A tracing of the unconfirmed private land claim, No. 109, New Mexico, known as the Rancho de Taos.

JANUARY 30, 1885.-Referred to the Committee on Private Land Claims and ordered to be printed.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
Washington, January 28, 1885.

SIR: I have the honor to transmit herewith a tracing of the plat of the preliminary survey of the unconfirmed private land claim, No. 109, in the Territory of New Mexico, known as the Rancho de Taos, Francisco de Antonia de Gijosa, claimant.

This plat is transmitted that it may be filed with the report of the surveyor-general of New Mexico, under the eighth section of the act of Congress approved July 22, 1854, Stats., vol. 10, p. 308, in this case, a copy of which was sent to you by this Department December 11, 1880. Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

H. M. TELLER,

The Hon. PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE, pro tempore.

Secretary.

In compliance with Senate resolution of January 21, 1885, documents relating to the collection of the tax on distilled spirits.

FEBRUARY 2, 1885.-Referred to the Committee on Finance and ordered to be printed.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, January 26, 1885. SIR: In compliance with the resolution of the Senate of the 21st instant, directing the Secretary of the Treasury "to communicate to the Senate copies of all official letters and other correspondence in his Department of date subsequent to the 30th of November, 1884, relating to the collection or postponement in any manner of the tax upon distilled spirits, and not accompanying his communication to the Senate in response to its resolution of the 13th instant," I have the honor to transmit herewith the following-described documents, viz:

(1.) Letter of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, dated January 24, 1885, in response to the Secretary, pursuant to the resolution of the Senate.

(2.) Petition of John B. Thompson (without date) to the Secretary of the Treasury.

(3.) Letter of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, dated December 2, 1884, written at the request of the Secreatry, in reply to Mr. Thompson's petition.

(4.) Letter of the Acting Secretary, dated December 5, 1884, to Mr. Thompson, transmitting the Commissioner's letter.

(5.) Letter of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, dated December 13, 1884, to the Secretary, suggesting that the opinion of the Attorney-General, be requested as to the power of the Department to make a certain regulation.

(6.) Letter of the Secretary, dated December 15, 1884, to the Attorney-General, asking his opinion as suggested.

(The opinion of the Attorney-General, under date of December 24, 1884, in response to the Secretary's request, will be found in document No. 8 of this series, printed in Circular No. 282.)

(7.) Letter of Phillip B. Thompson, James O. Broadhead, and James B. Beck, dated January 3, 1885, to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. (8.) Circular No. 282, dated January 3, 1885, on the "assessment and exportation of spirits," issued pursuant to the opinion of the AttorneyGeneral, by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, and approved by the Secretary January 6, 1885.

(9.) Circular No. 283, relating to the "exportation of spirits in bond," issued January 15, 1885, by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue with the approval of the Secretary.

Very respectfully,

SIR: In response to Senate resolution of January 21, 1885, calling for copies of all official letters and other correspondence in this Department "of date subsequent to the 30th of November, 1884, relating to the collection or postponement in any manner of the tax upon distilled spirits, and not accompanying the communication to the Senate in response to its resolution of the 13th instant," referred by you to this office on the 23d instant, I have the honor to state that some months ago this office was urged with great persistency by John B. Thompson, jr., esq., a distiller of Harrodsburg, Ky., to extend and enlarge the time prescribed in the then existing regu lations for the exportation of distilled spirits in bond.

The first written communication upon the subject was from Mr. Thompson to you and myself jointly, said paper being without date, a copy of which is inclosed. My reply to that letter was dated December 2, 1884, and a copy thereof is herewith transmitted.

Besides being a distiller, Mr. Thompson is a lawyer of ability, and his propositions of law applicable to the case were insisted upon with great zeal and not less ingenuity and force. His renewed efforts, notwithstanding my letter of December 2, were seconded by several members of Congress whose constituency were vitally interested in the subject, and finally I addressed you a letter under date of December 13, 1884, a copy of which is inclosed.

After you had transmitted the last-mentioned communication to the honorable Attorney-General, and had propounded to him such inquiry thereupon as seemed to you advisable, and after that officer had returned his answer thereto, Messrs. J. B. Beck, J. O. Broadhead, and Philip B. Thompson, jr., presented a written communication, under date of the 3d instant, a copy of which is also inclosed.

While I could not yield to the views contained in the last-named paper, with your approval, I did, under the authority of section 3330, Revised Statutes, and in deference to the opinion of the honorable Attorney-General, make Regulation No. 282, a printed copy of which is also inclosed.

Subsequently an additional Regulation, No. 283, was issued, a printed copy of which I inclose.

When the Senate resolution of the 13th instant upon the same subject was referred to this office it was regretfully observed that its language was probably inadvertently too narrow to cover any correspondence of this office upon the subject except Circular No. 282.

It may not be improper to remark that while this office had not entertained, nor theretofore acted upon, a view of the law similar to that expressed by the Attorney-General, still I did not doubt that it was proper to conform its action to the law as expounded by the head of the Department of Justice. The persons interested in the subject are manifestly entitled to all the rights the law gives them, and the honorable Attorney-General is the proper officer to state what the law is.

The only difference of opinion was as to whether the spirits could lawfully remain in warehouse after the expiration of three years. I thought not, except for the time necessary to enforce the collection of the tax by lawful means. The Attorney-General advises that the spirits may lawfully remain in distillery warehouses after the three years expire, for a time reasonably required in the process of exportation, provided the proper declaration of a bona fide purpose to export is made, and a bond given that it will be done within that reasonable time, and they are, after those things are done, to be regarded as in process of actual exportation, although delays may come from the difficulty of getting advantageous transportation rates and other facilities. By this means the spirits may be retained in distillery warehouses free of expense, rather than subject the owner to certain expenses alleged be to incident to the mode formerly in

vogue.