The SPEAKER. That point of order is not one upon which the Chair can rule, because it is entirely within the control of the House. The gentleman from New York [Mr. WHEELER] calis the previous question. If the House desires to entertain amendments they can refuse to second the demand for the previous question.

Mr. WHEELER. I said that I would hear the amendments that gentlemen may desire to offer.

Mr. HOLMAN. I have another amendment which perhaps the gentleman will allow to come in. I desire to move to insert after the words "shall be deemed just and equitable," in the first section of the proposed substitute, the words "not less than $50,000."

Mr. WHEELER. That proposition is now before the House in an amendment proposed to the original bill.

Mr. HOLMAN. Is it in the substitute?
Mr. WHEELER. It is not.

Mr. HOLMAN. I hope the gentleman will allow that amendment to be moved to the substitute.

Mr. WHEELER. I cannot permit such an amendment to be offered.

Mr. HOLMAN. Then I hope the House will vote down the demand for the previous question.

Mr. BANKS. I desire to move an amend. ment to show our confidence in the President of the United States. I desire to move to amend the first section of the proposed substi tute by inserting after the words "which amount," the words "when the award shall have been approved by the President of the United States." I think there can be no objection to that amendment.

Mr. WHEELER. I have no objection to it. Mr. RANDALL. Will the gentleman allow the addition of the words and by Congress?"

Mr. WHEELER. No, sir.

66

The amendment to the substitute was agreed to.

Mr. SPEER, of Pennsylvania. I desire to move an amendment.

Mr. WHEELER. I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island, [Mr. EAMES,] who has an amendment which he wishes to offer. I will hear his amendment read.

Mr. EAMES. I move to amend the first section of the proposed substitute by striking out the words "and to take into account as well any benefits or any injury which may accrue to the Government of the United States from the execution of this act," and inserting in place thereof the words "of the true and just value for the uses for the purposes aforesaid of the one half of said island." Also to strike out the words "as in their judgment, or in the judgment of a majority of them, shall be deemed just and equitable," and insert the words "ascertain as aforesaid." If so amended, that portion of the section will read as follows:

Provided, That within one month from the passage of this act the President of the United States shall appoint three commissioners, who shall be authorized, at the expense of the Central Pacific Railroad Company, to examine said island, to hear allegations and proofs of the true and just value for the uses and for the purposes aforesaid of the one half of said island; and within three months from their appointment said commissioners, or a majority of them, shall award such sum for the use of said half of said island, as granted by this act, ascertained as aforesaid, &c.

Mr. WHEELER. I decline to admit that amendment.

Mr. HOLMAN. I desire to call the attention of the gentleman from New York [Mr. WHEELER] to this fact: I hold in my hand the manuscript report of the stenographer of what occurred, and which I desire to read.

Mr. WHEELER. That question has been decided already.

Mr. HOLMÁN. I rise to a question of order. I insist that where there is a unanimous under

standing as to what the action of the House shall be it must be followed strictly. When the previous question was called upon the motion to reconsider the following occurred

The SPEAKER. The gentleman will see at once that there was no unanimous consent given in this case; there was a division, which division was emphasized by the yeas and nays. This is not a case where the Chair can enforce the unanimous consent of the House. Where a gentleman obtains the unanimous consent of the House to do a certain thing upon certain conditions, then it is the duty of the Chair to enforce those conditions. But where there has, been a division upon a question, which division has been emphasized by the yeas and nays, the gentleman will see at once that the Chair could not rule that the gentleman from New York must conduct this bill in a certain way. And the gentleman will further observe that should a majority of the House not second the demand for the previous question the bill will then be open for amendment in the widest latitude. Mr. HOLMAN. The gentleman said that the bill would be open to amendments. Mr. SPEER, of Pennsylvania. I desire to propose an amendment.

Mr. WHEELER. I will hear it.

Mr. SPEER, of Pennsylvania. I desire to move to insert after the words "shall appoint three commissioners," in the first section of the proposed substitute, the words "none of whom shall be interested directly or indirectly in said company." Also in the same section, after the words "who shall be authorized at the expense of the Central Pacific Railroad Company," insert the words "after being duly sworn or affirmed faithfully to perform their duties."

Mr. WHEELER. I will not be a party to casting any such imputation upon the President of the United States.

Mr. SPEER, of Pennsylvania. That is a very dignified way of evading an honest amend

ment.

Mr. WHEELER. I have no objection to the last part of the amendment, which requires these commissioners to be sworn.

Mr. BINGHAM. The other can do no harm.

Mr. SPEER, of Pennsylvania. There is no reflection upon the President. It is only to put him upon inquiry as to the men who may be recommended to him.

