The appellant refers to the act of June 19, 1886 (24 Stat. L., 79), the first section of which is as follows:

"That on and after July first, eighteen hundred and eighty-six, no fees shall be charged or collected by collectors or other officers of customs, or by inspectors of steam vessels or shipping commissioners, for the following services to vessels of the United States [here follows a long enumeration] Collectors or other officers of customs, inspectors of steam-vessels, and shipping commissioners who are paid wholly or partly by fees shall make a detailed report of such services, and the fees provided by law, to the Secretary of the Treasury, under such regulations as that officer may prescribe; and the Secretary of the Treasury shall allow and pay, from any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, said officers such compensation for said services as each would have received prior to the passage of this act; also such compensation to clerks of Shipping Commissioners as would have been paid them had this act not passed: Provided, That such services have, in the opinion of the Secretary of the Treasury, been necessarily rendered.”

The contention that this section repeals the provisions of the act of 1884 (supra) as to expenditures by shipping commissioners other than for clerk, is wholly without merit. There is nothing in the act last quoted which is susceptible of any such construction. It contains no repealing clause, it does not refer directly or indirectly to such expenditures, nor does it necessarily imply any intention to impose the burden of maintaining suitable premises for the transaction of the public business which he, the shipping commissioner, is expressly required to procure (sec. 4507, U. S. Rev. Stat.), upon him instead of upon the Government, which requires it to be maintained, and which had assumed the obligation of maintaining it and paying the necessary expense thereof under the acts of 1872 and 1884.

There is no weight in the suggestion that at the time the compensation of the shipping commissioner was fixed under the section above quoted from the act of 1884, "He was informed that it was to be understood that from such compensation he should pay all his official expenses except for employees and rent." The law regu lating this subject is to be found not in the "understanding of some former Secretary of the Treasury," nor in the "information" given to the plaintiff, but in the statute itself, which is too clear and unambiguous to admit of but one construction. The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

OPINIONS OF COMMISSIONERS.

The opinions expressed by shipping commissioners for and against the proposed plan are subjoined.

Following are the expressions of commissioners favorable to the proposed change: Bath, Me.-In my opinion the suggested change of system does offer advantages fully compensatory for the increased cost. (a) It would make the location permanent during the changes of commissioners. (b) Would keep the sailors off the streets and out of the liquor shops, where they have to be sought, and thus save much time and expense, and would be advantageous both to the commissioner and the men in this respect. (c) It would tend to discourage outside offices.

Boston. The suggested change of system would be of great reliet and assistance to the commissioner, and it has always been my opinion that the Government should assume this expense.

Brunswick, Ga.-It would better facilitate matters and be of advantage to shipping. Mobile.-The contemplated change would certainly make the shipping office more easy of access to the captains and seamen, thus saving much time in going to and fro. But the getting of seamen to collect or rendezvous at any specified place, is an experiment, the result of which is a matter of much doubt, inasmuch as the sailor boarding-house keepers would do all in their power against the success of the scheme, and the captains would of necessity, to some extent, side with them, as at present it is only in the main through the boarding-house keepers that they can secure their crews.

New Orleans. The proposed change would offer advantages, as a better class of seamen could be found, and at the same time it would keep them out of the hands of shipping agents and sharks. As it is now, whenever a crew is desired, the master of a vessel has to go from one house to another selecting the men he desires, which requires time.

Newport News.-The suggested change of system will offer many advantages and greatly compensate for the increased cost to the Government. My opinion is based on a knowledge derived from having been a seafaring man for twenty-three years, the last fifteen years as master of American sailing vessels. With the present compensation derived from the office of the shipping commissioner I can not afford to rent and maintain an office for this business. The great benefit to be derived from the establishment and maintenance by the Government of an office and room, as seems to be contemplated by your letter, is that the location becomes known, thereby

enabling sailors seeking berths to come to the office to ship, and at the same time masters seeking men as crews can open their articles at the office so as to have their men sign, ready for the vessel when she sails. When crews are to be paid off, masters can bring their papers to the office and have the crews paid off and all differences settled before the commissioner. As at present situated, I have to go to vessels that are in the stream to sign men, and when differences arise between master and sailors, I have to examine where best I can, which imposes a hardship on all concerned. A room for the sailors attached to the shipping commissioner's office would afford a resting place and refuge from the questionable methods of "land sharks" or runners for sailors' boarding houses, who infest this place. The shipping of sailors at Newport News is increasing, and would still more increase, to the benefit of maritime interests, if such an office and room were established.

