The Red Cloud chief., 1896-01-31
SEC. MORTON ATTACKED
senator iianshrougt ot north Dakota nit.
t,ri, Scores Tim.

ltTIN scores t'tnI.
WASHINGTON. Jan. 9s-Nr, Hans.
brough of North Dakota made n bite,
attack upon Secretary of Agriculture
Morton III the Senate to-day on tho
subject of ,he free distribution of
seeds, trees, etc, 10y the department
which MIR. Morton has stopped.
Mr.. lianSbrough said: ut is an I'M.
pleasant duty to he Obliged To CRITICS,
the acts of n cabinet officer, but in this
case II seems To me there is a great
principle involved. The essence OF
'ne controversy lies in the proposition
whether an executive officer OF the
government has the right to wilfully.
ueiloerateyI, designcdly and, ms in
inns case, premcditatcdly ignore
u solemn statute of Congress. 1
n'lieve II can he shown that
'he honorable secretary of agri.
culture has ~disobcycd the mandate
oi the legislative branch OF the roy.
eminent 1t IL Il part of his dcpart-
''chtal functions to carry into effect
any Jaw aprertaining to the affairs Of
ms department which congress secs
III to enact The last congress made
an appropriation of $1,000 To be used
III thc purchase and distribution of
s''us' trccS, cuttings, bulbs. etc, ms
required 10y law. The secretary first
si'oW'u MS deliberate purpose 10 cyade
'hiN law when lac asked the attorney
general for an Interpretation of the
statute, with reference to the purchns,
of seeds. There is nothing nj nil in
tie opjnion of the attorney general
which Is incouNisten, with the prior
work of the department."
Mr.. li~aushruugh proceeded to show
tHat the Secretary advertised for seeds
in n technical way. and receiving no
bid refused To- rcadvcrtisc. The Son.
atur continues: 1T was the plain
duty OF Ii Secretary, il he were faith.
ful To the performance OF that duty
ana desired to execute the laws of Com
grcsS, to have ~rcadvertised and To hav,
earnestly endcavorcd To get bids offer
ing seeds OF the kind and character the
law demanded and the Secretary re-
CURED. Instead of this, he reject
cd all Of the bids upon technical
grounds, forthwith abolished the seed
DIVISION OF his department and an
hounccu that there would be no seeds
purchased and distributed under the
appropriation bill for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1896.
In his statement, made before tho
committee on agriculture n few DAYS
ago, the Secretary said he was not on
posed, on principle, to the purchase
ana distribution of seeds. Later in
the proceedings he admitted that from
his view of the case such purchase and
distribution would be p~aternalistic
and in conflict with his party creed.
! leave the Secretary to Justify these
statements one with the other.
"Altogcthcr, the position of the seq
rotary in this matter is exceedingly
lame. That he deliberately set ont 10
disobey the mandate of Congress there
can be no doubt. That he is person.
ally opposed to the purchase and dis
tribution OF seed of any character,
whether they be rare or or
otherwise, there is no question. And
so we have here "a case in which n HIGH
executive official deliberately sets
aside the law Of Congress-. and | saw
that II Is not so much the value of the
seeds or the good results that come
from their distribution, as it i, the
settlement of the question as 10
whether "A departmental official shall
disobey the Legislative authority.
"He was opposed to this appropria-
tion at the outset and although il was
his clear duty to do everything i'm hls
power To carry out that law, he has
placed every obstacle i'm the way of It's
execution, and has finally refused To
execute it. The proper time to dis.
cuss the propriety of the
Of seeds is when the act
the appropriation for money comes
before the proper committee of Con-
The great question is the con-
conduct of the Secretary.
an officer of the executive branch
tue Government, who Is in effect a
nigh salaried clerk, defantly and
~'tubbornly refuse To carry into effect
he acts OF Congress of the United