The Owosso times. (Owosso, Mich.) 1897-1926, 1921-01-28
WASHINGTON LETTER.
THE ULTIMATE BULWARK.

| Washington, Jan. 26.-Quoting the
words of December periodical, that
"The great recurrent calamity known
as session of Congress is now upon
u.s." the Republican Publicity asso-
citation, through its president, Hon.
Jonathan Bourne, Jr., says: "Thus
within the circulation of that periodi-
cal, very limited let us hope, is spread
a false doctrine that leads to unrest
and that constitutes a near approach
| to sedition.
| LET us see what the statement
above quoted means. If session of
| Congress is recurrent calamity,
then the Constitution specifically
provides for the bringing on of a
calamity every year. No one has
ever seriously proposed to amend
the Constitution in such a way as to
| abolish Congress or discontinue it's
sessions, therefore, since Congress
has the support of the people in gen.
| eral, it is actually charged that the
people tacitly approve an annual re-
turn of a calamity. The statement
above quoted is not merely an in
dictment of Congress-it is an in
dictment of the entire American peo-
pie. 1t may not be technically sedi-
tious, but it is calculated to create
distrust of that branch of the govern
ment which is set first in the Consti-
tuition and which is vested with great
est power. A legislative branch with
representatives chosen by the people
is fundamental essential Of Re-
publican form of government. The
statement that the annual session of
Congress is a calamity is, therefore,
an attack upon our form of govern
ment.
"This analysis of the statement
quoted is good enough to demon
strate it's vicious character, and the
article merits no further attention.
1t may be just as well, however, to
review few facts in the recent rec
ord of Congress in order to demon
strate whether or not session Of
that body is national calamity.
Following the war, the executive
departments asked for certain appro-
priations from public funds for ex-
penditure by themselves. 1t follows
that if they had been vested with
the power, they would have appro-
priated the m oney, levied the taxes
upon the people, and collected the
taxes by force of arms if necessary.
But the Constitution requires that
Congress make appropriations and
levy taxes. Congress cut two and
half billion dollars out of the de-
mands for funds, and saved the peo-
pie that amount of expenditure.
Once more the executive departments
have renewed their excessive de-
mands, and Congress is now engaged
in cutting down the demands. 1t is
too early to predict what the saving
will be, but quite likely it will ap-
proach billion dollars. Is it ca
lamity to have Congress save the tax
payers three and half billion dol
lars?
after conclusion of the war, the
executive departments desired to re-
tain their extraordinary powers so
that they could continue an auto
cracy in peace as they had in war.
Congress has insisted that what was
practically military control over the
civilian activities of the people shall
end Is it a calamity to have Con-
gress do that? During the war Con-
gress alone stood between the people
and an absolute monarchy. Is it a
calamity to have Congress do that?
Following the resumption of
peace, under the armistice, Congress
made appropriations for an army
very limited in size but adequate for
the condition of world affairs. In
stead of observing this limit, Secre-
tary of War Baker recruited an army
far in excess of the number specified,
and incurred a deficit which the ma
ton must pay. Was it calamity to
have Congress try to protect the tax
payers from needless expense for
military establishments?
"Go on through the record of Con-
gress and, you will find that it has
fully justified the judgment of the
founders of this government who
looked upon representative body of
legislators as the ultimate bulwark
of American liberty"