Birmingham state herald., 1896-06-04
THE SENATE FOLLOWS SUIT. River and Harbor Bill Repassed
 -56 to 5 AFTER FOUR HollRS' DEBATE
 E Mr. PettigreW Chara ' zed the Veto Power
Mir. Pettigrew Chara Y zed the Veto Power
 as Rel :. the Past.
SEVERE csITIcl : OF THE PRESIDENT
"He Permits Ns ,-.-,straint but His Imperial Will," AliS the senator-Noted Election Case of Murray vs. E;l-
 liott Up in the House.

Washington, June 3.-Tne senate fol- l lowed the example set yesterday by the
 house of representatives in passing, by
 vote of 56 to 5, the river and harbor bill over the presidents veto. The five nega- l tive votes came from democratic sena- | tors, namely, MesSrs. Bate of Tennessee, l Chiffon of Texas, Hill of New York, Smith of New Jersey and Villas of Wis | consin. The debate preceding the vote l occupied about four hours. Speeches in | favor of overriding the veto were made | by Messrs. Vest, sherman, Pettigrew, re- 1 publican, of South Dakota; Berry demo- 1 crat, of Arkansas; Stewart, populist, of 1 Nevada; Hawley, republican, of Connect | icut, and Butler, populist, of North Car | olina. Speeches in favor of sustaining | the veto were made by Messrs. Smith, | Villas, Bate and Hill, the latter intro l ducing joint resolution to amend the l constitution by giving the president 1 power to veto any items on an appropria- | tion bill-a power which the constitution I of the state of New York gives to the l governor of that state.
 | MT. Pettigrew's speech characterized 1 the veto power as relic of the past, | which had no place in a free govern | ment. He denounced the president in | severe terms, charging him with an ut 1 ter disregard for his sacred oath of office, | with overriding the laws, influencing congressman by the use of patronage, enriching himself at the public expense, 1 and, in fact, permitting no restraint but l his imperial will.
 1 The conference report (partiaD on the | naval appropriation bill was presented l and discussed and went over until to- l morrow, the vote to be taken at l D. m. | The points in discussion were as to the l number of battleships and as to the con- 1 tract price for armor plate.
 | At 6:15 D. m. the senate adjourned un- til tomorrow at II a. m.
 Mr. Vest opened the debate upon the | question of passing the river and harbor l bill over the presidents veto. He said l there were statements in the presidents | message as to which, with all due re- l spect to the president and his office, | something should be said in defense of l the two houses of congress. He should
 endeavor to say just as much about tue l bill and the message as was absolutely l necessary, and no more. While unques-
 tionably the president of the United l States had the constitutional power to | exercise his veto prerogative, 1t was not the idea of the constitution that that | veto power should be exercised as one l of the ordinary fnstrumentalities of ad- | ministering the government.
 The veto power had been exercised only 1 seven times in the first twenty-eight years of the government-twice by l Washington and five times by Madison; never by John Adams or Thomas Jeffer- son.
 MT. Vest proceeded to discuss the mes | sage in detail and pointed out various in- accuracies in it. Among these was the | statement that the bill appropriated di- rectly about $14,000,000, and covered con- l tinued contracts to the amount of $60,- | 100000 The former sum exceeded the actual figures by $1,39OO00 and the latter l sum by $2,343, 0000 The president, MT. | Vest said, had historically charged con- | gress with extravaganza; but if the pres 1 ident had turned to the river and harbor bills enacted in the last six years he would have discovered that, considering
 the size of the country and the demands l of internal commerce, the bill was com | paratively economical Then 1t had to | be remembered that the appropriation l was not for one year, but for two years. so that instead of an appropriati ton of l about $14,000,000, as the president said | the amount to be spent in the next fiscal | year would not be more than $6,O0O, 900,
 being one-half of the $12,OOO, 900 already mentioned.
 l MT. Vest said that he was puzzled to know to what the president alluded in l speaking of private interests, but he sup 1 posed that 1t was a case of the destruc- | tion of the bar at the harbor of Bruns- wick, Ga, which had been undertaken by
 a private citizen, a lawyer and where an
 additional depth of feet of water had |
 had been done in the face of the opposi- l ton of the army engineers. It was so re- l markable success that the conference committee had voted to extend the con- i tract. He was prepared to defend 1t and
 to say 1t was right, and that there should
 be no monopoly of engineering by army engineers.
 | He prophesied, as "coming events cast
 their shadows before." that in few years 1 the attention of congress would be drawn I n in1p Itaf fQ1t ftt1far l ing all the water ways of the country in
 order to give cheaper transportation to l the people. He pointed out the revolu-
 tion that has been made in the grain ex- | porting trade by the deepening of the
 mouth of the Mississippi, New Orleans
 having become thereby the chief grain | exporting port of the country As to the
 presidents intmation that the payment l of the $62, ,000, 900 covered by the bin was as | binding as the bonded debt of the goyern-
 ment, Mir Vest mildly suggested to the president that there was no interest on l It. It did not propose, to use another ex- pression of the president. to mortgage posterity."
 l MT sherman gave reasons why he
 should vote for the passage of the bill,
 potwithstand. the presidents objec- l tions. In the first place, he did not think that such an appropriation bill ought to | be vetoed under any circumstances. It | was not a mandatory provision, but
 merely a permlssive one If the secre- | tary of the treasury said there was mo money in the treasury not otherwise ap- | propr.ated' he was not bound to expend l It. So that the president had complete l control of the matter. Therefore he l could not conceive a case where such l bill should be vetoed. Congress, Mr. l Sherman declared, ought to stand by it's | exclusive power to appropriate money, l leaving to the president the expenditure | of 1t only when there is sufficient money l in the treasury for the purpose.
 There was a wide difference between a l mandatory law. binding on the president | and on all the departments and on the | people and mere permission to expend 1 so much money for a particular object l He could not imagine, therefore. veto ! which he would support. Instead of