New York.-These changes would prevent the exaction of any fee from the sailors by either the shipping agent or boarding-house keeper.

Philadelphia.-The suggested change of system would be of great benefit to the seaman and master. Those desiring to ship without being subjected to any cost, could leave or bring their baggage and report in person daily, and be ever ready to sign articles and proceed to sea when wanted. If there was any imposition practiced by master or vice versa, the one so affected could be righted without any delay. If the master desired to engage his crew without having to pay the "middleman,” he could do so. It would induce the sailor to ship himself and avoid the payment of the dollar, which he alleges he has to pay for a chance. It would give the commissioner greater control over the sailor and possibly do away with the "middleman." It would be a safeguard thrown around the sailor, if he desired to take advantage of it. It would increase the efficiency of the office and have a tendency to lessen the expense appertaining to the ship, thereby encouraging American shipping.

Providence.-Without doubt the suggested change of system offers advantages compensating for the increased cost to the Government. Quarters directly supported by the Government will be resorted to in every case by masters and seamen when they become aware that the accommodations for them are so maintained. In case of a change in commissioners, there is less liability of change in location by the succeeding official, thus allowing the establishment of an office which can at all times be readily located. But the chief advantage will be the great benefit in quick shipment of crews. Seamen, knowing that a waiting room is provided for them at the expense of the Government, will gather there, and will do so in preference to other places, and captains requiring crews can select their men with great facility at the general headquarters which the proposed change will surely establish.

Savannah.-The interests of the merchant marine, and the objects and purposes of the act of Congress providing for the appointment of shipping commissioners and defining their duties, will be promoted by the establishment of properly equipped offices. Referring specially to the office at this port, it should be open at all times during regular business hours, and properly attended, but the compensation attached to it does not permit the employment of a clerk, and therefore does not enable me to properly attend to the duties incident thereto. The interests of commerce will be best served, and the primary purpose of Congress more properly carried out, by having some one present at all times. The wharves of Savannah extend along the river front a distance of 2 miles or over, and as the proper discharge of the duties of shipping commissioner necessarily requires him to visit ships along those wharves for various purposes-such as mustering crews, occasionally shipping seamen on board, who, without injury to the interests of the vessels, can not visit the office-these duties must be neglected to some extent, or the office left vacant during the absence of the commissioner. With a well-conducted office, in which the commissioner or a clerk could be found at all times during business hours, affairs could be conducted in a manner much more satisfactory to all concerned and the object and purpose of the law better served.

Following are the expressions of commissioners opposed to the proposed change: Baltimore.-The suggested change of system would not in my opinion offer any advantages compensating for the increased cost to the Government.

New Bedford.-The suggested change would offer no advantages, as the United States shipping commissioner furnishes the office and room at his own cost.

Pascagoula.-The manner in which the United States shipping commissioner's office is kept and the business conducted seems to afford full and satisfactory conveniences for all concerned, the office being kept in the rear portion of a large and commodious store, and both the captain and seamen have full room and liberty to consult at any part or place therein they may desire, and at any time to suit their convenience between 7 o'clock a. m. and 7 o'clock p. m., and without expense to the Government, which store is owned and conducted by myself. Under all the existing circumstances, I would not recommend the rental and maintenance of an office and room as a United States shipping commissioner's office, as the same can be conducted satis

factorily in the present mode and manner, affording ample facilities for any and all business that may arise. Should intricate or private matters arise, whereby a retired place be needed, an ample room is afforded upstairs in the same building.

Rockport, Me.-No advantages compensating for increased cost to the Government. Waldoboro, Me.-I do not think the change of system would offer any advantages compensating for the increased cost to the Government at this port.

