BENJ. HARRISON.
VETO MESSAGES.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, December 24, 1890.
To the Senate:
I return to the Senate, in which it originated, with my objections, the bill (No. 544) "to provide for the purchase of a site and the erection of a public building thereon at Bar Harbor, in the State of Maine." The statement of a few facts will show, I think, that the public needs do not justify the contemplated expenditure of $75,000 for the erection of a public building at Bar Harbor. Only one public office, the post-office, is to be accommodated. It appears from a report of the Postmaster-General that the rent paid by the United States for a room containing 875 square feet of floor space was in 1888 $300 and the expenditure for fuel and lights $60. One clerk was employed in the office and no carriers. The gross postal receipts for that year were $7,000. Bar Harbor is almost wholly a summer resort. The population of the town of Eden, of which Bar Harbor forms a part, as taken by the census enumerators, was less than 2,000. During one quarter of the year this population is largely increased by summer residents and visitors, but for the other three quarters is not much above the census enumeration. The postal receipts for 1890 by quarters show that for more than half the year the gross receipts of the post-office are about $8 per day. The salary of a janitor for the new building would be more than twice the present cost to the Government of rent, fuel, and lights. I can not believe that upon reconsideration the Congress will approve the contemplated expenditure.
BENJ. HARRISON.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, January 26, 1891.
To the House of Representatives:
I return herewith without my approval the bill (H.R. 12365) entitled "An act to authorize Oklahoma City, in Oklahoma Territory, to issue bonds to provide a right of way for the Choctaw Coal and Railway Company through said city." This bill authorizes the corporation of Oklahoma City to issue corporate bonds to the amount of $40,000 for the purpose of providing the right of way for a railroad company through the city, if the proposition shall receive the assent of a majority of the legal voters at an election to be called for that purpose.
It is attempted to distinguish this case from the ordinary case of a municipal grant to a railway company by the fact that this railway company had located its line through the lands afterwards settled upon under the town-site law before such settlement, and that the route thus located cuts the plat of the city diagonally and in a way to be very injurious to property interests.