1889, inclusive, and while in the discharge of the duties of that office, expended for the clerical force necessarily employed by him in the shipment and discharge of American seamen at the port of Liverpool the sum of $3,100. Congress had, prior to the year 1886, provided a fund, which the State Department had drawn upon to the amount of about $2,100 annually, to defray the expenses incurred at the consulate in the shipment and discharge of American seamen, but which it had omitted to provide subsequent to the year 1885. Mr. Russell was obliged to disburse from his own funds the above-named sum to meet the expenses of this service, as appears by the vouchers hereto annexed. The consul preceding Mr. Russell at Liverpool called the attention of the State Department to the omission by Congress to provide the funds to meet these expenses and urged the necessity of continuing said appropriation to his successor. The State Department, recognizing the justice of Mr. Russell's claim, advised him to apply to Congress for reimbursement, as that Department had no authority to use any of its funds for the payment of these expenditures. Your committee find that the amount named in the accompanying bill was actually and necessarily expended by Mr. Russell and was less than the usual amount expended by his predecessors for such service; that no part thereof has been repaid to him, and that in justice and equity he is entitled to have the same refunded to him by the Government, and recommend the passage of the accompanying bill. The annexed correspondence is made a part of this report. UNITED STATES CONSULATE, SIR: I have to invite the attention of the Department to the omission of Congress to appropriate specifically as heretofore for the expenses attending the shipment and discharge of seamen at this and other consulates. While personally I have no interest in the Department's action on account of my retirement from consular duties, nevertheless the appropriation for the next fiscal year will be available, and the urgent needs of the consulate warrant me in requesting, in behalf of my successor, an allowance from the item of $6,000, appropriated by Congress, the expenditure of which is placed at the discretion of the President, for the several consulates and commercial agencies in the transaction of their business. The sum, from my experience and observation, having in view the proportionate amount of work attending the shipping office at this and other seaport consulates, which I think should be awarded this consulate is $2.000. In support of the claim for the above-named sum I beg to invite the attention of the Department to my dispatch No. 233, dated June 19, 1883, in which will be found more in detail the facts touching the requirements existing now as then, which need not be repeated in this dispatch. I shall therefore venture to suggest that the Department at an early day authorize the expenditure of the sum named to defray the expenses of the shipment and discharge of seamen at this consulate for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1886. I have the honor to be, respectfully, your obedient servant, Hon. JAMES D. PORTER, Assistant Secretary of State. STEPHEN B. PACKARD, Consul. UNITED STATES CONSULATE, Hon. WILLIAM F. WHARTON, Assistant Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. SIR: I desire to bring to the notice of the Department of State, with a view to having the matter brought before Congress at its next sitting, the very heavy expenditure I have been reluctantly obliged to make during the four years I was consul, in order to carry on efficiently the work in connection with the shipping department of the consulate, the total amounting to £600 10s. 6d. When I arrived at my post in June, 1885, I found that in addition to the allowance of $2,000 per annum for clerk hire there was an allowance of $2,100 per annum for the shipment and discharge of seamen, but that after the end of that month it would be discontinued altogether, Congress having made no appropriation. This matter was brought before the notice of the State Department by my predecessor in his dispatch No. 319, dated June 6, 1885, and also by myself in my Nos. CHARLES T. RUSSELL. 52 and 91, dated February 1 and December 1, 1886, and I was finally informed that I could not receive any assistance from the Government in that direction, but that the subject would be brought to the notice of Congress-Department instruction No. 91, dated January 19, 1887. No appropriation, however, was made for that department of the consulate during the whole four years that I was in charge, but the work had to be discharged. It is hardly necessary, I think, for me to say that the work in connection with the shipment and discharge of seamen at a port of such magnitude as Liverpool is very great, and although it was performed with as small a clerical force as possible it has actually cost me the sum of £600 10s. 6d., which I paid in addition to the annual allowance for clerk hire. Seeing, therefore, that the expenditure is absolutely necessary for clerical work in connection with the shipment and discharge of seamen, I am convinced that if these facts are brought before Congress I will be reimbursed this heavy outlay. I therefore respectfully claim that the sum stated is due me, and I do so feeling that I am making a just and honorable claim, and one that can not but recommend itself to the consideration of Congress. Some of the clerks to whom I paid this amount are no longer connected with the office, but I have no doubt I can procure from them a proper voucher for the amount each of them received, but those who remain can certify to this expenditure. I am, sir, your obedient servant, CHAS. T. RUSSELL, Late Consul. LIVERPOOL, January 10, 1890. I, William J. Saulis, vice and deputy consul of the United States of America at Liverpool, do hereby certify that I was, during the period Mr. Russell was consul here, bookkeeper, and as such had the payment of salaries to