New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1879-04-30

INC OHllfu CldttS lTolH udNiuE huy ioiNN ~ 49,
place OF any election prepared to preserve ORDER to
make arrests to keep the peace, in any manner to
enforce the laws. This is altogether foreign to the
purpose of an Army Appropriation bill. 800
The practice of lacking to appropriation biils
measures not pertinent TO such bills did not pre-
vail until more than forty years after this adoption
of the Constitution. 1t has become "A common prac.
tice--all parties when in power have adopted IT.
Many abuses aud great waste of pubic
money have in this way crept into appropri-
alton bills. The pubiic opinion is against
It, The States which have recently adopted
constitutions have generally provided rem
edy for the evil by enacting that no law shall
contain more than one subject, which shall be
plainly expressed IN its title. The constitutions OF
more than half of the States contain substantially
this provision The public welfare will be promoted
IN many ways by return TO the early practice OF
the Government aud To the true principle OF egsa-
ton, which requires that every shall stand
or fall according to its own merits. If IT were I'M
derstood that to attach to an appropriation mea-
sure irrelevant TO the general object of the bill
would mpciil and probably prevent Its hnal passage
ana approval, valuable reform III the parliament
airy practice of Congress would be ACCOMPLISHED.
The best justification that has been offered Tor at
tachlng irrelevant riders TO appropriation DIS Is
that IL is done for convenience sake to facilitate
the passage of measures which are deemed eX-
podient by all the branches OF Government when
participate in legislation.
1t cannot be claimed that there is any such reason
for attaching this amendment OF the election laws
TO the Army Appropriation bill The history OF the
measure cOntradIctS this assumption. majority
OF the House OF Representatives in the last Coz
gresS in favor of section SIN OF this bill was
known that majority Of the Senate was opposed
it could not be adopted. Il was attached
to the Army Appropriation bill, to compel
the Senate to assent to IT. ~ was pla,a!y
ton bill would not I've allowed TO pass unless the
proposed amendments of the election laws were
adopted with 1t. The Senate refused TO assent to
the bill account of this irrelevant section Con-
TesS thercupOn adjourned without passing an APP
preparation bill for the Army, and the present extra
session of the XLVIth Congress became necessary
to furnish the means 20 carry on the Government
THE NEW DOCTRINE DEFINED.
The ground upon which the action Of the House
of Representatives is defended has been distinctly
st ted by many of its advocates. a week before
the close of the last session OF Congress the doctrine
in question was stated by one of its abest de-
tenders follows:
1t Is our duty to repeal these II is not worth while
10 attempt tie repeal, except upon an appropriation
would the Republican President sign bill for such a
repeal Whatever objections to legislation npon spDro
apply where free and the liberty OF the c-
zen concerned. We have The power 10 vote money
conditions to and insist upon the redress
OF grievances.
By another distinguished member of the House it
was said:
right of the representatives o. the people 10 with
hold supplies is old English iiLerty History re-
cords numerous instances where the Commons, feeling
that the people oppressed BY laws that the Lords
would consent repeal by the ordinary methods OF
legislation obtained redress at last by refusing appro-
prlations unless accompanied by feilei measures
That question Of the gravest magnitude and new
in this country was raised by this course Of pro-
ceeding was fully recognized also, by its defenders
in the Senate. 1t was said by distinguished SEN
atcr:
Perhaps no greater question IN the form We are
brou Int TO consider considered by The Amer
T6e merits or dement's Of the laws winch the House
bill proposes repeal but involves the rights the PRIV
Congress and of the President Of the United States IL
is vast question. tits question whose Importance
vet has been brought so sharply before the American
Congress and the American people as II may be now
1t Is question which sooner or later must Be decided
and the decision determine what are the powers Oh
the House OF Representatives under the Constitution
aud what Is tie duty OF that House IN the view ol me
Of that Constitution according to Its letter and
its spirit. ,, ~, ., 4, =,
were possible condition 10 speak ana 10 ar
que IT, with very grave didence, and certainly with
the utmost anxiety for can think OF IT as long
ana as carefully have thought Of II without seeing
that we are at the beginning perhaps OF struggle mat
may last long IN this cOuntryas similar struggle
lasted in what We are accustomed to call tne mother
land There the struggle lasted for two centuries before
long here but il may last until every this cham
Der Is in his grave 1t Is the question whether e
w 1aHt gPSw on ye qRe the rep4a
srntatves OF the taxpayers Republic. We, the
House OF Representatives, alone have the right to or
nate bills which grant the money Of the people The
Senate represents We represent the taxpayers
of the Reubc We therefore, by the very OF the
Constitution, charged with the Outy OF originating
the bills winch grant the money OF the people We
claim the right which the House OF Commons III Eng
land established after two centuries OF contest 10 say
that will grant the money OF the people unless
there is redress OF grievances"
Upon the assembling Of this Congress, in pUrSu-
ance of a call for an extra session, which was made
necessary by the failure of the XLNth Congress
to make the needful appropriations for the sup
port of the Government, the question was presented
whether the attempt made i'll the last Congress TO
engraft by construction new principle upon the
Constitution should be persisted III or not. This
Congress has ample opportunity and time to pass
the appropriation bills, and also to enact any poti
cal measures which may be determined upon in sep
arate bills by the usual and orderly methods OF pro-
ceeding. But the majority of both houses have
deemed il wise TO adhere TO the principles asserted
and maintained in the last Congress by the majority
of the House of Representatives That principle Is
that the House of Representatives has the sole right
originate bills for raising revenue, ard therefore
has the right TO withhold appropriations, upon which
the existence of the Government may depend, unless
the Senate and the President shall give their assent
any legislation which the House may see III 10 at
tach TO appropriation bllls.
THE HOUSE NOT THE EXCLUSIVE JUDGE.
To establish this principle is to make radical,
dangerous and unconstitutional change In the
character of our institutions. The various depart
ments of the Government and the Army and Navy
are established by the Constitution, OF by laws
passed in pursuance thereof. Their duties are
clearly defined and their support is carefully pro-
vided for by law. The money required for this
purpose has been collected from the people, and is
T ow in the Treasury ready TO be paid out as soon
as the appropriation bills are passed. Whether APP
are made not, the collection OF the
taxes will go on. The public money will accumu-
late in tho Treasury. 80
IL was not the intention of the trainers of the Con-
'itutiOu that any single branch of the Government
should have the power TO dictate conditions upon
Which this treasure should be applied TO the pur-
noses for winch 1t was collected. ANY such inien-
I ON. If il had been entertained, would have been
plainly expressed IN the Constitution.
That a majority OF the Senate now concuTs IN
the claim of the House adds to the gravity Of the
atinn INIT docs not alter Che question NJ issue.