Mower County transcript. [volume] (Lansing, Minn.) 1868-1915, 1879-05-08
59ur m! d., ~} {.!3} passing the sp

y 5surned without p!3} passing the ap
the present extra session ct tie 46th
to carry on. the government. The ground
upon which the action of the house Of
representatives. is defended is distinctly
A week before the close of the last session
Of congress, the doctrine in question was
stated BY pne Of Its ablest defenders. as fol
lows: 1T ia OUT duty to repeal. It il
not worth while to attempt to REPEAL except
upon the appropriation bill. The Republican
senate would not sgree to have the Repub
lican president sign a bill for such repeal
Precipitation, bills may be made in an ordi
nary case doec not apply where free cleo
tons and the liberty Of citizens ATE con
cerned. We have the power to vote money
Let us annex the conditions to it, and insist
upon the redress of grievance" By an
other distinguished member of the house
it was said: "The right of representative.
of the people to withhold supplies is as old
as English liberty. History records numer
that the people were opposed by laws that
the lords enacted, and would not consent te
repeal by ordinary means of legislation
obtained redress 1T last by refusing appro
priations unless accompanied BY relief
measures"
That question, of gravest magnitude, ane
new in this country, was raised by thii
course of proceeding, and was fully recoR
nized also by it's defenders in the senate. L
was said by disting aished senator: "Per
haps no greater question in the form ": arr
brought to consider it, was ever considered
by an American congress in time of peace
for it involves not only the merits and de
merits of the laws which the house bill pro
poses to repeal, but involves the rights, tn,
privileged, the powers, the duties OF the two
branches of congress and of the president o.
the United States. 1t is q Question, the i'm
portanee of which can scarcely be estimated
1t is a question that never yet has beer
brought SO sharply before an American
congress-, and the American people as 1t may
be now. It is a question which sooner OF
later must be decided, and the decision
must determine what are the powe g of the
ton; according to it's letter and ito spirit
Mr. President, l should approach this ques
ton if l were in the best possible condition
to speak, and certainly with the utmos
anxiety, for no one can think ovel
it as long end carefully as 1 hav.
thought of it, Without seeing that we are a.
the beginning, perhaps, of struggle thai
may last as long in this country as = similar
struggle in what we are accustomed to call
the Metherland. That struggle lasted fol-
two centuries before it was ultimately de,
cided. It is not likely to last go long here
but it may last until every man in this cham
be- is in his grave. 1t is question whether
or no the house of representatives has q
right to say we will grant supplies only on
| condition that grievances are rejressed
We are the representatives Of the tax-pay
ers of the republic. We, the house of rep
resentatives, alone, have the right to origi
nate 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
lie. We therefore, by the very terms OF thu
constitution, are charged with the duty Of
originating bills which grant the money OIL
the people. We claim the right which the
house Of commons in England established
after two centuries of contest, to say that
we will not grant the money Of the people
unless there is 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 45th congress to make needful appropri.
atoms for the support of the government,
the question was presented whether the at.
tempt made in the last congress to engraft,
by construction, a new principle upon the
constitution should be persisted in or not
This congress has ample opportunity and
time to pass appropriation bills, and also to
enact any political measures which may he
determined upon by separate bills, by the
usual and orderly methods of proceedings
But majority OF both houses have deemed
it wise to adhere to the principle asserted
and maintained in the last congress by Il
majority of the house of representatives.
That principle is that the house Of repre-
bills for raising revenue, and therefore has
the right to withhold appropriations upon
which the existence OF the government may
depend, unless the senate anc president
shall give their assent to any legislation
which the house may see fit to attach to ap.
preparation bills. To establish this
principle is to make radical, dan
gerous and unconstitutional change in
the character OF our institutions. The vari
GUS departments of the government and
army and navy are established by the con
thereof. Their duties are clearly defined
and their support is carefully provided fol
by law. The money required for this pur
pose has been collected from the people ant
is now in the treasury, ready to be paid GU
as soon as the appropriation bills are passed
Whether appropriations are made or not
the collection of taxes will 20 on; the pub
lie money will accumulate in the treasury
| 1t was not the intention Of the trainers OF
! the constitution that any single branch Of
the government should have 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 Il
had been entertained, would have been
plainly expressed in the constitution.
That q majority of the senate now concurt
in the claim of the house, adds to the gravity
of the situation, but does not alter the QUE
ton at issue. The new doctrine, if main
tanned, will result in the concentration Of
unchecked and despotic power in the house
Of representatives. A bare majority of the
house will become the government. The
executive will no longer be what the fran
ers of the constitution intended-an equal
and Independent branch of the government
1t is clearly the constitutional duty of the
president to exercise his discretion and
judgment upon all bills presented to him
without constraint or duress from any other
branch of the government. To say that q
majority of either or both houses of con-
gress may insist on the approval Of bill
under penalty of stopping all the operations
of the government for want of
necessary supplies, is to deny to
the executive that duty or legis.
lative power which is plainly conferred by
a section of the seventh article of the con.
stitution. 1t strikes from the constitution
the qualified negative of the president. It
is said that this should be done, because it is
the peculiar function of the house of repre-.
sentatives to represent the will of the
people; but no single branch or depar .ment
of the government has exclusive authority
to speak for the American people. The most
authentic and solemn expression of their
will is contained in the constitution of the
United States. BY that constitution they
have ordained and established government
whose powers are distributed among the co.
ordinate branches, which. as far as possible,
consistently with harmonious co.opera.
ton, are Independent of each other.
The people of the country are unwilling
to see the supremacy of the constitution
replaced by the omnipotence of any depart
ment of the government. The enactment
of this bill into q low will establish prece.
dent which will tend to destroy the equal
independence of the several branches o:
the government. Its principle places no,
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 measure of redress
An act of congress to protect elections Is