the clerks of the consulate; that during the period from July 1, 1885, to June 30, 1889, I paid the sum of £600 10s. 6d. for clerical services performed in connection with the shipping department of the consulate in excess of the amount of clerk hire allowed during that period, the said expenditure having being actually and necessarily made, as appears by the books kept by me and now in Mr. Russell's possession. [SEAL.] W. J. SAULIS, Vice and Deputy Consul of the United States of America at Liverpool. I, William Pierce, do hereby make oath and say that during the period 1st July, 1885, to 30th June, 1889, I was employed as clerk in the consulate at Liverpool. From my own knowledge I am aware and know that the sum of £600 10s. 6d. was actually paid by Mr. Russell in excess of the amount allowed for clerk hire during that period. Part of said amount was paid to myself and the remaining portion to clerks who are not now here. WM. PIERCE. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 10th day of January, 1890. Consul of the United States of America at Liverpool. UNITED STATES CONSULATE, 26 CHAPEL STREET, The statements herewith to the vice-consul and Mr. Pierce are entitled to full faith and credit, but I desire to add that I am convinced that the disbursements referred to were actually made and were actually necessary. I am not now paying so much for extra clerks as Mr. Russell paid, because the Department has sent to the consulate a competent consular clerk, but it will be apparent to anyone who visits this office that additional allowance for clerk hire is needed. THOS. H. SHERMAN, Consul. S. Doc. 231, pt 3-51 CHARLES T. RUSSELL, Esq., DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, February 21, 1890. Late Consul of the United States, Liverpool, Now at 50 Lime Street, London, England. SIR: Referring to your dispatch of the 22d ultimo, I have to inform you that the Department has no funds out of which it has authority to render such relief as is required by your dispatch. Your only recourse would seem to be to present your claim for reimbursement of the amount expended for clerk hire to Congress. I am, sir, your obedient servant, [See p. 791.] WILLIAM F. WHARTON, May 31, 1894. [Senate Report No. 458.] Mr. Dolph, from the Committee on Foreign Relations, submitted the following report: The Committee on Foreign Relations, having had under consideration Senate bill 2024, and having duly considered the same, report the same favorably with an amendment. The committee adopt the following House report: [House Report No. 1378, Fifty-second Congress, first session.] The Committee on Foreign Affairs, to whom was referred House bill 1891, having had the same under consideration, submit the following report: By joint resolution of Congress approved February 1, 1888, the sum of $50,000, or so much thereof as might prove necessary, was appropriated to pay such expenses as might be incurred by the Government of the United States in accepting the invitation of the British Government to participate in the international exhibition to be held in Melbourne August 1, 1888. The sum thus appropriated, it was further directed, was to be expended in the discretion of the Secretary of State. Under the authority of this act the Secretary of State appointed one commissioner and four assistant commissioners to have general charge and supervision of American exhibits, and to properly represent the interests of the American people at the said exposition, fixing their salaries at the rate of $5,000 and expenses for the commissioner and $2,500 for each of the assistant commissioners, the latter amount being for both salary and expenses. The commissioner so appointed was Frank McCappin, of California; and the assistant commissioners, F. B. Wheeler, of New York; R. L. Miller, of Virginia Thomas B. Merry, of Oregon; and Alex. Campbell, of Louisiana. Prior to these appointments, however, the press throughout the country, in writing of the approaching exposition, had announced that the compensation of the assistant commissioners would be $5,000 and expenses. To ascertain the truth of these statements inquiries were made at the State Department on the request of the gentlemen subsequently appointed, and these were met by the assurance that it was the purpose of the Department to allow each of the assistant commissioners a salary of $2,500 together with $2,500 each for the expenses of the trip and of the sojourn in Australia. Thereupon Messrs. Wheeler, Miller, Merry, and Campbell, who had been already selected as assistant commissioners, though not yet publicly appointed, signified their willingness to serve and commenced at once their preparations for the journey to Australia. It was not until they had made all necessary arrangements for a prolonged absence from the country, after they had engaged passage on the steamer sailing to Melbourne, that the State Department publicly announced the appointments, together with the unexpected reduction in compensation to $2,500 to cover both expenses and salary. Acting under the belief that this sum might prove sufficient for their expenses of travel and living during their nine months' absence in Australia, the assistant commissioners decided not to draw back, but to continue to Melbourne and render there the service the Government required of them. It was made to appear, however, to the subcommittee before whom one of the assistant commissioners, Mr. Alex. Campbell, appeared that the expenses were far in excess of what had been anticipated; that the commissioners were subjected to large and unexpected expenses in the discharge of their duties, and that the amount asked in this bill would not repay them for the actual and necessary outlays made in properly discharging the duties of their position as commissioners. Inasmuch as the labors of these assistant commissioners were not only arduous, but of great value to the country as well; that their acceptance of the office was due to a misunderstanding or to