I am inclined to think the item for clerk hire in this bill should be so regarded.  This was the only appropriation included in the bill presented in the Forty-eighth Congress in behalf of this postmaster upon which a favorable committee report was made and which was not unfavorably spoken of by the Department.

But it does not follow that the other item for fuel and lights should be allowed.  I think it should not, on the grounds that the amount was fixed by the Department upon full examination, that there is no special reason shown why the postmaster should have exceeded the expenditures allowed, and that to give the least encouragement to postmasters that these allowances would be upon their application revised and increased by Congress would lead to demoralization in the service.

It appears that the allowance made to this officer for fuel and lights was increased October 1, 1883, and although the claim now made on this account embraces the period from July 1, 1883, to September, 1885, nothing was asked for fuel or lights in the bill presented to Congress for this beneficiary’s relief in 1884.

It should not have been tacked upon the bill now presented.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, August 27, 1888.

To the Senate: 

I return without approval Senate bill No. 288, entitled “An act for the erection of a public building at Sioux City, Iowa.”

On the 19th day of June, 1886, I was constrained to disapprove a bill embracing the same subject covered by the bill herewith returned.  Further investigation on the second presentation of the matter fails to convince me that $150,000 should be expended at present for the erection of a public building at Sioux City.

From all the representations that are made in an effort to show the necessity for this building I gather that the only two purposes for which the Government should furnish quarters at this place are a term of the United States court not specially crowded with business and the post-office, which, though perhaps crowded, I am sure can get on very well for a time without a larger public building.

As far as the court is concerned, it was agreed when a term was located there in 1882 that it might be held in the county building, which from the description furnished me seems to be entirely adequate for the purpose and very well arranged.  The term held in October, 1887, was in session for nine days.

I am decidedly of the opinion that if a public building is to be located at Sioux City it had better be delayed until a better judgment can be formed of its future necessity and proper size.

I see some of the parties interested have such confidence in the growth and coming needs of the place that in their opinion the work ought not to be entered upon with a less appropriation than $500,000.

GROVER CLEVELAND.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, September 1, 1888.