Mr. HOAR. I suggest that the word "disinterested" be inserted before the word " commissioners."

Mr. SPEER, of Pennsylvania. I accept that.

Mr. WHEELER. I have no objection to that, nor have I any objection to requiring the commissioners, when taking their official oath, to swear that they have no interest in this railroad.

The SPEAKER. The Chair desires to understand what is agreed upon between gentle

men.

Mr. WHEELER. I assent to the amendment providing that these commissioners shall be sworn, and that in the oath which they are to take for the faithful performance of their duties they shall swear that they have no interest in this corporation.

The SPEAKER. If there be no objection that amendment will be incorporated in the bill. The Chair hears no objection.

Mr. GARFIELD, of Ohio. I desire to offer an amendment, to insert at the end of the first section the following:

And when notified by the President of the United States to remove any or all of their buildings and improvements, the said company, its successors, and assigns, shall do so without any expense or charge to the United States; and in case of refusal or neglect to do so the said buildings and improvements may be removed by the United States at the expense of said company, its successors and assigns: And be it further provided, That if the half of the island selected as aforesaid shall contain any buildings or other improvements erected by the United States, the said company shall pay to the United

States the cost of the same before occupying said lands, the said sum to be determined and collected by the Secretary of War.

Mr. WHEELER. As to the first proposition it is unnecessary, because the substitute provides that Congress may at any time alter, repeal, or modify this act. As to the second proposition, I cannot assent to it.

Mr. GARFIELD, of Ohio. The amend ment simply provides that the company shall not have a claim against the United States for the cost of removing their buildings, &c., when required by the Government.

Mr. WHEELER. I decline to admit the amendment.

Mr. GARFIELD, of Ohio. I hope the House, by voting down the previous question, will allow that amendment to be offered and adopted.

Mr. MAYNARD. Has the gentleman from New York considered the propriety of amending the substitute by striking out the words at the expense of the Central Pacific Railroad Company" in the following proviso of the first section?

Provided, That within one month from the passage of this act, the President of the United States shall appoint three commissioners, who shall be authorized, at the expense of the Central Pacific Railroad Company, to examine said island, to hear allegations and proofs, and to take into account as well any benefits or any injury which may accrue to the Government of the United States from the execution of this act.

Mr. WHEELER. As to that proposition I will say

Mr. HOLMAN. I object to debate unless we are allowed to offer amendments.

The SPEAKER. Debate is objected to. The question is on seconding the demand for the previous question. The Chair will order tellers in order to save time, as they will undoubtedly be demanded. The gentleman from New York, Mr. WHEELER, and the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. HOLMAN, will act as tellers. The House divided; and the tellers reported-ayes 86, noes 66.

So the previous question was seconded. Mr. HOLMAN. In order to give time for reflection, I move that the House now adjourn. Mr. RANDALL. I suggest that the amendments be printed.

The SPEAKER. The Chair will suggest to the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HOLMAN] that by an order of the House adopted last week, sessions have been fixed for this evening and to-morrow evening, to consider reports from the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

Mr. HOLMAN. I modify my motion and move that the House now take a recess until half past seven o'clock.

The question being taken on the motion of Mr. HOLMAN, there were-ayes 51, noes 81. Mr. COX called for tellers.

Tellers were ordered; and Mr. Cox and Mr. WHEELER were appointed.

The House divided; and the tellers reported-ayes 46, noes 77.

Mr. RANDALL. I call for the yeas and

nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

Mr. FARNSWORTH. As a recess is to be taken till half past seven o'clock this evening, and as it is now four o'clock, we might as well take the recess now as after spending time in calling the roll. I suggest that by unanimous consent the recess be taken now. Mr. WHEELER. I have no objection.

Mr. GARFIELD, of Ohio. The only objection is that it cuts into the business of another day. I hope gentlemen will let us get on with the public business.

Mr. RANDALL. It is plunging deeper into the coffers of the Government whenever we pass this bill.

Mr. GARFIELD, of Ohio. I agree with the gentleman as to that.

There being no objection, the House (at four o'clock and five minutes p. m.) took a recess till half past seven o'clock p. m.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee, reported back the following petitions; which were referred to the Committee on Revolutionary Pensions and War of 1812:

Petition of Josephine Mills and Martha T. Mills, heirs of Daniel W. Mills, for the compensation and bounty due him for services in the war of the Revolution;

Papers relating to the petition of Ellis Lewis Brown, for pension;

Petition of certain soldiers of the war of 1812; and

Petition of N. R. Colvin and others, for pensions to soldiers who served fourteen days during the war of 1812.

