaty has been rejected without any
apparent disposition on the part of the Senate to alter or amend its
provisions, and with the evident intention, not wanting expression, that
no negotiation should at present be concluded touching the matter at
issue.

The cooperation necessary for the adjustment of the long-standing
national differences with which we have to deal by methods of conference
and agreement having thus been declined, I am by no means disposed to
abandon the interests and the rights of our people in the premises or to
neglect their grievances; and I therefore turn to the contemplation of a
plan of retaliation as a mode which still remains of treating the
situation.

I am not unmindful of the gravity of the responsibility assumed in
adopting this line of conduct, nor do I fail in the least to appreciate
its serious consequences. It will be impossible to injure our Canadian
neighbors by retaliatory measures without inflicting some damage upon
our own citizens. This results from our proximity, our community of
interests, and the inevitable commingling of the business enterprises
which have been developed by mutual activity.

Plainly stated, the policy of national retaliation manifestly embraces
the infliction of the greatest harm upon those who have injured us,
with the least possible damage to ourselves. There is also an evident
propriety, as well as an invitation to moral support, found in visiting
upon the offending party the same measure or kind of treatment of which
we complain, and as far as possible within the same lines. And above all
things, the plan of retaliation, if entered upon, should be thorough and
vigorous.

These considerations lead me at this time to invoke the aid and counsel
of the Congress and its support in such a further grant of power as
seems to me necessary and desirable to render effective the policy I
have indicated.

The Congress has already passed a law, which received Executive assent
on the 3d day of March, 1887, providing that in case American fishing
vessels, being or visiting in the waters or at any of the ports of
the British dominions of North America, should be or lately had been
deprived of the rights to which they were entitled by treaty or law, or
if they were denied certain other privileges therein specified or vexed
and harassed in the enjoyment of the same, the President might deny to
vessels and their masters and crews of the British dominions of North
America any entrance into the waters, ports, or harbors of the United
States, and also deny entry into any port or place of the United States
of any product of said dominions or other goods coming from said
dominions to the United States.

While I shall not hesitate upon proper occasion to enforce this act,
it would seem to be unnecessary to suggest that if such enforcement is
limited in such a manner as shall result in the least possible injury to
our own people the effect would probably be entirely inadequate to the
accomplishment of the purpose desired.

I deem it my duty, therefore, to call the attention of the Congress to
certain particulars in the action of the authorities of the Dominion
of Canada, in addition to the general allegations already made, which
appear to be in such marked contrast to the liberal and friendly
disposition of our country as in my opinion to call for such legislation
as will, upon the principles already stated, properly supplement the
power to inaugurate retaliation already vested in the Executive.

Actuated by the generous and neighborly spirit which has characterized
our legislation, our tariff laws have since 1866 been so far waived
in favor of Canada as to allow free of duty the transit across the
territory of the United States of property arriving at our ports and
destined to Canada, or exported from Canada to other foreign countries.

When the treaty of Washington was negotiated, in 1871, between the
United States and Great Britain, having for its object very largely the
modification of the treaty of 1818, the privileges above referred to
were made reciprocal and given in return by Canada to the United States
in the following language, contained in the twenty-ninth article of said
treaty:

It is agreed that for the term of years mentioned in Article XXXIII of
this treaty goods, wares, or merchandise arriving at the ports of New
York, Boston, and Portland, and any other ports in the United States
which have been or may from time to time be specially designated by the
President of the United States, and destined for Her Britannic Majesty's
possessions in North America, may be entered at the proper custom-house
and conveyed in transit, without the payment of duties, through the
territory of the United States, under such rules, regulations, and
conditions for the protection of the revenue as the Government of the
United States may from time to time prescribe; and, under like rules,
regulations, and conditions, goods, wares, or merchandise may be
conveyed in transit, without the payment of duties, from such
possessions through the territory of the United States, for export from
the said ports of the United States.

It is further agreed that for the like period goods, wares, or
merchandise arriving at any of the ports of Her Britannic Majesty's
possessions in North America, and destined for the United States, may
be entered at the proper custom-house and conveyed in transit, without
the payment of duties, through the said possessions, under such rules
and regulations and conditions for the protection of the revenue as the
governments of the said possessions may from time to time prescribe;
and, under like rules, regulations, and conditions, goods, wares, or
merchandise may be conveyed in transit, without payment of duties, from
the United States through the said possessions to other places in the
United States, or for export from ports in the said possessions.

In the year 1886 notice was received by the representatives of our
Government that our fishermen would no longer be allowed to ship their
fish in bond and free of duty through Canadian territory to this
country, and ever since that time such shipment has been denied.

The privilege of such shipment, which had been extended to our
fishermen, was a most important one, allowing them to spend the time
upon the fishing grounds which would otherwise be devoted to a voyage
home with their catch, and doubling their opportunities for profitably
prosecuting their vocation.

In forbidding the transit of the catch of our fishermen over their
territory in bond and free of duty the Canadian authorities deprived us
of the only facility dependent upon their concession and for which we
could supply no substitute.

The value to the Dominion of Canada of the privilege of transit for
their exports and imports across our territory and to and from our
ports, though great in every aspect, will be better appreciated when
it is remembered that for a considerable portion of each year the St.
Lawrence River, which constitutes the direct avenue of foreign commerce
leading to Canada, is closed by ice.

During the last six years the imports and exports of British Canadian
Provinces carried across our territory under the privileges granted by
our laws amounted in value to about $270,000,000, nearly all of which
were goods dutiable under our tariff laws, by far the larger part of
this traffic consisting of exchanges of goods between Great Britain and
her American Provinces brought to and carried from our ports in their
own vessels.

The treaty stipulation entered into by our Government was in harmony
with laws which were then on our statute book and are still in force.

I recommend immediate legislative action conferring upon the Executive
the power to suspend by proclamation the operation of all laws and
regulations permitting the transit of goods, wares, and merchandise in
bond across or over the territory of the United States to or from
Canada.

There need be no hesitation in suspending these laws arising from the
supposition that their continuation is secured by treaty obligations,
for it seems quite plain that Article XXIX of the treaty of 1871, which
was the only article incorporating such laws, terminated the 1st day of
July, 1885.

The article itself declares that its provisions shall be in force "for
the term of years mentioned in Article XXXIII of this treaty." Turning
to Article XXXIII, we find no mention of the twenty-ninth article, but
only a provision that Articles XVIII to XXV, inclusive, and Article
XXX shall take effect as soon as the laws required to carry them into
operation shall be passed by the legislative bodies of the different
countries concerned, and that "they shall remain in force for the period
of ten years from the date at which they may come into operation, and,
further, until the expiration of two years after either of the high
contracting parties shall have given notice to the other of its wish to
terminate the same."

I am of the opinion that the "term of years mentioned in Article
XXXIII," referred to in Article XXIX as the limit of its duration, means
the period during which Articles XVIII to XXV, inclusive, and Article
XXX, commonly called the "fishery articles," should continue in force
under the language of said Article XXXIII.

That the joint high commissioners who negotiated the treaty so
understood and intended the phrase is certain, for in a statement
containing an account of their negotiations, prepared under their
supervision and approved by them, we find the following entry on the
subject:

The transit question was discussed, and it was agreed that any
settlement that might be made should include a reciprocal arrangement
in that respect for the period for which the fishery articles should
be in force.

In addition to this very satisfactory evidence supporting this
construction of the language of Article XXIX, it will be found that
the law passed by Congress to carry the treaty into effect furnishes
conclusive proof of the correctness of such construction.

This law was passed March 1, 1873, and is entitled "An act to carry into
effect the provisions of the treaty between the United States and Great
Britain signed in the city of Washington the 8th day of May, 1871,
relating to the fisheries." After providing in its first and second
sections for putting in operation Articles XVIII to XXV, inclusive, and
Article XXX of the treaty, the third section is devoted to Article XXIX,
as follows:

SEC. 3. That from the date of the President's proclamation authorized by
the first section of this act, and so long as the articles eighteenth to
twenty-fifth, inclusive, and article thirtieth of said treaty shall
remain in force according to the terms and conditions of article
thirty-third of said treaty, all goods, wares, and merchandise, arriving

etc., etc., following in the remainder of the section the precise words
of the stipulation on the part of the United States as contained in
Article XXIX, which I have already fully quoted.

Here, then, is a distinct enactment of the Congress limiting the
duration of this article of the treaty to the time that Articles XVIII
to XXV, inclusive, and Article XXX should continue in force. That in
fixing such limitation it but gave the meaning of the treaty itself is
indicated by the fact that its purpose is declared to be to carry into
effect the provisions of the treaty, and by the further fact that this
law appears to have been submitted before the promulgation of the treaty
to certain members of the joint high commission representing both
countries, and met with no objection or dissent.

There appearing to be no conflict or inconsistency between the treaty
and the act of the Congress last cited, it is not necessary to invoke
the well-settled principle that in case of such conflict the statute
governs the question.

In any event, and whether the law of 1873 construes the treaty or
governs it, section 29 of such treaty, I have no doubt, terminated with
the proceedings taken by our Government to terminate Articles XVIII to
XXV, inclusive, and Article XXX of the treaty. These proceedings had
their inception in a joint resolution of Congress passed May 3, 1883,
declaring that in the judgment of Congress these articles ought to
be terminated, and directing the President to give the notice to the
Government of Great Britain provided for in Article XXXIII of the
treaty. Such notice having been given two years prior to the 1st day of
July, 1885, the articles mentioned were absolutely terminated on the
last-named day, and with them Article XXIX was also terminated.

If by any language used in the joint resolution it was intended to
relieve section 3 of the act of 1873, embodying Article XXIX of the
treaty, from its own limitations, or to save the article itself, I am
entirely satisfied that the intention miscarried.

But statutes granting to the people of Canada the valuable privileges of
transit for their goods from our ports and over our soil, which had been
passed prior to the making of the treaty of 1871 and independently of
it, remained in force; and ever since the abrogation of the treaty, and
notwithstanding the refusal of Canada to permit our fishermen to send
their fish to their home market through her territory in bond, the
people of that Dominion have enjoyed without diminution the advantages
of our liberal and generous laws.

Without basing our complaint upon a violation of treaty obligations,
it is nevertheless true that such refusal of transit and the other
injurious acts which have been recited constitute a provoking insistence
upon rights neither mitigated by the amenities of national intercourse
nor modified by the recognition of our liberality and generous
considerations.

The history of events connected with this subject makes it manifest
that the Canadian government can, if so disposed administer its laws
and protect the interests of its people without manifestation of
unfriendliness and without the unneighborly treatment of our fishing
vessels of which we have justly complained, and whatever is done on our
part should be done in the hope that the disposition of the Canadian
government may remove the occasion of a resort to the additional
executive power now sought through legislative action.

I am satisfied that upon the principles which should govern retaliation
our intercourse and relations with the Dominion of Canada furnish no
better opportunity for its application than is suggested by the
conditions herein presented, and that it could not be more effectively
inaugurated than under the power of suspension recommended.

While I have expressed my clear conviction upon the question of the
continuance of section 29 of the treaty of 1871, I of course fully
concede the power and the duty of the Congress, in contemplating
legislative action, to construe the terms of any treaty stipulation
which might upon any possible consideration of good faith limit such
action, and likewise the peculiar propriety in the case here presented
of its interpretation of its own language, as contained in the laws
of 1873 putting in operation said treaty and of 1883 directing the
termination thereof; and if in the deliberate judgment of Congress any
restraint to the proposed legislation exists, it is to be hoped that the
expediency of its early removal will be recognized. I desire also to
call the attention of the Congress to another subject involving such
wrongs and unfair treatment to our citizens as, in my opinion, require
prompt action.

The navigation of the Great Lakes and the immense business and carrying
trade growing out of the same have been treated broadly and liberally
by the United States Government and made free to all mankind, while
Canadian railroads and navigation companies share in our country's
transportation upon terms as favorable as are accorded to our own
citizens.

The canals and other public works built and maintained by the Government
along the line of the lakes are made free to all.

In contrast to this condition, and evincing a narrow and ungenerous
commercial spirit, every lock and canal which is a public work of the
Dominion of Canada is subject to tolls and charges.

By Article XXVII of the treaty of 1871 provision was made to secure to
the citizens of the United States the use of the Welland, St. Lawrence,
and other canals in the Dominion of Canada on terms of equality with the
inhabitants of the Dominion, and to also secure to the subjects of Great
Britain the use of the St. Clair Flats Canal on terms of equality with
the inhabitants of the United States.

