Pairs.-An agreement between two members of a legislative body, that would have voted on opposite sides of a question, for each to abstain from voting, is called a pair; the result is thus left unaffected and one or both of the members is enabled to be absent.

Pacific Railroads.-This name is applied collectively to various railroads, as stated below, to which the aid of the national government was extended in order to facilitate railroad connection between the Pacific coast and the remainder of the country. Such communication had long been regarded as necessary to prevent a gradual utter divergence of interests between these sections and consequent ultimate separation. As early as 1846 the scheme had been broached. In 1855 surveys were made, and in 1860 both of the great political parties recommended government aid to the project. In 1862 an act was accordingly passed granting to the companies five sections of public land and $16,000 in government bonds for every mile constructed, the land and bonds for every stretch of forty miles to be turned over to the company only on the completion of such stretch. For different portions of the route the grants of bonds varied, some being as high as $48,000 per mile for the more difficult. On the other hand, all transportation or other service performed for the government was to be applied to its reimbursement for the principal and interest of the bonds so issued. Meanwhile the bonds were to be a first lien on all the property of the company. In 1864 the grant of land per constructed mile. was increased from five to ten sections. (See Land Grants.) The stretch of forty miles required to be completed each time before bonds and land on any part of it were granted, was reduced to twenty miles, and the company was authorized to issue bonds not exceeding the amount of the government bonds, the mortgage of the latter in favor of the government to be postponed to that of the new bonds; moreover, it was provided that only one-half of the value of the company's services to the government was to be retained to extinguish the debt; the other half was to be paid in cash

to the company. On May 10, 1869, the last rail was laid. Under this arrangement there were advanced to various companies amounts as given below. This was the condition of the accounts on January 1, 1888:

In May, 1878, an act, known as the Thurman Act, was passed, prescribing more stringent terms for the repayment of government advances. In addition to the amounts retained out of sums due for government service, the Act of 1862 provided for the payment of five per cent. of the net earnings of the company. The Act of 1878 retained the entire amount due to the companies for government service, one-half to be applied to interest payments, one-half to form a sinking fund for the principal, and it required, moreover, the annual payment of a fixed sum ($850,000 for the Union Pacific and $1,200,000 for the Central Pacific), or so much thereof as might be necessary to make the total obtained by adding the five per cent. of net earnings and the whole of the compensation retained, equal to twenty-five per cent. of the net earnings. The method of computing the net, earnings was prescribed, and it was provided that the additional payments thus required were not to be exacted unless the net earnings were sufficient to meet the interest on the bonds prior in lien to the government mortgage. Below is the condition of the account on January 1, 1888:

Pan Electric Scandal.-The Pan Electric Company is a company claiming patents which would be valuable if the Bell Telephone patents were declared invalid. The promoters of the scheme are alleged to have distributed some of the stock among Senators in order to secure, if possible, legislation favorably affecting their company. A. H. Garland, at present Attorney-General, received some of this stock while Senator, it is charged, and when the Pan Electric Company applied to the Attorney-General to begin suit in the name of the United States government for the annulment of the Bell patents, comment was naturally rife. The application was heard by the Solicitor-General, the AttorneyGeneral being on a vacation, and after mature delibera

tion favorably decided. The holding of this stock by the Senators had previously been the subject of inquiry by a congressional committee.

Panics. (See Commercial Crises.)

Paper Blockade. (See Blockade.)

Pardon.-A pardon in its legal sense is the remission of the penalty imposed for the commission of a crime. When partial it is called a commutation of sentence. The effect of a full pardon is to restore the criminal to all his rights and privileges as a citizen. It is regarded as a deed and must be accepted to be valid. It cannot, however, be recalled when once made complete by delivery and acceptance. The pardoning power is inherent in the sovereign. In the United States the power of granting pardons for offences against federal laws is delegated to the President. In the States it is usually given to the Governor, but it may be left to the Legislature, or entrusted to a Court of Pardons, as in New Jersey.

Paris Monetary Conference.-There have been. three such conferences. I. The Conference of 1867 met in Paris, June 17, 1867, at the invitation of France. The United States was represented by Samuel B. Ruggles, of New York. The Conference voted in favor of the single gold standard, "leaving each State the liberty to keep its silver standard temporarily," and also in favor of the five-franc gold piece of France as the common denominator for an international coinage. The conclusions of the Conference were to be referred to the governments taking part in it. The answers were to be sent to France, to which nation the power of reassembling the Conference was given. The Conference adjourned July 6th. It was not re-assembled. II. The Act of Congress of 1878, authorizing the coinage of the standard silver dollar (see Coinage), directed the President to invite the European governments to a conference for the purpose of fixing the relative value of gold and silver, and of promoting international bi-metallism. The Conference assembled in Paris, August 16, 1878, the United States being represented by Reuben E. Fen

ton, of New York; W. S. Groesbeck, of Ohio; Francis A. Walker, of Connecticut, and S. Dana Horton, Secretary. The Conference voted that silver as well as gold was necessary for use as money, but that all questions connected with its adoption as a standard alone, or together with gold, ought to be left to each country to settle for itself; that the restriction of the coinage of silver was similarly a question for the determination of each nation for itself, and that the establishment of a fixed ratio between the two metals was impossible, in view of the differences of opinion that prevailed. The Conference adjourned August 29th. III. The Conference of 1881 was called by France and the United States for the purpose of devising a plan for the establishment "of the use of gold and silver as bi-metallic money,” and of fixing a ratio between these metals. The Conference met at Paris April 19, 1881. S. Dana Horton again represented the United States, as did also William M. Evarts, of New York; Allen G. Thurman, of Ohio, and Timothy O. Howe, of Wisconsin. After considerable discussion the delegates of France and the United States declared their belief that the fluctuations in the relative value of silver and gold were injurious to commerce, that free coinage (see Bi-Metallism) of gold and silver by the principal commercial countries would give the stability desired. That the ratio of 15 to 1 was the ratio best adapted to the purpose, and that the agreement of England, France, Germany and the United States would suffice to insure the success of any such combination. An adjournment was requested to give time for diplomatic negotiations, and it was voted to adjourn until April 12, 1882. The Conference never

re-assembled.

Particularists were those American Whigs that, in the early history of our government, feared that the federal government would be unduly strengthened to the detriment of the independence of the States.

Party Conventions. (See Nominating Conventions.)

Patriot War. (See Canadian Rebellion.)