CAROLINE S M'GHEE.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee, reported back the petition of Caroline S. McGhee, widow of Samuel McGhee, company F, second regiment Tennessee volunteers; which was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs.

SARAH M'ENANY.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee, reported back a bill (S. No. 347) granting a pension to Sarah McEnany, with amendments.

The bill, which was read, authorizes and directs the Secretary of the Interior to place upon the pension roll subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of Sarah McEnany, widow of James McEnany, late private of company C, eleventh regiment Maine volunteers, and the names of their minor children under sixteen years of age, and pay them a pension from the passage of this act. The amendments were read as follows: Strike out Enany" and insert "Nana" strike out" eleven" and insert" first;" strikeout" Maine" and insert" Vermont artillery:" so it will read:

That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to place upon the pension-roll, subject to the provisions and limitations ofthe pension laws, the name of Sarah McNana, widow of James McNana, late a private in company C, first regiment Vermont artillery volunteers, and the names of their children under sixteen years of age, and pay them a pension from the passage of this act.

The amendments were agreed to.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

The title was then amended so as to read, "An act granting a pension to Sarah McNana."

WILLIAM E. PICKENS.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee, reported back a bill (H. R. No. 1064) to amend an act entitled "An act granting a pension to William E. Pickens," with the recommendation that it do pass.

The bill, which was read, provides that an act approved March 3, 1871, entitled "An act granting a pension to William E. Pickens," be amended by striking out from the said act the words "by a gunshot wound received," and by adding the following: "provided, that a pension shall be granted him as of the rank of second lieutenant;" so it will read:

That the Secretary of the Treasury be authorized and directed to place upon the pension-roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of William E. Pickens, of Blount county, Tennessee, who was disabled in the secret service of the United States, on the night of the 7th November, 1861: Provided, Said pension shall be granted him as of the rank of second lieutenant, and shall be paid to him after the passage of said act.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

MRS. JANE W. M'KEE.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee, reported a bill (H. R. No. 2395) increasing the pension of Mrs. Jane W. McKee; which was read a first and second time.

The bill, which was read, directs the Secretary of the Interior to place on the pensionroll, subject to the limitations and provisions of the pension laws, the name of Mrs. Jane W. McKee, widow of William R. McKee, late colonel of the second regiment Kentucky volunteers, at the rate of fifty dollars per month, the certificate of pension now held by said Mrs. Jane W. McKee to be surrendered and canceled from and after the passage of this

act.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

MARY A. MORRIS.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee, reported back, with the recommendation that it do pass, the bill (H. R. No. 1872) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to place the name of Mary A. Morris, widow of Major General William W. Morris, upon the pensionroll at the rate of fifty dollars per month.

The bill, which was read, directs the Secretary of the Interior to place the name of Mary A. Morris, widow of Major General William W. Morris, upon the pension roll, subject to the laws and regulations of the pension service, at the rate of fifty dollars per month, to commence from the passage of this act, and to be in lieu of the pension heretofore granted to the said Mary A. Morris under the general pension laws.

Mr. HOLMAN. Inasmuch as this is out of the ordinary course of pensions, I wish to call the attention of the House to the rule which I did not suppose had been varied from of granting a pension of fifty dollars to a given class of widows whose husbands were killed in battle. Now, is it not to be apprehended, if the practice is adopted of giving widows of major generals or brigadier generals generally a pension of fifty dollars a month, or if it is adopted to any considerable extent, that it will become imperative that the practice will be adopted as a rule? If it is desirable that it should be adopted as a rule, would it

not be better to change the law at once? I understand that, according to the pension laws, the pensions for widows of officers of all these grades are at the rate of thirty dollars per month.

Mr. MOORE. I will say in reply to the gentleman from Indiana, [Mr. HOLMAN,] that the Committee on Invalid Pensions have no idea of considering all cases of that kind which are brought before them. There are, however, three or four cases which have been presented to us during this session upon which we have passed favorably.

The case of Mrs. Morris is a very peculiar one. Her husband served about sixty years in the Army of the United States, and died poor. One of his sons, an officer, was killed in the service; and this old lady, one of the most estimable women in this country, is entirely dependent upon her pension. She is a most elegant woman, and asks this favor at the hands of Congress; and regarding her case as exceedingly meritorious, the committee are unanimous in recommending the passage of this bill.

Another case which I have here on the list is that of the widow of General Sumner, which will be reported this evening or to-morrow night for the House to act upon. These are exceptional cases, and the committee thought were very meritorious. I hope there will be no objection to the passage of this bill for the relief of Mrs. Morris.