Wilmington, N. C.-The United States shipping commissioner's compensation averages about $300 per annum. A man qualified to perform the duties of the office can not give all his time for that compensation, but must necessarily have the office convenient to where he is engaged in other business. The establishinment of such an office at Wilmington, . C., would therefore more than double the present expense and be of no advantage whatever to the Government or the shipping interests.

ALLOTMENTS IN COASTING TRADE.

The act of February 18, 1895, abolished allotments in the coasting trade in the case of seamen shipping before commissioners, and made numerous changes in the laws relating to the offenses and punishment of seamen. Commissioners were instructed to report on the operation of the law so far as the partial abolition of allotments was concerned. The following report in favor of the law:

Boston.--It is my opinion, and the general opinion of masters and owners, that the nonpayment of allotments is of great benefit to both seaman and master and owner. My opinion is that the extension of the law to include foreign-bound vessels would be of great benefit to seaman and master. The seaman is always more independent, industrious, and temperate when shipping without advance wages or allotment. The law, however, should be modified so a man could leave an allotment of a part of his wages for the benefit of his wife, mother, or children. With this exception the law relating to the nonpayment of advances and allotments is largely a benefit to all concerned.

New Orleans.-The repeal of allotment notes in the coast wise trade, in my opinion, is good, as it keeps seamen out of the hands of shipping agents if the law is properly enforced. The opinions of masters and owners are the same. As for the foreign trade, I would suggest that the law remain as it is.

New York.-The act of February 18, 1895, has proven very beneficial to the seaman. The allotment which was formerly in use is no longer a source of constant complaint. Credit for upholding this law at this port should be given to the National Seaman's Union.

Pascagoula.-I am pleased with its workings in the coastwise trade, as it avoids controversies and ofttimes gives a seaman better pay when the voyage is up and avoids disputed accounts between seamen, boarding-house keepers, and masters of vessels. I could not recommend its extension to the foreign trade, because the voyage is, in many cases, long and indefinite. In such cases the sailor needs and must bave a way of meeting liabilities while absent. The allotment law does not affect the sober and prudent sailor as to its existence or alterations or modifications, as he, like others of like habits, has his friends who will advance or loan him money in case of need. The masters, owners, and seamen with whom I have talked on this subject seem to be generally opposed to the law and are of the opinion it produces extra efforts and inconveniences for them to effect their engagements, and is conducive of no good results.

Providence. According to request I include my opinion and the consensus of opinion of owners and masters of vessels and seamen as to the operation of the new provision of law forbidding allotments of wages in the coastwise trade. This part of the law, which went into effect in February, meets with the approval of nearly every master and owner who has expressed an opinion concerning it. It tends to prevent desertions at the "other end." Formerly a seaman would be in debt frequently to his vessel when she arrived out, after a quick run, and would desert to avoid the per ormance of labor for which he had been paid. At present, money is due the seaman when his vessel arrives out and he does not care to forfeit it by breaking his contract. The forbidding of allotment makes the sailor more of a man. He must pay his bills instead of running up accounts ashore, which made an allotment of his prospective wages necessary upon shipment. In my opinion the extension of the law forbidding allotments in the foreign trade would be desirable. Savannah.-The operation of the new provision of law forbidding allotments of wages in the coast wise trade is beneficial both to seamen and owners of vessels. It practically prohibits the payment of advanced wages under the guise of allotment notes. At first masters and seamen were opposed to it; seamen for the evident reason that it prohibits them from spending their wages before they are earned, and by masters because they found more difficulty in procuring seamer. Both classes begin to recognize the advantages of the law and are becoming reconciled to it. My opinion is that, for the same reasons that render it desirable in the coastwise trade, it would work advantageously in the foreign trade.

