I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State, in answer to the resolution of the Senate of May 9, 1896.

It is difficult to understand why under the Constitution it should be necessary to submit proposed legislation to Executive scrutiny and approval except to invoke the exercise of Executive judgment and invite independent Executive action.

This bill is in many of its features far removed from a legitimate deficiency bill, and it contains a number of appropriations which seem to me to be exceedingly questionable.

It is well known that the business of insurance is entered upon with the expectation that the premiums received will pay all losses and yield a profit to the insurance in addition.

I can not gather from the facts I have been able to collect concerning this appropriation that it is justified on any ground.

I do not understand it to be asserted that there exists any legal liability against the Government on account of its relation to these claims.

I hereby return without my approval House bill No. 8293.

I regret that I am constrained to disapprove an important appropriation bill so near the close of the present session of Congress.

There certainly ought to be a strong presumption that the case was fairly and justly determined by the Bureau.

I am advised by the Pension Bureau that the bill, if it becomes a law in its present form, would be inoperative.

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 4526, entitled 'An act granting a pension to Jonathan Scott.'