Mr. HOLMAN. I am exceedingly reluc tant to raise any objection to the passage of this bill. I think the rule which the House adopted a few years ago was a very reasonable one, and that was that where the husband was killed on the field of battle the widow should be entitled to a pension of fifty dollars a month.

Mr. MOORE. Let me correct the gentleman; there is no such law.

Mr. HOLMAN. I speak of the rule on the part of Congress, upon which it acted steadily. The last of those cases was that of Mrs. General Hackelman, who received increased pension.

But that is the only class to which increased pensions have been granted. There seem to be a great many meritorious cases where Congress is very glad to increase the pension beyond thirty dollars a month, but there does not, from the statement of the gentleman from Illinois, seem to be anything very peculiar about the merits of this case. A gallant general dies, and his widow receives a pension of thirty dollars a month. It is now proposed to increase that pension to fifty dollars a month. It seems to me that it will be found that there are very few instances where a pension of thirty dollars is allowed where it may be necessary to increase the pension to fifty dollars a month; but inasmuch as thirty dollars a month is now the rule, it seems to me that that rule should be of general application, and that the widows of our gallant officers, from the grade of lieutenant colonel up, who are now receiving thirty dollars a month ought to receive fifty dollars a month if others receive the same amount. I have great reluctance to make objection to the bill.

Mr. MOORE. The gentleman is mistaken about the existence of any such rule. If the widow of an officer who has been killed in battle should make application, and she were well circumstanced, we should by no means give her an increase of pension; but in this case the widow is wholly dependent on the pension; she relies upon no child, and her family has suffered exceedingly. She is now quite old, and a more worthy person is not to be found in this country, and whatever the increase may be, it will not last for long. She distinguished herself during the period of her husband's long service in the Army, as being one of the most benevolent and kind persons to the soldiers, and she deserves this consideration.

Mr. HOLMAN. I only wish to say to the

gentleman from Illinois that he apprehends the rule I spoke of-a class of pensioners whose pensions were increased from thirty dollars to fifty dollars a month. That class was uniformly confined to the widows of generals who fell in battle. The gentleman may perhaps remember the discussion which occurred upon this subject a few years ago.

Mr. MOORE. The gentleman is so far mistaken that I will give him a single case, the case of Mrs. Myra Clarke Gaines, who was granted a pension, the half pay of a major general, larger pay than this, and not on account of her husband being killed in battle.

Mr. HOLMAN. I do not say that there are not such instances, but I say that the increased pensions should be limited to that one class; there have been exceptions at all times.

Mr. HAZELTON, of Wisconsin. And this is a good exception.

Mr. SCOFIELD. I do not understand what the statement of facts in this case is, for I was not in, but I do not want to oppose the bill, because I do not know anything about it. The fact that this party is poor is in her favor, but we ought to have a rule so that pensioners from all parts of the country shall be treated alike. Now, the Committee on Pensions of the last Congress did have a rule on that subject; widows of generals who fell upon the field were allowed a pension of fifty dollars a month.

Mr. MOORE. Ah, well, now my friend is mistaken. I beg to inform him that I think I speak advisedly, as chairman of the Committee of Pensions, that there was no such rule. It is a mistake on the part of my friend.

Mr. SCOFIELD. No, sir, it is no mistake. The gentleman was not chairman at that time. I wish to say that there was a case from my district, from the county of Erie; the case of Mrs. Vincent, whose husband fell in battle in Virginia. It was a very hard case; she was a young lady, but without means, and a great deal of sympathy was felt for her. I had her papers here, and the committee told me at once that it came within the rule; but they learned afterward that he was not made a general. He was a colonel when he fell, and his commission as general did not arrive until after he was dead, and therefore he was never mustered in as general. The widow was not allowed such a pension; and upon consultation with a great many members of the committee, particularly with the chairman, they said they never went beyond that rule.

Mr. MOORE. That is not so. Mr. SCOFIELD. What is not so? That they did not so inform me?

Mr. MOORE. Oh, no; not that. Mr. SCOFIELD. I stated what they in formed me, that is all; and the gentleman said, "That is not so. Now, I want the committee to be governed by some kind of a rule, so that when the people of my district say to me, "Why don't you get special bills passed for those cases?" I can say that the rule is against it. And when they inform me that Mrs. So-and-so has a pension, I want to be able to say that the facts in her case are such as to bring her within the rule.

Mr. MOORE. I will state to the honor. able gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Sco. FIELD] that if this House could adopt a rule that would apply to all these cases, we could enact it into a law, and they would not have to come here for special acts. When we relieve persons by special acts we always act upon the particular merits of each individual case. We have just passed a bill for the relief of the widow of a colonel who fell in the Mexican war, giving her a pension of fifty dollars a month. There were peculiar considerations in her case. Her son, a brave young man, who furnished his mother with $1,000 a year for her support, was killed in the recent Corean expedition. These exceptional cases appeal to the House with a great deal of force. The fact that we yield in such 42D CONG. 2D SESS.-No. 170.

exceptional cases does not bind us to give a pension of fifty dollars a month to every widow of a colonel or of a general. It must be known to members of this House that there were hundreds of generals who fell in battle whose widows are drawing but thirty dollars a month.

Mr. HOLMAN. The gentleman is mistaken; there is not a single exception. Every widow of a general who fell in the last war now draws a pension of fifty dollars a month. The practice began in the Fortieth Congress, and continued down to the close of the last Congress. I am confident I am correct in this matter, for I was deeply interested in some of the cases that went through the House on that ground alone.

Mr. MOORE. I ask a vote on this bill.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

MARTHA R. WHITE.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same commit tee, reported a bill (H. R. No. 2396) granting a pension to Martha R. White; which was read a first and second time.

The question was upon ordering the bill to be engrossed and read a third time.

The bill, which was read, directs the Secretary of the Interior to place upon the pensionroll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of Martha R. White, widow of William M. Reed, a soldier of the war of 1812, and to pay her a pension from and after the passage of this act.

Mr. WILLARD. I call for the reading of the report.

The report was read; and it states that Mrs. White is cut off from the benefit of the act of 1871, granting pensions to soldiers of the war of 1812 and their widows, for the reason that after living a long while in widowhood she was again married. Her second husband soon died and left her again destitute. She is now very poor, and maintained principally by the charity of her neighbors. She is seventy

seven years old, and cannot long remain a pensioner. Her last husband was a very active and valuable soldier, and died soon after the close of the war. Mrs. White has received only an eighty-acre land warrant. In view of her great age, that she is very poor, and debarred from pension only by reason of her second marriage, at which time she was not in receipt of a pension, the committee recommend the passage of a bill for her relief.

Mr. WILLARD. I will ask the chairman of the committee whether his committee grant pensions in cases like this, where there has been a remarriage. The Committee on Revolutionary Pensions and War of 1812 have not done so. I do not claim for our committee jurisdiction of this case; I only want to know the rule which the gentleman's committee has adopted.

Mr. MAYNARD. How old is this widow?

Mr. MOORE. Seventy-seven years of age. Mr. Speaker, I will remark that this case comes under the jurisdiction of our committee by an agreement with the chairman of the Committee on Revolutionary Pensions and War of 1812.

Mr. WILLARD. I do not raise any objection on the ground of jurisdiction.

Mr. MOORE. This old lady did remarry, but as my friend from Maine [Mr. PETERS] suggests, not much, her second husband living only about three weeks. [Laughter.] The case is one that appeals very strongly to the sympathies of the House.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

MARGARET C. GIBSON.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee, reported a bill (H. R. No. 2397) granting a pension to Margaret C. Gibson; which was read a first and second time.

The bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to place upon the pensiou-roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of Margaret C. Gibson, widow of Jacob Gibson, who was killed while on duty as a scout in the service of the United States, and to pay her a pension of eight dollars a month from and after the passage of this act.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

MARTHA G. RUDOLPH.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee, reported a bill (H. R. No. 2398) granting a pension to Martha G. Rudolph; which was read a first and second time.

The bill, which was read, directs the Secretary of the Interior to place on the pensionroll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of Martha G. Rudolph, widow of John C. Rudolph, to receive the pension now provided by law for widows of enlisted men who died in the service and in the line of duty.

Mr. ARCHER. If there is a report in this case I would like to hear it, unless the chairman of the committee will make some explanation.

Mr. MOORE. There is no report in the case further than a statement contained in the petition, which can be read if the gentleman desires it. Unless, however, some one insists upon the reading of the petition, I will, in order to save time, state that this is the case of the widow of a wagon-master, who was employed as such in the State of Kentucky in 1862. He was never mustered into the service. This bill has been recommended by the Committee on Invalid Pensions, and reported by me at the request of a member of the House; and I should not have insisted upon its passing the committee but for the fact that at the time this man was employed, in 1862, the War Department did recognize such an office as wagon-master. In September, 1862, I believe, an order was issued abolishing that office as a regimental office. This man was, however, employed as master of a wagon-train which he conducted to Cumberland Gap. Returning, he started with another train into East Tennessee; but he sickened and died with typhoid fever. He was not mustered in, but was employed as a wagon-master. At the request of an officer of the Army he took twelve teamsters with him to Lexington, Kentucky, he himself receiving an appointment as wagonmaster; and he died in the service.

