due deliberation we may think it best to consider and to act upon; and, without giving it entirely the cold shoulder, I would suggest that it be referred to the Executive Council, and placed upon the programme for consideration next year. That will give us time

to consider it and to understand it better than we now do.

The proposition was so referred, to be reported on the official programme of next year in the discretion of the Council.

The following resolution, submitted by Mr. THURBER, of New York, was adopted by the Board:

Resolved, That the National Board of Trade commends the efforts made by the Department of State for the collection of valuable information by our foreign consuls, bearing upon, and calculated to extend, our export trade; that to this information as wide publicity as possible should be given; and, to this end, we recommend Congress to make the necessary appropriations for its compilation, printing and wide dissemination among producers, manufacturers and public libraries.

No. XVIII., relating to disputed Presidential Elections (see p. 175), was again taken up.

Mr. THURBER, of New York: I think this is a very simple matter, that we can dispose of in a moment either one way or the other; and as the Board has thought best to postpone the resolution concerning elections, it may possibly think it better to postpone this. My opinion is, however, that there is a very great difference between the two propositions.

This proposition is something that will commend itself to all thinking men; and the question, as we all know, has been more or less under discussion by Congress. Owing to a difference of political views, no solution has yet been reached. At the same

time there is no doubt as to the desirability of its being pressed to some equitable solution; and, I think, an expression of opinion by this Board would have a very excellent effect.

It was moved that the proposition be referred to the Executive Council, to be placed on the programme of next year in their discretion.

THE RELATION OF THE BOARD TO POLITICS.

179

Mr. BOYNTON, of New York: That is simply a proposition to do nothing. You are well aware that our country narrowly escaped revolution only a short time since, by neglect to cover this question. Therefore, I hope that we shall, at least, dare to express an . opinion on that which has been so prominently debated this session; what possible objection can any person have? We must certainly have opinions upon this subject; and if our opinions are of any value to the Congress of the country, why not express them now?

Mr. NOURSE, of Boston: I presume, Mr. President, that, as to the subject matter proposed in this resolution, there will be no dissenting voice in this Board of Trade, -perhaps not one in all the United States. The question is, whether this is the place and the time for any expression of such an opinion.

I think, sir, that we ought to express such an opinion as this elsewhere, in our character as citizens at large. I deprecate very much the introduction of any avowedly political question into the National Board of Trade; and, when it is presented to us in this way, I earnestly protest against any expression of opinion by this Board upon the subject. I do it on the principle that, as it is the first step which costs, so in this matter, to every one of us as citizens, we must keep our hands off and touch it not, lest it lead as a precedent to the introduction of something else a little more dangerous, and less worthy than this is.

very good and desirable

Mr. ARNOUX, of New York: As having, in a certain sense, the charge of this resolution from our Board of Trade, I suppose it will be becoming in me to say a few words in regard to the postponement of the question.

We have discussed in this Board, I think, with profit, and perhaps with effect on the legislation of the country, many matters which may be considered in a certain sense political, but, so far, all discussion has been confined to questions growing out of subjects relating to trade. I can conceive of no one subject which has a more direct bearing upon, or which may be discussed more directly in connection with, the business of the country than the stability of our institutions.

If this question can be considered to have a commercial bearing, then it is properly here. If it has only a political bearing, I agree with the gentleman that it is not properly here; and I concur cordially and fully with Mr. NOURSE in all he has said, that

political questions, as political questions, should be excluded from our consideration. But, joining with our Board in presenting this question, I think that it has a commercial aspect which can wisely and profitably be discussed here.

Mr. BUZBY, of Philadelphia: The tariff might perhaps be considered a political question; but we do not hesitate to discuss it. If it be a political question, is it therefore out of the province of this Board? I should think not. And so with everything else that we may consider. The assumption by Government of the telegraph system would be, in one sense, a political question. And the New York Board of Trade and Transportation, not seeing any political aspect in the matter, has passed it as relating to the personal and commercial security of the country. I do not see, sir, how the objection is valid.

I must say that it is a question upon which, perhaps, the whole public peace may hang at no distant time; and, while we should hesitate to pronounce ourselves in favor of the adjustment of the matter upon any particular plan, I think we ought to say as much as this in favor of the general proposition. I do hope, sir, that we are not going to hold our peace until the waves of anarchy shall roll over us. I propose, sir, to anticipate that time; and I really hope we shall have quite as much courage as the New York Board, in urging upon Congress to make provision for the difficulty pointed out.

