The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1879-06-18
The Threatened Veto.

Mr.. CoNKLING and Mr. BLAINE threw aside
their rivalry for the time being, TO mako a
common assault on the bill appropriating
$2,69O,OOO for the Department of Justice, or
$4,000 less than the estimates. They may
possibly have succeeded In the principal OBJ
ject, OF furnishing pretexts for veto. but
they utterly failed to shake the foundation
on which the bill rests.
For the first time a specific mode OF APP
preparation has been employed for this de-
partment, which might have been properly
introduced long ago; because, In proportion
TO opportunity, its prodgality, partisanship,
and loose methods OF accountability exceed
those Of any other branch OF the public SER
vice. Now, what has been done? In the
first place, the estimate "for fees OF United
States marshals and deputies" were reduced
from $650,0O0 TO 5000, 900, for the regular
business OF the courts; n saving OF $5O,0OO
Secondly, the fees OF jurors we're reduced
from 50 TO 50 per diem; a saving OF $4,000
on the estimate. Thirdly, the fees OF Dis
trict Attorneys and their assistants have
been cut down $4,000. These three items,
with 4zu,UO0 OF other reductions, make up the
$4,000 Of difference between the appropri-
atoms and the estimates.
Certainly. this is reasonable retrenchment
md much less than might have been prop
eTly demanded. Heretofore, when the ap-
preparation was Jumped, the practice grew
into a great abuse, begun in 1872 and
pursued regularly until 1878 Of diverting a
large part of the general fund for the pay
ment OF deputy marshals as electioneering
partisans, and then applying 10 Congress 10
make up deficiency in the expenses Of the
courts, TO which this money should have
been applied.
1t is proposed TO arrest that habit by the
following proviso:
And no part Of the money hereby appropriated Is
appropriated TO pay any salaries compensation fees or
expenses under in title ~ OF the Revised
Statutes, or Of any provision Of said title"
This clause applies exclusively 10 deputy
marshals used for political service. The
supervisors are provided for in the perma-
nent appropriations, and therefore could
not be touched by this bill. Marshals are
forbidden to appoint deputies for election
purposes, and section 3,679 Of the Revised
Statutes is amended TO read thus:
mo department officer OF the Government shall,
during said Hsca year make contract any
liability for the future payment OF money until appro
praton sufficient contract or pay such liza
bility shall have FIRST been made BY law"
This restriction is imposed because the
departments have assumed to violate the
present law, and TO involve the Treasury to
the extent of millions, as was done when the
Army bill failed in the last Congress. In any
event, the condition is wise, because il checks
the tendency to loose expenditure and forms
an additional safeguard to the public purse
1t must be remembered that independent
of these appropriations, the salaries Of the
justices OF the Supreme Court, the Circuit
Judges, the District Judges, the Court
OF Claims, the Courts OF the District OF
Columbia, the Claims Commissions, the
Attorney-General and all the subordi-
mates, and the Solicitor of the Treasury and
his clerks, are voted In another bill, together
with all the incidental expenses.
SO that the whole judicial machinery Is
provided for In every way, with the small
difference OF $500 OF economy, as already
explained, and the limitation for the next
fiscal year as TO the employment Of deputy
marshals at elections. The expenses OF the
judiciary have nearly doubled in ten years,
and they continue TO grow. Even during
the period OF reconstruction they only aggre-
gated about sixteen hundred thousand dol
lars, and the latest estimate is three millions
After these sections, the most important
feature of the bill is one prescribing n
method for drawing jurors impartally, and
TO prevent the packing process which now
uisgraces some of the courts There is no
uniform system, and consequently between
bipartisan Judge. a partisan clerk, and a
partisan marshal, juries can be made to
order Very recently Democratic Confeder-
Ates were excluded from the jury In Charles
ton by Judge BOND, while Republican Con-
iederates, who had fought side by side with
Them during the war, were admitted without
The question Of test oath being raised.
When Mr.. PIERRRPoNT was Attorney-Gen-
oral he made the following statement In his
report to Congress for 1856:
"There is uniform system OF obtaining Jurors in the
United States, and great abuses have sprung up and
much avoritsm and corruption complained or It's
sAy TO provide uniform mode of selecting Jurors for
me courts OF the United states and respectfully sugge
NAT an act be passed 70 accomplish this result"
Even Mr.. DEvENs In his last report rec
commended the same measure, as follows:
My predecessors thought that uniform method Of