The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1842-08-09
REMARKS OF MR.. GUSHING,
OF MASSACHUSETTS,
ON the Reduction Of the Army and Macy
OF MASSACHUSETTS,

HOUSE OF REPREsENTANEs, July 81, 1872
The House being in Committee of the Whole on
the amendments of the Senate to the Naval ApPro-
priation bill
MIR. CUSHING said that the gentleman from Ten
nessee MR. Johnson) had complained OF others Tor
divergng from the question, and yet, when profess
ing advance arguments against the Senates amend
ments, had not mentioned one which had the least
bearing upon the subject
He had asserted that the appropriations OF this
year exceeded those of the last by two-and-a-half
millions. He demanded the proof.
Mr.. JOHNSON denied that he had said so; and pro-
ceeded to explain.
MIR. CUSHING supposed the gentleman had not
meant what he said but such had been his language
MIR. c. presumed he meant to say that the estimates
OF the Secretary had exceeded the appropriations OF
the last year by the amount he mentioned.
II the fact were so, it argument on the ques
ton of concurring in the Senates amendments
The real question was, and the only question: whe-
Their it proper not to add $4OOOOO 10 the
amount in the House appropriation bill. On that
question the gentleman had not thrown one particle
Of light he had not touched it, nor approached II IN
any way The true inquiry was, what would be the
Indebtedness of the Navy at the end of the year 1922
If that were $500 900 more than the House bill APP
proprated then the Senates amendment ought to be
concurred in. The general principle was, that the
appropriations in each year should meet the obliga-
lions of that year Now, he believed that the
which would be actually needed to discharge the debt
of the Navy, and at any rate did not exceed It, but
was, in fact, less.
The gentleman, instead of showing by figures that
this not the case had inveighed against an al
legged increase of the personal military strength OF the
Navy. He had asserted that the Secretary had add
ed to the Navy 5000 officers and men. He demand
ed to know ,chat Secretary had done this Let the
gentleman show it, if he could. MIR. c. denied the
fact. What Secretary had made such addition
lad Dol1 Cd Shtp
He challenged the gentleman to show it. 1t was on
such mere loose assertions that the gentleman invited
the House to reject the Senate's amendment to the
bill.
Some explanations here passed between MIR.
CUSHING and MIR. MCKAY, referring to former part
of the debate.
1t that in the lapse of years, this addition
had gradually been made not, however, by any one
Secretary, but by Congress- under the established po-
Icy of the Government for the gradual increase the
Navy. But what had that fact to do with the issue
now pending The only practical question was,
what would be the debt of The Navy in December,
1912 The increase if too great and too rapid might
be good argument why Congress should pass laws
to limit and regulate peace establishment; but sure
y it argument for refusing to pay the debts OF
the Governments it furnished valid excuse for re-
jecng the honest claims of men who had labored for
their money and were justly entitled to it.
Mr.. c. could not but be struck with the fact that
while the gentleman from Tennessee laying this
augmentation Of the personal force OF the Navy as an
accusation at the door of the existing Administration,
it had by his own admission, been growing as well
under former Administrations as under this, and was
nothing than the result of that cardinal policy
of this Government the gradual increase OF its naval
power.
Was that policy wrong? Did the gentleman main
tain it to be wrong2 And if it were, who re-
sponsble for it Really, from the tenor of the gen
lemans own language, one would have supposed that
Martin Van Buren, or Andrew Jackson had been the
~ III. IL. ~
expending so and SO much for the Navy. Who were
they2 Was it they who appropriated the money of
the people and applied according to their pleasure
No; it was Congress who had made the upPropria-
tions, and it did not become the gentleman speak
as though it were the work of any Department.
What would the gentleman have? Were we to re-
strain the Navy Department from employing the Ma
Wy Of the country? Were ships of war to he dis
rnantled Were they to be laid up to rot 'in ordi-
nary2" He never would agree 10 any such system
If the policy ofthe Government for the last twenty
years, was mistaken or false policy, let the House
say SO, in the proper time and form. That was NO:
the question. The question now was on paying
Just debts.
MIR. C. now referred to some of the remarks of the
gentleman from Georgia. Mr. Meriwether) who hal
insnuate1 that the Secretary made eyasve and
fair demand upon the House for the pay of the home
squadron and had by implication, imputed to MI
G.. himself the conceament of facts with view de-
ceive the House. The real fact had simply been ha,
on an estimate that Tapped and extended beyond
the limits of a fiscal year That fact, so far from be
ing concealed, had been openly avowed upon tina
floor in confirmation ofwhich position MIR. c quort
tn, printed report of speech of his made at the time
Another thing imputed by the gentleman from
Georgia upon the Secretary, had been the sending OF
double estimates for the pay of some OF the ships
as when vessel estimated for receiving ship af-
forwards went abroad But this instead of involving
double estimates, and an attempt to deceive, was
common everyday occurrence: The Columbus, iol
example, had been estimated for as receiving ship
but when the Ohio into port the Columbus sail
ed, and the Ohio took her place. The same thing
happened in regard to the frigate Columbia. 1t wa:
mere arrangement or exchange of ships
There was one other most extraordinary argu
ment against concurrence in this amendment which
had been urged by the gentleman from Tennessee
it was appeal to the blind esprit de corps of the
House: to its pride House: and the gentleman
had avowed the revolving determination that, rather
than yield to the Senate by amending the BILL he wa
ready to sacrifice the Navy Of his country. Thi
was an appeal to mems passions; and it was brough
as financial argument against providing for bal
ance of S40O, 900 which would be due, and must b.
paid.
The gentleman said it was question Of power. A
question of power; Why, what question could there
be in the case; Had not the Senate poper to amend
bill from this House
Mr.. JOHNSON explained He had referred to APP
pontments made without law.
MIR. G. said he had not reached the subject of APP
pointments yet; and it was different question, no
involved in the amendment. The gentemans appea
had been naked appeal to the passions of the House
and to crafty pride he called them to sacrifice thu
Navy, and declared himself ready for such alter
alive.
Mr.. c. considered it great misfortune of thu
present period that the several departments of thu
Government seemed to be trying questions of powe
between themselves, and those, too, of the most re
condite and delicate description. 1t Obvious
that If we would carry complex system lik'
ours, there must be discretionary forbearanc,
among its departments towards each other. With
out this the Government could not long continue t.
exist. Had we not quite trouble enough with tn,
questions of power between Congress and the Execu
tive without starting new questions between the twt