18
in the circulation of illuminated maps or gilt-edged literature, or the assignment of parts to gentlemen upon this floor; whether by the ordinary machinery of legislation or of lobbying, everything has been attended to in such a manner as to meet my unqualified admiration.
Now, sir, I am taunted by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Keek] with standing here alone as a minority of one of a certain committee. I will remind that gentleman that I stand here also as in a minority of one on that committee from any State or Territory wherein there is a gold or silver mine. Probably not another member of (he Committee on Mines and Mining ever saw a gold or silver mine, unless it may have been during the past summer, during such a fugitive, hasty visit as that made by the gentleman from Michigan, [Mr. Blair.] Upon the strength of three or four hours spent in Carson City and Salt Lake City that gentleman now assumes to speak ex cathedra, to instruct men who have lived there for twenty years, and to brush aside the assertions and representations made upon our responsibility here as members as matters of no account in comparison with his superior observation and information.
It seems to me that ordinarily committees are made up with some regard to the fitness of its members, to their former pursuits or investigations, so that they may be enabled to understand the kind of legislation which may come before them for their consideration. The Committee on the Judiciary is made up of lawyers, and able lawyers, too. The Committee on Agriculture is composed of members who live in agricultural districts and have some especial knowledge upon that subject.
In regard to the Committee on Mines and Mining, I desire to speak with all courtesy of my associates on that committee; our relations have always been most courteous. But I wish to say that the chairman of the committee, [Mr. Febriss,] in whose hands has been placed the duty of protecting the interests of the miners of the United States, numbering hundreds of thousands of our citizens, who under the policy of our Government have expended hundreds of millions of dollars in the development of mines—the chairman had so little regard for this large industrial class of our population that yesterday he stigmatized th-ern as "squatters" upon the public lands. Suppose the chairman of the Judiciary Committee should declare all lawyers knaves, or the chairman of the Committee on Patents abuse all inventors, what would be thought of his fitness for his place or sympathy with the interest confided to him? If there is one term more than another which is opprobrious to our people, one term that would be distasteful to the western settler, whether preemptionist, homestead settler, or miner, it is the term "squatter." It is a term which we use to express our contempt for those men who encroach , upon the property of their neighbors, who refuse to work for themselves, but, in mining parlance, "jump" thelands which others have improved.
Sir, these "squatters," as the gentleman calls them, are the people who come here with their voluminous petitions and ask justice at the hands of Congress. It may be that my residence there for twenty years, my knowledge of the men who signed those petitions, may have worked upon me unduly to induce me to listen to their prayer. But I say that I am not chargeable with any impropriety in standing up here alone, as a minority of one from a committee of nine members, and asking that their prayer be granted, without saying anything which would reflect upon that committee; I may say this at least, that the opinions of no individual member of that committee, or of several of them, should be allowed to overpower the opinions of the Representatives from the Pacific coast upon a mining question. If any one of them ever saw a gold or silver mine in his life let him now speak.
The gentleman from .New York [Mr. Fer-r.iss] also said that the people of Nevada desired this legislation. I say that is an error which may betray this House into a wrong vote upon this bill. The people of Nevada desired, if Sutro could come to Congress and procure an appropriation and grant of a right of way, that such aid should be granted to him by Congress. With the idea that the tunnel could be finished in three years, and they thereby would be saved a very large expense, which otherwise they would be compelled to go to themselves, they signed certain contracts to him and made certain subscriptions. But afterward those subscriptions were withdrawn, when they had found out more about this Adolph Sutro, when they came to understand him as a mere adventurer from whom they had no reason to expect the completion of a tunnel.
Mr. KERR. I desire to ask the gentleman a question.
Mr. SARGENT. I will yield for a question simply.
Mr. KERR. Does the gentleman by what he has said mean to have this House understand that at the time the law of 1866 was passed both the Senators and the Representative in Congress from Nevada misrepresented their constituents?
Mr. SARGENT. No, sir,- not at all; there is just the error into which the gentleman falls ; and I do not wish him to remain in that error or to betray the House into it. I believe that Adolph Sutro himself and the Nevada Senators placed a different construction on that law from that which Sutro put upon it in October last, and which induced these mining companies to consult their lawyers to ascertain whether that was the true construction of tho statute. The original law was understood by the Nevada Senators and by Sutro himself as confirming certain contracts. The construction now contended for is that it annuls certain contracts so far as Sutro himself is concerned, while giving him tho benefit of the royalty. This I would say in reply to the gentleman from Pennsylvania. [Mr. Wood WARD,] is the reason why this question cannot go to the courts. As was said by the ch: