FORTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION. [See p. 138.] July 18, 1882. [Senate Report No. 840.] Mr. Miller, of California, from the Committee on Foreign Relations, submitted the following report: The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was referred the joint resolution (H. Res. 209) to authorize the President of the United States to call an international conference to fix on and recommend for universal adoption a common prime meridian to be used in the reckoning of longitude and in the regulation of time throughout the world, have considered the same, and respectfully report: That they have examined all the memorials and papers referred to them in relation to a commission for establishing a zero of longitude and a standard of time throughout the globe. These papers present two principal phases: First. The establishment of a prime meridian from which longitude shall be reckoned for all sea charts, which shall therefore have a quality of universal usage. Second. Standard time for the use of railroads, etc., through different countries. The committee recognize the practical benefits to be derived from having a common zero of longitude for the charts of all commercial nations, and believe that in the course of years a single line of departure would be adopted. Yet it seems very important that its establishment should be hastened by a convention of delegates from the various commercial nations. It would appear as necessary as the universal reckoning of latitude from the equator. At all events, a question which has so long occupied the attention of men of science and which provokes earnest discussion of its practical phases may as well be settled. The promulgation of such a prime meridian would be analogous to the promulgation of the Gregorian calendar, giving the smaller countries an opportunity to avail themselves of it without compromising their dignity. The committee recognize the fact that most of the great commercial nations adopt the meridian of Greenwich as the zero of longitude, but that the longitude is reckoned east and west therefrom to the one hundred and eightieth meridian. This single circumstance involves the liability of those navigators near the zero and near the one hundred and eightieth degree of making in their calculations a mistake in sign which may place them on the wrong side of those meridians. The gravity of this point is appreciated when we remember that the zero of longitude through Greenwich crosses the track of an immense commerce along the dangerous coasts of western Europe. The committee therefore feel the advisability of counting the longitude through 360 degrees or twenty-four hours from the prime meridian, and thus avoid the possibility of falling into the foregoing errors. A source of danger to navigation in the use of several prime meridians is where two vessels signal each other under stress of weather, and the one which has had no observation for longitude receives and uses a longitude from the other vessel based upon a different zero from her own, and may proceed to her destruction. The same may happen to a vessel approaching a strange coast line. In order to ascertain generally what commercial nations are using a common meridian, the committee have obtained from the charts at the office of the Coast and Geodetic Survey the following enumeration: COUNTRIES USING THE GREENWICH MERIDIAN FOR CHARTS. Great Britain, with India, Australia, Dominion of Canada, British Columbia, and all the dependencies, together with survey of dangers, harbors, etc., all over the world. The United States. Germany (the topographical maps use Berlin, 13° 23′ 53′′ east of Greenwich). Russia (also uses Paris, 2° 20' 15" east of Greenwich; St. Petersburg, 30° 20′ east of Greenwich; but gives Greenwich preference). The Netherlands (also uses Amsterdam, 4° 53' east of Greenwich). PER CONTRA. France uses Paris, 2° 20′ 15" east of Greenwich. Spain uses San Fernando, 6° 20' east of Greenwich. Italy, no specimen of sea charts. On the topographical maps she uses Turin, Milan, and San Fernando. Upon the consideration of adopting a universal standard of time for all countries the committee believe that the acceptance of such a proposition by any convention is extremely doubtful. At different periods there have been so many chimerical schemes proposed, and no thoroughly practical one suggested, that the committee can not urge this as a reason for supporting the recommendation of a convention. The great railroad corporations of each country will naturally solve this problem for themselves, with, perhaps, local legislation, but the committee believe that the adoption of numbering the hours from 0 at the prime meridian or zero of longitude to 24, consecutively, will afford a basis of local action and hasten the establishment of common railroad time in the different countries. Beyond the demands of the railroad traffic it seems absolutely necessary that local time shall be retained, because of the many industries and trade customs and legal questions involved. It would appear to be as difficult to alter by edict the ideas and habits of the people in regard to local time as to introduce among them novel systems of weights, measures, volumes, and money. Upon a careful weighing of all the evidence before them the committee believe that the question of establishing simply a prime meridian for all nations and reckoning the longitude therefrom through 360 degrees and through twenty-four hours, consecutively, is of such practical importance to commerce and navigation as to justify the calling of the proposed convention, and they therefore recommend the passage of the joint resolution with the amendment agreed upon by the committee. FORTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION. [See pp. 105, 139, 141, 187, 402, 410, 415, 457.] January 31, 1883. [Senate Report No. 952.] Mr. Miller, of California, from the Committee on Foreign Relations, submitted the following report: The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was recommitted Senate bill 550, to incorporate the Maritime Canal Company of Nicaragua, beg leave to report the same back with sundry amendments, and recommend its passage as amended. [See Senate Report 368, Forty-seventh Congress, first session, p. 107.] FORTY-EIGHTH CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION. April 10, 1884. [Senate Report No. 432.] Mr. Miller, of California, from the Committee on Foreign Relations, submitted the following report: The Committee on Foreign Relations beg leave to report the accompanying amendment, which they propose to the bill making appropriations for the consular and diplomatic service for the year ending June 30, 1885, in lieu of bills S. 347, 594, and 1700, which bills the committee recommend be indefinitely postponed, and ask that the amend ment herewith be referred to the Committee on Appropriations. The subject-matters embraced in the above-mentioned bills have been carefully considered by the committee, and their views are contained in the letter from the Department of State, dated March 26, 1884, hereto appended and made a part of this report. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, March 26, 1884. SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 5th instant, inclosing copies of two proposed amendments to the consular and diplomatic bill for an appropriation to defray the expenses of a conference of independent American nations to promote commerce and general peace, and in which you inform me of the courtesy of the committee in submitting the amendments for my consideration, with the request that if the President approve of the proposition, to place it within his power, so far as expenses are concerned, to invite such a conference that I submit a draft of an amendment, such as I regard as proper, or that I indicate which of the two I prefer. I am thoroughly convinced of the advisability of knitting closely our relations with the States of this continent, and no effort on my part shall be wanting to accomplish a result so consonant with the constant policy of this country, and in the spirit of the Monroe doctrine, which, in excluding foreign political interference, recognizes the common interest of the States of North and South America. It is the history of all diplomacy that close political relations and friendship spring from unity of commercial interests. The merchant or trader is the forerunner and aid to diplomatic intimacy and international amity. With the spirit of the proposed amendments I am in harmony. But certain practical objections to the mode suggested occur to me. I fear that a congress so soon to meet, without previous conference with the several governments, and without the preparation of a well-digested programme for discussion, might be unable to acomplish a valuable result. The views of the States which are to be parties to the conference should be obtained, their wishes and aims carefully considered, and thereupon the scope and purpose of the congress carefully defined and outlined in the invitation. The disadvantage of summoning a congress without some definite assurance of general accord, and without an announcement of its programme, was shown in 1880, when the Colombian Government convoked a congress of Spanish-American States at Panama to concert measures for preserving peace between them by means of international arbitration. Few States were represented, and the conference failed to develop unity of views, and broke up without accomplishing anything, except, perhaps, a prejudice against the renewal of the project. Moreover, it is probable that the other States-certainly the smaller and less powerful among them-would desire a treaty of alliance, requiring of the United States protection and defense in case of attack, not only by European powers, but by their more powerful neighbors on this continent. Material aid also in the construction of their railroads and other similar public works would be expected, neither of which propositions could be entertained by us. In the conference the smallest State would have a voice equal to that of the United States; and while we need not necessarily be bound by the conclusions reached, it would weaken rather than strengthen our influence with these countries if we should feel forced to reject measures adopted by the conference. Considerations of much this character influenced the failure of the notable project for an American congress at Panama during Mr. Adams's Administration, in 1828-29. The congress was proposed by the South American States, then recognized by us as independent, but still nominally at war with Spain. Its purposes were mutual alliance and preservation of peace among them. President Adams and Mr. Clay favored the project, but continued opposition, in and out of Congress, developed the general belief that the only result would be to make the United States the responsible protector of the whole republican system of the continent, thus giving the minor States the benefit of a special protection which the United States did not need for themselves and could not adequately expect from the rest. The United States commissioner, although appointed, did not attend the congress, and owing to the disordered condition and conflicting interests of the Spanish-American States it attained no result. (See note to Dana's Wheaton, p. 99, et seq.) The true plan, it seems to me, is to make a series of reciprocity treaties with the States of Central and South America, taking care that those manufactures, and as far as is practicable those products which would come into competition with our own manufactures and products should not be admitted to the free list. By these treaties we might secure for valuable consideration, so as not to violate the mostfavored nation clause of other treaties, further substantial advantages, such, for example, as the free navigation of their coasts, rivers, and lakes. Indiscriminate reduction of duties on materials peculiarly the production of Central and South America would take from us the ability to offer