The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-04-07
HOUSE OF REpREsENTATIyEs.

Mr. ROBBINS, of New Jersey, presented certain Joint
resolutions of the legislature of that State which
referred TO the Committee Commences and ordered to
bc printed
THE DEFICIENCY BILL.
On motion Of Mr. LETCHER, of Virginia. the House
went into Committee of the Whole the state Of The
Union, (hr BococK, of Virginia, in the char) and
suined the consideration Of the army bill
Mr. PHELPS of Missouri in reply TO the charges made
by Mr. LovEoy in relation to the increased expenses of
tho War and Navy Departments, read statement show
ing the cost OF maintaining the army and navy for the
two years ending June 3d. 1885, and June 80, 1867.
The cost Of tic navy upwards Of millions Of
dollars per annu and of the marine corps about half
million The cost Of the army including the army prop
or the Military Academy and the arming and e1nipping
Of the militia between thirteen and fourteen millions
per The mistake Of Mr.. LovEJ0Y occnsioncd
by his confounding the money expended for the
sruction Of military roads, forts, and tho Improvement
Of rivers and harbors &c with TINT expended for tho
maintenance OF the army and navy
Mr.. UNDERWOOD, of Kentucky, caused n number of
official documents to 10 read in relation to the purchase
Of horses for the OF the government contracts made
by government officers, SC.
Mr. JONES, of Tennessee reviewed the entire BILL Oh
jccting to many items cxrsvagant and unwarrnted
Mr.. GROW, Of Pennsylvania, unable TO why
onchaf of the amount required for tho expenses of the
govcrnmcnt-ts regular yearly appropriations should
be passed in the way Of deficiency bill He was OPP
posed to approprating deficiency for my expenses to
in the future lilo held that the officers OF the gov
ernmcnt were bound to keep within the regular apropr
Mr. DOWDEfL, Of Aabama, said tho large expenses
Of the army for transportation could not have
seem hence the large amount included in the deficiency
bill He willing to act upon any plan that would
prevent this cvil but no did believe that it could be
entirely prevented. He defended the appropriation for
extra compensation Of the clerks contcnding that law
should be passed, dor their guidance hcfctcr,) giving
them fixed salary
Mr. HOUSTON, Of Alabama stated that as tho bill
stood he should be compelled to vote az inst IT, He OBJ
cctcd to the Sd section Of the bl which provides for
tho payment by the clerk Of the House of the allowances
authorized by the House during the last session. He
commended that there rule Of the House, no law
that justified the item additional appropriation for the
reporters.
Mr. SHERMAN, of Ohio, opposed the bill
Mr.. DAVIDSON of Louisiana, thought they called
upon to carry out the acts Of Congress which he
he considered just binding any laws which had been
PASSED during the present session He in the last
Congress and of those who voted against the
resolution referred to in debate but after il passed
he houghtit obligatory upon the secretary to pay it,
Mr. GARNET1, Of Virginia, thought the tendency Of
the executive branch Of the government towards the
gradual absorption of all power 10 extent these
deficiencies were unavoidable but he opposed to the
system positive and increasing of carrying
this government not under regular appropriations
but under system Of deficiencies that the Executive
when he failed 10 get appropriation should come the
next and tell them that they must appropriate ten
or twelve millions morenr the good faith of the gov
eminent would be broktM Ii they to go on with
these large deficiencies before the closc o Congress they
would have another loan bill before thcn.
Mr. MASON, Of Kentucky said his main objection to
the bill was that il WAS kind of omnibus b In which
certain items placed together 40 that those who
disposed 10 support the army navy were com
PEELED to swallow those things to which they were op
posed