Port Townsend.-In my opinion, and in the opinion of all shipping men with whom I have been brought in contact, the new law forbidding allotments of wages in the coasting trade has been found beneficial to all concerned. I do not think, however, that an extension of the law as regards the foreign trade would be beneficial; on the contrary, it is the opinion of all parties interested here that it would be decidedly injurious, inasmuch as deep water sailors are very often in a destitute condition, and are fed and clothed by boarding-house men who depend on the advance wages to repay them for their outlay, and should the means of recovering the money they have laid out be removed seamen would undoubtedly very often have to suffer considerable hardship. I am insisting that every boarding master shall furnish me with a statement of the indebtedness, signed by the seamen, before granting any advance note, thus protecting seamen as far as lies in my power.

New Bedford.-I consider the law forbidding allotment of wages in the coastwise trade is a good law, and it is for the benefit of seamen and masters of vessels; it meets with their approval and prevents demands from outside shipping masters (so called) on the seaman for providing him with employment. Before the acts of Congress (1872 and subsequent acts, same for the protection of seamen) I have known of cases where the seamen were charged with advances on the shipping articles either by dishonest masters or so-called shipping masters, which advances of wages the seamen never received, but they had to lose it. I am of the opinion that the law as it now stands, regarding allotments in the foreign trade, is satisfactory and no extension of said law forbidding allotments in said foreign trade is desirable.

The following commissioners report various objections to the law concerning allotments in the coasting trade:

Baltimore.-In the matter of the operation of the new provision of law forbidding allotments, etc., I find that it operates against the shipping interest and with great hardship to seamen generally. A seaman comes on shore from his late voyage, is paid off, and in a short time spends or makes way with, in some manner, his hard-earned wages without any thought whatever of his future, and in the meantime becomes indebted to his boarding-house keeper for board and lodging; he then finds that he must have money to meet such indebtedness, and he is compelled in many instances to seek employment on almost any terms. In order to secure money to pay his way he agrees to ship for a much less rate of wages in consideration of the master giving him a bonus about equivalent to the allotment. It operates to the disadvantage of seamen in other respects. In many cases seamen are discharged with a very small amount of wages due, and consequently find it very hard to get any boarding-house keeper to take them in on the ground of not having the means to pay their board in advance, and no allotment in prospect to pay. Boarding houses are very necessary for the accommodation of seamen; they can not, however, be expected to provide hoard, lodging, and other accommodations for them without remuneration. I would beg leave here to say, that from my experience as shipping commissioner, all sailor boarding houses are not the disreputable resorts nor are the keepers the horrible characters they are generally represented to be. With some exceptions they will compare very favorably with other classes of business men. The extension of the law forbidding allotments in the foreign trade is not at all desirable. It would certainly work greater hardships to seamen, aud cause much difficulty in the way of shipping. Owners and masters have great trouble in procuring crews without allotment, and many times have to resort to measures much against their will and to their great disadvantage. I am fully of the opinion the allotment system, as regulated by the Department and under which regulations seamen have been engaged since July 1, 1886, is the best arrangement that could be made. It worked well and with satisfaction generally to all concerned, and in my opinion should not have been changed. From my standpoint, I am fully convinced that no change should be made in the present allotment system in the foreign trade.

Bath, Me.-I am glad to have the opportunity, under your letter of April 22, to express to you my own conviction from experience, and the united opinion of shipmasters, shipowners, and sailors as well, that the law forbidding allotments works to the injury of all interests alike and ought to be immediately repealed. Instances are daily coming under my observation which support this view. Shipwrecked crews come here (there is none or little foreign trade from this port) to be shipped; they must have clothes and other necessities, which can not be provided for them under the law. Sailors arrested here serve their sentences and fill the jails of the town because of their inability under the law to get advanced to them money to pay their fines. They come out of jail without clothes, unable to ship, and a large army of tramps has been created and sent out to forage on the community by the operation of the law in question. I see no reason why the same arguments do not show the advisability of increased allotments in foreign trade.

Brunswick, Ga.-In answer to yours of April 22 in reference to the new law forbidding allotments, I wish to say that it is the consensus of opinion of those I have spoken to on the subject that it is a detriment rather than a benefit to shipping, as

it is a bid for fraudulent practice. A sailor who stops in a port a day or so will spend all of his wages, and he is necessarily compelled to get some place to stay, and under this new law the boarding-house people will not take them in as there is no legal way for them to get their money for caring for them, and it proves a hardship on the sailor rather than a benefit. I am of the opinion that it should not be extended to the foreign trade and that it would be advisable to abolish it as to the coasting trade.