reciprocity, and we would thus lose the opportunity to secure valuable trade. Removal of duties from coffee, without greatly cheapening its price, deprived us of the power to negotiate with the coffee-growing countries of Spanish America highly advantageous reciprocity treaties, and indiscriminate reduction of duties on sugar would complete our inability to establish favorable commercial relations with those countries which form our natural market, and from which we are now almost entirely excluded. If we confine the reduction of duties on such articles as sugar and coffee to those Spanish-American countries which are willing to negotiate with us treaties of reciprocity we cheapen these products for our own people, and, at the same time, gain the control of those markets for the products of our fields and factories. Another point seems well worthy of consideration. The United States are great producers of silver, and every market which can be opened for this valuable product is to our direct advantage. Great Britain, on the other hand, strives to disparage and exclude it as a means of exchange: for its use in this way depreciates her wealth and works to her disadvantage. The States of Central and South America are also silver producers, with interests like ours. It would, therefore, be advantageous, and is probably practicable, to agree upon a common silver coin equal in value, say, to our gold dollar, or to some other appropriate standard, which, under proper regulation as to coinage, etc., should be current in all the countries of this continent. Thus value would be given to our silver products, and commerce with these countries wou'd be aided. I suggest that it would be well to make an appropriation, giving to the President power to appoint a commission to carefully consider what the best interests of North and South America and the Isthmus require; to send, if found advisable, delegates to confer with the Governments of the other countries, and, after this commission has made its report upon the most feasible means of carrying out measures of mutual advantage, then empowering the President, if he sees proper, to call the convention. A body so convened would meet with its general object and scope marked out, and would know beforehand what wishes of the other States this Government is unable to comply with, thus avoiding what might seem a rebuff should we feel obliged to decline a project matured by the congress without our assent. I inclose herewith a draft of an amendment embodying these views, which meet the President's approval. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, Hon. JOHN F. MILLER, FREDK. T. FRELINGHUYSEN. Chairman Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate. FORTY-EIGHTH CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION. [See p. 134.] February 7, 1885. [Senate Report No. 1188.] Mr. Miller, of California, from the Committee on Foreign Relations, submitted the following report: 66 The Committee on Foreign Relations, in submitting the resolution to authorize and request the President to 'communicate to the Governments of all nations in diplomatic relations with the United States the resolutions adopted by the International Conference held at Washington in October, 1884, for the purpose of fixing a prime meridian and a universal day, and to invite their accession to the same," beg leave to ask the attention of the Senate to the following statement, viz: By an act of Congress approved August 3, 1882, the President of the United States was authorized and requested to call an International Conference to fix on and recommend for universal adoption a common prime meridian to be used in the reckoning of longitude and in the regulation of time throughout the world. In pursuance of the object sought to be attained by this act, the Secretary of State, in a circular note dated October 23, 1882, inquired of the several Governments of foreign States whether they would be disposed to take part in such a conference if invited thereto; to which inquiry a favorable answer was returned in the majority of cases, and the formal invitation of the President to send delegates to an International Conference to meet at Washington on October 1, 1884, "for the purpose of discussing, and if possible, fixing upon a meridian proper to be employed as a common zero of longitude and standard of time reckoning throughout the globe," was communicated to the several foreign Governments with which the United States maintain relations, by means of a circular note dated December 1, 1883, and issued by the Secretary of State. In response to this invitation, delegates appointed on behalf of Austria-Hungary, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, France, Germany, Great Britain, Guatemala, Hawaii, Italy, Japan, Liberia, Mexico, Netherlands, Paraguay, Russia, San Domingo, San Salvador, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Venezuela, and the United States of America, met in Washington on the 1st of October, 1884, in conference, for the purposes set forth in the said invitation; and after discussing and considering the subject in several conferences, adopted, on the 22d of October, 1884, certain resolutions reciting the conclusions they had reached. On the day last named the conference referred to unanimously adopted the following resolution, viz: That a copy of the resolutions passed by this conference shall be communicated to the Government of the United States of America, at whose instance and within whose territory the conference has been convened. The said resolutions have been communicated to Congress by the President, together with the record of the proceedings of the confer ence. The committee desire to submit also the following letter from the Secretary of State for consideration in this connection, viz: DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, February 5, 1885. SIR: Permit me to call to your attention the subject of the late Prime Meridian Conference held in October last, of which the full protocols, in French and Eng |