claims $2,941.22, for loss by exchange, with request that I furnish you with a report upon so much of Mr. W.'s memorial as relates to his claim for loss by exchange.

On the 5th instant the House of Representatives passed a resolution requesting the Secretary of the Treasury to furnish copies of the papers on file in his Department in relation to the claim of Mr. Wheeler, for losses by exchange on drafts for his salary, together with the grounds upon which said claim was disallowed by the Treasury Department.

A copy of this resolution was referred by the Secretary of the Treasury to this office for report, which report has just been prepared and transmitted to the Secretary this day.

Inasmuch as the report is full, and will doubtless be satisfactory, and as it will be in possession of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, of which Mr. Sickles is a member, it is suggested that a reference to it may be sufficient for Mr. Sickles's purposes, and thus the labor of copying it and the consequent delay be saved.

If, however, upon this explanation you still desire a special report, I will, with pleasure, cause it to be prepared.

The letter of Mr. Sickles and accompanying papers are herewith returned.

Respectfully,

Hon. JOHN APPLETON,

W. MEDILL, Comptroller.

7

Assistant Secretary of State.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

Fifth Auditor's Office, May 24, 1858.

GENTLEMEN: Your letter of this day, inquiring as to the action of this office upon Mr. Wheeler's account, as minister resident to Nicaragua, and the grounds of that action, came to hand this morning. There was no difficulty or uncertainty about Mr. Wheeler's accounts for salary or disbursements, made by him in the line of his duty as minister. All such accounts were properly vouched and allowed in this office as charged and claimed by Mr. Wheeler. The only item of his accounts that presented any difficulty was the charge for loss in exchange. The facts, as they appeared in this office in Mr. Wheeler's case, were these: Mr. Wheeler was authorized to draw upon “Baring Brothers," of London, for his salary, and, of course, to get his money he was forced to sell his drafts in Nicaragna for the highest price he could get. Those drafts were nominally worth par in that country, and were not selling at a discount; but to enable him to sell his drafts at par, he was forced to take the currency of that country also at par. This currency was composed of two kinds; one kind was a coin passing currently in Nicaragua called a dollar, which contained 33 per cent alloy and 67 per cent of pure silver, compared with the United States coin; and, consequently, a dollar of that currency was only worth, commercially, 76 cents. The other currency of that country consisted of United States ten-cent pieces, eight of which was of greater intrinsic value than a local dollar of that country; and thus, by common consent, eight United States dimes passed for a dollar. It appeared that Mr. Wheeler sold his drafts at par, but to do so, was forced to and did take 8 dimes or 80 cents United States coin for each dollar of his drafts, thus losing upon each dollar drawn for 20 cents. The Government was bound to pay Mr. Wheeler in Nicaragua 100 cents to the dollar, United States coin; but as the Government sent no money to Nicaragua to pay his salary and expenses, he was forced to sell his drafts there, and take such money and at such price as he could get. If he had refused to take 8 United States dimes to the dollar, he would have been forced to take a Nicaraguan dollar, which would only have been worth 76 cents, and thus his loss would have been 24 cents to the dollar.

Under those circumstances this office decided that Mr. Wheeler, being a Government agent, was bound to sell his drafts for the highest price he could get, and therefore he was bound to take 8 dimes to the dollar when he could do so. It appeared plain to this office that if the Government had paid to Mr. Wheeler, in Nicaragua, his salary in United States dollars (either in gold or silver), as the Government was bound to do, he would have saved thereby 20 cents on each dollar of his salary, which, under the circumstances, he was forced to and did lose, all of which was caused by drawing bills on London instead of paying him in United States coin in Nicaragua.

This office could not regard this loss in any other light than as loss in exchange, not believing that because, in common parlance in that country, 8 dimes was called a dollar, it really was a dollar, or that it was worth as much to Mr. Wheeler as 10 dimes (his real due) would have been. Thus he was allowed 20 per

cent loss in exchange upon all his drafts sold in that country; but drafts drawn and sold in the United States he was not allowed any loss. Thus you are answered as to what action this office took in Mr. Wheeler's case, and the principles upon which that action was based.

