Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-03-22
FEAR OF A CORRESPONDENT
His ideas Good During Holman's
Time; Not Now.
VIEWS OF A HOUSE AUTHORITY
Only Necessary to Glance at Present
Law to Show That Provision is Sus-
ceptible to a Point of Order.

The publication in last nights Star of the
fact that the provision in the legislative,
executive and judicial appropriation bill re-
lating to the graduated reduction and
eventual dismissal of aged government en-
ployes in the executive departments would
be eliminated from the measure on point
OF order has excited intense interest in this
city. 1t goes without saying that there
was general sigh of relief as result of
the announcement among the army of gov
ernment clerks in Washington. There have
been some suggestions made to The Star
however by government employees that a
mistake was maze and that owing TO the
fact that the provision in question on
Its face limits an appropriation it actually
Is not subject to a point of order
The Star is able today to reiterate the
statement published yesterday reitera tion
made on the highest authority This au-
thority pointed out today that the provision
in the legislative bill was not only in "A way
q limitation upon an appropriation but
was first and foremost legislative declar
alton.
Fear of a Correspondent
1t may be well in this connection to quote
an extract from a communication received
by The Star which voices the fear of gov
ernment employees that the obnoxious pro
vision may not be eliminated from the bill
The communication is in part as follows:
This article in last nights Star saying
the age limit clause of the legislative ap-
preparation bill would surely go out on g.
point of order has been great consola-
ton to many. Its tendency is to stop any
eHort TO secure the opposition of congress-
men to the measure.
i was among the number of the latter
until this morning, when L am told by one
whom l think Is first in parliamentary law
rule and proceedings that this is not me
case-that any measure, even though 1t
changes existing law, which tends to les
sen the amount of appropriations as 10
the matter with which it deals, is not sub
ject to elimination on a point of order
1he present rules of the House make any
provision In an appropriation bill which ls
In the nature Of legislative declaration,
and which, In effect, changes existing la w,
susceptible to elimination from such meas
ure on point Of order by one member OF
the House. The author of the communtea-
tion printed above evidently referred to
that rule of the House which existed when
Holman of Indiana one of the most ia
nous watchdogs of the treasury was at
the head of the appropriation committee.
At that time there was a rule of the
House which provided that any provision
in an appropriation bill which tended TO
lessen the amount of an appropriation could
not be eliminated on a point of order. That
was the case then. 1t is not the case at
the present time.
Even members of the appropriations com
mittee frankly admit that the provision in
the pending bill with reference to aged
clerks is susceptible to a point of order
and they all express the belief that this
point of order will be promptly made when
the paragraph in question is reached. The
rules of the House, as at present inter-
preted. are extremely rigid on the cues
ton OF legislative declarations and changes
In existing law appearing in appropria ton
bills. Time after time last session and this
session, and before, the chair has ruled
faVorabIy on points of order made against
paragraphs which were so near the line
that there was a wide difference of opn-
ion as to whether or not the paragraph
had the effect Of altering existing law.
There appears to be no difference of opn-
Ion in the present instance. 1t seems to
be generally admitted that the Superannu-
alton provision in the bill is a legislative
declaration that does change existing law.
Consequently, 1t is expected that 1t will be
eliminated from the measure almost as soon
reached
Views Of a House Authority
1t was pointed out today by one of the
House authorities that while the provision
did in a measure place limitation upon
an appropriation it made further the
legislative declaration that the clerk on
reaching the age of sixty-five years should
receive a certain salary; that on reaching
the age of sixty-eight years his salary
should be such and SO; that upon reaching
the age of seventy years he shall receive
so much. and that after 1913 clerk of
seventy years of age should be automat-
ically dropped from the rolls. 1t was only
necessary, this authority pointed out, to
glance at the present law. There is no
provision at present which fixes the amount
which shall be paid to clerk of sixty-five.
sixty-eight or seventy years old or which
says that q clerk of seventy years shall af-
ter a certain time be dropped.
Consequently, the provision Included in
a,is1ot iy,r1
and Is susceptible to point of order.
AS stated in The Star yesterday, the MEM
bers of the appropriations committee never
had any illusions about the matter The
provision was inserted in the bill in order
that the attention of members might be
called to conditions existing in the govern
ment departments at Washington and that
full and free discussion might ensue. This
purpose having been accomplished, the
members of the committee feel that they
have done their full duty and that the
superannuation proposition now rests with
the House ITSELF