> FIFTIETH CONGRESS, 1887-1889. 1069 
view were not sustainable, then under the fourth clause I think the 
amendment would clearly not be allowable, which clause provides that 
4. No amendment, the object of which is to provide for a private claim, shall be 
received to any general appropriation bill unless it be to carry out the provisions of 
an existing law or a treaty stipulation, which shall be cited on the face of the 
amendment. | 
This is purely a private claim in the nature of a relief bill, and, as 
suggested by the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Berry], a donation by 
the Government. It has not been estimated for by any department 
that I am aware of. It does not arise under any law or under any 
treaty, and is not, therefore, receivable. 
I said that I did not propose to ask the President of the Senate to 
rule upon the point of order unless the committee refuse to make a 
reduction so as to make a reasonable allowance to the widow of Pro- 
fessor Baird for the services he rendered as Fish Commissioner. If 
they will put the sum at $10,000, or even at $15,000, I will not oppose 
it if there is authority for the passage of such a bill, as to which ques- 
tion I hardly feel prepared to determine now, vecause I do not know 
whether his being appointed under an act of Congress and compen- 
sated out of the Smithsonian fund would constitute him an officer of 
the Government receiving salary so as to preclude the payment of 
another salary. As I have doubt on that subject, and as I know that 
Professor Baird rendered most valuable services to the Government 
while he was receiving a large salary for other services, still I will not 
object to voting $10,000 or $15,000 to his widow. 
Mr. 8. M. Cuttom. Iam inclined to think myself that the sum speci- 
fied in the committee’s amendment is too large. I appreciate the serv- 
ices of Professor Baird to this country and to the world very greatly, 
but it seems to me that the sum of $50,000 is too much money, and I 
should be inclined to propose an amendment to the amendment of the 
Committee on Appropriations reducing the amount to $25,000. 
Mr. Harris. Mr. President, I suppose there is no Senator on this 
floor who did not appreciate very highly the ability, the patriotism, 
and the public services of Professor Baird. It does not matter, how- 
ever, to me how the question may be decided as to whether he was or 
was not technically an officer of the Government. It is certainly true 
that he accepted a public service. He accepted it on terms satisfactory 
to himself. He rendered the service in a way eminently satisfactory 
to the country, and he received the salary for which he agreed to ren-- 
der it. 
After his death, to appeal to the sympathies of the two Houses of 
Congress to donate to his widow or to his estate the sum of $50,000, 
or $25,000 as suggested by the Senator from Illinois, or any other sum, 
is a precedent to which I do not intend to commit myself. It is wrong 