This, I believe, is a correct statement of the case. It is not a case altogether regular in its character; but it appears to the committee meritorious.

Mr. ARCHER. Is it not a variation from the usual rule to pension civil employés of the Army or their legal representatives?

Mr. MOORE. When a teamster or wagonmaster has been mustered into the service, he has been considered as entitled to a pension; but if not thus connected with the military service he has not been regarded as entitled to a pension. As I have already stated, this man was employed as a wagon-master prior to the order of September, 1862, and died in the service. I conceive that this case presents a

just claim; and in this view the committee agreed to report the bill to the House.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

ADA H. M'DONALD.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee, reported a bill (H. R. No. 2399) granting a pension to Ada H. McDonald; which was read a first and second time.

The bill, which was read, authorizes and directs the Secretary of the Interior to place on the pension-roll, subject to the limitations and provisions of the pension laws, the name of Ada H. McDonald, widow of Charles McDonald, late colonel of the first regiment of militia of the district of Memphis, Tennessee, organized under orders of the War Department, and to pay her a pension from and after the pas sage of this act; provided, if the widow shall cease to draw the pension hereby granted, the same may be continued to the minor son of Colonel McDonald, the only surviving child, until he is sixteen years of age.

The bill, which was read, authorizes and directs the Secretary of the Interior to place on the pension-roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of Margaret Coldwell, dependent mother of Edward C. Coldwell, late sergeant of company I, fifteenth regiment Kentucky infantry volunteers, and pay her a pension from the date of the passage of this act.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote

by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the

table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

MARTHA A. BROOKS.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee, reported a bill (H. R. No. 2402) granting a pension to Martha A. Brooks; which was read a first and second time.

The bill, which was read, authorizes and directs the Secretary of the Interior to place upon the pension roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of Martha A. Brooks, widow of John W. Brooks, late sergeant of company I, sixtyninth regiment Ohio volunteers.

Mr. MOORE. There are reports in all of these cases which may be read if any member so desires. This soldier was on a veteran furlough and not on a sick furlough. It is a meritorious case, and ought to be passed.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote

that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

Mr. MOORE. I will make a single statement in reference to this case, which I wish the House to understand. Colonel McDonald was killed in the city of Memphis by falling from his horse while on review as a colonel of a regiment raised in the State of Tennessee by orders from the War Department. He was one of the most gallant officers in the Army. He was known through the entire West as a man of high character, and as a gal-by which the bill was passed; and also moved lant soldier he had served through three years with distinction. By orders from the War Department he was made the colonel of one of these regiments raised by authority of the War Department, but as he was not directly connected with the United States force, his pension was not granted by the bureau. He leaves but one child, a son, and the provision of the bill is that if the widow should cease to draw the pension by this special act, the only son of this gallant officer shall continue to draw it until he is sixteen years of age. It is a meritorious case. No better or braver officer was in the service. I hope this bill will pass without any opposition.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

WILLIAM B. TAYLOR.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee, reported a bill (H. R. No. 2400) granting a pension to William B. Taylor; which was read a first and second time.

The bill, which was read, authorizes and directs the Secretary of the Interior to place on the pension-roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of William B. Taylor, late a private in company E, seventy-third regiment Illinois volun

teers.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

MARGARET COLDWELL.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee. reported a bill (H. R. No. 2401) granting a pension to Margaret Coldwell; which was read a first and second time.

GEORGE G. GARDNER.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee, reported a bill (H. R. No. 2403) granting a pension to George G. Gardner; which was read a first and second time.

The bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to place upon the pension-roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of George G. Gardner, late a private in the one hundred and ninety-seventh regiment Pennsylvania volunteers, in lieu of the naval pension of six dollars per month now held by him.

Mr. MOORE. This is a very feeble old man who has been drawing a pension of six dollars a month, and asks that it be increased to eight dollars. It is a very worthy claim, and it is a very small favor that we are asked to grant. He is certainly entitled to it. He was a marine, or has been in the Navy; he has served both in the Navy and Army all his life-time, and now gets only six dollars a month. He is not able to earn a cent.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.
ELIZABETH O'NEILL.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same commit. tee, reported a bill (H. R. No. 2404) granting a pension to Elizabeth O'Neill; which was read a first and second time.

read a third time; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time, and passed.

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

JULIA WHISTLER.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee, reported a bill (H. R. No. 2405) granting a pension to Julia Whistler; which was read a first and second time.