The equality with the inhabitants of the Dominion which we were promised
in the use of the canals of Canada did not secure to us freedom from
tolls in their navigation, but we had a right to expect that we, being
Americans and interested in American commerce, would be no more burdened
in regard to the same than Canadians engaged in their own trade; and
the whole spirit of the concession made was, or should have been, that
merchandise and property transported to an American market through these
canals should not be enhanced in its cost by tolls many times higher
than such as were carried to an adjoining Canadian market. All our
citizens, producers and consumers as well as vessel owners, were to
enjoy the equality promised.

And yet evidence has for some time been before the Congress, furnished
by the Secretary of the Treasury, showing that while the tolls charged
in the first instance are the same to all, such vessels and cargoes as
are destined to certain Canadian ports are allowed a refund of nearly
the entire tolls, while those bound for American ports are not allowed
any such advantage.

To promise equality, and then in practice make it conditional upon our
vessels doing Canadian business instead of their own, is to fulfill a
promise with the shadow of performance.

I recommend that such legislative action be taken as will give Canadian
vessels navigating our canals, and their cargoes, precisely the
advantages granted to our vessels and cargoes upon Canadian canals, and
that the same be measured by exactly the same rule of discrimination.

The course which I have outlined and the recommendations made relate to
the honor and dignity of our country and the protection and preservation
of the rights and interests of all our people. A government does but
half its duty when it protects its citizens at home and permits them
to be imposed upon and humiliated by the unfair and over-reaching
disposition of other nations. If we invite our people to rely upon
arrangements made for their benefit abroad, we should see to it that
they are not deceived; and if we are generous and liberal to a
neighboring country, our people should reap the advantage of it by a
return of liberality and generosity.

These are subjects which partisanship should not disturb or confuse. Let
us survey the ground calmly and moderately; and having put aside other
means of settlement, if we enter upon the policy of retaliation let us
pursue it firmly, with a determination only to subserve the interests of
our people and maintain the high standard and the becoming pride of
American citizenship.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _August 27, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of the
27th instant (the Senate concurring), I return herewith House bill No.
10060, entitled "An act prescribing the times for sales and for notice
of sales of property in the District of Columbia for overdue taxes."

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _September 7, 1888_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In reply to the resolution of the Senate in the words following--

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, _September 5, 1888_.

_Resolved_, That the President is requested, if not incompatible
with the public interests, to inform the Senate whether the recent
treaty with China and the amendments adopted by the Senate have been
ratified by the Emperor of China--

I have to communicate the annexed copies of dispatches from our minister
to China, giving the only official information at hand in relation to
the matter to which reference is had.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _September 12, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

Responding to the inquiries contained in the subjoined resolution of the
Senate of the 28th ultimo, I have the honor to state in reply to the
subject first therein mentioned, calling upon the Executive for "copies
of all communications, if any, addressed by his direction to the
Government of Great Britain, remonstrating with that Government against
the wrongs and unfair treatment to our citizens by the action of the
Canadian Government in refunding to vessels and cargoes which pass
through the Welland and other Canadian canals nearly the entire tolls
if they are destined to Canadian ports, while those bound for American
ports are not allowed any such advantage, and the breach of the
engagement contained in the treaty of 1871 whereby Great Britain
promised to the United States equality in the matter of such canal
transportation; also copies of any demand made by his direction upon
Great Britain for the redress of such wrongs, and the replies of Great
Britain to such communication and demand," that I herewith transmit
copies of all communications between the Department of State and the
United States consul at Ottawa, which are accompanied by copies of the
orders of the Canadian officials in relation to the subject inquired of;
also correspondence between the Department of State and the British
minister at this capital, with copies of the documents therein referred
to.

I also inclose, as connected therewith, a copy of Executive Document
No. 406, House of Representatives, Fiftieth Congress, first session,
containing the answer of the Acting Secretary of the Treasury, dated
July 23, 1888, in reply to a resolution of the House of Representatives
relating to the navigation of the Welland Canal, and the documents thus
transmitted comprise the entire correspondence in relation to the
subjects referred to in that portion of the resolution of inquiry which
is above quoted.

The second branch of inquiry is in the words following:

And also that there be communicated to the Senate copies of all papers,
correspondence, and information touching the matter of the refusal of
the British Government, or that of any of her North American dominions,
to allow the entry at Dominion seaports of American fish or other
cargoes for transportation in bond to the United States since the 1st
day of July, 1885.

It will be remembered that though the fishing articles of the treaty of
1871 expired on the said 1st day of July, 1885, a temporary arrangement
was made whereby the privileges accorded to our fishermen under said
articles were continued during the remainder of that year's fishing
season.

No instance of refusal by the Canadian authorities since July 1, 1885,
up to the present time to allow the entry at Dominion seaports of
American cargoes other than fish for transportation in bond across the
territory of Canada to the United States has been made known to the
Department of State.

The case of the fishing steamer _Novelty_, involving, among
other things, a refusal, on July 1, 1886, of the right to permit the
transshipment of fish in bond at the port of Pictou, Nova Scotia, was
duly communicated to Congress in my message of December 8, 1886, a copy
of which I herewith transmit. (Ex. Doc. No. 19, Forty-ninth Congress,
second session, p. 1.)

On page 16 of this document will be found a copy of a communication
addressed by the Secretary of State to the British minister, dated June
14, 1886, on the subject of the refusal of transshipment of fish in
bond. At page 24 of the same publication will be found the protest of
the Secretary of State in the case of the _Novelty_, and at pages
49-50 are the response of the British minister and report of the
Canadian privy council.

On the 26th of January, 1887, a revised list of cases of alleged ill
treatment of our fishing vessels in Canadian waters was furnished by the
Secretary of State to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate,
in which the above case is included, a copy of which, being Senate
Executive Document No. 55 of the second session Forty-ninth Congress, is
herewith inclosed; and in the report by Mr. Edmunds, from the Committee
on Foreign Relations (No. 1683 of the same session), the case referred
to was again published. And, as relating to the subject of the
resolution now before me, the following pertinent passage, taken from
the said report, may be of interest:

As regards commercial and other friendly business intercourse between
ports and places in the Dominion and the United States, it is, of
course, of much importance that regulations affecting the same should
be mutually reasonable and fairly administered. If an American vessel
should happen to have caught a cargo of fish at sea 100 miles distant
from some Canadian port, from which there is railway communication to
the United States, and should be denied the privilege of landing and
shipping its cargo therefrom to the United States, as the Canadians
do, it would be, of course, a serious disadvantage; and there is, it
is thought, nothing in the treaty of 1818 which would warrant such an
exclusion. But the Dominion laws may make such a distinction, and it is
understood that in fact the privilege of so shipping fish from American
vessels has been refused during the last year.

I also respectfully refer to Senate Miscellaneous Document No. 54,
Forty-ninth Congress, second session, being a communication from the
Commissioner of Fish and Fisheries to Hon. George F. Edmunds, chairman
of the Committee on Foreign Relations, dated February 5, 1887, which is
accompanied by a partial list of vessels injuriously treated by the
Canadian authorities, based upon information furnished to the United
States Commissioner of Fish and Fisheries.

This list is stated to be supplementary to the revised list which had
been transmitted to the committee by the Secretary of State January 26,
1887.

Of the sixty-eight vessels comprised in this list it is stated that six,
to wit, the _Nellie M. Snow_, _Andrew Burnham_, _Harry G. French_,
_Col. J.H. French_, _W.H. Wellington_, and _Ralph Hodgdon_, were
refused permission to transship fish. None of these cases, however, were
ever reported to the Department of State by the parties interested, or
were accompanied by affidavit; nor does it appear the facts ever were
investigated in any of the cases by the parties making the reports,
which were obtained by circulars issued by order of the Commissioner of
Fish and Fisheries. The concluding inquiry is as follows:

And also that he communicate to the Senate what instances have occurred
since the 3d of March, 1887, of wrongs to American fishing vessels or
other American vessels in the ports or waters of British North America,
and what steps, if any, have been taken in respect thereto.

Soon after the passage of the act of March 3, 1887, the negotiation
which had been proceeding for several months previously progressed
actively, and the proposed conference and the presence at this capital
of the plenipotentiaries of the two Governments, out of which the since
rejected treaty of February 7, 1888, eventuated, had their natural
influence in repressing causes of complaint in relation to the
fisheries. Therefore since March 3, 1887, no case has been reported to
the Department of State wherein complaint was made of unfriendly or
unlawful treatment of American fishing vessels on the part of the
Canadian authorities in which reparation was not promptly and
satisfactorily obtained by the United States consul-general at Halifax.

A single case of alleged unjust treatment of an American merchant
vessel, not engaged in fishing, has been reported since March 3, 1887.
This was the ship _Bridgewater_, which was first brought to the
attention of the Department of State by the claimant by petition filed
June 1, 1888.

On June 18, 1888, legal counsel, who appeared and desired to be
heard, filed their formal authority and the claim was at once duly
investigated, and on June 22, 1888, a communication was addressed by the
Secretary of State to the British minister, which sets forth the history
of the claim, and a copy of which is herewith transmitted; and of this
formal acknowledgment was made, but no further reply has been received.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _September 18, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

I herewith transmit, in reply to the resolution of the Senate of the
11th instant, a copy of a report from the Secretary of State, with
accompanying documents, relative to the pending treaty with China.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _October 1, 1888_.

_To the Congress_:

I have this day approved House bill No. 11336, supplementary to an act
entitled "An act to execute certain treaty stipulations relating to
Chinese," approved the 6th day of May, 1882.

It seems to me that some suggestions and recommendations may properly
accompany my approval of this bill.

Its object is to more effectually accomplish by legislation the
exclusion from this country of Chinese laborers.

The experiment of blending the social habits and mutual race
idiosyncrasies of the Chinese laboring classes with those of the great
body of the people of the United States has been proved by the
experience of twenty years, and ever since the Burlingame treaty of
1868, to be in every sense unwise, impolitic, and injurious to both
nations. With the lapse of time the necessity for its abandonment has
grown in force, until those having in charge the Government of the
respective countries have resolved to modify and sufficiently abrogate
all those features of prior Conventional arrangements which permitted
the coming of Chinese laborers to the United States.

In modification of prior conventions the treaty of November 17, 1880,
was concluded, whereby, in the first article thereof, it was agreed that
the United States should at will regulate, limit, or suspend the coming
of Chinese laborers to the United States, but not absolutely prohibit
it; and under this article an act of Congress, approved on May 6, 1882
(see 22 U.S. Statutes at Large, p. 58), and amended July 5, 1884 (23
U.S. Statutes at Large, p. 115), suspended for ten years the coming of
Chinese laborers to the United States, and regulated the going and
coming of such Chinese laborers as were at that time in the United
States.

It was, however, soon made evident that the mercenary greed of the
parties who were trading in the labor of this class of the Chinese
population was proving too strong for the just execution of the law, and
that the virtual defeat of the object and intent of both law and treaty
was being fraudulently accomplished by false pretense and perjury,
contrary to the expressed will of both Governments.

To such an extent has the successful violation of the treaty and the
laws enacted for its execution progressed that the courts in the Pacific
States have been for some time past overwhelmed by the examination of
cases of Chinese laborers who are charged with having entered our ports
under fraudulent certificates of return or seek to establish by perjury
the claim of prior residence.

Such demonstration of the inoperative and inefficient condition of the
treaty and law has produced deep-seated and increasing discontent among
the people of the United States, and especially with those resident on
the Pacific Coast. This has induced me to omit no effort to find an
effectual remedy for the evils complained of and to answer the earnest
popular demand for the absolute exclusion of Chinese laborers having
objects and purposes unlike our own and wholly disconnected with
American citizenship.

Aided by the presence in this country of able and intelligent diplomatic
and consular officers of the Chinese Government, and the representations
made from time to time by our minister in China under the instructions
of the Department of State, the actual condition of public sentiment and
the status of affairs in the United States have been fully made known to
the Government of China.

The necessity for remedy has been fully appreciated by that Government,
and in August, 1886, our minister at Peking received from the Chinese
foreign office a communication announcing that China, of her own accord,
proposed to establish a system of strict and absolute prohibition of her
laborers, under heavy penalties, from coming to the United States, and
likewise to prohibit the return to the United States of any Chinese
laborer who had at any time gone back to China, "in order" (in the words
of the communication) "that the Chinese laborers may gradually be
reduced in number and causes of danger averted and lives preserved."

