The Army Bill

Senator Thurman, advocating the nmy bill, said the opposi.tion to this bilí proceeds upon a principie that is utterly and absolutely indefensibie. It proceeds upon the ground that it is the duty of Congreas to make appropriations to execute every law that ia upon the statute books, whether that law be constitutional or not, politie or not. just or not, The principie upon which this bill is opposed would have made it the duty of Congress to appropriate money to carry into effect the alien and seditionlaws and the fugilive slave laws, if slavery still existed and that law was in force. It would require Congress to mak; appropriations to carry into effect the most detrimental or unconstitutional law that was ever enacted, if that law had not been repealed. SöClS a príiteiplé never obtained in this or any other government that had a legislative body that made an apppropriation. I would likc to know how i arn bound to regara a law as constitutioual because some foriner Congress enacted that law. Take these election laws. I never was clearer in my lif e than upon the proposition that those laws are unconstitutional, and am I to be foresworn by voting money to carry them into execution? If I do I make myself particeps criminis. No, sir. A law is passed ; it is a bad and unconstitutional law, and a quent Congress may be unable to repeal it. C'ongress has an absolute right to use all the powers the constitution eonfers upon it upon the question whetherthelaw shall be executed or not, and if it cannot be executed without appropriating the people's money, then the man who thinks it unconstitutional and votes the people's money to executeit, is a perjured man and othing less. Xothing is clearer than tliat if a majority of Congress are opposed to a law, and cannot repeal it, yet they are not bound to vote the money of the people, which is m their keeping, to execute that law which they believe to be unconstitutional. I will go further, and say if they believe the law to be impolitic they have that right. Blaine - Theu a citizen, by the same reasoning, is not bound to obey a law. Air. Thurman- The senator f rom Main? would not niake liis living as a lawyer, or he would not ask me such a question. What is this Congress ? Is tïiia Oongress bound by the decisión oí a tonner Congrega as to what is constitutional, and, if' a law is unconstitutional, are we to stultify ourselves and beeome particeps criminis by voting money to execute it? But there is anotheridea started here, and that is tlmt if an appropriation bilí does not appropriate money for everything, it ought to be vetoed or voted down. Iíj there in that bilí ni appropriation that is objectionable or not pursuant to the constitution? No man will say so, Wlio, then, has a right to vote against the bilí, rouch less to veto it, because it does not appvopriate for íiomething else? Suppose it did not appropriate for the ordnanee department at all. Certalnly it is our duty to appropriate for that aepartment. We would have totakethe responsibility. But would that justify any persón in voting against the bilí or vetoing it? What right would anybody have to say that in due time, and according toour judgnient, we would not appropviate for it? The idea that Congress is obliged to support every bad, oppressive, impolitic or unconstitutional law is n harder blow at this governmont tlian has ever been dealt at it. It is to weaken constitutional powers of Congress so that it is hardly worth having. I will vote against any amendment, without any regard to its merits. I do not propose to sentí thia bilí back to the other end of the capítol after last night's experience if I can help It. 1 do not propose to prolong this session by delaying the passage of thisbill. ♦ ♦ It was true that the Democrats had not attempted to coevce the executive, neither did they propose to allow the executive to díctate what their legislation should be. Their appropriations were proper. If the President vetoed them beeause they did not c.ontain something else, the responsiblity feil on hiw, The bilis contaiued all that Congress saw fit to appropriate, and all that had been ostimated as neeessary. Xow, If the President refusea to sign them because he thinks they ought to contain something else, the blame is with him. It is not for the minority to díctate to the judgmeat oí the majority.