March 13, 1860.

[Senate Report No. 137.]

Mr. Mason made the following report:

The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was referred the memorial of J. E. Martin, esq., acting consul of the United States, praying compensation for diplomatic services, have had the same under consideration, and now report:

[See Senate Report 182, Thirty-fourth Congress, first session, p. 684.]

March 13, 1860.

[Senate Report No. 138. ]

Mr. Mason made the following report:

The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was referred the memorial of Townsend Harris, consul-general of the United States in Japan, praying for compensation for his services in negotiating a treaty of commerce between the Kingdom of Siam and the United States, have had the same under consideration, and now report:

[See Senate Report 176, Thirty-fifth Congress, first session, p. 699.]

[See p. 751.]

March 28, 1860.

[Senate Report No. 156.]

Mr. Slidell made the following report:

The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was referred the memorial of Isaac E. Morse, praying additional compensation as special commissioner to New Granada, have had the same under consideration, and report:

The memorialist was appointed by the Government as special commissioner to New Granada, and entered upon the discharge of his duties on the 7th of November, 1856.

He appears to have returned to the United States on the 28th of April, 1857, and to have made a final settlement of his account on the 20th of June, 1857, but the Department of State refused to allow him any compensation beyond the rate of salary allowed a minister resident for the time of his service. His salary having been computed at that rate, he was paid the sum of $3,572.84.

Not conceiving that this afforded him a fair compensation for an important and special service, the memorialist appealed to the Secretary of State, and presented the following letter from the Hon. William Marcy, the Secretary of State at whose solicitation he had consented to accept the mission:

BALLSTON SPA, June 27.

SIR: I have received a letter from the Hon. Isaac E. Morse, the late commissioner to New Granada, in relation to his compensation.

It was understood that his expenses were to be allowed, together with a fair per diem compensation, but the precise rate was not, I think, agreed on.

It was regarded as a highly responsible and difficult mission, and I thought he

I had in

might justly claim as liberal a sum as had been paid in any similar case. my mind the allowance made at the Department to Mr. Schenck and Mr. Pendleton, which was, I think, about $20 a day.

As there had been no particular appropriation for the mission, I expected Mr. Morse would be paid out of the contingent fund for foreign intercourse. This was the usual, if not the universal, mode of payment in such cases. Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

Hon. LEWIS CASS, Secretary of State.

W. L. MARCY.

Although the committee by no means adopt the precedent which Mr. Marcy appears to have had in his mind, they yet deem the duties performed by the memorialist of a most important character, and the mode of compensation in effect to have been fixed by the Secretary of State at the time the service was undertaken.

The committee therefore recommend that the memoralist receive a compensation for his services at the rate per diem of a minister resident, and that there be added thereto his traveling expenses at the rate of $15 per diem during the entire term of his mission.

There seems, however, to have been some difference of opinion between the Department of State and the memorialist as to the precise date when the mission terminated.

The memorialist arrived in New Orleans, on his return from New Granada, on the 28th of April, 1857, and the Department closed his compensation account as of that date.

It seems, however, that upon the memorialist's arrival in New Orleans he found his family too unwell to permit his leaving them. He therefore telegraphed that fact to the Department of State, with a request that he might be allowed to remain a day or two in New Orleans, on account of his own health and that of his family; in reply to which he was authorized by the Secretary of State to "take his [your] time to come" to Washington.

Allowing, therefore, for this delay on leave, as well as for the time occupied in traveling to and from Washington, the date of the 1st of June, 1857, should be properly fixed for the termination of his mission.

In view of all these circumstances, as well as of the importance of the services rendered, the committee recommend that the memoralist, Isaac E. Morse, be allowed at the rate of $7,500 per annum during the term of his special mission as commissioner to New Granada, and that he be allowed at the rate of $15 per diem for his traveling expenses during the entire term of his services as special commissioner as aforesaid.

The committee report a bill in accordance with the foregoing opinions.

March 28, 1860.

[Senate Report No. 159.]

Mr. Seward made the following report:

The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was referred the petition of J. Hosford Smith, late United States consul at Beirut, Syria, "praying an increase of compensation for his services as consul, and compensation for judicial services," report:

The petitioner, in the year 1850, accepted the appointment of consul at Beirut, in Syria, and engaged in trade at that place.

The compensation and perquisites of his office consisted at that time of a salary of $500, the fees of the consular office, and the privilege of engaging in business.

On the 1st of July, 1854, the compensation of the consul at Beirut was raised to the sum of $2,000, subject to certain restrictions; and on the 1st of January, 1855, the petitioner, having been recalled by order of the President, gave place to a successor.

The petitioner represents that, during the period of his appointment it became necessary for him to advance large sums from his private means to extend the usefulness of the consulate. He represents, moreover, that he performed certain judicial duties within the intendment of the act passed August 11, 1848, entitled "An act to carry into effect certain provisions in the treaties between the United States and the Ottoman Porte, giving certain judicial powers to ministers and consuls of the United States in those countries," and claims to be entitled to the compensation therein allowed "any person vested by the United States with consular authority in" any port in Turkey.

For the expenses and losses incurred and services rendered, as well as for having founded a trade which he alleges to have brought large additional revenues into the Federal Treasury, asks indemnity and compensation.

While your committee are satisfied that the petitioner has performed his official duties with fidelity, it does not appear proper to acknowledge the principles of public obligation which he has laid down for their guidance.

