The Washington times., 1915-02-01
THE POINT OF ORDER

Every little while The Times feels
called to the ungracious, though not
unwelcome, task Of defending the
business of legislation by dint Of
riders upon appropriation bills. One
of the most widely accepted Of the
old wives tales about legislative
methods, is that the rider on the ap-
preparation bill is wicked, vicious,
undesirable, and never to be al
lowed. The man who is opposed
to a given rider always exploits this
view; but experienced legislators
never take themselves too seriously,
because they know that next time
they may be on the other side, and
want to affix the rider.
The Times has repeatedly pointed
out that the rider is simply the sur
vival of the ancient controversy be-
tween kings and legislatures about
the control Of the public purse. The
king does the spending; in our sys-
tenn that means the Administration.
The legislature has the privilege of
furnishing the cash; and if it de-
prives itself Of the privilege Of i'm
posing conditions on which the cash
may be used, it has poor privilege.
The rider is the imposed condition;
and it is that just as truly now as
when Magma Charta was adopted, or
ship money. was extorted by the Tu-
doris and the Stuarts.
The point of order prevents
legislative condition being thus writ
ten into an appropriation measure.
1t is common knowledge, if students
of legislation would only stop to
think, that a large part Of the most
valuable legislation is enacted in this
form; enacted, because despite the
point of order it is still possible to
get attention to the supply bills
where other legislation may be side
tracked with ease.
The other day Congressman Hob
son pressed an amendment to the
naval appropriation bill, to establish
a chief of operations in the Navy De-
partment. 1t was frankly understood
that this was the beginning of
general staff system. 1t meant to
vest somebody in particular with the
supremely important duty, for the
navy, of making plans for possible
wars. The general staff of the army
has such a duty; but there is no
general staff of the navy, and plans
are not made in any responsible,
highly organized way. The German
navy has splendid general staff,
and its wonderful readiness and
varied plans for making the most
effective use of the naval force have
chiefly contributed to keep German
naval power in position where it
still holds Britain at arms length.
A chief of operations in our navy
would at least center responsibility
somewhere; center it in a technical
authority competent to discharge it
But legislation to create such post
was new legislation; under the rule
about legislation on appropriation
bills it was only necessary for a
member to object, and it must be
stricken out. Mr.. Mann, Republican
leader, made the point of order, and
out it went.
If it could have been discussed
enough to let the House know what
it meant, and if then a vote could
have been had on it, that amend
ment probably would have passed. If
not this session, then at some near
one; for the discussion would have
given realization how much it is
needed. Instead, it is killed with
out even consideration,
So long as government is SO ex-
pensive business as it is, there will
be increasing need for the privilege
of writing limitations and conditions
into appropriation bills. The money
bill rider continues to be the most
efficient instrument of real legisla-
tive accomplishment. 1t ought to be
-s