With great respect, I am your obedient servant,

The COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS.

House of Representatives in Congress.

MURRAY MCCONNEL,

Fifth Auditor.

By a resolution of the House of Representatives, passed 5th May, 1858, "copies of the papers on file in the Treasury Department, in relation to the claim of J. H. Wheeler, late minister to Nicaragua, for losses charged to have been sustained by him by discounts upon drafts for his salary, together with the grounds upon which said claim was disallowed by the Treasury Department," was furnished by the First Comptroller of the Treasury and published. (Ex. Doc., No. 125.) On page 26 of said document is the following certificate:

I do hereby certify that during the absence of Mr. Wheeler from the United States at Nicaragua as minister, under a general power of attorney, I transacted all his pecuniary matters in this country, such as collecting rents, debts, and his salary. That during the first year the drafts were drawn on Messrs. Baring Brothers, London; and subsequently, by instructions from the State Department, the place of payment was made at the Treasury Department. That under this power of attorney I did draw from said bankers in London, and from the Treasury Department, the amount due Mr. Wheeler for his salary, and Mr. Wheeler from Nicaragua drew on me for the amounts, as he required; that said drafts were sold by him in Nicaragua, to different persons at different times; and from these persons and others I have always understood and believe that the currency of that country was 8 dimes to the dollar, which was paid to Mr. Wheeler for said drafts.

"WASHINGTON, October 16, 1857."

"J. F. BROWN.

"I further certify that Mr. Wheeler did commence drawing on me drafts as soon as he arrived in Central America, to wit, in December, 1854, and continued the same until he left that country in November, 1856.

"J. F. BROWN."

"NOTE. It is represented to me that Mr. Wheeler purchased property in Washington, where his family continued to reside, to be paid for from his salary. That he appointed Mr. Brown his agent to draw the same and apply it as aforesaid, and in support of his family. It is also represented that Mr. Brown sold a portion at least of said drafts for as high as 11 per cent premium."

The note appended by the Comptroller is not a copy of any paper furnished by Mr. Brown, nor is it believed of any paper on file in the Comptroller's office. The resolution of the House called for "copies of papers on file." The truth of this note, thus surreptitiously interpolated, may be judged from the following affidavit of Mr. Brown:

"I, Joseph F. Brown, do hereby certify that the note appended to a certificate, dated 16th October, 1857, given by me, as printed in Executive Document No. 125, was never furnished directly or indirectly by me to the First Comptroller or to anyone else;

66

That to my own positive knowledge Mr. Wheeler at no time ever purchased any property in Washington, to be paid from his salary as minister to Nicaragua; nor was I ever employed as his agent to apply his salary, as aforesaid, in any shape or form for such a purpose;

"That his family did not continue to reside in Washington during his absence in Central America, but accompanied him when he left the United States, except one of his sons at school, who followed him in the spring after his departure in the fall;

"That in the drafts which, as his agent, on London were drawn, no premium was realized by me in the aggregate, but, on the contrary, a positive loss; and that the averments in said note appended to my statement are in every respect untrue. "And I further certify that at the end of each quarter Mr. Wheeler had overdrawn and was in arrears to me in his drafts drawn on me in Washington while he was in Central America.

"Sworn to and subscribed before me this 28th May, 1858.

"J. F. BROWN.

"THOS. J. FISHER, J. P."

This proves the spirit by which the document was prepared by the First Comptroller, and the gross injustice done by it.

Hon. John B. Kerr, late chargé to Nicaragua, states (see page 8 of Doc. No. 125) that "the only currency of Nicaragua during his official residence there, consisted of American dimes, 8 to the dollar, and single and 2 franc pieces, 4 to the dollar."