This view of the Chinese Government, so completely in harmony with that
of the United States, was by my direction speedily formulated in a
treaty draft between the two nations, embodying the propositions so
presented by the Chinese foreign office.

The deliberations, frequent oral discussions, and correspondence on the
general questions that ensued have been fully communicated by me to the
Senate at the present session, and, as contained in Senate Executive
Document O, parts 1 and 2, and in Senate Executive Document No. 272,
may be properly referred to as containing a complete history of the
transaction.

It is thus easy to learn how the joint desires and unequivocal mutual
understanding of the two Governments were brought into articulated
form in the treaty, which, after a mutual exhibition of plenary powers
from the respective Governments, was signed and concluded by the
plenipotentiaries of the United States and China at this capital on
March 12 last.

Being submitted for the advice and consent of the Senate, its
confirmation, on the 7th day of May last, was accompanied by two
amendments which that body ingrafted upon it.

On the 12th day of the same month the Chinese minister, who was the
plenipotentiary of his Government in the negotiation and the conclusion
of the treaty, in a note to the Secretary of State gave his approval to
these amendments, "as they did not alter the terms of the treaty," and
the amendments were at once telegraphed to China, whither the original
treaty had previously been sent immediately after its signature on March
12.

On the 13th day of last month I approved Senate bill No. 3304, "to
prohibit the coming of Chinese laborers to the United States." This bill
was intended to supplement the treaty, and was approved in the confident
anticipation of an early exchange of ratifications of the treaty and its
amendments and the proclamation of the same, upon which event the
legislation so approved was by its terms to take effect.

No information of any definite action upon the treaty by the Chinese
Government was received until the 21st ultimo--the day the bill which
I have just approved was presented to me--when a telegram from our
minister at Peking to the Secretary of State announced the refusal of
the Chinese Government to exchange ratifications of the treaty unless
further discussion should be had with a view to shorten the period
stipulated in the treaty for the exclusion of Chinese laborers and to
change the conditions agreed on, which should entitle any Chinese
laborer who might go back to China to return again to the United States.

By a note from the chargé d'affaires _ad interim_ of China to the
Secretary of State, received on the evening of the 25th ultimo (a copy
of which is herewith transmitted, together with the reply thereto), a
third amendment is proposed, whereby the certificate under which any
departing Chinese laborer alleging the possession of property in the
United States would be enabled to return to this country should be
granted by the Chinese consul instead of the United States collector,
as had been provided in the treaty.

The obvious and necessary effect of this last proposition would be
practically to place the execution of the treaty beyond the control of
the United States.

Article I of the treaty proposed to be so materially altered had in the
course of the negotiations been settled in acquiescence with the request
of the Chinese plenipotentiary and to his expressed satisfaction.

In 1886, as appears in the documents heretofore referred to, the Chinese
foreign office had formally proposed to our minister strict exclusion of
Chinese laborers from the United States without limitation, and had
otherwise and more definitely stated that no term whatever for exclusion
was necessary, for the reason that China would of itself take steps to
prevent its laborers from coming to the United States.

In the course of the negotiations that followed suggestions from the
same quarter led to the insertion in behalf of the United States of a
term of "thirty years," and this term, upon the representations of the
Chinese plenipotentiary, was reduced to "twenty years," and finally so
agreed upon.

Article II was wholly of Chinese origination, and to that alone owes its
presence in the treaty.

And it is here pertinent to remark that everywhere in the United States
laws for the collection of debts are equally available to all creditors
without respect to race, sex, nationality, or place of residence, and
equally with the citizens or subjects of the most favored nations and
with the citizens of the United States recovery can be had in any court
of justice in the United States by a subject of China, whether of the
laboring or any other class.

No disability accrues from nonresidence of a plaintiff, whose claim can
be enforced in the usual way by him or his assignee or attorney in our
courts of justice.

In this respect it can not be alleged that there exists the slightest
discrimination against Chinese subjects, and it is a notable fact that
large trading firms and companies and individual merchants and traders
of that nation are profitably established at numerous points throughout
the Union, in whose hands every claim transmitted by an absent Chinaman
of a just and lawful nature could be completely enforced.

The admitted and paramount right and duty of every government to exclude
from its borders all elements of foreign population which for any reason
retard its prosperity or are detrimental to the moral and physical
health of its people must be regarded as a recognized canon of
international law and intercourse. China herself has not dissented from
this doctrine, but has, by the expressions to which I have referred, led
us confidently to rely upon such action on her part in cooperation with
us as would enforce the exclusion of Chinese laborers from our country.

This cooperation has not, however, been accorded us. Thus from the
unexpected and disappointing refusal of the Chinese Government to
confirm the acts of its authorized agent and to carry into effect an
international agreement, the main feature of which was voluntarily
presented by that Government for our acceptance, and which had been the
subject of long and careful deliberation, an emergency has arisen, in
which the Government of the United States is called upon to act in
self-defense by the exercise of its legislative power. I can not but
regard the expressed demand on the part of China for a reexamination and
renewed discussion of the topics so completely covered by mutual treaty
stipulations as an indefinite postponement and practical abandonment of
the objects we have in view, to which the Government of China may justly
be considered as pledged.

The facts and circumstances which I have narrated lead me, in the
performance of what seems to me to be my official duty, to join the
Congress in dealing legislatively with the question of the exclusion of
Chinese laborers, in lieu of further attempts to adjust it by
international agreement.

But while thus exercising our undoubted right in the interest of our
people and for the general welfare of our country, justice and fairness
seem to require that some provision should be made by act or joint
resolution under which such Chinese laborers as shall actually have
embarked on their return to the United States before the passage of the
law this day approved, and are now on their way, may be permitted to
land, provided they have duly and lawfully obtained and shall present
certificates heretofore issued permitting them to return in accordance
with the provisions of existing law.

Nor should our recourse to legislative measures of exclusion cause us to
retire from the offer we have made to indemnify such Chinese subjects as
have suffered damage through violence in the remote and comparatively
unsettled portions of our country at the hands of lawless men. Therefore
I recommend that, without acknowledging legal liability therefor, but
because it was stipulated in the treaty which has failed to take effect,
and in a spirit of humanity befitting our nation, there be appropriated
the sum of $276,619.75, payable to the Chinese minister at this capital
on behalf of his Government, as full indemnity for all losses and
injuries sustained by Chinese subjects in the manner and under the
circumstances mentioned.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, October 12, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

I transmit, with a view to its ratification, a convention between the
United States of America and Venezuela to further extend the period for
the exchange of ratifications of the claims convention of December 5,
1885, between the said contracting parties and to extend the period for
the exchange of ratifications of the convention of March 15, 1888,
between the same contracting parties, also relating to claims.

I invite attention to the accompanying report of the Secretary of State
and the papers inclosed therein.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

VETO MESSAGES.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _Washington, April 4, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill 2477, entitled "An act for
the relief of Nathaniel McKay and the executors of Donald McKay."

It is proposed by this bill to allow the beneficiaries named therein to
present to the Court of Claims for determination certain demands made
by them against the Government on account of the construction of two
ironclad monitors called the _Squando_ and the _Nauset_ and a
side-wheel steamer called the _Ashuelot_.

The contracts for building these vessels were made early in 1863. It was
agreed that they should be completed within six or eight months. It was
also provided in these contracts that the Government "should have the
privilege of making alterations and additions to the plans and
specifications at any time during the progress of the work, as it may
deem necessary and proper," and that if said alterations and additions
should cause extra expense to the contractors the Government would "pay
for the same at fair and reasonable rates."

It thus appears that the time allowed for the completion of these
vessels was with the assent of the contractors made exceedingly short;
that notwithstanding this fact they consented to permit such alterations
of plans as must almost necessarily prolong the time, fixing no limit to
such extension, and that in the same breath they fix their measure of
compensation for such alterations and an extended time consequent
thereon at "a fair and reasonable rate" for the extra expense caused
thereby.

Almost immediately upon the beginning of their work alterations and
changes were made in the original plans for these vessels, and they were
repeated and continued to such a degree that the completion of the
vessels was delayed many months.

In the latter part of the year 1864 and early in the year 1865 payments
in excess of the contract price were made by the Navy Department to the
contractors under the provisions of the contract above recited. The
contract price for the _Squando_ was $395,000. The contractors
claimed extra compensation amounting to $337,329.46, and there was
allowed $194,525.70. The contract price of the _Nauset_ was
$386,000, the extra compensation claimed was $314,768.93, and the amount
allowed $192,110.98. The contract price of the side-wheel steamer
_Ashuelot_ was $275,000, the extra compensation claimed was
$81,447.50, and the amount allowed was $22,415.92. The different sums as
thus adjusted were received by the contractors in settlement of their
claims for extra expense, and receipts in full were given by them to the
Government.

A number of other contractors had done like work for the Government and
claimed to have demands growing out of the same for extra compensation.

Evidently with the view of investigating and settling these claims, on
the 9th day of March, 1865, the Senate passed the following resolution:

_Resolved_, That the Secretary of the Navy be requested to organize
a board of not less than three persons, whose duty it shall be to
inquire into and determine how much the vessels of war and steam
machinery contracted for by the Department in the years 1862 and 1863
cost the contractors over and above the contract price and allowance
for extra work, and report the same to the Senate at its next session;
none but those that have given satisfaction to the Department to be
considered.

This board was appointed by the Secretary of the Navy on the 25th
day of May, 1865, and consisted of a commodore, a chief engineer,
and a paymaster in the Navy. Its powers were broad and liberal, and
comprehended an inquiry touching all things that made up "the cost to
the contractors" of their work in excess of the contract price and
allowances for extra work.

The board convened on the 6th day of June, 1865, and sat continuously
until the 23d day of December following, and made numerous awards to
contractors. The parties mentioned in the bill now under consideration
were notified on the 9th and 15th days of June, 1865, to prepare and
submit testimony to the board in support of their claims, and they
repeatedly signified their intention to do so.

Donald McKay was the contractor for the construction of the monitor
_Nauset_ and the steamer _Ashuelot_. The proceedings of the
board show that on the 11th day of August, 1865, he notified the board
that the only claim he made for loss was on the hull, boiler, and
machinery of the _Ashuelot_, which he would be prepared to present
in about six weeks.

Neither of these parties presented any statement to the board, and no
claim of theirs was passed upon.

On the 2d day of March, 1867, an act was passed directing the Secretary
of the Navy to investigate the claims of all contractors for building
vessels of war and steam machinery for the same under contracts made
after May 1, 1861, and before January 1, 1864. He was by said act
required "to ascertain the additional cost which was necessarily
incurred by each contractor in the completion of his work by reason of
any changes or alterations in the plans and specifications required and
delays in the prosecution of the work occasioned by the Government which
were not provided for in the original contract." It was further provided
that there should be reported to Congress a tabular statement of each
case, which should contain "the name of the contractor, a description of
the work, the contract price, the whole increased cost of the work over
the contract price, and the amount of such increased cost caused by the
delay and action of the Government as aforesaid, and the amount already
paid the contractor over and above the contract price."

Under this act Commodore J.A. Marchand, Chief Engineer J.W. King, and
Paymaster Edward Foster, of the Navy, were designated by the Secretary
of the Navy to make the investigation required. These officers on the
26th day of November, 1867, made a report of their proceedings, which
was submitted to the Senate with a tabulated statement of all the claims
examined by them and their findings thereon.

It appears by this report that the claims of the beneficiaries mentioned
in the bill herewith returned were examined by the board, and that
nothing was found due thereon under the terms of the law directing their
examination.

These claims have frequently been before Congress since that time. They
have been favorably reported and acted upon a number of times, and have
also been more than once strongly condemned by committees to whom they
were referred.

A resolution was passed in 1871 by the Congress referring these and
other claims of a like character to the Court of Claims for
adjudication, but it was vetoed by the President for reasons not
necessarily affecting the merits of the claims.

