Evening star., 1909-07-16
50 the PRESIDENT MAY TRAVEL
HOUSE ADOPTS THE AMEND
MENT PROVIDING ee5, 1000.
Notion to Strike Out Lost by &
Strict Party Vote Of
lot to $50.

discussing tho proposed allowance Of $25.-
600 for travelling expenses OF the Presi-
dent, the democrats vigorously opposing
the amendment. A motion to strike out
the amendment was lost by 1o7 to $50.
When the reading OF the bill for amend
ment was begun Mr.. Macon promptly
made q point OF order against the addi-
tional appropriation for the President on
the ground that II never had been author
ICED In an appropriation bill. Mr.. Taw-
ney was prepared for such q move and
produced the necessary authority. re-
marking at the same time that the origi-
nal appropriation in 1905 was passed with
the aid of democratic votes This did not
end the matter. however. The discussion
Of the point became general and there
were many arguments advanced to show
that the previous act did not compel an
appropriation now.
Pleasure Trips, Rainey Says.
In the opinion Of Mr.. Rainey Ull.)
there was no exigency of government call
ing the President to different states. 1t
was simply an effort to provide pleasure
trips for the President. He began to
discuss the constitutionality OF the prop
osition when Mr.. Longworth (Ohio) called
him to order. with the result that the
presiding of1cer directed Mr. Rainey to
confine himself strictly to the point of
order.
Mr. Wanger (Pa) in the chair overruled
the point of order. whereupon Mr.. Bow
ers (MissD promptly moved to strike out
the provision for travelling expenses. and
the discussion over the question regarding
the authority to make the appropriation
was opened up anew.
As to Public Business.
Answering some of the criticisms direct
ed at the provision, Mr.. Scott (Kan.) main
tanned that the public business could not
possibly suffer by reason Of the Presi-
dents absence, because no matter where
he went he would be in touch at all
times with the seat of government.
He believed in presidential tours. As a
rule. he said, they were at the solicitation
Of the people and not of the Presidents
own initiative. 1t would be a sorry day
for the republic. he exclaimed. il the time
should come when no man could afford
to accept the presidency unless he had
private fortune.
Mr. Scott compared the enormous allow
ances made to European monarchs with
those to the President of the United
States. from which he sought to show
that the Presidents allowances were ex-
ceedingly small.
my understanding always has been."
said Mr.. Clark (Mo.). amid democratic ap-
plause, that we went out Of the royalty
business on the 4th day OF July. 1776."
AS far as he was concerned. he said. he
had no disposition to return to 1t.
Debate was closed by Mr.. Tawney. who
made an earnest appeal for the adoption
Of the amendment. He believed 1t the
duty of the President to comply wherever
he consistently could with the request or
the people to mingle among them. he
said it would benefit the United States II
enough money were appropriated every
year to take the Congress and the Presi-
dent over the country to ascertain its
conditions and needs.
The motion of Mr.. Bowers to strike out
the provision was voted down by strict
party vote, 107 to 1JO.
Attorney Generals Office Deficiency.
Mr.. Murphy, Missouri. in opposing the
$25 600 item covering deficiency In the
office Of the Attorney General. said that
he believed this ought to be investigated
by a special committee.
II do not believe that there would have
been any deficiency or that we would
have been called upon to pay the deficl-
ency II we had not paid Francis ]. Heney
some $4,000 out Of the Treasury, por-
ton Of which I do not think he ever
earned" said Mr. Murphy. IT the state
ment is true, he was paid after he had
resigned from a certain case-I believe
it was the United States agt. Binger
Hermann-some $1,000 or $4,000 more
than he was entitled to and II my infor-
nation is correct, he has been paid some
S47, 500 out of the Treasury Of the United
States since he has been In the employ
of the state of California, and as | have
been informed. against the constitution OF
the state Of California"
At this juncture the bill was laid aside
and the House adjourned.