Martinsburg gazette. [volume] (Martinsburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1833-1855, 1852-04-06

moment was done in either body: the House
being engaged on uuiinportant items Of the
Deficiency bill,
Mr. Faulkner. by unanimous consent, pre-
scented preamble and resolutions Of the
General Assembly Of Virginia, requesting the
Congress Of the United States to make far
Their appropriations Of scrip for satisfying
Virginia bounty land warrants, aud for cedine
to the United States the refuse lands ia the
military district between the Sciota AID the
Miami rivers. in the State of Ohio: which
were referred to the committee on Public
Lands. and ordered to be printed.
ARMY DErIcIEScY Bill.
In committee Of the Whole on the state Of
the Union--members being limited to five
minute speeches:
Mr.. Faulkner: A view of this question has
been taken by some gentlemen in this debate
which, il well founded, should have 6eci
siye Influence upon the result in this House,
and certainly would materially influence my
vote. Ii has been said. that ibis bill inyol-
YES vital aud fundamental question Of pow
er between tie Executive and the Legisla
tive departments of the Government. ! lat
Congress ut its last session, in reducing the
army appropriations fity per cent. below the
estimates, thereby indicated its fixed deter
mnation to limit the expenditures of the
army within these appropriations and that all
expenditures beyond that amount, Or in that
proportion for the present fiscal year. SO far
as 1t has elapsed, WIS ii palpable violation Of
the viii Of Congress, clearly aud distinctly
f.la Al.
man from South Carolina IMr Wallape a
lew moments siucc, aud it was the view of the
gentleman from Kentucky Mir. Marshall ]
announced on yesterday; the latter gentle
man indeed. was 50 emphatic in bis opinion
as to declare that he would rather vote to
dishand the army, and leave the frontiers to
their own defence. than to vote one dollar OF
the present def iency
Now sir. it | viewed this question in the
light taken Of it by these gentlemen. ! might
reach the same conclusions to which they
clear purpose to limit expenditure within cer-
tain bounds. and a department of the Cow
ernmemt shall disregard TINT purpose. would.
with them, assume the responsibility of reiu-
sing to vote further supplies. But | draw
no such conclusions from the proceedings o.
the East Congress- That body, il reducing
the appropriations. did NOT eurtail single
object Of expenditure. For the last four OF
FIVE years. the annual expenditures Of the
qnarterrasteg's department have exceedtd
S4e00. coo And as wise and Intelligent
body, we cannot presume that they meant to
force the Y ar Department to achieve an i'm
,tiIft,, he,
present established, upon distant frontier
at one half Of what the experience Of the last
four or five years have shown that it would
cost The utmost that can be rredicated OF
the action Of the last Congress, is, thet it
believed there was waste and extravaganza
in that branch Of the Government that it
meant to give to the Government stern re.
buke; but it is equally certain that it never
designed 10 Interfere with the existing mil
itary establishment. or to assume the respon-
sibilty Of recalling the army from the from
tier, or to authorize any imp' rtant rodhfca
ton in that arm Of the public service Is it
not an ad.pittes, fact, that after the appropi-
atoms were reduced, an amendment was
offered to the bill by Mr. Schenek. then a
Representative from Ohio. to authorsze the
President. bG the discharge of officers. and
by other means, in his discretion, to bring
the necessary expenditures within the limits
Ct tie appropriations This proposition was
rejected by decisive vote Is it fair, then,
to infer that it was the intention Of Congress
to coniine the expenditures within certain
limits. that should not be trauscended
Would it have been wise or manly policy
upon their part to continue in full vieor our
existing military establishment charged
with the weighty duties of international obl-
CATION and Of protecting our extended and
almost limitless frontier, and to declare that
it should he done for so much, and no more,
and especially when the sum granted was on
~ one half of the amount which experience
bad demonstrated was essential to be ser
vice? Is it not more reasonable to suppose
that they meant. only to inculcate watchful
ness and economy, knowing that the want of
an appropriation could thereafter be supplied
by deficiency bill; mode of relief, which
it is well known, was anticipated at the last
session by those who favored, and by those
who opposed reduction Of the appropriations
Now, sir
l. r