People's Pilot, Volume 5, Number 48, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 4 June 1896 — SENATE JOINS HOUSE. [ARTICLE]

SENATE JOINS HOUSE.

RIVERS AND HARBORS BILL NOW A LAW. President’* Veto I* Upset—Senator Ve*t Claim* the Appropriation* Made Are Not Extravagant—Home Making Preparation* for Early Adjournment. Washington, June 4. —Ths senate passed the river and harbor bill over the president’s veto by the vote of 56 to 5. This was the last tep in making the bill effective and it is now a law. Thp vote was taken after three hours of spirited debate, during which the president was criticised and defended, the remarks at times being directly and bitterly personal. The opposition to the veto was expressed by Senators Vest, Sherman, Pettigrew, Hawley and Butler, while the veto was defended by Senators Vilas, Hill and Bate. The veto message was read, and Senator Vest took the floor. The senator did not question the President’s veto prerogative, but the framers of the constitution never had intended that this power should be exercised in the ordinary affairs of the government. It was to be a power to meet extraordinary emergencies when popular passion had led to hasty legislation, or when a constitutional question was involved. Senator Vest then analyzed the statements of the veto concerning extravagance. The President had, he said, stated that the bill made direct appropriations of about $14,000,000, while in fact they aggregated $12,608,900, a difference of $1,391,100. The senator took up other items, showing that the totals were less than the President’s statements would indicate. As to the general charge of extravagance, he said that in view of the vast interests involved, the extent of the country and the fact that the river qnd harbor bill covered two years, this measure was comparatively reasonable. Mr. Sherman said he would vote to pass the bill over the veto, because, the improvement of the .waterways of the country was one of the most important branches of national development, and one in which other great nations were showing even greater advance than the United States. Moreover, the legislative branch was given the exclusive right to appropriate money. “It is time to curb this daily exercise of the veto power,” declared Mr. Sherman. Mr. Smith (dem. N. J.) said this discussion of the veto power was not new. As a result of personal inquiry at the engineer department he was able to state that this bill contained appropriations of $10,500,000 for projects which had not been approved by the government engineers, and $1,500,000 for projects which the engineers reported as unworthy. Mr. Vilas (dem. Wls.) said that the bill contained important appropriations for his state, but he could not bring himself to the conviction that this great burden should be added to the people of the country. Where was the money coming from? asked Mr. Vilas. Was it comingifrom more taxation and more bonds? Because of the recklessness of expenditure he would vote to sustain the veto.”

Mr. Pettigrew (rep., S. D.) in expressing the belief that the time had come for a constitutional amendment limiting the veto power, made a violent attack on the president. * Mr. Stewart (pop., Nev.) opposed the veto because he thought river and harbor* improvements were meritorious. Mr. Hill upheld the veto power, declaring that the fine distinctions and limitations which had been stated were in the brains of Senators, but not in the constitution. Senators had quoted Jackson, but Mr. Hill reminded them that “Old Hickory” himself inauguthe vetoing of river and harbor bills and in 1832 interposed the first \e.o of such a measure. In conclusion Mr. Hill offered a resolution proposing an amendment to the constitution providing that the president may veto a specified item of an appropriation bill without vetoing the entire bil. Mr. Butler (pop., N. C.) spoke of the presidential use of patronage to influence legislation and elections. This with a veto power, made the president an autocrat more dangerous than a king of England could be. This closed the speechmaking and the vote was taken, resulting in the passage of the bill over the president’s veto —yeas, 56; nays, 5; Mr. Sherman endeavored to go on with the filledcheesebill, but Mr. Vest objected. Opposition to the Bond Bill. Washington, June 4. —Tlie bill prohibiting the issue of bonds, which passed the senate Tuesday, was considered Wednesday. Representative Wheeler (dem., Ala.) moved to report the bill favorably, but no action was taken. The sentiment of the committee seemed to favor making an adverse report. After the meeting the republican members of the committee met with other republican leaders of the house to discuss the question. The predominant sentiment was that it was desirable to dispose of the resolution without delay. It is understood that every republican member of the committee will vote for an adverse report and that Mr. Turner (Ga.) and Mr. Cobb democrats, will vote with them. Messrs. Wheeler (Ala.), McMillin (Tenn.), McLaurin (S. C.), Crisp (Ga.), democrats, it is supposed, will support the resolution. Getting Ready to Adjourn. Washington, June 4.—The house Wednesday began clearing the decks for final adjournment by extending the length of the daily The house met at 11 o’clock, and sat until 6 p. pa. In kdditipn to this Mr. Dingley, the

floor leader of the majority, gave notice that henceforth he should object to all leaves of absence, save such as were requested on account of sickness. The importance of keeping a quorum con stantly in attendance, he explained, compelled him to take this step. A partial conference report on the general deficiency bill was agreed to. and the bill sent back to further confer ence.