Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1885-12-16

49,. -. - ~ Tue INDUSTRY, all the din.
isence tnat could be found In any ono
~, oii,i'.tee OF the house. IL was claimed
~ .,v minority oil the committee on rules
s s,o' e''is would lead TO Increased expend.
suiSs; ~ would be only so, he con.
seiueui u the members who should con.
s',eupe 'he committees were less inteli.
IIh' leSs honest, less vigilant, less cans.
uie Oh performing the duties thai
Go'oiNed ON them than the members of
suu committee on appropriations. Il was
stated in the minority rcport that sinc.
thc agricultural appropriation bin had
been transferred 20 the care of tho com.
/ hlitee on agriculture the appropriations
Tor the agricultural bureau had Neon
| largely Increased. This was accounted
( Tor by the fact that the duties and powers
oi that bureau were largely incrcased.and
/ ne commented ON the fact that. though
the agricultural interest was the most
! important Ia the country, the last ugri-
| cultural appropriation bill carried only
ohe-tWelith of the money which had been
/ appropriated to erect public buildings In
| philadelphia TO tax industry, aud about
tle same amount that mad been given for
q public building Ia an interior town
where one member oil the appropriation
committee resided But this was not the
only bill in which the approprla-
! lions had been increased under
the management of the Demo.
cratic appropriation committee. The
expenditure for the postolllce department
/ had grown Sl700O,0o0 since the Forty
third congress. lie didn't complain. he
didn't saw it had not properly grown so.
/ but he only pointed out the fact that ap-
! preparations would grow and rightly
grow WI, ther they were made by the COM
| inltlee on appropriations OF some other
/ committee, 1t was not new thing for
! him To be in favor OF the distribution Of
appropriation bills. lie had voted To take
away the agricultural appropriation bin
| from the appropriation committee at
time when that committee was presided
over by warm friend Of his, Mr. Atkins
OF Tennessee, to whom the public owed
as much as to any other man the dimin-
! ishcd expenditures Of the government.
The minority report had introduced a
number Of senators rs witnesses against
the individuality Of divis-
ion of the appropriation bills. They
\ had been summoned to say
1 that in the house the appropriation bills
! should be kept together in order that the
expenditures might be reduced, and in
the senate that they should be kept to-
gether in order that the expenditures
might be largely increased. He then
passed on to the consideration of the
proposition to prohibit the incorporation
of general legislation on appropriation
bills, declaring that it would be in the in
terest of considerable and speedy lcgisla-
ton. The suggestion was made that the
only way to get a decrease OF eNpendi-
lures through the senate was to permit
the Holman amendment to stand. He
remarked that the senate would hardly
worry itself about increasing approprla-
| tons which were made In the interest of
Democratic officials.
! MIR. Randall of Pennsylvania said he had
not intended TO speak ON the subject to-
day, but some views had been expressed
| by the gentleman from Illinois (Morrison)
which he was unwilling to pass
over without notice. He realized fully
! that his past relations TO the committee
on appropriations would seem to indi-
cate in the minds of some men that he
was welded TO particular control IN this
respect, but he was sure that those who
| knew him best would give him credit
in this matter of acting from a
proper sense of duty, as 1t related
| to the public good. The gentleman from
! Illinois had seen tit to allude to his views
as expressed in the minority report. In
| that report there was not word which
reflected upon a human being. He mad
studiously, in and out of this hall, en-
deavored to discuss and argue the ques-
ton from higher level than an individ-
ual level. He had said with elaboration
| that the tendency of division of the
| - n g
was to increase the public expenditure OF
the government, and he believed he was
i'm possession of facts which would sub
stantqte what he said. He instanced the
river and harbor bill, and presented a
table to show that while the bill had been
in the possession Of the appropriation
committee the average annual approprla-
ton for internal improvements had been
1880, 900, and that since the bill had
been conhded TO the commerce and river
and harbor committees, the average an'
nual appropriations had jumped to Sl3,'
sol 900 This statement, he thought,
would bear him out in the assertion that
the sera~ation of the appropriation
bills would largely Increase the
expenditure. Mr.. Randall sent to
the clerks desk and had read an extract
from the annual message OF President
Arthur TO the FOrty.seyenth congress re
commencing that no appropriation 6e
made for internal Improvement, and IN
forming it that a sufficient amount re-
NAMED from the appropriations oil the
previous year to carry on the necessary
works of Improvement. Yet in the lace
of this message and in the face OF the
further fact that no estimates had been
submitted the For,y-seyenth congress had
demanded estimates and actually passed
n bill involving an expense OF nearly
Sc, 100000. With thIs state OF facts NJ
was quite content to leave to the mouse
and country the question as to whether
there had not been a tendency to increase
expenses under the plan OF distributing
the appropriation bills
Mr.. O'Neil of PENNSYLVANIA inquired
whether his colleague had any evidence
70 show that President Mthur's views III
mis- particular had ever been sustained 10y
tho mamie In his opinion IreSldenl