The bill directs the Secretary of the Interior provisions and limitations of the pension laws, to place on the pension-roll, subject to the the name of Julia Whistler, widow of William Whistler, late a colonel in the United States Army, to take effect from the passage of this

act.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

MARGARET RILEY.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee, reported a bill (H. R. No. 2406) granting a pension to Margaret Riley; which was read a first and second time.

The bill, which was read, directs the Secretary of the Interior to place on the pensionroll, subject to the limitations and provisions of the pension laws, the name of Margaret Riley, widow of Charles Riley, late private of company B, twelfth regiment Kentucky volunteer cavalry, and pay her a pension from and after the passage of this act.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved

that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

ELIZABETH CUPP.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee, reported a bill (H. R. No. 2407) granting a pension to Elizabeth Cupp; which was read a first and second time.

The bill, which was read, authorizes and directs the Secretary of the Interior to place upon the pension-roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of Elizabeth Cupp, widow of Valentine Cupp, late a captain in the Missouri home guards, and pay her a pension from and after the passage of this act.

Mr. McCORMICK, of Missouri. I should like to hear the report in that case read. The report was read.

Mr. McCORMICK, of Missouri. I would only say that this case is a very fair and meritorious one.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

HANNAH E. CURRIE.

a first and second time.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and

The question was upon ordering the bill to be engrossed and read a third time.

The bill, which was read, directs the Secretary of the Interior to place on the pensionroll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of Hannah E. Currie, mother of Samuel A. Currie, late

major of the thirty-third regiment Ohio volun. teers, to take effect from the passage of this

act.

Mr. TOWNSEND, of New York. I would like to have the report read, or some statement made in reference to this case.

The report was read.

Mr. McCORMICK, of Missouri. I would irquire the amount of pension per month that this bill grants to the mother of this deceased soldier?

Mr. MOORE. Twenty dollars a month; he was a captain.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

MARY A. SHOEMAKER.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee, reported a bill (H. R. No. 2409) granting spension to Mary A. Shoemaker; which was read a first and second time.

The question was upon ordering the bill to be engrossed and read a third time.

The bill, which was read, directs the Secretary of the Interior to place on the pensionroll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of Mary A. Shoemaker, widow of Horace Shoemaker, late captain in the Missouri State militia, in lieu of the pension now held by her.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

MINOR CHILDren of b. f. BROWNE.

Mr. MOORE also, from the same committee, reported a bill (H. R. No. 2410) granting a pension to the minor children of Benjamin Franklin Browne; which was read a first and second time.

The question was upon ordering the bill to be engrossed and read a third time.

Mr. GARFIELD, of Ohio. I would inquire of the gentleman from Illinois, the chairman of the Committee on Pensions, if all these pensions are limited to the date of the passage of the act?

Mr. MOORE In all the cases I have presented, I think, the pension has been limited to the date of the passage of the act. If any bills have been passed extending the pension beyond the time of the passage of the act, the House need not have any apprehension that they will pass at the other end of the Capitol; but I think they are all drawn so that the pen. sions shall date from the passage of the act. Members of the committee have altered their b.is so as to conform with that rule of the Senate with the exception of one or two cases in the hands of the gentleman from Ohio, (Mr. PECK,] which he prefers not to change, hat to leave to the action of the House.

Mr. GARFIELD, of Ohio. I think it will facilitate the passage of these bills if it is anderstood that that was the case unless something was stated to the contrary.

Mr. MOORE. If any bill of the kind should come in the attention of the House shall be called to it.

Mr. GARFIELD, of Ohio. Of course I do not mean to say that there cannot ever be cases where we ought to go back, but when a a provides for arrears of pensions we ought to know it.

Mr. KILLINGER. I have watched these pils very closely, and I believe not one has passed in which the provision was not that the pension should date from the passage of the act.

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

Mr. MOORE moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table.

The latter motion was agreed to.

A. SCHUYLER SUTTON.

Mr. PECK, from the Committee on Invalid Pensious, reported a bill (H. R. No. 2411) granting a pension to A. Schuyler Sutton;

which was read a first and second time. 'The question was on ordering the bill to be engrossed and read a third time.

The bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to place on the pension-roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of A. Schuyler Sutton, late a private in company A, ninety fifth regiment Ohio volunteers, at the rate of thirty dollars per month from the passage of this act, and in addition thereto to pay him at the rate of fifteen dollars per month from December 15, 1863, to the time this act shall take effect.