In a letter dated Baltimore, 11th July, 1857, to Mr. Wheeler, Mr. Kerr states: "Let me know what claim you are making in regard to the difference of currency between the two countries and your loss thereby. In every thousand it was two hundred. It will be explained in the papers filed by me."

Gen. Joseph Lane, Delegate in Congress from Oregon, states:

In transit from Washington to Oregon I have had occasion to pass by the Nicaragua transit route from San Juan del Norte to San Juan del Sur, and found the currency of that Republic, universally paid and received, to be 8 dimes of the United States coin to be equal to the dollar of the country.

"WASHINGTON CITY, May 28, 1858."

"JOSEPH LANE.

[Certificates of M. E. Bradley and Thomas J. Van Dyke, of value of American dollar in Nic aragua.]

I do hereby certify that I resided in Nicaragua during the years 1855 and 1856, and acted often as the agent and private secretary of Mr. Wheeler, the American minister.

That the universal currency of the Republic of Nicaragua is 8 dimes to the dollar, and it is the custom to take them and receive them at that rate.

That a bill of exchange on London or New York commanded no premium, but was par only in Nicaragua.

That in my transactions I had occasion to call on Mr. Wheeler for drafts, and negotiated with others for him, and on no occasion was any premium charged or paid. THOMAS J. VAN Dyke,

PHILADELPHIA, March 19, 1857.

I do hereby certify that the currency at Granada, Nicaragua, Central America, for the last five years, was 8 dimes to the dollar, and that, although the Government did within the last year enact that 10 dimes should be the legal currency, yet among the people the usual custom was to take and receive 8 dimes. Witness my hand this 19th March, 1857.

M. E. BRADLEY. And I further certify that a bill of exchange on London or New York was at par only, and commanded no premium.

M. E. BRADLEY,

Agent Republic Nicaragua, and was put in possession of the Transit Co. property as Q. M. when seized by Nicaraguan Government.

The statements are all made by gentlemen of observation and truth, who were on the ground. The statement furnished by Messrs. Eames and Bowlin, in Docu ment No. 125, as to the currency of Venezuela and New Granada, are not pertinent to the point at issue, since neither of them were conversant with affairs in Nicaragua, or were even in the country, and should not weigh against the testimony of Mr. Kerr, General Lane, Mr. Van Dyke, and Mr. Bradley, who were in Nicaragua

[See p. 725.]

THIRTY-FIFTH CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION.

February 18, 1859.

[Senate Report No. 380.]

Mr. Polk made the following report:

The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was referred the memorial of E. George Squier, late chargé d'affaires of the United States to the Republic of Guatemala, praying additional compensation for extraordinary services performed by him during his mission, have had the same under consideration, and now report:

The memorial sets forth that on the 2d of April, 1849, the memo

rialist was commissioned as chargé d'affaires of the United States to the Republic of Guatemala, and also formally accredited to the Republics of San Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Honduras, by separate letters to the ministers of foreign affairs of those Governments. That the President also conferred upon him, in due form, full and separate powers to negotiate treaties with the Governments of Guatemala, San Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras, and Costa Rica. That with the first four of these Republics he concluded important treaties, two of which were ratified by the Senate. That in carrying on correspondence and conducting negotiations with five different Governments at the same time he was compelled to employ two secretaries, for which no compensation was allowed him. That in collecting information with regard to the practicability of a ship canal between the two oceans, through Nicaragua, in accordance with his instructions, he necessarily traversed the State in every direction, and spent considerable sums of money in procuring proper instruments, and many weeks of time. That in June, 1850, he returned to the United States, on leave of absence from the Secretary of State, and while here a new Administration came into power, and he was superseded on the 13th of September following. That upon the settlement of his accounts at the Department he was allowed a salary only to the time of his leaving Central America, together with the usual infit of a chargé d'affaires.