The case of Chouteau _vs_. The United States, reported in Fifth
Otto, page 61, which arose out of the contract to build a vessel called
the _Etlah_, appears to present the same features that belong to
the claims here considered. It is stated in the report of the House
committee on this bill that "the _Squando_ and _Nauset_ were
identical in the original plans and the changes and alterations thereon
with the _Etlah_ and _Shiloh_, built in St. Louis;" and yet
the Supreme Court of the United States distinctly decided in the
_Etlah_ case that the only pretext for further compensation should
be sought for in the contract, where the contractor had evidently been
content to provide for all the remedy he desired.

It seems, then, that the contractors mentioned in this bill, after
entering into contracts plainly indicating that changes of plans and
consequent delay in their work were in their contemplation, availed
themselves of the remedy which they themselves had provided, and
thereupon received about 50 per cent in the case of two of these vessels
of the contract price for extra work, giving the Government a receipt in
full. When soon thereafter opportunity was offered them to make further
claim of as broad a nature as they could desire, they failed to do so,
and one of them disclaimed any right to recover on account of one of the
vessels, though all are now included in the present bill. In 1867 the
claims were fully examined under a law of Congress and rejected, and the
Supreme Court in an exactly similar case finds neither law nor equity
supporting them.

If it be claimed that no compensation has been yet allowed solely for
the increase in the price of labor and material caused by delay in
construction, it is no hardship to say that as the contractors made
provision for change of plans and delay they must be held to have taken
the risk of such rise in price and be satisfied with the provision they
have made against it. Besides, much of the increase in the price of
labor and material is included in the extra cost which has already been
reimbursed to them.

But the bill does not provide that these contractors shall be limited in
the Court of Claims to a recovery solely for loss occasioned by increase
of the cost of labor and material during the delay caused by the
Government. By the terms of the proposed act the court is directed to
ascertain the additional cost necessarily incurred in building the
vessels by reason of any changes or alterations in the plans and
specifications and delays in the prosecution of the work. This, it seems
to me, would enable these contractors to open the whole question of
compensation for extra work.

It hardly seems fair to the Government to permit these claims to be
presented after a lapse of twenty-three years since a settlement in full
was made and receipts given, after the opportunity which has been
offered for establishing further claims if they existed, and when, as a
consequence of the contractor's neglect, the Government would labor
under great disadvantages in its defense.

I am of the opinion, in view of the history of these claims and the
suspicion naturally excited as to their merit, that no injustice will be
done if they are laid at rest instead of being given new life and vigor
in the Court of Claims.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 16, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return herewith without approval House bill No. 445, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Laura A. Wright."

The beneficiary named in this bill is the widow of Charles H. Wright,
who was pensioned for a gunshot wound received in the military service
of the United States on the 19th day of September, 1864. He continued
in the receipt of such pension until June 25, 1884, when he committed
suicide by hanging.

It is alleged on behalf of his widow that the pain caused by his wound
was so great that it caused temporary insanity, under the influence of
which he destroyed himself.

There is not a particle of proof that I can discover tending to show an
unsound mind, unless it be the fact of his suicide. He suffered much
pain at intervals. He was a farmer in comfortable circumstances, and
according to the testimony of one of the physicians, filed in support
of the widow's claim, his health was good up to the time of his death,
except for the wound and its results. The day before his death he was
engaged in work connected with his farming occupation, though he
complained of pain from his wound. Early the next morning, still
complaining, as it is alleged, of his wound, he went out, declaring he
was going out to milk, and not returning in due time, upon search his
body was found and his self-destruction discovered. This was nearly
twenty years after the deceased received his wound, and there is not
a suggestion of any act or word of his in all that time indicating
insanity. It seems to me it can hardly be assumed in such circumstances
that the insanity and death of the soldier resulted from pain arising
from his wound, merely because no other explanation can be given. In
numerous cases of suicide no cause or motive for self-destruction is
discovered.

We have within our borders thousands of widows living in poverty, and
some of them in need, whose dead husbands fought bravely and well in
defense of the Government, but whose deaths were not occasioned by any
incident of military service. In these cases the wife's long vigil at
the bed of wasting disease, the poverty that came before the death, and
the distressing doubt and uncertainty which darkened the future have not
secured to such widows the aid of our pension laws.

With these in sight the bounty of the Government may without injustice
be withheld from one whose soldier husband received a pension for nearly
twenty years, though all that time able to labor, and who, having
reached a stage of comfortable living, made his wife a widow by
destroying his own life.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 16, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

I return herewith without approval Senate bill No. 809, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Betsey Mannsfield."

It is proposed to grant a pension to the beneficiary named in this bill
as the mother of Franklin J. Mannsfield, who enlisted as a private April
27, 1861, and died in camp of disease on the 14th day of November, in
the same year. His mother filed an application for pension in June,
1882.

The testimony filed in the Pension Bureau discloses the following facts:

At the time of the death of the soldier the family, besides himself,
consisted of three persons--his father and mother and an unmarried
sister. They owned and resided upon a homestead in Wisconsin comprising
293 acres, 20 of which were cleared, the balance being in timber, all
unencumbered. The assessed valuation was $1,170, the real value being
considerably more. The father was a farmer and blacksmith, healthy and
able-bodied, and furnishing a comfortable support, but shortly after the
soldier's death he began to drink and his health began to fail. Upon the
marriage of the daughter he deeded her 50 acres of the land. He became
indebted, and from time to time sold portions of his homestead to pay
debts; but in 1882, at the time the mother's application for pension was
filed, there still remained 110 acres of land, valued at about $3,300,
40 acres of which was mortgaged in 1880 for $600. Since 1879 the farm
had been rented, except 8 or 10 acres reserved for a residence for the
family. They owned two cows, and the rent averaged about $125 a year.

This was the condition of affairs as late as 1886, when the claim of the
mother for a pension was, after investigation, rejected by the Pension
Bureau, and it is supposed to be substantially the same now.

It also appears that a son, born since the soldier's death, and upward
of 18 years of age, resides with his parents and furnishes them some
assistance.

The claimant certainly was not dependent in the least degree upon the
soldier at the time of his death, and she did not file her claim for
pension until nearly twenty-one years thereafter.

Though the lack of dependence at the date of the soldier's death is
sufficient to defeat a parent's claim for pension under our laws, I
believe that in proper cases a relaxation of rules and a charitable
liberality should be shown to parents old and in absolute need through
default of the help which, it may be presumed, a son would have
furnished if his life had not been sacrificed in his country's service.

But it seems to me the case presented here can not be reached by any
theory of pensions which has yet been suggested.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 16, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

I return herewith without approval Senate bill No. 549, entitled "An act
granting a pension to Hannah R. Langdon."

The husband of the beneficiary named in this bill entered the military
service of the United States as assistant surgeon in a Vermont regiment
on the 7th day of October, 1862, and less than six months thereafter
tendered his resignation, based upon a surgeon's certificate of
disability on account of chronic hepatitis (inflammation of the liver)
and diarrhea.

On the 12th day of June, 1880, more than seventeen years after his
discharge, he filed a claim for pension, alleging chronic diarrhea and
resulting piles. He was allowed a pension in January, 1881, and died of
consumption on the 24th day of September, in the same year.

Prior to the allowance of his claim for pension he wrote to the Bureau
of Pensions a full history of his disability as resulting from chronic
diarrhea and piles, and in that letter he made the following statement:

I have had no other disease, except last September (1880) I had
pleurisy and congestion of my left lung.

From other sources the Bureau derived the information that the deceased
had suffered an attack of pleuro-pneumonia on his left side, and that
his recovery had been partial.

In December, 1880, he was examined by two members of the board of
surgeons at Burlington, Vt., of which board he was also a member, and
the following facts were certified:

For the past fifteen years claimant has practiced his profession in this
city, and has up to within a year or a year and a half of this date
shown a vigor and power of endurance quite equal to the labor imposed
upon him by the popular demand for his services. About a year ago he
evinced symptoms of breaking down, cough, emaciation, and debility.

These results--"breaking down, cough, emaciation, and debility"--are
the natural effects of such an attack as the deceased himself reported,
though not made by him any ground of a claim for pension, and it seems
quite clear that his death in September, 1881, must be chargeable to the
same cause.

His widow, the beneficiary named in this bill, filed her claim for
pension December 5, 1881, based upon the ground that her husband's death
from consumption was due to the chronic diarrhea for which he was
pensioned. Upon such application the testimony of Dr. H.H. Atwater was
filed, to the effect that about 1879 he began to treat the deceased
regularly for pleuro-pneumonia, followed by abscesses and degeneration
of lung tissue, which finally resulted in death, and that these diseased
conditions were complicated with digestive affections, such as diarrhea,
dyspepsia, and indigestion. Another affidavit of Dr. Atwater, made in
1886, will be found in the report upon this bill made by the House
Committee on Invalid Pensions.

The claimant's application for a pension was rejected by the Pension
Bureau on the ground that the cause of her husband's death was not shown
to have been connected in any degree with the disease on account of
which he was pensioned or with his military service.

I am entirely satisfied that this determination was correct.

I am constrained to disapprove the bill under consideration, because
it is thus far our settled and avowed policy to grant pensions only to
widows whose husbands have died from causes related to military service,
and because the proposed legislation would, in my opinion, result in
a discrimination in favor of this claimant unfair and unjust toward
thousands of poor widows who are equally entitled to our sympathy and
benevolence.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 18, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 258, entitled "An act for the
relief of Major Daniel N. Bash, paymaster, United States Army."

The object of this bill is to release Paymaster Bash from all liability
to the Government for the loss by theft of $7,350.93, which was
intrusted to him for the payment of United States troops at various
posts, one of which was Fort McKinney, in Wyoming Territory.

He started from Cheyenne Depot, accompanied by his clerk, D.F. Bash.
Before starting he attempted to procure an iron safe in which he could
deposit the money which he should have in his possession during his
absence, but was unable to do so. It is alleged that it is customary for
paymasters in such cases to be furnished with safes by the Government.

On the 17th day of March, 1887, Major Bash arrived at Douglas, Wyoming
Territory, having in his possession $350.93, which was a balance left
in his hands after making previous payments on the way. At Douglas he
received by express $7,000, $250 of which were in silver. He was met
here by an escort consisting of a sergeant and private soldier, who had
been sent from Fort McKinney, and who were under orders to report to the
paymaster at Douglas and to act as guard from that place to Fort
McKinney.

Another unsuccessful attempt having been made at Douglas to obtain
a safe or treasure box in which to carry the money, the same was
put in a leather valise as the best thing that could be done in the
circumstances. The money was first handed by the paymaster to his clerk,
and by the clerk put in the valise and handed to the sergeant of the
escort. There is evidence that the sergeant was told not to permit it
to be out of his sight. Immediately after supper at Douglas the entire
party entered the stage and proceeded upon their journey, the sergeant
carrying the valise. Major Bash asserts that he said to the sergeant,
"You must take good care of the valise; it contains the money."

The next morning, on the 18th day of March, the party arrived at Dry
Cheyenne. When the paymaster went in to breakfast at that place, he
found all the party at the breakfast table. After breakfast he walked
out to the stage, the sergeant going at the same time. He asked him what
he had done with the valise, and received the reply that it was in the
stage. He then said to the sergeant, "You ought to have brought it in
with you; you should take better care of that valise." The valise was
then examined and the money was found untouched.

Pursuing their journey, the party arrived at Antelope Springs, Wyoming
Territory, at half past 10 o'clock the same morning. The paymaster
alleges that he asked the sergeant if he should take dinner there, and
that, being answered in the negative, he remarked to him that he might
then stay at the stage; that he then went to the stage station, leaving
the two soldiers and the clerk at the stage; that he remained at the
station warming himself a short time, finding there three citizens, one
of whom he afterwards learned was Parker, the thief; that he left the
room in which he had been warming himself and went to the dining room,
passing along the front of the house, and as he did so noticed the stage
standing there with no one near it except a stock tender; that on
reaching the dining room he found his entire party at the table; that he
looked "pretty sharp" at the sergeant, as he was surprised to see him
there, but as he was just eating his pie he (the paymaster) said nothing
to him; that not more than a minute after that the sergeant and driver
got up and went out; that three or four minutes after they went out they
rushed back and said that the valise had been taken.

It was found that the valise and money had been taken by Parker, who had
mounted a horse and ridden away. He was pursued so closely that revolver
shots were exchanged between the sergeant, who was badly mounted, and
the thief. The sergeant alleged that he could have shot Parker if he had
been provided with a gun instead of a revolver.