Mr. HOLMAN. This is a peculiar bill. I trust there will be some explanation of it. Mr. PECK. This is a very meritorious case. Mr. Sutton was in the Mexican war in 1846 and 1847. At the breaking out of the rebellion he enlisted as a private, went to Columbus, Ohio, and was authorized by Governor Tod to organize and drill the ninetyfifth Ohio regiment, with the promise that he should be made its lieutenant colonel. Before he obtained his commission he was sent to Kentucky, and immediately on his arrival there he went into battle under General NelHe was wounded in the face, fracturing both sides of the jaw. He is now deaf in one ear, paralyzed in his limbs, and unable to properly masticate his food. He only asks that he be put on the pension-roll as lieutenant colonel, instead of his present rate of He was pension of fifteen dollars per mouth.

son.

a lawyer, but is now unable to attend to any business. I really think this is a very meritorious case.

Mr. MOORE. I desire to make a statement in reference to this case. This man was a brilliant young lawyer. When he was ordered into battle he was acting as lieutenant colonel, and his commission was expected; everything had been done in good faith. His wound was so terrible that for one whole year the man was without consciousness. He was

a proud-spirited man, and during all these years he has lived upon the means he had, feeling that he never would ask for relief from the Government until driven to it by extremity. I have never heard of another such case. He was It is one of the most peculiar cases. never mustered into service, for he did not know his own name for twelve months after he was wounded. He has spent about eleven thousand dollars of property that he had, and is now utterly unable to do anything for his own support. He asks no more than he ought to get. Whether he will get it at the other end of the Capitol or not, I cannot say; but I think this House ought to grant it to him.

Mr. GARFIELD, of Ohio. I desire to ask the gentleman who has charge of this bill if it provides for vacating his present pension? If we are now to give him thirty dollars a month, that should be in lieu of his present pension of fifteen dollars per month. I suppose it is not meant to give him this in addition to his present pension.

Mr. PECK. In the first place, he was granted a pension of eight dollars per month, which was afterward increased to fifteen dollars per month. Now he asks that his pension shall be thirty dollars per month as lieutenant colonel. The committee think he should have it in lieu of his present pension of fifteen dollars a month.

Mr. GARFIELD, of Ohio. I move to amend

this bill so as to provide that the pension hereby granted shall be in lieu of the pension he now receives.

Mr. PECK. I have no objection, for that is the intention of the bill.

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. TOWNSEND, of New York. It seems to me that there has been made a very considerable provision for this suffering soldier. And now it is proposed to go back and give him $1,500 more, making $3,000 in all.

pension of thirty dollars a month. Mr. PECK. It is proposed to give him a

Mr. TOWNSEND, of New York. If I understand this bill, it proposes to go back and pay this man fifteen dollars a month in addition to what he is already receiving.

Mr. PECK. It proposes that his total pension shall be thirty dollars a month from the time he received the wound.

Mr. TOWNSEND, of New York. At what time was he wounded?

Mr. PECK. I think in 1863.

Mr. TOWNSEND, of New York. Then the bill proposes to extend this pension back nine years.

Mr. PECK. This man after being wounded He had some was insensible for a whole year. little private fortune which is now exhausted. It is a most meritorious case.

Mr. TOWNSEND, of New York. I move to amend the bill so as to provide that this increased pension shall begin from the present time.

Mr. PECK. I do not yield for any amend

Mr. PECK. No; the intention is to give him thirty dollars a month from the date of his injury.

Mr. SMITH, of New York. I wish to ask the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. PECK] one question. I am in favor of this bill upon its merits; but I wish to inquire whether this case is not on all fours with the case in which a veto message was received from the President of the United States to-day?

Mr. MOORE. I have no doubt we shall pass that bill over the veto of the President. Mr. PECK. I call for a vote on the passage of the bill.

Mr. MOORE. I ask that the language of the bill be so amended as to read "acting lieutenant colonel."

The SPEAKER pro tempore, (Mr. NIBLACK.) That change can be made by unanimous consent. The Chair hears no objection, and the bill will be so amended.

Mr. GARFIELD, of Ohio. As the bill is now amended it amounts to this: it gives this man who acted as lieutenant colonel thirty dollars a month from the date of his injury. In other words, it adds to what he has already received enough to make his pension thirty dollars a month from that time. I think the bill is all right and ought to be passed.

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

Mr. PECK moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. The latter motion was agreed to.

HELEN M. SMITH.

Mr. PECK also, from the same committee, reported a bill (H. R. No. 2412) granting a pension to Helen M. Smith; which was read a first and second time.

The bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to place on the pension-roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of Helen M. Smith, widow of Preston T. Smith, who died at Beverly, West Virginia, in February, 1862, while in the employ of the Government, the pension to be at the