In consideration of these facts, the memorialist asks that he may be allowed a sum equal to an outfit of a chargé d'affaires to each of the Republics to which he was commissioned, and with which he opened relations; and also for the salary accruing between the 28th June, the date of his leave, and the 13th of September, the date of his recall; and, in support of his claim, refers to allowances heretofore made in similar cases, viz, to Mr. Murray, in 1800; Mr. Madison, in 1804; Mr. Pinckney, in 1806; Messrs. Schenck and Pendleton, in 1852, and Mr. Kerr, in 1854.

It further appears that the Secretary of State, in a letter addressed to the Hon. D. E. Sickles, of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, dated April 12, 1858, in answer to a call for information on the subject, fully sustains the statements of the memorial in regard to the "value and importance of the services rendered by the memorialist at a most interesting juncture of our relations in that quarter, and especially in connection with the negotiations which were going on here at the same time with Great Britain;" and after speaking of the energy and zeal which he had exhibited in the public service as being such as justly to entitle the memorialist to the leave of absence asked for and granted by the Department, the Secretary adds:

The precedents referred to in the memorial of Mr. Squier are pertinent to his application. The "letters of credence" and "full powers" bestowed upon the functionaries named were documents of precisely the same character as those herein before mentioned as furnished to Mr. Squier.

In the various precedents cited by the memorialist and referred to by the Secretary there may have been peculiar circumstances which, in the judgment of Congress, justified their allowance. But, in the opinion of the committee, as a general rule the purpose and object for which outfits are allowed to our diplomatic representatives is mainly to furnish the means for fitting up necessary establishments, suited to their grade, at the courts to which they are accredited, without having to draw upon either their salaries or private resources

for that purpose. In this case it does not appear that any such establishments were necessarily fitted up. On the contrary, the very brief period, less than a year, during which the memorialist remained in Central America renders it more than probable that none such were required, except, perhaps, at the court where he chiefly resided while in that country.

In carrying out this view, the committee believe that a reasonable allowance should be made to cover the expenses of the memorialist in going from one court to another, together with clerk hire and other charges incident to the negotiation of the several treaties concluded by him with the Republics of Central America. And in the absence of any certain data from which to ascertain the amount of such expenses, the committee regard the allowance of one additional outfit of $4,500 as amply sufficient for that purpose, and recommend it accordingly.

With reference to the claim for $937 for the balance of salary, alleged to be due for the interval between the date of his departure from Central America, 28th June, 1850, to the time of his recall (13th September, 1850), the committee are of opinion that the decision of this question rested properly with the Department. If justified by law and usage in such cases, it would doubtless have been allowed in the settlement of his accounts, unless excluded by special considerations. Unadvised of the peculiar circumstances which may have caused the rejection of this item by the proper accounting officers in the settlement heretofore made, the committee are not disposed to disturb that settlement. They therefore report a bill in accordance with these views, and recommend its passage.

[See p. 738.]

THIRTY-SIXTH CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION.

December 22, 1859.

[Senate Report No. 1.]

On motion by Mr. Crittenden,

Ordered, That the report from the Committee on Foreign Relations on the claim of Francis Dainese, made at the last session of Congress, be printed and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations, with bill S. 14.

[In the Senate, March 3, 1859.]

Mr. Crittenden made the following report:

The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was referred the bill for the relief of Francis Dainese, have had the same under consideration, and report to the Senate that they recommend the passage of said bill.

For a statement of the case they refer to the accompanying reports made from the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives on the 8th of August, 1856, and on the 5th of March, 1858, respectively.

[In the House of Representatives, March 5, 1858.]

Mr. Burlingame, from the Committee on Foreign Affairs, made the following report:

The Committee on Foreign Affairs, to whom was referred the memorial of Francis Dainese, late consul at Constantinople, praying compensation and indemnity for services, expenses, and losses, make the following report:

The memorialist held the office of vice-consul, acting consul, and consul from May 16, 1849, to December 20, 1852, a period of three years seven months and four