2o6 KANSAS UNIVERSITY QUAkTERI.V. 



under the form of an amendment, for the bill of the House (H. R. 

 ^o. 1537) entitled ' An act to repeal existing duties on tea and 

 coft'ee,' of a bill entitled 'An act to reduce existing taxes,' * "*' * 

 is in conflict with the true intent and purpose of that clause of the 

 constitution which requires that ' all bills for raising revenue shall 

 originate in the House of Representatives,' and that therefore said 

 substitute for House bill No. 1537 do lie upon the table."* The 

 clerk of the House was also directed to inform the Senate of the 

 purport of the resolution if the House should see fit to adopt it. The 

 debate which ensued was all upon one side, and the names which 

 follow indicate that the best talent of the House was engaged in 

 defending the House privilege. -Mr. Dawes, referring to the dis- 

 cussion over the Scott bill of the previous Congress, said: "The 

 same proposition is now before the Senate in a little different form. 

 The bill which now comes back from the Senate * * * is a bill 

 embracing a general revision not only of import duties, but of another 

 entire and distinct field of taxation, that of internal revenue. * * * 

 That provision of the constitution which guarantees to the people's 

 representatives the right to originate all bills of this character seems, if 

 the view of the Senate is correct, to be entirely nugatory. "f Mr. 

 Cox argued that ''the amendment made by the other body, under 

 the provision of the constitution * * * must be pertinent to our 

 bill,"! and Mr. ICldridge said, " If their right to amendment is unlim- 

 ited, then our right amounts to nothing whatever. It is the merest 

 mockery to assert any right, 't: * * jj. jg clear to my mind that 

 the Senate's power to amend is limited to the subject matter of the 

 bill."i:j Mr. Garfield remarked: ''If that bill from the Senate, now 

 on your table, Mr. Speaker, be recognized by us we shall have 

 surrendered absolutely not only the letter but the spirit of the rule 

 hitherto adopted, and with it our exclusive privilege under the 

 constitution. "II Mr. Butler said: " In my judgment that limit (upon 

 amendment) is this: they may perfect a bill sent them by the House; 

 they may amend the body of such bill; they may propose amend- 

 ments adding to or reducing the amount of revenue upon the subject 

 matter of the bill, and nothing further. They must stop there."** 

 Mr. Hale declared that '-this restriction as to the right of originating 

 revenue bills is worth nothing to the House unless it carries with it 

 * * * a limitation of the right of the Senate to amend, "tf and 



*Cdng. Globe, ikti-t:. pi. il/. p. •Jin.v 



+ Ibid., p. -2105. 



tlbid., p. 2\W. 



jilbid., p. -2107. 



.■Ibid.,p. '.MOT. 



•*Ibld.. p. 310S. 



++Ibid.. p. '-'lOS. 