The facts in relation to this subject were developed upon a court of
inquiry called for that purpose; and much of the above recited is
derived from the evidence of Major Bash himself, taken upon such
inquiry.

The following is the finding of the court concerning the conduct of the
paymaster in the premises:

That Major Daniel N. Bash, paymaster, United States Army, did not give
such direct and detailed orders to the members of the escort as to the
manner in which they should guard the public money in his (Bash's)
possession while en route to Fort McKinney as the importance of the
matter required, and that he did not take the proper and necessary pains
to see that any orders which he had given on this subject were duly
obeyed.

This finding defines a case of negligence which renders the paymaster
liable for the loss of these funds. But a number of army officers,
including the members of the court of inquiry, suggest that the
paymaster thus found at fault should be relieved from responsibility.
This is much the fashion in these days.

It is said that a safe should have been provided; that the paymaster
had the right to rely upon the fidelity and efficiency of the escort,
and that the two men furnished him as an escort were unintelligent
and negligent; that they should have been armed with guns instead of
pistols, and that the instructions given to the escort by the paymaster
were sufficient to acquit him of culpable neglect.

It seems to me that the omissions of care on the part of this officer
are of such a nature as to render much that is urged in his favor
irrelevant. He had the charge of this money. It was his care, vigilance,
and intelligence which were the safeguards of its protection. If he had
as full an appreciation as he indicates of the importance of having a
safe, he must have known that in its absence additional care and
watchfulness on his part were necessary, whatever his escort or his
clerk might do.

But notwithstanding all this he seemed quite content to leave this large
sum of money in the hands of those sent to him, not to have the custody
of his funds, but to guard him from violence and robbery. On the very
morning of the day the theft was committed he had found fault with the
sergeant for leaving the money in the stage while he took breakfast, and
had said to him that he (the sergeant) ought to have brought it in with
him. He here furnishes his own definition of the kind of care which
should have been taken of the money--the sergeant "ought to have brought
it in with him;" and this suggests the idea that it would have been
quite consistent with his duty, and perhaps not much beneath his
dignity, if he had taken it in himself. (Chief Paymaster Terrell, in a
letter favoring leniency, states that the coin could not have weighed
less than 15 pounds.)

It must certainly be conceded that what then took place plainly warned
him that to insure the safety of this money he must either take personal
charge of it or he must at least be sure that those to whom he
surrendered it were watchful and vigilant. And yet when, a few hours
later, on the same day, upon arriving at Antelope Springs, he was
informed by the sergeant that he did not propose to take dinner there,
the paymaster almost casually said to him, "Then you stay at the stage,"
and he himself went to a room at the station to warm himself. When, as
he went from there to the dining room, he passed the stage and saw no
one near it except a stock tender, a very conservative idea of duty and
care would have induced him to stop at the stage and ascertain the
condition of affairs. If he had done so, he probably would have found
the money there, and could have taken it in with him or watched it until
some of his party came out from dinner. Instead of doing this, he
himself went to the dining room, and indicated his surprise at seeing
the sergeant there by looking at him sharply. However, as he was just
eating his pie, nothing was said.

It is not improbable that the thief waited for the clerk and escort, and
lastly the paymaster himself, to enter the dining room before venturing
to take, entirely unmolested, the valise containing the money. When it
is considered that after finishing his pie the sergeant came out to
the stage so nearly the exact moment of the theft that, though badly
mounted, he was able to approach near enough in pursuit of the fleeing
thief to exchange revolver shots with him, it is quite apparent that the
loss might have been prevented if the paymaster had remained a short
time by the stage when he saw it unprotected, or had taken the valise in
with him, or promptly diverted the attention of the sergeant from his
pie to the money which all had abandoned.

When, therefore, it is said that this loss can be charged in any degree
to the neglect or default of the Government, it is answered that the
direct and immediate cause of the loss was the omission on the part of
this paymaster of the Government, in whose custody these funds were
placed, of the plainest and simplest acts of prudence and care.

The temptation is very strong to yield assent to the proposition for
the relief of a citizen from liability to the Government arising from
conduct not absolutely criminal; but the bonds and the security wisely
exacted by the Government from its officers to insure proper discharge
of public duty will be of very limited value if everything is to be
excused except actual dishonesty.

I am thoroughly convinced that the interests of the public would
be better protected if fewer private bills were passed relieving
officials, upon slight and sentimental grounds, from their pecuniary
responsibilities; and the readiness with which army officers join in
applications for the condonation of negligence on the part of their
army comrades does not tend, in my opinion, to maintain that regard
for discipline and that scrupulous observance of duty which should
characterize those belonging to their honorable profession.

I can not satisfy myself that the negligence made apparent in this case
should be overlooked.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 21, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 823, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Hannah C. De Witt."

An act the precise duplicate of this was passed at the present session
of the Congress, and received Executive approval on the 10th day of
March, 1888. Pursuant to said act the name of the beneficiary mentioned
in the bill herewith returned has been placed upon the pension rolls.
The second enactment is of course entirely useless, and was evidently
passed by mistake.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 21, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 418, entitled "An act granting
a pension to William H. Brokenshaw."

The history of the military service of the beneficiary mentioned in this
bill, as derived from the records of the War Department, shows that he
was received at draft rendezvous at Jackson, Mich., on the 25th day of
March, 1865; that he was sent to the Twenty-fourth Regiment of Michigan
Volunteers on the 29th day of the same month, and that he was present
with his command, without any record of disability, from that date until
the 30th day of June, 1865, when he was mustered out with his company.
It will thus be seen that he was in the service a few days more than
three months, just at the close of the war. It is not alleged that he
did any actual fighting.

In 1883 he filed an application for pension, alleging that on the
evening of the 25th of March, 1865, being the day he was received at
rendezvous, he was injured in his ribs while getting into his bunk by
three other recruits, who were scuffling in the room and who jumped upon
him or crushed him against the side of his bunk.

An examination upon such application made in 1884 tended to show an
injury to his ribs, but the claim was rejected upon the ground that no
injury was incurred in the line of duty. It must be conceded that upon
the claimant's own showing he was not injured as an incident to military
service.

Aside from this objection, it is hardly possible that an injury of this
kind, producing the consequences which it is alleged followed its
infliction, could have been sustained by this soldier and not in the
least interrupted the performance of his military service, though such
service was very short and probably not severe. When with this it is
considered that eighteen years elapsed between the date of the alleged
injury and the soldier's application for pension, I am satisfied that no
injustice will be done if the disposition made of this case by the
Pension Bureau is allowed to stand.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 21, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 4633, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Morris T. Mantor."

The records in this case show that the beneficiary named in this bill
enlisted on the 25th day of February, 1864, and that he was mustered out
July 18, 1865.

It is also shown that though he was reported sick a considerable part of
his period of service there is no mention of any trouble with his eyes.

In the year 1880 he filed an application for pension, alleging dropsy
and disease of his eyes, caused by an explosion of ammunition.

The case was examined in 1882 and 1883, and was again specially examined
very thoroughly and critically in 1885.

The evidence thus secured seemed to establish the fact that the
claimant's eyes were sore for many years before enlistment, and that
their condition before that date, during his service, and after his
discharge did not materially differ. It also appeared that no
pensionable disability from dropsy had existed since the filing of his
application.

On these grounds the application was rejected, and I am convinced such
action was entirely justified.

The reported conduct of the claimant on the last examination and his
attempts to influence witnesses in their testimony add weight to the
proposition, quite well established by the proof, that his claim to a
pension lacks merit.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 24, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 5247, entitled "An act granting
a pension to William H. Brimmer."

The beneficiary named in this bill enlisted September 5, 1864, as a
wagon master, and was discharged on the 30th day of May, 1865. There is
no record of any disability during his short service.

In February, 1888, nearly twenty-three years after his discharge, he
filed an application for a pension, alleging that in the fall of 1864 he
was made to carry sacks of corn, which produced a weakness of the walls
of the abdomen, resulting in rupture. In an affidavit filed upon said
application the claimant testifies that he said nothing about his injury
or disability to anyone while in the service and can furnish no evidence
except his own statement.

The first and only medical evidence presented touching this claim is
that of Dr. Reynolds, who examined him in 1880 or 1881, who then came
to the conclusion that the claimant was suffering from an incomplete
hernia, which a few months thereafter developed in the right groin. From
this examination and testimony no hint is furnished that the injury was
due to military service, nor any intimation that it might be.

In February, 1888, a medical examination was made under direction of
the Pension Bureau, when it was found that the claimant had the general
appearance of being healthy and well nourished, but that he had a small
uncomplicated inguinal hernia on the right side, which was easily
retained.

I can not believe upon the facts presented that an injury of the
character alleged could have been sustained in the service and still
permitted the performance of all the duties of wagon master for months
thereafter, remaining undeveloped for so many years, and that there
should now be such a lack of testimony connecting it with any incident
of military service.

I believe the rejection of this claim was right and just upon its
merits.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 24, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill 6908, entitled "An act granting a
pension to William P. Witt."

The beneficiary named in the bill was enrolled for one hundred days'
service on the 13th day of July, 1864, and was mustered out on the 16th
day of November, in the same year. The record shows that he was reported
present on all rolls until he was mustered out.

He filed a claim for pension in 1884, alleging that he incurred chronic
diarrhea, liver disease, rheumatism, and a disease of the head affecting
his hearing during his military service. Two comrades testify to his
being sick and being in the hospital to such an extent as to wholly
discredit his presence with his company. A physician testifies that he
prescribed for him some time in the month of November, 1864, for liver
disease and jaundice, to which rheumatism supervened, confining him six
weeks or more.

There seems to be a complete hiatus of any medical or other evidence
concerning his physical condition from that time until nearly twenty
years thereafter, in July, 1884, when he was examined, and it was found
that he had impaired hearing in both ears, but no symptoms of
rheumatism, and that his liver was normal.

Without further detailing particulars, the entire complexion of this
case satisfies me that the claimant contracted no pensionable disability
during his one hundred days of service.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 24, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 4550, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Chloe Quiggle, widow of Phillip Quiggle."

The husband of the beneficiary named enlisted February 11, 1865, and was
discharged September 27, 1865. The records show that he was reported
August 31, 1865, as "absent, confined in post prison at Chattanooga
since August 18, 1865."

He filed a claim for pension June 25, 1880, alleging that after a march
from Chattanooga to a point 1-1/2 miles distant and back he upon his
return drank some water, which produced diarrhea, since which time he
had been troubled also with disease of kidneys and rheumatism.

He died in September, 1882, and the claim then pending on his behalf
was completed by his widow. After a special examination the claim for
diarrhea was, on the 21st day of April, 1887, allowed from September 28,
1865, to January 1, 1870, when it was shown that any disability from
this cause ceased. The claim for disease of kidneys and rheumatism was
rejected upon the ground that no such disabilities were shown to be due
to military service.

The widow filed a claim on her own behalf August 27, 1883, alleging the
death of the soldier from the results of prostration by heat while
marching near Nashville, Tenn., and also from disease of kidneys,
rheumatism, and chronic diarrhea.

It is reported to me that the evidence taken during a special
examination of this case established that before and after enlistment
the soldier was addicted to the excessive use of intoxicating liquors.

One physician stated to the examiner that shortly after the soldier's
discharge he found him suffering from disease of kidneys and from
rheumatism and diarrhea, but that he concluded the disease of the
kidneys had been coming on for a year; that it could not have been
caused by a sunstroke a few weeks previously, and that the diseases were
of longer standing than that.

Another physician who attended the soldier during his last illness
testified that he did not know that he suffered from any disease until
the summer of 1882; that he found him suffering from retention of urine,
and that the difficulty rapidly developed into an acute attack of
Bright's disease; that no indications of rheumatism were found, but that
the disease progressed steadily and was a well-marked case of Bright's
disease of the kidneys. He also testified that the origin of the disease
was no doubt recent, though possibly it might have existed in a low form
for some years.

A medical examination in May, 1882, developed no disease of the kidneys.

It seems to me that all the reliable testimony in the case tends to show
beyond a doubt that the soldier's death was not due to any incident of
his military service. I do not find that the medical testimony given by
his neighbors makes a suggestion that it was, and upon all the facts I
am of the opinion that the pension which has been already allowed was a
liberal disposition of the case.

The beneficiary named in this bill is aged, and it would certainly be a
gratification to grant her relief; but the question is whether we do
well to establish a precedent for the allowance of claims of this
character in the distribution of pension funds.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 30, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 465, entitled "An act granting
a pension to William Sackman, sr."

