The Washington herald. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1906-1939, 1907-02-11
MONDAY. FEBRUARY II. 1897.
Congressional Expenditures.

While Senator Tillmau's resolution ask
ing for Information as 70 the employ
ment of special agents, attorneys, and
so on by the executive departments may
uncover some new instances OF "EXecu-
tive usurpauon" as it was doubtless in
tended 90 do, we should not be surprised
# il would disclose the responsibility Of
Congress for practically all the special
employees now on the pay roll of the gov
eminent. Within the past few years TIE
practice has grown up. against the pro-
test of such careful legislators as Mr..
Tawney. of appropriatiug money in lump
sums 10 be use al the discretion of
executive departments a notable case
in point was the grant TO the Department
OF Justice of half a million dollars for
the enforcement of the Sherman anti
trust law, and we have no doubt num-
Der of such cases could be gathered from
recent appropriation bills. This practice
of making general instead of specific.
appropriations is believed by many able
lawyers TO be unconstitutional, as it is
UnquesuonabIy Unwise and eNtravaEaut.
Daniel Webster discussed this point many
years ago in "a speech made IN the Sen
ate opposing "a grant of S30AC00 20 be
used at the discretion OF the Executive for
purposes of national defense. Mr. Web
ster said.
Tho Constitution declares that no money shall
BE- drawn from the Treasury bat in consequence Ut
appropriations made by law. What is meant by
appropriations. Does this language not mean that
particular sums shan be- assigned by Jaw 90 par
ucIiar objects. How far this pointing out and fix
ing the particular ab5cet- shall De carried is qges
tiln that cannot be settled h1 amy precise uls
But sH-.-r agIr1Trati0u shat is To- say. the des.g
nation Ct every object for which money IS voted as
far as srel designation is practicable has been
thought 20 bg a NEST important republican IuncI-
pie"
Webster opposed the appropriation Of
100000 90 be expended by the Executive
as he chose fer the national defense. but
half q century later Congress gave Presi-
dent Mckinley SJo.05003J to be expended
in the same way and for the same pur-
pose, and there was not dissenting
voice. Since 1SJS the Executive discretion
has been given more and more latitude in
the expenditure of funds for d variety Of
purposes, "a complaisant Congress con-
sentiag, until it is now discovered, by
the keen scent of hunters for Executive
usurpauou," that appropriations TO be
expended at Executive discretion are
Liable 10 abuse. and that it is time 90 ask
in the language Of Senator CuIbers0n
whether this is a personal government
OF one Of law. Should it be found that
expenditures are made in any department
of the government i'm coutraventiou of the
constitutional provision that no money
shall De drawn from The Treasury with
out warrant of law. Congress viii have
no trouble In applying the remedy. A
beginning I'm this direction has already
been made by forbidding expenditures in
excess of appropriations, thereby creating
deficits which Congress is expected to
make up.
Some one, not long ago. suggested that
a moribund set Of House committees
whose nominal duty it as % supervise
expenditures in the executive depart
ments De rasuscitaJcd and required TO per
form their proper function, and so keep
a watchful eye upon the use made of the
moneys annually appropriated by Con-
Eress- There is merit in the suggestion.
which was "a wholesome recognition OF the
responsibility OF Congress as the guardian
Of the public purse. The revenues and
expenditures Of the government being
wholly within the control OF Congress, as
every one knows, it must, i'm the last
analysis. be considered the fault Of that
body if the public funds are improperly
expended.