The true Democrat., 1855-03-07

itol for the use of the Congress of the United States of America, is surely a civil and not military matter. An appropriation for it be- longs properly to the civil and diplomatic bill, where 1t has heretofore uniformly been includ- ed. There has been until now no variation from the practice of putting appropriations for this object in the civil and diplomatic appro- priation bill. The effect of retaining this clause in the present bill will be to set a precedent changing the character of the service When you put money to be used for this object in an appropriation bill different from that which ap- pears to assimilate itself to the subject matter, it is the first step in road which will lead, you know not where.
 This capitol is not fort. It is not an arse- nal It is not a barrack for troops. It has no connection with military affairs. would glad ly vote to keep the army disconnected from this portion of the public buildings. The ap- propriation does not rightfully belong to this bl To retain it here is against all precedent. There is no sympathy, no connection between the object of the appropriation and its position in this bill.
 am aware, sir, that the charge of the work for the extension of the capitol has been assign ed to the Secretary of War. To that do not object at all. There may be, and doubtless is, peculiar fitness in assigning that service to the supervision of the present Secretary of War; I do not understand that 1t has been committed to him in virtue of his position as presiding over the military affairs of the country. 1 take it that the President has assi igned to that off, cer this particular service as peculiarly appro- priate to his capacity, judgment and taste; and not because of his having charge of the militia ry affairs of the country. Now, it is proposed to take the appropriation for this civil service |-the extension of the capitol from its regu- lar position in the civil and diplomatic bill and |place 1t upon the military appropriation bl.- On the same principle, if, to morrow, we should lose the services of the present Secretary of War by death or resignation, and there should be circumstances making it appropriate to com init the matter to the charge of the Postmaster General we should have to change the position of the appropriation. and insert it in the post office appropriation bill. There might, some- times, be propriety in committing the subject to the judgment of the Attorney General or Se- cretary of the Navy, for the time being; and on this principle you would, on every such change be compelled to place the appropriation in new bill. The effect of this would be, that whenever any gentleman would have occasion to refer to the laws to find the sum appropriat- ed for this object, he would be unable to ascer- tain it without a vast amount of labor and trou- ble Thus business would be thrown out of its true order. I prefer to keep business in its proper order.
 It may possibly be, since this bill has been sent to us in advance of other appropriation bills, that the object was to insure the more speedy passage of this appropriation, so that the work may progress. That would seem to be the reason on a superficial examination and if that were the reason, 1t would be an apolo- gy-perhaps good one-for changing the po- sition of the appropriation. 1 understand, how ever, that such is not the case. There is now on hand from S6OOOOO to $8OO,OOO of former appropriations for the work, and that sum can- not be used up before the civil and diplomatic appropriation bill, where this clause regularly belongs, will have passed both Houses of Con- gress, and become a law of the land.
 Sir 1t is just by such steps as these that the whole direction of affairs may ultimately be changed. I look upon this as dangerous pre- cedent, which may result in placing the whole control of the public buildings in the hands ofthe military rather than the civil department of the government. 1 have made the motion to strike out this clause not because 1 am opposed to the amount of the appropriation not because wish to cast any reflection on those who plac- ed 1t here-but simply for the reason that 1t is an iwegularity, an innovation which ought not to be encouraged
 MT. Bayard. MT. President, if this were to make precedent, 1 admit that the objections of the honorable Senator from Arkansas would be quite sufficient to induce me to vote in favor of striking out this appropriations; but 1t seems to me that 1t IS too late in the day now to make an objection merely on question of irregular ity, if there be no intrinsic objection to the ap- propriation itself. 1 knew not under what circumstances this appropriation was attach ed by the House of Representatives to this bill, but the appropriation itself is not objected to. It is founded on the estimate of the appropriate department. It is a proper appropriation, and one which ought to be passed. It is here What precedent does it make? Why, sir, you cannot take up a sin gle appropriation bill which you have lassed for many years back in which you cannot point out irregularities much greater than this. Why should you strike out proper appropriation from teis bill, to be made, probably, the subject of future discussion, or contest in some other shape when 1t comes up in another bill? 1 confess cannot see the force of the objection.
 This is making no precedent for since have been member of the Senate, have not seen a single appropriation bill which has not con- Idlueu lIoHl one lo tcl OT twenty irregularities much greater than this. I do not see that it can have any influence hereafter, as prece- dent in the case of the superintendence of the direction of any other buildings under any other department, and that therefore the appro- priation for that building must be in the bill connected with the appropriations for that de- partment. do not think that is the object. I am utterly ignorant of the reason why the House of Representatives put the clause in this bill think that probably it was more by ac- cident than anything else; but being proper in itself, l see no reason to revise the action of the House of Representatives in this particular, unless there be some objection to the appropria- ton. I cannot consider the question of irregu- larity as any real objection, for if that be con- sdered good ground, it twould be sufficient to cause the rejection of every appropriation bill which has been passed for the last six years at any rate.
 MT. JOHNSON. I consider it evident that this clause, as it stands in the bill changes the direction of the appropriation as to its location at any rate. A few years hence, it may be ne- cessary for those who are not aware of this di- rection, to search for the appropriations which