For one, sir, I think we should deserve all the punishment we might receive hereafter, if we should not act. The action proposed is so simple, and it should be so acceptable, that we may very properly insist upon it.

In one sense I think this ought not to be considered as a political question. I do not understand it to be a question on which parties are divided. The objection to political questions is a very obvious one, and a very good one; but clearly this is not within that scope.

As I said before, it is one on which no party feeling is shown,— that is, neither party has taken it up exclusively, and it is one

on which there is not likely to be strictly party debate. This ought not, therefore, to be excluded here, though it treats of a governmental matter.

Mr. NOURSE, of Boston: I was going to say that it has already

PARTISANSHIP AND POLITICS.

181

begun to be a party question, and a pretty serious one, in Congress. The plan of Mr. EDMUNDS represents the Republican party; and there was a Senate Bill which passed at the last session, and has been urged so strongly as to delay business in the House of Representatives until, at length, within the last two or three days, it has become almost entirely and purely a party question. Although this resolution does not contemplate recommending any one plan, and is entirely unpartisan, still, because it has this political aspect, and has no more direct bearing on commercial affairs than any other proposed act of legislation, I object to its introduction. I deprecate its present discussion not only, but any action on it. We should not like to vote against such a resolution, and I earnestly desire it may not be voted for, because it might lead hereafter to the introduction of resolutions less harmless.

Mr. ARNOUX, of New York: I was just undertaking to make an explanation. I understood when I came into the room that the pending measure was proposition No. XIX., and my remarks were addressed more exclusively to the subject of that proposition.

Mr. YOUNG, of Baltimore: May I ask the gentleman from New York who has charge of this bill, whether he has any resolution to offer in connection with it, - whether he has any plan to offer or anything particular to suggest.

Mr. THURBER, of New York: No, sir, nothing specially, except that we ought not to be exposed to such troubles and dangers as those of 1876-1877. It does seem to me that there is the strongest distinction between a partisan and a non-partisan question, and that on one like this there can be no difference of opinion. The only thing interfering with the action of this Board on the subject now is, that the end of the session is near and there is a pressure for immediate adjournment, and the members do not appreciate the importance of the question or the timely nature of the resolution in its present shape.

I think, sir, if gentlemen would only look at it in the proper light they would pass it unanimously.

Mr. HOYT, of New York: We have now just passed through an election, and it will be four years before there will be any necessity for putting into operation any new law upon this subject.

I agree perfectly with what has been said about the propriety of having this question finally and favorably settled. But, in the present aspect of the question before the House of Representatives, and the partisan character that the discussion has assumed there, it would seem to me better to lay the matter over for another year, and then it can be taken up and acted upon.

Mr. BOYNTON, of New York: It seems to me that the point is not well taken of carrying it over for a year, because the necessity may not arise for four years. When is there a time so proper as four years before the possible necessity may occur?

Last year a presidential election was pending, and I noticed in the House and in the Senate the utter impossibility of getting either to act, for each political party hoped to get some benefit.

Who then can so wisely or fairly present to Congress a nonpartisan settlement of this great Constitutional question which may involve the destruction of our institutions? - Who can so fairly present it as this Board, representing the mercantile interests of the country?

settle this question

When in Europe I well recollect with what intense anxiety each despatch was watched for, and how it was believed that we were on the very verge of revolution, and the end of our institutions. I hope that we shall not put these things off. We should say to Congress, "Rise above politics for once, and so that a conflict upon it can never occur." That is all we need say; and we should say it just at the time when members are in the frame of mind to act upon it, and when it is the foremost thought in the minds of the two Houses of Congress. We ought certainly not to postpone and postpone a matter in connection with which we once narrowly escaped losing the results of an hundred years of such achievements as history has no parallel to.

If our institutions, within a century, of free Government, of total separation of Church and State, with general education in our country, have secured an advance in material progress unexampled, -if they have added more than the sixty centuries preceding,are we worthy sons of our patriotic fathers in running any possible chance for the ruin of these institutions, by postponing a settlement definite and just of this question, non-political and non-partisan? Who can present it unless we can present it here?

Mr. CROSBY, of Chicago: There seems to me to be a point in