The beneficiary named in this bill served from December 24, 1861, to
February 29, 1864, in the Fifth Regiment of the Missouri Militia
Cavalry.

He was discharged on the day last named for disability. His certificate
of discharge states his disability as follows:

Palpitation of the heart and defective lungs, the disability caused by
falling off his horse near Fredericktown, Mo., while intoxicated, on
detached service, in the month of September, 1862. Not having done any
duty since, a discharge would benefit the Government and himself.

It appears that a claim for pension was filed in the year 1881, in which
the claimant alleged that--

At Fredericktown, Mo., about the 10th or 12th of April, 1863, he had
three ribs broken by falling from his horse while surrounded by
guerrillas.

It will be seen that while the certificate of discharge mentions a fall
in September, 1862, no allusion is made to any fracture of ribs, while
the claimant alleges such an injury occurred in April, 1863.

In 1885 the surgeon who made the medical certificate attached to the
discharge, in answer to an inquiry made by the Commissioner of Pensions,
says:

I have to state that I remember the case very distinctly. I made the
examination in person, and was thoroughly acquainted with the case. I
read the statement on which the application for discharge was based to
the man, and he consented to have the papers forwarded as they read.
The application for pension is fraudulent and should not be allowed.

I have omitted references made to the habits of the soldier by this
medical officer.

Of course much reliance should be placed upon these statements made by
an officer whose business it was to know the exact facts, and who made
his certificate at a time when such facts were fresh in his mind. There
is no intimation that the surgeon who made the statement referred to was
inimical to the soldier or influenced by any unjust motive.

The attempt to impeach the record thus made is based upon affidavits
made by a number of the soldier's comrades, who testify to his character
and habits, and only three of whom speak of an injury to the soldier
caused by falling from his horse. Two of these affiants allege that they
were with the claimant on detached duty when his horse took fright and
ran away with him, injuring him so that he could not rise and get on his
horse without assistance. So far as these affidavits are before me, no
date of this occurrence is given, nothing is said as to the character of
the injuries, and no reference is made to the condition of the soldier
at the time. The third affiant, who speaks of an injury, says that it
occurred while on duty on the march from Pilot Knob to Cape Girardeau,
in the year 1862 or 1863, and that it was caused by the soldier's being
thrown from his horse. He says further that the soldier was not
intoxicated at that time.

No mention is made that I can discover of any fracture of the ribs
except in the claimant's application for pension made in 1881, seventeen
years after his discharge, and in a report of an examining surgeon made
in 1882.

With no denial of the soldier's condition, as stated by the surgeon,
on the part of the only parties who claim to have been present at
the time of the injury, I can not satisfy myself, in view of the other
circumstances surrounding this case, that the allegations contained in
the claimant's discharge are discredited.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _April 30, 1888_.

_To the Senate_:

I return without approval Senate bill No. 838, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Mary Sullivan."

On the 1st day of July, 1886, an act was approved which is an exact copy
of the one herewith returned. In pursuance of that act the beneficiary's
name was placed upon the pension rolls.

A second law for the same purpose is of course unnecessary.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 1, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 19, entitled "An act for the
relief of H.B. Wilson, administrator of the estate of William Tinder,
deceased."

The purpose of this bill is to refund to the estate of William Tinder
the sum of $5,000, which was paid to the Government by his administrator
in June, 1880, upon the following facts:

In 1876 two indictments were found against one Evans, charging him with
passing counterfeit money. In May, 1878, he was tried upon one of said
indictments and the jury failed to agree. Thereupon the prisoner entered
into two recognizances in the sum of $5,000 each, with W.R. Evans and
William Tinder as sureties, conditioned for the appearance of the
prisoner Evans at the next term of the court, in November, 1878, for
trial upon said indictment. Before that date, however, the prisoner fled
the country and failed to appear according to the condition of his bond.
In the meantime William Tinder died and H.B. Wilson was appointed his
administrator.

Suits were brought upon the two bail bonds, and, the liability of the
sureties not being admitted, the suits were tried in March, 1880,
resulting in two judgments in favor of the United States and against the
surety Evans and the estate of Tinder for $5,000 each and the costs.

Soon thereafter an application was made by the administrator of the
estate of William Tinder for relief, and an offer was made by him to pay
$5,000 and the costs in compromise and settlement of the liability of
said estate upon said two judgments.

These judgments were a preferred claim against the estate, which was
represented to be worth sixteen or eighteen thousand dollars. The other
surety, Evans, was alleged to be worthless, and it was claimed that
neither the administrator of the Tinder estate nor his attorneys had
known the whereabouts of the indicted party since his flight, and that
some time would elapse before certain litigation in which the estate was
involved could be settled and the claims against it paid.

It was considered best by the officers of the Government to accept the
proposition of the administrator, which was done in June, 1880. The sum
of $5,099.06, the amount of one of said judgments, with interest and
costs, was paid into the United States Treasury, and the estate of
Tinder was in consideration thereof released and discharged from all
liability upon both of said judgments.

Thus was the transaction closed, in exact accordance with the wishes and
the prayer of the representative of this estate and by the favor and
indulgence of the Government upon his application. There was, so far as
I can learn, no condition attached, and no understanding or agreement
that any future occurrence would affect the finality of the compromise
by which the Government had accepted one-half of its claim in full
settlement.

It appears that in 1881 the party indicted was arrested and brought to
trial, which resulted in his conviction; and apparently for this reason
alone it is proposed by the bill under consideration to open the
settlement made at the request of the administrator and refund to him
the sum which he paid on such settlement pursuant to his own offer.

I can see no fairness or justice to the Government in such a proposition.
I do not find any statement that the administrator delivered the
prisoner to the United States authorities for trial. On the contrary, it
appears from an examination made in the First Comptroller's Office that
he was arrested by the marshal on the 25th day of May, 1881, who charged
and was paid his fees therefor. And if the administrator had surrendered
the prisoner to justice it would not entitle him to the repayment of the
money he has paid to compromise the two judgments against him.

The temptation to relieve from contracts with the Government upon
plausible application is, in my opinion, not sufficiently resisted;
but to refund money paid into the public Treasury upon such a liberal
compromise as is exhibited in this case seems like a departure from all
business principles and an unsafe concession that the interests of the
Government are to be easily surrendered.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 3, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 4534, entitled "An act for the
relief of Emily G. Mills."

The object of this bill is to provide a pension for the beneficiary
named therein as the widow of Oscar B. Mills, late a second assistant
engineer, retired, in the United States Navy. The deceased was appointed
an acting third assistant engineer in October, 1862, and in 1864 he was
promoted to the place of second assistant engineer.

It is supposed that while in active service he did his full duty, though
I am not informed of any distinguished acts of bravery or heroism. In
February, 1871, he was before a naval retiring board, which found that
he was incapacitated for active service on account of malarious fever,
contracted in 1868, and recommended that he be allowed six months' leave
of absence to recover his health.

In December, 1871, he was again examined for retirement, and the board
found that he was not in any way incapacitated from performing the
duties of his office. The next year, in 1872, another retiring board,
upon an examination of his case, found that he was "laboring under
general debility, the effect of intermittent fever acting upon an
originally delicate constitution," and he was thereupon placed upon the
retired list of the Navy.

On the 10th day of August, 1873, he was accidentally shot and killed by
a neighbor, who was attempting to shoot an owl.

As long as there is the least pretense of limiting the bestowal of
pensions to disability or death in some way related to the incidents of
military and naval service, claims of this description can not
consistently be allowed.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 7, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 1406, entitled "An act to
provide for the sale of certain New York Indian lands in Kansas."

Prior to the year 1838 a number of bands and tribes of New York
Indians had obtained 500,000 acres of land in the State of Wisconsin,
upon which they proposed to reside. In the year above named a treaty was
entered into between the United States and these Indians whereby they
relinquished to the Government these Wisconsin lands. In consideration
thereof, and, as the treaty declares, "in order to manifest the deep
interest of the United States in the future peace and prosperity of
the New York Indians," it was agreed there should be set apart as a
permanent home for all the New York Indians then residing in the State
of New York, or in Wisconsin, or elsewhere in the United States, who
had no permanent home, a tract of land amounting to 1,824,000 acres,
directly west of the State of Missouri, and now included in the State
of Kansas--being 320 acres for each Indian, as their number was then
computed--"to have and to hold the same in fee simple to the said tribes
or nations of Indians by patent from the President of the United
States."

Full power and authority was also given to said Indians "to divide said
lands among the different tribes, nations, or bands in severalty," with
the right to sell and convey to and from each other under such rules and
regulations as should be adopted by said Indians in their respective
tribes or in general council.

The treaty further provided that such of the tribes of these Indians as
did not accept said treaty and agree to remove to the country set apart
for their new homes within five years or such other time as the
President might from time to time appoint should forfeit all interest
in the land so set apart to the United States; and the Government
guaranteed to protect and defend them in the peaceable possession and
enjoyment of their new homes.

I have no positive information that any considerable number of these
Indians removed to the lands provided for them within the five years
limited by the treaty. Their omission to do so may have been owing to
the failure of the Government to appropriate the money to pay the
expense of such removal, as it agreed to do in the treaty.

It is, however, stated in a letter of the Secretary of the Interior
dated April 6, 1878, contained in the report of the Senate committee to
whom the bill under consideration was referred, that in the year 1842
some of these Indians settled upon the lands described in the treaty;
and it is further alleged in said report that in 1846 about two hundred
more of them were removed to said lands.

The letter of the Secretary of the Interior above referred to contains
the following statement concerning these Indian occupants:

From death and the hostility of the settlers, who were drawn in that
direction by the fertility of the soil and other advantages, all of the
Indians gradually relinquished their selections, until of the Indians
who had removed thither from the State of New York only thirty-two
remained in 1860.

And the following further statement is made:

The files of the Indian Office show abundant proof that they did not
voluntarily relinquish their occupation.

The proof thus referred to is indeed abundant, and is found in official
reports and affidavits made as late as the year 1859. By these it
appears that during that year, in repeated instances, Indian men and
widows of deceased Indians were driven from their homes by the threats
of armed men; that in one case at least the habitation of an Indian
woman was burned, and that the kind of outrages were resorted to which
too often follow the cupidity of whites and the possession of fertile
lands by defenseless and unprotected Indians.

An agent, in an official letter dated August 9, 1859, after detailing
the cruel treatment of these occupants of the lands which the Government
had given them, writes:

Since these Indians have been placed under my charge, which was, I
think, in 1855, I have endeavored to protect them; but complaint after
complaint has reached me, and I have reported their situation again and
again; and I hope that it will not be long when the Indians who are
entitled to land under the decision of the Indian Office shall have it
set apart to them.

The same agent, under date of January 18, 1860, referring to these
Indians, declares:

These Indians have been driven off their land and claims upon the New
York tract by the whites, and they are now very much scattered and many
of them are very destitute.

It was found in 1860 that of all the Indians who had prior to that
date selected and occupied part of these lands but thirty-two remained,
and it seems to have been deemed but justice to them to confirm their
selections by some kind of governmental grant or declaration, though
it does not appear that any of them had been able to maintain actual
possession of all their selected lands against white intrusion. Thus
certain special commissioners appointed to examine this subject, under
date of May 29, 1860, make the following statement:

In this connection it may be proper to remark that many of the tracts
so selected were claimed by lawless men who had compelled the Indians
to abandon them under threats of violence; but we are confident that no
serious injury will be done to anyone, as the improvements are of but
little value.

On the 14th day of September, 1860, certificates were issued to the
thirty-two Indians who had made selections of lands and who still
survived, with a view of securing to them such selections and at the
same time granting to them the number of acres which it was provided
they should have by the treaty of 1838. These certificates were made
by the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, and declared that in conformity
with the provisions of the treaty of 1838 there had been assigned and
allotted to the person named therein 320 acres of the land designated in
said treaty, which land was particularly described in said certificates,
which concluded as follows:

And the selection of said tract for the exclusive use and benefit of
said reserve, having been approved by the Secretary of the Interior, is
not subject to be alienated in fee, leased, or otherwise disposed of
except to the United States.

