he 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.

Upon an examination of the facts it appears to me to be clear that no
leg