The Sumter banner. [volume] (Sumterville, S.C.) 1846-1855, 1852-04-06
-, t5 tssJsst s.i ~ a.
TGisa -fGs---EWo Doltars Per Amsayalst
#E asa Advaalce.s
ylL. 49,. '.iss : q II
Mo 2


less nc cssii, we are unable to see UPON
what J'ls,liable principle Congress- cal,
ssall'c'ioh such All assumption. 1hat
opqrr position may be more clearly
understood, nc take Il case Illus.
t:n'ion: The Executive calls fvr
lNc millions Of dollars tor the quarter.
masters Department.; this is lis esti.
mate for the year. Congress deems {
TINS amount too large and Only an (
propria;cs three millions. Now. If j
t'lc l-Sec''tive goes on and expends i
iive millions, We eay'itllat isl done
III violation Of law; and if the Exi
ccntlve asks tho next Congress to J.
sanction the excessive expenditure, IL
should be done only Upon the most
conclusive reasons. When Congress-
approl rates Il specific .snnl4to sustain
IL Specific b. ancll Of the government ovcriil e
the Executive las no authority for X X
tTanFssccnlils the limit Z fixed by Com
grass: To do SO is to violate tho
law; and no violation of law by B the
Executive ought 70 be sanctioned.
except under the pressure of absolute
necessity, What We maintain, there:
fore, is: that the present teficiercys
bill presents a case in which the sEx-
ccutive should be held t, iisid ne.
.e"untability. Why has more money
been expended than wasaappropriatsel
by Copgress?s Why were not the es.
pendtures made according to IN. 4
scale indicated by the Congressional s.
appropriations? What was the con.
trolling necessity to justify the Ex-
ccutivc in setting his discretion above
the law? How has the money been
expended! These are questions which
necessarily arise in the case, and un.
less they arc satisfactorily met and
answered, a most dangerous precedent
will be set; tho result of which will be
that the Executive estimates, and no.
the Congressional appropriations, will
become the law Of the land. We
deem it proper to repeat that we onot
make these remarks tor the purpose OF /;
intiniating any opinion as to the pro
Ptlety of the deficiency bill, but with
the sole view of showing isow ilis,or-
tantf IL is that those who are NO tiled "
that they willrbe held responsible for
the expe, ditnres according to the sap-
preparations by Congress, fnay'see the
necessity Of looking closely into this
dangerous innovation upon the proper
practice of the gorerrmcnt.p If tho
Executive can have deficiency bills !
passed whenever he chooses thus Co
have excess Of expenditure sanctioned.
the responsibility should rest distinctly
and sihgly upon those who make the
estimates, and not upon those who ap-
Propriate according to- the estimates.
In other words, upon this new doctrine
the business OF making appropriations
by Congress will become a mere for
NAL proceeding, having no response
biiity attached To it. This, surely, is
not inaccordance with the true spirit of
oar institutions, and it is an innovation
which should be promptly met by /.
the most rigid Investigation into the
necessity for the present deficiency
bill. We do not believe that the
public mind will be satisfied that this
government is economically admins
tered with an annual expenditure Of
over fifty million of dollars; until the
subject shall be thoroughly sifted; and
there can be no better time TO benin
this investigation than is presented
upon this Executive application for
the passage Of the deficiency bill before
Congress. a 7a
Now, did anybody ever. see such
collocH,ion Of defences, palliations
amd excuses! Why when Gen. Jack
son removed the deposites. or rather
changed the place. Of making them
il future, he did not rely on excuses,
and pailiatious and cXpediences. /. He
relied on what he considered his
constitutional power. But if a Pres
idcnt can violate the law and; rely on
reasons and Arguments he is the leg
islativc as well as the Executive
power. Why suppose the appropria-
tons ~ere inadequate, lie is NOT
responsible. s...
The excuse given in this case, in
our opinion aggravates the offence.
The President locates the different
divisions of he army where he pleases,
and then il the law does not provide
for that arrangement, he aciii. And
he pleads as his reason for violating
the law his desire to supply tho
soldiers where he placed them. He
cnlists the feelings of The aymy OH
his side in violation ofthc law. Why
this is Louis Napolcoii's policy. Ant.
il, this is tolerated, how long Willitbe
before we shall have a comp dc s'taR
Is not Congress competent to de-
tcrmme how much tho people shall
hcltaxcd for the defence four f.ontier
and of the Mexicans? And when
seven or eight millions are votedfor
the army, can the President vote three
or four million S more9 Congress-
refuses 10 ratify it, and proceedsto
inpcach the President, what so ma
tural us for him to appeal TO the army
against the fi,ctious majority in Con
grcss, anu With {. army a.d tlls