Stevens County tribune. (Morris, Minn.) 1877-1880, 1879-05-08

repeal. Whatever objection to legislation upon
appropriation bills may be made IN ordinary
cases. does not apply whore free elections and
the liberty of citizens are concerned. We nave
the power t., vote money, let us annex condi-
tions to it, and insist upon redress OF the
grievances.
By another distinguished member of the
House it was said the right of the representa-
tives of the people to
WITHHOLD SUPPLIES
is az old as English liberty. History records
numerous instances where the commons, feel
ing that the people were oppressed by laws that
the lords would not consent to repeal by 3rdi-
nary means of legislation, obtained redress at
last by refusing appropriations unless accom-
panied by the rel1ef measures. That question,
of the gravest magnitude, and new in this
country, was raised by this course of proceed
ing. 1t was fully recognized also by its de-
tenders in the Senate. 1t was said by distiu-
guished Senator, perhaps
NO GRAvER QUESTION
in the form we are brought to consider it was
ever considered by the American Congress In
time of peace for it involves not only the
merits and dement's of the laws which the
House bill proposes to repeal but involves the
rights, the privileges, the powers and the du-
ties of the two branches of Congress and OF
the President of the United States. 1t ts .
question whose importance can scarcely be
estima ed. 1t is a question that never yet has
been brought sharply before the American
Congress and the American people as it may
be now. It is a question which sooner or later
must be decided, and the decision must deter
mine what are the powers of the House of Rep
reseutatives
UNDER THE CONSTITUTION.
Mr.. President, should approach this question,
were in the best possible condition to speak
and to argue to it, with very grave dlfhdence
and certainty, with the utmost anxiety, for
none can think over it as long and carefully as
have thought of it, without seeing we are
beginning, perhaps, struggle that may last
longer in this country, as similar struggle IA
what we are accustomed to call the motherland.
The struggle lasted for two centuries before it
was ultimately decided. It is not likely to
last so long here, but it may last until every
man in this chamber Is in his grave. It's
question whether or not the House of Repre-
sentatives has the right to say we will grant
supplies only upon condition that
GRIEVANCES ARE REDREssED.
We are representatives of the tax payers of the
republic. We, the House of Representatives,
alone have the right to originate money bills.
We, the House of Representatives, have alone
the right to originate bills which grant the
money of the people. The Senate represents
the States. We represent the tax payers of the
republic We, therefore, by the very terms of
| the constitution are charged with the duty of
originating bills which grant the money Of the
| people. We claim the right which the house of
commons m England established after two cen
turies of contest, to say We will not grant the
money of the people unless there is a redress of
| grievances.
Upon the assembling of this Congress in
pursuance of the call for an extra session,
which was made necessary by the failure
of the Forty-ffth Congress to make needful
appropriations for support of the government.
| the question was presented whether the attempt
made in the last Congress to engraft by con-
strnctlon
NEW PRINCIPLE UPON THE CONSTITUTION
should be persisted in or not This Congress
has ample opportunity and time to pass the
appropriation bills, and also to enact any polit-
ical measures which may be determined upon
| by separate bills by the usual and ordinary
methods of proceedings. But the majority of
! both houses have deemed it wise to adhere to
the principle asserted and maintained by the
last Congress by majority of the House of
Representatives. That principle is that the
House of Representatives has the sole right to
originate bills for raising revenue, and there
| fore has the right to withhold appropriations
| upon which the
| EXISTENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT MAY DEPEND,
unless the Senate and President shall give their
assent TO any legislation which the House may
see fit to attach to appropriation bills. To es-
tablish the principle is to make radical, dan
ger0us and unconstitutional change in the
character of our institutions. The various de-
partments of the government and the army,
and the navy are established by the constitu-
tion OF bylaws passed in pursuance thereto.
Their duties are clearly defined and their sup
port is carefully provided for by law. The
money required for this purpose has been col
lected from the eople, and is now in the treas
ury ready to be paid out as the appro-
priatiOn bills are passed. Whether the appro-
priations are made or not, that collection of
taxes will 60 on, and the public money will &C
cumulate in the treasury. It was
not the intention of the trainers
of the constitution that any single branch of
the government should have the power to die
tate the conditions upon which this treasure
should be applied to the purposes for which it
was collected. ANY such intention, if it had
been entertained. could have been plainly ex-
| pressed in the constitution. That the
| majority of the Senate now concurs in the claim
of the House adds TO the gravity of the situa-
tion but it does not altar the question at issue.
The new doctrine, if maintained, will result in
the consideration of
! UNCHECKED AND DEsPoTIc POWER
in the House of Representatives. bare
majority of the House will become the govern
ment The executive will no longer be what
the trainers of the constitution intended, an
equal and independent branch of the govern
ment. 1t is clearly the constitutional duty of
the President to exercise his discretion and
Judgment upon all bills presented to him with
| out constraint or duress from any other branch
of the government. To say that q majority of
either or both houses of Congress may insist
upon approval of bill under the penalty of
stopping all of the operations of the govern
ment for want of necessary supplies Is to
DENY TO THE EXECUTIVE
that duty of legislative power which is plainly
conferred by the seventh article of the consti-
tuition. 1t strikes from the constitution the
qualified negative of the President. It is said
this should be done because ii is the peculiar
function of the House of Representatives to
represent the will of the people, bnt no single
branch or department of the government has
exclusive authority to speak for the American
people. The most authentic and solemn ex-
preston of their will is contained in the con-
stitution of the United States. By that con-
stitution they have ordained and established a
government whose. powers are distributed
among coordinate branches, which, as far as
possible consistently with q harmonious CO.
operation, are absolutely independent Of each
other. The people of the country are unwil-
| ling to see the
SUPREMACY OF THE CONSTITUTIONS
| replaced by the omnipotence of any depart
: ment of government. The enactment Of this
bill into a law will establish precedent which
will tend to destroy the equal independence of
the several branches of the government. Its
principle places not merely the Senate and
executive, but the Judiciary also, under the
coercive dictation of the House. The House
alone will be the Judge of what constitutes
. grievance. and also of the means and meas
ures of redress. An act of Congress to protect
elections is now the grievance complained of,
but the House may, on the same principle, de-
termine that any other act of Congress already
made, that nomination or appointment TO
office by the President, with the advice and
consent of the Senate, or that decision OF
opinion of the supreme court, Is q grievance,
and that If measures OF redress be withheld
the appropriations required for the support of
the offending branch Of the government be ne
fused. Believing that this bill is