The daily Cairo bulletin. (Cairo, Ill.) 1878-1???, 1882-08-30
THE DAILY CAIRO BlEr1N WEDNESDAY MORNING 80 1882

slider the ACCESSIBILITY Of accepting Mr..
Lookwoods proposition to put up waters
works in the city. The commute will doubt
lesshod ameeting during this week and give
thcimportant matter entrusted to it thor
ough consideration. There seems to be an
inclination on the part of some of the com.
mittee to ignore Mr., Lockwood's propoe
al entirely and to simply draw up specf-
cations for the erection of waterworks IN
the city, subject to certain condition, and
to advertise for bids accompanied by
bonds fora faithful performance of duty
under the agreement. The committee EN-.
| bodies some of the best material the city has
and may be confidently expected to do that
which will be the best for the city. They
are all gentlemen OF good judgment and
considerable experience in the matters con.
nected with the subject under consideration.
While they will recogniz3 the fact that the
| city,wants water works the very best kind
and agree to nothing that may in any way
work to the citys disadvantage in after
years, they will doubtless also acknowledge
that the man who would come to this ci y
and invest from one hundred thousand to
one hundred and fifty thousand dollars Of
his own or other mems money in an impor
tant private enterprise for public use, de-
serves all possible encouragement consis
tent with the public good and should have
no unnecessary impedments placed in his
way.
1t is claimed by the eastern oppo.
nents OF the River and Harbor bill that
the bill is unconstitutional The Evans.
| vile Courier sustains this claim in this way
THAT the river and harbor bill appropri-
ating SS,OOO,0OO Of the public money to
objects which have no more lawful claim
for a dollars subsidy than the farms of the
| western frontier settlers is unconstitutional,
has yet to be denied by any lawyer above
the range Of the petilogger. Opinions diff
fer however, as to what course the presi-
dent can or should persue to defeat the rob.
berry the treasury by a palpably unco
stitutional act of congress. But a prior
point is whether the act has really been
passed or not over the presidents veto The
constitutional provision is that when the
president dsapproves bill he shall return
it to the house in which it originated, and
"two thirds of that house are necessary to
pass it over the veto; the same language
applies to the necessary vote over the other
house-"two thirds of that house" Now
the House Of Representatives
is composed Of members chosen every
second year by the people of the states
as duly apportioned, The other house is
composed of two senators from each state
chosen by the legislature thereof" To the
present house there was 293 members cho-
sen, and to the present senate 76-two-
thirds of each respectively being 1876 aud
| 81. The Affirmative vote of the house in
passing the river and harbor bill over the
vote was only 1913, and that Of the sepatc
only 4l-much less than two-thrds Of each
case. The advocates OF the steal under
take to count the pairs Of members that
were absent to fill out a two.thirds vote
But the constitution not only does not rec.
ognize pairs in such connection or in any
other connection, but it expressly says
reference 70 the vote Of the two houses in
passing bill over a veto: But In all such
cases the votes OF both houses shall be de.
termlned by yeas and nays, and the names
OF the persons voting for and against the
bill shall be inferred upon the journal of
each house respectively" Constructive
presence OF voting can not count or be rec.
ognized. Actual presence, yea or nay re.
spouse and record of name are required
The river and harbor bill, having fallen
seveoty.three short of two.thrd vote in
the senate, is a nullity by proof of the re-
cord and should be so treated by the exec.
utve, AS it certainly would if brought be-
fore it by the judicial department of the
| government