Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1912-01-02
Congress Probably Unable to
Cut Out Taft Perquisite.
BARRED BY CONSTITUTION
Presidents Allowance for Travelling
Expenses Secure.
MADE BEFORE HIS TERM BEGAN
Democratic Leaders, However, Will
Eliminate Other Items, Includ-
ing That for Tariff Board.

While the democrats of the House will
have no difficulty i eliminating from the
Sundry civil appropriation bill. considera-
ton of which is soon to be begun by
the House appropriations commit f. the
appropriation of s225.OOO for the Presi-
dents tariff board and $4,000 for the
Presidents economy commission, they
may strike d snag when they come to
the presidential travelling allowance Of
$4,000 Not that there wouldn't be suffi-
cient democratic votes in the House to
eliminate this item with the others, but
| the democratic leaders fear there may
be constitutional bar to such action.
When the republican House voted. in
President RoOsevelts administration. that
| an annual allowance of S25.000 would be
| made for the travelling expenses of the
| President the democrats opposed il on
| the ground that such provision in effect
| increased the Presidents compensation"
! during his term of office, a performance
which is specifically prohibited by the
| Constitution Of the United States. But.
while the use of the appropriation by
| President Roosevelt may have been open
| to question, its application by President
| Taft to the purposes for which II was in
tended is admitted on all sides to be en-
| tirely proper in view of the fact that the
provision was inserted before he became
| the nations chief magistrate.
Goes Over to Next Administration.
Consequently most of the republicans
| and a good many of the democrats are
| inclined to the belief that the House.
even should it be overwhelmingly op-
posed to the continuance Of the $4,000
travelling allowance. could not take 1T
away from President Taft, but could
only provide for its action elimlnat-
ing the sum from the sundry civil DILL
| to take effect at the beginning OF the
next administration.
The point involved is admittedly a
nice one, and unquestionably will be
| thoroughly aired when the sundry civil
bill is under consideration. The para
graph in the Constitution applied to
the travelling appropriation, and which
would operate to prevent its elimina-
tion as one of President Tafts emolu'
ments follows:
THE President shall at stated times
receive for his services a compensa.
tion, which shall neither be increased
nor diminished during the period fol
| which he shall have been elected, and
he shall not receive within that period
any other emolument from the United
States, or any of them"
| OF course some mebers of the House
pooh pooh the hair-splitting that is neces-
sary to make this question a live one and
contend that the $4,000 isn't in any sense
| compensation at all. But as most
members of the House. regardless OF
politics. take questions of this sort very
seriously, indeed, ii is only reasonable to
anticipate quite learned debate on the
paragraph when 1t comes before the
House in it's regular turn.
Knox Case Recalled.
| Such an opportunity for expounders OF
the Constitution to eXpound freely and
unreservedly hasn't been furnished since
the salary of Secretary Of State Knox
| was increased during his term of Office
and then was reduced again in order to
make him eligible to hold the job.
| Democratic members of the appropr1a-
| tons committee will probably be unani-
nous in the view that the $4,000 travel
ing allowance is merely an expense ac-
| count and that Congress may abolish ii
| at any time But a good many OF their
| colleagues, who want to see the allow
ance cut off, don't agree with them, con-
| stitutionally, as tt We're, and are worry
| jne. over the DrODOSitiOn.