Mobile.-The new law prohibiting advances to seamen going coastwise or to exempt ports, will not, I am inclined to think, work well. Jack is proverbially improvident and loves his dram, and once under its influence ceases to be responsible for his acts, and is soon plucked by the shore vampires, who leave him high and dry; then, having no money nor anything to deposit as security, he is turned out on the street to shift as he can, liable at any time to be locked up as a vagrant. It may be, however, that when the sailor is forced to rely on his earnings in hand for food and shelter, and thus become independent of the boarding-house keepers, the plan will work well, and it undoubtedly will, if it can be made plain to both captains and sailors that only in the way contemplated can they secure work and men. But in this, as in all experiments, its merits can only be known by being tested. It would perhaps work well in ports where provision is made for the sailor to get board and lodging outside of the regular sailor boarding houses. But there are so many instances in which sailors have to make some provision for the family left at home, that it would work as a great hardship to those left behind for the supporter of the family not to be able to make provision for them, and for this reason and the necessity for some means to supply personal wants-clothing, etc., on the eve of a voyage; the sailor as a rule, not being noted for his providence, is most generally without much of anything after being ashore for even a short time, so that it does seem to be almost a necessity that the sailor be allowed an advance-I am satisfied that the taking away the privi lege of making advance would result in detriment both to the sailor and the mercantile marine service.

Norfolk.-My opinion is that in taking away the privilege of allotments from our coastwise and West India trades the Government has given no protection to the sailor-on the contrary, has deprived the man of the opportunity of providing himself with any additional boots, shoes, or clothing that may be required from change of temperature or climate, or, where he has a mother, wife, or sister dependent upon him, from making the necessary provision for her in his absence, and thus, under a pretense of taking care of his money, may place him in a position that he or those he most cares for may be beyond its benefit when he is able to return and get his well-earned pittance. This opinion, I find, is generally held by the sailor, and as a result from it the available number of able seamen is diminishing and likely to do so more and more every day as a more general return of prosperity comes to our country and opens up new avenues of employment. The shipmaster complains that he finds it harder work to secure a crew, and those gotten are often inferior to what were obtainable under the former law, which he much prefers. This difficulty involves delay, which means increased expenses to the vessel, with which, it is hardly necessary for me to say, no shipowner is ever pleased.

Philadelphia.-I have consulted almost all the owners, masters, and seamen doing business in this port and find great dissatisfaction existing among them; they all prefer the law of August 19, 1890, instead of the present law. In this port we have about 9 miles of water front on the Pennsylvania shore and about 6 miles on the New Jersey shore where vessels anchor and dock. When a seaman signs articles we invariably find he has no money to transport himself and luggage to the vessel; therefore the captain is compelled to pay the necessary expense, and upon the termi nation of the voyage the captain can not deduct from the seaman's wages the amount so paid. In many cases the seaman, after having been put on board, changes his mind and leaves the vessel prior to departure, thereby causing the captain additional expense of supplying a man in his place. We have on record since March 4, 1895, the names of 160 seamen who refused to proceed to sea after having signed articles of agreement in this office. Permit me to say that under the existing law we are subjected to great inconvenience regarding seamen fulfilling their contracts.

In answer to your question regarding allotment in the foreign trade, I desire to say that in my opinion it would be almost impossible to furnish crews in the foreign trade without giving allotment. To abolish the present law would be very injurious to the shipping interests of Philadelphia.

Rockport.-În regard to the forbidding of allotments, I find that a great many sailors come ashore without money and consequently become charges for the towns, as no boarding masters will take them in, not having any way to get their pay. Think there should be an allotment or advance allowed not to exceed $10.

San Francisco. I beg to say, in my opinion, it is doubtful whether the act of February 18, 1895, forbidding allotments of wages in the coast wise trade, can be strictly