Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1872-12-13

signed to reduce the cost of the Interna
| Revenue department; but IN view o
how little had been done under the pre-
vious law, he had not much confidence
that this one would affect the object.
Senator Morrill, (Vermont) said thai
when General Grant came into power
there were two thousand eight hundred
/ Assistant Assessors, but now there were
only about one thousand three hundred
There had been q reduction under the
law, passed three years ago, of about one
| thousand five hundred Assistant As
SCISSORS, besides about thirty Assessors
since then. The law of June last was
passed providing for a reduction of the
number to eighty, and Senator Trum-
bull complained that no action had been
taken under the law, ignoring the fact
that the time had not yet arrived when
| the law was to go into effect; but in the
meantime the Commissioner of Internal
Revenue had devised a scheme by which
the force could be very much more re-
duced than by the law of June last.
That law reduced the number of Col
lectors and Assessors to eighty, leaving
it with the Assessors to retain the pres
ent number of Assistant Assessors, but
but this bill would reduce the number OF
Collectors to one for each Collection Dis
trict, while providing that no Collector
shall receive more pay than four thou
sand five hundred dollars, and as their
deputies are to be paid out of their own
pockets, the number of deputies makes
no difference to the United States.
@Senator Trumbull, in reply to Senator
Morrilrs statement that the time for the
law of June last to go into effect had not
arrived, read the following provision of
that law:
''Pnor to the first day of January,
1873, it shall be the duty of the Presi-
dent, and he is hereby authorized and
directed to reduce the Internal Revenue
Districts of the United States to eighty
in number.n
He LTrumbull1 repeated that the num-
Der of officers of internal revenue allowed
to be retained under this bill was greater
than the number allowed by the laws al
ready enacted, but uneXecuted, on the
plea that deputy collectors would
cost the United States nothing, because
each Collector would pay his own Depu-
ty Collectors out of his forty-five hun
dred dollars year, was prepOsterous.
Senator Casserly said the administra-
ton, whether from want of power or of
will, had tailed to carry out the reforms
in the Internal Revenue Department
for which Congress had provided. He
believed if the President understood the
subject more thoroughly, he would be
more prompt to act on his own iudg-
ment in enforcing the law, but it was
his misfortune to be surrounded by men
interested in keeping the truth from
him, and who, being themselves pressed
at home by clamorOus army of office
holding leeches, are unable to do their
duty to the President.
Senator Sherman said there was not
the least occasion for the Senator from
California [Casserly], or any one, to
arraignlthe President in connection with
this subject, or intimate that he had in
some way contrived to put off the exc
cution of the law of June last, until after
the election; everybody knew that in
matters of this kind, the President did
not act merely upon his own judgment;
no doubt by the first of January, he
would have performed the duty imposed
upon him by this law, but he would do
it after due consideration with officers Of
the department. There was no occasion
for the intimation that the Presidents
course was in some way connected with
politics
After some further discussion, the FL
nance Committees amendments were
agreed to, and the bill passed.
The bill for the relief of the sufferers
by the Boston fire was called up by SEN
ator Wilson.
Senator Ferry (Michigan) criticised
the bill, but said he would vote for it,
Senator Morrill, (Vermont) opposed
the bill, and said that as a mat
ter of relief it was humbug, and as
matter of policy it was extremely vi
cious.
Senator Sumner said he hoped the bill
would be passed as it came from the
House. He said the bill was opposed as
setting bad precedent, but the prece-
dent would be only applicable in simi-
lar case, and when such a case should
occur, he should insist upon its applica-
ton.
Senator Carpenter opposed the bill as
he had opposed the Chicago Relief Bill,
on the ground that it was unconstitu-
tional.
Senator Logan favored the bill; he de-
MED that it was humbug, and said that
the passage OF the Chicago Relief Bill
was one of the strongest inducements
to the prompt rebuilding of Chicago.
Without action on the bill the Senate,
at four o'clock in the evening went into
Executive session, and soon after adj
jOurned.