In a letter dated September 13, 1860, from the Indian Commissioner to
the agent in the neighborhood of these lands reference is made to the
conduct of white intruders upon the same, and the following instructions
were given to said agent:

In view of these representations and the fact that these white persons
who are in possession of the land are intruders, I have to direct
that you will visit the New York Reserve in Kansas at your earliest
convenience, accompanied by those Indians living among the Osages to
whom said lands have been allotted, with a view to place them in
possession of the lands to which they are entitled; and if you should
meet with any forcible resistance from white settlers you will report
their names to this office, in order that appropriate action may be
taken in the premises, and you will inform them that if they do not
immediately abandon said lands they will be removed by force. When you
shall have given the thirty-two Indians peaceable possession of their
lands, or attempted to do so and have been prevented by forcible
resistance, you will make a report of your action to this Bureau.

The records of the Indian Bureau do not disclose that any report was
ever made by the agent to whom these instructions were given.

In 1861 and 1862 mention was made by the agents of the destitute
condition of these Indians and of their being deprived of their lands,
and in these years petitions were presented in their behalf asking that
justice be done them on account of the failure of the Government to
provide them with homes.

In the meantime, and in December, 1860, the remainder of the reserve not
allotted to the thirty-two survivors was thrown open to settlement by
Executive proclamation. Of course this was followed by increased
conflict between the settlers and the Indians. It is presumed that it
became dangerous for those to whom lands had been allotted to attempt to
gain possession of them. On the 4th day of December, 1865, Agent Snow
returned twenty-seven of the certificates of allotment which had not
been delivered, and wrote as follows to the Indian Bureau:

A few of these Indians were at one time put in possession of their
lands. They were driven off by the whites; one Indian was killed, others
wounded, and their houses burned. White men at this time have possession
of these lands, and have valuable improvements on them. The Indians are
deterred even asking for possession. I would earnestly ask, as agent for
these wronged and destitute people, that some measure be adopted by the
Government to give these Indians their rights.

An official report made to the Secretary of the Interior dated February
16, 1871, gives the history of these lands, and concludes as follows:

These lands are now all or nearly all occupied by white persons who have
driven the Indians from their homes--in some instances with violence.
There is great necessity that some relief should be afforded to them by
legislation of Congress, authorizing the issue of patents to the
allottees or giving them power to sell and convey.

In this way they will be enabled to realize something from the land, and
the occupants can secure titles for their homes.

Apparently in the line of this recommendation, and in an attempt to
remedy the condition of affairs then existing, an act was passed on the
19th day of February, 1873, permitting heads of families and single
persons over 21 years of age who had made settlements and improvements
upon and were _bona fide_ claimants and occupants of the lands for
which the thirty-two certificates of allotments were issued to enter and
purchase at the proper land office such lands so occupied by them, not
exceeding 160 acres, upon paying therefor the appraised value of said
tracts respectively, to be ascertained by three disinterested and
competent appraisers, to be appointed by the Secretary of the Interior,
who should report the value of such lands, exclusive of improvements,
but that no sale should be made under said act for less than $3.75 per
acre.

It was further provided that the entries allowed should be made within
twelve months after the promulgation by the Secretary of the Interior of
regulations to carry said act into effect, and that the money arising
upon such sales should be paid into the Treasury of the United States
in trust for and to be paid to the Indians respectively to whom such
certificates of allotment had been issued, or to their heirs, upon
satisfactory proof of their identity, at any time within five years from
the passage of the act, and that in default of such proof the money
should become a part of the public moneys of the United States.

It was also further provided that any Indian to whom any certificate of
allotment had been issued, and who was then occupying the land allotted
thereby, should be entitled to receive a patent therefor.

Pursuant to this statute these lands were appraised. The lowest value
per acre fixed by the appraisers was $3.75, and the highest was $10,
making the average for the whole $4.90 per acre.

It is reported that only eight pieces, containing 879.76 acres of land
taken from six of these Indian allotments, were sold under this statute
to the settlers thereon, producing the sum of $4,058.06, and that the
price paid in no case was less than $4.50 per acre.

It is proposed by the bill under consideration to sell the remainder of
this allotted land to those who failed to avail themselves of the law of
1873 for the sum of $2.50 per acre.

Whatever may be said of the effect of the action of the Indian Bureau in
issuing certificates of allotment to individual Indians as it relates to
the title of the lands described therein, it was the only way that the
Government could perform its treaty obligation to furnish homes for any
number of Indians less than a tribe or band; and if these allotments did
not vest a title in these individual Indians they secured to them such
rights to the lands as the Government was bound to protect and which it
could not refuse to confirm if it became necessary by the issuance of
patents therefor.

These rights are fully recognized by the statute of 1873, as well as by
the bill under consideration.

The right and power of the Government to divest these allottees of their
interests under their certificates is so questionable that perhaps it
could only be done under the plan proposed, through an estoppel arising
from the acceptance of the price for which their allotted lands were
sold.

But whatever the effect of a compliance with the provisions of this bill
would be upon the title of the settlers to these lands, I can see no
fairness or justice in permitting them to enter and purchase such lands
at a sum much less than their appraised value in 1873 and for hardly
one-half the price paid by their neighbors under the law passed in that
year.

The occupancy upon these lands of the settlers seeking relief, and of
their grantors, is based upon wrong, violence, and oppression. A
continuation of the wrongful exclusion of these Indians from their lands
should not inure to the benefit of the wrongdoers. The opportunities
afforded by the law of 1873 were neglected, perhaps, in the hope and
belief that death would remove the Indians who by their appeals for
justice annoyed those who had driven them from their homes, and perhaps
in the expectation that the heedlessness of the Government concerning
its obligations to the Indians would supply easier terms. The idea is
too prevalent that, as against those who by emigration and settlement
upon our frontier extend our civilization and prosperity, the rights of
the Indians are of but little consequence. But it must be absolutely
true that no development is genuine or valuable based upon the violence
and cruelty of individuals or the faithlessness of a government.

While it might not result in exact justice or precisely rectify the
wrong committed, it may well be that in existing circumstances the
interests of the allottees or their heirs demand an adjustment of the
kind now proposed. But their lands certainly are worth much more than
they were in 1873, and the settlers, if they are not subjected to a
reappraisement, should at least pay the price at which the lands were
appraised in that year.

If the holders of the interests of the allottees have such a title as
will give them a standing in the courts of Kansas, I do not think they
need fear defeat by being charged with improvements under the occupying
claimants' act, for it has been decided in a case to be found in the
twentieth volume of Kansas Reports, at page 374, that--

Neither the title nor possession of the Indian owner, secured by
treaty with the United States Government, can be disturbed by State
legislation; and the occupying claimants' act has no application in
this case.

And yet the delay, uncertainty, and expense of legal contests should be
considered.

I suggest that any bill which is passed to adjust the rights of these
Indians by such a general plan as is embodied in the bill herewith
returned should provide for the payment by the settlers within a
reasonable time of an appraised value, and that in case the same is not
paid by the respective occupants that the lands be sold at public
auction for a price not less than the appraisement.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 9, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 4357, entitled "An act to erect
a public building at Allentown, Pa."

The accommodation of the postal business is the only public purpose for
which the Government can be called on to provide, which is suggested as
a pretext for the erection of this building. It is proposed to expend
$100,000 for a structure to be used as a post-office. It is said that a
deputy collector of internal revenue and a board of pension examiners
are located at Allentown, but I do not understand that the Government is
obliged to provide quarters for these officers.

The usual statement is made in support of this bill setting forth the
growth of the city where it is proposed to locate the building and the
amount and variety of the business which is there transacted; and the
postmaster in stereotyped phrase represents the desirability of
increased accommodation for the transaction of the business under his
charge.

But I am thoroughly convinced that there is no present necessity for the
expenditure of $100,000 for any purpose connected with the public
business at this place.

The annual rent now paid for the post-office is $1,300.

The interest, at 3 per cent, upon the amount now asked for this
new building is $3,000. As soon as it is undertaken the pay of a
superintendent of its construction will begin, and after its completion
the compensation of janitors and other expenses of its maintenance will
follow.

The plan now pursued for the erection of public buildings is, in my
opinion, very objectionable. They are often built where they are not
needed, of dimensions and at a cost entirely disproportionate to any
public use to which they can be applied, and as a consequence they
frequently serve more to demonstrate the activity and pertinacity of
those who represent localities desiring this kind of decoration at
public expense than to meet any necessity of the Government.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 10, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 7715, entitled "An act for the
relief of Georgia A. Stricklett."

By the terms of this bill a pension is allowed to the beneficiary above
named, whose husband died on the 21st day of July, 1873. It appears from
the records that he was mustered into the service to date from October
10, 1863, to serve for one year. It is alleged in the report of the
committee of the House who reported this bill that he was wounded with
buckshot in the face and head by bushwhackers, when on recruiting
service, on the 23d day of July, 1863. If these dates are correct, he
was wounded before he entered the service; but this fact is not made the
basis of the disapproval of the widow's application for relief. There
seems, however, to be no mention of any such injury during his term of
service, though he is reported sick much of the time when present with
his regiment, and is reported as once in hospital for a disease which,
to say the least of it, can not be recognized as related to the service.

The soldier himself made no application for pension.

A physician testifies that he was present on the 21st day of July, 1873,
when the soldier died; that he examined the body after death, and to the
best of his knowledge such death was caused partially by epilepsy, and
that the epilepsy was the result of "wounds about the face and head
received during his service during the war."

Another physician testifies that the soldier applied to him for
treatment in 1868, and that his disability was the development of
confirmed epilepsy, and he expresses the opinion that this was due to a
wound from a buckshot. This physician, while not giving epilepsy as the
cause of death, says that "had he lived to die a natural death he
certainly would have died an insane epileptic."

The report speaks of his death by "an accidental shot."

The truth appears to be that he was killed by a pistol shot in an
altercation with another man.

Unless it shall be assumed that the epilepsy was caused by the buckshot
wound spoken of, and unless a pension should be allowed because, if the
soldier had not been killed in an altercation, he might have soon died
from such epilepsy, this bill is entirely devoid of merit.

Surely no one will seriously propose that a claim for pension should
rest upon a conjecture as to what would have caused death if it had not
occurred in an entirely different way.

The testimony of the physician who testified in this case that death was
caused partially by epilepsy suggests the extreme recklessness which may
characterize medical testimony in applications for pension.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 18, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 2282, entitled "An act to
pension Mrs. Theodora M. Piatt."

The deceased husband of the beneficiary named in this bill served
faithfully and well in the volunteer service, and after his discharge as
major entered the Regular Army and was on the retired list at the time
of his death, which occurred on the 17th day of April, 1885. At that
time he seems to have been engaged in the practice of the law at
Covington, Ky.

He does not appear to have contracted any distinct and definite
disability in his army service, though his health and strength were
doubtless somewhat impaired by hardship and exposure.

It is conceded that he committed suicide by shooting himself with a
pistol.

A coroner's inquest was held and the following verdict was returned:

Benjamin M. Piatt came to his death from a pistol bullet through the
brain, fired from a pistol in his own hand, with suicidal intent,
while laboring under a fit of temporary insanity, caused by morbid
sensitiveness of wasted opportunities and constantly brooding over
imaginary troubles and financial difficulties.

It is said in support of his widow's claim for pension that, being lame
as a result, in part at least, of his military service, he, by reason of
such lameness, fell from a staircase a few months before his death, the
injury from which affected his mind, causing insanity, which in its turn
resulted in his suicide.

Much interest is manifested in this case, based upon former friendship
and intimacy with the deceased and kind feeling and sympathy for his
widow. I should be glad to respond to these sentiments to the extent of
approving this bill, but it is one of the misfortunes of public life and
official responsibility that a sense of duty frequently stands between a
conception of right and a sympathetic inclination.

The verdict returned upon the coroner's inquest, founded upon a friendly
examination of all the facts surrounding the melancholy death of this
soldier, made at the time of death and in the midst of his neighbors and
friends, both by what it contains and by what is omitted, together with
the other facts developed, leads me to the conclusion that if a pension
is granted in this case no soldier's widow's application based upon
suicide can be consistently rejected.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 18, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 5545, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Nancy F. Jennings."

William Jennings, the husband of the beneficiary named in this bill,
enlisted in October, 1861, and was discharged June 24, 1862, upon a
surgeon's certificate of disability, the cause of disability being
therein stated as "hemorrhoids."

He never applied for a pension, and died in 1877 of apoplexy.

