The Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1877-1885, 1882-12-05


concur with the secretary that the law
bought to he amended.
| RIVERS AND HARBoRs
| The grounds that impelled me to with
hold my signature from the Dill entitled
AN actssasking approprias ions for the
construction, repair. and pr .servation OF
certain works onriEers and harbors,e which
became law near the close of our last
/ session prompt me to express that nc
| similar measure be deemed necessary dur
l ing the present session of congress- Iu-
| deed such measure would DOW be open
| to serions objection in addition to that
which was lately urged upon your atten-
ton. l am informed by the secretary OF
war that the greater portion of the sum APP
propriated for the various items specified
in ffiatsremains nnex pended of the new
wofESs which it authorized; expenses have
been incurred upon two only for which The
total appropriation was $210,0O0. The
present available balance is disclosed by
the following table: Amount of appro-
priation by act of Aug. 2, 1882, $736, 875
00' amount of appropriation by act of
june 10, 1882, $4,000; amount of appro-,
priation for payments to j. B. Eads, 1904,
900; unexpended balance of former appro-
prIations Sd. 738, 1858; total $23. 791, 1873.
Less amount drawn from treasury between
July 1st, 1862 ana Nov 80, 1882, $6, 056,-
1874; total 81, 734, 944. 1t is apparent by
this exhibit that as concerns most items
to which the act of August 2, 1882, relates
there can be no need of further appropria-
tons until after the close of the present
session If, however. any action should
be necessary in respect to particular OBJ
jects il will be entirely feasible to provide
for those objects by appropriate legisls
ton. 1t is possible, for example, that a
delay until the assembling of the next con-
gress to make additional provision for the
mississippi river improvements might be
attended with serious consequences. II
such should appeareto be the case a just
bill relating to the subject would command
my approval. This leads me to offer a
suggestion which trust will commend it
self to the wisdom of congress. Is it not
advisable that grants of considerable sums
of money for diverse and independent
schemes of internal improvement should
be made the subject of separate and dis
tinct Legislative enactments? 1t will
scarcely be gainsayed even by those who
favor the most liberal expenditures for
purposes sought to be accom-
plished by what is commonly called
che river end harbor bill, that the
practices of grouping in such bill appro-
pfiationS for great diversity of objects
widely separated either In their nature in
the locality with which they are concerned,
or IN both, is one which is to be most dep
recated. Unless it is remediable il is inev-
ftably tending TO secure the success of the
bin as whole. though many of the items.
If separarately considered, could scarcely
fail of rejection. By the adoption of the
course / recommended every member OF
congress, whenever opportunity should
arise for giving his influence and vote for
appre priations, which he would
be enabled to do without being called upon
TO sanction others deserving his approval
So, also. would the executive be afforded
a full opportunity to exercise his constitu-
tionai rreTogative OF opposing whatever
appropriation seems to hinl objection
able ~ithout inaPerifing the success of 9th
ers which commended themselves to his
judgment. 1t may be urged, in opposition
to these suggestions, that number of
works of international improvement,
which are justly entitled to governmental
aid, is so great as TO render impracticable
several appropriation bills therefor, or even
for such Il comparatively limited number
as to make a disposition of large sums of
money. This objection may be well
on whether it be or not. the adj
vantages which would be likely to ensue
from the adoption of the course have
recommended may perhaps be more effec-
tually attained by another, which respect
fully submit to congress as an alternative
proposition. Ii was provided by thereon
stitltions of fourteen Of our states tllafthe
executive may disapprove any item OF
items of a bill appropriating money where
upon the part of the bill approved shall be
law, and the part disapproved shall fail to
becMne law unless repassed according to
provisions prescribed for the passage of
bills over the veto of ahe executive. The
states wherein some such provision as the
foregoing is q part of the fundamental law
are Alabama, California. Colorado, Flor
ida, Georgia, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mis-
souri,, Nebraska, Now Jersey. New York, |
Texas, West Virginia I |
commend toyour careful consideration the
question whether the amendment of the |
federal constitution in the particular indi-
eated-wonld not afford the best remedy for |
what is often grave embarrassment, both |
20 members ofaeongznsss and to the execu- |
tive, and is sometimes serious public |
1t appears by the secretarys report that |
the available naval force of the United |
afataa eansistu Of Q1 cruicarc 4 e;poIa