Perth Amboy evening news., 1917-06-26

legislative methods when congress
breaches conservatism and economy
to the people OF the country but IT.
self would practice extravaganza.
Many items contained in the bill
as reported are susceptible to criti-
cism even IL war conditions did not
prevail. 1t will be argued that the
bill Is regarded as an emergency
measure. 1t is difficult to harmonic
this view with the inclusion of such
items as s5,000.000 for the construc-
ton of locks and dams In the Ohio
river, s1.000.000 for improvement of
the Lower Missouri river, and, as
above mentioned, condemnation of
the so-called SS,000,000 to $4,000
600 Chesapeake and Delaware canal.
as well as $401,000 for the Tennessee
and $632,000 for the Cumberland riv-
ers, or $1,200.000 for the upper Miss
issippi, and an indefinite amount for
Los Angeles and Richmond, Cal,
both of which last-named harbors
| show very decided appearances OF
reclamation schemes. Attention is
also directed to q new item not car
ried In the House bill last session
which appears on page Is, and reads
| as follows:
Waterway from the Mississippi
river to the Sabine river, Louisiana:
For maintenance, $1,000; for COM
pleting Improvement from Mermen-
tau river to Sabine river, Louisiana
| and Texas, I'm accordance with the
report submitted in Senate Document
No. 750, Sixty-fourth congress-, sec
| ond session, and subject to the con-
ditions set forth in said document,
$2SO.000; In all. S2S7,000.
Attention is also called to items
for new projects and maintenance of
streams where testimony shows only
one boat Is in operation. Also, items
appear for the removal of water
hyacinth. The adoption of 500, 900
new project on the Congaree Is only
cited by way Of illustration of emer-
gency items included.
With such items as the ones men,
| toned included in bill supposed to
be based upon the emergencies of
the present war condition. this argu-
| ment not only falls fiat but almost
becomes ridiculous. Just wherein
| such items as the above can be claim
ed to be for emergencies. the minor
ity are unable to understand. The
committee was informed that the bill
was approved by the Secretary Of
War in behalf of national defense but
the representative of the Chief of
Engineers informed the committee
that the basis of approval of items
was commercial needs rather than
military necessities. The minority
would suggest that IL the bill was
approved by the Secretary of War
| for national defense. either he or the
chief of engineers should have ap-
peared before the committee in re-
IN Ne 10 ctj IN u
| their appearance to explain the va
rious Inconsistencies, rather than re-
spending to the committees vote by
sending an assistant. a
Attention is directed to the So
called grouping system" wherein
numerous items are placed under
one appropriation, giving the engi-
neers authority to use the entire
amount for any one or all of the
Items. as they may see At. This Is
another effort to take away from
congress Its control over appropria-
| tions and place 1t in the hands Of de-
partment officials We. oppose the
extension of these powers. The pres
ent bill is more Objectionable In this
respect than any of its predecessors
because of this policy adopted by the
army engineers who prepared the
bill, and now ask congress to o. X.
| their bill. Small items, including
waterway projects of doubtful value,
are now grouped together, under the
system referred to, in many instances
with from q half dozen to thirty
other projects in one group, and an
appropriation of a lump sum Is made
to cover all, good. bad, and indiffer-
ent projects In that group. Certain
projects In the group are given spe-
cific appropriations that do not ap-
pear in the bill, but any other pro-
! ject may be given all or any portion
of the appropriation, because the bill
provides that in the discretion Of the
chief of engineers and the secretary
of war any allotment or division may
be made. M eUA ts,flr
This provision enables engineers to
expend the money whenever and
wherever they may choose on pro-
jects in the group, and even that con-
struction may admit of more liber-
al Interpretation. Tho general group
ing system, formerly confined to one
or two groups, now prevents any ef-
fort to expose or abandon appropria-
tions for small wasteful or useless
waterways because the plan covers
good and bad items indiscriminately
punched or grouped. Wasteful pro-
iects can not well be subject to in
are not separately set forth in the
bill, nor are specific appropriations
stated. This departure in methods,
previously begun in a small way per-
mits the diversion of funds appropri-
ated for legitimate waterways to be
used for wasteful projects, and sub
stitutes the determination of admin
istrative officials for that of congress-
There is now in the hands Of the
army engineers with which to meet
emergencies an additional million
dollars, which is a balance from the
last lump sum appropriation bill and
which can be used for the necessary
maintenance and improvement of
such adopted projects as the judg-
ment of the engineers may decide.
But of still greater significance are
the sheets made up for office use by
the engineers, a copy of which is in
the hands of the minority. There Is
hardly an item for which there is not
on hand an ample balance to care
for the needs of the projects for
which congress has made appropria-
tons.
These sheets. following the title of
Improvement, have. three columns
,oarked az follows; 2. Balance un-