misinformation for which they were in nowise responsible; that their actual expenses in the prosecution of this work for the Government were greater than what has been already allowed, and what they now ask, and that there yet remains an unexpended balance of $10,770.27 from the appropriation of February 1, 1888, the committee recommends the passage of this bill, wherein an additional compensation of $1,500 is asked for each of these four assistant commissioners. FIFTY-FOURTH CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION. January 13, 1896. [Senate Report No. 43.] Mr. Turpie, from the Committee on Foreign Relations, submitted the following report: The memorialist, Mrs. Eliza J. Gray, is the widow of Isaac P. Gray, deceased, late the United States minister to the Republic of Mexico. Mr. Gray was commissioned as such minister March 20, 1893. Arrived in the City of Mexico May 2, 1893. Presented his credentials and entered upon the discharge of his duties May 9, 1893. Being called home by the very serious illness of his son, Pierre, Mr. Gray left the City of Mexico December 7, 1894, upon three months' leave of absence for Indianapolis, Ind., where his son was at that time residing. While at Indianapolis, attending upon his son's illness, in the latter part of January, 1895, Mr. Gray, by request, visited Washington to confer with the late Secretary of State, the Hon. Walter Q. Gresham, concerning the then existing complications between the Governments of Mexico and Guatemala, which were at that time becoming daily more strained and critical, wherein the good offices of the United States had been tendered and were yet pending. Although his full regular leave had not expired, Minister Gray, in compliance with the wishes of the Secretary of State, engaged to leave his son, who was then convalescing, and return to his post as soon as practicable. He started from Indianapolis for the City of Mexico February 7, 1895, by the way of Chicago, and arrived on the morning of February 14. While in Washington in January before he had contracted a slight cold. He thought himself recovered from it when he left Indianapolis, but the exposure and fatigue of the trip renewed and intensified the disease. On arriving at San Antonio, Tex., en route, he consulted a physician. His condition was not deemed alarming. The train stopped long enough to have the prescription filled, and Minister Gray continued on his journey, stating to the physician that official business made it necessary that he should reach Mexico as soon as possible. During the journey, on the night preceding his arrival at the City of Mexico, his condition changed with great suddenness for the worse. He arrived at 9 o'clock a. m. in a state of unconsciousness, and died at 7 o'clock p. m. the same day of an acute attack of double pneumonia. The memorialist had remained in the City of Mexico awaiting the return of her husband, without any warning of the terrible calamity which was about to befall her. Relying upon established precedents granting allowances in such cases, and upon the fact that Minister Gray lost his life in the attempt to discharge the public duties of an important station in the service of the Government, we are of the opinion that such relief as an appropriation usual in these cases may afford ought to be granted to the petitioner. The late minister, as is well known from inspection of the public records of the State Department, and from the expressions of opinion by the Secretary of State then in office, had discharged his diplomatic duties with singular diligence, fidelity, and very marked ability. The following precedents in such cases have been kindly furnished by the Secretary of State: The appropriation act approved March 3, 1879, gave to Mrs. Taylor, wife of Bayard Taylor, who died while minister to Germany, at Berlin, the sum of $7,000. Joint resolution of July 28, 1882, gave to Mrs. Hurlburt, widow of General Hurlburt, who died while minister to Peru, one year's salary and legal allowances after deductions of salary paid. The joint resolution also of the same date gave to Mrs. Kilpatrick, widow of General Kilpatrick, one year's salary and legal allowances after deductions of salary paid. A joint resolution approved August 1, 1892, gave to Mrs. Garnett, the widow of Rev. Henry Garnett, who died while minister to Liberia, one year's salary and legal allowances after deductions of salary paid. Mr. Garnett had only been in Liberia a few weeks. The deficiency bill approved March 3, 1883, gave to Mrs. Marsh, widow of George P. Marsh, who died while minister to Italy, the balance of one year's salary, reckoned from June 20, 1882. The act approved December 23, 1884, gave to Mrs. Jane Venable, widow of William E. Venable, who died while minister to Guatemala, the sum of $5,636, being the balance of one year's salary. The deficiency bill approved March 13, 1885, gave to Mrs. Wing, widow of Rumsey Wing, who died while minister to Ecuador, and to Mrs. Hunt, widow of William H. Hunt, who died while minister to Russia, a sum of money equal to six months' salary in each case. Page 906, Statutes at Large, volume 25, the appropriation act shows payment to the widow of Moses A. Hopkins, late minister to Liberia, of six months' salary. The remains of Minister Gray were conveyed from his late residence, in the City of Mexico, escorted by a large military and civic procession, among whom were the President and other chief officers of that Republic, to the railroad station of departure for the north. They were thence conveyed to Indianapolis and lay in state in the capitol, and were buried at Union City, Ind., in the family cemetery. The salary of the minister to Mexico at that time was $17,500. We think that under the circumstances of the death of a citizen so eminent and an officer so highly honored, both by the Government of his own country and of that to which he was accredited, a sum equal to one-half of the annual salary, $8,750, would be a reasonable allowance. |
