National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1876-08-08
THE CONFEDERATE HOUSE VERSUS THE
UNION SENATE

L
UNION SENATE.
The sole object of the labors of the Con
federate House of Representatives appears
to have been the manufacture of ammuni-
ton for the Democratic campaign. The
costly investigations, the charges against
public officers, are but endeavors to create
campaign literature, while the rallying cry
of L" Reform Retrenchment Behold US,
their prophets " are but tricks Of speech
to veil the most arrant and dangerous
humbugs that ever menaced this Govern
ment. In this protracted session, that has
been such an expensive farce, the Confed-
crate House is endeavoring to delude the
people into the belief that they are earn
estly bent on retrenchment of the ma
tional expenses, and that they are OBJ
structed in the performance Of their pure
and patriotic programme by the Republi-
can Senate. They are, by self-assertion'
the embodiment of wise economy and
judicious retrenchment, virtuous martyrs
for the public veal, whose light is put IN
der bushel by the ruinous pertinacity OF
the Senate. Will the people accept this
view2 Have we no garnered wisdom
from the past7 Is there, then, no harvest
from our public schools, from our freedom,
from the press, from the calamitous rule of
this party that deluged our fair lan1 with
precious blood and annihilated millions of
treasure, and from the fact that these prin-
ciples which they claim have ever been an
unknown element in the Democratic
party1 God forbid that such lessons should
fail to guard US against the crawling
treachery that seeks to inject such deadly
poison into the public mind.
The Senate has shown as complete will
ingness to cut down the expenses of the
Government wherever it could be done ju-
diciously as the House has, and even more
sincerely. The leaders of the House are
aware of this, and that all their talk about
the resistance of the Republicans to econ
omy is the veriest clap trap and dema-
gogery. They have artfully and speciously
put upon the appropriation bills new legs
lation, not at all germane to the bills,
knowing that the Senate cannot with
proper respect to existing laws and its
own dignity, and to its duty to the country
as coordinate branch of the Legislature,
consent to adopt it, except as it might be
introduced in separate bills, each standing
on its own merits.
1t is true that the practice of introducing
new legislation into appropriation bills has
become only too common. 1t is vicious
practice, from the danger that, in many
cases, provisions which would not stand
the scrutiny of both Houses of Congress if
introduced separately may be enacted, be-
cause it is regarded as less evil to enact
them than to defeat with them an other
wise judicious and necessary appropriation
bill. But, in spite of this pernicious prac
tice having been measurably allowed,
until the present Confederate House as
sumed the leadership in legislation, it has
been almost invariably the custom when,
ever an appropriation bill has been referred
to committee Of conference for the branch
of Congress in which new legislation was
proposed to recede from its position on
that point if the other branch 'evinced de-
cided repugnance thereto, thus tacitly adj
hitting that such legislation has no real
night unless both Houses acquiesce in it as
a measure for the public good that can best
be introduced in this manner.
Adherence to new legislation under such
circumstances is practically an offensive as
sumption by the insisting House of Con
gress of the right to dictate what the law
shall be, both to the other House and to the
Executive; or in failure of such dictation
being accepted, of stopping the wheels
Government, and this is the attitude as
sumed by the present House towards the
Senate and Executive. The Senate has
consented to many of the principal re-
auctions of expenditure, has agreed to all
it can agree to without injury to the pub
lie service, but it properly refuses to sur
render all its legislative rights. A few
Democratic leaders in the House are at
tempting 10 rule our International affairs in
opposition 70 precedent and prudence.
They practically say to the Senate, 1--WE
"only shall say how much money shall be
expended" and to the Executive, 1--WE
"alone shall decide how every dollar shall
"be spent or we will block the wheels of
1.-the Government" There is not only an
absence of right in this bullying, but an
absence of dignity and common sense. 1t
is course without precedent, reason, law,
logic or craftsmanship. 1t does not attain
to the firmness ofa self assured tyranny, but
is rather the spitefulness of feeble minded,
vicious child, who, digging his rebellious
heels into the. earth, says doggedly to his
two honorable brothers, 81 will do as
"please, and you must both do as say
cor I'll smash everything, and nobody
"shall do anything" shaking his fist at
the entire family, who are looking rather
ashamed of his antics than angry at his
senseless perversity. Yet, less honest than
this bad boy, the Democratic charlatans
attempt to palm off their iniquity as virtue,
though since virtue has never been one of
the component parts of the organization
of the party, they have of it no personal
knowledge, and are, perhaps, somewhat to
be excused for imagining this thin disguise
will inveigle the people into confidence in
their sham economy and pretended purity.
The policy pursued by the House is rev
evolutionary, and as such will be condemned
as inimlcal to the welfare of the Govern
ment as was the policy of the ex Confed-
crates and their disloyal sympathizers when
they openly fought for its overthrow, or
skulked in the security of the Union lines,
while they covertly sought the ruin OF the
Government they could not rule with the
same diligence they displayed at this juno
ture in bunting popularity. Let US have
faith that now as then their mischievous
designs will sink into obloquy under the
searching gaze of an intelligent people.
EDUCATION IN THE SOUTH.