246 



CONGRESS. (Corns AND COINAGE.) 



To go there as a suitor, to get a judge to declare 

 the forfeiture ; and I do not know but that the 

 better opinion among the bar of the United 

 States to-day is, that that is the real duty of 

 the Government whenever it seeks to declare 

 a forfeiture of these lands. That it shall go as 

 a suitor in the courts after having made a seiz- 

 ure- of them, as they would in a case of con- 

 fiscable property go into the courts, and upon a 

 libel filed, or whatever it is that you choose to 

 use, ask the judge to declare a forfeiture as a 

 matter of right. 



" I say that I have gone a little further than 

 that. I have done it because I have conceived 

 that the United States was not only a party to 

 a contract in the enactment of these statutes, 

 but that it was a law-maker at the same time ; 

 that it was acting in a double capacity of mak- 

 ing a law and also of making a contract when 

 these grants were made, and that the Govern- 

 ment, through its Congress, had the right to 

 declare that that law had been violated, and 

 that it was no longer, therefore, a shelter of 

 protection to the claimant under its former 

 grant. Perhaps the distinction is not a very 

 palpable one; but perhaps more in deference 

 to the eager earnestness of gentlemen who 

 seem determined to wrest the property from 

 the railroads I have gone with them, believing 

 that many of these roads had forfeited their 

 rights of property in these grants. So I have 

 consented on my part to advocate the doctrine 

 that Congress has the right to make a legisla- 

 tive declaration upon a question of this kind 

 which will have all the effect of office-found 

 under the English law, and will reinstate the 

 United States in the possession of the land. 



"Now, sir, if that declaration has all that 

 effect, that is enough, and surely it is as far as 

 we have any precedent for going. The British 

 Parliament have never seen proper to condemn 

 property out and out by a legislative enact- 

 ment. They have always relied upon that 

 ancient prerogative writ addressed by the king 

 to the coroner, that he would summon a jury 

 in the first instance, and have judicial procedure 

 taken on the question of the right of the crown 

 to repossess itself of lands. That Government 

 has always, in deference to the rights of its 

 citizens and rights of property, maintained that 

 attitude toward its people. It brings to me a 

 sense of humiliation, when I think that the 

 British Government can be more just to British 

 subjects than this free American Republic dares 

 to be to its own people." 



Mr. Morgan moved to amend the bill by 

 adding the following sections, but the motion 

 failed by a vote of 15 to 28 : 



SECTION . That jurisdiction is hereby conferred on 

 the Circuit Court of the United States for the District 

 of Oregon to hear and determine all questions and 

 controversies concerning the rights and equities in 

 said forfeited lands that are claimed or asserted by the 

 United States, or by any person or corporation claim- 

 ing the same under or in consequence of any law of 

 the United States, or any act of its lawfully authorized 

 agents, and to enforce any judgment or decree, either 



interlocutory of final, that said court shall render in 

 respect of said lands or any interest therein. 



SEC. . That it shall be the duty of the District At- 

 torney of the United States for the District of Oregon, 

 under the direction of the Department of Justice, to 

 proceed in the Circuit Court of the United States for 

 the said district, by bill in equity, in the name of the 

 United States of America as plaintiff, against any cor- 

 porations or persons that claim any interest in the 

 lands hereby declared forfeited, arising under said act 

 of Congress approved May 4, 1870, or under this act, 

 so as to bring before said court for its determination 

 the validity of such claim, whether the same be legal 

 or equitable. 



SEC. . That any person or corporation not made 

 a party defendant in said proceeding, but claiming 

 any interest under the laws of the United States in the 

 lands ; or any part thereof, which are declared forfeited 

 by this act, may present such claim by petition in said 

 cause, duly verified by oath ; and if tne court, upon 

 consideration thereof, shall decide that the adjudica- 

 tion and settlement of such claim is necessary to do 

 complete justice in said cause, the court shall direct 

 that such further proceeding be had upon such peti- 

 tion as that the same may be fully heard and deter- 

 mined, and shall proceed to decree upon the same as 

 fully as if such petitioner had been made a party de- 

 fendant in said suit : Provided* That no sucn petition 

 shall be filed after twelve months from the date of the 

 filing of the bill in said cause. 



SEC. . That the court, if it shall see fit, may tax 

 all the costs of the suit under the third section of this 

 act against the United States, and shall apportion the 

 costs of any proceeding under the fourth section of 

 this act between the parties according to justice and 

 equity. Any party to the suit instituted under this 

 act shall have the right of appeal from any final decree 

 therein to the Supreme Court of the United States, in 

 the same manner and under the same conditions as are 

 prescribed by law and the rules of said court for ap- 

 peals in equity cases ; and the Supreme Court shall 

 cause said appeal to be advanced on the docket so that 

 the same shall be speedily determined ; but no right 

 of appeal shall exist after six months from the time 

 when said final decree is entered on the records of the 

 Circuit Court of the United States. 



The bill to declare a forfeiture of lands 

 granted to the Texas Pacific Railroad Company, 

 and for other purposes, which also originated 

 in the House, and passed that body at the pre- 

 vious session of Congress, was amended and 

 passed the Senate, February 19. It was ap- 

 proved by the President, March 2. It is sub- 

 stantially the same as the measure just given, 

 and Mr. Morgan, though favoring its adoption, 

 endeavored to have the above-quoted provis- 

 ions for the judicial settlement of controversies 

 arising out of the forfeiture incorporated in 

 the bill, and failed. 



Coins and Coinage. Feb. 4, 1885, the House 

 bill for the retirement and recoinage of the 

 trade-dollar, passed at the previous session of 

 Congress, was reported back to the Senate 

 from the Committee on Finance, with an 

 amendment striking out all after the enacting 

 clause and inserting the following : 



That until July 1, 1885, United States trade-dollars, 

 if not defaced, mutilated, or stamped, shall be received 

 at the office of the Treasurer or any assistant treasurer 

 of the United States in exchange for a like amount, 

 dollar for dollar, of standard silver dollars of the 

 United States. 



SECTION 2. That the trade-dollars received by th 

 Treasurer or any assistant treasurer of the United 

 States shall not be paid out or in any other manner 



