FIFTIETH CONGRESS, 1887-1889. 1067 
has no right to donate the public money; he may take that view of it, 
that his oath of office and the Constitution of the United States require 
him not to sign a bill which is a mere gift, as the Senator from Ver- 
mont says this is. If that be true, then you propose to put upon a 
general appropriation bill and force him either to approve that which 
his conscience does not approve, or to veto one of the general appro- 
priation bills of this session of Congress. That, it seems to me, ought 
to be a sufficient objection to putting it upon this appropriation bill. If 
there is a just and valid claim either for rent or for salary, let it go to 
the Committee on Claims and let it take its chances with every other 
claim that comes before this body, and not seek upon this general 
appropriation bill to give $50,000 of the money which we have no 
right to give, which does not belong to us, which the Constitution does 
not authorize us to give. If we do not owe the money, then it is simply 
a gift and can be nothing more and nothing less. 
The PRESIDENT pro tempore (Mr. J. J. InGauus). The question 
recurs upon agreeing to the amendment proposed by the Committee 
on Appropriations. Is the Senate ready for the question ? 
Mr. J. H. Reacan. Mr. President, I knew Professor Baird very well 
during his life time and respected him very greatly, and I take it that 
no one knew him but did respect him and respects his memory; and 
in what I shall say I shall bear in mind the great value of his services 
and his worth as a citizen and as a man. 
This amendment proposes to give his widow $50,000 in considera- 
tion of services rendered by Professor Baird to the Government. The 
question is raised whether he was an officer of the Government of the 
United States in his capacity as Secretary of the Smithsonian Institu- 
tion. By the act of Congress of 1846 for the organization of the 
Smithsonian Institution, it is provided that a Secretary shall be 
appointed. It does not specify what his compensation shall be, and I 
understand that his compensation has been paid out of the fund arising 
from the interest on the donation given by Mr. Smithson. So, while 
he was not compensated out of the Public Treasury, he was appointed 
under an act of Congress. I do not. know whether that would pre- 
clude his right to receive an additional salary or not, and it is not 
material, in the view I take of the question, whether it would or not. 
In Europe, under Great Britain, Germany, and other governments, 
we find large appropriations made for individuals out of the public 
treasury. The amounts paid annually out of the public treasury of 
Great Britain to the royal family go up into millions, because it is the 
policy of that country to maintain royalty and to maintain an aristoc- 
racy. In this country it has not until lately been any part of our 
policy. Weare gradually drifting into the policy of creating an aris- 
tocracy supported out of the Treasury, who render no service and who 
are paid at the expense of other people. I do not wish to see this go 
