en for its purposes from appropriations
for the support of the Army, were $290,712.07.

The act approved March 3, 1885, designed to compensate officers and
enlisted men for loss of private property while in the service of the
United States, is so indefinite in its terms and apparently admits so
many claims the adjustment of which could not have been contemplated
that if it is to remain upon the statute book it needs amendment.

There should be a general law of Congress prohibiting the construction
of bridges over navigable waters in such manner as to obstruct
navigation, with provisions for preventing the same. It seems that under
existing statutes the Government can not intervene to prevent such a
construction when entered upon without its consent, though when such
consent is asked and granted upon condition the authority to insist upon
such condition is clear. Thus it is represented that while the officers
of the Government are with great care guarding against the obstruction
of navigation by a bridge across the Mississippi River at St. Paul a
large pier for a bridge has been built just below this place directly in
the navigable channel of the river. If such things are to be permitted,
a strong argument is presented against the appropriation of large sums
of money to improve the navigation of this and other important highways
of commerce.

The report of the Secretary of the Navy gives a history of the
operations of his Department and the present condition of the work
committed to his charge.

He details in full the course pursued by him to protect the rights of
the Government in respect of certain vessels unfinished at the time
of his accession to office, and also concerning the dispatch boat
_Dolphin_, claimed to be completed and awaiting the acceptance of
the Department. No one can fail to see from recitals contained in this
report that only the application of business principles has been
insisted upon in the treatment of these subjects, and that whatever
controversy has arisen was caused by the exaction on the part of the
Department of contract obligations as they were legally construed. In
the case of the _Dolphin_, with entire justice to the contractor,
an agreement has been entered into providing for the ascertainment by a
judicial inquiry of the complete or partial compliance with the contract
in her construction, and further providing for the assessment of any
damages to which the Government may be entitle