Wheeling Sunday register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1882-1934, 1892-03-06
Mr.. Hatch and His Committee on Agri-
culture Do 1t Nicely.
PENSION MATTERS CONSIDERED.
Agricultural Appropriations Go to the Committee on
Agriculture and Not to the General ApprOpri-
atoms Committee as Mr. Holman Has
Claimed They Should-Mr.
Hatch's Address to the
House.

broken in the House to. day for the first
time this session and all the barriers
and traditions which precedents and
practice have thrown around that com
mittee were borne down under the i'm
petus Of the champions OF agriculture.
1t was the old conflict OF prerogative
against precedents, OF the Committee
on Agriculture against the Committee
on Appropriations and, as usual, Chair
man Hatch and his colleagues carried
the day, and Mr.. Holman was unable TO
check that tide of sentiment which
swept over the Heuse and awarded TO
the Agricultural Committee jurisdiction
over its own appropriations. The ef-
feet of to-day's action OF the House is
not a matter of to-day alone, Tor IT Is re-
garded as the first breach in the bull
warks that surround the Committee on
Appropriations. II is far-reaching in
its results and may break entirely the
force of the Appropriations Committee
ia its assumption and desire to scrutln-
ize and revise all appropriations to be
passed upon by the FIfty-second Con-
gress.
The exciting incident OF the day oc-
Cured when Mr.. Holman, OF Indiana,
opposed the bill on the ground that the
Committee on Agriculture had no juris-
diction over the matter, and that 1t
properly came under the jurisdiction OF
the Committee on Appropriations. lie
made the further objection that the
committee had not properly investi-
gated the question of appropriation, and
propounded several inquiries bearing
upon this point.
Mr.. Hatch declined to be catechized
by the gentleman from Indiana, but Mr..
White, of Iowa, member OF the COM
mittee on agriculture, asserted emphat-
ically that proper inquiry had been
made. When Mr.. Holman had finished
speaking Mr.. Hatch took the floor, pre-
facing his remarks with an expression
of regret that his colleague on the
Committee of Agriculture, Mr.. White,
of Iowa, had been caught in the trap
set by the gentleman from Indiana.
81 set no trap" said Mr.. Holman.
"If the gentlemen set trap" said
Mr.. White, II did not apprehend IT.
thought that the gentleman asked a
legitimate question; whether or not any
witnesses were before the Committee on
Agriculture. l replied that we relied
upon the gentlemen who do the work,
and we came into the House and de-
mand the appropriation because it is
absolutely necessary"
Mr.. Hatch said he regarded Mr.. Hol-
mans objection as resting upon the
foundation that the appropriations car
ried in the bill had not been properly
inquired into, because they had been In
vestigated by the Committee on Agrl-
culture instead Of by the Committee on
Approximations. Laughter. He (Mr.
Hatch) had made the same fight for
many years. He had never brought in
report from the Committee on Agri-
culture that had not been attacked be-
cause 1t was unconstitutional or had not
been recommended by the Committee
on Appropriations Laughter.
The measures reported by his COM
mittee were always unconstitutional or
had not passed muster before the Com
mittee on Appropriations. Laughter. !
The Committee on Agriculture would
faithfully discharge its duty to the
House and TO the country. but he did
net propose to be catechised by the gen.
tleman from Indiana as to what infor-
nation he got about this or that. 1t
was none OF the gentleman's business.
Laughter. 1t was the business OF the
Committee on Agriculture. The fact
was that the Committee had had
before It the Secretary of Agri-
culture, the heads OF the
various bureaus and three or four men,
bers OF Congress. The committee had
reported this bill not by leave OF the
gentlemen from Indiana nor by favor OF
the Committee on Appropriations but
under the rules of the House which gave
to the Committee on Agriculture juris-
diction over all appropriations for the
Agricultural Department. II this was
not an appropriation bill what was IL?
Mr.. Holman-"It IS deficiency"
Mr.. Hatch-"That is a distinction
without a difference" Continuing, Mr..
Hatch said that time and time again he
had seen the gentleman from Indiana
take the constitutional knife and pare
appropriations so that they could not
be seen under microscope; and when
his own State was interested open the
doors wider than was necessary TO allow
this Capitol to 90 through. Laughter.
The bill was then passed and the
House went into Committee OF the
Whole (Mr. Outhwaite, OF Ohio, in the
chair on the invalid pension appropri-
alton bill.
The discussion which ensued was d.
rected TO the relative positions Of the
Democratic and Republican parties on
subject of pensions. The speeches mad
were for the most part directed toward
this question, Mr.. Boutelle, of Maine,
making the principal speech in denun-
citation Of the Democratic attitude and
serving notice upon the Democratic
party that IL would be held TO strict
account by the people IL it took upon
itself the responsibility Of stalking upon
the most sacred of all the expenditures
Of the Government.
Mr.. Tarsney, OF Missouri. defended
the bill, and the appropriations made
under it. The time had passed, he said,
when gentlemen could make political
capital ont of the pension question by
telling the pensioners how much money
the Republican party had given them,
whether the pensioners were soldiers
or whether they were not. He, twho
had been a soldier), was opposed
to seeing men who served with
him for four years drawing pension OF
IS a month when men who had never
seen a battle were drawing SIP. The
soldiery of the country was becoming
tired OF these discriminating pensions
which were robbing the true soldier.