The compensation of the consulate at Beirut had been fixed prior to the date of his appointment. He admits that he accepted it as an incident advantageous to his commercial business. If, therefore, he expended his own money in extending the influence of the position, it is to be supposed that he was indemnified for the outlay by the actual or prospective fees of office, or profits of commerce. Certainly no citizen could be required, by considerations of patriotism, to expend his own substance to advance the general commerce of his country. In relation to the compensation claimed by the petitioner for judicial duties alleged to have been performed by him during the term of his consular service, the committee have had their attention called, by a letter addressed by the Department of State to the Committee on Commerce, on the 29th of July, 1856, to the report of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs (House Doc. No. 166, Thirty-fourth Congress, first session) upon the petition of the Hon. George P. Marsh, asking compensation for judicial services rendered by him under the act of 11th of August, 1848, while minister resident of the United States to the Ottoman Porte."

66

As the compensation asked by Mr. Marsh depends upon identically the same legal authority with that asked by the petitioner, the committee adopt the facts and reasoning in the report referred to as conclusive against the compensation sought by the petitioner.

It is perfectly plain that ministers and consuls of the United States appointed under and by virtue of treaties with the Ottoman Porte incurred an obligation to perform the services thereby imposed, and must be held to have accepted the salary and perquisites of the said appointments in full compensation of all diplomatic and judicial serv ices imposed upon them by the treaty relations existing between the two countries at the date of their appointment to office.

The Department of State, in the communication referred to, states

that the petitioner discharged the duties of his office with entire faithfulness, and added by his commercial enterprise to the revenues of the Federal Government.

It expresses the opinion that the petitioner should not receive additional compensation for consular or judicial services rendered, or for expenses incurred, and adds that, "in view of all the circumstances of the case, it would be proper that the rate of compensation should commence on the 1st of July, 1853."

In consideration, therefore, that the petitioner has contributed, by his enterprise, to extend the commercial influence of the United States; that the compensation of the consulate at Beirut was increased upon his recommendation; and that the Department of State has recommended an increase of his salary as a gratuity for his services, the committee is of opinion that the petitioner should receive the sum of $1,500 as an addition to the salary already paid him for services as consul at Beirut from July 1, 1853, to July 1, 1854, and report herewith a bill accordingly.

April 3, 1860.

[Senate Report No. 167.]

Mr. Polk made the following report:

The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was referred the claim of the legal representatives of John Forsyth, deceased, having maturely considered the same, beg leave to report:

That they fully concur in the report made by the said Committee on Foreign Relations to the Senate of the United States at the first session of the Thirty-fifth Congress, and adopt the same as their report on said claim to the Senate at this present Congress.

[See Senate Report 266, Thirty-fifth Congress, first session, p. 702.]

April 11, 1860.

[Senate Report No. 190.]

Mr. Polk made the following report:

The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was referred the petition of E. George Squier, praying to be allowed an outfit as chargé d'affaires to each of the Governments of Guatemala, San Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Honduras, and also a balance of salary which he claims to be due, have had the same under consideration, and report:

That having reviewed Report No. 380, made at the second session of the Thirty fifth Congress by this committee, upon the same petition, they have determined to adopt the same, and herewith submit a bill in accordance with its recommendations.

[See Senate Report 380, Thirty-fifth Congress, second session, p. 714.]

[See p. 742.]

April 11, 1860.

[Senate Report No. 191.]

Mr. Polk made the following report:

The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was referred the petition of James G. Clarke, praying compensation for his services as chargé d'affaires of the United States at Belgium, have had the same under consideration and report:

The petitioner seems to have acted as private secretary to the minister resident of the United States at Brussels, and in that capacity to have taken charge of the legation during the absence of the minister from September 24, 1856, to the 11th June, 1857, at which time the minister resident resigned.

The petitioner continued to discharge the aforesaid functions until the 27th September, 1858, at which date a minister resident of the United States arrived at Brussels, and his services terminated.

As the petitioner does not seem to have been appointed or acknowledged by the Government of the United States in any diplomatic capacity, there appears no legal obligation to make him compensation, yet in consideration that, from the time that the American minister resigned, on the 11th June, 1857, to the 27th September, 1858, at which date his successor arrived at Brussels, the petitioner appears to have performed the functions referred to faithfully and creditably, the committee deem it proper to award him compensation at the rate per annum of the salary of a secretary of legation at Belgium, in full compensation and indemnity for his services.

They therefore report herewith a bill in accordance with these opinions.

April 17, 1860.

[Senate Report No. 201.]

Mr. Mason made the following report:

The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was referred the memorial of Jonathan Ely, legal representative of Edward Ely, deceased, praying that the accounts of said Edward Ely as United States consul at Bombay may be settled on just and equitable principles, have had the same under consideration and report:

It is stated by the Department of State that the decedent had been in the service of the United States as consul at Bombay for a period of seven years immediately preceding his death, and that he had discharged his official duties with ability and to the entire satisfaction of the General Government.

His consular accounts with the Government had been settled with the Government to the 1st of July, 1856, and the balance due him paid to his order.

It would appear, however, that owing to the rebellion in India the correspondence of the decedent with the Department of State in most instances failed to reach this country, and it became, therefore, impossible for the decedent to communicate with his Government regularly during the interval between the last settlement of his accounts and the date of his death.

Immediately after his death Hollis Moore, esq., the vice-consul at Bombay, forwarded all the vouchers and other papers of the decedent