In the report of the committee which reported this bill the allegation
is made that the deceased came home from the Army with chronic diarrhea
and suffered from the same to the date of his death.

The widow filed a claim for pension in 1878, which was rejected on the
ground that the fatal disease (apoplexy) was not due to military service
nor the result of either of the complaints mentioned.

If we are to adhere to the rule that in order to entitle the widow of a
soldier to a pension the death of her husband must be in some way
related to his military service, there can be no doubt that upon its
merits this case was properly disposed of by the Pension Bureau.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 18, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval a joint resolution, which originated in the
House of Representatives, "authorizing the use and improvement of Castle
Island, in Boston Harbor."

This island is separated from the mainland of the city of Boston by a
channel over one-half mile wide. Fort Independence is located on the
island, and it is regarded by our military authorities as quite
important to the defense of the city.

The proposition contained in the joint resolution is to permit the city
of Boston, through its park commissioners, to improve and beautify this
island in connection with a public park to be laid out in the city, with
the intention of joining the mainland and the island by the construction
of a viaduct or causeway across the water now separating the same.

It is quite plain that the occupancy of this island as a place of
pleasure and recreation, as contemplated under this resolution, would be
entirely inconsistent with military or defensive uses. I do not regard
the control reserved in the resolution to the Secretary of War over such
excavations, fillings, and structures upon the island as may be proposed
as of much importance. When a park is established there, the island is
no longer a defense in time of need.

This scheme, or one of the same character, was broached more than four
years ago, and met the disapproval of the Secretary of War and the
Engineer Department.

I am now advised by the Secretary of War, the Chief of Engineers, and
the Lieutenant-General of the Army, in quite positive terms, that the
resolution under consideration should not, for reasons fully stated by
them, become operative.

I deem the opinions of these officers abundant justification for my
disapproval of the resolution without further statement of objections.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 18, 1888_.

_To the Senate_.

I return without approval Senate bill No. 1064, entitled "An act for the
relief of L.J. Worden."

This bill directs the Postmaster-General to allow to L.J. Worden,
recently the postmaster at Lawrence, Kans., the sum of $625 paid out by
him as such postmaster for clerk hire during the period from July 1,
1882, to June 30, 1883.

The allowances to these officers for clerk hire and other like expenses
are fixed in each case by the Post-Office Department and are paid out of
an appropriation made in gross to cover them all. The excess of receipts
for box rents and commissions over and above the salary of the
postmaster is adopted by law as the maximum amount of such allowances in
each case, and within that limit the amount appropriated is apportioned
by the Post-Office Department to the different offices according to
their needs.

The allowances to the Lawrence post-office for the year ending June 30,
1883, was $3,100. This was fully its proportion of the appropriation
made by Congress for that year, and as much as was in most cases given
to other offices of the same grade. In September, 1882, during the
first quarter of the year in question, the postmaster made application
for an increase of his allowances, which was declined, and a similar
application in December of the same year was also declined. The reason
given for noncompliance with this request in both cases was a lack of
funds. It is the rule to make only such allowances in any year as can
be paid from the appropriation made for that period.

No further application for increase of allowances was made by Mr. Worden
until March, 1884, when the same were increased $300 for the year, to
date from the 1st day of January preceding.

It was found at that time, after a full and fair investigation by the
Department, which had in hand abundant funds for an increase of these
allowances, that notwithstanding the increase of business at this
post-office, $300 added to the allowances for the year from July 1,
1882, to June 30, 1883, was sufficient; and yet more than twice that sum
is added by the bill under consideration to the allowances for the year
last named.

Forty-four postmasters have submitted vouchers, amounting to nearly
$9,000, for clerk hire during that year in excess of allowances; but
they were all rejected, and I understand have not been insisted upon.

I assume that the Post-Office Department in 1884 dealt justly and fairly
by the postmaster at Lawrence, and upon this theory, if he should be
reimbursed any expenditure for a previous year, the demand he now makes
is excessive.

But the cases should be exceedingly rare in which postmasters are
awarded any more than the allowances made by the Department officers.
They have the very best means of ascertaining the amount necessary to
meet the demands of the service in any particular case, and it certainly
may be assumed that they desire to properly accommodate the public in
the matter of postal facilities. When the appropriation is sufficient,
the decision of the Department should be final; and when the money in
hand does not admit of adequate allowances, postmasters should only be
reimbursed money voluntarily expended by them when recommended by the
Postmaster-General.

Any other course leads to the expenditure of money by postmasters for
work which they should do themselves and to the employment of clerks
which are unnecessary. The least encouragement that they may be repaid
such expenditure by a special appropriation would dangerously tend to
the substitution of their judgment for that of the Department and to the
relaxation of wholesome discipline.

I think, when the application of Mr. Worden for an increase in his
allowances was twice declined for any cause during the year covering his
present demand, that if he made personal expenditures for clerk hire,
and especially if he did so without the encouragement of the Department,
they were made at his own risk. It appears, too, that the amount of his
claim is larger than can be justified in any event.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

The time allowed the Executive by the Constitution for the examination
of bills presented to him by Congress for his action expired in the case
of the bill herewith returned on Saturday, May 19. The Senate adjourned
or took a recess on Thursday afternoon, May 17, until to-day, the 21st
of May.

On the day of said recess or adjournment the above message, disapproving
said bill and accompanying its return to the Senate, where it
originated, was drawn, and on May 18 was engrossed and signed. On
Saturday, the 19th of May, the Senate not being in session, the message
and the bill were tendered to the Secretary of the Senate, who declined
to receive them, and thereupon they were on the same day tendered to the
President of the Senate, who also declined to receive the same, both of
these officials claiming that the return of said bill and the delivery
of said message could only properly be made to the Senate when in actual
session.

They are therefore transmitted as soon as the Senate reconvenes after
its recess, with this explanation.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

[May 22 the Senate proceeded, as the Constitution prescribes, to
reconsider the said bill returned by the President of the United States
with his objections, pending which it was ordered that the said bill and
message be referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections. No
action was taken.]

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 19, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 88, entitled "An act granting a
pension to Sally A. Randall."

Antipas Taber enlisted in the War of 1812 and was discharged in the year
1814. There is no claim made that he received any injury in the Army or
that his death, which happened long after his discharge, was in the
slightest degree related to his military service. It does not appear
that he ever made any application for a pension or was ever upon the
pension rolls. He died at Trinidad, in the island of Cuba, April 11,
1831, leaving as his widow the beneficiary mentioned in this bill. About
twenty-two years after his death, and in February, 1853, she married
Albert Randall, and twenty years thereafter, in October, 1873, Randall
died, leaving her again a widow.

It is alleged in the report of the committee in the House to which this
bill was referred that Mrs. Randall is a worthy woman, 75 years of age,
in needy circumstances, with health much impaired, and that the petition
for her relief was signed by prominent citizens of Norwich, Conn., where
she now resides.

All this certainly commends her case to the kindness and benevolence of
the citizens mentioned, and the State of Connecticut ought not to allow
her to be in needy circumstances.

It seems to me, however, that it would establish a bad precedent to
provide for her from the Federal Treasury. From the statement of her
present age she must have been born during the time of her first
husband's enlistment. She knew nothing of his military service except as
the same may have been detailed to her. Her first widowhood had no
connection with any incident or condition of health traceable to such
service, and her second husband, with whom she lived for twenty years,
never entered the military service of the Government.

I do not see how the relief proposed can be granted in this case without
an unjustifiable departure from the rules under which applications for
pension should be determined.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 19, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 879, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Royal J. Hiar."

The beneficiary named in this bill enlisted November 11, 1861, in the
First Regiment of Michigan Engineers and Mechanics. He is reported as
absent without proper authority from May 24, 1862, to January 15, 1863,
when he was discharged by reason of varicose veins of the left leg and
thigh, claimed to have existed before enlistment.

He filed a claim for pension August 30, 1876, alleging disease of the
right side and hip, due to typhoid pneumonia, contracted while repairing
a hospital tent in March, 1862.

There is no record of this disease. The proof he furnishes of the same
is extremely slight, though he was furnished ample opportunity. The
disability of which he complains has no natural relation to the sickness
he claims to have had during his service, but is quite a natural result
of "an injury while logging," to which some of the witnesses examined in
a special examination of the case attribute it.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 19, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 5234, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Cyrenius G. Stryker."

The beneficiary named in this bill enlisted for nine months in
September, 1862, and was discharged June 27, 1863.

His enlistment was in Company A, Thirtieth New Jersey Regiment. The bill
proposes to pension him as "a private in Company A, Thirtieth Regiment
New York Volunteers."

He alleges that he was pushed or fell from the platform of a car in
which he was transported to Washington after enlistment and injured his
spine. On the claim which he presented to the Pension Bureau in June,
1879, repeated medical examinations failed to reveal any disability from
the cause alleged, and after a special examination his claim was
rejected because, with the assistance of such special examination, the
claimant did not prove the origin of alleged injury in service and the
line of duty or a pensionable degree of disability therefrom since
discharge.

The evidence now offered in support of this claim appears to have
reference to a time long anterior to its rejection by the Pension Bureau
in 1886, and does not impeach the finding of the Bureau that at the
latter date there existed no pensionable disability.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 19, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 3579, entitled "An act granting
a pension to Ellen Shea."

This beneficiary is an old lady and a widow. Her son, Michael Shea,
enlisted in January, 1862. The records show that he was sick on one or
two occasions during his service. He is also reported as a deserter and
absent without leave and in arrest and confinement fully as often as he
was sick. He was discharged January 20, 1865.

No application for a pension has been made on his behalf. The mother
filed a claim for pension in July, 1884, alleging that her son
contracted a fever in the service which resulted in insanity, which was
the cause of his death on the 10th day of March, 1884.

He was killed by a snow slide in the State of Colorado. The only hint
that his death was in any way connected with the service is the
suggestion that not having the proper use of his mind he wandered away
and was killed.

His mother now lives in Chicago and, I suppose, lived there at the
time of her son's death. There is very little evidence offered of any
unsoundness of mind, and his death occurring at Woodstock, Colo., it is
hardly to be supposed that he wandered that far. And as tending to show
that unsoundness of mind had nothing to do with his death it may be
mentioned that an attorney having the mother's application for pension
in charge withdrew from the case in October, 1884, for the reason that,
having made inquiries at the place where the soldier was killed, he
found that his death was caused by a snow slide, and that he was
informed that a number of other persons lost their lives at the same
time.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 19, 1888_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I return without approval House bill No. 8164, entitled "An act granting
a pension to William H. Hester."

It is claimed that the beneficiary named in this bill was injured by
sand blowing in his eyes during a sand storm while in the service in the
year 1869, resulting in nearly if not quite total blindness.

It is conceded in the report of the committee to which this bill was
referred in the House that the claim for pension made by this man to the
Pension Bureau was largely supported by perjury and forgery; but the
criminality of these methods is made to rest upon three rogues and
scoundrels who undertook to obtain a pension for the soldier, and it is
stated by the committee as their opinion that the claimant himself was
innocent of any complicity in the crimes committed and attempted.

I have quite a full report of the papers filed and proceedings taken in
relation to the claim presented to the Pension Bureau, and I am sorry
that I can not agree with the committee of the House as to the merits of
the application now made or the good faith and honesty of the
beneficiary named in the bill herewith returned.

Among the facts presented I shall refer to but one or two touching the
conduct of the claimant himself.

Upon his examination, under oath, by a special examiner, he stated that
he was brought to Washington to further his claim by a man named Miller,
one of the rascally attorneys spoken of in the committee's report; that
Miller was to pay his expenses while in Washington, and was to receive
one-third of the money paid upon the claim.

This is not the conduct of a man claiming in good faith a pension from
the Government.

He further stated under oath that his eyes became affected about January
15, 1869, by reason of a sand storm; that the sand blew into them and
cut them all to pieces; that he was thereafter hardly able to see or get
around and wait on himself, and that Edward N. Baldwin took care of him
in his tent.

This Mr. Baldwin was found by the special examiner and testified that he
knew the claimant and served in same regiment and bunked with him; that
he never knew of the sand storm spoken of by Hester; that he never knew
that he had sore eyes in the service; that he (Baldwin) did not take
care of him when he was suffering with sore eyes, and that he never knew
of Hester being sick but once, and that was when he had eaten too much.
He was shown an affidavit purporting to be made by him and declared the